Comment
I never received a reply from Sen. Udall (I think that's how his name is spelled). Do you know where he stands, or has he run from the issue as well?
I agree, Bennet hid from Colorado during the Healthcare debate. The ATP even did a signed petition drive and delivered it to their office. Most of this really fealt futile since he wasn't even around for the debate. One of the only things that caught the attention of politicians and news media were the days that we performed opperation avalanche and buried the capital in mail, calls, and visits. When the servers at the capital crashed and there was a line of thousands outside the capital to speak to their congressman we got some notice and recogniton to the debate.
Frederick, I recently wrote a letter to both of our state senators asking that they support the repealing of the healthcare law. So far, only Bennett has responded. I cited Constitutional reasons why this law should not stand. His responses was diluted with typical liberal rhetoric: "Our state needs it ... we have lots of poor families ... it would cost the country more to repeal it than to keep it."
He also cited the CBO's calculations, which are not an accurate reflection of the true costs, as the CBO deliberately omits the costs of enforcing the law via the IRS and grossly underestimates the numbers to favor the law. Bennett seems to believe that the CBO under this administration is not biased in anyway, kind of like the Attorney General isn't supposed to be biased. We know how that's working out.
Nevertheless, Bennett was clearly not in a position to logically consider the facts (The Cato Institute is a great place to start with regard to the real costs of healthcare). We should really concentrate on removing Senators and Congressmen who do not understand or uphold Constitutional principles and law. Our legislators are the ones who have the real power to repeal this law. President Obama does need to go, too.
I agree that we should pin-point Obama's record. It seems that the evidence for grounds of impeachment is building. We should also consider bringing more light to those Obama has appointed, as well. Eric Holder has been a crucial player in attempting to erode our 2nd Amendment right. He has also subverted the 10th Amendment by denying states such as Texas the right to determine by which means they will hold elections and verify eligibility. There are also the numerous "czars" who were appointed in order to circumvent the legal process of law and policy making. Additionally, we have Secretary of Defense who seems to think that Obama only needs to consult with international powers (UN) to determine if we should go to war. This is a direct violation of the War Powers Act. These are the things we need to focus on.
I welcome your thoughts on this.
I think that we could incorporate some of the Alinsky articles in pin-pointing the focus to President Obama and his record. I also believe that Tom Tancredo's speech on the proceedings to impeach the President are right in target with that focus. By taking one of the most offensive attacks to the liberties of the people on the sale of weapons to the Cartel to facilitate future Brady Laws. We could also focus on the Heath Care Law if this is voted on by the Supreme Court this year. The only way to get the President Impeached and Remove him from office legally is to demand that these issues are discussed in the media and on the highest of political scales.
Randy,
You have done well to cite the above information.
The methods President Obama has utilized in his attempts to lead this country have added to the general downward economic trend. Prosperity is not built on redistribution, but on a principled work ethic. Private property cannot rightfully be taken from one man and given to another deemed to be more worthy or needy. Demanding that such measures be a part of America's benevolence is a contradiction to the very meaning of benevolence.
Furthermore, when the government picks winners it is also picking losers, as we see in the bailouts. This is not economic freedom, but manipulated markets under the coercive rule of a morally unauthorized government.
When I say morally unauthorized, I mean a government which does not adhere to the cornerstone of our nation -- the American Constitution.
What we seem to have is a President who sits in the highest office of this land, intentionally violating the paths of legislation required by our Constitution. He has belittled the spirit of freedom in his creation of czars in order to circumvent traditional legal paths. He has upset the balance of powers by appointing judges who are not loyal to our Constitution, and who would rule on the side of new tolerance and secular humanism in complete opposition to everything this great nation was built on. He has with deliberate intent rebelled, ignored, and defied the oath of his office which requires that he uphold the law -- our Constitution.
© 2024 Created by Chairman's Committee. Powered by
You need to be a member of Arapahoe Tea Party to add comments!
Join Arapahoe Tea Party