Senator Tells Public to start Protesting on the Streets

reply to post by TypeSH2001



Yeah there is a strike call for third week in March 13-19 and to go to DC on the 21st to let them know we are not happy. It's a major for redress on the Govt.

They are calling for the end of the Fed Res. and I hope they push for exposure of the Cafr

Another 8000 earmarks in another bill for 410billion.

Have you had enough yet?

Car czar.
health czar.

etc.

This is unconstitutional!

Have you had enough yet?

Giving DC a congressman.

Giving DC two senators.


This is against the Constitution!

These are all just this week!


Have we had enough yet?

Feel that blood boiling inside?

Is something inside you trying to
tell you something?

Damn right.....................

reply to post by j2000

Another 8000 earmarks in another bill for 410billion. Have you had enough yet?

I certainly have had enough, but apparently Democrats have not. There are actually 9,000 earmarks in the new bill:

www.newsmax.com...

Obama's New Spending Bill Has 9,000 Earmarks Monday, February 23, 2009 9:29 AM By: William Douglas and David Lightman, McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — During the 2008 presidential campaign, candidates Barack Obama and John McCain fought vigorously over who would be toughest on congressional earmarks. "We need earmark reform," Obama said in September during a presidential debate in Oxford, Miss. "And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely." President Barack Obama should prepare to carve out a lot of free time and keep the coffee hot this week as Congress prepares to unveil a $410 billion omnibus spending bill that's riddled with thousands of earmarks, despite his calls for restraint and efforts on Capitol Hill to curtail the practice. The bill will contain about 9,000 earmarks totaling $5 billion, congressional officials say. Many of the earmarks — loosely defined as local projects inserted by members of Congress — were inserted last year as the spending bills worked their way through various committees. So while Obama and McCain were slamming earmarks on the campaign trail, House and Senate members — Democrats and Republicans — were slapping them into spending bills. "It will be a little embarrassing for the president if he signs a bill with that many earmarks on it," said Stan Collender , a veteran Washington budget analyst. "He'll say they're left over from the Bush years, and he as to say that next year the bill will be clean." Experts agree that most earmarks are legitimate. Cary Leahey , senior economist with Decision Economics in New York , said the nation's economic crisis is a contributing factor to the plethora of earmarks. Lawmakers can argue that for a relatively small price they've helped boost the economy. "One congressman's earmark is another legislative way to fix a serious problem in his district," Leahey said. Kenneth Thomas , a lecturer in finance at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of business, agrees. "I generally believe that the priority is getting money into the system sooner rather than later, especially if it's for projects that will use local contractors and create jobs," he said. Still, it wasn't supposed to be this way. Earmarks have come under fire because of those that seem to provide what Maya MacGuineas , president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, calls "laugh lines," such as Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere" or North Dakota's Lawrence Welk Museum . Obama pledged to take a hard hand on earmarks and warned lawmakers in a Feb. 3 letter from Budget Director Peter Orszag not to decorate the recently signed $787.2 billion stimulus bill with them. Democrats declared the bill earmark-free. Republicans disagreed. "While this bill does not include traditional earmarks, we should all understand that there are earmarks in this bill," said Sen. Mike Enzi , R- Wyo. "There is $850 million ... to bail out Amtrak , a $75 million earmark for the Smithsonian, a $1 billion earmark for the 2010 census." Democrats have been trying to revamp the earmark process for about two years. In 2007, they instituted a system that required members to explain the contents of each earmark, as well as a justification for why it was included in the legislation that way. They claimed this led to a reduction in earmarks by as much as 43 percent. But critics contended the system still had problems. Simply making information more available, they said, didn't address the major criticism: That such projects should go through the regular legislative process, subject to detailed hearings and bipartisan votes. Not only does this mean the public has no chance to challenge questionable spending, but too often powerful interests who know how to work the system get favorite measures inserted. For instance, Congressional Quarterly reported recently that more than 100 House members got earmarks for clients of the PMA Group , a lobbying firm with close ties to Rep. John Murtha , D- Pa. , who heads the powerful defense spending subcommittee. The CQ Politics analysis said that in the 2009 defense spending bill, which Congress approved last year, PMA clients got about $300 million . The CQ study came after reports that the FBI is investigating the possibility of illegal campaign contributions by PMA to Murtha and other lawmakers. A Murtha spokesman said earlier this month that the FBI probe has nothing to do with Murtha. A PMA spokesman declined to comment on the probe. Appropriations committee chairmen say they are on track to reform the earmark process beginning in fiscal 2010 by requiring members to make public their requests early, so the public can scrutinize them and presumably contact lawmakers. The change, though, doesn't apply to the 2009 funding that Congress will consider next week

People are starting to wake up because everything that the govt has thrown at our problems has done nothing. Even though Bernancke says it'll be fine by the end of the year, uhm.. it won't.

Someone has robbed the US blind and no one is going to jail for it.

If your congressmen are telling you to take to the streets and protest, it might be time to consider doing so.

Just sayin'

reply to post by xman_in_blackx

Someone has robbed the US blind and no one is going to jail for it.

The rich rarely go to jail. Bernie Madoff ripped of thousands of people to the tune of over $50 Billion, and he's merely told to stay in his multi-million dollar penthouse. What a punishment!

AIG gets $85 Billion of taxpayer money, then turns around the next day and sends their executives to a spa in California, with massages, makeovers, etc. What a punishment.

An executive who oversaw a company going bankrupt, works for 17 days, and gets tens of millions of dollars in a "Golden Parachute" for 17 days work.
What a punishment.

Who gets punished? The Lower and middle class taxpayers, who pay for all of these atrocious "punishments".

This is not a democracy, it is an aristocracy of the rich.

Someday, hopefully soon, these crooks will pay for their crimes against the taxpayers. That day cannot come soon enough.

Originally posted by j2000
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

 

Here a pig, pig, there a pig, pig,

eegh I eegh I oooooohhhhhhhhhh!

Hey now . . . leave us alone.

As I said in other posts, I email the votestrike.com as they said they would send free flyers to pass out. I asked them how many flyers one could get.
These folks are Serious about getting the Govt. back to the Constitution.

we try to post strike updates as quickly as we get them. they can be found at
votestrike.sosblogs.com... and votestrike.webs.com...

we do need as many people as possible re posting these updates to their myspace, facebook, etc pages and to their blogs

we can ship as many flyers as you need but need a mailing address

welcome to the struggle, have no illussions about what you are in for- dr king was arrested during peaceful demonstrations and it took more than 1 boycott/1 protest to succeed

reply to post by j2000
I just found this post and am amazed at the prescience of the posts and Sen. DeMint!

Looking back 7 months later, the OP was exactly on point.

s&f

jw

Originally posted by j2000
reply to post by ziggy1706

 

You are right.
But there is a better way. If one could organize it a little better.

More like a Parade that stops at the door so to speak.

If you can focus the energy, it would be very powerful.

I would like to see people marching in squads like the millitary and doing cadence songs for the message.

It would be controlled, peaceful, but still give them that funky feeling in their gut like they should listen.

Or maybe a"Tea Party?"

Who would've guessed!

jw

Originally posted by j2000
OH today was a big relief.

Bernake came out and said it was all over.
The stock market came up today.
So I guess there is no need to assemble and take back out country.
No reason whatso ever to go back to the Constitution.
As long as we can buy more "Stuff", the Govt can take our other rights away.

Yeah Right! A-holes!

and what happened the next month?

Dow 8,100!

where's consumer spending today?

hell, where's consumers?!

As I've just mentioned in another thread, this is a good method of getting attention.
But, I would say you need to do this not for the benefit of those in power, but for your fellow Americans to see.

The state controlled media will not report on it, so advertise yourselves. If this is happening up and down the country, it gets coverage through word of mouth.

It takes £40 and a little time to set up a website, a few hours and a little cost of printing to hit the universities. It's free to contact civil liberty groups and truly independent press on the net and advertise the event.

But, you need to act on this in accordance with everything else. You need to start a movement to boycott the propaganda press. You need to harass your regional leaders for an adequate response to questions. You need to encourage discussion about a third and fourth party.

I agree with the gentleman, you all need to become activists, whether that's in opposition to banking bailouts, auditing the fed, proposals for secession, limiting federal powers... if you have an opinion, you need to be out there in the protest, not leaving it to someone else in the weak hope that they'll change things for you.