About Me

Name: JayPeriod
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Constitution...What Constitution?

Posted by JayPeriod on Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:37:58 AM
By now, I'm sure you've heard all the hoopla over President-elect Obama's citizenship.  There have been more than a dozen lawsuits filed by citizens and former candidates to stop the Electoral College from finalizing the past election on the grounds that the President-elect has not provided iron-clad proof that he is a U.S. citizen.  To this point, both courts and the President-elect have ignored document requests and deadlines, most citing the lack of standing the plaintiffs have to bring the suit.

These suits will not stop.  Well into his term, more and more people will bring these suits to ask for proof.  There is only one way for Obama to put these suits, which his staff call "garbage," to rest; produce an official copy of his birth certificate.

Much like Sen. John Kerry four years ago, the production of an official document could put an end to the endless claims.  Yet, here we are four years later, and Kerry has not produced the requested documents, which he promised to do.  I fear the President-elect will follow the same way.

We live in a society in which we are innocent until proven guilty.  Yet, there is still the idea of, "what have you got to hide?"  If Obama is confident of his citizenship, he has nothing to fear in releasing the document.  If he indeed has no such document, don't we the people have a right to know?

So, what will happen?  Nothing, I suppose.  The courts have stated that it is the responsibility of the Congress and the Democrat Party to ensure he fulfills the Constitutional requirement of being a "natural born citizen."  In our current state, that's like asking the fox to watch the hen house.  In other words, nothing will be done and this will haunt us for the duration of his term.  History could very likely reveal that he was, in fact, the first unconstitutional President.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Born Free, Taxed To Death

Posted by JayPeriod on Thursday, March 20, 2008 10:10:48 AM
Gas prices are soaring, putting a pinch on family budgets.  Most Americans are spending about one quarter of their income on credit card interest, meaning there is less money to put into the economy.  Then, we have the wonderful Democrats and their brilliant tax policies.

In their rejection of the a renewal on the Bush tax cuts, Democrats have stated that they want to increase the taxes paid by the rich.  Who would those rich be?  According to their own words, anyone making $32,000 a year is rich.  $32,000.  Rich.

I've often wondered how people can believe that the likes of Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and others in the Democrat elite are the protectors of the poor.  These people wouldn't know poor if it slapped them in the face.  They have surely never been around many poor people for any length of time, especially if they consider an annual income of $32,000 to be rich.  Do they understand that it's many of these "rich" people who are among those facing mortgage foreclosure?

The fact that many of these Democrat Fat Cats inherited their fortunes, therefore exempting them from taxes, does not stop them from the idea of taxing the rest of us into absolute poverty.  They'll still have their fortunes, right?  Yet, they continue to come up with more and more taxes, trying to put us all in the poor house, which they'll then develop programs to care for us, making us utterly reliant on the government for our every necessity.

Now, on top of calling anyone making $32,000 rich, they think we should pay for programs to cut global warming with a gas tax.  Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich) is calling for a 50 cent tax on each gallon of gas to pay for programs to combat global warming.  Never mind that every day more and more evidence comes out that proves global warming is a hoax, we should accept another tax on gas to pay for it.

There is no way these people are actually concerned over the poor or global warming.  There would be nothing stopping them from donating the money they want to fund their projects.  Rep. Dingell could donate all he wants to fight global warming.  Ted Kennedy could use his family's fortune to provide health care for several thousand poor, if he was really interested in that.  That's not what they are worried about, though.

Again, it's not about caring for the poor or reducing the number of poor.  These guys get their power rush from there being so many poor.  The need there to be poor people.  No, it's about making as many people dependent on the government as possible.  In other words, it's about making as many poor as they possibly can.

We must stop this insane plan.  We cannot allow them to destroy America.  For that will surely be the outcome.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Nancy Pelosi Not Worried About Terrorism

Posted by JayPeriod on Monday, March 10, 2008 2:33:48 PM
Congress is now back after their recess.  They left a few weeks ago (I guess a couple of months of four day work weeks are just too much for them) without addressing the soon to expire FISA wiretapping bill.  This bill would have continued to authorize the intelligence agencies to wiretap any individual in the US who had contact with anyone on the list of al-Qaida found during raids in Afghanistan.  Nancy Pelosi decided to take this bill up after their recess.

So, now that they are back, where is the discussion and vote on this bill?  Instead, Pelosi has decided that she would spend the Congress' valuable time filing a lawsuit against the White House for firing their employees.  She is apparently not worried about what terrorists have to say or what plans they may be making.

This is the kind of irresponsible leadership we have come to see from the Pelosi leadership.  She has her own agenda and not even the safety of our nation will deter her from following that agenda.  She is often flanked by the likes of Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, among others.

What does this say about the Democratic Party?  Where are their priorities?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Empty Rhetoric

Posted by JayPeriod on Wednesday, February 27, 2008 3:44:14 PM
Since he began his bid for the White House, Sen. Barak Obama has screamed from the highest mountain that he will bring troops home from Iraq before his hand comes down at his swearing in.  It is what has gotten him the backing of Move On and the Leftist base.  It has energized them and boosted his chances in these primaries.

Now, when questioned about the possibility of al Qaeda setting up shop in Iraq, he has stated that he would reserve his right as Commander-in-Chief to send troops back in to battle them.  As Sen. McCain pointed out, al Qaeda is currently in Iraq and has set up shop.  Obama then quipped back that he reads the papers and he is aware that they are there.

So, my question is, why would he withdraw troops from a situation he would send them back into?

Since al Qaeda is currently in Iraq, why would he withdraw troops, allowing al Qaeda to gain strength and a foothold?  Would that not put our troops into a worse situation than they currently are in?  Would that not alienate our allies in the Iraqi government by showing them we are not committed to their survival, making the task more difficult than it needs to be?

What we see now is Obama trying to shift from his Leftist, pacifist position to satisfy his radical base to a position that will make him more palatable to the general voting public.  As with everything else we hear from him; words, words, words.  With the little experience he has, he has learned the value of empty rhetoric.

He can complain all he wants about the "illegal" war in Iraq (he'll also have to deal with the illegal action Bill Clinton took in Kosovo that has led to the instability of that region of the world), but the truth is that we are now fighting al Qaeda in the Middle East, not here in America.  The vast majority of Congressmen and Senators, on both sides of the aisle, including Sens. Kerry, Kennedy and Clinton, believed for many years that Iraq was indeed a front in the War on Terror.  We have the responsibility to fight them and defeat them there.

Now, we will begin to see a whole new Obama.  He will begin to run to the middle, hoping to fool America into believing that he is the right man for the job.  We will not, though, be fooled.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »