CONGRESS BLOCKING AMERICAN'S & KILLING MORAL

How far is to far, when government steps into people's everyday lives, and decisions they make? Congress Democrats were speaking, on the FDA, regulating smoking and smokers. Sheryl Crow, hardly a politician (still a person with a large forum), is asking for people to not "spare any squares" (as in reference, to the "Sienfeld" episode). Crow is speaking out for people to utilize and only use a regulated amount of toilet paper. Barack Obama came out today and made this assertion, "There are things you can do individually, though, to save energy. Making sure your tires are properly inflated — simple thing. But we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling — if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You'd actually save just as much!"

Democrats, in both the Congress and Senate, are gushing over themselves on "no drilling, no nuclear power, no shale recovery, no off shore drilling." Demanding for "the people/the tax payers" for conservation (led by Nancy Pelosi, Harry Ried, and Sen. Leahy), investing in "new and clean technologies" and stating "more people should be using bicycles, walking, and public transportation" (while they continue to do whatever they want). Today, the Democrats voted to not stay on Capitol Hill and go vacationing (again), over the next ten days. Rather than, staying to solve and have an up/down vote, on whether to lift the moratorium on drilling (in the US). A step President Bush has already taken, which immediately started the prices of oil to drop (now at $126.00 a barrel), lifting the Presidential ban on drilling. However, Bush's act will go untouched, because Congress also has to lift the moratorium, as well, for the private sector to begin drilling. Yet, the Congress (led by Democrats who would rather pander to their base, then help the people they are supposed to serve) will not veto the act, which will not allow new drilling options (that 76% of Americans want).

Over the last year, against the people's voice and overall majority thought, the Democratic lead Congress (at a 17-19% approval rating, the lowest of all time) and Senate have gone against the people and wasted tax payer's time and money. Here is seven items Democrats decided to act, vote, or pander on, instead of, 7 things the people/tax payers wanted.

Seven Things Either on the Congressional/Senate Floor, or Worked On:

1. Working on fast food acts, not serving people who are to heavy for their height.
2. In the last two days, making sure to take the time, to honor last year's Hiesman Trophy Winner.
3. Several meetings in Congress on Impeaching President Bush (when he has 5 months left, in his service to the country)
4. A revamp of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which oversees toy safety
5. Attempting to invoke cloture on a House-passed bill (HR 6331) that would delay a 10.6% reduction to Medicare physician fees.
6. Bill aimed to get some 17 year old kids, "preregistration," and allow some to vote (boosting the youth vote, which Obama and Democrats would prosper from).
7. Looking to for an "Iraq Pullout" (in early '08) vote, while President Bush promised to veto

Seven What The People Wanted Done, By Over 65% (most over 76%):

1. Pull the congressional moratorium off of the off shore and other drilling.
2. An up/down vote on the 73 judges, President Bush has put forth, over a year ago (yet no vote has happened, and it will not happen, as Democrats are hoping Obama wins, allowing him to select 73 new liberal/democrat friendly judges, for life).
3. A bill and working solution to the sanctuary cities, illegal immigration, and immigration civil rights violations (for the illegal immigrant being paid, less than minimum wage, etc..)
4. A COMPLETE resolution from the FDA and CDC on the Salmonella Case (which effected up to 30-50,000 people, but making 1300 sick for sure)
5. A tax bill that continues credit or deductions for research and development, state and local sales taxes, tuition, children and charitable contributions. 6. A bill to eliminate new pay cuts for doctors who treat Medicare patients. 7. Important measures giving direction to the FAA and the Defense Department.

The people are not getting represented, in Congress, the Senate, or in the White House. This coming election, between Obama and John McCain, and Congressman/Senate seats, is set of huge decisions, for all Americans. The economy, gas and food prices, the countries deficit, national security, Iraq, Iran, Russia, China, the dollar and national debt, health care, social security, and countless other issues are on the table, with the newly elected leaders. Just the "Macro" side of this election will dictate whether big government (Obama), where the CDC, education, health care, immigration, etc...etc... will be in the hands of huge government agencies, built by higher taxes. Some, may want that. John McCain is looking to keep the decisions of the people's lives, to themselves and big government out. Obama is for Planned Parenthood (3rd term/partial birth abortions and judges who back all Roe V. Wade). McCain is not for abortion, and definitely (his words) "will not be appointing judges who are for left of center." McCain is for drilling, nuclear, wind, solar, shale exploration, and every kind of new and clean energy possible. Barack is not for nuclear, drilling, and will only say that he is for new, clean technologies (without any real policies for energy stated, he is a question mark).

Americans are on the clock to research, make educational decisions about who they want, and then get out and vote. Whether voting for a Democrat, Republican, Independent, or Libertarian, it is time for everyone to get out and do their duty. If you do not vote, then you do not have anything to say, after the election seasons are over. Period!

From DMAN, at TheThoughtSpigot.com
http://thethoughtspigot.com/
"Where the news, sports, politics, and public opinion collide in one site"

CNN's "GPS" SHOWS VACILLATING OBAMA VIEWS, ON FOREIGN POLICY

Sunday, on a spectacular new television show (Fareed Zakaria, "GPS"), Barack Obama was interviewed, one on one, with Fareed Zakaria. The interview was not the "conventional drivel" on Jessie Jackson comments, Dr. Jeremiah Wright, or any of the other non-issue topics, the mainstream media is churning out. Instead, Zakaria provided a balanced and poignant interview, with an array of questions above the belt and needing specific answers. On CNN Sunday, Obama showed just the razor sharp wit and his expansive verbiage, to gloss over certain issues and give just enough, for the illusion of a complete answer. However, after reading the transcript and listening to the interview twice, there is a distinct glimpse into an Obama Presidency, in the foreign policy realm.

In the CNN/"GPS" interview, Obama was one on one with a man, holding a vast expanse of knowledge of the Muslim world, foreign governments and Middle East hot beds. Plus, Fareed Zakaria is a straight down the middle interviewer and man.Discussing Iraq and Iran, Obama has changed his far left and anti-Iraq war stance attitude. Originally, Obama stated, "On day one, of his Presidency, he would be pulling one to two brigades out of Iraq. Leveling the American presence down, to fully stop the war, within eighteen months." Over the last 6-7 weeks, since Clinton dropped out of the race, he jogged back to the right in his position, "I would have to not only check with the commanders on the ground, assess the situation, discuss with the Iraqi government, and then we will find out the best way to leave Iraq." A difference in words and strategies, since Clinton is gone.

Iran was an issue Obama was not as vocal about, as with China and Russia. The "change" in his potential policy was not a complete turn around, but a change for him, America, and definitely a divide, with McCain. The difference is Obama wanting to talk (as a President), face to face, with some (maybe, all) of our enemies and nations in distinct contrast to American interest.

Russia and China huge problems,with a variety of issues, but nuclear proliferation and the constant "vote against America" in the United Nations (against North Korea, Iran, Darfur, and tactical issues it's allies have/are using). Disarming North Korea, thru "6" party talks, was the only way to disengage their nuclear facilities. One on one talk failed, talks thru China and thru Japan failed, and UN sanctions failed, as well. Iran is a completely different animal, compared to North Korea, in a multitude of different ways, and 1-1 talks are not a move at all.
Consensus is a word good for trades in baseball, the stock market, and hundreds of other everyday terms, deals, and actions. People who will lay down their lives at the blink of an eye (for beliefs, to kill others not like them) is a hard objective to achieve. China holding trillions of dollars of our national debt and Russia going the way of "KGB Days with Putin" are not with the US,(hence, America's missile systems in Poland, et. Al). Obama's statement on "GPS" was, "When I am President, I would work for a full consensus, finding a consensus with everyone, including Russia and China. Also, not making a "consensus" with the twisting of arms and withholding goodies from other countries, not following our ways, or what we are working towards."

Barack Obama is one of the more gifted speakers in the world today. However, he is the most liberal senator, in the senate and he continues to have no actual senate policies, or combined legislation. The interview with Fareed Zakaria was a subtle and poignant interview. Showing Obama's "flexibility in his future policies." Iran firing long range missiles, building and constructing nuclear weapons, and having a massive border with Iraq, makes overseas policies huge. However, aside from the more than subtle changes in the interview on foreign issues, Obama has the same kind of vacillation on the domestic issues. Where does this man stand, on anything, and what has he actually accomplished, in his short political life, to be the President of the United States?

From DMAN, at TheThoughtSpigot.com
http://thethoughtspigot.com/
"Where the news, sports, politics, and public opinion collide in one site"

To Have A Friend, To Be A Friend

To have a friend is one of most choice things, in all of the world. Out of the thousands, possibly millions, of people who pass thru the lives of everyone, finding someone who is trustworthy, allows a person to be themselves (while also showing their faults in order to allow them to become a better person), sincere, and most of all will be in a person's life thru the thickest of tar pits and the lightest of feathers. Some say, "this is a good guy," "She is a good person" and "they would make a good friend." However, the ultimate test is for a person to say, "he/she is a great friend" (in the deepest root, of the meaning).

A notable quotes, "If a person can find two, or three, real friends, they are truly blessed." In a world dwelling in all of the negatives, scandals, and overall pitfalls of life, sometimes it is very important to appreciate the friend(s) one has. A true friend balances out the bad, pointing out the good. They may have a criticism, but it is from the heart and only to enhance another person's interest and personality (not to hurt, scorn, or be-little a person). They do not come from a place of dissent, but of love, hope and an overall place of goodness. A true friend is not jealous, is not passive, nor over the top, but brings out a brilliant blend of another person, for the betterment of the person.

Do you have any true friends? If you do, have you told them how much they mean to you and how much you appreciate them, for not what they do, but who they are? Lastly, are you a true friend to anyone? Turn the first two paragraphs around, on yourself. Look deep into your soul, and see if you love someone for who they are (not what they do, what they give/bring to you, or any other one sided thing for your own gain, at their expense), what they are about (the attributes in their overall being) do you appreciate them in their good times and bad (or do you trickle away from them, only soaking up their great ventures, like a vulture), and are you showing your love and overall affection for them (not for what/where it gets you, or how it makes you feel). Sometime, it is very tough to have friends, but it is a million times harder to be a true friend. Obviously, only a person can answer this for themselves.

Hopefully, most people have a friend. However, everyone can always try to be the best friend, to another, they possibly can be. If you do have a friend, tell them how much they mean to you and yours. If you do not have anyone, try to look for the good in everyone, as you never know when, or where a special person may come from.

Inspired by: Harding, Los, Brian, & J

From DMAN, at TheThoughtSpigot.com
http://thethoughtspigot.com/
"Where the news, sports, politics, and public opinion collide in one site"

66 Years Ago

Sixty-six years ago, the United States made it illegal, punishable by up to $500,000 and 1-5 years in jail (depending on the infraction, how the crime was committed, and other circumstances), for crushing (poaching in any way) one egg, or killing a bald eagle. The law was put into effect, for the "American Bird" and also for conservation, as the bird was becoming extinct. After this July 4th, holiday weekend, it seems evident the project was a complete success. Eagles have continued soaring all over the United States, numbers are way up, and the laws continue on the books of our great nation.

In third world countries, human rights violating countries and even in small backwoods towns, jungles, and thru the cracks of society there continues to be massive violations to women (in the form of the cutting of women's private areas off, for fear of to liberal of girls and religious practices). Countries like Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Liberia, and countless others in Africa are using rape, machetes, and other forms of torture to enhance political and economic gain. Some expect the atrocities in these countries and states, but equate a massive and growing problem, in America.

The sixty-six years, the country has made an open season and struggle to preserve eagles and their eggs. However, in the very same country (since January 22, 1973, thru 2001), it is estimated (only estimate numbers from 1998-2001, the rest of the numbers) have been more than 40 million abortions. The numbers, per year, since 1975 have been over 1 million abortions a year, since the third year of abortion on demand. Obviously, if divided out, it totals 92 abortions, babies killed, or embryos taken out (whichever makes it easiest for you to digest it) a day, for over 28 years. (92 abortions X 10858 days (in 28 years) = 40 million)

An eagle's egg is "an embryo," (by definition), being the egg has a potential healthy eagle in it, waiting for only time and nature, to take place. A woman who is pregnant has an egg in her, that is waiting for time and nature, to take place. For sixty-six years, a person could not kill an eagle embryo, without it being an official crime (not to mention the moral and ethical implications). Therefore, the real question is when did a bird's life, become more important than a human life? Why are people protecting animals, more than the unborn? Just questions, but only individuals can answer them (the abortionists, the women who are getting abortions, and anyone affiliated with the abortion industry).

From DMAN, at TheThoughtSpigot.com
http://thethoughtspigot.com/
"Where the news, sports, politics, and public opinion collide in one site"