Joe Manchin is a dishonest, lying sack of crap

Joe Manchin is a lying sack of crap democrat, who just like Obama, will say whatever he needs to say to whoever he is in front of to get elected. Remember his campaign ad? “Dead-Aim” Joe?

Well, let’s start with the obvious. He managed to fool the NRA into endorsing him, and is seen in the ad using a hunting rifle to shoot an effigy of the cap-and-trade legislation.

Strong 2nd Amendment supporter, right? Uh… no. He just had his gun control legislation defeated (would a “strong” 2nd Amendment supporter introduce gun control legislation), but now he is vowing to reintroduce it. He says this about his bill:

Manchin: “…this basically not only protects your Second Amendment rights, it expands your Second Amendment rights.”

Really? How do you expand on “shall not be infringed?” Just curious. So, unless his bill rescinds other gun control laws, and in the net reduces gun control, he just told another lie.

In the ad he used to get elected, he also said he would “repeal the bad parts of Obamacare.” Well, I guess he hasn’t found any “bad parts” yet. In fact, in other venues he seemed to indicate that he thought Obama was doing a good job with his “healthcare reform.” Like this one…

Then, to “cap” off his campaign ad, he “blasts” cap-and-trade as “bad for West Virginia.” Well, Manchin’s own words would seem to contradict his own campaign ad. Listen here…

In summary, as I said above, Joe Manchin is a lying sack of crap democrat, who just like Obama, will say whatever he needs to say to whoever he is in front of to get elected.

Advertisements

Obama Willfully Breaking Laws and Violating the Constitution – Time to Impeach, Nullify, and Possibly Incarcerate

Why is congress waiting? Why are the American people LETTING congress wait? Obama has committed more than enough offenses that can easily be considered impeachable. He has willfully and knowingly broken the law, yet no one stands in his way. Why?  Will congress and the American people just stand by and let him continue the destruction or America?  Every time congress has a chance to become relevant again and put a stop to Obama’s treachery, they punt.  Why?  Will the last true American out of Washington, D.C. please turn off the lights and bring the flag?

Here are a few of the things Obama has done to break laws and butcher the constitution:

War Powers Act
Illegal Immigration/Amnesty
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
Cap-and-Trade



+ Continue reading

Obama’s Oil Spill Fix: $7 per Gallon Gasoline

I keep telling you to watch the other hand and not get distracted by shiny pretty things. Obama may not have caused the oil spill in the gulf, but he is certainly making every attempt to capitalize on it politically.

His cap-and-trade (tax) wealth redistribution scheme was pretty much DOA. But now he is trying to whip up anger and channel it into support for his scheme, just like, what term am I looking for… Oh, yeah, just like a COMMUNITY ORGANIZER.

It is becoming more and more apparent that he is incapable of even ACTING like a president, much less capable of actually being one. That requires leadership, not just cheer leading skills.


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/gallon_gas_9GlF3o1xIcIBelOV3k0RsK

$7-a-gallon gas?

By BEN LIEBERMAN
Last Updated: 4:31 AM, June 19, 2010
Posted: 12:02 AM, June 18, 2010

President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.

That’s a Harvard University study’s estimate of the per-gallon price of the president’s global-warming agenda. And Obama made clear this week that this agenda is a part of his plan for addressing the Gulf mess.

So what does global-warming legislation have to do with the oil spill?

Good question, because such measures wouldn’t do a thing to clean up the oil or fix the problems that led to the leak.

The answer can be found in Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s now-famous words, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste — and what I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”

That sure was true of global-warming policy, and especially the cap-and-trade bill. Many observers thought the measure, introduced last year in the House by Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.), was dead: The American people didn’t seem to think that the so-called global-warming crisis justified a price-hiking, job-killing, economy-crushing redesign of our energy supply amid a fragile recovery. Passing another major piece of legislation, one every bit as unpopular as ObamaCare, appeared unlikely in an election year.

So Obama and congressional proponents of cap-and-trade spent several months rebranding itdownplaying the global-warming rationale and claiming that it was really a jobs bill (the so-called green jobs were supposed to spring from the new clean-energy economy) and an energy-independence bill (that will somehow stick it to OPEC).  (Just like the Department of Energy was supposed to get us off of foreign oil when it was founded in the ’70’s.  It’s grown into a multi-billion dollar per year black hole that accomplishes nothing.  If they closed the department of Energy and saved that money, I might be more inclined to believe Obama and the left was actually serious about energy independence.  It would also help if we were allowed to drill for our own oil.  The reason they were drilling in such deep water to begin with was because environmentalists and liberals FORCED them to.  Every liberal policy accomplishes the exact opposite of its stated intent.)

Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) even reportedly declined to introduce their new cap-and-trade proposal in the Senate on Earth Day, because they wanted to de-emphasize the global-warming message. Instead, Kerry called the American Power Act “a plan that creates jobs and sets us on a course toward energy independence and economic resurgence.”  (Lies…)

But the new marketing strategy wasn’t working. Few believe the green-jobs hype — with good reason. In Spain, for example, green jobs have been an expensive bust, with each position created requiring, on average, $774,000 in government subsidies. And the logic of getting us off oil imports via a unilateral measure that punishes American coal, oil and natural gas never made any sense at all.

Now the president is repackaging cap-and-trade — again — as a long-term solution to the oil spill. But it’s the same old agenda, a huge energy tax that will raise the cost of gasoline and electricity high enough so that we’re forced to use less.

The logic linking cap-and-trade to the spill in the Gulf should frighten anyone who owns a car or truck. Such measures force up the price at the pump — Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs thinks it “may require gas prices greater than $7 a gallon by 2020” to meet Obama’s stated goal of reducing emissions 14 percent from the transportation sector.

Of course, doing so would reduce gasoline use and also raise market share for hugely expensive alternative fuels and vehicles that could never compete otherwise. Less gasoline demand means less need for drilling and thus a slightly reduced chance of a repeat of the Deepwater Horizon spill — but only slightly. Oil will still be a vital part of America’s energy mix.

Oil-spill risks should be addressed directly — such as finding out why the leak occurred and requiring new preventive measures or preparing an improved cleanup plan for the next incident. Cap-and-trade is no fix and would cause trillions of dollars in collateral economic damage along the way.  (The Bush administration passed laws on what kind of safety shutoff valves had to be used in these rigs, then promptly exempted BP because of the large campaign contributions they made.  Then along comes Obama who then renews the exemptions…. because of the large campaign contributions, house payments, etc.)

Emanuel was wrong. The administration shouldn’t view each crisis — including the oil spill — as an opportunity to be exploited, but as a problem to be addressed. And America can’t afford $7-a-gallon gas.

Ben Lieberman is senior analyst of energy and environmental policy in The Heritage Founda tion’s Roe Institute.


Obama, the Oil Spill, Government Paralysis, and Cap-and-Trade

Three days after the oil rig explosion, the Dutch government offered to assist the United States by sending ships equipped with oil-skimming booms. It also provided a plan for creating sand barriers to protect the sensitive marshlands of the Gulf coast. (http://www.fortliberty.org/obama-administration-rejected-help-with-oil-spill-cleanup.html)

What did Obama say? “Thanks, but no thanks.”

25 skimmer boats are available, but the administration is hiding behind red tape. (http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/06/11/skimmer-boats-available-no-interest/?test=latestnews)

The Maine Department of Environmental Protection has more than two miles of absorbent boom ready to go. It also wants to send oil-skimming barges and a team of trained responders.

“We’re waiting. We’ve got trained people, we’ve got equipment,” said Barbara Parker, director of response services for the DEP. “I’ve talked to people in other New England states. We’re all waiting. We can’t just go. We have to be asked.” (http://www.pressherald.com/news/Maine-oil-spill-team-others-wait-in-frustration.html)

Have they been asked? What’s that rhythmic chirping insect noise I hear?

States and towns are trying to fight, but getting told to stand down by the EPA. Bobby Jindal, governor of Louisiana, wanted to build sand berms along the coast to stop the oil from reaching shore and marshlands. The EPA stonewalled saying there might be an “environmental impact.” Really? What as a bigger effect and is much more difficult to clean up? Piles of sand, or oil soaked wetlands? Thanks, liberal tree huggers for paralyzing our government.

