Chuck Schumer is Outraged Over Libby Clemency
Jul 7, 2007 Uncategorized
Senator Chuck Schumer is outraged that President Bush exercised his Constitutional authority in commuting Scooter Libby’s sentence. Schumer sent an email to people across the country expressing his “outrage.”
“George Bush has commuted the sentence of Scooter Libby and wiped away two and a half years of prison time with the stroke of his pen. President Bush is willfully ignoring Libby’s felony conviction, ignoring the jury’s guilty verdict, and ignoring the rule of law. Our nation deserves better. NewsMax
Another country heard from, as it were. Schumer is real good about getting his dander up over anything Bush or Republican but remains remarkably silent when members of his own party commit real crimes or do exactly the same things. Schumer himself was involved in a crime when he illegally obtained the credit report of Michael Steele, who was running for the open Senate seat in Maryland. Schumer kept the people responsible on the payroll and dismissed the whole incident while distancing himself from it.
Schumer was also one of the Senators who voted not guilty when Bill Clinton was impeached. With the stroke of a pen Schumer helped Clinton escape from facing his crimes. As far as credibility on an issue of ethics is concerned, Schumer lacks any standing. Where, by the way, was Schumer’s outrage when his prophet Clinton pardoned 140 people with the stroke of a pen? Clinton pardoned some folks while active investigations were going on. Clinton also fired every US federal prosecutor in order to remove one who was going after a friend of his in the Congress. Where was Chuck’s outrage?
Chuck Schumer is a loud mouth blow hard who screams about every act of President Bush. Like it or not the President exercised authority given to him by the Constitution, unlike those in Congress who continue to ignore that important document when they enact laws that are not authorized by it.
Schumer is right about one thing. He indicated in his email that “our nation deserves better.” It deserves better than two bit hacks running the place and we would be better served if people like Schumer were to be voted out of office.
Tags: Political Commentary
Another Big Brother Money Grab
Jul 7, 2007 Uncategorized
It is not a secret that governments use their law enforcement agencies to produce revenue. The use of red light cameras and the new practice of tacking civil penalties onto traffic tickets are designed to do one thing and one thing only and that is generate revenue for the local government (or for the state). Of course, politicians and law enforcement officers will never admit to this and will stick to the party line that it is about public safety. However, when jurisdictions take down or move red light cameras they cite decreased revenue as the reason. I have never heard them say “we made it so damned safe here that we do not need it any more.” People who believe that it is about public safety also believe that police officers do not have quotas. Regardless of what anyone tells you, they do.
I am not a fan of speed traps because they cause people to do stupid things and when one considers that the very cops giving out the tickets will exceed the speed limit when they leave, the idea of public safety becomes more blurred. Recently, a Maryland police officer (from one of the counties) was killed when he stepped out in traffic to stop a speeder and was struck. Was the revenue required bu his quota worth his life?
The use of automated devices is increasingly infringing upon our rights. While Democrats and the Communist ACLU worry about wire tapping terrorists local jurisdictions are happy to send a ticket in the mail for some infraction thus denying the defendant the right to face his accuser. The courts have upheld these devices though because it is all about the money.
The newest item to harass people is the stop sign camera and the first ones are set to be deployed in California (where else). These devices will monitor cars at stop signs and determine if the car was stopped for a sufficient amount of time before moving on. The cameras are designed to keep people from treating stop signs as yield signs. Who is to say how long is sufficient and how will people refute a camera, which is a still picture? California already has enough traffic problems without adding to them. I suggest each person who comes to a stop sign come to a complete stop and count to 10 before proceeding. This should gum up traffic pretty good and keep cameras from snapping $100 pictures.
I know it is just a matter of time before these stop sign cameras come to my state of Maryland. The Democrats in this state have screwed the budget up so badly that they are looking for any way possible to increase revenue. They are already discussing charging money for the number of points assessed for a traffic offense (in other words, speeding ticket $250 and 3 point on license. Tack on civil fine of $500-$1000 per point). These schemes are designed to do nothing more than increase revenue. When a politician says it is about safety, it is about money because they do not care about your safety, just safely keeping their jobs.
Americans need to start fighting back against intrusive government. A good start is for Californians to have prolonged stops at stop signs in order to mess up traffic and in order to keep cameras from fining them. Besides, maybe some of the stop signs will get changed to yield signs in the process.
