Hold Onto It Beyond the Law’s Reach

2010 February 9

Filed in:

Principalities and Powers (Government)

I heard the President once again criticize the senate for not compromising on health care.  He said that bipartisanship does not mean one side gets their way all the time.  He said he is willing to compromise some of his party’s desires to get a bill passed.

1)      Who said Bipartisanship is a worthy cause?

2)      Who said we want to pass this bill?

3)      Who said compromise of important points was a valid option?

4)      The president, when he believes things are important enough, declares he will sign an executive order.  Executive Orders are unconstitutional.  Presidents can’t make laws.  So, when he believes something is important he will hold onto it beyond the law’s reach.  Why can’t conservatives hold onto something within the law’s reach?

5)      The critics keep saying that filibustering is obstruction.  Yes, that’s the point.

6)      The critics keep calling the conservatives obstruction-IST. Only as long as the other side will admit in public that they are Social-ISTS.  Then, obstructionists are the type I would want to vote for.


Warming Indeed

2009 December 19

Filed in:

Principalities and Powers (Government)

Too bad the Administration is in Copenhagen right now…. their Admin buildings are covered in a foot of snow…early this year.  Warming indeed.

We Promise Not to Look at the Board

2009 December 1

Filed in:

Thrones, Principalities and Powers (Government)


Apparently, it’s important that our national financial policies NOT be run by our country.  We should fight for FREEDOM!  Freedom for foreign banking cartels to move our chess pieces while we promise not to look at the board.

The following snippet of a nice longer analysis comes from American Banking News

What Bernanke subtly attempts to do here is take the issue out of the authority of the United States in the minds of the readers and place it in the authority of “global consensus.” Who cares about global consensus, and what he also calls the “appropriate role of central banks?”

With the fact that Bernanke continually refers to this in a variety of ways when attempting to defend the Federal Reserve in its ‘doing business as usual,’ it seems to strike at the core of what Ron Paul and many of us are concerned about, and that is what types of entangling alliances and agreements are being made with foreign governments and foreign central banks without lawmakers or the American people knowing what they are. This, probably more than anything else, is what Bernanke wants to keep hidden.