About Me

Name: Eric Jay
Location: Oceanside, CA
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Can You Say: Plummet? Sure you can...

Posted by Eric Jay on Wednesday, July 29, 2009 8:00:00 PM
     I have not so much to say, other than to say it's about time reality caught up with perception...is the average voter seeing the truth rather than the MSM 'Cinderella President' put forth?  (Update, don't know why but the graphic portion is not loading very well, a large blank spot, so I deleted the graph, go to the link below.)
 
 
     Do you need more proof that voters are starting to see the forest for the trees? Via Drudge Report, Gallup: Obama Hits New Low. I know, I know, polls have no meaning...
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rep. Conyer's On Reading A Bill: Another Argument For Part Time Legilators

Posted by Eric Jay on Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:00:00 PM
     I am appalled at the lack of duty our legislators feel toward their constituents. One reason that we send them off to Washington is that they are supposed to be knowledgeable and one reasonably assumes that at a minimum they would read what they vote upon. One example of our representatives not reading the bill put before them was the TARP 'stimulus bill.' Another bill with more than 1000 pages; we know how that has worked out. According to Congressman John Conyers that's what we have lawyers, besides we push it downhill; localities and states can then sort the mess out:
"Thousand-page bills, unread and indeed unwritten at the time of passage, are the death of representative government. They also provide a clue as to why, in a country this large, national government should be minimal and constrained. Even if you doubled or trebled the size of the legislature, the Conyers conundrum would still hold: No individual can read these bills and understand what he's voting on. That's why the bulk of these responsibilities should be left to states and subsidiary jurisdictions, which can legislate on such matters at readable length and in comprehensible language."  Rep. John Conyers before the National Press Club
    At the minimum we should demand that legislation be delayed until a) the legislator reads the bill and b) the legislation has been posted for a minimum period (based upon the length). This is disastrous let alone unacceptable. This is one way that a new bureaucracy is created and no one knows about it.
     Last night on Greta Van Susteren's show Congressman Mike Pence had the following to say:
What we've found so far, there -- it includes 33 entitlement programs, creates or expands or extends, 53 additional offices, bureaus, commissions, programs, bureaucracies the bill creates. It uses the word -- you'll like this from an attorney's perspective. It uses the word "shall" 1,683 times, representing new duties for bureaucrats and mandates. That's up from an increase of 306 mandates in the discussion draft. (Emphasis mine)
     The rush is not because there is some crisis as the White House is wont to tell us, daily (nice tactic Rahm, straight from Alinksy's rules, perhaps?) I might add. the rush is simply to get it passed before the public is all the wiser let alone the Senators and Representatives. This is unacceptable and one can see that voter frustration is beginning to boil over! Seen the Claire McCaskill Town Hall meets the 'Tea Party?'
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Foreign Policy Failure(s)

Posted by Eric Jay on Wednesday, July 29, 2009 8:00:00 AM
     Powerline has a post that basically says that the Obama Administration foreign policy is a failure, complete failure. The current trip to Israel by Middle East Envoy George Mitchell with hat in hand is merely the latest example. The Jerusalem Post had this to say:

Although no agreement was announced regarding the US demand for a settlement freeze, Israeli officials said the sides were "getting close" to "finding that common ground to enable progress."

      Our staunchest ally in years past is only "getting close," not even "close" to an agreement. The shift in policy by the current president has placed a strain on relations. What the Obama Administration has done is, basically, placed all of the Middle East players on the playing field as equals. His Egypt speech made that clear, his intent was to reach out to the Muslim world. Again, his efforts while noble are not effective. He has alienated Israel into a position that it can only be "getting close" to an agreement. In the end, they may simply decide to agree to disagree. Where does that leave us? Certainly, we are no closer to the Middle East peace that all presidents have sought.
     I believe that when the president made clear that he was going to sit down with any and all who were willing to meet. The impression then and perhaps now is that all leaders were/are the same and that he would meet with them without preconditions. Naturally, since he made the comments during the campaign he later back tracked and issued a more nuanced approach. Of course, he didn't mean without preconditions and certainly those talks wouldn't be at the presidential level.
     The first major foreign policy gaff was the Russian 'reset' debacle. The president needs some big win. He is suffering from a very bad week. Healthcare Reform is going nowhere fast and his comments regarding the police is still front and center of press coverage and the blogosphere. It seems that foreign policy isn't going to be a part of his bog win.
    
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »