Posts Tagged ‘Axe’

David Axelrod Argues for Smaller Government

by Doug Powers on Friday, May 17th, 2013

This is article 307 of 468 in the topic Government Corruption

Never thought I’d see the day that Greasy Axelrod advocated for shrinking the federal monstrosity, but if it’s too much for He Who Knows and Sees All to keep track of, Axe is right — time to cut its size:

The government is simply too big for President Obama to keep track of all the wrongdoing taking place on his watch, his former senior adviser, David Axelrod, told MSNBC. “Part of being president is there’s so much beneath you that you can’t know because the government is so vast,” he explained.

Come on, liberals, jump on board the “smaller government” bandwagon. Do it for the future of America. Or, if that’s not important enough of a consideration, do it for Obama.

*****
“Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.” Barack Obama, February 2008

“I’m hearing about this stuff from the news.” Barack Obama, May 2013

Go straight to Post

POLITICS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION

by Stephen Levine on Saturday, August 25th, 2012

Recently I was involved in a situation where a blogger noticed that someone apparently “plagiarized” a portion of one of my blog items. After reviewing the facts, the matter did not arise to the level of plagiarism, but more like the failure to attribute a quote. What makes it a non-issue for me is that the paragraph appears to be re-written, so it is not an exact reproduction of my words.

So why jump up and down? To quote an unknown author, “Big people discuss ideas, ordinary people discuss things, and small people discuss other people.” As long as the author made the point he was trying to make – and it agreed with my original intent – good on him. The author did not simply reprint one of my blog items under his own name – although that has happened before.

Could it be that the blogger and the publication have an axe to grind with a former politician and radio talk show host? Engaging in the politics of personal destruction because the blogger disagrees with the author’s viewpoint, conservatism or color?

Notice that I am not naming the individuals or the publications involved because I do not believe it is a big deal. In fact, I believe it is one of those non-issues that are rarely worth discussing.

Bottom line …

It is probably wise to consider who is speaking as well as what is being said. I know that much of what I write about Barack Obama and his fellow travelers appears to be snarky and in the same vein. But there is a difference. Here is a President who has promoted policies which have decimated my finances, the finances of the United States and more importantly, trashed our Constitution. Think about it, someone characterized as a constitutional law professor implementing clearly unconstitutional rules and regulations.

This is not some former politician and/or radio talk show host who made a mistake … this is the alleged leader of the free world and the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces. Someone clearly deserving of scorn.

I would have a diametrically different viewpoint if my work was commercial and it was abused for the profit of another individual. But it’s not and I don’t really think it is worth jumping up and down, waving one’s arms and saying  anything more than “bad puppy.”

— steve

Go straight to Post

JUST HOW DUMB ARE REPUBLICANS?

by Burt Prelutsky on Friday, March 2nd, 2012

This is article 583 of 1300 in the topic 2012 Elections

Someone once observed that Democrats are evil, whereas Republicans are stupid. As a Republican, I really wish I didn’t have to acknowledge the truth of that statement. But after suffering through the GOP primaries thus far, what choice do I have?

Frankly, I don’t object to the contenders going after each other with axe handles. That’s what primaries are for. Every contender should have ample opportunity to besmirch the other guy’s generally sleazy reputation. How else will we be able to find out the awful truth before the general election rolls around and we hear it from the opposition?

After all, on the important issues, such as an abolition of ObamaCare, removing all of those absurd EPA regulations stifling business, rebuilding the military and lowering taxes, they’re pretty much in agreement. The only exception, of course, is squirrely Ron Paul, who never allows one of his naps to be interrupted by nightmares involving a nuclear Iran.

The bone I have to pick with the RNC concerns the way they conduct primaries. For one thing, any state should be allowed to set its own date for a primary. It is beyond stupid that the world has to stop for weeks at a time just so that a few thousand people can gather for a little caucus in Iowa and an election involving less than a million people can be held in New Hampshire.

Only a Party of dunces would punish major states such as Michigan and Florida for moving up the dates of their primaries by slashing their number of delegates to the national convention in half.

By the time the election rolls around, I guarantee we’ll all be far more interested in the vote totals in Florida and Michigan than those coming out of Iowa and New Hampshire.

This is especially the case after Iowa proved that they can take two weeks to count up a handful of votes and still manage to get it wrong.

Next, we come to those other states that hold caucuses that are referred to as beauty contests because the winner doesn’t collect any delegates, but merely gets to brag about his meaningless victory until the next actual primary rolls around.

Perhaps the dumbest decision of the RNC is to hold what are known as open primaries. It’s bad enough when neither Party has an incumbent in the race, as occurred in 2008 when the 22nd Amendment prevented George Bush from running a third time. However, when there is an incumbent, as there is now, why would you allow Democrats to muddy the waters by voting in GOP elections? Does anyone at Republican headquarters really think they will vote for the candidate who is likely to wage the strongest campaign against Obama?

If in spite of the idiocy displayed by the RNC, a Republican wins the November election, there are a few things, aside from the most obvious, such as the deep-sixing of ObamaCare, I have on my wish list. To begin with, I would like to see English finally made the official language of this country, meaning we would never again print a ballot in Urdu, Mongol or Tagalog. Photo IDs would be required in order to vote and confirmation of one’s legal status through E-Verify would be required for those seeking employment.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Rep. John Dingell (D-Inosaur) Upset at Cancellation of House ‘Page Program’

by Doug Powers on Saturday, August 20th, 2011

This is article 15 of 36 in the topic Government Programs

Dingell hasn’t been this angry since Champ Clark crap-canned the Horse & Buggy Chauffeur Program, forcing him to have to learn how to drive his own damn carriage.

I honestly didn’t know there still was a “Page Program” in the House — haven’t heard about it since the Mark Foley incident — but that doesn’t matter, because there isn’t anymore, and Dingell isn’t happy about it:

The House’s longest-serving current member, Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), is calling on Republican and Democratic leadership to justify their recent decision to terminate the page program.

In a letter sent Friday to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Dingell expressed concerns about the recent cancellation of the program — in effect for nearly 200 years — due to prohibitive costs and advances in technology.

“While I appreciate the fiscal constraints currently facing our nation and the House of Representatives, I believe the decision to end the House Page Program was short-sighted,” Dingell wrote.
[…]
The page program employs roughly 70 high school students to serve as messengers and couriers on the House floor and around the Capitol complex, offering them the opportunity to work and attend high school in Congress for a semester, or for several weeks during the summer.

“This decision was not easy, but it is necessary,” Boehner and Pelosi wrote of the cancellation, noting that the cost to operate the program exceeds $5 million annually.

You know it was a waste of money if Botoxi the Clown was in favor of giving it the axe. Either that or she’ll use it as an excuse to hire more congressional staff.

Go straight to Post

Tolerance and Diversity: America’s Experiment with Dishonesty

by Rev. Michael Bresciani on Wednesday, August 3rd, 2011

This is article 3 of 104 in the topic Preserving America

the-experiment.jpgFreedom of choice, free speech and endless opportunities were once the phrases that stood foremost in the thinking of Americans and anyone in the rest of the world who entertained a dream of coming to America. These words have morphed from their denotations, to their present connotations with great speed, but never more so, than in the last quarter century.

Tolerance is a call to allow others of different political, social, philosophical and religious persuasions to be a part of what has long been established in the nation. Sister, diversity, is the gate keeper of new changes that tacitly are the promise of a way to better living, through change itself. The slogan of Barack Obama’s campaign and now his administration is ‘change we can believe in.’ No need to criticize that grand notion, all we need to ask is; how has that been going?

Change is good with practical limitations applied but total change may actually be the axe that smashes the foundations of a people and brings their social construct to the ground. Finding ways to control and utilize the great Mississippi River are changes that we accept but should the river suddenly change course the nation would be plunged into confusion.

It is only when we ask and attempt to answer the question, ‘what is the motive behind the call to change;’ from which we would expect an entirely new reality to emerge. Tolerance and diversity is a concept that has gone largely unexamined and has no clear definition. By allowing other ideas, cultures and behaviors on a new grand scale, do we mean to establish them? If they were not already established why are we allowing them? If they are transient, nascent and mere bumps along the cultural journey of a people then aren’t we submitting our nation to the rule and sway of pop culture? Is it possible that we would rather have Lady Gaga running for president than say, Michele Bachmann?

How have the religions, social concepts and political persuasions we are so eager to allow, faired in their own settings or place of origin? Has Islam done anything to pull nations out of seventh century social patterns that see women as chattel, children as shields for terrorists and other cultures as the great Satan? Until that happens, what is our keen interest in the new to us religion predicated upon? What is the attraction?

Why weren’t we suddenly driven to study and allow the Taoist religion of Japan into our culture immediately after the bombing of Pearl Harbor? We were all willing to accept that Japan had given us full reason to see her as an enemy. What has changed in the American psyche that after watching two of our tallest buildings crumble to dust with 3,000 people in them we now are urged to refrain from labeling the perpetrators of this act as terrorists. We are encouraged to allow them to build mosques and we have charged or commissioned entire governmental agencies like NASA to reach out to Muslims in good will. It is from these kinds of changes that we get the first clues that tolerance and diversity not only need to be better defined but they need to be scrutinized from top to bottom.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

Idaho School Attempts Pledge Cancellation Coverup??

by Rev. Austin Miles on Sunday, February 20th, 2011

This is article 29 of 259 in the topic Education

In December, an individual at the Vallivue Academy, a charter school in Boise, Idaho, alerted this news site about the Pledge of Allegiance being permanently cancelled in the school due to a complaint made by a female Muslim student (see story, “Muslim Complaint Ends Pledge in Idaho School”). Before publishing the story, corroborative testimony served to verify the event. Two months after it was published, an angry email was received from a teacher of that school. It is reprinted as it was received.

——-Original Message——-
From: Mike

To: chaplainmiles@aol.com
Cc: kkrone@vallivue.org; cmitchell@vallivue.org; hrenk@vallivue.org
Sent: Tue, Feb 15, 2011 8:39 pm
Subject: Muslim Complaint Ends Pledge in Idaho School!

Reverend Miles,
I would like you to check your sources. This never happened. Both of the situations quoted never took place. Please feel free to come see for yourself. I am quite surprised that you would publish such a tale without doing the research. It reeks of propaganda. I am sorry you got misled. I am sure you are a good man and would want to right the wrong you have done. I got a call today from Coral Gables, Florida checking out the story. Since it is now nationwide and it is the first I have heard of it I was surprised when they sent me to your website and read it myself. Pretty harsh stuff for something fictional. Whoever your source was they must have an axe to grind or they are delusional.
Best wishes,
Mike Bowers
Counselor/Teacher Vallivue Academy

***
Having respectful regard for my readers, I sent the following email in response.

——-Original Message——-
From: chaplainmiles@aol.com
To: blue300marlin@earthlink.net
Sent: Wed, Feb 16, 2011 10:18 am
Subject: Re: Muslim Complaint Ends Pledge in Idaho School!

Dear Mr. Bowers,
Of course, your email was of great interest to me. I was contacted by someone connected with your school whom I had not known previously, telling me that a female Muslim student objected to the Pledge being said at the school and that it was discontinued because of that complaint. I checked this out with someone else connected with the school who I DO know and have every reason to trust and that person confirmed the validity of the story and said, “Now nobody can say the Pledge.” So this was not carelessly done on my part. If this is not true, it grieves me deeply. If you will, please send me an official statement that as a teacher at Vallivue School you absolutely are not aware of such a happening and you can say with certainty that The Pledge of Allegiance continues to be said each day and has without interruption and I will publish your statement. Please include the name of other teachers who will back that up. If indeed I have been misled, some sparks will fly.
Rev. Austin Miles

***
Mr. Bowers was given the opportunity to state the school’s position fully. One could not do more than that. He responded with this surprising email with copies sent to other teachers at that school:
——-Original Message——-
From: Mike

To: chaplainmiles@aol.com

Cc: cmitchell@vallivue.org
; hrenk@vallivue.org ; kkrone@vallivue.org

Sent: Thu, Feb 17, 2011 1:07 pm
Subject: Response

Chaplain Miles,
I am not sure how any letter I sent would be used, revised, rewritten, or distributed. I therefore decline.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Senator pushing move towards Chinese-style censored web with presidential kill switch pressured Amazon to axe Wikileaks

by Greg Hedgepath on Thursday, December 2nd, 2010

This is article 9 of 31 in the topic Wikileaks

Senator Joe Lieberman, the man behind legislation to give President Obama a kill switch for the Internet in the move towards a Chinese-style government controlled world wide web, now has the power to shut down websites with a mere phone call, as was underscored yesterday when Amazon axed Wikileaks from its servers after being pressured to do so by Lieberman’s Senate Homeland Security Committee.

The revelation that Amazon had killed Wikileaks after the controversial whistle blower organization moved over its servers to Amazon’s cloud network came directly from Lieberman himself, stating that the, “Decision to cut off Wikileaks now is the right decision and should set the standard for other companies Wikileaks is using to distribute its illegally seized material.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__zpnmtwL5w

The decision was made after Lieberman’s staffers called Amazon to pressure the company to axe Wikileaks. “Committee staff had seen news reports yesterday that Wikileaks was being hosted on Amazon’s servers,” reports TPM. “Staffers then, according to the spokeswoman, Leslie Phillips, called Amazon to ask about it, and left questions with a press secretary including, “Are there plans to take the site down?”

Amazon later called back Lieberman’s office to tell them that they had taken down the website. Amazon claimed the take down was because Wikileaks had violated its terms of service, but as TPM’s Rachel Slajda points out, this was a somewhat nebulous reason.

“(Amazon’s) terms of acceptable use include a ban on illegal activities (it’s not yet clear whether Wikileaks has broken any laws) and content “that may be harmful to our users, operations, or reputation.” It also prohibits using Amazon’s servers “to violate the security or integrity of any network, computer or communications system,” although Wikileaks obviously obtained the cables long before hopping on Amazon’s servers.”

“Funny how Amazon spent days loudly refusing to delete a pedophile guidebook on free speech grounds, but this happened behind the scenes and the company is refusing to comment,”writes Rob Beschizza.

Wikileaks also responded to the shut down by slamming Amazon for its apparent disdain for free speech, tweeting, “If Amazon are so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books.”

The London Guardian notes that the website was pulled after “US political pressure”.

(ARTICLE CONTINUES HERE)

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, December 2, 2010

Go straight to Post

Climate Change in the House: Republicans to Axe Pelosi’s Global Warming Committee

by Doug Powers on Thursday, December 2nd, 2010

Is it getting hot in here, or is Nancy Pelosi crazy? House Republicans will most likely bet on the latter:

Republicans will eliminate the House committee created by Speaker Nancy Pelosi to highlight the threat of climate change, Representative James Sensenbrenner, the top Republican on the panel, said today.

In one of her first acts as speaker in 2007, Pelosi, a California Democrat, created the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming to draw attention to climate-change science and showcase how a cap on carbon dioxide needn’t be a threat to economic growth.

The good news is that many pro-rationing climate change worry-warts won’t find out about this until they fly home next week from their low-budget meeting in Cancun, Mexico.

Another tidbit:

Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Pelosi, said it’s “very disappointing” that House Republicans will shut the committee and won’t make energy independence and climate change a priority in the next Congress.

President Obama just extended offshore drilling moratoriums and imposed new drilling bans in the Gulf, as well as the Atlantic and Pacific coasts for the next several years, and Pelosi’s spokesman thinks Republicans cancelling some committee meetings will put a serious dent in America’s quest for energy independence?

Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin