Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Davy Crockett and the U.S. Constitution

April 9, 2010 by  

Davy Crockett and the U.S. Constitution

When you hear the name “Davy Crockett,” what do you think of?

If you’re of “a certain age,” as the more diplomatic among us like to say, you probably think of Fess Parker wearing a coonskin cap. The incredibly popular television program in which he starred had every boy in America (and a few girls, too) clamoring for their own buckskin jacket and coonskin cap.

A few years later John Wayne played Davy Crockett in the film The Alamo, laying down his life at the Alamo for the cause of Texas’ independence. About the same time the Kingston Trio had a hit with a song called “Remember the Alamo.” I can still remember most of the lyrics.

But before the events portrayed in the movie and the television show, the famed frontiersman served for a couple of terms in the United States Congress—from 1827 to 1831 and again from 1833 to 1835.

After his defeat in the 1834 election he said, “I told the people of my district that I would serve them faithfully as I had done; but if not… you may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas.” He eventually did, and died on March 6, 1836, when the Alamo finally fell to Mexican troops after an 11-day siege.

It is an episode from his time in Congress that I want to tell you about today. Davy himself first told the tale, in a speech on the floor of the House that he later reprinted under the title “Sockdolager!”

A “sockdolager” is one of those slap-your-forehead moments, when something suddenly becomes blindingly clear to you. That’s how Davy felt when he came to realize that his understanding of the U.S. Constitution was sadly lacking. Here’s what happened.

Near the end of his first term, Davy decided to visit the western edge of his district to see how much support he’d get if he decided to seek reelection. To appreciate how different campaigning was back then, let me quote the beginning of Davy’s tale:

“So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddle-bags and put out. I had been out about a week, and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence.”

Can you believe it? No fancy entourage, no public relations flacks paving the way, no reporters covering the scene. Not even a buggy with a suitcase or two; it was just Davy, a horse, and a couple of saddle-bags. Life sure was different back then, wasn’t it?

Davy introduces himself to the farmer and says, “I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and ….”

Before he could continue, the man interrupted and said, “Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before and voted for you the last time you were elected. I supposed you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.”

Needless to say, the young congressman is surprised and asks the man why on earth not. The farmer replies, “You gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case, you are not the man to represent me.”

As Davy says, when he later related the story on the floor of Congress, “This was a sockdolager!” I told the man, “There must be some mistake, for I do not remember that I gave my vote last winter upon any constitutional question.” The man replies, “No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the back woods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?”

Crockett replies, “Certainly it is. And I thought that was the last vote for which anybody in the world would have found fault with.”

Then comes the classic denouement: “Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?”

Let me pick up the rest of this part of the story, exactly as Davy Crockett told it on the floor of Congress: “Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:  ‘“Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.’

I’d love to share the farmer’s entire response with you, but I don’t have room here. Instead, let me do two things. First, let me direct you to Davy Crockett’s complete speech. Personal Liberty Digest has created a special link to “Sockdolager!” by Davy Crockett. To see it, just click here. (And while you’re there, why not send it to a few dozen of your friends?)

Second, let me go right to the farmer’s concluding remarks. He told the congressman, “When Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people.”

Davy has no choice but to acknowledge the truth of what he’s heard. He tells the man, ‘“Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard.

“If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote, and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.”

What are the chances, ladies and gentlemen, that your congressman would ever make such an admission—or such a speech—today?

You really should read the rest of the story. You’ll be delighted to learn that when Congressman Crockett gets back to Washington, the House has taken up a bill to appropriate money for the wife of a distinguished naval officer. Everyone who has spoken about it has declared himself in favor. It looks like it will pass unanimously when Davy Crockett takes the floor.

To read what he says, and what happens next, please click here to enjoy Davy Crockett’s “Sockdolager!”

And remember the story the next time your congressman votes to take your money for some government activity that is nowhere to be found in our Constitution.

Until next Friday, keep some powder dry.

—Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of PersonalLiberty.com. He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Davy Crockett and the U.S. Constitution”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Lora Hubbel

    That was Daniel Boone – not Davy Crocket where Fess parker raptured every boy and girl who is now in their 50′s. Davy Crocket was only a miniseries….

    • Steve Proctor

      Sorry Lora, but Fess did play Davy Crokett too, so the point is still correct. And I do agree charity is for the people & Church to give of their own FREE will , not the Government decision, like sending millions of OUR $’s over seas, especially when we are broke. I would not send a dime to Hati just for the fact Obama has already sent $100 million of our tax dollars, that is a good enough donation.No other country would send us money or take up collections for us when something bad happens.

    • Bryll

      Lora,
      Davy Crocket was a miniseries on Walt Disney’s Show in the 1950′s. Fess Parker played the role of Daniel Boone in the TV series during the mid to late 1960′s. But all in all, Television and Television characters should not be the most important issue here. The history of the real Davy Crocket is what is most important.

    • JeffH

      Davy Crockett was the Disney hit television show that stars Fess Parker and Buddy Ebsen(as Georgie Russel) and became a national sensation and made coonskin caps a staple for a generation of American youngsters. With a rifle named Old Betsy, Davy Crockett fought for justice with his own brand of homespun ingenuity.
      Davy Crockett, King of the Wild Frontier and Davy Crockett and the River Pirates.

      Fond memories abound.

      • JC

        Still got my coon skin somewhere. ;)

      • http://?? Joe H.

        As I said the day itwas announced he died, One of the last hollywood GREATS has died!!! God rest his soul!!!!

  • Richard Henderson

    when I was in the age group you are speaking of, all we had was radio, But one of David Crockett’s last known statements is on my face book, to congress ” y’all can go to helll, I’m going to Texas” , by the way, I am related to Daniel Bohun.

  • Yandle

    Mr.Wood,
    Your comment, “Davy has no choice but to acknowledge the truth of what he’s heard” contains something more precious gold, which is “to acknowledge the truth”. This is something people will not do in these days and in Davy’s words “which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden”, by which people will not acknowledge the truth. Where are the Davy Crocketts in our present day? In this day and time “a man in a field plowing” is looked on as ‘unlearned and ignorant’, while in fact they have more wisdom than most have with all their learning. Very good article, Mr. Wood.

  • Flynn

    Forget about Fess Parker and Daniel Boone! Davy Crockett was the real hero of the 19th century. Fess Parker was just another Hollywood “nut case”, and he was probably a democrat. Daniel Boone, though he opened up the frontier and placed his name on half of western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee, never really did anything beyond what thousands of other frontiersmen did. Davy Crockett, on the other hand, served faithfully for two terms in the U. S. House of Representatives and gave his life for the independence of Texas. Davy Crockett was the real hero as he was my hero as a kid growing up in Alabama in the Fifties.

    • RJ

      Flynn
      Get your facts right before shooting from the —–.
      Fess Parker was a republican, conservative, and a close friend of Ronald Reagan.

      I suggest that you research both Boone and Crockett. I appreciate what each man did.

      • http://victorbarney@embarqmail.com Victor L Barney

        Thanks for the info., RJ. I myself wore a coonskin cap as a boy honoring Davy Crockett, portrayed by Fess Parker!

      • Robert Wayne

        You can’t really blame Flynn for suspecting Fess Parker to be another left wing Democrat. Seems like 98%, if not more, of Hollywood is made up of left wing extremists and outright communists although it probably wasn’t as bad back in the ’50s and ’60s as it is today. It really surprised me the other day when I heard Victoria Jackson, a former Saturday Night Live comic was speaking out at a tea party rally. I guess every once in a blue moon there is a sane person out in Hollywood.

    • Floyd

      Daniel Boone spoke at the First Continental Congress.His speech on
      sovereignty should be mandatory reading in every school! His motion
      to be the first speaker, as an act of mockery for he wore frontier
      clothes,turned out to humble everyone in the room. GOD bless Daniel
      Boone, Davy Crockett, and Fess Parker, whom recently died.

  • s c

    I’d like to know what happened to the FARMER. That man knew more than enough to represent the PEOPLE and do it RIGHT. When you get put in your place by someone who does not chase polls, works the ground with his hands yet makes time to WATCH those who are in Washington, THAT’S the kind of LEADER I want in Washington.
    You can take career politicians, poll watchers, “elite” retards, over-educated buffoons, social justice anarchists, liberation theology atheists, union suck-ups, ACORN-like brownshirts, RINOs and every other type of pretender and shove them all down the nearest toilet.
    America needs LEADERS. Specters, Pelosis, Bidens, Obummers, Grahams, Gingriches and McCains need not apply. Period!

    • Phyllis

      Well said sc. Something has got to change with this “system”. People can not go on with things so out of control.

    • Frank

      There are people like the Farmer running for office. Its our Job as Americans ti Find them and help them financially (provided we like what they say).

      • TIME

        Frank,
        Your words have the tone of truth in them, its up to us all to tell our elected persons be they to congress or the senate “what they will do for us.”
        > Not what they will do for us and or themselfs.< No more of this will we stand for. Rhetoric is for growing plants, not a country.

        As your states candidate come forth for congress and the senate we all need to help each other to weed out the "POSERS," and get the real hard core Americans that have {no agendas} other than serving the people of the United States. We as Americans don't care how its done in DC, we don't need any more DC pretzel logic.
        Round pegs don't fit in square holes and we all know that.

        And People we can't stop at 2010 November, this has to keep going until we have every law thats been placed on the books since 1913 tossed out for good, not just repealed these laws will need to be removed as if they never happened.

        This is going to be a long trip and there is going to be very hard work to be done, all of our hands will get dirty from cleaning up this mess thats gone on for the last 100 years.

        As I have said before and I will say it again, {many of us will loose everything we have and have worked for.}
        Thats what it will take to fix this mess. Its not going to be easy nor clean cut.

        We can not afford to make any mistakes from now on, we can not let down our guard – for even a nano second.

        And when the mess is cleaned up we can never allow any of these tricks of the "PROGRESSIVES" to happen again ever.

        • Yankee Will

          Kind of like cleaning out the chicken house, eh Time? You can spread fresh straw over the old, but in a short time, it will stink just as bad as before. You have to clean it out every so often all the way down to the floor boards! And you can’t just do it once! You must do it every so often to keep the birds healthy and get rid of the stench!
          Hope all is well with you, friend.

        • Rowdy

          Well Said: I can’t believe someone else has exactly the same sentiments. Main problem beyond these points is how to do it. We have to enact legislation allowing the citizens to form an oversight committee that has power to administer lie detector tests to any and all politicians past, present, and future to determine if they are acting or have acted in a manner befitting the betterment of the United States of America by upholding the Constitution, and the rights of American citizens. If they have not or are not, they should be removed from office and/or if retired still be subjected to an investigation to determine the degree of their transgressions. After this determination they should be punished for their crimes against their country by stripping them of any retirement benefits, health care benefits, monetary gains as a result of their term of office, banned from holding office ever again and deported from our country. All in proportion to the degree of their guilt. All politicians from that day forward would be subject to that test and again at any time randomly to ensure their dedication to performing their assigned jobs in a diligent manner for their country not for themselves. We would very soon have a much lighter tax burden and a much improved government operation.

      • JC

        Doesn’t matter what they say or whether we like what they say, they are all too soon bought and paid for. End the Fed and end lobbying.
        Return to the Constitution and a Justice system. In other words…we have to start over, without a central bank run by people we didn’t elect, who are able to control everyone and everything.

      • Martha

        I think there are some…in the third party. Unfortunately, they have less money than the elites, and they are fought tooth and nail, especially by the “so-called conservative” republicans.

    • Paul

      We need TRUE TERM LIMITS for Congress and Judges.

      No serving in the house and then the senate nor the senate and then the house.

      All term limits should be 2 terms of 4 years each.

      No career politicians.

      As a farmer said “he buried the survivors because all politicians lie.

      • Richard

        For years as I pondered term limits I thought as you…two terms of four years is enough, lately I have come to believe ONE, six year term would be better so we would never need to watch them waste half of the term in office raising money to run again.

        • Meteorlady

          Term limits sound good, but you are throwing the baby out with the bath water. I have a good senator and would be OK if he continued to serve as long as he kept listening to his constituents. South Texas has Ron Paul and I would hate for him to go away also.

          Here’s a good solution – get involved! We have our Democrat Representative that is up for re-election. He voted “no” on the health care bill only because his vote was not needed and they considered him vulnerable. Then he put a spin on that “no” vote and said he was listening to us. The fact is – he NEVER stood up and actually opposed the bill nor did he do anything to try and stop the reconciliation process. I went on line and looked at his voting record – it’s all common knowledge on the web – and he was not representing the majority of his constituents – he was representing the Democratic party.

          Then I started going to every Republican candidates’ meet and greet. Learned a lot when you talk with them face to face in a small group. I found a guy that I believe will represent me and my political views and I worked the phones one evening for him. Face to face he was a really good guy, answered all our questions (they were hard questions) and seemed to be honest and straightforward. He actually answered every question in an intelligent and thoughtful manner – wasn’t vague or didn’t give us half answers. The other candidate was good also, but he didn’t quite answer our questions entirely and was a little vague on some issues. So, armed with that knowledge I voted for the best candidate to represent me.

          Everyone needs to get involved and do that. Don’t just read the signs or see the advertising on TV. That is not the true person. A face to face is the best way and it’s easy, just go to their website and find a meeting place near you – then ask HARD questions and watch their body language and face as they answer them. Don’t accept vague or incomplete answers – hammer then until they tell you what you wanted to know. Also try and find who is donating to their campaign – that’s also telling.

          • usmadgirl

            Meteorlady,

            I completely agree! As I’ve said over & over, when you look at your representatives’ voting record & they vote with all your views, why would you want to throw them out & risk electing a RINO or a Progressive plant?

            My representatives have voted my views on everything except for Lamar Alexander on a couple of votes, but he’s done such a good job on the health care hoax I’d really have to see a much better candidate (that I first “investigate”) to replace him.

            My Congressman, Zack Wamp (a very conservative Republican), is now running for Governor & I will definitely vote for him. He’s been my congressman for YEARS & if elected as Gov., will replace a fairly moderate Dumb-o-crap, but STILL a Dumb-o-crap. Our Attorney General is also a Dumb-o-crap & I guess that’s why Tennessee hasn’t filed a law suit against the HC crap! I’ve written both my Dem Gov. & Atty Gen.

            I don’t know who will ever be able to replace Zach in Congress! Thank goodness, I’m in one of the most conservative districts of TN. Memphis, however, has that crazy goofball, Steve Cohen (D), that has said all the awful things about Tea Party people. He’s a real progressive “jackass”!

            My long-winded point is, most of us have NEVER been involved in the process; so we’ve allowed all the progressives to be elected. NOW, we’re awake, alert, knowledgeable, suspicious & have the power of the Tea Party to help us choose, promote & nominate the true conservative candidates! So don’t cut your nose off to spite your face with “term limits”. If your reps don’t represent your views, replace them with someone who does!

      • DaveH

        How do you guys think Term Limits will guarantee good behavior? It is a nice-sounding “magic” bullet, that like magic isn’t real.
        Freed of re-election worries, it would be a crapshoot as to whether they behaved or not.
        There is no substitute for voter education. We need to get educated in economic and political matters. We need to quit voting for sweet-sounding lies, and learn what the candidates really stand for by their past actions. John McCain is a good example. He presents himself as a Freedom-loving Conservative, and he is anything but that. Do your homework.

        • TIME

          Dave, I agree with you 100% I used to think that TERM limits were the gig that we needed.

          BUT not anylonger, due to just what you noted, Thus I came up with an idea that I feel is really the best way around this problem of bad performance by a congress person or a senate person.

          The PEOPLE have a recall, if said person is not doing the job well.
          Not so much an impeachment, but just a hard cold “YOUR FIRED.”
          This will with out question be very radical in nature, but it will bring these people back down to earth.

          Here is a basic idea of what I think we need to do.

          Any bills that they are asked to sign they bring back to the state and send it out to all voters, they would have a full month to look it over ask questions about said bills.

          At what point the states would have a vote on how they feel about the said bill. At that time the rep would return to DC and vote as the state asked them to.

          I know this will require a lot more effort on all of our parts.
          BUT it will also bring home all the facts prior to any Federal vote where you have zero say. You would have full say and no more of this crap thats going on now.

          So – if said person fails this basic task, they are fired ASAP, With No benifits.

          You have an other vote to find a new Congress person or Senate person.

          No bills will ever be longer than two pages, have ZERO trade offs, as in NO PORK, as in ZERO PORK.

