As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text. Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.
As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text. Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.
And we thought that Joe Biden was the blooper king. It looks like Michelle Obama can give the Vice President a run for the money on faux pas leadership.
As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text. Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!
As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text. Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!
The 111th Congress did not respect the rules. It did not uphold the Constitution. The health-care bill was bribed into law. Tax cheats like Rangle and Geithner held positions of authority! The president ridicules the Bible.
John Adams said that anyone who works against the establishment of the Ten Commandments in society is working against freedom and civilization.
Liberals hate the Ten Commandments. Conservatives love the Ten Commandments. Why would I want to be a liberal?
~ Victoria Jackson, in this column ~
Victoria had a lot to say today that I believe to be right on the money. Throw in the video of AlfonZo Rachel of Macho Sauce Productions, and this is the perfect column to start with in 2011! I was going to put this one on my Cross Tribe Network blog, but decided not to since this column also involves a political discussion involving Conservatives and Liberals.
I am not "religious." The word "religion" is taken from the Greek word "re-ligio," and it means "to bind back to God." Works for salvation. Religions teach works for salvation. Christianity does not. The Bible says, "For by grace are you saved through faith and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast" (Ephesians 2:8,9).
I've always seen the world as saved and lost. We, the saved are supposed to tell the lost the truth, the message, so they can be saved from destruction. One optimistic Christian I know calls the unsaved, "pre-Christians."
After my political awakening, I see America as liberals and conservatives. We the conservatives must tell the liberals the truth, the message, so that together we can save our country from destruction. Liberals are just "pre-conservatives."
It's funny, but the lost and the liberals seem to be the same group. Both resist God and His ways.
I know a few liberals who claim to be Christians, but they won't discuss abortion or the gay army or any of the issues. They retain a smug, superior face and tight lips.
Before I even read this column, I was having some questions. At some time I hope to write about those questions, but not now, not here.
Ummm.... okay, I lied. There is one question I had that needs to be written about here as it does relate directly to this column by Henry Lamb. I was wondering if I should really be worrying about the radical left? The reason I asked that question is because I wondering to myself (until just now), "If the radicals on the left - bluntly, the Marxists - were to be in actual control of this country, would We the People be able to take back the United States of America?"
So, are my fears justified? They probably are. And I feel good because I do know that I am not alone, I know that many people comprehend the grave danger facing this country and that jeopardizes our liberty.
I am encouraged to know that there are people like Henry Lamb, and many others, that have the courage to keep informing us. It helps to know that I do not stand alone. I know that there is a storm coming, but I am not afraid to face it. No, make that, WE are not afraid to face it! Just sayin'.... Proud Socialists March at Left-Wing Protest in DC
Marxists influenced the direction of government excessively during the Wilson administration, the Roosevelt administration and since the Clinton administration. Obama and his cadre of Marxists czars, along with the Democratic majority in Congress, have turned up the heat on advancing his Marxist agenda. The Democrats and the Marxist organizations gathered at the Lincoln Memorial last week will do whatever is necessary to prevail in every election they can, and then enact every Marxist scheme they can during the lame-duck session of Congress.
Never have the Marxists been this close to completely "transforming the United States of America," as Obama so proudly predicted. Never has it been so important to turn out the Democrats in Congress and replace them with candidates who honor and respect the U.S. Constitution, free markets, private property and individual freedom.
The recent gathering at the Lincoln Memorial was nothing less than an enormous, nationally televised coming-out party for closet Marxists. Washington watchers have long known about the love affair between the Marxists in America and other major political forces. Here are a few of the organizations that are marching, lock-step, in support of the Democratic majority that is advancing a Marxist agenda:
Communist Party USA (CPUSA)
Democratic Socialists of America
Committee of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism
The Democrats and their coalition of Marxist organizations say the Reid-Pelosi Marxist majority must be returned to Congress because the Republicans will return to the "failed policies of the past" and run the "economy into the ditch" again.
Any honest analysis of why the economy ran into the ditch has to begin with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, promoted by the Carter administration and many of the organizations that "came out" last weekend. The purpose of the law was to make it easier for low-income families to get mortgages.
Marxists, of course, believe that adequate housing is a right, and that government has the responsibility to see that every person has adequate housing. The Clinton administration, goaded on by many of the organizations that "came out" last weekend, lowered the credit requirements to the point that NINJNAs (No Job, No Income, No Assets) were buying upscale houses all over the country with what were called "subprime" mortgages. To his credit, George W. Bush tried in vain to tighten the regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but Democrats Charles Schumer and Barney Frank led the charge to defeat tighter controls.
It was clearly the failed policies of the Democrats and their Marxist buddies who ran the economy into the ditch, not eight years of the Bush administration.
Speaker after speaker last week railed against corporations that out-sourced jobs to foreign countries. They fail to recognize that it is their failed policies that force corporations to find less expensive production costs.
Environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity and hundreds of others constantly force production costs upwards by lobbying for ever-stronger environmental regulations that virtually stop land use and require reams of scientific and technical reviews to meet Environmental Impact Statement requirements. These regulatory costs rarely improve the environment, and since they are not required in other countries, corporations are drawn away from America.
Labor unions drive wage and benefit costs up year after year, without concern for the financial impacts or whether there are sufficient sales to cover the costs. This is what killed the U.S. auto industry. This, along with excessive environmental and social regulatory costs, is what has killed the entire American manufacturing industry. These are the failed policies that are dragging the American economy into the ditch, not eight years of the Bush administration. This ever-increasing cost of production doesn't exist in other countries; these Marxist policies force industry to leave the U.S.
Marxists claim they believe in non-discrimination, equality for everyone. That is, everyone but the rich.
Marxists believe in discrimination against the rich. Marxists believe that the rich should be penalized and forced to pay a higher tax rate than everyone else.
In Maryland, a man faces a staggering 16 years in prison after he posted a YouTube video of his interaction with a state trooper. The trooper, driving an unmarked car (in other words, not driving an obvious law-enforcement vehicle) and not wearing a uniform, cut in front of Anthony Graber (who is a Maryland Air National Guard sergeant), brandished a gun and yelled at Graber – all before identifying himself as a police officer.
Phil Elmore brings up the rising number of state and local governments that are making the video taping of authorities - mainly police officers in the process of making an arrest - illegal. This opens up a number of questions. Will elected officials like Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) finally decide that they no longer want to be seen by the world on youtube? I am sure that Rep. Pete Stark thinks that could be done, being that he thinks the federal government can do anything it wants to:
Rep. Pete Stark at Town Hall Meeting in California
The point is, Big Brother has surveillance of We the People in place to keep an eye on us. Should we be restricted from being able to keep an eye on the police or any other public official? As long as people with video cams are not interfering with official police actions, there should be absolutely NO restrictions. I consider it a First Amendment right. It is the freedom of the press that has kept the government (supposedly) in line.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
We must have the ability to continue to monitor those in authority. Trying to use "wiretapping laws" as an excuse to prohibit the video camera from recording an incident is a big stretch, and it is doubtful that it would be considered Constitutional if tested in court. Just sayin'...
To preserve what remains of our free society, videotaping those in power when they operate in public (or in our homes) must be legal. It is the most effective way to help prevent abuses of power that would otherwise go unseen and unpunished. The danger presented to law-enforcement officers' safety, or to their efficacy as agents of our government, is negligible, in my opinion. The loss to every one of us should we give up the right to record police does far greater damage to society and to the individuals it comprises.
While I would never adopt the leftist, authoritarian attitude that, "If you've got nothing to hide you should welcome Big Brother looking over your shoulder for your own good," this isn't about public surveillance of free citizens. It's about providing a check on the otherwise unbridled power of law enforcement officers to abuse their considerable discretion when nobody is looking. It's about keeping honest the men and women who are empowered to exercise authority – and force in the name of authority – over their fellow free citizens. It's about watching the watchmen through the unblinking and unbiased eye of a camera lens.
Recently, I watched an online "viral" video in which a protester holding an "Impeach Obama" sign was roughed up by security personnel at a state fair. While the protester certainly was manhandled, the force used might or might not have been justified. I pictured a jury at the man's trial watching the video as evidence. Did the man's actions warrant the force he received? Did he give the security officers provocation? What about the context for the incident? And what do the security people have to say about it all – the people who, when they saw they were being videotaped, asked the cameraman to shut off his machine?
To his credit, that cameraman's answer was an immediate and emphatic "No." He was not going to be bullied into letting those in authority do whatever they liked behind metaphorical closed doors. What that cameraman may not have thought to ask himself, however, is this: Could he be charged with a crime for recording the protester's arrest? Just what are the consequences for filming someone in public – specifically, for filming a police officer in public?
As the technology to record video becomes ever more accessible and less expensive, the prevalence of handheld video cameras (often in the form of wireless phones) has increased dramatically. Public surveillance by our government has increased, too, and we as Americans must contend with the shadow of Big Brother looming larger over us with each passing day. The good thing about video, however, is that it makes no judgments, provided it is not edited in bad faith or filmed from a compromising angle. A video of an incident tells the truth about what happened more accurately than any eyewitness can relate. So why are more and more law enforcement and government officials trying to make criminals of citizens who record encounters with police?
The Chicago Tribune asks, "Police record citizens. Why not the other way around?" The Tribune story points out that Chicago has one of the largest networks of surveillance cameras in the country. In Illinois, however, it's illegal to record the police – even if you're trying to gather evidence of police wrongdoing. If you try it, you could be arrested and charged with a felony. This is because in Illinois both parties must consent to the recording of a conversation ... unless one of those parties is a police officer.
With the Gulf of Mexico quickly becoming an oil bath, I think it's time to lighten things up a little today.
And speaking of Oilbamagate, why haven't they figured out how to plug the hole yet? For heaven's sakes, why haven't they tried filling the hole with ABC gum? Even Obama's kids knew that! And all this to interrupt yacht races and... oh, yeah, Obama's golf game with Joe Biden. Hmmm....
And then there is the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010. Why aren't more people talking about that threat to our freedom? Joe Lieberman wants to give President Oilbama the "Kill Twitter Switch!" Wait, I thought they already had that. Enough with the stupid whale already! And even worse, AG Eric Holder wants to use the Act to kill the Mafia Wars on Facebook before Costra Nostra takes over the country... (He obviously doesn't want to follow in J. Edgar Hoover's footsteps!)
Well, in the meantime, a new issue has risen in the news cycle. It seems that there is a rising threat of vuvuzela terrorism going on at the World Cup soccer tournament in South Africa. A friend of mine that lives in South Africa tells me that people keep thinking that they are hearing swarms of bees... That can't be good. And then there's the threat of a looming worldwide AIDS epidemic because of people blowing each others vuvuzela. Quick, somebody call WHO! Ban the vuvuzela now before this becomes another Illuminati NWO conspiracy theory! Never mind, Alex Jones has it covered...
And speaking of the vuvuzela... I had no idea what it was. It all started with my friend on twitter on Friday, when TXCupCaketweeted "If you don't follow these tweeps, I'll be forced to blow my vuvuzela at you!..." Huh? Yep, I had to ask... I haven't been following the World Cup soccer thing, (ever!)... And I received the answer quickly from TXCupCake: "@johnny2k Let me warn you.... it's the most annoying (sic) noise in the world... (aside from Hilary Clinton's laugh)http://www.vuvuzela.fm/"
Now that we have all of the severely serious (or is that seriously severe?) stories out of the way, it's time for my Fathers' Day giftto lighten up your day, DAD! Now, this is what I call entertainment for my father (and even if he has no idea who Gandalf is, he shouldn't feel bad, because I don't have a clue, either!):
Gandalf Goes to the World Cup
June 18, 2010 — The fellowship of the vuvuzela! Middle Earth is preparing for the World Cup.
A Democrat congressman from Illinois says when it comes to the health-care reform plan adopted by Congress and signed into law by President Obama, he just doesn't concern himself with what the Constitution requires.
The comment came in a heated exchange recorded recently between Rep. Phil Hare, D-Ill., and constituents.
While being pressed on the complications of the "Obamacare" plan, as critics have dubbed it, he was asked, "Where in the Constitution?"
"I don't worry about the Constitution on this to be honest," Hare said.
Instead, he said, he worries about peoples' lives:
"It's people's lives. It's people's children. It's when you take your child to the hospital and you think it's really bad and your heart is thumping, thumping, thumping while you're waiting for the doctor to tell you what it is and then the doctor comes out and says it's going to be ok, except you don't have insurance and you're stuck with a $10 or $15,000 bill. …"
When the congressman stated he doesn't concern himself with the Constitution, one of the constituents muttered, "Jackpot, brother."
"I care more about the people that are dying every day that don't have health insurance," Hare said.
Posts
