Does the rule of law still mean anything?

Tuesday, June 30, 2009 Comments

Well, at least it does in Honduras. What the state-run media is calling a "military coup" was actually the arrest of their president for violating their Constitution, after attempts to get him to comply with the Constitution failed. It was carried out on orders from the Supreme Court after the Congress intervened.

What I can't figure out is why Obama is joining with the likes of Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro to side with the ousted would-be dictator.

Aside from the obvious question as to why the president of the United States of America wouldn't defend another country's right to uphold its own Constitution (oh yeah, he doesn't respect ours either), wasn't it just last week that he was telling us we have to be uber-careful to not be seen as meddling in the affairs of other countries? He turned a blind eye to the plight of Iranian citizens who wanted nothing more than freedom and integrity in their elections and took something like two weeks to make a statement (rather tepidly IMO) against the violence perpetrated on the people by their own government. Yet he wasted no time in rushing to the defense of a man who was removed from office for illegal activity.

Back to my original point about the rule of law... while I'm pleased to see Hondurans standing up for their Constitution, I can't help but wonder about the rule of law in our own country.

We have a president who continually violates the law and the Constitution whenever it suits him, a media that by and large refuses to call him on it, and so far the Supreme Court hasn't really weighed in. The rule of law has been replaced by the rule of "empathy" (isn't justice supposed to be blind?), or the rule of "I won" (so therefore I can do whatever I want and you can't stop me).

Read full post >>

Here we go again

Comments

Here is the end of John Boehner's comments in the House prior to the vote on "crap and tax." He is absolutely right when he says the American people expect and deserve better than to have our so-called representatives vote on a bill that they haven't read (how could they? it was 1,200 pages plus a 300 page amendment filed at 3am the morning of the vote), that hasn't even been completely written (placeholders?!), against the will of millions who melted the phone lines to express their disapproval of this. They knew full well that this bill is against the will of the people, that's why they chose to vote on it on a Friday evening, just a few days before a holiday weekend. It's why the Democrats spent the day making deals for who would be "allowed" to vote against it as long as they could still pass it. They know this will be a make-or-break issue when the next election comes around, and it's not that far off.



Read full post >>

Call Congress today: Vote NO on cap & tax

Friday, June 26, 2009 Comments

The House is voting today on the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade bill (aka Cap and Tax because it represents a huge tax that will raise the cost of literally everything in this country). Please call the switchboard at 202-224-3121 or 202-225-3121, or click here to find the contact information for your Representative.

When I called this morning, the switchboard numbers were busy, but I got through to my Congressman and confirmed he is voting no. If you don't get through, please keep trying! This is big enough that I would go so far as to say it will be a make-or-break vote in terms of whether I would vote for someone in the next election.




Obama pushes anti-gun treaty

Thursday, June 18, 2009 Comments

He can't get it through Congress so he wants to circumvent the House (only the Senate ratifies treaties), not to mention yet more trampling on the Constitution. Let's hope the Senate won't go for this, time to start calling / writing.



For more information, click here and here.

TOTUS

Wednesday, June 17, 2009 Comments

A little break in all the seriousness for something funny:

Letter to Washington: We the people are coming

Tuesday, June 16, 2009 Comments

Glenn Beck read this on his radio program today, he received this from someone in Arizona, it's an open letter to Washington, DC. I'm sharing it here to spread the word, I think a lot of us feel this way (I know I do). It's a little long, but well worth the read.

UPDATE: Please take a moment to sign the petition if you agree with this letter.

I'm a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you're willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would horribly feel so disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut job am I? Will you please tell me?

Well, these are briefly my views and issues for which I seek representation:



I'd love to hear your reactions. And on that note, are you planning to participate in one of the many July 4th tea parties, and/or join the march on Washington on 9/12?

Read full post >>

Personally opposed

Saturday, June 13, 2009 Comments

I want to preface this by saying I do not in any way, shape, or form condone murder of any kind. The man who killed Dr. Tiller (and in a church, no less - was I the only one surprised to learn that Tiller actually attended church? seems a bit incongruous but I'm getting off-track here...) was wrong to do so. As Mel pointed out, he deprived Tiller of the chance to change.

Having said that, I came across this and I think it captures well the absurdity of the position that many who are pro-abortion take.



Read full post >>

Gov't-controlled healthcare is not the answer

Wednesday, June 3, 2009 Comments

Do we really want government bureacracy to come between our families and our doctors? I know I don't.

The Obama administration is bent on shoving government-run healthcare down the throats of the American people, whether we like it or not. People need to understand that "universal healthcare" does not mean "free healthcare." It doesn't even mean "accessible healthcare." What it means is government-controlled healthcare. Each and every American will pay for it with significantly higher taxes, and many will pay with their lives as a result of delayed / denied care.





If you believe the claims that those with private insurance will be able to keep it with no change, you need to see this:



The goal will be to drive private insurance out of the market. One way to do that is by making it cost-prohibitive. Obama is open to proposals to tax employer-provided health insurance benefits for the first time ever. Government-run healthcare would, of course, not have such a tax. This will effectively tax the private health insurance industry out of business in my opinion, because most families will not be able to take on the additional tax burden of maintaining their private health insurance, on top of their premiums and the already increased tax burden that's coming in order to pay for the government's out-of-control spending.

Obama keeps talking about healthcare reform in terms of "cutting costs" and yet, clearly by the way he and Congress are struggling to come up with the funding for this, it's going to significantly increase costs to the American taxpayers, not decrease them.

Read full post >>