Advertisement
-
545 People
Heres an Interesting Article I thought I would pass on to you-------Your Thoughts?
545 PEOPLE
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations... The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does..
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.
The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes..
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget.. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is also the leader of the majority party.
She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want.. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red .
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way..
There are no insolvable government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.
Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
more
-
56 men signed the Declaration of Independence
Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men
who signed the Declaration of Independence?
Five signers were captured by the British as traitors,
and tortured before they died.
Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.
Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army;
another had two sons captured.
Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or
hardships of the Revolutionary War.
They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes,
and their sacred honor.
What kind of men were they?
Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists.
Eleven were merchants,
nine were farmers and large plantation owners;
men of means, well educated,
but they signed the Declaration of Independence
knowing full well that the penalty would be death if
they were captured.
Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and
trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the
British Navy. He sold his home and properties to
pay his debts, and died in rags.
Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British
that he was forced to move his family almost constantly.
He served in the Congress without pay, and his family
was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him,
and poverty was his reward.
Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer,
Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton.
At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that
the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson
home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General
George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed,
and Nelson died bankrupt.
Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed.
The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months.
John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying.
Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill
were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests
and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his
children vanished.
So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and
silently thank these patriots.
It's not much to ask for the price they paid.
Remember: freedom is never free!
more
-
Sotomayor – Racist Activist?
By Rich W.
Much has been made of Sotomayor’s statement that she “would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” I don’t put much stock in short quotes out of context from years ago, and so I read the whole speech she made in 2001. In reading it I think she would also agree that a “wise ditchdigger . . .” In other words, our experiences influence our judgments in many ways. A breadth of experiences, hopefully, leads to wiser decisions. In further context, the speech was made at the annual “Honorable Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Memorial Lecture” at Berkley University. Given that she was asked to speak on diversity in the courts, her statement is not surprising. It would have been, if she had chosen to suggest that diverse experiences led to “less wise” decisions.
More recently, the Supreme court overturned her decision concerning the New Haven firefighters. But, was it her decision, and what was that all about? Let’s look at the background, and her part in the case.
Two tests were given to 118 firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut, to determine who would best fill promotions to Captain (7 positions) and Leutenant (8 positions.) For the captain’s test, 58% of the whites, 32% of the blacks, and 20% passed the test. For open positions, 10 whites were eligible due to their high scores, and no Blacks or Hispanics.
For the Lieutenant’s test, 64% white, 32% Black, and 20% Hispanic passed the test. 7 whites & two Hispanics were eligible for promotion.
Current federal law requires that such tests for promotion cannot have a “disparate impact on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” and that the test measures knowledge and abilities that are “job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.” Certainly, the results had “disparate impact”. They would have had to prove that the test was “job related” and “necessary”. The City of New Haven decided that the test did not comply with federal law, and refused to certify the results, while they searched for a solution.
Of course the city was sued by the winning firefighters. The federal district court upheld the city’s decision. The case was appealed to the Federal Second Circuit Court, and a three judge panel (including Sotomayor) unanimously agreed with the district court and city. It was appealed again, to the Supreme Court, and the lower courts’ ruling was overturned by a 5-4 decision.
So, what do I think about all this?
Firstly, Sotomayor’s opinion wouldn’t have changed the outcome even one iota. The most she could have done was to make the Circuit court’s decision divided rather than unanimous.
Secondly, there is serious debate about how the law should be interpreted in this case, and Sotomayor, the other two Judges on the circuit court, the District court Judge, and 4 Supreme Court judges weren’t wrong, just overruled.
Thirdly, her opinion wasn’t “activist”. If anything, the 5 judges that overruled their 4 peers and the 4 lower court judges were the “activists.” Perhaps the law, or portions of it, should be overturned. However, even this Supreme Court ruling doesn’t do so.
Lastly, I’d have to read up on some of the other cases she has ruled on to have an opinion of her, but don’t much care for “the spin.” I think she should be confirmed, and am reasonably sure she will be.
Rich W.
more
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)