          If – said person takes moneys from lobbyist they are fired with NO benifits.

          If they lie to the persons of the state, they are fired with NO benifits.

          This is all common sense and should be employed when all new 2010 congress and senate persons are elected. thats the only way a house cleaning will work.

          If they ever do what has been done over the last number of years. They will face prison time and loose all benifits.
          If in many cases where outright TREASON has taken place, well we all know the end game on that.
          Its well written out as to what the punishment is.

          As well the 28th amd should be put in place. Thus all laws passed the congress and senate they must also be in the same boat as the persons they serve.

          As of 2010 all Benifits that congress and the senate have gotten over the years will be null and void ASAP.
          That means they will have the same health care as you have, the same Social security as you have and the same retirement packages that the average person has. A 401K and no more full pay for life crap.

          But thats just a rough idea.

          • Yankee Will

            I LIKE IT!

          • Jana

            Time,
            I also like all of the above, and think we should utilize all of these plus have term limits. Just having term limits by themselves isn’t enough so using all of the above too, would be good.
            Term limits keeps someone from becoming a ‘Career’ politician, as well as stops them from becoming too powerful like Pelosi and Reid are right now. It also stops this nonsense of them getting a ‘retirement benefit’ for life.

          • Dolores Kool

            Why do they need benefits anyway? Term limits with no benefits, especially pensions. Their service should be for the benefit of the country and not a step to a political career, and they should have to live with the same laws as all citizens. DK

          • Carole

            I totally agree with what you have written. I have always said that if our elected officials in DC had to work for the ‘lowest minimum wage’, with absolutely no benefits, you’d have honest people there that cared about our country.
            I had to work hard to earn the little bit that I get in Social Security and it burns me to know that these bums (all of them) do nothing and look at the benefits that the tax payer has to provide them. I want to see them have to work hard (out of their vocabulary) and pay into the Social Security system the way I had to do.
            Make this retroactive to every living politician and living President so they lose their benefits just as I may end up losing my Medicare and Social Security because of the leeches in DC taking money I paid, not what they paid.
            I could go on and on but the only thing left for the ordinary citizen to do is remember, “vote them all out in 2010 and 2012″. As I read this week, BHO is counting on the citizens to have short memories and forget all this by November and put the same scum back in office that has brought us to our knees so that he can continue until he either has us flat on our face or flat on our back.

          • TIME

            Thanks for all the imput folks, I do feel they should get some benifits – but not the packages that they all have now, thats absurd and also makes many of these persons soon to be the highest paid unemployed persons in the US.

            And do we really want to pay Bart Simplepack $200.00K fo the rest of his life?
            That 15 minutes of fame pant load that knows damm well what he did was treason thus the real reason why he has opted out of running, no matter what rhetoric he states, such as his long drive to DC in the snow in his old beat up ford and how he so abused by his job.

            That tripe he is tossing out like candy coated road apples clearly reeks.

            Its quite obvious to anyone who grasp the numbers of Democrats that are {now NOT running for re-election} that they knew what there were doing was 100% WRONG in all respects.

            When you have persons who have never lost an election saying – I am not running, thats a clear statment that they understood what they have done to be 100% wrong and did it just to stay in favor with party leaders.

            Thus its “incumbent on all of us to understand” that party leaders are “not our leaders” they are in it for themselfs only, based on the results of their behavior.

            Thats not just Democrats that extends to the Republicans as well.

            Thus anyone who we allow in to office needs to understand right up front that they serve the United States Population – NOT party leaders, nor themselfs, NOR any Special interest groups. And not the President, who by the way who also serves us, not uncle George Soarass, nor the Rothchilds, nor any WORLD BANKERS.
            Thats only reasonable.

            Thats why the independant state vote on all bills / laws should be done. It draws a clear line as to what we who pay TAX’S thus we are the bottom line want.
            “The time of being told what we will get is over!” That has to change now in 2010 or else we will have the same problems.

            Also its high time we stop giving moneys to any other country. Keep our money here in the United States and build us back up.

            If just 35 states had the guts to join the now growing law suit on the HCR bill, there is not a ghost chance in hell it would become law.
            Even the courts can grasp that. If we had 40 states, it would be a slam dunk that bill would be DOA when it hit the court.

            We really need to have a PLAN, and we also really need to let anyone who runs for any office understand that THEY WORK for US – end of story.

          • Meteorlady

            Forgive me, but….. I can’t keep reading about congressional benefits and their health care. Most of it is wrong. I’m a truth sort of person even though might not always like what I find.

            Here’s some facts.

            House and Senate rank and file members make $174,000 per year. The speaker and such make a little more. That’s a lot, but if they didn’t have a lot of money when they moved to Washington it’s not a lot, as the cost of living there is really high. Some freshman congressmen and representatives actually sleep in their offices.

            Retirement Pay: Prior to 1984 members of congress and federal civil service employees did not pay into SS and had their own Civil Service Retirement System. In 1983 an amendment to the SS Act required all employees hired after 1983 to pay into SS. Since CSRS was not designed to work with SS congress developed a new plan – Federal Employees’ Retirement System Act of 1986.

            Members of congress receive retirement and health benefits under the same plans available to all federal employees. They are vested after 5 years of full participation. The congressional retirement is funded through participants’ contributions. Members of congress under FERS contribute 1.3% of their salary into FERS and under both plans pay 6.2% of their salary into SS. They are not eligible for a pension until they reach age 50 and have completed 20 years of service. Members are eligible at any age after completing 25 years of service or after they reach age 62.

            The congressional pension depends on the years of service and the average of the highest 3 years of their salary but it cannot exceed 80% of their final salary.

            Congressional Research Service reports that 413 retired members of congress were receiving federal pensions based on their service as of Oct. 2006. Of this number 290 had retired under CSRS and were receiving an average pension of $60,972. A total of 123 members have retired with service under both CSRS and FERS or with service under FERS only and their average pension was $35,952 in 2006.

            While this is a generous pension plan, they did pay into it and there are many factors that determine how much they receive. Also, while it’s conceivable that they could get payouts totaling more than a million by the time they die, thet would be the exception, not the rule.

            Bottom line – they pay into SS, they have the same health care benefits as all federal civil service employees, and they do not retire with their full salary.

          • TIME

            ML,
            I am not going to argue with whats writen, as whats written many times (looks) like it is.

            But; the facts are that after just “one term” in congress and or the senate – these persons get (FULL pay) for the rest of their lifes, and thats the facts.
            Plus health care paid for by the “TAX payers” thats for life and is a thousand times better than what they passed for the rest of us, and a hundred times better than you can buy now.
            Again a FACT.

            I known a few of these folks and they do in fact get just what they got when working “PART TIME.”
            Do you get $175K for a part time job? { I don’t know any that do.}

            And you need not live in DC proper to work Part Time in DC.
            There are areas within 50 miles that the cost are within reason.
            Just as “all Americans” must drive to work, so to should Congress and Senate persons, hey take a train, WOW – what a thought, when I go to the city I take the train, less cost when you add in parking, gas, and time.
            So the sad poor little me I can’t find a place to live crap is for the bloody birds.

            Oh and lets not forget the other PERKS that a vast amount of these folks take advantage of, not all of them, so on that I agree straight off.
            You know the perks I am talking about, things like Paid Vacations, New cars, interest free loans, Investments, Free Air flight. Thats just a few off the top of my head, all noted as favors between friends etc..

            Thanks for the points; from a Truth kinda person.

          • Claire

            Time: Very good. I like it too.

          • Meteorlady

            Time – facts are facts……

            http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/congresspay.htm

            I don’t get 175,000 but I don’t have to pay 4 to 5,000 dollars for a one bedroom apartment in Washington DC either.

        • APW

          Good info, meteorlady. Could this also explain why we have so many “career politicians” – since they have to have 20 years in service just like any other retirement plan?

          • Jana

            Meteorlady,
            And they also get an automatic cost of living increase every year, plus have a very generous ‘office allowance’ that they use freely to purchase things that are supposed to be for the running of their office, but as we have seen with Pelosi, has been used for liquor and flowers for co-workers. In real life circumstances they would pay for these things out of their own pocket, but in their circumstances it is protocol to put it on their office tab. That is subsidizing their income no matter how you look at it, and most of these politicians have money to begin with.
            Another point, look at the transportation costs for the jet that Queen Pelosi uses to go back and forth from California to Washington and back. This is just one that we know about.

          • DaveH

            The thing that gets me is how did the voters turn a blind eye to Legislators assuming the right to determine their own salaries and benefits? I wish I could do that.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Jana,
            No it isn’t a cola it’s an automatic raise that they were able to vote in for themselves!!!! I wish I could’ve by-passed my boss and gave myself a raise!!!! They by-passed the voters(SEE BOSS HERE) and were able to give themselves an automatic, manditory, yearly raise!!!!

          • Smilee

            Meteorlady, is completely correct in her post and Jana is completely correct in they do get any annual COLA increase if it applies, DaveH, the power to set their own wages and changes to their wages is guaranteed them by the constitution and of course Davy again expresses his hated for that document also that he is jealous of the Congress’s right to do so. Joey again shows his inability to say anything intelligent, poor fellow.

          • Meteorlady

            I was not defending them – I was merely stating the truth. “Time” choose to disregard it because he has heard the argument enough and truly believes it. Everyone else is just mad at them in general. My point was that if you believe this type of thing, what else is out there that is false?

            I just believe that if you are going to publicly state something you need to really check the facts – just writing or saying it doesn’t make it so.

        • Rowdy

          yes TIME they should have some benefits. The same ones I get. I posted it elsewhere but can’t post it too much. The solution I see is. We have to enact legislation allowing the citizens to form an oversight committee that has power to administer lie detector tests to any and all politicians past, present, and future to determine if they are acting or have acted in a manner befitting the betterment of the United States of America by upholding the Constitution, and the rights of American citizens. If they have not or are not, they should be removed from office and/or if retired still be subjected to an investigation to determine the degree of their transgressions. After this determination they should be punished for their crimes against their country by stripping them of any retirement benefits, health care benefits, monetary gains as a result of their term of office, banned from holding office ever again and deported from our country. All in proportion to the degree of their guilt. All politicians from that day forward would be subject to that test and again at any time randomly to ensure their dedication to performing their assigned jobs in a diligent manner for their country not for themselves. We would very soon have a much lighter tax burden and a much improved government operation.

    • EltonJ

      There goes 23% of the American Population. With expressed apology to American Liberal.

    • DaveH

      The problem is, SC, that most Freedom loving people aren’t wired to pretend to know what is best for the lives of others. So, the very people that we should employ in our Government aren’t attracted to the job.

    • Robert Wayne

      S.C. I couldn’t agree with you more. The problem is that the modern national and mainstream media does nothing but villify political candidates with an attitude and the kind of knowledge like that farmer or even worse they completely disregard those kind of candidates. During the presidential election I was campaigning for a fellow named Tom Tancredo. Tancredo’s main platform was that he wanted to put a stop to the illegal mexican invasion going on in this country. He made common sense by saying that the last thing this country needs is a bigger uneducated welfare class and that it was time the federal govt. stop pandering to illegal aliens and companies who wanted them here as cheap, undocumented labor. The mainstream media completely ignored him and other than Fox, they spent all their time kissing up to McCain, Clinton and most of all Obama. And instead of doing a little research on these candidates, the majority of sheep, uh, I mean voters, voted for the candidates that the mainstream media pushed on them. Now, instead of a president who wants to bring the troops home from the middle east and put a stop to the outright invasion of this country by mexican civilians, we’re stuck with a communist bozo who won’t be happy until he’s completely destroyed this country and turned it into another USSR or Red China. In the meantime, the voters of today who are like that farmer are people like that Joe the plumber guy who stood up to Obama during the campaign, earning the undying hatred and ridicule of the scumbag mainstream media. Unfortunately, there are way too few like that farmer or Joe the plumber nowadays and way too many clapping seals who sit there waiting for a fish every month from the federal govt.

    • momof4

      SC,
      You said it!!! And I agree!!!!!
      You know what I really want? Is honesty in a person. I just want to be able to trust a politicion again. I am so sick of the crap!

      • http://?? Joe H.

        mom,
        I liked what a sports show host said here in Cleveland. his name is Trivisanno and he said the politician he would vote for and support would be the one that promises to steal less of the voters money than the other guy. he said at least the guy would be talking with a little truth!!! I got a real kick out of it!!

  • George E

    Wonderful story. Thanks for sharing.

  • http://Yahoo Dennis Phillips

    Chip, I must thank you from the bottom of my heart for this. I have thought seriously about running for city councel. I joke about it by saying, wouldn’t it be funny to see a councel of rednecks running Danville, Va., but the more I think about it the more I am apt to do just that thing.
    I am fed up with what they are doing. They tax the crap out of us and plant trees in the midium strips between the four lane highways they always have men leaning on shovels beside with some machine digging up a road that I just came down the day before and not a thing was wrong with it then.
    To make it short, this site just made my mind up. Especially the part about the BBQ. I have thought myself about haveing a pig picking to get people to listen to what I have to say. I have a 20 acre field back here that would go great for a pig picking one night and a fish fry the next. Plenty of room for campers and tents and plenty of gituar and fiddle playing.

    I just wanted to thank you for the post. It was a great one. You have a great day. You just made my day for me.
    Dennis Phillips

    • Robert Wayne

      You’d have my vote Dennis. As far as I’m concerned we need more ‘rednecks’ in govt. and we need to get rid of all of the politically correct goons who don’t give a damn about the ordinary taxpaying American except to see how much money they can steal from us through illegal taxation for all of their insane social schemes. And if you are white, Christian, heterosexual or even just conservative, you can bet that you’ll be getting the raw end of the deal with these social justice schemes. Your wallet will be getting thinner while muslims, atheists, homosexuals and so called ‘minorities’ will either be paying less or no taxes or getting a govt. check every month…..at our expense.

    • Yankee Will

      Good luck Dennis! Ya got my vote!

    • Meteorlady

      If I lived there I’d vote for you. You go man!

  • Damned Yankee

    Let’s start at the big tax payer money give aways, and work our way down to the small ones.

  • James

    The issue in question depends on how you interpret the following clause in the Constitution: Section 8 – Powers of Congress: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.

    I believe you will find that there are many things the government does that could be considered as falling under “…general Welfare….”

    I am not implying that it does justify all that is done, but it is a very important part of the issue at hand.

    • Richard

      “general welfare” at the time of the constitution’s writing meant that it must benefit to WHOLE country….it was never to steal money from one group in order to benefit another. In other words if every single citizens did not recieve the SAME benefits from the action it was not to be done. Why else do you suppose Jefferson said, “The two enemies of the people are criminals and government. Let us tie down the second with the chains of the Constitution so that the later does not become the legalized version of the first.” Our congress and president’s for the past hundred plus years have allowed just what Jefferson warned of. Now our government IS legalized criminal activity. Liberals watched Robin Hood movies a few too many times and didn’t catch that the story was make believe.

      • Janet

        Apparently the liberals also didn’t pick up on Robin Hood taking from the “government” (not the rich) and returning it to the people who were over taxed.

    • DaveH

      James,
      If the General Welfare clause is interpreted as a power of the Federal Government, then there are no limits to Federal Government and the Constitution is a wasted document.
      I think our Founders meant well, but they definitely needed to be more rigorous in their writing of the Constitution.
      However, the english language being what it is, an imprecise language, the Constitution would unfortunately be subject to interpretation no matter how rigorously it was written.

      • DaveH

        Also, the “General Welfare” power is taken out of context by Liberals who just want to do as they please.

        Here is the entire sentence from Article I, Section 8:
        “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States”.

        The words “general Welfare” are qualifying the “Power to lay and collect Taxes”, not giving the Federal Government an unlimited power.

      • DaveH

        Further treatment of the Constitution’s “general welfare” misinterpretation can be found in the The Federalist #41 by James Madison:
        http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa41.htm

        After opening the page you can do a find on “general welfare” to take you to the pertinent paragraphs (unless you just want to read the whole thing).

        • JC

          Which is exactly why the Southern Confederacy removed the General Welfare Clause for their Constitution. To prevent the abuse of power.

          • Smilee

            IT LOST ITS FORCE OF LAW IN 1865

          • DaveH

            Wow!
            Really, Sleepee?

          • JC

            What’s your point smilee? The general welfare clause lost it’s force of laW IN 1865? I don’t think so.
            That the southern confedearcy lost its force of law in 1865? Well DUH!
            & You miss the point completely.

          • Smilee

            JC
            It is still in our constitution the confederate constitution did not have it and it was scraped when the war ended and it was that Constitution we were talking about, it would help if you read more carefully then you would be less likely to mix things up

    • Phgreek

      hmmm…let me start by saying the interpretation of “Section 8″ could be wide open…however one cannot deny the palpable change in its interpretation since the progressive movement of last century. In other words until that point, no politician would have dreamed of interpreting it in the fashion it is applied today. Let us also put progressiveism in no uncertain terms…it is shifting the balance of the focus from nation’s well being to individual well being….with the gross misrepresentation that a Nation is better if all its people are well…patently false!

      Now, the answer is quite simple for me…as we move further in time from the spirit and intent that forged this great nation, oportunisitc politicians continue to smear the meaning and intent of section 8 for their own purposes…and the health of this nation they swore to protect is traded away every election. This view simply cannot be argued…had section 8 been intended to be the personal welfare clause, it would have been interpreted this way much earlier in the development of this nation.

    • Earlw

      I seem to recall the phrase was to [promote] the general welfare. This means to do it’s best to make sure the general population is well served and functioning smoothly. “Welfare, as we know it today, didn’t even exist at that time in history. It meant well-being…….

      • Smilee

        Smilee says:
        April 9, 2010 at 11:44 pm

        Smilee says:
        April 9, 2010 at 10:59 pm
        EARL

        Section 8 of Article I, does not use the word promote it uses the word provide for and equates the general welfare to the common defense so the force of law is to be applied equally to both issues, it is a wide definition not a narrow one and gives to congress the power to provide for both within this context. Many here try to narrow that definition usually to include what they wish it to be and not what it is, We all, I think believe it places few limits on common defense and if we believe that then it has to be equally applied to the general welfare. It does not mandate congress to do so but places few restraints on it either.
        Reply

        • George E

          Interesting argument. However, I’m inclined to believe that even for those who believe our Constitution should be a “living breathing document” to reflect current day opinions, citizens would constrain government’s spending and power if citizens were really aware of the cost that each of us is obligated to by our government. This would certainly be accomplished if all taxes were consolidated into one payment for each person/family each year. In other words, citizens will effectively balance terms like “general welfare” against the cost to be paid, when really presented with the facts. Unfortunately, we are taxed in so many incremental ways, and told that we will not be taxed for new programs, that people really haven’t fully grasped the concept yet of what all our government is costing us. It’s been like living off a low interest credit card. Monthly payments don’t change all that much, month-to-month, but the debt is rising very fast, and will come due. When we finally do come to this reality, citizens will get control of the government once and for all, and will determine that “general welfare” must be defined in very narrow terms.

          • Smilee

            George E says:
            April 10, 2010 at 7:28 am

            “general welfare” can only defined in narrower terms by amending the constitution not by law, until then Congress has the power to enact laws in wide terms. You raise some good points and some I agree would be beneficial and many could done by congress now if it had the political will to. The last 30 years there has been little of that and none for the last 10 years.

        • Meteorlady

          The I believe that all anti-poverty programs should be abolished because they are not for the general welfare of the population of the United States. They only benefit certain people leaving the rest of the general population out, hurting the economy by taking money out of the hands of people that would spend and keep the economy going, It takes money out of the hands of people that would work for charities and give freely to people that need help.

          • Smilee

            Meteorlady says:
            April 10, 2010 at 7:56 am

            What in your opinion does “provide for the general welfare” in the constitution mean, you tell us what in your opinion you think it is not but you have not told us what you think it is. My opinion is you do not understand what it is but if you told us we could better understand you. My guess you do not know so you will not be able to tell us.

          • Meteorlady

            I was talking about anti-poverty government give-away programs, not the “general welfare” clause.

            But if I must, “general welfare” mean to me that the government should protect my family and my property by providing me with a viable judicial system and an army to protect our borders and the lives and property of every American citizen. It means that congress should serve us by enacting laws that preserve the general welfare of ALL citizens of this country. It certainly does not mean that the government has the right to take my money by force and coercion and give it to someone else who didn’t work for it.

      • Jana

        Meteorlady,
        I agree.
        Article 1 Section 8 actually says,
        “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, ‘Imposts and Excises’ to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States: but all Duties, ‘Imposts and Excises’ shall be uniform throughout the United States.”

        Sounds to me like the GENERAL WELFARE here means free from fear of attack from other countries, other ideologies coming in to take us over, as well as having law and order in our land. Not welfare money, and especially not redistribution of the wealth of this country.

        • Smilee

          Jana

          It says “of the united states” not other countries and the war on terrorism we are now fighting is not against any country, are you saying that does not apply to the common defense, why would you think common defense and general welfare mean the same thing. The fact that they are divided by the word “and” clearly says they have different meanings. You talk in circles and clearly have no understanding of the constitution.

          • Jana

            Smilee, excuse me? Talk about not making sense and talking in circles, thats all you ever do.
            The AND can also mean continuing in the same thought.
            You asked Meteorlady what she thought it meant so why don’t you Mr. Brilliant tell us what you think it means.
            However, remember when this was written, there were no hidden meanings. These men were being open and forthright in what they wanted. I do believe that if these very men were here right now you would find so much fault with them that you would truly look silly.
            They would be way too conservative for you. It actually sounds like you have no understanding of the Constitution, or of common sense either for that matter.

          • Jana

            Smilee,
            You still didn’t say what you think it is so obviously you can’t. Just what I thought. By the way, when we talk about apples and oranges, we are still talking about fruit.
            Smilee, you are just an antagonizer. That is all you are good for.

          • Smilee

            jANA

            IF YOU HAD READ MY POST ABOVE TO Earlw: April 9, 2010 at 11:19 am, YOU WOULD HAVE KNOWN I ALREADY HAVE EXPLAINED MY POSITION YOU HAVE NOT AS YET, ALL YOU TO IT BITCH AND BITCH AND PUT PEOPLE DOWN, I AM STARTING TO BELIEVE YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF INTELLIGENT DISCOURSE AS YOU HAVE PASSED UP EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO OR MAYBE THIS WHOLE THING IS JUST TO DEEP FOR YOU AND BEYOND YOUR ABILITY TO COMPREHEND IT.

          • Jana

            Wow, Smilee isn’t smilee any more, he is a frownee. Must have had too much to drink tonight to respond like you did. I sure hope you don’t talk to your family like that, but you probably do. Your poor family.

            I am quoting one of your own responses, and it fits perfectly here,

            ” personal attacks are your only responses, don’t you realize it reveals your character or lack of character. It could also be act of frustration because deep down you realize I am right and you can’t deal with that. It would be nice if you could post in an adult manner.”

            Obviously you cannot conduct yourself in an adult manner when you have either had too much to drink or lose your temeper.

            I admit I am a wimp, but now we all know you are one too.

          • Smilee

            Jana

            I read your posts you did not read mine I responded to yours you ignored mine again responded with the same as before and you still have not responded to my point you just continued on with your bitching. I stand a 100% I do not think you know the truth so you just strike out widely in frustration

          • Jana

            Smilee, At least it doesn’t sound like you have been drinking, but I did answer you. You haven’t bothered to read with any comprehension.
            But, I would ask that you not use vulgarity when addressing me, as I have not used those words on you.
            You truly have some good points at times and I see some validity to what you say

          • Jana

            Sorry, it did not let me finish as it just submitted.

            I still think common defense and general welfare mean common and general, not specific welfare, not programs for the poor. It means defense of all, and welfare of all, as in doing no harm to the people and letting no other country take us over. Ergo, a military. The government is not supposed to be our parents.
            To me it is quite simple.

        • Smilee

          Smilee says:
          April 11, 2010 at 11:32 pm

          Jana says:
          April 11, 2010 at 7:11 pm

          Sorry, it did not let me finish as it just submitted.

          I still think common defense and general welfare mean common and general, not specific welfare, not programs for the poor. It means defense of all, and welfare of all, as in doing no harm to the people and letting no other country take us over. Ergo, a military. The government is not supposed to be our parents.
          To me it is quite simple.

          THANKS FOR GIVING YOUR OPINION AND ANSWERING MY QUESTION, I DO APPRECIATE THAT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND MAY NOT EVEN DISAGREE WITH SOME OF YOUR FEELINGS BUT I STILL DISAGREE WITH YOUR INTERPRETATIONS, YOUR RIGHT IT IS NOT SPECIFIC WELFARE IT IS GENERAL WELFARE, GENERAL BEING A WIDE DEFINITION AND NOT A SPECIFIC ONE, SPECIFIC BEING A NARROWER DEFINITION REQUIRING MORE DEFINITION TO HAVE MORE MEANING. THE WIDER DEFINITION ENCOMPASSES MUCH MORE THAN THE FOUNDING FATHERS GAVE US GUIDANCE IN, THEY WERE NOT SPECIFIC. THEY GAVE THAT POWER SPECIFICALLY TO CONGRESS AND THEREIN I DISAGREE WITH YOU, IF CONGRESS DECIDES THAT IT IS WELFARE FOR THE POOR, OR HEALTH ETC. THEY FIT WITHIN A WIDE DEFINITION AND THEREFORE LEGAL, ITS NOT WEATHER YOU OR I LIKE IT, I BELIEVE THAT IS WHAT IT MEANS. COMMON DEFENSE I BELIEVE COVERS ALL NECESSARY DEFENSE AND IT TOO IS NOT NARROWLY DEFINED EITHER AND THUS LEAVES IT TO CONGRESS TO PROVIDE IT AS THEY DETERMINE NECESSARY, AS ALSO THE CASE WITH THE GENERAL WELFARE. IF THE FOUNDING FATHERS DECIDED NOT TO DEFINE IT MORE SPECIFICALLY OR A GIVE IT A NARROWER DEFINITION THEY THEN CHOSE TO LEAVE THE NARROWER DEFINITION TO CONGRESS. I ALSO BELIEVE THEY DID NOT MEAN DEFENSE AND WELFARE AS PERTAINING TO THE SAME ISSUES AS THEY DEFINITELY HAVE VERY DIFFERENT MEANINGS BOTH GENERALLY AND SPECIFICALLY AND THEREFORE CANNOT BE CONSTRUED TO MEAN THAT. THESE ARE MY VIEWS. I APPRECIATE YOUR RESPECT OF THEM, AGAIN THANKS FOR GIVING YOUR BELIEFS, FEELINGS AND THINKING ON THE ISSUES.

          • Smilee

            Sorry it posted twice I’m not sure why or how it happened

  • Richard Henderson

    I have a hard time dealling with any one who pays attention to television, and or movies, never have catered to either one, just the radio for me, but even that now is gone, country and western music are gone, they are all now that rock and roll stuff that they brought out in the late 50′s. there just ain’t nothing worth paying attention to anymore, everything is corrupted, polluted or just not right. I like my childhood, of making our own music, and musical instruments. singing to ourselves and or half the country side as we rode the mule home from school. maw and paw were both born in 1904, and I was the first born of three, so I had the responsibility of, well just about everything.

    • Smilee

      Richard Henderson says:
      April 9, 2010 at 7:07 am

      Section 8 of Article I, does not use the word promote it uses the word provide for and equates the general welfare to the common defense so the force of law is to be applied equally to both issues, it is a wide definition not a narrow one and gives to congress the power to provide for both within this context. Many here try to narrow that definition usually to include what they wish it to be and not what it is, We all, I think believe it places few limits on common defense and if we believe that then it has to be equally applied to the general welfare. It does not mandate congress to do so but places few restraints on it either.

      • Smilee

        OOPS!! this was suppose to address Earl and not Richard sorry

        Earlw says:
        April 9, 2010 at 11:19 amS

      • http://?? Joe H.

        Smelly,
        your own smell must be getting to your faint senses!! Richard H. at 7:07 AM said nothing what so ever to do with your post!!!!

        • Smilee

          Can’t you read, i corrected it, now the jokes on you

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Smelly,
            the only joke I see is you!!!

    • Smilee

      Smilee says:
      April 9, 2010 at 10:59 pm
      EARL

      Section 8 of Article I, does not use the word promote it uses the word provide for and equates the general welfare to the common defense so the force of law is to be applied equally to both issues, it is a wide definition not a narrow one and gives to congress the power to provide for both within this context. Many here try to narrow that definition usually to include what they wish it to be and not what it is, We all, I think believe it places few limits on common defense and if we believe that then it has to be equally applied to the general welfare. It does not mandate congress to do so but places few restraints on it either.

  • Mike Gardner

    You can keep all the bums you mentioned except one. I wqould keep Newt Gingricht. I think overall he has worked to do the right thing. Now goofball Graham? You can þake him, please. He has done nothing but go against my wishes. He is way off on immigration and practically every other issue.

    • Earlw

      Newt Gingrich is just another neo-con, and has the morals of a toad. Who in their right mind would divorce his wife while she was hospitalized? Remember the “contract with(on) America? No thanks, more of the same

      • Claire

        Newt isn’t the only one that stabbed his wife in the back. Edwards, Ensign, Sanford, Clinton, and possibly others that haven’t come to “light” yet. And I heard Limbaugh has been married 3 times. What about Hannity and a girl he was supposedly involved with that ended up being killed? I wish to add Hannity was not involved with her her murder. I read this on the Internet. What about Barney Frank? There are few politicians that do NOT have skeletons in their closet.

        • Meteorlady

          Add all the Kennedy boys and some members of the immediate family of elitists.

          • Claire

            Meteorlady— Egad I can’t believe I forgot the Kennedys. They couldn’t keep their pants on either. I cannot understand why their wives stayed with them. Money? Yuk. No amount of money would keep me anywhere near them. And Jackie marrying that old Onassis. Double Yuk. But gosh I sure thought Jack and Jackie’s son John was gorgeous. He was a hunk!!! LOL

      • libertytrain

        John Edwards ring a bell – wholesome, “fine”, Democrat man, sleeping with a gal and getting her pregnant – trying to get an associate to take the fall for it and all of it while John’s wife suffers/suffered through cancer – I’m with Claire – a whole lot of losers in politics. Can’t seem to keep their brains above their pant’s level.

        • Jim H.

          Libertytrain, I believe the reason Denny Hastert got to be speaker of the House, was because he didn’t run around on his wife.

          • eyeswideopen

            Jim, he might have got elected because he didn’t mess around on his wife, but if you look at these two links, you can see that one of the big things the conservatives/repubs were upset about, the closed door meetings, were also done by Hasert. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15423-2004Nov26.html

            He also had a flair for spending over a million dollars on his office and employees in 2008. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-use-this-hastert-0218-20100217,0,640306.story?egovernemetn
            Sad, that the speaker of the “fiscally responsible party” in a time of economic crisis didn’t think that a million dollars was a lot of money.

          • Jana

            Eyes, I couldn’t agree with you more. No matter what party it is, there are some bad people in them. That is why the Tea Party has become so popular. They are not about a particular party, but voter responsibility to put in office someone of any party, that will be responsive to the people, and back to the basics of the Constitution. Whether they be Democrats or Republicans, it does not matter. Both parties are good, but they have both been corrupted. Now its time to CLEAN OUR HOUSE.

          • Claire

            Gosh, I read my post this morning about the hair issue concerning Edwards and Blago. LOL But I remember Edwards paying $400 for a haircut when he was campaigning. I knew right then and there he was a shallow person. And Blago always commented about his hair and I think he thought he looked like Elvis. Crazy.

          • Jim H.

            Eyes, The topic was fidelity, that’s all. Unless you have proof that he did run around on his wife it’s irrelevent. How much does Peosi spend on her office, staff, and parties. The first thing she did when she got the position was get a bigger, more expensive plane to take her from Washington to San Fransisco and back at the taxpayer expense.

          • Jim H.

            Eyes, But since Pelosi doesn’t claim to be from the party of fiscal responsibility it’s OK.

        • Claire

          libertytrain– Some of these guys can’t keep their pants zipped. I look at them and think what the heck did the “other woman” see in them? Edwards and Clinton were “pretty boys” that were so egotistical they thought no woman would ever turn them down. The others, well if a person goes by looks, they left a lot to be desired. I cannot respect people that pull these stunts. To treat their families and wife like they were nothings, just for a roll in the hay. I betcha my husband is glad he never stepped out on me!!!

          • Palin12

            John Edwards even told that Hunter gal he would marry her after his wife dies.

          • Claire

            John Edwards is a nothing. I never cared for him. To me he was just a “pretty boy” in love with his hair. During the campaign he never came across as being a sincere person. Now I know why. He is no better than Blago, they both think they have nice hair. And they are on the same level—the lowest of lowlife. Slimy characters.

          • libertytrain

            Claire – yes an impressive bunch of low-life’s – unfortunately living the high-life – frequently on our dime.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Claire,
            My wife just about choked on her coffee when I told her that you called Clintoon a “pretty boy”!! she calls him a fat, no class, redneck!!!

          • Claire

            Joe H– LOL At the time Clinton pulled his stunt he was younger and (a big and) a person could tell he was in love with himself. He was conceited back then and maybe yet today. I bet he is disappointed that he couldn’t stay young forever. Be sure to tell your wife that I used the term “pretty boy” because HE THOUGHT he was a pretty boy.

        • momof4

          The Most Promising Method of Securing a Virtuous and Morally Stable People is to Elect Virtuouse Leaders 3rd Principle in The 5000 Year Leap. If you have not read it, please do!!! We have not had a virtuous
          leader in a very long time it seems to me there is always something in their closet no matter how good they seem to be. I know nobody’s perfect, but come on!

  • http://www.WessAdams.com Wess

    Great article Chip, Thanks for posting. I agree with the Truth that Crockett learned and accepted from the plain farmer Mr.Bunce. Oh that we had more like him today, we need to glean his wisdom of action and boldness as well. My favorite quote from Crockett was from the link you provided, “I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.” Amen!

    Wess

    • JLC

      Wess, there are people like that “Out There” — a good many of them! The problem is that too many of our young people, and more than just a few of our older ones, have been so thoroughly indoctrinated (as opposed to educated) that they just aren’t listening. Perhaps a thorough house-cleaning in our educational system would help!

      • Char

        amen to that: We will need to teach them to read and understand what they are reading. Has anyone out there seen the last examples of how our kids are doing in the reading department. Not good!!

  • http://NONE REASON-1

    This is already in the main body of the constitution. Article I Sec.8 All
    laws must be [ UNIFORM ] throughout the United States. That means that
    they must apply equally to ALL citizens even congress. That makes their
    retirement and medical plans [ UNCONSTITUTIONAL ].

    Since the first congress removed the original 1st amendment stipulating
    the determination of their salaries and assumed the power to determine
    their own salaries, each congress in sucession assumed the same power and
    eventually assumed the power to determine their retirement and medical
    plans. The Founding Fathers and writers of the Constitution never intended
    that congress should be a lifetime profession and certainly never intended
    that it be comprised of lawyers which constitutes a conflict of interests.
    This is why it is riddled with [ CORRUPTION ] as is every legal authority
    throughout these United States.Now you know why Crockett told them to ” Go to hell”! According to the Bible that is where they will end up eventually regardless of how much money they steal from the people.

    They forgot that money [ BURNS ].

    • Smilee

      REASON-1 says: April 9, 2010 at 7:41 am

      ;but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States:

      these must be uniform nothing else has to be, your mumbo jumbo shows your lack of understanding of this issue and the rest of your posts being so jumbled up cannot be intelligently responded to so have to leave it here

    • Meteorlady

      Please read my post above about their salaries, retirement and health care benefits.

      • Smilee

        What’s your point??????????

        • Jana

          Never mind Meteorlady, Smilee is incapable of any type of English comprehension. He has his ears closed and he is blind to any type of truth. Probably an inherited gene.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Jana,
            careful mentioning genes around smelly, he will tell you his are Lee Riders!!!

          • Smilee

            Neither of you can, or will if you can, enter into any discourse on the actual issues. personal attacks are your only responses, don’t you realize it reveals your character or lack of character. It could also be act of frustration because deep down you realize I am right and you can’t deal with that. It would be nice if you could post in an adult manner.

  • Rhonda Brooks

    It is well known that the individual citizen is more informed and is better equipped with the intelligence to comprehend and inform our own congress about the Constitution and the policies they push better than congress themselves.

    We all saw how factual and informed citizens were at the townhalls over the healthcare reform bill; whereas, the politicians of today had to admit they were commenting on something they had not even read which shows total ignorance beyond belief.

  • Rhonda Brooks

    There is a reason why the Founders and the best Presidents and Congressmen in the beginning were all laborers, farmers, business owners. Now, compare to today’s Presidents, congressmen. No experience in operating a business, plowing a field and growing things, nor laboring long enough to produce one drop of sweat and we wonder why today, they lack any clue as to how to run a whole country. Folks, we need people that have actually held jobs that required the qualifications of hard work, hard decisions, communication and sweat and understand the plight of the real workers of this country. Only qualifications we have now; they’re lawyers! ‘Nuff said.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      Rhonda,
      There are exceptions to every rule. look at Carter, the last farmer we had!!! He was a peanut farmer and had them for brains!!!

  • EltonJ

    Lawyers did suffer a witch hunt in Virginia at one time.

    • Bryll

      I teach students in the third grade. Last year I taught my students the U.S. Constitution. In May of ’09, when we had finished with the Bill of Rights, I said to them, “You now understand the basic law of this country better than most grown-ups. You remember all of the new politicians who took office in January, and how they promised to protect and uphold the Constitution. If your parents will let you, watch the news, or read the news and judge for yourselves how well they are keeping their promises.” The last day of school I got called into the principal’s office and told that 5 of my students’ parents had complained that I had said that “Obama was a evil man.” I had never referenced his name. Once the students knew the law, they could form their own opinion. It is true that what is called “education” needs to be thrown out. Most teachers have not got a clue concerning the facts.

      • Jana

        Bryll,
        Good for you. We need more teachers out there daring to teach our Consitution. Knowledge and Truth are powerful.

        I wish more of our representatives felt like Davy Crockett, wanting to actually uphold the Constitution.

        Our Founding Fathers sacrificed a great deal to write and sign this Precious Document. So did their families. It wasn’t easy to take the stand that they took. Now its time for us to take a stand, because if we don’t we will not have anything left to stand for. We will be under dictatorship.

      • Meteorlady

        Good for you – my 17 year nephew was never taught anything about the Constitution, Federalist Papers, Bill of Rights or about the founding of this country. He just thinks it all just happened but not sure how. Sad………

      • APW

        Great job, Bryll!! I was one of the fortunate students that had a teacher like you, who taught us the Constitution and encouraged us to think for ourselves. Many, many more teachers like you are needed, in ALL grades! I was also fortunate enough to have a history professor in college that did the same – he has just published a book called “The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Founding Fathers”. His name is Dr. Brion McClanahan, currently from Phenix City, AL.

      • JC

        AWESOME!
        I’m not a teacher but I spend plenty of time teaching my kids and their friend what the country is “supposed” to be. They see things a little differently now than they were taught in school….

      • momof4

        Bryll,
        Good for you. You are very brave. If my kids had teachers like you I would not have had to pull them out of public school. May God bless you richly for your good work

      • Claire

        Bryll — My kids went to Lutheran schools because we did not have teachers like you in public schools. You are to be commended.

  • DaveH

    Our out-of-control Government in action:
    http://gunowners.org/toy-gun-control.htm

  • American Liberal

    Great news on the economy…. Retail sales the best in a decade for March…… I’m sure all Americans are pleased with this great news….if president Obama can bring back this economy after the Republicans destroyed it he will go down as a truely great president…

    • Earlw

      There is simply no accounting for deluded and blind, historically unsophisticated individuals like yourself. Keep kidding yourself that Obama is the great saviour……….As long as the federal reserve keeps providing fiat paper money to the country, the economy will run, but the more you print, the less its worth, eventually terminating at zero, then the economy you so loudly and repeatedly boast of, will collapse. This man is working to destroy the middle class(that’s you) as fast as he can…Good luck with your idea…

      • http://?? Joe H.

        Earlw,
        don’t worry, they are an endangered species as they are going to drown in the water they think he can walk on!!!!

    • Robert Wayne

      The economy was in fine shape until the Democraps took over the Senate in 2006. Since then, it’s all been downhill. You libtards are so hardheaded you’ll be eating grass and if you can afford a loaf of bread it’ll cost $100 in the near future and instead of seeing Obama and his lackeys for the communist thieves that they are, you’ll still be blaming Bush.

    • Gorba

      Stop drinking the coolaid. Obama has done nothing correctly. Get real

    • DaveH

      Keep Hoping and Dreaming, AL. In the meantime, I suggest you start protecting your cash money from the inevitable loss of purchasing power.

    • Pep

      Oh me, another disillusioned youngster.

    • Meteorlady

      Let me know how the VAT tax works out for you – oh and Cap & Trade works for your energy needs and all the increase in prices that come with it. Let me know how 20-30 million illegals being made legal works for you when Americans are looking for jobs and can’t find them – while the illegals/now legal are heading for the welfare offices.

      You are so deluded it’s funny. Read some more on the retail sales and the unemployment rate. That rate is higher than the government says because people have exhausted their unemployment and are sitting around waiting for jobs to “happen”. Where I live grown children are coming back home to live with their parents in order to make ends meet. They are taking jobs that illegals would be working. A friend int he survey business says 5 survey firms have gone under because there is no building or development going on, So tell me again how well we are doing?

      The federal reserve is printing money at an alarming rate and that will lead to hyperinflation – and your dollar will be worth about 1/2 or 1/3 of what it is now. Record spending is not going to put this country back together again. Obama has not a clue about the economy – he has surrounded himself with tax cheats, Wall Street insiders, and liberal people that have no understanding of this country.

      • Jana

        One of the issues in Cap and Trade if passed will come back to haunt us all. This is the registering of our homes. We must have all “approved” appliances, commodes, water heaters, air conditioners – heating and cooling, and electrical etc. etc.

  • Tomass

    If they have a law degree, vote them out!

    • http://victorbarney@embarqmail.com Victor L Barney

      Mine ya, I’m not for lawlessness, but I agree with you “If they have a law degree, vote them out”!

    • JC

      Good idea, it’s only 98% of lawyers who are making the rest look bad, but it is “Lawyers” and their “interpretations” of the Constitution that have made for a convluted and controlling law system that has little to do with justice. Vote em out!

    • APW

      That is quite possibly the best suggestion I’ve heard yet! In addition to the gentleman who suggested limiting the length of bills to just a couple of pages – not 2000+!

  • Enlightened one

    Tea Bagger and Massey Mine co. CEO Blankenship.. Quote… Safety regulations are ” nonsense”….. Over 2000 safety violations since the 1st of the year…

    • Earlw

      What does this have to do with this thread?????

      • libertytrain

        nothing that I can tell.

        • http://?? Joe H.

          liberty,
          now you can see the results of having half of your brain tied behind your back, as he said on the other thread, when you only have half a brain!!!!

      • JeffH

        “Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.”

        Changeing the subject changes the discussion.

      • eyeswideopen

        Earlw, come on you didn’t slam these people: Richard Henderson, Mike Gardner, Earlw,(you!!!) Claire, Libertytrain, Jim H, eyeswideopen, American Liberal, Gorba, Dave H. all of them including you made statements that did not have anything to do with the thread. Do you not hear yourself when the hypocrisy starts coming from your mouth? What is it with you people? Are you that desperate to attack someone, that it doesn’t even register that you just committed the same exact foul you are accusing them of?????????? Unbelievable.

        • DaveH

          Speaking of someone desperate to attack. Your poor Husband. Or Wife.

        • Meteorlady

          Eyes – are you posting under two monikers then answering yourself?

        • libertytrain

          well now there are at least 6 replies to a non-thread issue – who cares? This is a place to communicate – so communicate and enjoy yourselves – all enjoyable conversations takes twists and turns – it’s the side trips along the journey that make our lives a little more interesting.

          • Claire

            libertytrain– I agree with you again. I know I get off course.

    • Robert Wayne

      Typical left wing lies and nonsense. Just like their accusing the tea partiers of ‘rayyyyyyyyyyyycism’ against the scumbag traitors on the side of Odumbo’s illegal healthcare scam.

      • Jana

        Robert W,
        We have been warned that the leftist and the SEIU (I think that is right) Union is going to crash the Tea Party and I am sure they are planning on bringing their bad manners, dirty mouths and vulgarity with them. These people are thugs and can be violent so beware. What they want to do is discredit the decent people that are out there with legitimate concerns. Reminds me of exactly what Satan does. Tries to put evil where there is good and corrupts it. Knowledge is power.

    • DaveH

      EO is just upset because his ignorant fellow Liberals kept working at the unsafe mine even though they knew it was unsafe.

    • JC

      And a new moon was discovered just between your ears! ;)

    • Meteorlady

      In a mostly democratic state the people that enforce the law don’t so Massey gets what he wants because he provides “jobs” and the state doesn’t want to loose that.

      • Jana

        Meteorlady, I think the state of Obama wants all jobs lost. That is his goal. He wants us all dependent on the Government.

        • JC

          Or Dead.

    • momof4

      E.O.
      What the hell are you talking about????

    • Meteorlady

      You point is????????

  • Janvier Francis

    Dear Steve Proctor ! Nobody ask you to send a dime to Haiti, You’re grown,you can do whatever you want but remember Savannah Ga where the slave gave their blood to give you freedom in this country also after getting themselves independance from France in 1803 that France undr Napoleon would come to invade America without this fight in Hayti they wouldn’t be no USA (America)today we should be under France rules you may have your own reason to say that,so now people can see why Hayti is paying for the price of its independance, go to Library make research to clean up your mind, Hayti shouldn’t like that it was protecting you and your ancestor from France protectorate also Thanks Hayti for this freedom in America.

    • Robert Wayne

      I’ve seen some idiotic left wing posts on here, but as usual yours is more lies. What do a motley crew of uncivilized Africans rising up against a few French who were in Haiti over 200 years ago have to do with the independence of this country. Haiti is just another group of third world Africans who are too lazy to work for themselves and have grown accustomed to handouts from American taxpayers. If American politicians had any gonads at all they’d tell these foreigners from Haiti and every other country digging in our pockets where to go.

    • Gorba

      Really, and look how well the Haitians have done for themselves since they opted for self rule. The USA and it’s people have given more to Haiti after the earthquake than all other countries combined. Nice job.

    • Yankee Will

      Uuuuhhhhh…yeah…

    • JC

      Another twisted moonbat.

    • Meteorlady

      The US and other countries have pumped billions into Haiti. It has not worked because there no accountability on how projects on a national level are working out. The state is unconcerned about their problems and often do not even address them. There is no accountability as to what happens with the money even among international aide groups. The cost of living in Haiti is very high. And there is political corruption so our aid money that goes directly to the government never really sees any return.

      We would be better off funding responsible people to help get Haiti going, but to keep doing the same things over and over is not working.

  • Save America Susie

    This was a great article! That is what we should have more of. It’s like PURE GOLD suddenly discovered…STORIES of our EARLY HEROES and FOUNDING FATHERS. People have gotten away from the true origins of this country because they are not taught it in school anymore. Sad state of affairs! We need to get back what once was so common place: knowledge & wisdom. Thanks for running this article today, CHIP!
    Please include more!

  • Rennie

    Novel idea, put the farmers in office, kick the bullshitters out!

    • momof4

      Rennie,
      I LOVE IT !!!!!!

  • DougR

    If our politicians would enforce the laws and follow the laws, we would not be in this position. Do you realize how many politicians and or government employees fail to pay taxes, have been charged with fraud and/or criminal activity yet are not punished because they protect each other. I have been to the Dominican Republic, next to Haiti, talk about 3rd world living, the amount of money we are sending to Haiti should make every citizen a very rich person, however, the government will keep it as usual.

    • JC

      You’re right Doug. Foreign aid is generally money taken from poor people in rich countries and given to rich people in poor countries.

  • Norman

    Forget Davey & Daniel.Watch the video with Judge Napolitano on this site. This should scare the shit out of all of you. Could they be used to disarm this country. For what reason do we need to fund a private army? Perhaps to protect Obama. Wake-up America. Can you see what’s happening here? We are taxed to death now. It will never be enough for those bastards in Washington. You’ll just keep working and sending it in. They’ll take care of you. Warren Buffett sez we need to pay more taxes. He has numerous offshore accounts [Berkshire companies] in Panama to avoid taxes. Can you believe it? Wake up people you are being bamboozeled. There is no factual data. Everything is manipulated.

    • JeffH

      Obama’s Private Army? Obama’s Private Army now law. Hidden in health care bill‏http://www.personalliberty.com/feature-video/obamas-private-army/

      March 31, 2010 — I know it’s FOX News, but it is the substance that counts here. Remember Obama saying that we need a “civilian army that is just as well trained and funded as the military”? Well, here it is. Tucked away in the middle of the over 2,000 page health care monstrosity that nobody in congress bothered to even read.

      This is not just an expansion of the National Guard, no. This is a private health corp. that is to be trained by the military and will be under the direct command of the president. This is nothing short of tyranny and fascism, but many of the kool-aid drinkers will find a way to justify and defend this as well, despite the fact that it is in direct violation of the law that their beloved president took oath to uphold.

      I mean, come on. What do we need a private health care enforcement core for? What the hell does the military have to do with health care? Is it not enough that you are going to be MANDATED to by health care under the threat of penalty? Use your brains and for god’s sake…WAKE UP, people. This is not about republicans vs democrats. It is about WRONG VS RIGHT.

      • Smilee

        SPIN SPIN SPIN, YOUR LIES, LIES, LIES, HERE JEFFIE IS THE TRUE STORY:

        Obama’s “Private Army”

        April 7, 2010
        Bookmark and Share

        Q: Did the new health care law give Obama a Nazi-like “private army” of 6,000 people?

        A: No. Contrary to false Internet rumors, the new Ready Reserve Corps of doctors and other health workers will report to the surgeon general and be like the “ready reserves” in other uniformed services. They will be used during health emergencies.

        FULL QUESTION

        I just received an e-mail concerning a section of the new healthcare bill establishing a “ready reserve health corps” of 6,000. Some, Fox News, are saying this is an attempt to erode our freedoms. Should we run to our bunkers?

        Obama Just Got His Private Army

        Were you aware of the fact that the health care bill created a civilian army?

        A Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency.
        All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws (which means they will not be sworn to uphold the Constitution) and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended.

        Remember when Obama said he wanted a “national security force”? Not the national guard, but a civilian one that has not sworn to uphold the Constitution?

        ⬐ Click to expand/collapse the full text ⬏
        On July 2, 2008 in a speech in Colorado Springs, Barack Obama called for a police state. Remember that first alarming glimpse of what that army might look like? Notice how much these “Hitler youth” type young men talk about health care!

        Obama just got his private army… and no one seems to have noticed. It is buried in the Senate revisions to the health care bill.
        Subtitle C–Increasing the Supply of the Health Care Workforce
        Sec. 5201. Federally supported student loan funds.
        Sec. 5202. Nursing student loan program.
        Sec. 5203. Health care workforce loan repayment programs.
        Sec. 5204. Public health workforce recruitment and retention programs.
        Sec. 5205. Allied health workforce recruitment and retention programs.
        Sec. 5206. Grants for State and local programs.
        Sec. 5207. Funding for National Health Service Corps.
        Sec. 5208. Nurse-managed health clinics.
        Sec. 5209. Elimination of cap on commissioned corps.
        Sec. 5210. Establishing a Ready Reserve Corps.
        Subtitle D–Enhancing Health Care Workforce Education and Training
        See the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, page 1312:

        SEC. 5210. ESTABLISHING A READY RESERVE CORPS.

        Section 203 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 204) is amended to read as follows:
        SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS.

        (a) ESTABLISHMENT:
        (1) IN GENERAL.–here shall be in the Service a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency.

        (2) REQUIREMENT.–All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended.

        (3) APPOINTMENT.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

        (4) ACTIVE DUTY.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall at all times be subject to call to active duty by the Surgeon General, including active duty for the purpose of training.

        (5) WARRANT OFFICERS.–Warrant officers may be appointed to the Service for the purpose of providing support to the health and delivery systems maintained by the Service and any warrant officer appointed to the Service shall be considered for purposes of this Act and title 37, United States Code, to be a commissioned officer within the Commissioned Corps of the Service.

        (b) ASSIMILATING RESERVE CORP OFFICERS INTO THE REGULAR CORPS: Effective on the date of enactment of the Affordable Health Choices Act, all individuals classified as officers in the Reserve Corps under this section (as such section existed on the day before the date of enactment of such Act) and serving on active duty shall be deemed to be commissioned officers of the Regular Corps. [Note here that those personally appointed by BO -- without the advice and consent of the Senate -- automatically become a part of the Regular Corps. Ed.]

        (c) PURPOSE AND USE OF READY RESERVE:
        (1) PURPOSE. The purpose of the Ready Reserve Corps is to fulfill the need to have additional Commissioned Corps personnel available on short notice (similar to the uniformed service’s reserve program) to assist regular Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions.

        (2) USES: The Ready Reserve Corps shall–

        (A) participate in routine training to meet the general and specific needs of the Commissioned Corps;
        (B) be available and ready for involuntary calls to active duty during national emergencies and public health crises, similar to the uniformed service reserve personnel;
        (C) be available for backfilling critical positions left vacant during deployment of active duty Commissioned Corps members, as well as for deployment to respond to public health emergencies, both foreign and domestic; and
        (D) be available for service assignment in isolated, hardship, and medically underserved communities (as defined in section 399SS) to improve access to health services.

        (d) FUNDING.—For the purpose of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of the Commissioned Corps under this section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to the Office of the Surgeon General for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014. Funds appropriated under this subsection shall be used for recruitment and training of Commissioned Corps Officers.

        Again, I ask the question: Were you aware of the fact that the health care bill created another army? We can easily imagine what they will be ordered to do, including lethal injections (a.k.a. vaccinations) to “unworthy” people?

        Whew, Nazi Germany all over again and it is happening right before our eyes, and right under our noses.

        FULL ANSWER

        This e-mail features a prominent reference to something we’ve dealt with before: A July 2, 2008, speech in Colorado Springs by then-presidential candidate Barack Obama. Obama talked there about building up “a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as our military force. But the doomsayers left out the context: Obama was proposing strengthening the Peace Corps, Americorps, the USA Freedom Corps and the ranks of the State Department’s foreign service officers.

        Despite our efforts, though, some people have been on the lookout for signs of Obama’s “national security force” ever since, and they think they have found it in section 5210 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the health care overhaul recently signed into law by the president. The blogosphere has been ablaze with postings, which, like the e-mail above, often contain references to Hitler, brownshirts, Nazism and the like.

        The truth about the new Ready Reserve Corps is a lot less interesting than the conspiracy theories. Before the law was passed, the Public Health Service, unlike other elements of the government’s seven uniformed services, didn’t have a “ready reserve” – a cadre of individuals who could be called up involuntarily in times of need. What it had was a regular, full-time corps of 2,800 doctors, nurses, scientists and other medical professionals, which was the limit under law. It also had a reserve corps. But most of the individuals in the reserve corps, which was larger than the regular corps, were on extended active duty for the duration of their careers; in other words, they worked full-time, just like the regular corps, because they were needed, but the statutory cap prevented the service from bringing them into the regular corps.

        The new law eliminates the personnel cap and brings the members of what used to be the reserve corps into the regular corps, which as a result now numbers about 6,600, according to an official at the Public Health Service who spoke to us on background.

        And the law creates the ready reserve of individuals who can be called up for service by the U.S. surgeon general in times of need; the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina is often used as an example of an incident that might trigger a call-up.

        Officials at the PHS are in the process of developing regulations that will determine how the Ready Reserve Corps is populated, but the person we spoke to said there will be limits on how long individuals could serve on active duty. Those who are activated will be paid for the duration of their service, and the bill provides $12.5 million per year through 2014 for the Ready Reserve.

        It’s unclear at this point how large the Ready Reserve will be, but a number in the neighborhood of several thousand has been mentioned. The PHS had been hoping to create the new team for several years, for reasons that may have been best described in a 2008 report, Blueprint for a Healthier America, published by a nonprofit group called the Trust for America’s Health to help guide the next administration and Congress:

        Blueprint for a Healthier America: There are not sufficient numbers of public health professionals to respond during major health emergencies, and when Corps members are called away to respond to emergencies, it means their ongoing functions are often neglected. If a “Ready Reserve” program was created, retired members of the Corps could become reservists who could be deployed on short notice during emergencies, or could fill in at federal agencies when active members are needed during emergencies, to ensure ongoing functions are carried out. Reservists would be required to participate in an appropriate number of drills and training throughout the year. Members of the reserve could also help fill in to provide services for underserved communities where health problems are the greatest.

        Jerry Farrell, executive director of the Commissioned Officers Association, told us that the Ready Reserve can help the PHS avoid situations such as what happened after Katrina, when so many members of the regular and reserve corps were dispatched to New Orleans and other areas hit by the 2005 hurricane that “the corps discovered, for instance, that they had deployed a whole surgical clinic of the Indian Health Service.”

        Needless to say (we hope), there is absolutely no support for this chain e-mail’s speculation that uniformed members of the Public Health Service would be ordered to give “lethal injections (a.k.a. vaccinations) to ‘unworthy people.’ ”

        –Viveca Novak
        Sources

        Hamburg, Richard. Deputy Director, Trust for America’s Health. Interview with FactCheck.org. 6 April 2010.

        Trust for America’s Health. “Blueprint for a Healthier America.” October 2008.

        Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Pub. L. No. 111-148. Enacted 23 March 2010.

        Farrell, Jerry. Executive Director, Commissioned Officers Association. Interview with FactCheck.org. 6 April 2010.

        Posted by Viveca Novak on Wednesday, April 7, 2010 at 4:13 pm
        Filed under Ask FactCheck · Tagged with Army, Barack Obama, chain e-mail, health care, health care reform, ready reserve

        FactCheck Radio
        In episode 6 of our podcast, we explain the controversy over abortion and federal funds in the health care law, unemployment statistics touted by the White House, and a long-running April Fools’ hoax.

        Listen to this episode

        Listen to past episodes
        The FactCheck Wire

        Jumping to Conclusions About Census Participation
        Jumping to Conclusions About Census Participation

        Republican Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina is fearful that “blatant misinformation coming from otherwise well-meaning…Click to read the full post »

        Massey’s Mining Money
        Massey’s Mining Money

        The West Virginia coal mining disaster that took more than two dozen lives this week brought…Click to read the full post »

        View the full Wire archives
        Ask FactCheck

        Q: Did the new health care law give Obama a Nazi-like “private army” of 6,000 people?

        A: No. Contrary to false Internet rumors, the new Ready Reserve Corps of doctors and other health workers will report to the surgeon general and be like the “ready reserves” in other uniformed services. They will be used during health emergencies.

        Read the full question and answer

        View the Ask FactCheck archives
        “Just the Facts” Vidcast

        View enlarged video player for Episode 4: “Census”

        View Just the Facts Archive
        FactCheck Mailbag

        FactCheck Mailbag, Week of March 30-April 5
        Lies of omission are much more insidious than half truths because they can easily be defended unless someone knows what the missing piece of information is. Close Quote Mark

        • http://?? Joe H.

          smelly,
          just answer one glaring question. If Obummer doesn’t want a “civillian army”, then why did he say he did??? And don’t even try to tell me he didn’t as I heard it the night he said it and have heard it about 5 or 6 times since!!!

        • JeffH

          Smilee, you are a straight up idiot. I suppose that you are calling Judge Andrew Napolitano a liar.
          If you dare get your head out of your arse long enough to watch and listen you might just learn it’s not just fear mongering and paranoia.

          http://www.personalliberty.com/feature-video/obamas-private-army/

          • Smilee

            Go read my post jeffy and you would know the truth, facts joey not opinions and propaganda will inform you of the truth

          • DaveH

            Who cares what they call them? Of course they aren’t going to call them Hitler’s Brownshirts. The fact is that they will be paid by the government and answer to the government.
            Big Government is the Problem, Not the Solution.

            There are only two kinds of people who vote for Socialism, those who think they will get to feed at the trough, or those who are just hopelessly naive.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            smelly,
            when sombody knoledgable enough to know facts puts them up I do pay attention!!!!

          • Smilee

            Joey

            I have never seen you do anything but ignore the true facts, i gave you the true facts and you scream stupid statements in total frustrations because when presented with the truth you cannot respond to it in a rational manner as the truth exposes your immaturity

  • LA Pyeatt

    As mentioned above, Col. Crockett was truly an American hero, and everyone should know this lesson about Constitutional limits on government authority. One thing the article didn’t mention is that Davy Crockett was turned out of office in 1830 because of his opposition to the Indian Removal Act. The IRA was supposed to be voluntary on the part of the Indians, but it was implemented through a combination of force and fraud. The final result was the Trail of Tears (which was actually a series of several separate removals), by which the Indians’ land and their right to self-government were forcibly taken away. The Cherokee Trail of Tears alone left over 4,000 innocent people dead (mostly children and the elderly), and the Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Seminole peoples suffered similar casualties. The Cherokee people will never forget how Col. Crockett fought in the halls of Congress to give justice to the Indians.

    • libertytrain

      What a great guy he must have really been. Wish he was here now.

      • JC

        Him, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams….

      • Claire

        libertytrain— HI!! Oldies but goodies. They don’t make them like that anymore. Hope all is well with you.

        • libertytrain

          Hi Claire -congrats on your dog successes- lovely for you – ah, two more months of toddlers for me – then the sky is the limit!

          • Claire

            libertytrain—- Thanks for the congrats, I am so proud of the doggies. And you have two more months of the toddlers.!! It will fly by! And you will miss them. It is great that you are/were able to take care of them. I am sure your daughter and son-in-law are very grateful too. It means a lot for the grandparents to take care of them in times like these. I only had to care for my grandkids on weekends sometimes. Those weekends were kind of rough, especially taking care of two little ones and the dogs too. But it was fun. Kept me on my toes. I will be thinking about you!! You will have new- found freedom. Look out world, here comes libertytrain!! LOL

          • http://?? Joe H.

            libertytrain,
            Now that you were able to spoil them it’s almost time to send them home!!! HEHEHE!!

          • libertytrain

            Claire and Joe – it’s been tough – not as pleasurable as grandparents who do get to spoil them and send them home. We had to be the parents and it’s been physically and mentally hard. I don’t know how many other grandparents are in this particular situation because of dual-deployments – but I sure have run into a lot of grandparents this year that are raising grandchildren for ridiculous reasons. One had a daughter that wanted to be a stripper —-

          • Claire

            libertytrain–I know exactly what you mean. A couple we know are raising 2 little kids. Their daughter was/is on drugs and she took off. Our friends went ahead and adopted the grandkids. They are in their 60s and raising 2 toddlers. But they could not let them go for adoption. This type of scenario is happening more frequently. It is sad.

    • eyeswideopen

      La Pyeatt, the man had ethics and lived them. He probably would have the same fate today, if he tried to prevent a wrong from happening. Thx for additional info.

  • http://www.personalliberty.com/news/pediatric-patients-with-chronic-pain-look-to-acupuncture-19609231/ James A Graham

    Oh Boy, do we need this!!

    I think this sounds like some very good ideas. Return the nation to the people, for the people and of the people. It’s time.

    OH BOY, DO WE NEED THIS!!

    THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS AND SENATE!!!!!
    A friend sent this along to me. I can’t think of a reason to disagree.

    I am sending this to virtually everybody on my e-mail list and that includes conservatives, liberals, and everybody in between. Even though we disagree on a number of issues, I count all of you as friends.. My friend and neighbor wants to promote a “Congressional Reform Act of 2010″. It would contain eight provisions, all of which would probably be strongly endorsed by those who drafted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

    I know many of you will say, “this is impossible”. Let me remind you, Congress has the lowest approval of any entity in Government, now is the time when Americans will join together to reform Congress – the entity that represents us.

    We need to get a Senator to introduce this bill in the US Senate and a Representative to introduce a similar bill in the US House. These people will become American hero’s..

    Thanks,
    A Fellow American

    .Congressional Reform Act of 2010

    1. Term Limits: 12 years only, one of the possible options below.

    A. Two Six year Senate terms
    B. Six Two year House terms
    C. One Six year Senate term and three Two Year House terms

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    2. No Tenure / No Pension:

    A congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security:

    All funds in the Congressional retirement fund moves to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, Congress participates with the American people.

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, server your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan just as all Americans.

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    6. Congress looses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    7. Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the American people.

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    8. All contracts with past and present congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.

    The American people did not make this contract with congressmen, congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career.. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    If you agree with the above, pass it on to all in your address list. If not, just delete..

    • chuck b

      are you kidding!! sounds something like a liberal congressman has
      written, four years is enough for anyone to serve in congress. four years is enough for any senator. one four year term for president. retire on social security and receive minimum wage for salary. that way the elected one would have to be wealthy and not tempted by big money.
      this baloney about they have to spend more time in washington to learn the ropes, that”s the problem once they learn the ropes that’s when all
      under the table deals start.

    • eyeswideopen

      James, excellent!!! Except number 6 is already in the healthcare law. Senator Grassley was responsible for that. Have you thought of putting on the internet under a petition, which would get it max exposure. I will find the petition site for you if you need it.
      Finally, someone who is coming up with solutions. If you need me to find number 6 to prove it to you I will. Good Luck. P.s. not really sure about hopping back and forth between house and senate, am thinking about that one.

    • Smilee

      We need to get a Senator to introduce this bill in the US Senate and a Representative to introduce a similar bill in the US House. These people will become American hero’s..

      No 1 is a constitutional issue and can only be changed by amending the constitution and cannot be changed by law. are you really silly enough to think you can get the congress to vote on any of this, your quite the joke, why are you wasting your time ROTFL

      • Joel Johnston

        Smilee ROTFL…from what you “medical” marijuana usage? You must be one of the self-entitled masses with time on your hands through government charity. Go back to your bong and search ebay for more Chez Guevara memorabilia.

        • Smilee

          joel, want to share with us why you are not able to say anything intelligent???

          • http://?? Joe H.

            smelly,
            why waist intelligence on someone like you that wouldn’t be able to understand it anyways???

          • Smilee

            It would be nice if you possessed any intelligence to waste, but you are totally devoid of that

  • kate8

    Congressmen were supposed to be from the ranks of the people. That way they serve a limited term and then go back to their regular business. This is mostly true for conservatives, but most democrats are career politicians. Most of them have not run a business nor even held a real job. Unless they are lawyers. Then all they know how to do is find ways to circumvent the Constitution. And they prostitute themselves out to the highest bidder to stay in office, since they have no where else to go. Pathetic.

    Not that republicans are much better these days, as far as being whores. The point is, they should be of the people, not the elite.

    • Claire

      kate8 — It’s not whore anymore — it’s “Ho.” LOL

    • Smilee

      want to share with us why you think they circumvent the constitution, off the cuff statements without reason or fact does nothing to inform us and makes you look stupid, angry and frustrated.

  • Lewis F

    Folks, neither Daniel Boone nor Davie Crockett were “hero’s” in the true sense of the word. Daniel Boone would go to New Orleans, which was under Spanish control, and except gold as payment to try and convince St. Louis to become Spanish territory so they could have complete control of the Mississippi River. Then he would do the same thing in St. Louis with the promise of convincing the Spanish to become an American territory. He played both end to the middle.

    Davie Crockett had no experience “on the frontier” and needed to do something to bolster his resume. So he dawned a coon skin hat and a deer skin suit for a photo opt. That was the only time he wore the outfit. Then he took off for Pensacola, FL where Andrew Jackson had just embarrassed the US by taking over the city from the Spanish and claiming Florida for the U.S.A. Andrew Jackson was the first governor and Davie figured he would spend some time there to build his resume. Unfortunately he became ill and had to return to Washington. When that failed, he then decided to go to the Alamo and gain some experience there. We all know how that ended.

    • Jim H.

      Lewis F, As someone with an interest In U.S. history I would like a list of your sources.

      • JeffH

        I find it just amazing that there were “photo opts” in those days even though there were cameras.

        Born on August 17, 1786, in Greene County in East Tennessee, Crockett grew up with the new nation and helped it grow. He lived in Tennessee for all but the last few months of his life and promoted the gradual westward expansion of the frontier through Tennessee toward Texas. In his search for a better life for himself and his family, he participated in a process that we now call the American dream.

        • JeffH

          Answer why would you think that the Health and Human Services need a highly trained and armed corp for? For what purpose is this written into the Health Care Bill? It’s right before your very eyes and you refuse to think your mighty POTUS isn’t the glamorous savior of the free world. May God have mercy on your soul!

          • JeffH

            Meant for Smilee…wrong spot!

          • Smilee

            Oh jeffie where did you come by this lie, non of what you say has a shed of truth in it, are you ever going to be able to tell the difference between fact and propaganda which you so frequently try to pass off as fact or truth.

    • JeffH

      Davy Crockett stands for the Spirit of the American Frontier. As a young man he was a crafty Indian fighter and hunter. When he was forty-nine years old, he died a hero’s death at the Alamo, helping Texas win independence from Mexico. For many years he was nationally known as a political representative of the frontier.

      Between 1811 and 1813 Crockett fought under General Andrew Jackson in the Creek War. It was his reputation as an Indian fighter and frontiersman that first established his popularity. He was a member of the Tennessee legislature in 1821-1822 and again in 1823-1824, and of the twentieth Congress of the United States in the years 1827-1829, in the twenty-first Congress, 1829-1831 and again, in the twenty-third Congress, 1833-1835. To be a representative in the Tennessee legislature and then serve honorably as a member of Congress of the United States, was quite a feat for one with less than six months schooling. His motto was, “Be always sure you are right, then go ahead.”

      Yes, Davy Crockett of Tennessee, went far in his day by his own effort and achievement, and rose high in the esteem of his fellow men – from the humblest of beginnings, as is attested by the rough-hewn native limestone slab, still to be seen at the site of his birth in upper Greene County, near Limestone, in East Tennessee. His tombstone reads: “Davy Crockett, Pioneer, Patriot, Soldier, Trapper, Explorer, State Legislator, Congressman, Martyred at The Alamo. 1786 – 1836″
      Courtesy Davy Crockett Birthplace
      1245 Davy Crockett Park Road, Limestone, TN 37681

      • libertytrain

        Thanks Jeff – that was nice.

  • chuck b

    good grief!!! this tells me both boone and crockett were democrats.now my day is ruined.

    • JeffH

      chuck b, don’t be too alarmed. What was then is not now, if you can understand it.

    • JLC

      Not to worry, Chuck! In Davy Crockett’s lifetime, there was no Republican Party. There were Democrats and Whigs. Davy Crockett died in 1836, and the Republican Party was formed in 1854, as an offshoot of the Democratic Party, and the Whigs gradually died out. Gen. John C. Fremont was the first Republican candidate for president. Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican president.

  • Liberty

    The Honorable David Crockett was well know for his ability to spin a yarn. Would he be kinfolk of yours?

  • kate8

    Why does the left so much enjoy denigrating our national heros?

    Oh. That’s right. They hate what America once stood for.

    • Jim H.

      Kate, Boone and Crockett were self reliant rugged individualists. The left would be threatened by that kind of personality. They need wishy washy, blind following sheep to form their kind of government.

  • chuck b

    jeffh

    my comment was for lewis f,

    • JeffH

      chuck b, not a prob.

  • Joel Johnston

    I believe there are enough Americans with the passion to see real constitutional reform. I have, at times, dwelled in fear that there is no unified party to carry the cause forward with real conviction to win. Then I have thought about how any competitive event plays out and realized that there is nothing to be concerned about. There are numerous parties surfacing to represent the cause and there will undoubtedly be competition with winners and losers. One party will emerge as the leader of the cause.

    One concern remains for me and that is putting the best candidates forward. With competition between the teams we may see good men and women drop from the race along with their fledgling parties. To resolve this issue I suggest that “We the People” need to encourage all parties emerging to support Constitutional Reform to compete on the quality of their reform plan first. The candidates that each individual party supports should then be allowed to compete for the candidacy of the “unified party”. We would send the best prepared party to Washington and we would know about the candidates we are putting forward. Let’s face it; there are some folks we just would not want on the ballot for a variety of reasons.

    I am a carpenter and I know how important it is to build from the ground up. If you think this is a good idea, pay it forward. Search for reform parties with a direction you could get behind and support them. Share good and positive ideas with them and let know what you expect of them. Be a player for your team and may the best man/woman win. If you lose the battle you have not lost the war so pickup and rally behind the winner. Stay involved and continue to push for the people who will win the fight for your rights under OUR Constitution. If you think the cream rises to the top on its own, you have forgotten that the milk below is also pushing it up.

  • Joel Johnston

    If God be with you, then who can be against you?

  • Steamboat Jack

    On term limits.

    Term limits haven’t worked out so well in California. Now every person in that legislature is a Bozo without experience. Basically the unelected staff makes all of the decisions because they are the only ones that understand the process.

    The real problem is with the electorate. They will not spend the time and effort to find out about the candidates and the issues. The real story here is about the farmer and his efforts to educate himself. With an educated electorate, these problems would be few and far between. (A responsible press would help, also. But still, the ultimate responsibility lies with the individual voter.)

    There is a tendency to “make a law” to solve every problem. It is an arrogance and hubris of power to think that way. In this case term limits won’t work because it is not a cure for “stupid”.

    Regards,

    Steamboat Jack

  • Joel Johnston

    One more thing…march for fair tax. Check out the website and join the virtual march. http://www.onlinetaxrevolt.com/

    • DaveH

      Before you get all warm and fuzzy about the Fair Tax, you should read this:
      http://mises.org/daily/1814

      • DaveH

        There is only one real solution to all this. The Government is way too big. We need to cut back the size of Government dramatically and there is only one political party with the cojones to do it – The Libertarian Party:
        http://libertarianparty.org/platform

  • kate8

    Love the Congessional Reform Act idea, but it’s true that Congress would never pass it.

    What we need is a citizen’s referendum. There has to be a way for
    the people to force reform on government, or the Constitution is an unenforceable joke and we are simply at their mercy.

    Any ideas out there?

  • kate8

    As far as the left’s denigration of our national heros, I could say the same about some of theirs.

    If I mentioned names I’d be accused of hate speech. But the point is, even heros are human and, besides, what is written about them is subject to the bias and interpretation of the author.

    Having heros, brave men who stood for something, gives us role models and hope for humanity. If one of us rises to the call of a national cause, could we say we never erred? If our lives had to be perfect
    according to our values, none of us would qualify.

  • chuck b

    kate8

    you cannot mention hero’s on the left, because there are none. unless you consider subversive’s hero’s.

  • kate8

    Exactly. But these are the one’s the left worships.

    In the last days, what has always been called good will be called evil, and what has always been called evil will be called good….

  • chuck b

    the illegal immigration is but a small part of our problem, the enforcement of our law is the main issue, neither party has the guts to do anything about it. our first step should include securing our voting precincts and stop the illegal vote, this should be our first priority. i have seen this manipulation in california and most people saw it with the al franken senate victory. we do not have the time left for promises from these politicians it must be now. we have been invaded without firing a shot and they are using our rights to defeat us. barry is their pharaoh and i am worried that they may have enough votes to keep the dem’s in power come next election. forget the polls they are manipulated, our country is in danger.

  • kate8

    With ya on this, chuck.

  • Matthew M. McLaughlin

    I steel say (“SOCKDOLAGER”) and Thank You!

  • Choice

    Ballad of Davy Crockett
    Bill Hayes
    Words by George Bruns and Lyrics by Tom Blackburn

    Born on a mountain top in Tennessee
    Greenest state in the land of the free
    Raised in the woods so he knew ev’ry tree
    Kilt him a b’ar when he was only three
    Davy, Davy Crockett, king of the wild frontier!

    In eighteen thirteen the Creeks uprose
    Addin’ redskin arrows to the country’s woes
    Now, Injun fightin’ is somethin’ he knows,
    So he shoulders his rifle an’ off he goes
    Davy, Davy Crockett, the man who don’t know fear!

    Off through the woods he’s a marchin’ along
    Makin’ up yarns an’ a singin’ a song
    Itchin’ fer fightin’ an’ rightin’ a wrong
    He’s ringy as a b’ar an’ twict as strong
    Davy, Davy Crockett, the buckskin buccaneer!

    Andy Jackson is our gen’ral’s name
    His reg’lar soldiers we’ll put to shame
    Them redskin varmints us Volunteers’ll tame
    ’cause we got the guns with the sure-fire aim
    Davy, Davy Crockett, the champion of us all!~

    Headed back to war from the ol’ home place
    but Red Stick was leadin’ a merry chase
    Fightin’ an’ burnin’ at a devil’s pace
    South to the swamps on the Florida Trace
    Davy, Davy Crockett, trackin’ the redskins down!

    Fought single-handed through the Injun War
    till the Creeks was whipped an’ peace was in store
    An’ while he was handlin’ this risky chore
    Made hisself a legend for evermore
    Davy, Davy Crockett, king of the wild frontier!

    He give his word an’ he give his hand
    that his Injun friends could keep their land
    An’ the rest of his life he took the stand
    that justice was due every redskin band
    Davy, Davy Crockett, holdin’ his promise dear!

    Home fer the winter with his family
    Happy as squirrels in the ol’ gum tree
    Bein’ the father he wanted to be
    Close to his boys as the pod an’ the pea
    Davy, Davy Crockett, holdin’ his young’uns dear!

    But the ice went out an’ the warm winds came
    An’ the meltin’ snow showed tracks of game
    An’ the flowers of Spring filled the woods with flame
    An’ all of a sudden life got too tame
    Davy, Davy Crockett, headin’ on West again!

    Off through the woods we’re ridin’ along
    Makin’ up yarns an’ singin’ a song
    He’s ringy as a b’ar an’ twict as strong
    An’ knows he’s right ’cause he ain’ often wrong
    Davy, Davy Crockett, the man who don’t know fear!

    Lookin’ fer a place where the air smells clean
    Where the trees is tall an’ the grass is green
    Where the fish is fat in an untouched stream
    An’ the teemin’ woods is a hunter’s dream
    Davy, Davy Crockett, lookin’ fer Paradise!

    Now he’s lost his love an’ his grief was gall
    In his heart he wanted to leave it all
    An’ lose himself in the forests tall
    but he answered instead his country’s call
    Davy, Davy Crockett, beginnin’ his campaign!

    Needin’ his help they didn’t vote blind
    They put in Davy ’cause he was their kind
    Sent up to Nashville the best they could find
    a fightin’ spirit an’ a thinkin’ mind
    Davy, Davy Crockett, choice of the whole frontier!

    The votes were counted an’ he won hands down
    So they sent him off to Washin’ton town
    With his best dress suit still his buckskins brown
    A livin’ legend of growin’ renown
    Davy, Davy Crockett, the Canebrake Congressman!

    He went off to Congress an’ served a spell
    Fixin’ up the Govern’ments an’ laws as well
    Took over Washin’ton so we heered tell
    An’ patched up the crack in the Liberty Bell
    Davy, Davy Crockett, seein’ his duty clear!

    Him an’ his jokes travelled all through the land
    An’ his speeches made him friends to beat the band
    His politickin’ was their favorite brand
    An’ everyone wanted to shake his hand
    Davy, Davy Crockett, helpin’ his legend grow!

    He knew when he spoke he sounded the knell
    of his hopes for White House an’ fame as well
    But he spoke out strong so hist’ry books tell
    An’ patched up the crack in the Liberty Bell
    Davy, Davy Crockett, seein’ his duty clear!

    When he come home his politickin’ done
    The western march had just begun
    So he packed his gear an’ his trusty gun
    An’ lit out grinnin’ to follow the sun
    Davy, Davy Crockett, leadin’ the pioneer!

    He heard of Houston an’ Austin so
    To the Texas plains he jest had to go
    Where freedom was fightin’ another foe
    An’ they needed him at the Alamo
    Davy, Davy Crockett, the man who don’t know fear!

    His land is biggest an’ his land is best
    From grassy plains to the mountain crest
    He’s ahead of us all meetin’ the test
    Followin’ his legend into the West
    Davy, Davy Crockett, king of the wild frontier!

    • JeffH

      Ah yes, again fond memories, I can still remember the tune which was played on AM radio around the coutry, and of course on Walt Disney Presents whenever Davy Crockett showed.

  • Smilee

    Jana

    jana

    If I say orange and apples do I end up with a oranpple or are they still two different fruits. It is still two different fruits. It reads:

    provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States:

    Common defense and general welfare of the united states are two totally different things, your silly spin does not change that fact.

    as you ignored my questions, I’ll ignore yours as well

    • DaveH

      You’re taking it out of context, Smilee. It says:
      “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States”

      They were just qualifying the Power to lay and collect taxes, duties, etc.

      If that was meant to be a Power of the Federal Government, there would be no need to follow with the other powers, as it would be all-encompassing. If fact there would be no limits to Federal Power if they had the Power to provide for the General Welfare. Anything they wanted to do could be rationalized as being for the General Welfare.

      • Smilee

        to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States”

        POWER TO COLLECT TAXES AND POWER TO PAY FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE UNITED STATES

        KEY WORDS YOU IGNORE: “TO PAY” NOT ONLY THE POWER TO COLLECT ALSO THE POWER TO USE TO PAY FOR THIS AND ALL IN THIS ARTICLE AND OTHERS AS WELL

        SS, MEDICARE, MEDICAID, WELFARE AND MANY OTHERS HAVE AND ARE PAID FOR SOME AS LONG AS 70 YEARS AND AFTER ALL THIS TIME YOU OR NO ONE HAS CHALLENGED IT AS FOR YEARS AND YEARS IT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED CONSTITUTIONAL. IT HAS BECOME CLEAR YOU DESPISE THE CONSTITUTION AND WISH IT WAS SOMETHING IT IS NOT.

        • DaveH

          No Smilee, It is Big Government loving Liberals like you that I despise. You and your kind can justify any amount of theft as long as you perceive that it benefits you.
          You can rationalize enslaving people or any other form of disrespect and force upon your fellow human beings as long as it suits your purposes. You are no better than the Southern Slave Owners of bygone days. They too made the argument that they were doing what was best for their servants.

        • DaveH

          And Smilee,
          maybe you should enroll in a private school where you can learn how to read.

        • DaveH

          The magnitude of your ability to rationalize, Sleepee, is exceeded only by the magnitude of your lust for Other Peoples’ Money.

          • Smilee

            To your responses, all three of them convinces me even more that you really do hate the constitution but if you admitted that people would probably believe you are unamerican so you blame it on liberals instead and attack them personally rather than address the content of their posts. Your attitude and paranoia really appear to make you one very unhappy person.

          • DaveH

            Sleepee,
            There are 4 things that we allow you to do on this board.
            1) You can post any nonsense that you want.
            2) You can post any Liberal nonsense that you want.
            3) You can post any Progressive nonsense that you want.
            4) You can post any Left-Wing nonsense that you want.

            Duh, even you Sleepee, might recognize that since rules 2, 3, and 4 are just subsets of rule 1, it makes no sense at all to enumerate them. Just as it would have made no sense at all for the writers of the Constitution to give the Federal Government the Power to provide for the General Welfare of the citizens and then list 16 other powers that are all subsets of such an imagined Power of providing for the General Welfare.

            I will admit that the framers of the Constitution, especially those who knew the inclination of leaders to grow government as large as possible, should have been more careful with the words so that even the most ignorant Liberal couldn’t twist them.

          • DaveH

            For those that missed the earlier link, I will repost the link to The Federalist #41 by James Madison:

            http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa41.htm

          • Jana

            DaveH,
            With all of frownees responses it just shows how really liberal (the perverted liberals) he is. The perverted liberal progressives on the Supreme Court who are not interpreting the law but rewriting the laws of the Constitution are doing harm to this country.

            I went to the link you provided and read the whole thing, it was so interesting. Our Founding Fathers were very wise in what they wrote, but the liberal progressives have been perverting it, and rewriting it for a long time now. They are trying to change our country into the very disarray that their own lives are in. Their minds are confused and filled with evil, so they are trying to turn this country into a pathetic mess.

          • Smilee

            Davy

            Your entitled to your opinions, but you have your facts skewed and as you present them they are not the actual fact. The constitution is what it is and it is neither liberal or conservative, you hate liberals so you use them as your scapegoats to justify you self created propaganda as your interpretations are just that and not to be believed.

            The federalist papers was the documents Madison used to sell and persuade the colonies to ratify the constitution, it is and never has been law albeit it is a source of reference, it is no more than that. There is no journal of the founding fathers deliberations which would have carried more weight if they existed but all notes and everything was burned before the constitution was released to the public and thus the federalist papers in their absence were drafted to sell the colonies on putting the constitution into law which they did, the constitution being the law supersedes and trumps the federalist papers and the supreme court can either use them in their interpretation if it helps give clarity or reject them if it does not and they have done both. You davey seem to think the federalist papers should be given first priority if you feel it supports what you want the interpretation to be even when your interpretation is incorrect. I personally believe as long as you bear such deep hatred for government and the constitution you will never see the reality of what constitution really is or means.

        • American Citizen

          To pay the debts of the country, i.e. what Cogress amasses, not to provide everything each and every citizen wants. The general welfare of this country is its freedoms, not monetary welfare. You are the one misreading the meaning of the Constitution. Read what the founding fathers really meant.

        • American Citizen

          Once again, Smilee, we pay for SS ourselves, altho forced to. We paid all our working lives into it, now pay premiums. It’s not free.

          • American Citizen

            That includes Medicare. With premiums, deductibles and co-pays, we pay out of pocket $8,000 and up a year. Medicaid recipients also do not get totally free care. There are taxes upon taxes which we all pay, rich and poor. Even the air we breathe is taxed. And this administration is looking to impose even more. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

          • Smilee

            AMERICAN CITIZEN

            SS AND MEDICARE DEDUCTIONS ARE A TAX YOU PAY WEATHER YOU EVER COLLECT BENEFITS OR NOT. YOU OR YOUR ESTATE GET NOTHING UNLESS YOU REACH THE AGE OF 62, 65 AND UP TO 67 OR ARE DISABLED. EVERY GOVERNMENT SERVICE YOU DO NOT PAY FOR IS COLLECTED IN ONE FORM OF TAXES OR ANOTHER. IF YOU COLLECT MORE SS PAYMENTS THAN YOU PAID IN IN SS TAX YOU WILL STILL CONTINUE TO GET YOUR SS PAYMENTS UNTIL YOU DIE, IT IS A GOVERNMENT RUN INSURANCE PAID FOR BY TAXES UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY COLLECT ON Medicare AND THEN YOU ALSO PAY A PREMIUM ON PARTS B & D, NO GOVERNMENT SERVICE IS FREE YOU PAY FOR ALL OF THEM WITH YOUR TAXES. conservatives OFTEN REFER TO GOVERNMENT SERVICES AS BEING FREE, THEY ARE WRONG BUT THEY STILL KEEP SAYING THAT. THERE IS NO REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SS & MEDICARE AND OTHER TAXES EXCEPT ITS TAXES ARE A DEDICATED TAX BUT NEVER THE LESS A TAX

  • kate8

    Hey, Choice! Thanks for the words to the song. What a treat!

  • George d.o.b. 1926

    With all this talk going on I have a question. How we the tax paying citizens start a movement for a “Constitutional Convention”? In the opinion of the contributors here would it serve the purpose we are looking for? Could a convention right the many wrongs we see. I am trying to include a email that I received, I think it is timely.

    I hope you will excuse my fumbling efforts at the computer.

    Sherry Hackett, wife of the late Buddy Hackett, is a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat.
    It would be thought that many other Democrats share her position.

    This was written by Sherry Hackett, Buddy Hackett’s widow.

    “WE NOTICED” President Obama:

    Today I read of your administrations’ plan to re-define September 11 as
    a National Service Day. Sir, it’s time we had a talk.

    During your campaign, Americans watched as you  made a mockery of our
    tradition of standing and crossing your heart when the Pledge of Allegiance
    was spoken.. You, out of four people on the stage, were the only one not
    honoring our tradition.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    During one of your many speeches, Americans heard you say that  you
    intended to visit all 57 states.

    We all know that Islam, not America has 57 states.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    When President Bush leaned over at Ground Zero and gently  placed a
    flower on the memorial, while you nonchalantly  tossed your flower onto
    the pile without leaning  over.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    Every time you apologized to other countries for America’s position on
    an issue we have wondered why you don’t share our  pride in this great
    country.. When you have heard foreign leaders  berate our country and
    our beliefs, you have not defended us. In  fact, you insulted the
    British Crown beyond belief.  And, you even bowed before the Saudi king

    YES, “We noticed.”

    When your pastor of 20 years “God-damned America ” and said  that
    9/11 was ” America ‘s chickens coming home to roost”  and you denied
    having heard recriminations of that nature, we  wondered how that could
    be, after attending that church for 20 years. You later disassociated yourself  from that church and Pastor
    Wright because it was politically expedient to do so.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    When you announced that you would transform America ,  we wondered
    why. With all her faults, America is the  greatest country on earth.
    Sir, KEEP THIS IN MIND, “if not for  America and the people who built
    her, you wouldn’t be sitting in  the White House now.” Prior to your
    election to the highest office in this Country, you were a senator from
    Illinois and  from what we can glean from the records available, not a
    very remarkable one.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    All through your campaign and even now, you have surrounded 
    yourself with individuals who are basically unqualified for  the
    positions for which you appointed them. Worse than that, the  majority
    of them are people who, like you, bear no special allegiance, respect, or
    affection for this country and her traditions.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    You are almost 15 months into your term and every morning millions  of
    Americans wake up to a new horror heaped on us by you. You seek  to
    saddle working Americans with a health care/insurance  reform package
    that, along with cap and trade, will bankrupt this nation.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    We seek, by protesting, to let our representatives know that we are not
    in favor of these crippling expenditures, and we are  labeled
    “un-American”,”racist”, “mob”. We wonder how we are supposed  to let
    you know how frustrated we are. You have attempted to make our protests seem
    isolated and insignificant. Until your appointment, Americans had the right
    to speak out.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    On September 11, 2001 there were no Republicans or Democrats, only
    Americans. And we all grieved together and  helped each other in
    whatever way we could. The attack on 9/11 was carried out because we are
    Americans. 

    And YES, “We noticed.”

    There were many of us who prayed that as a black president you could
    help unite this nation. In your short tenure in office you have done  more to destroy
    this nation than the attack on 9/11. You have failed us.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    September 11 is a day of remembrance for all  Americans. You
    propose to make 9/11 a “National Service Day”.  While we know that you
    don’t share our reverence for 9/11, we  pray that history will report
    your proposal as what it is, a disgrace.

    YES, “We noticed.”

    You have made a mockery of  our Constitution and the office that
    you hold. You have  embarrassed and slighted us in foreign visits 
    and policy.. 

    YES, “We noticed.”  

    When you denied a military flyover at the annual “God and Country” rally in Idaho, where new military recruits were inducted, and all military were honored, that was the first time in 42 years that a military flyover did not occur.  When the organizers contacted the Pentagon to ask why this was not allowed, they were told that it was because the event was of a “Christian nature”.  

    Yes, we noticed. 

    We have noticed all these things. We will deal with you. When Americans
    come together again, it will be to remove you from office.

    Take notice.

    If you agree with this,  please pass it on.
     

    Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox. See how. =

    The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail. Get busy.

    • Jana

      George d.o.b. good points. I received this email too and passed it on. Yes, we did notice. And, we are still noticing, and we will not forget like they are hoping we will.
      Obama is the worst President we have ever had, that is up to and including Carter, Wilson, and F.D.R.
      These however are the Progressive Liberals heroes. UGH.

    • JC

      Thanks George, it’s a good reminder that we and not Obama are Americans and that he muct go as soon as possible so that we might begin to undo all the damage this phoney is wreaking on America,

  • American Citizen

    Progressives, take note. The government puts a nickel in one pocket while taking a dime out of the other.

  • chuck b

    over the year i have received numerous emails criticizing barry soetoro’s handling of the presidency by some well named journalist or actor and especially one supposedly written by andy rooney of cbs. these are all fraud for the most part and written by unknown people, i agree with most of the content, i don’t agree with using these liberal names as if they have had a change of heart and i wouldn’t be surprised if the george dob1926 post quoting buddy hacketts widow is also use of a very liberal name under false pretense.

    • Jana

      I agree with you on that point.When I passed it on, I even made a point to say that I doubted very seriously that Buddy Hackett’s widow said this, but that I did agree with the contents.
      I sent something out just recently that I wrote. It came back to me about 2 weeks later with pics and other comments added to it. What a surprise. I had to laugh as it had taken on a life of its own.

    • JC

      I don’t really care who said or if it was said by anyone of note at all. It’s an accurate portrayal of “His Hopiness the Kenyan Prodigy”

      • Smilee

        IT IS ALL A CHILDLESS AND RADICAL SPIN AND ALL OUT OF CONTEXT, YOU CAN’T TAKE SNIPPETS OF THE TOTAL, THUS CHANGING ITS MEANING SO IT DOES NOT PORTRAY THE WHOLE TRUTH WHICH YOU PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY CARE LITTLE ABOUT YOU LET YOUR HATRED FOR THIS MAN DRIVE YOU ACTIONS AND WORDS AND DRIVE YOUR MISREPRESENTATIONS OF HIS ACTIONS AND WORDS, THEY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW WELL HE IS DOING HIS JOB AND THEREFORE Totally irrelevant. JC, HE IS TWICE THE AMERICAN YOU CAN EVER HOPE TO BE.

  • kate8

    Ever notice how libs tend to write the way they talk?

    Incoherent gibberish and run-on sentences.

  • Smilee

    Jana says:
    April 11, 2010 at 7:11 pm

    Sorry, it did not let me finish as it just submitted.

    I still think common defense and general welfare mean common and general, not specific welfare, not programs for the poor. It means defense of all, and welfare of all, as in doing no harm to the people and letting no other country take us over. Ergo, a military. The government is not supposed to be our parents.
    To me it is quite simple.

    THANKS FOR GIVING YOUR OPINION AND ANSWERING MY QUESTION, I DO APPRECIATE THAT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND MAY NOT EVEN DISAGREE WITH SOME OF YOUR FEELINGS BUT I STILL DISAGREE WITH YOUR INTERPRETATIONS, YOUR RIGHT IT IS NOT SPECIFIC WELFARE IT IS GENERAL WELFARE, GENERAL BEING A WIDE DEFINITION AND NOT A SPECIFIC ONE, SPECIFIC BEING A NARROWER DEFINITION REQUIRING MORE DEFINITION TO HAVE MORE MEANING. THE WIDER DEFINITION ENCOMPASSES MUCH MORE THAN THE FOUNDING FATHERS GAVE US GUIDANCE IN, THEY WERE NOT SPECIFIC. THEY GAVE THAT POWER SPECIFICALLY TO CONGRESS AND THEREIN I DISAGREE WITH YOU, IF CONGRESS DECIDES THAT IT IS WELFARE FOR THE POOR, OR HEALTH ETC. THEY FIT WITHIN A WIDE DEFINITION AND THEREFORE LEGAL, ITS NOT WEATHER YOU OR I LIKE IT, I BELIEVE THAT IS WHAT IT MEANS. COMMON DEFENSE I BELIEVE COVERS ALL NECESSARY DEFENSE AND IT TOO IS NOT NARROWLY DEFINED EITHER AND THUS LEAVES IT TO CONGRESS TO PROVIDE IT AS THEY DETERMINE NECESSARY, AS ALSO THE CASE WITH THE GENERAL WELFARE. IF THE FOUNDING FATHERS DECIDED NOT TO DEFINE IT MORE SPECIFICALLY OR A GIVE IT A NARROWER DEFINITION THEY THEN CHOSE TO LEAVE THE NARROWER DEFINITION TO CONGRESS. I ALSO BELIEVE THEY DID NOT MEAN DEFENSE AND WELFARE AS PERTAINING TO THE SAME ISSUES AS THEY DEFINITELY HAVE VERY DIFFERENT MEANINGS BOTH GENERALLY AND SPECIFICALLY AND THEREFORE CANNOT BE CONSTRUED TO MEAN THAT. THESE ARE MY VIEWS. I APPRECIATE YOUR RESPECT OF THEM, AGAIN THANKS FOR GIVING YOUR BELIEFS, FEELINGS AND THINKING ON THE ISSUES.

    • Jeep

      Okay, let’s go with your “definition”. I believe what you are inferring is that it is the govts “right” as stated to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves.

      But, who are those tax payers that will fund this “right”? Last time I checked, are not the “rich” also American citizens? By your own definition providing tax dollars to the “poor” aids in their welfare. So, the opposite is true as well; the taking of earnings from any American (i.e. the rich) to give to the “poor” is impeding their welfare. Are you saying that the Constitution gives authority to the govt to inhibit the welfare of some?

      And, does the govt decide what is a proper level of subsistance? Where does that authority come from? I believe that common sense would dictate clearly that any type of “redistribution” by definition hurts the welfare of some. Would you argue that the rich are not covered by this clause? Or, that it is such a “wide definition” that the fed govt can just do what it wants?

      • Smilee

        Jeep says:
        April 12, 2010 at 8:36 am

        JEEP, THE CONGRESS WAS GIVEN THAT POWER THAT WAS MY POSITION I DID NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUES YOU RAISE, YES, COMMON SENSE SHOULD PREVAIL, CHANGING CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD AS WELL, YOU FORGET THERE IS A LOT MORE SUBSIDY GIVEN TO THE RICH IN TERMS OF TOTAL DOLLARS THAN THE POOR AND PROPORTIONALLY THE RICH PAY LESS IN TAXES THAN ALL OTHERS. FAR LOWER WAGES AND BENEFITS PAID TO TODAY ARE FAR LOWER THAN YEARS AGO IN TERMS OF PURCHASING POWER AND THEY NO LONGER ARE SUFFICIENT IN MANY CASES TO PROVIDE A LIVING WAGE AND THIS WAS A LOT THE MOTIVE FOR MANY CHANGES IN THE NINETIES AN EXAMPLE BEING THE EARNED INCOME CREDIT THAT YOU QUALIFY FOR ONLY IF YOU HAVE EARNED INCOME TO SUBSIDIZE THOSE LOW WAGES AND BENEFITS SO I BELIEVE IT COULD BE ARGUED THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS SUBSIDIZING THE WAGES AND BENEFITS OF A LARGE SHARE OF THE LOW PAID WORKERS AND THAT OF COURSE LEAVES MORE MONEY INT THE HANDS OF THE EMPLOYERS OR MANAGEMENT IN CORPORATIONS WHICH IS INDIRECTLY AVAILABLE TO THEM BECAUSE OF THAT AND THEY ARE TYPICALLY MUCH BETTER OFF FINANCIALLY AND SOME VERY RICH AND IT ALSO HAS BEEN ONE OF THE CHIEF REASONS OF THE REDISTRIBUTION OF THE WEALTH IN AN UPWARD PROJECTORY OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS. TODAY YOU HEAR A LOT OF SCREAMING OF THE REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH BUT IN FACT IT IS JUST REVERSING THE WEALTH DISTRIBUTION OVER THE LAST THIRTY YEARS AND ISN’T INTERESTING THAT THOSE WHO SCREAM ABOUT THE POOR BENEFITING FROM IT NEVER WERE AGAINST IT WHEN IT WAS THE RICH BENEFITING FROM IT, YOU SAID:

        I believe that common sense would dictate clearly that any type of “redistribution” by definition hurts the welfare of some. … Would you argue that the rich are not covered by this clause? Or, that it is such a “wide definition” that the fed govt can just do what it wants?

        I WOULD AGREE WITH THE FIRST SENTENCE BUT NOT THE SECOND AS THE LAST THIRTY YEARS THE RICH WERE THE RECIPIENTS IN MANY GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS AT A LOT LARGER DOLLAR AMOUNT OF BENEFITS THAN THE POOR WHO RECEIVED BENEFIT FORM GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS, SO WHAT YOU SEE IS SOME REVERSAL OF THAT AND AN ATTEMPT TO PUT IN BACK IN BALANCE AS THE SHIFT OF WEALTH UPWARDS HAS PUT IT WAY OUT OF BALANCE AND IS A BIG PORTION OF OUR ECONOMY PROBLEMS TODAY IN THE EARLY EIGHTIES THE TOP 22% OF THE POPULATION SHARED THE TOP 1% OF THE WEALTH TODAY THE TOP 5% DO, THIS IS ABOUT THE SAME AS THE TWENTIES AND IS ALSO THE GREATEST POOR TO RICH WEALTH RATIO OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD TODAY. WITH SO MANY POOR PEOPLE TODAY AND GROWING WE RUN THE RISK OF BECOMING A THIRD WORLD CIVILIZATION IF WE DO NOT REVERSE THE WEALTH DISTRIBUTION. THE POWER TO DO IS SO IS GIVEN THE CONGRESS THAT POWER IS IN ARTICLE ONE SECTION EIGHT. Government is for “WE THE PEOPLE” AND I THINK THAT MEANS ALL THE PEOPLE NOT JUST THOSE WHO HAVE SUFFICIENT INCOME AND PAY THE TAXES, YOU INFER THAT THOSE THAT PAY THE TAXES SHOULD BE GIVEN GREATER POWERS OR BENEFITS. I BELIEVE THAT CONGRESS HAS THE POWER NOT THE GOVERNMENT AS THE GOVERNMENT ALSO INCLUDES THE EXECUTIVE AND THE JUDICIAL AND THIS ARTICLE IS CLEAR THAT POWER RESTS JUST WITH CONGRESS NO ONE ELSE. THAT’S WHY I FIND IT SO AMUSING WHEN THEY SAY OBAMA IS REDISTRIBUTING THE WEALTH WHEN HE DOES NOT HAVE THAT POWER, CONGRESS DOES BUT TODAY’S WORLD IS SO FILLED WITH HATERS OF THIS MAN IT IS HARD TO UNDERSTAND, ESPECIALLY WHEN I HAVE LIVED THROUGH 13 ADMINISTRATIONS AND NEVER HAVE I SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS BEFORE ALTHOUGH IT WAS QUITE BAD DURING THE CLINTON YEARS BUT BEFORE THAT THESE PERSONAL ATTACKS RARELY HAPPENED AND TO MY UTTER AMAZEMENT MANY PEOPLE TODAY WILL NOW BELIEVE THE PROPAGANDA AND RHETORIC. In MN A LOCAL TV INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER DID A REALITY CHECK ON MICHAEL BACHMANN’S INTERVIEW SHORTLY AFTER THE HEALTH CARE PASSED AND NOT ALL OF THE INTERVIEW WAS ON THAT BUT FIVE OF HER CLAIMS HE FOUND TO BE TOTALLY FALSE AND TWO MISLEADING BUT A FEW DAY LATER AT HE BACHAMNN/PALIN RALLY SHE MADE THE SAME STATEMENTS AND AGAIN THIS LAST SUNDAY ON ONE OF THE SUNDAY MORNING TALK SHOWS. THIS WOMAN BRAGS SHE IS A CHRISTIAN AND THERE IS NO WAY I WILL BELIEVE SHE DOES NOT KNOW SHE IS LYING AS SHE IS QUITE INTELLIGENT BUT IT IS HER RECKLESSNESS IN IN ADDITION TO HER LYING, WE DEPLORE. FOR THESE REASONS I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ONE I CITED ABOVE. YOU APPEAR TO ME TO HAVE A PREJUDICE AGAINST THE POOR AS YOU SEEM TO BE OK WITH WELFARE FOR THE RICH AND THE CORPORATIONS AND THIS WELFARE EXISTS BIG TIME UNDER THE GUISE OF SUBSIDY, GRANTS AND INFLUENCE THE RICHES SPENDING HABITS. BUT DO NOT CALL IT BY ITS REAL NAME, WELFARE REMEMBER TARP, BIG TIME WELFARE TO THE RICH BUT MOST EXPERTS BELIEVE IT WAS FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE OF ALL OF US AND PREVENTED A REAL DEPRESSION AND I THINK THEY ARE CORRECT AND NOW THEY NEED FOLLOW UP REGULATIONS TO PREVENT IT IN THE FUTURE. WILL THEY BE THAT SMART??

        • Jeep

          We could argue the finer points of your assessment of who is helped more, and by whom. Perhaps it is true that the top earners have been the recipients of the greater portion of the largess of govt handouts, but that is to miss the point. My interpretation is that any singling out is wrong. And, if you indeed agree with my statement that to help some, others must suffer, I can only say, “Huh?” How is it, then that you side with those that historically decided as you, and not side with others that hold my view.

          And, let me correct one thing, I did not mean to infer that those who pay higher taxes should be given more power. However, if that is the case, then by going down this current “redistribution” we are now empowering those who do not pay taxes. Either way, in this view someone will be receiving more “power”. I see a danger in either side being empowered, the “rich” will take advantage of the “poor”, or the “poor” will try to live off of the “rich”. The rest of my point is simple, I also hear the other side demonizing the rich, well, darn it, the rich are citizens too. Some seem to think that the rich are some figment that can be called whatever, and thrown to the wolves at our leisure.

          Look, and speaking strictly from a personal point of view, I grew up on a small ranch in Az where my father with 7 kids never made much money, but was quite content. I have since worked my own way up to what the president has defined as “rich” (over 250k). Except for my VA house loan this was all done without govt asst. This is where I have a problem with others in this country. If I can do it, so can anyone else.

  • Shawnee Brittan

    I am a cousin of David Crockett and I enjoyed your article.

  • Rowdy

    We have to enact legislation allowing the citizens to form an oversight committee that has power to administer lie detector tests to any and all politicians past, present, and future to determine if they are acting or have acted in a manner befitting the betterment of the United States of America by upholding the Constitution, and the rights of American citizens. If they have not or are not, they should be removed from office and/or if retired still be subjected to an investigation to determine the degree of their transgressions. After this determination they should be punished for their crimes against their country by stripping them of any retirement benefits, health care benefits, monetary gains as a result of their term of office, banned from holding office ever again and deported from our country. All in proportion to the degree of their guilt. All politicians from that day forward would be subject to that test and again at any time randomly to ensure their dedication to performing their assigned jobs in a diligent manner for their country not for themselves. We would very soon have a much lighter tax burden and a much improved government operation.

  • Jeep

    “I ALSO BELIEVE THEY DID NOT MEAN DEFENSE AND WELFARE AS PERTAINING TO THE SAME ISSUES…”

    I will let a guy who has a little more knowledge on the subject answer that one.

    “Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction.”

    James Madison, 1788

    You can read the rest of Madison’s explanation by following JeffH’s link. But, I hope you do not plan to argue with the fourth President of the United States on that one.

    “…MUCH MORE THAN THE FOUNDING FATHERS GAVE US GUIDANCE IN…”

    Our founders gave us lots of guidance, you just have to look.

    • Jeep

      Smilee says:
      April 11, 2010 at 11:32 pm

      This post should have gone under here…sorry.

    • Smilee

      JEEP

      I UNDERSTAND THAT AND THAT WAS HIS VIEW, THERE WERE OTHERS IN HIS TIME THAT DID NOT SHARE HIS VIEW AS WELL THAT COULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED GUIDANCE BUT THAT IS ALL IT IS, THEIR WRITINGS AND THE FEDERALIST PAPERS WERE JUST THAT AND DO NOT CHANGE THE LAW AND WHEN THERE IS OPPOSING VIEWS EVEN IN THAT DAY THE PREVAILING VIEW IS THE CONSTITUTION AND THE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS INTERPRETING IT NOTHING ELSE IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS IF RELEVANT. SO MANY TODAY TO ADVANCE THEIR DESIRED INTERPRETATIONS ARE GREAT ABOUT QUOTING MANY OPINIONS OF THAT DAY AND THEY FAIL TO UNDERSTAND OR DO NOT CARE THAT THEY ARE NOT THE LAW. HISTORY AND PRECEDENT ARE ALSO REFERENCES AND THERE IS A LOT OF BOTH SINCE MADISON LIVED. THE TERM SETTLE LAW MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU?? MANY LAWS HAVE ALSO REACHED THAT STATUS SINCE HE LIVED. IT IS NOT THAT HIS WRITINGS CANNOT STILL BE GUIDANCE BUT IF ONLY THEY CAN JUST AS EASILY FIND HIS VIEWS IRRELEVANT TODAY AND OF NO GUIDNCE.

      • American Citizen

        The writings tell us the intent behind the laws.

  • Jeep

    Yeah, I understand “settled law”. However, the doctrine of stare decisis is not always to be relied upon. As with so many other things in life, it simply depends on your point of view. I could argue that since the Constitution was ratified and the Supreme Court was created by it, which came first? The interpretation, or the writing? There is the obvious answer, and then the interpretation. We could go ’round and ’round this mulberry tree all day. But, just like you would argue that “general welfare” means that congress can do what it pleases, I would argue that “general welfare” means that congress must support everyone equally. And, as congress agrees with you for the moment, I would hope that the people would vote in a congress that would agree with me. (At which time I would argue vehemently for “settled law”, just kidding.)

    • American Citizen

      If “general welfare” means that Congress must support each of us equally, then each of us should equally be taxed. Does that work for you?

      In my opinion, providing for the general welfare means they must provide and defend the freedoms listed to each of us equally. In other words, stay out of our lives and let us seek the opportunities this country has to offer on our own. The Constitution does not say it has to give us happiness, only the pursuit of happiness.

  • LazarusUnbound

    I see a whole lot of comments here critical of the Democratic party, as if they were the lone creators of the budgetary mess we have now and the political situation wwe work within. Well, BULL SH/T! Your beloved ‘conservatives’ and the rest of the republican party flunkies have been doing the same for decades! Both the dems and reps have had the corner on politics for almost a century now and the laws are set up to help them keep it that way. The problem is that no one paid any attention as one abuse of power after another was winked at by ‘the people’ if they paid any attention at all. Now, all of a sudden, EVERYTHING is Obama’s fault, or liberal’s fault, or the democrats. The plain truth is that the fault is YOUR OWN !!! How many of you voted for 3rd party candidates or donated to them? How many of you protested against undeserved and unwarranted congressional pay increases? How many of you protest against political parties using the practices, language, and propaganda of the same type as Josef Boebbels? Most of you are so conned you use the language of fascism but are too ignorant to recognize it- homeland indeed! And every day you grease up your heinies for some new outrage, which is acceptable to you if packaged properly. It is YOU who has created this 2 party monster- 2 parties with one single head- the dollar provided by the rich or corporate powers. The only way you will fix ANY of this is to defang the 2 monsters you have already created so the other little parties can get strong enough to affect a congressional vote. All the rest is just more yakking and non-action that leaves ‘We the People’ powerless to affect our fates or to control our government. Anyone with an ‘us and them’ mentality when it comes to our politics has already sold out to a party or big money. If you elect reps and senators who aren’t campaigning FOR AMERICA but for their party then it is YOU who has sold out. And if you are so blind as to accord everything that is wrong with the party you dislike but view your party through rose colored glasses then you are a child undeserving of a vote or else you have been so propagandized as to be worthless to the nation. I can’t emphasize enough how stupid republicans look when everything the president proposes gets some idiotic propaganda label from you like ‘Obamacare’. How many other things have been connected to him in such a moronic way? Why do you permit your party to inflict propaganda on the American people? The people you supposedly want to succeed and get better educations? From what I’ve seen it can be counted on that if the republicans name something then it’s real purpose will be the exact opposite of what the name says- ‘No Child Left Behind’ and ‘Patriot Act’. HA! What is lovingly referred to as ‘neo-conservatives’ in the republican party would be much more accurately described as crypto neo-nazis as they have nothing to do with what Reagan would term ‘conservative’ and a lot in common with the nazi party of the 1930s. If you don’t believe me then do a study and compare. The democratic party engages in the same practices as the republican party but in nowhere near the same degree.
    Like I said, break the power of the 2 monsters and we have a fair chance of regaining the republic for the American people. Keep on voting for them and you’ll see us stuck in the same jams on your dying day-and so will your kids- and so will their kids and so on…

    • keith

      quit passing the buck.we are speaking of NOW!the past is past and water under the sewer.it’s time to quit the friggen blame game b.s.damn can’t you see what they’re doing NOW!!!!get your head out your ass and the mind will follow.it’s time for action NOW,thats all you morons can do,rather than focus on how screwed up your party is,you try and justify what they’re doing by pointing fingers like a 2 year old.IT’S TIME TO FIX THIS SH*T THIS NOV!!!!!!!!

  • LazarusUnbound

    That should be Josef Goebbels! sorry!

  • http://cboye.wordpress.com katz

    So are you all in favor of disbanding the Air Force?

  • http://forcefactoralert.weebly.com Shelby Pensiero

    I certainly pray that the us government deals with this particular tragedy better than they did with hurricane Katrina. Having made it through a flood personally, I will tell you it can often be truly devestating. Even if you’re fortunate enough to have the means to be able to replace any material posessions, there are always some important things that dollars cannot restore. My heart genuinely is out to those men and women and they’re in my thoughts and prayers.

  • Doug Wynn

    Looks like I found this late. Once I read it I took for ever to relocate the article. This is an eye opener. After reading this I am going to write my representatives living fat on the hill every time they give money to a foreign nation. An example is giving money to our enemy the Japanese after the Tsunami, or helping the Muslim refugees in Africa. If you take the time to read Congressman Crockett’s full speech I am sure you will enjoy it as much as I have.

  • Chouteau

    The federal governments authority and responsibility to Gov public money for charity, to tax and to redistribute wealth appears in several places, including the preamble, in which the Founders said that one reason they were creating a federal government was to “promote the general welfare.” Promote means advance. General means all. Welfare means health, happiness, well-being.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.