Just got off the phone with my congressman’s office. I’ll call both senators also if this bill makes it through the house!
Mike
Also called my congressman’s office, and followed up with an email, regarding H.R. 1207, and another bill he was speaking about on the floor this morning…
I don’t know if it was coincidence or if FDJake has pull in places we don’t know about, but out of the blue, guess who cold-called me today pushing the 2nd ammendment… the NRA! I joined a 2-year membership even though I don’t own a gun… They tried for 5-years at first, but gave up rather quickly and jumped to the 2-year… I guess this now confirms my non-liberal status… :biggrin
Since we seem to be keeping score on who does what… I am two ahead of you FDJake… better get crackin’ otherwise people will have to think you are a do nothing talker… :rolleyes
Nice job Positive!!!
You’re right…I better get going…The NRA AND A call to your Congressman…You DO have me beat…Who know’s you may have really started something here!!!
Nice work!!! And I mean that!!
Thanks for the info.I’m a multiple gun owner(I do live n alabama)and NRA member.We do need to protect all our rights since they seem to be under attack alot lately.I don’t know why any of most of what they are attacking has to do with the economy.Funny how that was the lead topic before election and it’s suddenly fallen by the waste to take care of making sure the world knows we don’t torture.I wonder if it was torture for a person to have to decide to jump out of a 30 story window or burn to death?
Wow, I learned my lesson.
If you are trying to support something, post it at the end of a heated thread.
Not a new thread like this that went nowhere:
Well, I’ll tell you… I’ve gone down this path multiple times, and always hope for the best, but unless it’s also in the media, it usually falls by the wayside… like I said, let’s hope for the best…
The sad thing is… right after the Tea Parties, Obama made a big deal about giving his cabinets 90 days to save collectively, you ready for this?.. $100 Million? :shocked :shocked :shocked Talk about a back-handed slap at the over million people who attended these Tea Parties all across the country…
According to AP article - "WASHINGTON (AP) - Cut a latte or two out of your annual budget and you’ve just done as much belt-tightening as President Barack Obama asked of his Cabinet on Monday.
The thrifty measures Obama ordered for federal agencies are the equivalent of asking a family that spends $60,000 in a year to save $6. " - yeah, Change you can believe in… ugh.
AP Article - http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97MDHAG0&show_article=1
So, I don’t hold out hope that he is even willing to really respond and hold the Fed’s feet to the fire on TARP, when they literally just pulled numbers out of the air for “Stimulus”, “Omnibus”, etc. legislation, legislation mind you, that the people we are paying to represent us NEVER EVEN READ! What in the world are we paying these people for?
So the work IMHO must be on LIMITING the additional damage Obama and the out of control Dem spending are foisting on the American Taxpayers WITHOUT even doing due diligence on what they are signing… 2010 will be an important election cycle to put our money and efforts where our mouth are…
On the Fed accountability…
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Bank-bailout-may-hurt-apf-14979409.html?.v=8
Quote from the article - “With a sharp rebuke, Barofsky’s report notes that the Treasury Department has refused to adopt the inspector general’s recommendation that all recipients of TARP money account for the use of their government money.”
Sounds just like the government…
This is just a side note, but I don’t consider 1776 to be a true revolution. In my mind what happened in France in 1789, or Iran in 1979 constitutes a true revolution.
Websters would disagree with you…
rev-o-lu-tion [rev-uh-loo-shuh’n]
–noun
-
an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.
-
Sociology. a radical and pervasive change in society and the social structure, esp. one made suddenly and often accompanied by violence.
But I am curious how you came to this conclusion…
1776 seems more like colonizers throwing off the yoke of the mother country and then continuing the same colonization effort, only with a constitution. Revolution to me means the society is fundamentally restructured with wealth transfers, a class of people sent to re-education camps and/or killed off. The severing of the relationship between the metropolitan country and a group of colonists doesn’t seem like the same thing.
Well that was a very oversimplification of it…
The continuing colonization under the constitution only occurred AFTER the revolution. Remember it was almost 300 years before the actual revolution began. England during this time went through their own revolution from a monarchy to solidifying a parliamentary system, neither of which continued under the new system of government in America.
Reading up a little on parliamentary vs. republic vs. democracy might bring a better understanding of how important the revolution was… Our country is a Representative Republic… although it is getting harder to recognize…
The war, the Declaration of Independence, and subsequent American system of government formed was a direct separation from England in a totally new direction under a violent overthrow of English rule… it’s hard to say it was NOT a revolution when hundreds of thousands died in the process of obtaining the former…
Go back and actually read the Declaration of Independance and you’ll see it was defining the revolution and the right to do so…
"Revolution to me means the society is fundamentally restructured with wealth transfers, a class of people sent to re-education camps and/or killed off. "
Wealth was transferred from the King back to the people of the colonies, people who were sympathetic to English rule, were re-educated to the live under a new system of government, and those who fought with the English within our borders were imprisoned and/or killed off.
Even using your broad definition, though not necessarily accurate, HoldandBuy, it was a revolution…
I guess my point is that I don’t consider a group of colonists who weren’t indigenous to the area breaking off from the metropolitan country an ocean away to be a true revolution. The system in England didn’t go away, just the vestiges of it here. If a group of British or French colonists in some African country decided to break away I wouldn’t consider that a revolution either.
I think a big part of the problem is all these electronic devices like Blackberries and cellphones (I say this as I type on the internet :biggrin). Those things are fine when used in moderation, but people have become too distracted by these gadgets, and they don’t take action. It’s the bread and circuses of our age.
Well, the problem with that line of thinking is that we were already here about 300 years (longer than we’ve been a nation), and England did go solidly from a monarch to parliamentary system post 1776…
Also consider that the British navy was THE navy of the day, controlled the seas and controlled the American coasts/shipping, and were not really challenged on the seas by the colonists to any degree, but rather the French… their ships were much larger and their armaments more fortified… The british could not take the battle inland to any effect, and their supplies had to come from England, so we had the “home turf” advantage… and we took well advantage of it…
The American Revolution had alot of influence in the French Revolution, as well as Spains…
The system in England did change post American Revolution… it solidified the parliamentary system and eventually relegated the monarchy to it’s current form…
The American Revolution brought about change all across the board… religion, economics, politics, free speech and social structure, all paid for with blood and treasure…
“…a group of colonists…”
There were about four (4) million people already here, spread over thirteen states, bigger than England (which is about 20% the size of Texas)… hardly a “group of colonists”, otherwise we would not have made it…
“If a group of British or French colonists in some African country decided to break away I wouldn’t consider that a revolution either.”
If they broke away from the current political structure, form their own country within the existing borders controlled by Africa, changing Africa’s name in the southern hemisphere to “Utopia”, setting up their own monetary system, their own laws, etc. - you wouldn’t consider that a revolution?
Besides, most historians rightfully refer to it as revolution for some reason…
You seem to be very knowledgeable about this subject, however, I would like to ask…
One has to ask how these events improved things in a revolutionary way for people living in the American land mass at that time who were not part of the colonial group, i.e. slaves and Indians. You can say they improved over the long haul for slaves via amendments to the constitution, but then you have to ask whether they would have improved anyway, perhaps faster, since there was a movement against slavery in Europe as well, and slavery in the islands was ended prior to that in the US, I believe. The founding fathers were very timid about the slavery issue. And clearly things got much, much worse for American Indians over the next hundred years or so. The transfer of wealth that you talk about was based more on one’s loyalty to England, not based on actual class. I would assume that most of all of those who held wealth before the revolution and sided with the founding fathers retained it afterwards–maybe I’m wrong. There was more opportunity but it was still largely for the same segment of the population. Having said all that I think the constitution, etc. are fantastic developments, my quibble is with the term “American Revolution”. I think the historians should have created a different term for what happened. However that is the term that stuck…
As for the Africa question, if the majority indigenous population were still treated as second class citizens or exploited for their natural resources, no I do not consider that a real revolution.
“One has to ask how these events improved things in a revolutionary way for people living in the American land mass at that time who were not part of the colonial group, i.e. slaves and Indians.”
Being that the native indians fought on both sides in the American Revolution, and free slaves also fought on the American side, they were part in parcel a part of the event. By the time of the American Revolution, native indians were working directly with the Americans, the French and the British. One could argue they saw the writing on the wall, and were looking for the right group to align with amongst their many “nations”. Slaves still exist today in many regions of the world, India, Sudan, Africa, Pakistan, Burma. Thailand, etc. so it is the question might be better put, if both the native indians and slaves did not participate, would the native indians killed themselves off (as they were ALL warring against each other), and would the slaves still be slaves without the backdrop of the Declaration of Independance (which the original verson called for slavery’s abolition) exhorted that ALL men are created equal.
“You can say they improved over the long haul for slaves via amendments to the constitution, but then you have to ask whether they would have improved anyway, perhaps faster, since there was a movement against slavery in Europe as well, and slavery in the islands was ended prior to that in the US, I believe.”
I don’t know how they would have improved WITHOUT the abolitionist movement and subsquant laws and ammendments. Would the slave owners who were eventually forced to give up their slaves just done it by themselves? It took another 100 years for Civil Rights…
“As for the Africa question, if the majority indigenous population were still treated as second class citizens or exploited for their natural resources, no I do not consider that a real revolution.”
If that’s your perpective, then France’s revolution wouldn’t qualify as a revolution either… that was one of the major reasons they did revolt…
If you hear of some group that is serious about revolution, let me know and sign me up.