Monday, March 2, 2009

No Taxation Without Representation


Representation: The action or fact of one person standing for another so as to have the rights and obligations of the person(s) represented.

Represent:  To take the place of in some respect. To act in the place of or for usually by legal right. To Manage the legal and business affairs of.  To serve especially in a legislative body by delegated authority usually resulting from election.



The current taxation actions DO NOT fit within this scope.  As such, they are a violation of the constitution.  In order to make the current actions adhere to the constitution, we must redefine the word "representation".

Our governments current definition would have to be changed like this:

Representation(usgov):  Ignoring the will, needs, and rights of the people in order to pass a laundry list of agenda items that had previously not been allowed simply because you can now get enough votes.

The people are not being represented in these bills.  Sound economics are not present in these bills.  The constitution is not being upheld or protected by these bills.  Given that our Military is sworn to protect the constitution, it would be a great news day to see them storm the White House and Congress and clean up this mess they way the founders would have wanted.

No wonder they don't want the people to have a 2nd amendment.  The actions being taken by our government are getting increasingly close to what the 2nd amendment was designed to prevent.
Posted by Blog Friend at 8:26 AM

The Mortgage Crisis

The mortgage crisis could not have been an accident. The people that "approved" the mortgages KNEW that:

  1. Were going to have prohibitive payments in 12 to 24 months
  2. Were going to be on property worth far less than what they sold for within 12 to 24 months
  3. Would be forclosed on because they couldn't sell for the amount of the mortgage

Bankers blame it on homeowners making bad decisions or not having foresight. However, those bankers get very uncomfortable when you point out that these mortgage were all approved by bankers that get PAID to know the market and it's trends.

When you point out that regular people like you and I saw this coming back in 2004/2005, they start to tap their fingers and look around nervously.

The short answer is that they set us up and we don't know "why".

Mortgages traditionally require people prove they can make the payments even when the market is not headed down. The banks knew exactly what they were doing...

The Media On It's Knees

Why is it that the mainstream media is clamoring on their knees in front of Obama as if their unwarranted affection will somehow lower his zipper and give them what they so desperately seem to want?