DESIGNATION, AS IN “the International City of Jerusalem” is code for “We’re going to deny a nation-state the exercise of sovereignty over its territory.” As though an ad hoc group comprised of China, Venezuela, North Korea, and Iran were to declare New York “an international city” because all nations of the world have stake in it.
Americans would rightly call bullshit on that. So, too, should all right-minded people on the effort to peel away Jerusalem from Israel.
Bullshit.
BLESSED ARE THEY which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake:
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
–Matthew, 5:10
I would remind all of you who bitch about religious expression, and seek to extirpate it from the public square, that you are the persecutors, not those availing themselves of their First-Amendment-protected* right to free exercise of religion.
You.
If words hurt you that bad, maybe you should go back in the nursery until you grow up. Nobody is trying to convert you by the sword.
Oh. Wait. Somebody is. But, take note: it’s not Christians.
*PROTECTED … NOT granted.
h/t baby troll blog http://www.babytrollblog.com/?p=2524#comments
--Dolly
######Language Warning######
Sunday, July 22, 2012
GRANTED THEY OPERATE IN DIFFERENT VENUES Biden in the Senate and Bloomberg in the Mayoralty of New York City (The Biggest Hick Town in America), but still... The idiocy of the two of them could cancel out the spin of the Universe or something.
Sultan Knish quoted Bloomberg on guns:
I don’t think there’s any other developed country in the world that has remotely the problem we have. There’s no other place that allows- we have more guns than people in this country. Every place else, if there are murders they’re generally not done with guns – not generally, a lot more are not done with guns.
Now, Greenfield takes Bloomberg apart quite handily with a quote from Billy Madison:
Mr. Bloomberg, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
... but I have a take of my own. Whenever a politician makes reference to how they do things in the rest of the world, he/she/it needs to be bitch-slapped most definitely and reminded that America is NOT the rest of the world. We don't WANT to be the rest of the world. The country exists for the express purpose of telling the rest of the world to fuck off and die. So if politician in question doesn't like that we do things different from the the rest of the world, he/she/it ought to be encouraged to go live in those other countries and stop trying to fuck up this one.
I got your back...NOT!
The recent recall election in Wisconsin brought to mind my opportunity to attend an event that featured motivational speaker Reggie Dabbs. Reggie engaged the crowd of young people by teaching them a song one phrase at a time. I Can! You Can! We Can! I got your back! By the time he is done teaching them this rather simple song, the young people are completely engaged and he has their attention. He then relates his own personal story to the audience which builds "street cred" with them. He shares with them that "You can never change your past, but you can change your future". I have attended three of his events to date and witnessed the impact he has had on audiences and giving young people hope and inspiring them to take personal responsibility in changing their own situation.
Having lived in urban areas, I understand the import of someone proclaiming "I got your back" and the potential implications of not doing so when the time came. Anyone who ever served in the military also understands this this. The same goes for business , politics and any personal, professional or public relationship people enter into.
President Obama has touted himself as the Union Workers president from the gate. He touted his credentials as a Community Organizer and standing on picket lines with union workers. He promised union workers he would be there for them . He promised workers he would fight attempts to weaken or repeal the Davis-Bacon Act (collective bargaining.) And of course, how can we forget the Vice President who credits his election to the Teamsters?
They have told labor over and over again, they would have their back. Yet, when the union organized a recall of Governor Scott Walker, the President and Vice-President weighed how it would look if they stood with those who supported them and lost. The dynamic duo of cheap promises failed to have the back of those who put them in office when they needed them most. Does it shock or sadden me? Of course not!
Can't you just picture those who placed their hope and trust in the dynamic duo saying "Where were you?".
In trying to play it safe and not get their hands dirty in a recall that they predicted would end in failure, the President and Vice President lost every bit of "street cred" they had with the ones that had their back. While I do not expect that these voters will all of a sudden become Mitt Romney supporters, I do believe the betrayal factor is being underestimated, and far beyond Wisconsin.
Union members nationwide witnessed a President and Vice President abandon them in the midst of a historic battle. So, in November, with the U6 unemployment rate at 14.6%, with 222,000 less people working than last May, and Obama and Biden's street credibility gone, what impact will it have on the election? I believe we will see less union members come out to vote and many of the first time voters who participated in the 2008 election have been disenchanted and also will not return to vote for Obama/Biden in November.
I would not be the least bit surprised to see these voters back door the ticket by giving no advance warning that they were staying home. They may return the favor of allowing the President to believe they have his back and abandon him when he needs them the most!
RON PAUL DELEGATES MAY HAVE FOUND A WAY TO EVEN THE ODDS WITH ABSTENTION
PUBLISHED APRIL 30, 2012 BY SUSSEX COUNTY ANGEL
The 2012 Republican nomination for president is now down to two candidates, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. Newt Gingrich is expected to suspend his campaign on Tuesday, leaving his campaign over 4 million dollars in debt. The Republican National Committee endorsed Mitt Romney last week, on the very day that the Gingrich campaign started to discuss exiting the race.
