Saturday, August 23, 2008
Joe Biden Response to RW Attack
We all know that with Obama selecting Biden as VP, the RW will begin to attack and they will surely mention Biden's plagerism issue.
Biden should respond that yes he was boneheaded to do such a thing... then go on to say...
But I make this PROMISE to the American people. I will NEVER, NEVER, FORGE, or Use FORGED, or ORDER the FORGING OF DOCUMENTS to LIE our country into war causing the death of our US FORCES!
Biden should respond that yes he was boneheaded to do such a thing... then go on to say...
But I make this PROMISE to the American people. I will NEVER, NEVER, FORGE, or Use FORGED, or ORDER the FORGING OF DOCUMENTS to LIE our country into war causing the death of our US FORCES!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Facts Not Necessary.
I was one of those Americans who was totally horrified and frightened as I watched the events of 9/11 on live TV. For days I sat there staring into the faces of the hijackers hour after hour, not ever questioning how they knew who they all were so quickly. But, when I heard, and I swear I did, Bush say they attacked us because of our military presence in Saudi Arabia, I thought to myself, well no wonder! Bush never repeated these words however, I have never been able to find them anywhere on the internet.
No, his message was quickly and permanently changed. The real reason was forever in the MSM and the lies were born. America never was allowed to have the discussion as to WHY.
Just like today, we see and hear over and over and over on TV, radio, and print, Rev. Wright saying "god, damn America", over and over and over. As if this was all he said and are led to believe he said it because he HATES AMERICA and is a racist.
We are not allowed to hear anything the Rev. said before or after this comment. Nope, it's not important and doesn't matter. We are to take this one little clip as fact and don't ask any questions, just listen to what they want us to hear. No discussion allowed!
Personally, I see the Rev's. words as both historically and factually accurate. I can understand his anger and see his anger as justified and that more people should be as outraged as he was and probably still is. But, we won't discuss those things.
Nope, we will just condemn the Rev's. words, tie Senator Obama to them, and persecute a great leader over an out of context sound bite.
Mission Accomplished
No, his message was quickly and permanently changed. The real reason was forever in the MSM and the lies were born. America never was allowed to have the discussion as to WHY.
Just like today, we see and hear over and over and over on TV, radio, and print, Rev. Wright saying "god, damn America", over and over and over. As if this was all he said and are led to believe he said it because he HATES AMERICA and is a racist.
We are not allowed to hear anything the Rev. said before or after this comment. Nope, it's not important and doesn't matter. We are to take this one little clip as fact and don't ask any questions, just listen to what they want us to hear. No discussion allowed!
Personally, I see the Rev's. words as both historically and factually accurate. I can understand his anger and see his anger as justified and that more people should be as outraged as he was and probably still is. But, we won't discuss those things.
Nope, we will just condemn the Rev's. words, tie Senator Obama to them, and persecute a great leader over an out of context sound bite.
Mission Accomplished
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Obama's Preacher, Bush's bin Laden's and Sauid Royal Family
I find it dispicable that Obama's relationship, and connection to Rev. Wright is being made out to prove by some, that Obama is not who he says he is. The media is almost to the point now of implying that Obama himself wrote the sermon for Rev. Wright. Even though the Reverend's statements are both historically and factually correct. I guess Obama just doesn't have the right kind of Christianity through Rev. Wright.
Senator Obama has had to come out and renounce and reject, and vehemently disagree with Rev. White. He has been forced to run far and fast away from this man. Senator Obama is clearly being persecuted by guilt through association. What a sad America we live in. Perhaps he should have his daughter's re-baptized too on national TV.
President George W Bush, and his father former President George H W Bush, however get a complete and total pass on their relationship and direct self chosen ties to the Bin Laden family. These two men also get the same pass regarding their close family relationship, business dealings, government cooperation, and looking the other way on Saudi terrorists, that come from the land of the Saudi Royal family, that still today kill US Citizens in Iraq.
This is absolutely pathetic... I wish Bush and his Admin would be interrogated in this manner regarding their relationships with people in the world. Breitbart.tv » Obama on Pastor’s Controversial Statements: ‘If I Had Heard Them Repeated, I Would’ve Quit’ the Church
This is the treatment the Bush's get over their relationship with the Bin Laden family...
"I don't think the sins of the son should be visited on the father or the brother and the cousins and the aunts." ('WSJ,' 27 September 2001)
And while the Bush family still holds hands with their FRIENDS the Saudi Royal family, The NBC News analysis of Web site postings found that 55 percent of foreign insurgents came from Saudi Arabia.
USA Today 12/08 CAIRO (AP) — Private Saudi citizens are giving millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons.......
If the Bush's were held to the same standard as Senator Obama is on his relationships, it would have to be said that the Bush family is directly tied to and responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans across the world.
But we know that this is not the case. I say that anyone who looks the other way and gives the Bush family a pass, yet persecutes Senator Obama for his Pastor's words, is a hypocrite, and could even be considered complicit and in complete agreement for the REAL REASONS these people kill Americans and do what they do in the first place.
Therefore, if the Bush Family does not reject and denounce, their friendship and cut all business ties with their bin Laden business partners along with their family friends the Saudi Royal Family, that they SUPPORT the KILLNGS of AMERIACNS in the WORLD, and approve of their murderous ways.
Senator Obama has had to come out and renounce and reject, and vehemently disagree with Rev. White. He has been forced to run far and fast away from this man. Senator Obama is clearly being persecuted by guilt through association. What a sad America we live in. Perhaps he should have his daughter's re-baptized too on national TV.
President George W Bush, and his father former President George H W Bush, however get a complete and total pass on their relationship and direct self chosen ties to the Bin Laden family. These two men also get the same pass regarding their close family relationship, business dealings, government cooperation, and looking the other way on Saudi terrorists, that come from the land of the Saudi Royal family, that still today kill US Citizens in Iraq.
This is absolutely pathetic... I wish Bush and his Admin would be interrogated in this manner regarding their relationships with people in the world. Breitbart.tv » Obama on Pastor’s Controversial Statements: ‘If I Had Heard Them Repeated, I Would’ve Quit’ the Church
This is the treatment the Bush's get over their relationship with the Bin Laden family...
"I don't think the sins of the son should be visited on the father or the brother and the cousins and the aunts." ('WSJ,' 27 September 2001)
And while the Bush family still holds hands with their FRIENDS the Saudi Royal family, The NBC News analysis of Web site postings found that 55 percent of foreign insurgents came from Saudi Arabia.
USA Today 12/08 CAIRO (AP) — Private Saudi citizens are giving millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons.......
If the Bush's were held to the same standard as Senator Obama is on his relationships, it would have to be said that the Bush family is directly tied to and responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans across the world.
But we know that this is not the case. I say that anyone who looks the other way and gives the Bush family a pass, yet persecutes Senator Obama for his Pastor's words, is a hypocrite, and could even be considered complicit and in complete agreement for the REAL REASONS these people kill Americans and do what they do in the first place.
Therefore, if the Bush Family does not reject and denounce, their friendship and cut all business ties with their bin Laden business partners along with their family friends the Saudi Royal Family, that they SUPPORT the KILLNGS of AMERIACNS in the WORLD, and approve of their murderous ways.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
If Bush were a Democrat
As if it weren't bad enough that Americans have been continually lied to by Bush and his henchmen since 2000, we have also been lied to by our Democratic leadership in Congress since 2005 when they began to see a chance at a majority.
Out of what can only be viewed as "self concern" for their re-election to office and political careers, these selfish bastards have not only not held Bush accountable for the lies, they have held the rug up while others held the brooms to sweep it all away.
Where is John Conyers ? Certainly not in the headlines regarding any impeachment investigation. He seems perfectly content (or too afraid for his position and career) to just let things be.
Where is Henry Waxman? Sibel Edmonds is waiting.
935. Nine Hundred-thirty five. 32.08 is the number of dead and wounded US soldiers for each one of the 935 LIES told to America and the world by Bush and his thugs. But here again, our Democratic leadership tells us they can't RISK hurting their chances in Nov. 2008. It is much more about them personally than it is about accountability. After all, they must protect themselves at all costs. They fear bringing anything to light would only embarrass them and hurt them as a party.
But, what if Bush were a Democrat? If Bush were a Democrat, I believe the Democratic Leadership's actions prove that in order to PROTECT THEMSELVES and their careers Pelosi would be out there on TV every night championing impeachment and accountability to stave off political embarrassment.
Just one more trip through the Looking Glass in a way
Out of what can only be viewed as "self concern" for their re-election to office and political careers, these selfish bastards have not only not held Bush accountable for the lies, they have held the rug up while others held the brooms to sweep it all away.
Where is John Conyers ? Certainly not in the headlines regarding any impeachment investigation. He seems perfectly content (or too afraid for his position and career) to just let things be.
Where is Henry Waxman? Sibel Edmonds is waiting.
935. Nine Hundred-thirty five. 32.08 is the number of dead and wounded US soldiers for each one of the 935 LIES told to America and the world by Bush and his thugs. But here again, our Democratic leadership tells us they can't RISK hurting their chances in Nov. 2008. It is much more about them personally than it is about accountability. After all, they must protect themselves at all costs. They fear bringing anything to light would only embarrass them and hurt them as a party.
But, what if Bush were a Democrat? If Bush were a Democrat, I believe the Democratic Leadership's actions prove that in order to PROTECT THEMSELVES and their careers Pelosi would be out there on TV every night championing impeachment and accountability to stave off political embarrassment.
Just one more trip through the Looking Glass in a way
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Bush's Role in the Sub Prime Mess
I haven't yet heard Bush's name really mentioned regarding the financial disaster caused by the sub-prime mortgage crisis yet. Well here's a tid bit from 2002 when Bush addressed HUD.
Remarks by the President on Homeownership - HUD
Bush's "Dream Plan" specifically targeted poor minorities all across America. I guarantee you that bundling these sub-prime loans was well discussed and thought out before hand. Someone needs to point Bush's role out in this mess to the world! Here are some excerpts from Bush's speech to HUD in 2002.
"Let me first talk about how to make sure America is secure from a group of killers, people who hate -- you know what they hate? They hate the idea that somebody can go buy a home. "
"I worry about our economy, because there are people who can't find work who want to work."
"We also have got to understand, in this land of plenty, there are pockets of hopelessness and despair. You know, I mentioned the word American Dream in Atlanta. I also recognize that some people aren't sure that dream extends to them. "
"...our jobs, our collective jobs, is to make sure that notion of the American Dream extends into every single neighborhood around this country."
".....less than 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanics own homes. That ownership gap signals that something might be wrong in the land of plenty. And we need to do something about it."
"But it's going to mean we're going to have to work hard to achieve the goal, all of us. And by all of us, I mean not only the federal government, but the private sector, as well."
"And so I want to, one, encourage you to do everything you can to work in a realistic, smart way to get this done. I repeat, we're here for a reason. And part of the reason is to make this dream extend everywhere"
"The third problem is the fact that the rules are too complex. People get discouraged by the fine print on the contracts. They take a look and say, well, I'm not so sure I want to sign this. There's too many words. (Laughter.) There's too many pitfalls. So one of the things that the Secretary is going to do is he's going to simplify the closing documents and all the documents that have to deal with homeownership"
"It is essential that we make it easier for people to buy a home, not harder........We've got people who have newly arrived to our country, don't know the customs. We've got people in certain neighborhoods that just aren't really sure what it means to buy a home."
"There's some people out there that can fall prey to unscrupulous lenders.........." Bush goes on here, but I just find this an odd choice of words considering what has happened since.
"And so, therefore, I've called -- yesterday, I called upon the private sector to help us and help the home buyers. We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers."
Remarks by the President on Homeownership - HUD
Bush's "Dream Plan" specifically targeted poor minorities all across America. I guarantee you that bundling these sub-prime loans was well discussed and thought out before hand. Someone needs to point Bush's role out in this mess to the world! Here are some excerpts from Bush's speech to HUD in 2002.
"Let me first talk about how to make sure America is secure from a group of killers, people who hate -- you know what they hate? They hate the idea that somebody can go buy a home. "
"I worry about our economy, because there are people who can't find work who want to work."
"We also have got to understand, in this land of plenty, there are pockets of hopelessness and despair. You know, I mentioned the word American Dream in Atlanta. I also recognize that some people aren't sure that dream extends to them. "
"...our jobs, our collective jobs, is to make sure that notion of the American Dream extends into every single neighborhood around this country."
".....less than 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanics own homes. That ownership gap signals that something might be wrong in the land of plenty. And we need to do something about it."
"But it's going to mean we're going to have to work hard to achieve the goal, all of us. And by all of us, I mean not only the federal government, but the private sector, as well."
"And so I want to, one, encourage you to do everything you can to work in a realistic, smart way to get this done. I repeat, we're here for a reason. And part of the reason is to make this dream extend everywhere"
"The third problem is the fact that the rules are too complex. People get discouraged by the fine print on the contracts. They take a look and say, well, I'm not so sure I want to sign this. There's too many words. (Laughter.) There's too many pitfalls. So one of the things that the Secretary is going to do is he's going to simplify the closing documents and all the documents that have to deal with homeownership"
"It is essential that we make it easier for people to buy a home, not harder........We've got people who have newly arrived to our country, don't know the customs. We've got people in certain neighborhoods that just aren't really sure what it means to buy a home."
"There's some people out there that can fall prey to unscrupulous lenders.........." Bush goes on here, but I just find this an odd choice of words considering what has happened since.
"And so, therefore, I've called -- yesterday, I called upon the private sector to help us and help the home buyers. We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers."
Friday, January 18, 2008
Forget Reagan and Listen
All Barack Obama said was;
I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what's different are the times...I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.
Sadly, everyone STOPPED listening at Ronald Reagan. So, typical of the way things are today. I doubt Barack just said this off the top of his head without giving it much thought beforehand. I have always viewed Barack as a THINKER, and someone who has the ability to put things into context and see them in a whole picture. Barack is not a man of rhetoric and empty talking points. But, because you just might be, you STOPPED LISTENING as soon as Ronald Reagan was mentioned.
Ok, forget Ronald Reagan, and read this as a stand alone statement.
"I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating."
What was America going through during these times? Do you even remember? How did you and the rest of America feel during these years? Were you happy and confident with the direction of America? Or were you ready for "change" and a new direction? Barack did not say,"let's go back to the Reagan years", and he surely didn't in any way praise Reagan's policies.
And what about now, today, 2008, how do you feel?
Now let's take this part of Barack's statement as a stand alone also.
"..tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."
What, you don't want "clarity" as to just what the hell direction America going anyway? Would you just rather continue to fight among one another, let alone the world, than to have a clear vision for America and just bicker over the use of Ronald Reagan's name?
Is "optimism" and hope and positive thinking ways for leadership not your idea of a better America?
Maybe you're just upset because Barack didn't inject "God" into his statement or, military, and most powerful nation, and flag, and prayer, AFTER he mentioned Ronald Reagan. Then again maybe your 're upset because this is all you thought of when you heard Ronald Reagan's name.
American's need to learn to LISTEN, and get out of the mentality that Ronald Reagan did bring to America. Stop thinking division and left and right, and Clinton, Reagan, and start thinking about America and where we want to go from here. I choose a path.
I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what's different are the times...I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.
Sadly, everyone STOPPED listening at Ronald Reagan. So, typical of the way things are today. I doubt Barack just said this off the top of his head without giving it much thought beforehand. I have always viewed Barack as a THINKER, and someone who has the ability to put things into context and see them in a whole picture. Barack is not a man of rhetoric and empty talking points. But, because you just might be, you STOPPED LISTENING as soon as Ronald Reagan was mentioned.
Ok, forget Ronald Reagan, and read this as a stand alone statement.
"I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating."
What was America going through during these times? Do you even remember? How did you and the rest of America feel during these years? Were you happy and confident with the direction of America? Or were you ready for "change" and a new direction? Barack did not say,"let's go back to the Reagan years", and he surely didn't in any way praise Reagan's policies.
And what about now, today, 2008, how do you feel?
Now let's take this part of Barack's statement as a stand alone also.
"..tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."
What, you don't want "clarity" as to just what the hell direction America going anyway? Would you just rather continue to fight among one another, let alone the world, than to have a clear vision for America and just bicker over the use of Ronald Reagan's name?
Is "optimism" and hope and positive thinking ways for leadership not your idea of a better America?
Maybe you're just upset because Barack didn't inject "God" into his statement or, military, and most powerful nation, and flag, and prayer, AFTER he mentioned Ronald Reagan. Then again maybe your 're upset because this is all you thought of when you heard Ronald Reagan's name.
American's need to learn to LISTEN, and get out of the mentality that Ronald Reagan did bring to America. Stop thinking division and left and right, and Clinton, Reagan, and start thinking about America and where we want to go from here. I choose a path.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Move-On
Hillary said in New Hampshire: This is very personal for me. I have so many ideas for this country and I just don’t want to see us fall backwards. emphasis mine.
Fall backwards? How much more backwards can America be right now? What is it Hillary fears that America would fall backwards on? Is she afraid of moving backwards on the lousy lop-sided trade deals that have cost millions of American jobs in the last 16 years? Perhaps Hillary doesn't want to see her powerful corporate lobbyist friends fall backwards and take a back seat to the American people when it comes to current policy on things like healthcare, pharmaceuticals, banking, television and radio market ownership, the politicization of our judicial system, and the fact that most Americans have sat idly by while our Constitution has been shredded, ripped apart and ignored completely. And oh, all that executive power that the next president will be handed due to our current totally backward thinking do nothing, spineless, self-absorbed Congress.
Maybe Hillary doesn't want to see the insane ideology of American domination of the Middle East to fall backwards. After all, the war machine certainly gives her lots of money now don't they. Then there's the current position of American policy on torture and rendition that perhaps Hillary doesn't want to see fall backwards either. Does Hillary view alternative energy for America as falling backwards also? And gawd forbid No Child Left Behind were to fall backwards.
We are currently a nation that is nearly $10 TRILLION dollars in debt, we are stuck in an illegal occupation of Iraq that costs us billions of dollars a day, healthcare is a mess, education is failing, wages are falling, prices are rising, the straw houses bush built to grow his economy are on fire, and Hillary tells Americans,".. I just don’t want to see us fall backwards."
Odd choice of words in my opinion. I think this is the gaff of the 2008 race for the Democratic nomination. Hillary has stolen Obama's message about change and hope and confidence in the American people, but then subconsciously slips her real view on how she see's those changes as backwards. What would Freud say I wonder? I mean considering her past support for all the things that have really put America on this backward track we've been on for so long and all.
Hey Hillary, maybe you should have said "Move-on" instead of fall backwards.
Fall backwards? How much more backwards can America be right now? What is it Hillary fears that America would fall backwards on? Is she afraid of moving backwards on the lousy lop-sided trade deals that have cost millions of American jobs in the last 16 years? Perhaps Hillary doesn't want to see her powerful corporate lobbyist friends fall backwards and take a back seat to the American people when it comes to current policy on things like healthcare, pharmaceuticals, banking, television and radio market ownership, the politicization of our judicial system, and the fact that most Americans have sat idly by while our Constitution has been shredded, ripped apart and ignored completely. And oh, all that executive power that the next president will be handed due to our current totally backward thinking do nothing, spineless, self-absorbed Congress.
Maybe Hillary doesn't want to see the insane ideology of American domination of the Middle East to fall backwards. After all, the war machine certainly gives her lots of money now don't they. Then there's the current position of American policy on torture and rendition that perhaps Hillary doesn't want to see fall backwards either. Does Hillary view alternative energy for America as falling backwards also? And gawd forbid No Child Left Behind were to fall backwards.
We are currently a nation that is nearly $10 TRILLION dollars in debt, we are stuck in an illegal occupation of Iraq that costs us billions of dollars a day, healthcare is a mess, education is failing, wages are falling, prices are rising, the straw houses bush built to grow his economy are on fire, and Hillary tells Americans,".. I just don’t want to see us fall backwards."
Odd choice of words in my opinion. I think this is the gaff of the 2008 race for the Democratic nomination. Hillary has stolen Obama's message about change and hope and confidence in the American people, but then subconsciously slips her real view on how she see's those changes as backwards. What would Freud say I wonder? I mean considering her past support for all the things that have really put America on this backward track we've been on for so long and all.
Hey Hillary, maybe you should have said "Move-on" instead of fall backwards.
Monday, November 05, 2007
Changes
How many times have we elected an individual to represent us in DC, who at the time was just a semi ordinary person. Only to watch them becomes MILLIONAIRES on our dime! Then whose interests do they represent?
Since Americans seem to be on a roll for wanting to change things in DC, I thought I'd put my two cents in.
1. Instead of posh million dollar second homes in DC. I suggest GOVERNMENT BARRACKS and dining facilities where members of both parties have to live together, share bathrooms, eat together, and strict policies of NO LOBBYISTS after 9:00 pm.
2. Instead of nearly $200,000 a year salaries and socialized health care plans and yearly cost of living increases, and full salary retirement give them: AVERAGE SALARIES of the state they represent, average salary increases of their state's constituents, Health Care like we get from our employers, and 401K for retirement to supplement their SOCIAL SECURITY. The pay checks STOP when they break the law or , get voted out.
3. PUBLIC FINANCING period. No lobbyist dollars from ANYONE! No lavish LOBBYIST TRIPS and GIFT allowed! No lobbyist fund raising lunches or dinners. All EARMARKS will be UP FRONT and the name of the person requesting them will be OPEN PUBLIC INFORMATION! NO "LOOP HOLES"!
4. DURING WAR TIME members stay in DC without going home every weekend and adhere to the same "TOURS of DEPLOYMENT" lengths as our US Military soldiers!
These are just some of the changes, we all know the list could go on and on. I want people in Washington DC who WANT to SERVE for the sake of serving, (like our military does) not as a way to get put on the fast track to becoming a millionaire while they do virtually nothing for us!
And one more thing. I would like to have a two week period each year (August) where WE THE PEOPLE can if we choose to, go to DC, and have EACH AND EVERY elected member be present on the floor of the House, and where WE THE PEOPLE could ASK the QUESTIONS in a NATION WIDE PUBLIC FORUM! LIVE on CSPAN! NO middleman.
The only thing that the American people from both parties seem to be able to agree on about our government is THAT IT IS BROKEN! Well then let us embrace this common ground BUILD on THIS and BRING ABOUT THE CHANGE that only WE THE PEOPLE have the POWER TO DO!
PEACE !
bowncr1212
now if we could only find a way to SCARE THEM WITH OUTSOURCING their JOB TOO!
Since Americans seem to be on a roll for wanting to change things in DC, I thought I'd put my two cents in.
1. Instead of posh million dollar second homes in DC. I suggest GOVERNMENT BARRACKS and dining facilities where members of both parties have to live together, share bathrooms, eat together, and strict policies of NO LOBBYISTS after 9:00 pm.
2. Instead of nearly $200,000 a year salaries and socialized health care plans and yearly cost of living increases, and full salary retirement give them: AVERAGE SALARIES of the state they represent, average salary increases of their state's constituents, Health Care like we get from our employers, and 401K for retirement to supplement their SOCIAL SECURITY. The pay checks STOP when they break the law or , get voted out.
3. PUBLIC FINANCING period. No lobbyist dollars from ANYONE! No lavish LOBBYIST TRIPS and GIFT allowed! No lobbyist fund raising lunches or dinners. All EARMARKS will be UP FRONT and the name of the person requesting them will be OPEN PUBLIC INFORMATION! NO "LOOP HOLES"!
4. DURING WAR TIME members stay in DC without going home every weekend and adhere to the same "TOURS of DEPLOYMENT" lengths as our US Military soldiers!
These are just some of the changes, we all know the list could go on and on. I want people in Washington DC who WANT to SERVE for the sake of serving, (like our military does) not as a way to get put on the fast track to becoming a millionaire while they do virtually nothing for us!
And one more thing. I would like to have a two week period each year (August) where WE THE PEOPLE can if we choose to, go to DC, and have EACH AND EVERY elected member be present on the floor of the House, and where WE THE PEOPLE could ASK the QUESTIONS in a NATION WIDE PUBLIC FORUM! LIVE on CSPAN! NO middleman.
The only thing that the American people from both parties seem to be able to agree on about our government is THAT IT IS BROKEN! Well then let us embrace this common ground BUILD on THIS and BRING ABOUT THE CHANGE that only WE THE PEOPLE have the POWER TO DO!
PEACE !
bowncr1212
now if we could only find a way to SCARE THEM WITH OUTSOURCING their JOB TOO!
Friday, December 08, 2006
The Daily Bumper Sticker
Iraq isn't a War Zone...... It's a CRIME SCENE
Sunday, October 01, 2006
Admitting Defeat
Well bush got what he wanted... Congressionally approved legislation that says America can torture "enemy combatants", hold them indefinetly without charge, and absolve anyone who commits acts of torture in the name of g w bush's war on terra of any charges of a crime.
To me, bush has pretty much admitted DEFEAT in his stupid war. He can't beat em militarily so he may as well just beat the shit out of them physically if he can catch them.
You don't torture people you are DEFEATING in the first place.
To me, bush has pretty much admitted DEFEAT in his stupid war. He can't beat em militarily so he may as well just beat the shit out of them physically if he can catch them.
You don't torture people you are DEFEATING in the first place.
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Letter to Sen Dick Durbin
Dear Senator Durbin,
It's already late September and the Democrats have yet to come out with a meaningful message for America. Why did the Democrats cave to Bush on torture and lousy terms for detainee trials anyway? I am very frustrated at the timid nature of the Democratic party... Tell Harry to get off the ropes and get in there a fight! Punch first!
I don't know why the Democratic message isn't focusing on "Making America Stronger". Senator, do you realize that America and her people are totally dependent upon China, Japan, Mexico, India, etc. to conduct our daily liives?
We are in many ways held at bay as a strong nation due to the fact that America no longer produces the things we would need to sustain ourselves should "things" ever get nasty between us and them.
America would not be able to hold say China for example at bay should say Iran or North Korea ever get hostile.
China is flush with cash, and could bring America to its knees just by the empty Walmart shelves alone. What if China did invade Taiwan... whatcha gonna do? Not a damn thing, that's what. Bush already told Taiwan to sit down and shut up once.
What if the government of Mexico objected strongly to our 700 mile fence and said for example... We are cutting Amreican oil shipments by 25% and sending that additional amount to China.. and then Venezuela followed suit.
What if Pakistan goes nuclear on India disrupting production and communications that America depends on everyday in the business world?
None of the problematic senarios I mention could be dealt with militarily.
America IS a weakened nation, a dependent nation, a broke nation, and no military we could ever send could save America from the economic and daily livelyhood disruption of destruction we could face.
You may say well it's a different world now and all that garbage... but when you get right down to it, if a farmer who leases land for planting his crops is stopped by the land owner from planting that year... where does that leave him?
America is in dire need of being re-built and reinforced from within our shores, because the defenses we have to sustain us in time of crisis have turned to rubble via abandoned manufacturing plants.
Here is a test... send a staffer out.. have them try to fully stock a new home with the necessities from goods made in America... next have them re-supply your office with things you use daily following the same guideline... then have them go shop for parts for their car...then try buying emergency supplies like batteries and blankets and radios and two-way radios.. and finally have them come to work the next day in the wardrobe they were able to put together with made in America labels ( and not faux ones).. try to sustain this test for one month... and let me know... do you feel "secure"?
It's not "protectionism" Senator.. it's survival through strength of a nation from within.
"Globally" should be a term used for Americans that can afford to travel.. not a term for necessity.
This I guarantee you is a message that will resonate with loud approval from sea to shining sea.
Get busy.. hold the Republicans accountable for "selling America's security" through lousy Free Trade Agreements to increase corporate profits. Leave no American's security behind!
It's already late September and the Democrats have yet to come out with a meaningful message for America. Why did the Democrats cave to Bush on torture and lousy terms for detainee trials anyway? I am very frustrated at the timid nature of the Democratic party... Tell Harry to get off the ropes and get in there a fight! Punch first!
I don't know why the Democratic message isn't focusing on "Making America Stronger". Senator, do you realize that America and her people are totally dependent upon China, Japan, Mexico, India, etc. to conduct our daily liives?
We are in many ways held at bay as a strong nation due to the fact that America no longer produces the things we would need to sustain ourselves should "things" ever get nasty between us and them.
America would not be able to hold say China for example at bay should say Iran or North Korea ever get hostile.
China is flush with cash, and could bring America to its knees just by the empty Walmart shelves alone. What if China did invade Taiwan... whatcha gonna do? Not a damn thing, that's what. Bush already told Taiwan to sit down and shut up once.
What if the government of Mexico objected strongly to our 700 mile fence and said for example... We are cutting Amreican oil shipments by 25% and sending that additional amount to China.. and then Venezuela followed suit.
What if Pakistan goes nuclear on India disrupting production and communications that America depends on everyday in the business world?
None of the problematic senarios I mention could be dealt with militarily.
America IS a weakened nation, a dependent nation, a broke nation, and no military we could ever send could save America from the economic and daily livelyhood disruption of destruction we could face.
You may say well it's a different world now and all that garbage... but when you get right down to it, if a farmer who leases land for planting his crops is stopped by the land owner from planting that year... where does that leave him?
America is in dire need of being re-built and reinforced from within our shores, because the defenses we have to sustain us in time of crisis have turned to rubble via abandoned manufacturing plants.
Here is a test... send a staffer out.. have them try to fully stock a new home with the necessities from goods made in America... next have them re-supply your office with things you use daily following the same guideline... then have them go shop for parts for their car...then try buying emergency supplies like batteries and blankets and radios and two-way radios.. and finally have them come to work the next day in the wardrobe they were able to put together with made in America labels ( and not faux ones).. try to sustain this test for one month... and let me know... do you feel "secure"?
It's not "protectionism" Senator.. it's survival through strength of a nation from within.
"Globally" should be a term used for Americans that can afford to travel.. not a term for necessity.
This I guarantee you is a message that will resonate with loud approval from sea to shining sea.
Get busy.. hold the Republicans accountable for "selling America's security" through lousy Free Trade Agreements to increase corporate profits. Leave no American's security behind!
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
For-getting Bin Laden?
I think it's time to get Americans talking about Osama Bin Laden again. I think we should discuss the possibility that maybe bush doesn't want bin laden. Perhaps this has something to do with Bin Laden denying involvement in 9/11 to begin with. Maybe that's why he was allowed to "escape" at Tora Bora, and why the 'war" in Afghanistan was never all that important to bush, and just maybe why the FBI doesn't list 9/11 on his Wanted Poster!
Or did the Saudi's tell bush "hands off"?
And just maybe the report that Pakistan said Bin Laden could live there as long as he was a "good boy" was a ploy by bush to be able to say, "what do you want me to do?" Bush want Americans to forget about Bin Laden plain and simple. Just like he has.
Bin Laden was nothing but a "tool" to bush and his NeoCon Administration and now perhaps they are "done with him", having achieved eroding our Constitution, convincing Americans to succumb to fear, luring us into standing patiently in lines with our shoes off, allowing our phone calls and emails and Internet activity to be "monitored", emptying our pockets and bags for "security" every time we attend a public event or enter a government building, and on and on because there is danger everywhere!
But I believe Americans have to ask themselves at some point just how it all got to this point, and the answer is the American media. I do not believe that the American people would have allowed these eroding actions of our freedoms to take place without the media playing town crier for the White House. The American media was the "terrorists little helper" bush was counting on to achieve his goal. Terror was the message and Government control of a "willing public" was the prize.
I wonder, perhaps Bin Laden was secretly advising the bush administration and that's why he said in a Sept 2001 interview, "...[T]error is the most dreaded weapon in modern age and the Western media is mercilessly using it against its own people. It can add fear and helplessness in the psyche of the people of Europe and the United States. It means that what the enemies of the United States cannot do, its media is doing that.
So, I think it's time Americans begin discussing Bin Laden again knowing what we now know and see what the American media has to say in reply.
Or did the Saudi's tell bush "hands off"?
And just maybe the report that Pakistan said Bin Laden could live there as long as he was a "good boy" was a ploy by bush to be able to say, "what do you want me to do?" Bush want Americans to forget about Bin Laden plain and simple. Just like he has.
Bin Laden was nothing but a "tool" to bush and his NeoCon Administration and now perhaps they are "done with him", having achieved eroding our Constitution, convincing Americans to succumb to fear, luring us into standing patiently in lines with our shoes off, allowing our phone calls and emails and Internet activity to be "monitored", emptying our pockets and bags for "security" every time we attend a public event or enter a government building, and on and on because there is danger everywhere!
But I believe Americans have to ask themselves at some point just how it all got to this point, and the answer is the American media. I do not believe that the American people would have allowed these eroding actions of our freedoms to take place without the media playing town crier for the White House. The American media was the "terrorists little helper" bush was counting on to achieve his goal. Terror was the message and Government control of a "willing public" was the prize.
I wonder, perhaps Bin Laden was secretly advising the bush administration and that's why he said in a Sept 2001 interview, "...[T]error is the most dreaded weapon in modern age and the Western media is mercilessly using it against its own people. It can add fear and helplessness in the psyche of the people of Europe and the United States. It means that what the enemies of the United States cannot do, its media is doing that.
So, I think it's time Americans begin discussing Bin Laden again knowing what we now know and see what the American media has to say in reply.
Saturday, July 08, 2006
Alters of Old and Plots of New
I've noticed a pattern developing in the way bush is trying to frighten Americans these days.
Throughout 2002- 2004, Americans were bombarded with those COLOR CODED ALERTS, usually ORANGE , but always caveated with "no specific information" at the end of the alert story.
I think in 2005, they figured out Americans were LAUGHING at the color code thing.
Now, since they "GOT" Zarqawi, we hear a rash of broken up "Terrorist PLOTS " , but these are always followed by the caveat of "NO IMMINENT THREAT".
Will Americans fall for this garbage too?
Throughout 2002- 2004, Americans were bombarded with those COLOR CODED ALERTS, usually ORANGE , but always caveated with "no specific information" at the end of the alert story.
I think in 2005, they figured out Americans were LAUGHING at the color code thing.
Now, since they "GOT" Zarqawi, we hear a rash of broken up "Terrorist PLOTS " , but these are always followed by the caveat of "NO IMMINENT THREAT".
Will Americans fall for this garbage too?
Friday, June 30, 2006
Hamdan v. Rummsfeld
Yesterday our Supreme Court showed the entire world what our form of Government, which is based on our Constitution is all about. Although it may be quite complicated and hard to understand, what is easy to understand for everyone in the world is that in America even "terrorists" will be given a fair trial beacuse of our Constitution.
I think perhaps this landmark ( it will be) ruling may do more to spread Democracy throughout the world than any military action by bush could ever achieve. The headlines should be, "Despite bush, America's Constituton Prevails in Law", sub lined by "Gittmo Detainees Learn First Hand About Democracy!"
I've always thought that American should lead by example, and yesterday's ruling is a giant step that Americans everywhere should applaud and work towards getting this positive momentum running. Instead of criticizing our Supreme Court upholding our Constitution's Laws and respecting the Genevea Convention, and trying to write legislation that will only cause further contempt for America around the world today, American's should loudly embrace this triumph of our Constitution its Third Branch of Government.
If America's government is going to claim "superiority", they should act in a dignified and respectuful manner as demonstrated by yesterday's ruling.
I think perhaps this landmark ( it will be) ruling may do more to spread Democracy throughout the world than any military action by bush could ever achieve. The headlines should be, "Despite bush, America's Constituton Prevails in Law", sub lined by "Gittmo Detainees Learn First Hand About Democracy!"
I've always thought that American should lead by example, and yesterday's ruling is a giant step that Americans everywhere should applaud and work towards getting this positive momentum running. Instead of criticizing our Supreme Court upholding our Constitution's Laws and respecting the Genevea Convention, and trying to write legislation that will only cause further contempt for America around the world today, American's should loudly embrace this triumph of our Constitution its Third Branch of Government.
If America's government is going to claim "superiority", they should act in a dignified and respectuful manner as demonstrated by yesterday's ruling.
Monday, June 26, 2006
Self Censored Press
Once again the NYT along with the LA times is being ridiculed for reporting on Bush's secret (probably illegal) spying programs in big bold black letters on its front page. Congressman Peter King (R-NY) says he is going to ask the Attorney General to prosecute.
Adding further embarrassment to the White House, both papers told their readers that the Administration had asked them "not to print" the article.
I recently found something neither paper reported on, and I would bet it's because the White House asked them not to.
In February of THIS year, Zogby International went to Iraq and conducted a face to face poll with 944 US Troops on the ground throughout Iraq. The headline Zogby chose was:
US Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006. I don't recall seeing this headline or anything similar to it written by either paper. I happened across it during a Google search. Even the Google results didn't link to any MSM (main stream media) websites. That's because they didn't write a story on it.
How could this poll not have been news? The American people list the Occupation of Iraq ( I no longer refer to it as a war) as the number one issue facing us today, yet the American media was silent on this poll's findings.
From day one in America every time someone who opposed going to "war" in Iraq to begin with, or asked legitimate questions relating to Saddam's capabilities, the Bush Administration war cultists replied with "you don't support the Troops". Yet when the troops "speak" via a poll, the headlines are no where to be found.
What the poll results say to me is that our Troops on the ground being shot at and blown up while trying to occupy Iraq, see the "plan" as flawed. Our military is well trained, they are professionals and they go to do a job, but they don't see the job as do-able with the current "plan". It's not because they simply want to come home. It may have more to do with the fact that Rummsfeld had our military invade and then try and occupy Iraq with fewer soldiers than California has cops!
Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE), just pointed out that the term "cut and run", was designed in a Republican designed "focus group". Focus groups are for ADVERTISERS, not Military planners. This fact too got very little press attention.
This isn't the first time America's MSM has IGNORED big stories. Remember the Downing Street Memo? What about Ohio 2004? And 9/11 itself still has many unanswered questions, but the Press has moved on on this issue too.
So, before Americans jump on the "remove the press from the First Amendment" bandwagon , they may want to ask, what isn't the MSM telling us because the Bush Administration asked them not to?
Adding further embarrassment to the White House, both papers told their readers that the Administration had asked them "not to print" the article.
I recently found something neither paper reported on, and I would bet it's because the White House asked them not to.
In February of THIS year, Zogby International went to Iraq and conducted a face to face poll with 944 US Troops on the ground throughout Iraq. The headline Zogby chose was:
US Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006. I don't recall seeing this headline or anything similar to it written by either paper. I happened across it during a Google search. Even the Google results didn't link to any MSM (main stream media) websites. That's because they didn't write a story on it.
How could this poll not have been news? The American people list the Occupation of Iraq ( I no longer refer to it as a war) as the number one issue facing us today, yet the American media was silent on this poll's findings.
From day one in America every time someone who opposed going to "war" in Iraq to begin with, or asked legitimate questions relating to Saddam's capabilities, the Bush Administration war cultists replied with "you don't support the Troops". Yet when the troops "speak" via a poll, the headlines are no where to be found.
What the poll results say to me is that our Troops on the ground being shot at and blown up while trying to occupy Iraq, see the "plan" as flawed. Our military is well trained, they are professionals and they go to do a job, but they don't see the job as do-able with the current "plan". It's not because they simply want to come home. It may have more to do with the fact that Rummsfeld had our military invade and then try and occupy Iraq with fewer soldiers than California has cops!
Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE), just pointed out that the term "cut and run", was designed in a Republican designed "focus group". Focus groups are for ADVERTISERS, not Military planners. This fact too got very little press attention.
This isn't the first time America's MSM has IGNORED big stories. Remember the Downing Street Memo? What about Ohio 2004? And 9/11 itself still has many unanswered questions, but the Press has moved on on this issue too.
So, before Americans jump on the "remove the press from the First Amendment" bandwagon , they may want to ask, what isn't the MSM telling us because the Bush Administration asked them not to?