One town in Alabama is having more success by saying that with or without government help or permission, they are going to protect their homes and town. (http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/06/09/small-town-relies-on-itself-to-fight-oil-2/) Wow! <sarcasm>That’s crazy talk. What country on earth would ever foster an environment where people were self reliant and not swinging from the government apron strings? These people must be from Mars.</sarcasm>

There are dozens, perhaps hundreds of people out there with ideas and products to help clean up and contain the oil spill, but they are either not being asked, or told to stay away. Why?

There’s no single golden BB that is going to solve this problem. This is an all hands on deck situation where everyone can do some small part. They guy with his oil absorbent hair might be able to clean a few beaches. The oil tankers with skimmers can get huge quantities of oil well out to sea. The guy with the 100 million tons of natural, biodegradable oil neutralizer might be able to handle the near shore threat, etc., etc. Why is NOTHING being done?

While Obama runs around looking for someone to blame, some way to blame Bush, and someone’s a$$ to kick while accepting no responsibility for the total lack of federal response, the disaster, much of which could have been prevented, gets worse by the day.

Why do I hear the words of Rahm Emanuel ringing in my ears? Don’t let any disaster go to waste. Why? Because while the spill and the oil covered birds grab headlines, Obama is grabbing more power. Remember the Cap-and-Trade legislation that was pretty much DOA in the senate? Well, Obama is trying to stir outrage at the oil spill and channel that into support for Cap-and-Trade. (http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/Will-the-Oil-Spill-Help-Secure-Cap-and-Trade-3847). People are just waking up to the hidden poison pills in the health care takeover and how bad it is going to be for both health care and the economy. Cap-and-Trade will be the dagger through the heart of the American economy. Yet Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and their liberal/progressive buddies persist. Why?

Control and power.

Be vigilant, America. While your attention is focused on the headline grabbing oil spill, moves are being made behind the curtain that most Americans will never approve of. While the magician points to the oily birds and the mess in the Gulf, we need to be watching his other hand.


Al Gore’s $8.875 Million House of Carbon

Remember all that noise Al Gore made about oceans rising and cities being flooded because of “man-caused global warming?” Well, Mr. Hypocricy, Al Gore doesn’t seem to be too worried about that anymore. He bought a nearly $9 million house RIGHT NEXT TO THE OCEAN. Where did all that money come from? Follow the money,… and you’ll see that global warming really is just a hoax.


http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/nswift/al-gores-8875-million-house-of-carbon

Al Gore’s $8.875 Million House of Carbon

By Nan Swift on Apr 30, 2010

Two days ago the LA Times reported that Al Gore has picked up a pricey new Italian-style villa with “ocean view, fountains, six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms” all for a mere $8,875,000.

It always seems a little surprising that this self-styled eco-warrior isn’t living in a tree with the rest of his disciples, but it shouldn’t be all that shocking because he can definitely spare the change he shelled out for the Montecito-area cottage.

Of course the most famous public figure with deep financial ties to the climate change money machine is Al Gore. During the last ten years, he has increased his personal fortune a hundredfold, from “between $1 million and $2 milion” (from his 2000 Presidential candidacy disclosures) to over $100 million in 2007. Gore and former Goldman Sachs executive David Blood founded Generation Investment Management (GIM), a venture capital firm that invests in “green” businesses. GIM is a member of the Chicago Carbon Exchange (CCX) which is the commodity trading market created to facilitate the sale of carbon credits.

Money machine? The blog quoted above points to a good introduction:

If you accept that CO2 is the problem, then steps need to be taken to reduce CO2 emissions, which many developed countries have attempted using “cap and trade” schemes. In cap and trade, you use the law to require companies in developed countries to reduce their CO2 emissions, or to buy carbon offsets if they can’t.

Where do carbon offsets come from? Simply enough, some authority must certify that someone else has either reduced their CO2 output, or has agreed not to do something that would increase CO2 output they would otherwise have done. For every ton of CO2 you don’t emit, you get a certificate that you can sell on the carbon market to someone who needs permission — an indulgence — allowing them to emit a ton of CO2.

But what about the details? Who has the authority to certify? And how do you measure CO2 not emitted? The opportunities for graft are vast. There isn’t much that is easier than not building a facility that therefore doesn’t emit CO2. Convince an inspector that you really would have built that facility, or simply that you built a modern efficient plant where you might otherwise have built a dirty inefficient one, and you’re entitled to a credit.

Once you have the carbon credit you need to sell it, which means there must be a market — a role filled in part by the Chicago Carbon Exchange (CCX).

Glenn Beck does an excellent job of trying to unpack the growing carbon credit market/jungle below:

It’s difficult to dismiss this as a lot of tinfoil hat ranting – people have been picking up on this in bits and pieces over a long time period now, even Rolling Stone did a piece on this last July!  The Washington Examiner also has more information on the Fannie Mae cap and trade connection here.

Thanks to the elaborate “cash web” Gore and his cohorts have put together, he can not only afford his new digs, he can afford the carbon offsets from such an elaborate, energy sucking abode.  Unless, of course, he can just give them to himself?  Perhaps for an early birthday present.

On the other hand, even if he did buy the offsets to counter the earth abuse the Montecito pad is committing, it probably wouldn’t do much good.  The Christian Science Monitor has an indepth investigative report on the extreme no good at all and, in fact, extreme fraud some carbon offset outfits are accomplishing.

An investigation by The Christian Science Monitor and the New England Center for Investigative Reporting has found that individuals and businesses who are feeding a $700 million global market in offsets are often buying vague promises instead of the reductions in greenhouse gases they expect.

They are buying into projects that are never completed, or paying for ones that would have been done anyhow, the investigation found. Their purchases are feeding middlemen and promoters seeking profits from green schemes that range from selling protection for existing trees to the promise of planting new ones that never thrive. In some cases, the offsets have consequences that their purchasers never foresaw, such as erecting windmills that force poor people off their farms.

Carbon offsets are the environmental equivalent of financial derivatives: complex, unregulated, unchecked and – in many cases – not worth their price.

And often, those who get the “green credits” thinking their own carbon emissions have been offset, are fooled.

As we’ve pointed out in the newly revamped Cap and Trade online war room, government wants us to have a lot of economic pain for what is clearly no ecological pay off. The entire system is barely afloat under the weight of fraud, back room deals, and the type of cronyism that would make Boss Tweed proud.  And for some reason we’re supposed to believe that the government is some how more pure and will pull this off better?

That’s a big pill to swallow.

It’s good that the cap and trade gambit is being exposed, but the dots are purposefully hard to connect and the kind of serious attention that is required to bring this kind of information to the forefront of the public conscience is seriously lacking.  That’s why it is easy for Kerrry, Graham, and Lieberman to get away with saying their new bill isn’t cap and trade, but caps and all this other junk that people accept without questioning.  It’s all very complex and shady – it would take serious unpacking to discern what is really going on and who is getting rich off the taxpayers – because someone always is.

For all those reasons and more, it’s essential that we take action now before the bill that was dead, then wasn’t, comes back for more.

It’s also essential that citizens stand up for themselves, do some serious investigating, and demand answers.  That’s what the Tennesse Center for Policy Research did when they exposed that Al Gore’s electricity bill was 20X the national average in 2007.  But don’t worry, he can afford it.


Obama’s Secret Power Grabs

Our government has a defined process as laid out in the constitution.  The chart below illustrates how Obama is sidestepping that process, undermining the constitution, and usurping power from the congress and senate that does not belong to him.  Chairman Maobama must be stopped from doing this.  He is with the aid of liberal-progressive democrats destroying the system of government, and the nation it produced over the last 200 plus years.

Are you ready to see Obama throw America onto the trash heap of history?  I’m not.  And I won’t quit fighting for this country and the constitution I swore to defend until the day I die.


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/04/12/phil-kerpen-obama-power-grab-fcc-internet-congress-lisa-jackson-epa-carol/

Updated April 12, 2010

Obama’s Secret Power Grabs

By Phil Kerpen
FOXNews.com

President Obama seems to believe that most of his sweeping agenda to transform the country can be accomplished without even a vote of Congress.

While Congress considers sweeping new legislation to permanently institutionalize the bailouts and federal control of our financial system (right on the heels of their health care takeover, of course) several other sweeping power grabs are going on outside the spotlight of legislative debate. Indeed President Obama seems to believe that most of his sweeping agenda to transform the country can be accomplished without even a vote of Congress. The chart seen above and found here shows what the administration is up to.

As I’ve previously noted here in the Fox Forum, the the EPA is pursuing an aggressive global warming power grab under the direction of White House Climate czar Carol Browner (who was not subject to Senate confirmation), and the FCC is pursuing a regulatory takeover of the Internet.

Both of those efforts are now escalating. The EPA has now finalized its vehicle emissions rule, for the first time regulating global warming under the 1970 Clean Air Act. While EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is trying to calm a political backlash by promising the delay the onslaught of regulations (the overall blueprint is over 18,000 pages and regulates almost everything that moves and lots of things that stay put) she remains committed to them. The Senate will have a key vote on S.J. Res. 26, which would stop the EPA, some time in May.

The FCC was smacked down in court last week in Comcast v. FCC, which held that the Commission has no jurisdiction to regulate the Internet. Yet FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a close friend of Obama’s, is now considering Internet regulations of an even more extreme nature and by an even more dubious mechanism—reclassifying the Internet as a phone system to regulate it like an old-fashioned public utility.

Obama has a pattern of sidestepping Congress that will only get worse in the aftermath of the health care fight and the pending financial “reform” legislation. For a full explanation of all of these threats as well as action items on how to stop them, please check out the interactive version of the chart on www.ObamaChart.com.

Phil Kerpen is vice president for policy at Americans for Prosperity. He can be reached on Twitter, Facebook, and through www.philkerpen.com.

+


It WAS A Republic…

It’s our fault, America. We let our republic slip away. We let socialist politicians calling themselves both republicans and democrats lead us into this wilderness while we blindly followed. While it’s nice that the republicans appear to be listening at the moment, the fact still remains that they are all politicians, and many of them played the political game that compromised away our constitution to the progressive/socialists on the left who have TOTALLY taken over the democrat party.

We are seeing a great deal of unrest in America today from both conservatives and liberals. From the conservatives because our liberty is being destroyed, and from the left because it isn’t being destroyed fast enough. For you dimwits who voted for our undocumented president, what did you think would happen? He told you in no uncertain terms what he was going to do, and EXACTLY what kind of “hope and change” he was going to give you. Why didn’t you listen? Now as many of you wake up to the reality that the republic we once new is lying on the ground, quickly bleeding to death with both legs and one arm severed, you say in your uneducated ignorance “…I had no idea this would happen.” If you have any desire to save this nation from the ash heap of history, join us now or get your anus out of the way.

We have a chance to start over in the house, and make a down payment on our future in the senate. We have a chance to throw out EVERY member of the house in November and replace them with someone who will respect and obey our constitution. We have the chance to do the same with 1/3 of the senate. If the future of this nation is important to you, then you will do everything within your power to help make sure this happens.


http://www.personalliberty.com/liberty/it-was-a-republic-but-we-couldnt-keep-it/

It Was A Republic, But We Couldn’t Keep It

March 29, 2010 by Bob Livingston

It Was A Republic, But We Couldn’t Keep It

Will it never end?

Will the daily, relentless assault on our freedoms by the current socialist-in-chief, President Barack Obama, and the socialist Democrat-controlled Congress never end? (Not until they are gone.)

Will the constant pounding and pounding on the Constitution by Obama and Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the socialist elite elected class—as they work to not just chip away at our nation’s foundation as progressives before them, but to obliterate it completely—never end?  (Not until we get rid of them.)

Will the takeover of business and industry never end?  (Not until we make them stop.)

Will the calls for a cap-and-trade system that will raise taxes and energy costs and further erode out economic well-being never end?  (Not until we stop it.)

Will the push for amnesty for illegal aliens never end?  (Not until they are afraid enough of us to quit pushing it.)

Will the spending and the money printing and currency debasement never end?  (When the economy collapses and the revolution begins.)

Will the hubris of the elected class never end?  (Only when we the people end it for them.)

Apparently not.

Day by day; week by week; month by month the socialist Democrats pounded away at so-called healthcare reform. In office for 14 months, the Obama-Pelosi-Reid triumvirate worked to enact a socialist, European-style big government healthcare system on America.

The American people didn’t want what Obama, Reid and Pelosi were peddling. By 59 percent to 39 percent (by up to 80% against it in many polls), according to the latest CNN/Opinion Research poll, Americans opposed Obamacare.

And they said so over and over. They said “no” to the secrecy of the bills, which were crafted in smoke-filled rooms, behind closed doors and foisted upon the public at the moment of the vote. They said “no” to the cost which kept growing and growing with each incarnation. They said “no” to the Louisiana Purchase (to get Mary Landrieu’s vote), the Cornhusker Kickback (to garner Ben Nelson’s support) and to the Gator Aid (to secure the support of senior citizens).  (Not just “no,” but “H*** NO!”)

They said “no” by marching on Washington D.C., by the tens of thousands. They said “no” through the Tea Parties. They said so through calls and letters. They said “no” at town hall meetings. They said “no,” “no,” “No,” “NO!”

They said “no” at the voting booth in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Yet the socialist Democrats passed it anyway.

So the people ask, “What part of no don’t you understand?”

Know this: Pelosi, Reid and Obama—they understand. They just don’t care. It’s the progressive way.

Responding to questions about the special favors garnered by recalcitrant Senators in order to enlist their support, Reid replied with something to the effect of: That’s the legislative process. If a Senator didn’t get something he wasn’t doing his job.

Hey. It’s only money, and printing it is cheap.  (OPM, Other People’s Money.)

As Pelosi responded when asked where Congress gets the authority to mandate United States citizens purchase health insurance: “Are you serious?”

Well, yes Madame Speaker, Constitutional issues are serious business to us. They should be to you. But they’re not. That’s because the Constitution limits their power over the citizenry and power is what the socialist elected elites seek.

If the Constitution was important to the socialist elite there would have been an open process in putting together a bill that reformed the health insurance system by letting the free market system work rather than further empowering government. And certainly there would have been no talk of using parliamentary trickery—the Slaughter Rule, also known as Deem and Pass—to pass it.

If the Constitution was important to the socialists there would be no provisions mandating that people buy something simply for being American and no need for 14 states to file suit against the Federal government for violating the 10th Amendment.

If the Constitution was important to the socialists Americans wouldn’t be sitting back asking themselves, “What’s next on their agenda: Another stab at amnesty for illegals, another run at cap-and-trade, a gun grab, a value added tax?”

If the Constitution was important the government wouldn’t own General Motors, Chrysler, the financial industry and now, insurance companies.

If the Constitution was important the government wouldn’t be in the business of setting the salaries of everyone from the lowest level employee to the CEOs of large companies.

To be fair, all of this can be laid at the feet of the socialist Republicans who blindly followed George W. Bush’s big government socialism over the economic cliff. They—the socialist Republicans—are claiming an epiphany now and appear to be standing up to the Democrat tyranny. But like all socialist elected elites, when they controlled Congress the socialist Republicans grew government, expanded its power to monitor its citizenry and supported Bush’s nation-building, empire-expanding war policies and his original $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

Though they—the socialist Republicans—claim to be strict constructionists when it comes to the Constitution now, they helped Bush enact his ridiculous “compassionate conservatism” that increased government entitlement spending and therefore increased the roles of non-producers eager to sponge off the hard work of the producers.

But that’s what you get from the socialist elected elites. They ignore the Constitution because to them the “be all and end all” is government. They like big government and they like bigger government even better.

You can be sure that the Obama-Pelosi-Reid triumvirate isn’t going to rest on its laurels. More big government programs are on the way.

And Pelosi is not afraid to kick in a few doors to accomplish it. As she told a group of Leftwing bloggers leading up the passage of Obamacare, “…once we kick through this door there will be more legislation to follow.”

So this is only the beginning of the socialist takeover of America. It’s evidence that sovereignty is in the hands of but a few, just as the writer Brutus warned in Anti-Federalist No. 1: “If the people are to give their assent to the laws, by persons chosen and appointed by them, the manner of the choice and the number chosen, must be such, as to possess, be disposed, and consequently qualified to declare the sentiments of the people; for if they do not know, or are not disposed to speak the sentiments of the people, the people do not govern, but the sovereignty is in a few.”

At the close of the Constitutional Convention a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what type of government had been created. Franklin’s reply: “A republic, if you can keep it.”

We couldn’t.

Throw the ALL out.


%d bloggers like this: