545

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing.. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.

Who is the speaker of the House?

She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ .If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.They vote their own pay raises for themselves because they want it that way.

There are no unsolvable government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like 'the economy,' 'inflation,' or 'politics' that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.They, and they alone, have the power.They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

By Charlie Reese

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper

LETS MAKE SOME MUSIC BABY

I'm coming home for good this weekend my love !

TRIFECTA COMPLETE !!!

1. The great VAN JOHNSON
2. The beautiful BETTY PAGE
3. The U.S.CONSTITUTION

YES -- THE U.S. CONSTITUTION folks, I kid you not. It was told to us officially by this man.

Yesterday in an interview by 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl , Barney Frank whom some have called the "smartest guy in Congress," -which is lucky for us since he works on some of the thorniest issues around- was asked about the Banking Handouts(oops sorry) I meant BAILOUTS!

He worked hand in glove with Treasury Secretary Paulson to write the rescue plan for the banks, then pressed and prodded his colleagues in Congress to get it passed. The relationship between Frank and Paulson has soured lately, since Paulson hasn’t spent any of the rescue money to help struggling homeowners. "Secretary Paulson is refusing to use that money that Congress voted to reduce foreclosures. The bill says he’s supposed to. He won’t do that," Frank says. "You wrote the bill," Stahl points out. "You’re, quote, 'the smartest man in Congress.' How did it happen that you wrote a bill that the secretary of treasury has the power not to fulfill in the way you wanted it fulfilled?" "Because there’s a metaphor that works here: you cannot push on a string." ( NOW HERE IS THE MURDER WEAPON) -- "There’s no Constitutional way to force them to do things," Frank says.

"But didn’t you write the bill in a way that allows him to do this? And you could have written it differently," Stahl remarks.

"No. There’s no way you can force people to do things," Frank says.
IF YOU DID NOT SEE THE MAGIC BULLET -- I WILL SLOW IT DOWN FOR YOU.

The duty of the U.S CONGRESS is to write LAWS !!!

OR AM I JUST BEING SILLY?

WHAT EVERY MAN WANTS FOR CHRISTMAS

A WOMAN WITH WORLD'S BIGGEST BOOBS!

Were you expecting something else?

Folks, read your Constitutions. Study American history. Study world history. Study the rise and fall of republics and come to understand that conservatives and conservatism does not sit here wanting to manage your life, wanting to manage your social affairs or what have you. Conservatism exists to defend, to defend what was good, to defend the greatest revolution and its result – this nation – in the history of man.

No other revolution in the history of the world ever resulted in a more free society. They simply don’t. When there are revolutions, they have one like they have in Cuba, and a dictator arises. When there’s a revolution, they have one like they had in Russia, and the tsar’s head is cut off, and Lenin arises. Ours is the only – and we should be damn proud of this. And we’re stupid and foolhardy to think that we can improve on it. Ours is the only revolution in the history of the world, the American Revolution, the only one that produced more freedom than existed before it began.

I challenge you to show me another one because there isn’t one.

BIKE NIGHT

I'M NO PERRY COMO, SANTA -- BUT I DO BELIEVE I WILL TOAST A FEW FOR YOU! AND MAYBE I'LL GET MY CHRISTMAS PRESENT -- A FEW BOOBIES TO SEE TONIGHT.

TRI-FECTA?

1940s Movie Heartthrob Van Johnson Dies

'50s Pin-Up Queen Bettie Page Dies

Why Not Cut Gubbmint Jobs Too Obama?

THIS IS A EXCERPT FROM THE MIKE CHURCH SHOW; SIRIUS SATELLITE RADIO
A FAV OF MINE -- THE KING DUDE HAS HIS SHITE TOGETHER!
Mike: Well, let me tell you, you can’t print your way out of this crisis. You cannot continue to manufacture cash out of thin air, have it be worth something, and print your way out of this just because there’s more money in circulation, which is what they’re doing. Which is what the President, or the office of President-elect Obama, which is what he’s doing. And you sit there, and you scratch your head, oh, it’s so rotten, we’ve lost 170,000 jobs lost since [Mike sobbing], I know all these things, I’ve seen it [Mike sobbing]. And then he goes on to say, well, and I’m going to announce the appointment of two people that are going to fix it. Why, we’re going to have a health – we’re going to have a health secretary. Tom Daschle’s going to lead us into health care nirvana. He’s going to fix all this.You guys messed it up. They screwed it up. They broke it. And they broke it because, not because they’re bad people, but because they believe in the power of coercion. They believe in the power of government brute force. You cannot fix, make, mend, or have a functioning economy that functions as a result of the government’s brute force applied to it. That’s when you get what we have now. We have the brute force of regulatory boards and agencies and what have you, telling our merchants, our businesses, and our industries what they can do, when they may do it, and how they will do it. That is not a recipe for success And it never will be. We can sit here from now until we’re all literally poor and living in a Third World nation, and just keep printing wazoo out – or money out the wazoo, out the wazoo, out the wazoo. We can pile up mountains. What’s the next number after a trillion? Rev, is that quadrillion? We can print quadrillions of dollars of dollars. It won’t matter. There’s nothing to back it up. You are not increasing the productivity or the capital.
Mike: The only way we’re going to get out of this is to grow our way out of this. Understand this. Well, Mike, Mike, how do we grow our way out of it? [Whiny Voice] You’re such a – that is stupid conservative game. You don’t know anything.[end Whine] Here’s how you grow your way out of it. You cut the government. They consume. It is a beast. It is an unwieldy living organism, folks. It is a beast. That’s why I call it “Leviathan.” Here’s how you grow your way out of it. You cut the government. They consume. It is a beast. It is an unwieldy living organism, folks. It is a beast. That’s why I call it “Leviathan.” It consumes resources. It does not produce them. It consumes them whole and then poops out tax bills for you and I to have to pay back. It is the engine of destruction. It is not the salvation. And we’ll be sitting here, I’m telling out, we will be sitting here from now until they stop this or we force them to stop it. Talking about the same thing. If you want the same result, well, then, just keep nodding your head and tell Obama, appoint Daschle to take over this industry, appoint Nazi Pelosi to take over the automobile industry, have this czar and that czar. You’re going to have czars out the wazoo. If czars worked so well, well then Imperial Russia would still be run by Nicholas VI. And there would have been no need for the Bolsheviks to have a revolution, now, would there have been?You grow your way out of this. You grow your way out by minimizing the drain that the government and other external forces have on this nation that is so wealthy. We had the capital. We have the manpower. We absolutely can grow our way out of this in a matter of months. Now, let me give you the recipe here. You don’t have a plan. All you conservatives love to whine. You don’t have a plan, you stupid idiot. You think you’re so smart. Obama’s smarter than you. I’ll take that bet. You’re going to regret because I guarantee you I’m smarter than that loser.Here’s how you grow your way out of it. President-elect ends his press conference, but proposes a couple of things, and tells the Congress, don’t send me any bills that don’t have this in it because I’m going to veto ‘em. Number one: Freeze government spending. Freeze it. No COLA increases for government employees. You don’t like it, screw you. Go out and get a real job, loser. Number two: If you quit, you call in sick, we fire your ass. You’re done. And no, you’re not getting your pension. You don’t like it, screw you. You’ll live like the rest of us live. Number three: Through the method of attrition, as previously mentioned, you begin the exact same process for the government agencies. When something comes up for renewal, don’t renew it. Suspend it. Number four: You order the Treasury Department immediately, you order it immediately to suspend the collection of all income taxes. Just like Congressman Gohmert proposed. But you do it indefinitely. Number four: You announce to the world that the United States of America is the home for big business. And you cut the corporate tax rate to 10 percent. Just cut it, 10 percent. Number five: You announce to the rest of the world that, if you have capital invested here, now is a good time to cash it in and apply it to productive measures. We are slashing the capital gains tax rate to zero. And this will be in effect for a minimum of three years.Now, if you do those – and then you order the Treasury Department, you order the Treasury Department to tell the Federal Reserve that it is out of the business of dictating interest rates. You will no longer tell us what the interest rate will be. We will return to the monetized banking system where the banks are actually responsible for this. And you begin this in an orderly fashion. Get back to some sound money that’s actually worth something. You do those things, you’ll have mountains of foreign cash coming in here that we don’t currently have, and that could be put to productive measures. You get the government out of the way. You take the money that the government is currently confiscating and consuming and not putting to productive measures, and you return it to the people that will.

And then we can grow our economy truly, and we can begin to pay back this massive debt that we are going to irresponsibly and unconscionably pass on to our children and grandchildren.

That’s the great crime of our generation. We don’t seem to care.

Real Threat to Democracy

Last week, Fox News reporter Chris Wallace rightfully challenged Ron Howard's comparisons of George W. Bush to Richard Nixon, whose illegal behavior while president led to his resignation. Howard, who is director of the new film, Frost/Nixon, which chronicles reporter David Frost's interviews with the disgraced Nixon after he left office, seems to think, like many on the left, that George Bush was not only a bad president but a lawbreaker who should face investigation and possibly criminal sanction.
Specifically, George W. Bush's execution of the War on Terror and efforts to keep America safe in the wake of September 11 have sparked more than just concert reprimands from the likes of Bruce Springsteen. Bush faces accusations of "war criminal" and "imperial president." Wallace correctly pointed out to Howard after a screening of Frost/Nixon, however, that "to compare what Nixon did, and the abuses of power for pure political self-preservation, to George W. Bush trying to protect this country -- even if you disagree with rendition or waterboarding -- it seems to me is both a gross misreading of history both then and now."
Not only does it represent a gross misreading of history and a blatant neglect for facts, but the suggestion that George W. Bush should face repercussions for political decisions made while president is to invite a threat to democracy, given the implication it could have on future presidential decision-making and the corrosion of any hope for bipartisanship. And the suggestion would not seem so alarming if it were limited to entertainment flakes like Howard or Springsteen. However, presumably serious individuals, like Vice President-elect Joe Biden, have also suggested that the Obama administration might investigate Bush officials for crimes committed.
They are well-stablished legal maxims that "we are a government of laws and not of men" and that "no man is above the rule of law." However, the notion that George W. Bush violated clearly established laws is based on hyperbolic ignorance. Implementation of the policies at issue, from the war in Iraq, to the NSA wiretap program, to waterboarding, had legitimate legal justification and were executed with the good faith belief, and without clear precedent to the contrary, that the Commander in Chief possesses the requisite authority.
Others may hold a different view of the president's constitutional or statutory power. However, those disagreements are part of our constitutional system where not every question has a clear legal answer. The recourse for those legitimate disagreements is what we held on November 4 of this year: elections.
Furthermore, if members of Congress, such as Joe Biden, believed that the president was acting extra-constitutionally while in office, they could have passed legislation declaring waterboarding per se torture or the war in Iraq illegal and unauthorized going forward. If the president, consistent with his constitutional power, vetoed such legislative efforts, Congress could have attempted to override his veto or challenged the president's authority in the federal courts. Had the Supreme Court issued an unambiguous ruling that the president defied, then there might exist a plausible argument that he acted lawlessly. That never occurred, however, nor is it what Bush's critics argue. In most cases, Congress either relented or reached a constitutional compromise with the President, precisely how the system ought to work.
To argue now that Bush acted illegally and "shredded the Constitution" because his administration's legal analysis of ambiguous issues did not comport with the interpretations of certain law professors is folly. Pursuing these accusations would amount to a politically motivated witch-hunt, which anyone who respects the health of our constitutional system should oppose.
When the president takes the oath of office, he says that "I…will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." While he is not above the law, the president, as the head of one of three co-equal branches of government, deserves a degree of deference and freedom to exercise executive judgment without fear of prosecution after leaving office. This is especially important when the president is pursuing his most crucial and noble duty: protecting the American people.
Threats of legal comeuppance for Bush should not only concern Republicans or conservatives either. Congress, in response to Richard Nixon's executive excesses, passed the Independent Counsel's Act in 1978, creating an independent counsel's office that could investigate officials within the executive branch. The law was challenged in the Supreme Court as a violation of the separation of powers doctrine, since Congress had established an office that possessed power over, but was separate from, the executive.
In Morrison v. Olson, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the act. There was a lone dissenter, Justice Antonin Scalia, who warned of the political dangers that such an office could pose given the temptation for a special prosecutor to engage in politically motivated investigations or prosecutions. It was not until years later when a special prosecutor named Kenneth Starr was appointed to investigate a series of transactions known as "Whitewater," which ultimately culminated in the Monica Lewinsky scandal and President Bill Clinton's impeachment, that those on the left finally appreciated Scalia's warning.

For liberals anxious to retaliate against Bush, they should consider the future dangers that their antagonism would pose to both political parties, if not the moral implications of demonizing the president.

To ignore that is truly to invite a threat to our democracy that no patriot should ever want.

By Brett Joshpe

OF COURSE THIS IS BIKE WEEK

BEGAN SNOWING LAST NIGHT IN THE BAY AREA JUST NORTH OF GALVISTON.

Yes with all the motocycle venders setting up, this looks as if there is'nt going to be any --how can I say -- BOOBY-shots to be seen during bike week.

IT IS JUST OUR MONEY

Last week, a $34 billion bailout for the Big Three was on the table. Today, it appears a $14 billion compromise has been reached.
It's likely the Senate will vote on this compromise later in the week. I urge you to call your two Senators at 202-224-3121, or at the links to the right under "THE WALL" and tell them your thoughts about the bailout.

YOUR CALL

Somehow, I don't believe him: "I believe in common-sense gun safety laws, and I believe in the Second Amendment. Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven't indicated anything different during the transition. I think people can take me at my word." --Barack Obama, who still promises to make the so-called "assault weapons" ban permanent (on his site under Crime and Law Enforcement), which would ban most of the guns Americans have been buying since the election

Something cool that Xerox is doing.

If you go to this web site, http://www.letssaythanks.com/ you can pick out a thank you card and Xerox will print it and it will be sent to a soldier that is currently serving in Iraq . You can't pick out who gets it, but it will go to some member of the armed services. How AMAZING it would be if we could get everyone we know to send one!!! This is a great site. Please send a card. It is FREE and it only takes a second.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the soldiers received a bunch of these?

Whether you are for or against the war, our guys and gals over there need to know we are behind them.

IF YOU THINK YOU HAVE IT BAD - YOU COULD HAVE COME HOME TO THIS

OK, IS THIS ONE OF MY HORSES? I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED TO COME HOME AND SEE THIS. THEY ALWAYS SEEM TO BE GETTING INTO SOMETHING.