Ron Paul supporters will not let this news get them down. In fact, supporters of the 12-term Congressman from Texashave continued to grasp delegate positions in states where, despite the caucus winners, delegates are unbound. There are thirty states where delegates are able to vote for whomever they chose, regardless of primary and caucus results.
“The dirty little secret is: At the end of the day, these guys and gals can vote any way they want,” said a Republican who has attended national conventions for decades. “Each state has different (laws) on pledged delegates.”
Ron Paul supporters claim to be dedicated to a movement, not a candidate, and have announced they will support “no one but Paul“. They have currently been discussing whetherbound delegates may legally abstain from voting in the first round of voting at the Republican convention.
The act of abstention is when a participant in a vote is present for the roll call before the vote, but then purposefully casts either a blank vote or marking the ballot incorrectly. In many cases, the abstention of voting may be considered an act of protest. In fact, during the Republican National Convention in 2008, 14 delegates did not vote. These delegates were present during the roll call, but would not vote for any of the candidates at the time. Ron Paul supporters claim this would improve the ratio of votes in Ron Paul’s favor. An example of this is explained with no one abstaining (and a tiny voting pool) Mitt Romney would get ten votes while Ron Paul would get five votes. Mitt Romney would win, having obtained the 50% +1 needed to grasp the nomination. With delegates abstaining, this could change drastically. Mitt Romney could get five votes, Ron Paul would maintain his five votes, and five voters would abstain. As long as all the abstentions had participated in the roll call, no one would win the 50% +1 votes needed to become the nominee and on to the next round and a brokered convention.
This was a considered option for Hilary Clinton supporters in the 2008 election and was widely discussed. The question remains will delegates be kicked out of the convention if they abstain from voting.
RNC for Life discusses, state by state, how many delegates are bound and how many are unbound after the primaries, but it has no mention of the Republican state laws regarding abstaining from voting. There are fines of up to $1,000 for “faithless electors” who do not vote as bound, and many are considering this to apply to the Republican National Convention. These are not applicable. An elector is not a delegate. An elector is a member of the Electoral College,voting in the final election.
Many in the Republican Party are “outraged” at this suggestion by Ron Paul supporters. They dislike the concept of these “Ron Paul Republicans” breaking the party’s rules to support their candidate. However, Ronald Reagan’s campaign considered the exact same option in 1976. Check out this 1976 headline: “Reagan Forces May ‘Steal’ Ford Votes”.
“In secret strategy sessions, Reagan aides have toyed with the idea of asking delegates to abstain as long as their state laws require them to honor the primary verdicts. This would prevent the President from riding up an early-ballot victory. Then, in subsequent ballots, they could legally switch to Reagan.”
In fact, Rick Santorum, before suspending his own campaign,had hinted at the fact that he may ask delegates to abstainfrom voting for Mitt Romney. Gingrich seemed to imply the same thing. Ron Paul supporters and looking into this without any urging from the Ron Paul campaign.
It seems that each delegate must analyze the Republican Party rules in their own state to see if this form of protest voting would cause the delegate to be kicked out of the convention. At least 14 delegates did this in 2008. It seems the Republican race is not over yet.
The Pennsylvania primary is over. The results are in. The Commonwealth's candidates for November have been chosen and it is "game on" time for November.
But to those of us who closely look at election results, the voters have sent their Party Bosses a message.
The early remarks on the Republican US Senate primary from the Pennsylvania Democratic Party expose
their own grave concerns. In looking at the low turnout, an educated observation would be it was mostly
"super voters" who came to the polls.
So what did the reliable party voters tell us?
709,253 people voted in the Democrat's Attorney General race, their "race of interest".
Using the Democratic attorney general race as a barometer (709,253 total votes)
1. 14% did not vote “for” Obama
2. 21% did not vote “for” Casey.
These three races; Kathleen Kane’s victory , combined with the wavering of support for Obama and Casey, indicate Pennsylvania Democrats are more concerned about policy than party and are rejecting the Obama/Casey progressive agenda. As Kane's endorser Bill Clinton once said, " It's the economy stupid!"
On the Republican side, this year there was a major underlying controversy concerning the Republican State Committee endorsing candidates. Unlike years in the past, The Governor took an active role in the process
and many described his actions as nothing short of "strong-arming" state committee members into endorsing Steve Welch for US Senate.
The candidate with the second highest vote tally among state committee members was the winner of the primary,
Tom Smith. I witnessed a much greater support of Tom Smith throughout the Central and Northwest Caucus than I did the endorsed candidate in the race. In fact, I saw no Steve Welch for Senate signs in the tri-county area. In the eight polls I visited, I witnessed NO ONE distributing party slate cards. Rohrer had a 3-1 advantage in poll workers at the polling places I visited, yet Rohrer lost the county by nearly a 3-1 margin.
Conventional political wisdom states that low turnout almost always favors the endorsed candidate. Some were even touting God had intervened in the race by sending a snow storm to help Steve Welch. Welch came in third place, with 20.8% of the vote, trailing Sam Rohrer at 22.3% and Tom Smith at 39.5%. This race also highlighted strong anti-endorsement undertones which result in a humiliating defeat for an endorsed party candidate being rejected by the party rank and file.
The same message was sent by voters in both the Attorney General and Treasurers race. In those unopposed races,
More than 18% of primary voters did not vote for the endorsed Attorney General. More than 19% did not vote for the endorsed Treasurer.
The republican primary to many of the party rank and file , as witnessed by the aforementioned, was also a referendum on the endorsement process and the voters rejection of it.
The Presidential Primary results in the Democratic Primary were nothing short of embarrassing and send a loud message that Pennsylvania is in play for the Republicans this fall.
Likewise, Bob Casey's results are also telling. His challenger spent no money on his campaign and yet received almost 20% of the vote. and 50,000 votes less than Obama. Pennsylvanians remember four years ago Bob Casey's support of the President against Hillary Clinton .
Two years ago, Pennsylvania Democrats sent Arlen Specter, their endorsed candidate into retirement and rejected their party endorsement. This year, Republicans did the same.
Pennsylvanians are sending a very clear message that they are tired of party politics and are interested in the issues that impact their daily lives.
Source : PA Dept of State Election Results
(Any numerical changes reflect DOS adjustments to vote totals and do not affect the premise of the post)
Guest Post- Mrs. Patty Fish
As many of you know, I am a newly elected member to the DuBois Area School Board along with Roland Bechtel. Roland and I were elected in large part to represent 'The People'. Over the last few months as we begin to learn our new roles, we have been told time and time again that the public does not care because if they did, they would come to the school board meetings. At last week's public meeting, we were told that there were only a few 'vocal minority' that ever attended the school board meetings and if the public were truly interested in the budget, they were encouraged to come to the next school board meeting on Wednesday, April 25th, 7:00 pm at the Administrative Bldg. on the Liberty Boulevard in DuBois. (I don't know if that made the papers as I don't get the paper.)
I am writing to you today to tell you that Roland and I need your help. Our fellow board members think that we are out of touch when in actuality, they are the ones that are out of touch with the common, tax paying citizen.
At this Wednesday's meeting, the business manager is going to present next years school budget. They are planning a 2.4% tax increase (to the index) and they are going to sell it to you in a nice little package that the average citizen in Clearfield Co. is going to have a savings of 1 mil while those in Jefferson Co. will experience a slight tax increase of a few dollars. To make a long story short, some local businesses are now on the tax roles so our tax base has increased. Because of this, if the SB were to do nothing, Clearfield Co. citizens would have a 3 mil decrease in their taxes and Jefferson Co. would have I think a 1 mil decrease. Instead of giving relief to the taxpayers, they want to increase taxes to the index to generate about $700,000 more in revenue. Their thinking is to keep the tax payer's taxes the same so they (SB) don't lose any money when in reality they are increasing their revenue. It would be one thing if they were setting the money aside to cover the impending PSERS pension crisis that is coming our way but to date I haven't seen any evidence of that happening.
According to the preliminary budget that was presented last month, next year's budget was about $54 million dollars in expenses with $49 million in revenue.
Also, I questioned some of the items in this month's agenda. One is a Resolution to Harrisburg asking them to fund the schools from the state level instead of shifting the tax burden to the local taxpayers. I find this hypocritical when they are saddling the local taxpayers with wasteful spending. Two items in particular were new expenses of $23,740 for window shades and $1000 each for a single bookcase with side attachment (not to exceed $15,000) for the renovated Juniata School. When questioned, why are we burdening local taxpayers with ridiculous expenses of window shades and book shelves, we are told that we have money set aside as contingency because building materials are always more that what is originally quoted and they forgot to add window shades and matching bookcases.
I would like to encourage everyone and anyone that is concerned about the school budget and your taxes to attend the school board meeting on Wednesday. You are not required to talk but your mere presence will show our fellow board members that you do care and you are watching. Please feel free to forward my email on to others in the DuBois Area School District. I encourage you to contact your school board members with any concerns.
There is pure fire in the belly tonight.; focused determination.
I have watched the unsuspecting manipulated by blind trust in a personality. They have followed unquestioning, fallen into traps and in the end discredited themselves . They have been used
I am a preachers kid whose dad died when I was young. In later years, I watched this same type of manipulation in the church. I see the same thing occur in the political realm. The unsuspecting abused and manipulated trusting their leader.
But in the midst of the frustration I always end up coming to the same conclusion. There are those who are just looking to manipulate and those who are looking to be manipulated. They find each other and the latter follows unquestionably because they merely want to belong to something.
Screw that.
I can't save the former, but I can engage the latter.
Now I am blogging less and out in the public arena, it is time to change the blog name to something people can identify me with/to.
If I am not provoking thought, then often times 'people say' I am provoking people. Imagine that! Who'd have thought!
I can tell you, my wife would agree, Johns Provoking! Those may not be her exact words though!
Happy Easter All,
John
Recent Comments