Perhaps instead of making laws or using cameras the government can make speed limits more practical and use their power to crack down on aggressive and dangerous drivers and leave the rest of us alone.
Anything for money is what government is about. I imagine they will soon tax air and have monitors in our houses and work places so they can tell how much we are using.
Source:
theNewspaper.com
Unrelated trackbacks to Outside the Beltway ♦ Perri Nelson’s Website ♦ Blog @ MoreWhat.com ♦ 123beta ♦ Right Truth ♦ Adam’s Blog ♦ On the Horizon ♦ Stuck On Stupid ♦ Webloggin ♦ Leaning Straight Up ♦ Cao’s Blog ♦ The Amboy Times ♦ The Bullwinkle Blog ♦ , third world county ♦ Faultline USA ♦ Woman Honor Thyself ♦ The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns ♦ stikNstein… has no mercy ♦ The World According to Carl ♦ Pirate’s Cove ♦ Blue Star Chronicles ♦ The Pink Flamingo ♦ Dumb Ox Daily News ♦ Right Voices and Church and State
Thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: Link Fest, Political Commentary
Joe Biden is Insignificant, and He Knows it
Jul 6, 2007 Uncategorized
Senator Joe Biden has run for the Presidency in the past and he usually drops out of the race because he gets no support. Right now he is near the bottom of the barrel and the top tier candidates spend more on toilet paper than he has raised. Joe knows he has no chance and he probably just wants his name in the history books as an also ran so his great grand children can talk about how Poppa Joe almost made it *snicker*.
Joe has to do something, anything, to get media attention. Biden could capture Osama bin Laden and would not be on the news (though he would probably talk bin Laden to death). So what does he do? He attacks the President which seems to be the Democratic past time. In a recent speech (who knew he even had one) Joe Biden said that President bush was brain dead. Joe, and many other Democrats like to act as if President Bush is not a bright person. They insult his intelligence all the time and, of course, your Democratic candidate is so much smarter, or not brain dead, as it were.
So perhaps people can explain why Joe Biden voted for the war in Iraq? I know there are those, including Hillary Rodham, who say they were misled into war. If this is true, what does it say about their intelligence? Hillary, and many others, have stated they thought they were voting to give the option for war and that they believed that negotiations would be ongoing. The title of the resolution they voted on is, “A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.” If they could not figure they were voting for use of our armed forces (war) then what does it say about their intelligence?
Biden’s contention is that President Bush granted clemency to Libby and that shows Bush is brain dead.
“This is a guy who is on the balls of his heels, here’s a guy who is lower off in the polls than any president in modern history and he goes ahead and he does something that just flies in the face of the sensibilities of the American people.†New York Times
For those who do not know it, Biden voted not guilty in Clinton’s impeachment proceedings which basically excused Clinton for his illegal behavior. Not to mention that the President’s low approval ratings are still higher than the approval rating of the Congress. As much as the polls show people are dissatisfied with the President, they show that people are even more dissatisfied with Congress. Calling the President brain dead will not make those numbers go up.
But, it did get Biden some ink. When Paris Hilton gets more press for going to jail then a guy running for President, drastic measures are needed. Biden just showed how desperate, and insignificant he really is.
Unrelated trackbacks to Perri Nelson’s Website ♦ Blog @ MoreWhat.com ♦ third world county ♦ The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns ♦ On the Horizon ♦ Pirate’s Cove ♦ Stuck On Stupid ♦ The Pink Flamingo and Leaning Straight Up
Thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: Link Fest, Political Commentary
Anti War Zealots Refuse to Pay Taxes
Jul 5, 2007 Uncategorized
The idea that someone should not pay taxes because what those taxes goes toward is ridiculous. First of all, I don’t like to pay any taxes at all. I believe that the federal government wastes our money and then extorts more of it from us. Their henchmen in the IRS make sure we pay or we end up in real big trouble. Add the states that tax the hell out of people and it is no wonder that people who make 50,000 dollars a year have trouble making ends meet.
There is a group of anti war folks who are refusing to pay their taxes because they do not want the money they pay in to go toward funding the war. This is not a new idea and America’s last generation of ungrateful leeches had its share of people who refused to pay taxes so as not to fund the Vietnam War. I am having a little trouble with the logic of these ding bats. They oppose the war so they will not pay taxes that will go to pay for the war. Simple enough, but people do not get to pick and choose where their tax money goes. I could name at least a dozen programs that I do not want my tax money paying for. How would it work out if people decided not to pay taxes because of something they did not like that taxes were paying for?
Now the anti war zealots are trying to get legislation that will exempt their taxes from paying for the war:
War protesters have been pushing for a law called the Religious Freedom Peace Tax Fund that would allow designated conscientious objectors to have their income, estate, or gift taxes used for nonmilitary purposes. After years of efforts, they hope a Congressional hearing will be held on the proposal next year. My Way News
Anyone who reads this blog knows how I feel about the First Amendment and the Religion aspect of it. I know that there is no such thing as separation of church and state. However, since this is what the ACLU yaps about all the time, let me play devil’s advocate. If the government allows these folks’ taxes not to pay for war based on religion, isn’t that a violation of this separation of church and state thing the ACLU keeps inventing?
Putting that aside, would it be OK for religious people to refuse to have their taxes pay for things to which they oppose on religious grounds, such as abortion? Imagine how that would dry up abortions if people who oppose it could stop their taxes from paying for it. How about those of us who do not have children in school. Are we free to request that we do not pay taxes for schools? The article indicates that many of these people have taken jobs that pay so little money that they do not pay taxes at all. Suppose those of us who do pay taxes do not want our taxes to pay for the street repairs where these folks live. Or perhaps we do not want to pay for police and fire departments in their neighborhoods. If they are not paying taxes then they must not be entitled to the services that taxes pay for.
This whole issue is a slippery slope and once this bell is rung there will be no end to the number of people seeking to keep their taxes from paying for things they just don’t like.
Come to think of it, I am not that fond of the Congress. Is there anyway I can keep my money from going to them? Not unless I want their mob enforcers in the IRS showing up at my door with a horse head.
Unrelated Trackbacks to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson’s Website, Right Truth, The Populist, The Pet Haven Blog, DragonLady’s World, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Pursuing Holiness, Right Celebrity, third world county, Wake Up America, stikNstein… has no mercy, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Pundits, Exposing the Neo-Right, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Random Yak, DeMediacratic Nation, 123beta, Maggie’s Notebook, Webloggin, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao’s Blog, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Alabama Improper, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Planck’s Constant, High Desert Wanderer, The Yankee Sailor, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: Link Fest, Political Commentary
Jesse Jr. Wants Impeachment
Jul 3, 2007 Uncategorized
It isn’t bad enough that Jesse “Pimp Daddy” Jackson Sr. is a race baiting poverty pimp who shows up at every alleged act of racism and who has questionable dealings (read potentially illegal) but to have his son, a US Congressman, berate the President for granting clemency to Scooter Libby is just too much to bear. This half wit actually wants Bush impeached because the President exercised his Constitutional authority to grant clemency. Jackson Jr. said that it was time to impeach for crimes against the Constitution, with the clemency supposedly being the final straw.
I guess Jackson skipped law school the day they discussed this part of the Constitution. Article II, Section 2 clearly states:
…and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
How on Earth is this a crime against the Constitution? The President exercised his Constitutional authority in this matter and the Legislative Branch has no say in it. For a junior race baiter to chime in with such an absurd suggestion is beyond the pale. Jackson Jr. feels that it was improper for Bush to do this and he is entitled to that opinion. There are many who disagree though one would be hard pressed to find a Democrat who is not incensed based purely upon partisan politics. Every one of these jackasses gave Clinton a pass on lying to the Grand Jury and now they want Libby to hang for being convicted of the very same thing.
I guess I can understand the ones who are running for President or people like Pelosi who is trying to take the focus of the dismal job she and her majority are doing. But a guy like Jackson, who only has a seat because of daddy (probably extorted people so sonny would get elected) should keep in mind what an impeachable offense is. All he needs now is for pimp daddy to show up as the rhyming crusader and the circus tent will be full.
Everything with the dumb ass party is about impeachment. They just can not let go of the fact that Clinton was impeached (though unsuccessfully). They want revenge. Maybe they should spend more time governing and less time playing partisan games.
But then they wouldn’t be Democrats, would they?
Source:
CBS2 Chicago
Tags: Political Commentary