Video: No Need For More Words.

 

H/T to Nevada County Tea Party Patriots for the link!

Advertisements

About Russ Steele
Freelance writer and climate change blogger. Russ spent twenty years in the Air Force as a navigator specializing in electronics warfare and digital systems. After his service he was employed for sixteen years as concept developer for TRW, an aerospace and automotive company, and then was CEO of a non-profit Internet provider for 18 months. Russ's articles have appeared in Comstock's Business, Capitol Journal, Trailer Life, Monitoring Times, and Idaho Magazine.

21 Responses to Video: No Need For More Words.

  1. Todd Juvinall says:

    I like the argument on the immorality of the debt and deficit. They are the most immoral acts we adults have perped on our children. America should be totally ashamed and reverse this destruction of the economy of our kids. How can we let this atrocity continue?

    • D. King says:

      It is amazing how little the left is concerned about savaging their prodigy with crippling debt and diminished rights.

  2. stevefrisch says:

    I am sorry…have you guys all forgotten who was primarily responsible for the high debt in this country? It was primarily Republican presidents. Reagan, Bush I, Bush II all oversaw increases in debt; with Clinton over seeing a decline and Obama an increase. However, the moral issue is an interesting one; we did not seem to have any moral issue with going into significant debt to win WWII–or win the cold war under Reagan as you claim–but we have a moral problem with increasing debt to deal with the most significant soul crushing economic crisis since the great depression?

    • D. King says:

      Thomas Sowell

    • Barry Pruett says:

      Steve: As you know, at least when we had budgets, the federal budget is created and enacted by Congress (we have not had a budget since Obama was elected and his proposals did not receive any votes). The debt problems have generally occurred during Democrat-controlled Congresses. Clinton had the benefit of a Republican Congress (Newt Gingrich) which led to a needed easing of exploding deficits and debt. To his credit, Clinton compromised and worked well with Republicans in enacting needed budgetary reforms.

      I will add that I agree that the Bush and Republicans strayed from their base and tried to buy an electorate like Democrats. It did not work, as this middle-right country started looking for someone else to lead. Since 2008, Americans rightfull tried a new course and did not find such leadership or ability to comprise (a la Clinton) from Obama.

      Americans are looking once again and are coalescing around Romney for such change. In Massachusetts, Romney (a Republican) exhibited a distinct ability to work with Democrats to enact legislation. Obama has demonstrated that he does not have the ability to work across party lines and instead practices the tradition of divisive and divided politics without any regard to the national debt.

      You know as well as I do, the Republican party circa 2000 is not the same as the Republican party today. “I like the argument on the immorality of the debt and deficit. They are the most immoral acts we adults have perped on our children. America should be totally ashamed and reverse this destruction of the economy of our kids.” Thanks Todd.

      We need to work on this together and have a leader dedicated to reversing the path of heaping destructive debt and deficits on our children. Obama had four years to change from this destructive path. He didn’t.

      • Todd Juvinall says:

        I am seeking input on the Frisch’s mindset from a psychiatrist to see what makes such a vacuous mind like his always blaming others for the problems of the country, Primarily Republicans. He is a zero sum game mentality and maybe that is a good place to start in my analysis of his gray matter. Just as the lefty nuts blame Bush for everything from debt to their corns, they never discuss 9/11 in a way that it affected the economy. They never carry through with their points. They just stop at, “it was Bush and the republicans” that did it momma. I wasn’t totally sure about the empty space between the ears of a liberal but now I am pretty sure it is true. Frisch proves it so well.

      • stevefrisch says:

        While you are at that shrink Todd you might want to ask him/her why you turned out to be a rude, belligerent, misogynistic bully?

        The fact speak for themselves…Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II did not veto those acts of Congress did they Barry? We have a government comprised of co-equal branches that balances power. They signed them into law. They negotiated them with Congress. The mark of Cain you lay on the forehead of the Democratic Congress is equally laid on the foreheads of Republican Presidents. You may want to deny that, but the people are smarter than that and know the real score.

        And for you to say that you want to “work on this together” while the strategy of the current Republican Congress has been nothing but obstruction is laughable.

        Ironically I support deficit reduction–but you are not going to get it if Romney is elected–you will get an equally obstructionist Democratic controlled Congress by 2014, and we will be right back where we started. You can’t govern through obstruction and expect anything less.

      • Barry Pruett says:

        Steve: You must have misunderstood what I was saying. I laid blame on both parties. If you remember correctly, Newt Gingrich and the Republicans dragged Clinton to the middle, and to Clinton’s credit, he made the move towards the right in order to work with others – healthy cooperation. Further and if you read farther in my post, Republicans have been equally guilty of debt explosions too.

        You say, “And for you to say that you want to ‘work on this together’ while the strategy of the current Republican Congress has been nothing but obstruction is laughable. ” During the Obama administration, Republicans have time and again reached out towards Obama and democrats for compromise and amendments to bills on key issues. Obama’s response was, “I won.” Not very congenial.

        “Ironically I support deficit reduction–but you are not going to get it if Romney is elected–you will get an equally obstructionist Democratic controlled Congress by 2014, and we will be right back where we started. You can’t govern through obstruction and expect anything less.”

        I hope that you are not condoning Democrat obstructionism?

        As I said before, Romney is the change that Obama promised in 2008. Romney will bring willing Democrats and Republicans together for reform much the same as he did in Massachusetts. Romney needs to take this message directly to the People much the same as Reagan and Clinton did. It is a center-right country. This country was founded upon freedom and limited government…the message resonated with the American people.

        I know that liberals are frustrated right now. They expected the march “forward” to occur and are frustrated that the majority of the American people think marching “forward” is the wrong philosophy. Americans prefer economic freedom and oppose trickle down government. Ttickle down government goes against the grain of Amercianism.

        I stand with you in opposing obstructionism though. We do need to work together, and an easy way to do that is to influence the American people to be on your side. That is exactly what we are doing.

      • stevefrisch says:

        Republicans have made use of the filibuster an art form. Not since 40 segregationists (about 30 of them Democrats to our shame) stood in the way of civil rights has it been used more effectively. If you think Democrats are going to forget that you are dreaming. 60 is the new 50. And if the price of deficit reduction is gutting social security, medicare and our environment to maintain a military that is 8 times stronger than its closest rival and fat tax cuts for the rich I will be standing outside the door of the Senate supporting them blocking a Romney revolution. More power to em.

      • Todd Juvinall says:

        Frisch, I am a kind and wonderful man. Everyone except you says that. I think you are the problem and need the mental help, not me.

      • Barry Pruett says:

        Steve: As far filibusters go, the filibuster use took a decided turn on 2001-2003 when Democrats for the first time ever filibuster the judicial nomination of Miguel Estrada (who had enough votes to be confirmed). Because he was part of the team that represented George Bush in Bush v. Gore, the Democrats destroyed his judicial career. Although a filibuster had been used in 1968 with Justice Fortas, Estrada’s was the first filibuster ever to be successfully used against a judicial nominee who had clear support of the majority in the Senate, and the first filibuster of any court of appeals nominee.

        While in law school, I wrote about this issue. I agree that the Senate can make its own rules in connection with legislation and legislation should be cooled by unlimited debate in the Senate. However, judicial nominations are constitutionally an executive function.

        In 2001-2003, Democrats through the filibuster caused the Senate to (for the first time) obtain a super-majority on the president’s executive appointments. Constitutionally, this is an unsound practice.

        The Democrats wrongfully opened this pandoras box, so they should not now complain about the inevitable consequences.

      • A history of the use of the filibuster by the minority party in one graph is enclosed:

        http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-history-of-the-filibuster-in-one-graph/2012/05/15/gIQAVHf0RU_blog.html

        I would argue that the use of the filibuster is an inherently flawed mechanism, but one with a long history under the rules of the House and the Senate. This is pretty strong graphic proof that its use has been mastered by the Republicans in modern times.

      • Barry Pruett says:

        The filibuster is an effective tool for the Senate to cool legislation. The Democrats wrongfully opened the pandoras box during Bush in connection with executive functions. To complain now is disingenuous…clearly you know this fact because you completely avoided my point.

      • Well Barry we simply have a difference of opinion over this one. The record clearly shows a MUCH higher use of the filibuster by the Republicans. I think it is clear to anyone that after McConnell said the number one goal of the Republicans was to make this President fail, the Republicans have used the filibuster to obstruct legislation, have refused to bargain in good faith, and have done so to seek political advantage rather than act in the best interest of the country. If Democrats do the same in the future…well, you asked for it.

      • Barry Pruett says:

        “If Democrats do the same in the future…well, you asked for it.” The pandora’s box was opened in 2001 by Democrats. Further, you do not need a filibuster when you are in control of the Senate. You just jam bills under the table and not vote on them, because you are afraid to take a position.

        For ther record, I do not have a problem with the filibuster in connection with legislation – just with judicial appointments and other executive functions. We just have a different opinion about the escalation and what triggered it. Good conversation.

  3. Arthur M. Day. says:

    The Devout Democrat’s mantra: Someone else is to blame for everything and I am responsible for nothing.
    There are some groups for which this position has some legitimacy. They include prisoners of war, hostages, the severly mentally impaired, and infants.
    Pick a group Mr. Frisch.

  4. stevefrisch says:

    By the way, what does it actually mean in the video when the presenters say they want to “protect American culture”? What the hell does that really mean boys?

    • Todd Juvinall says:

      American culture is a foreign concept to you? Amazing. How about the Bill of Rights and the Constitution? Unique documents that made America a unique place for people t come and be free? Then out of that we coalesced around those concepts and developed an American “way of life”. You and your ilk are why the country is splitting apart Frisch.

  5. RL Crabb says:

    In the interest of bipartisanship, I would like to agree with all of you. It truly is a contest between the inept and the insane. Vote Libertarian.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: