A great lesson by Bill Whittle explaining ways which The Constitution is bastardized by abuses in our system.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Petition GOP Candidates to DECLINE Donald Trump Moderated Debate
This is my first post in a long while, but it seems time to jump back into the fray of online commentary.
I have created a petition imploring the GOP candidates to decline the invitation to participate in the Newsmax Presidential debate moderated by Donald Trump. While I respect Mr. Trump as a businessman and influential voice for America, I believe he carries with him "political baggage" based on his shortlived candidacy which may overshadow substantive discussion during the debate. Critics will no doubt ignore the message of the Candidates and frame their post debate commentary solely on Mr. Trump and his statements/views in their core analysis.
If you agree with me, please sign the petition and share with your social networks. These debates are about the American People, and should be approached with the gravitas consistent with the position of President of the United States. Check out the full petition here: Petition GOP Candidates to Decline Trump Debate Invitations.
If you have any campaign contact information that could be effective to forward this petition, please email them to me observer140@gmail.com Thank you.
I have created a petition imploring the GOP candidates to decline the invitation to participate in the Newsmax Presidential debate moderated by Donald Trump. While I respect Mr. Trump as a businessman and influential voice for America, I believe he carries with him "political baggage" based on his shortlived candidacy which may overshadow substantive discussion during the debate. Critics will no doubt ignore the message of the Candidates and frame their post debate commentary solely on Mr. Trump and his statements/views in their core analysis.
Why This Is Important
American voters would like to take this opportunity to implore you NOT to participate in the scheduled GOP debate sponsored by Newsmax and moderated by Mr. Donald Trump. While Mr. Trump's business acumen and contribution thereof as a member of our society are unquestioned -- his ability to create jobs, spur growth, create profits, promote capitalism, and his position in the iconography of American business leaders -- we do not believe his participation as moderator for a Presidential debate is one that is consistent with the gravitas of the position. Mr. Trump has made controversial comments within the last 18 months in his efforts to gain publicity for his own potential campaign which will serve to effectively hi-jack each respective candidate's message during this debate. Mr. Trump's participation will be a distraction to the process, provide fodder for critics, turn off Independent voters searching for a substantive policy debate, overshadow each candidates thoughtful message, and ultimately will make Mr. Trump the centerpiece of an event which should be highlighting the Candidates, and not the moderator. This will hinder our ability to get to know YOU as a candidate, and provide due respect to your message and vision for our great country.
Please accept our thoughts and feedback with due respect, and respectfully decline the Newsmax invitation. It is America, and The People, who should be the integral focus of each Presidential debate. As voters, it is important for us to get to know the Candidates in a forum which pays respect to the importance of the process and position of President of the United States of America. Raising the standards we expect in our government and people, and rising above the demagoguery currently stalling our government STARTS HERE. Treating this process with the respect it deserves, in short, shows the American People that we are respected as thoughtful contributors -- and not just faceless votes.
God bless you, and God bless America.
If you agree with me, please sign the petition and share with your social networks. These debates are about the American People, and should be approached with the gravitas consistent with the position of President of the United States. Check out the full petition here: Petition GOP Candidates to Decline Trump Debate Invitations.
If you have any campaign contact information that could be effective to forward this petition, please email them to me observer140@gmail.com Thank you.
By CJB with No comments
Friday, July 1, 2011
...the business community is always complaining about regulations. -- Barack Obama.
"Keep in mind.the business community is always complaining about regulations... they want to be able to do whatever they think is going to maximize their profits."
By Citizen Reporter with No comments
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Bachmann an idiot? Teabaggers? Race Card? Same liberal arguments, new election.
Added Jan 6, 2010, Under: Election Coverage , Media Bias , Online , Politics , progressives , racism , White House
I was inspired to swype out a quick comment to a liberal "comedian" blogger on the Cagle Post blogsite today, and thought I'd share it. The blogger does not advance any new arguments -- instead relying on the liberal standard playlist of: Call republicans stupid and simple; Mock the intellect of Republican women; Shuffle deck, pull out race card; use euphemism "teabaggers" to show liberal "intellect"; Repeat. It seems as though even the left understand Obama's failure as a President, and instead of finding arguments which support his re-election, can only say "Bachmann is stupid, vote for Obama". While Obama's intellect in itself is still up for debate, his performance as a President is not. Which is why I decided to comment.
Its interesting to me that the blogger is citing democracy while at the same time saying Palin and Bachmann's entry into the democratic election system is a detriment to it. Another blatant example of liberals and their "do as I say, not as I do", "we know better than you do" mindset.
The post in question can be found here: Democracy gone wild starring Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann
My comment below:
Its interesting to me that the blogger is citing democracy while at the same time saying Palin and Bachmann's entry into the democratic election system is a detriment to it. Another blatant example of liberals and their "do as I say, not as I do", "we know better than you do" mindset.
The post in question can be found here: Democracy gone wild starring Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann
My comment below:
Michele Bachmann is more qualified than Obama was when he was elected in 08 as a no-show Senator. Did you give the same ridiculous commentary about his credentials when he was the nominee? Your major beef is that she misspoke about NH and Mass history in a throw away line from a speech, deriding her intellect? Did you devalue Obama's intelligence in the same manner you have done here when he spoke of visiting "57 states" in a high profile campaign speech for President?
I think I'll adopt your train of thought and agree with you -- because of her lack of understanding of the history of the subject Michelle Bachmann is not qualified to be Governor of NH or Mass; and because of his lack of understanding of US History Barack Obama is not qualified to be President of the United States. He is an intellectual stammerer. His grand ideas are pedestrian and not grounded in logic. He does not accept viewpoints which oppose his own. Worse of all, he can not admit his shortcomings, can not adapt to changing landscapes, and will not accept that he is not the smartest man in any room. This all to our detriment.
Just like every President before him Barack Obama has inherited problems. In fact, it is arguably the main thrust of this job and, if he ever held a job he would know this, every upper or management position in the workforce. Unlike every President before him, Barack Obama thinks he should be exempt from judgment of his response to these problems. His job is to fix and guide the country as President at the time he is voted into Presidency. It's what he ran on, it's what it was voted on. Because now it has become abundantly clear his performance through policies and decisions are not meeting his defined goals and mission -- he should be replaced. He does not get a perpetual pass because "well, they broke it." We know someone else broke it -- that's why we voted you in... TO FIX IT! All he has done is perpetuated the problems, compounded the decline, and pointed fingers. But he has managed to make it a better country for his friends (donors), Unions (lobbys), and himself financially and legislatively in spite of, and on the backs of, the People of the United States.
He has failed us. And has done so magnificently. Like every President before him Barack Obama has inherited problems. And like many Presidents before him, he should be replaced for his substantial failures. He is not special, and he does not receive a pass. Each one of the individuals standing on the stage in NH on Monday have what Barack Obama did not - relevant experience. Whether they know where the first site of the Revolutionary War was or not.
By Citizen Reporter with No comments
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Did you know PROFITABLE corporation GE received $139 Billion in bailout money?
Added Jan 6, 2010, Under: Economy , jobs , Online , Politics , progressives , Socialism , White House
Ben Howe of Redstate posted an interesting short information video about the relationship between the White House and GE Corp.
Did you know GE, an enormously profitable business, has received $139 Billion (with a B) in bailout money. Inadvertent to taxpayers, but all too intentional for this White House, Citizens are funding $20billion in contracts to GE (again, an extremely profitable business) for "record modernization" via Obama's Health care initiative. This is technology GE almost exclusively owns and specializes in, and GE was issued grants/contracts by the government based on a direct request to Obama by CEO Jeffrey Immelt.
You might ask yourself, is it so bad that an American company is receiving government funds? That can only help the American workforce. Well, consider this:
Should we move towards "green" energy? Of course. We should have been doing so for years, but we haven't and are now decades behind. This doesn't mean we can just jump into the deep end. We must slowly allow for the infrastructure to meet the technology. However, our President has shown the tendency to ignore that simple premise. He is willing to deploy policy (Obamacare) which can not currently be sustained, be damned the impact because to him "it must be done now."
Jeffrey Immelt is supporting this premature ejaculation of progress because it is his goal to make the renewable energy arm of GE a multi-billion dollar business -- ahead of his competitors. This is a simple business strategy for GE. As long as there is one buyer who is willing to spend billions of dollars -- it doesn't matter if the technology is ready. The government will fund dead end projects, and make companies very rich in the process, without producing viable end product. This is a no win for the American public as it will force upon us more regulation, more taxes, and more personal expense without providing a palpable positive impact for our citizens and economy. As Spain can attest, Green energy initiatives, in their current state, kill jobs and bankrupt governments.
Thank god power CEO's of pseudo American companies can not substantially affect the policies in our White House, and the economic ideology of our President.
Except, GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt is now the head of President Barack Obama's Economic Advisory committee.
Did you know GE, an enormously profitable business, has received $139 Billion (with a B) in bailout money. Inadvertent to taxpayers, but all too intentional for this White House, Citizens are funding $20billion in contracts to GE (again, an extremely profitable business) for "record modernization" via Obama's Health care initiative. This is technology GE almost exclusively owns and specializes in, and GE was issued grants/contracts by the government based on a direct request to Obama by CEO Jeffrey Immelt.
You might ask yourself, is it so bad that an American company is receiving government funds? That can only help the American workforce. Well, consider this:
- GE recently has cut more than 21,000 US jobs and closed more than 20 factories
- More than 53% of GE's workforce is now outside the US
- GE used the financial overhaul as a way to dump its struggling financial arm at the expense of taxpayers
Should we move towards "green" energy? Of course. We should have been doing so for years, but we haven't and are now decades behind. This doesn't mean we can just jump into the deep end. We must slowly allow for the infrastructure to meet the technology. However, our President has shown the tendency to ignore that simple premise. He is willing to deploy policy (Obamacare) which can not currently be sustained, be damned the impact because to him "it must be done now."
Jeffrey Immelt is supporting this premature ejaculation of progress because it is his goal to make the renewable energy arm of GE a multi-billion dollar business -- ahead of his competitors. This is a simple business strategy for GE. As long as there is one buyer who is willing to spend billions of dollars -- it doesn't matter if the technology is ready. The government will fund dead end projects, and make companies very rich in the process, without producing viable end product. This is a no win for the American public as it will force upon us more regulation, more taxes, and more personal expense without providing a palpable positive impact for our citizens and economy. As Spain can attest, Green energy initiatives, in their current state, kill jobs and bankrupt governments.
Thank god power CEO's of pseudo American companies can not substantially affect the policies in our White House, and the economic ideology of our President.
Except, GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt is now the head of President Barack Obama's Economic Advisory committee.
By Citizen Reporter with No comments
Monday, January 24, 2011
Since when are the GOP obligated to serve as POTUS PR?
Sunday on Meet the Press Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was asked if he would reject "birther crazy talk". Mr. Cantor responded he would not reject the assertion, but did contend that he did not agree with it. In essence, Mr. Cantor's response was what every rational American's response should have been -- no matter what your personal belief about subject X you are entitled to it, just as those with differing beliefs are entitled to theirs.
So why is has it become so vogue for the DEMS to demand every GOP leader "repudiate" every single fringe opinion, thought, or idea that makes idle tongues wag? Eric Cantor believes the President is a rightful citizen, and stated it clearly. Period. It is not then his responsibility to work Public Relations for the embattled President to thwart every controversy that rears its head. That's what Robert Gibbs is for.
Mr. Gibbs implied the Republican leadership should be willing and is obligated to publicly oppose those who hold these unfounded beliefs because the President had supported efforts for a Congressional resolution which put to rest any controversy that John McCain's birth in the Panama Canal Zone had disqualified him for service as POTUS.
This coming from the same White House who would not publicly denounce the vitriol the NAACP leveled against the Tea Party in 2010. Even when it became clear there was a fringe left movement to affect the public perception of the Tea Party by infiltrating peaceful events claiming to be Tea Party members, and exhibiting blatantly racist behavior. A White House who did not publicly respond to the slanderous, ridiculous, malicious, and unfounded vitriol from Left Wing democrat leadership and personalities who tried to directly link Right Wing personalities with THE MURDER OF SEVERAL INNOCENT VICTIMS IN ARIZONA. Even when it became increasingly clear the actual perpetrator of the crimes was a mentally disturbed individual, apparently affected by left wing propaganda, and identified by his peers as a leftist. [My personal belief is that Loughner would have been affected by a Wonder Pets episode as easily as he was any political ideology]
So while the President and Democrat leadership willingly, openly, and predictably support and turn a blind eye to the malicious intent of persons in their own Leadership to level charges of Racism and Murder against SPECIFIC prominent members of conservative GOP circles -- they EXPECT those same individuals to come to the defense of the President in moot matters such as the existence of a verifiable Birth Certificate?
Are you kidding me? These are our statesmen? Our Dignitaries?
Their message is inconsistent, and their motivations are ultimately malicious.
The ridiculous charges leveled against the Conservative right after the Arizona shootings, and against the Tea Party in 2009-2010 were directly attributed to Democrat leaders who affect a broad swath of constituents -- and should have been IMMEDIATELY repudiated by Mr. Obama and top Democrat officials. The "birther" movement is a grassroots movement of citizens who share a common belief, and represent a fractional percentage of those who define as conservatives. It is not a popular sentiment amongst the majority of conservatives concentrating on the more pressing, traditional, and serious matters affecting their current political environment. It was a political non story when Lou Dobbs tackled it (to death) in 2008, and the top republicans have continued to treat it as such.
The GOP ignoring this ridiculous non-story -- to the dismay of the left wing media perpetually searching for ways to paint conservatives as ignorant, racist, "hicks" -- is the only appropriate response. Publicly repudiating (can we retire that word now; and "vitriol") the charge would be publicly validating it as worthy of our time and resources. This is what the DEMS want leading into a new campaign season -- their competitors concentrating on issues, topics, and manufactured stories which do not speak to the majority of the people casting votes. It is a formidable strategic plan to be the only party talking about serious issues, and to devalue the GOP brand.
If the conservatives are smart, they will recognize this and counter-punch with a strategy of their own.
Let it die.
So why is has it become so vogue for the DEMS to demand every GOP leader "repudiate" every single fringe opinion, thought, or idea that makes idle tongues wag? Eric Cantor believes the President is a rightful citizen, and stated it clearly. Period. It is not then his responsibility to work Public Relations for the embattled President to thwart every controversy that rears its head. That's what Robert Gibbs is for.
Mr. Gibbs implied the Republican leadership should be willing and is obligated to publicly oppose those who hold these unfounded beliefs because the President had supported efforts for a Congressional resolution which put to rest any controversy that John McCain's birth in the Panama Canal Zone had disqualified him for service as POTUS.
This coming from the same White House who would not publicly denounce the vitriol the NAACP leveled against the Tea Party in 2010. Even when it became clear there was a fringe left movement to affect the public perception of the Tea Party by infiltrating peaceful events claiming to be Tea Party members, and exhibiting blatantly racist behavior. A White House who did not publicly respond to the slanderous, ridiculous, malicious, and unfounded vitriol from Left Wing democrat leadership and personalities who tried to directly link Right Wing personalities with THE MURDER OF SEVERAL INNOCENT VICTIMS IN ARIZONA. Even when it became increasingly clear the actual perpetrator of the crimes was a mentally disturbed individual, apparently affected by left wing propaganda, and identified by his peers as a leftist. [My personal belief is that Loughner would have been affected by a Wonder Pets episode as easily as he was any political ideology]
So while the President and Democrat leadership willingly, openly, and predictably support and turn a blind eye to the malicious intent of persons in their own Leadership to level charges of Racism and Murder against SPECIFIC prominent members of conservative GOP circles -- they EXPECT those same individuals to come to the defense of the President in moot matters such as the existence of a verifiable Birth Certificate?
Are you kidding me? These are our statesmen? Our Dignitaries?
Their message is inconsistent, and their motivations are ultimately malicious.
The ridiculous charges leveled against the Conservative right after the Arizona shootings, and against the Tea Party in 2009-2010 were directly attributed to Democrat leaders who affect a broad swath of constituents -- and should have been IMMEDIATELY repudiated by Mr. Obama and top Democrat officials. The "birther" movement is a grassroots movement of citizens who share a common belief, and represent a fractional percentage of those who define as conservatives. It is not a popular sentiment amongst the majority of conservatives concentrating on the more pressing, traditional, and serious matters affecting their current political environment. It was a political non story when Lou Dobbs tackled it (to death) in 2008, and the top republicans have continued to treat it as such.
The GOP ignoring this ridiculous non-story -- to the dismay of the left wing media perpetually searching for ways to paint conservatives as ignorant, racist, "hicks" -- is the only appropriate response. Publicly repudiating (can we retire that word now; and "vitriol") the charge would be publicly validating it as worthy of our time and resources. This is what the DEMS want leading into a new campaign season -- their competitors concentrating on issues, topics, and manufactured stories which do not speak to the majority of the people casting votes. It is a formidable strategic plan to be the only party talking about serious issues, and to devalue the GOP brand.
If the conservatives are smart, they will recognize this and counter-punch with a strategy of their own.
Let it die.
By Citizen Reporter with No comments
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Keith Olbermann Fired!! (UPDATED)
According to sources for TMZ, Keith Olbermann's career has met an early demise at MSNBC. With two years left on his contract executives have decided to release him due to Comcast concerns about his history of defiance. Don't worry though, you won't see Keith at the intersection pimping his golden voice for a dollar. He reportedly will be paid out the remainder of his $7 million per year contract. Which explains, to me, why Keith rails against the Tea Party who oppose the Obama tax increases on the supposed "rich" -- because regardless of whether or not $250k per year is truly rich, it doesn't matter... Keith Olbermann IS!
Queue the verbose sermonizing (cough-Maddow) about "our colleague Keith's" journalistic integrity (cough-Rachel Maddow) and the hyperbole that will accompany about corporate corruption (cough-O'Donnell), right wing conspiracy, "they do it so why can't we" whining (cough-Schultz) and the memory of Edward R. Murrow (cough-Maddow-RachelMaddow) as the MSDemBC superstars elevate him to liberal martyrdom over the next fortnight. Until of course they realize it means someone else will get to move up on the power totem, and that $7 mill per year begins to look really appetizing (cough-EdSchultz-EdSchultz).
See the original article at TMZ.
UPDATE:
Mediaite reports Olbermann's termination wasn't incited by Comcast, but because he was "a difficult employee". Wouldn't that be like FNC firing Glenn Beck because he cries too much?
Queue the verbose sermonizing (cough-Maddow) about "our colleague Keith's" journalistic integrity (cough-Rachel Maddow) and the hyperbole that will accompany about corporate corruption (cough-O'Donnell), right wing conspiracy, "they do it so why can't we" whining (cough-Schultz) and the memory of Edward R. Murrow (cough-Maddow-RachelMaddow) as the MSDemBC superstars elevate him to liberal martyrdom over the next fortnight. Until of course they realize it means someone else will get to move up on the power totem, and that $7 mill per year begins to look really appetizing (cough-EdSchultz-EdSchultz).
See the original article at TMZ.
UPDATE:
Mediaite reports Olbermann's termination wasn't incited by Comcast, but because he was "a difficult employee". Wouldn't that be like FNC firing Glenn Beck because he cries too much?
By Citizen Reporter with No comments
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Obama to regulate regulations?
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Tuesday, President Obama announced plans to order a government wide review of regulations with the goal of eliminating those which overwhelm businesses, small businesses specifically, with job killing and economy stifling bureaucracy.
After two years in office which has seen trillions of tax dollars allocated towards "stimulus" that has included increased regulation (or arguable government takeover) in the housing/real estate industry, student loan industry, Wall Street and financial industry, and automotive industry; and a trillion dollar regulatory overhaul of the Health Care industry opposed by 70% of the citizens of our country, President Obama now believes there is too much regulation for businesses to function effectively.
Czar of Czars? Regulation of regulations? Is there anyone in the White House who finds this as redundant as the rest of us. Is this true concern from a President trying to capitalize on a "Clinton" moment after a November bloodbath and prove to the country he can govern from the center? Or is this just another calculated political game from a President trying to set up a crucial "vote-grab" for Independents as he ramps up for the 2012 Presidential campaign?
Read the full article at Yahoo?
After two years in office which has seen trillions of tax dollars allocated towards "stimulus" that has included increased regulation (or arguable government takeover) in the housing/real estate industry, student loan industry, Wall Street and financial industry, and automotive industry; and a trillion dollar regulatory overhaul of the Health Care industry opposed by 70% of the citizens of our country, President Obama now believes there is too much regulation for businesses to function effectively.
Czar of Czars? Regulation of regulations? Is there anyone in the White House who finds this as redundant as the rest of us. Is this true concern from a President trying to capitalize on a "Clinton" moment after a November bloodbath and prove to the country he can govern from the center? Or is this just another calculated political game from a President trying to set up a crucial "vote-grab" for Independents as he ramps up for the 2012 Presidential campaign?
Read the full article at Yahoo?
By Citizen Reporter with No comments
