According to Webster: “in·e·qual·i·ty,” The condition of being unequal.
In the real world, it means that some people are “different” than other people and it also means that some people have “more” than other people.
According to Webster: “dif·fer·ent,” Unlike in form, quality, amount, or nature; distinct.
You’ll have to forgive me, I’m one of those silly conservatives that believes that (taxpayer dollars) should be “limited” to the Nation’s business, ..and that (every “single” dollar) should be accounted for.
Question: When has there (not been) inequality in America’s wealth and (how does) taking money from Peter’s pocket to pay Paul solve the problem?
Question: When did America hire “Michelle” and the (first) children?
According to Webster: “more,” A greater quantity, number, degree, or amount.
Question: How can a man who earns $395,000 a year afford the reported $10 million Michelle spent on vacations during his first (four years) in office?
Seems pretty simple to me, but then I live by the yardstick of “God” given (common sense).
Once again, (for those of you that missed the class), ..the “preamble” to the Declaration of Independence; “ …
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Question: When did the inalienable right to pursue life liberty and happiness become not enough?
..the above, again, (for those of you that missed the class), is touted to be one of the best-known sentences in the English language.
Glad you asked; A proud gentleman by the name of Thomas Jefferson.
(Thomas Jefferson – America’s 3rd. President).
A gentleman that also wrote; “Believe me, dear Sir: there is not in the British empire a man who more cordially loves a union with Great Britain than I do. But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament propose; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America.”
—Thomas Jefferson, November 29, 1775
In no sentence or paragraph in the U.S. Constitution does it promise or guarantee anyone a free lunch.
The U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights are documents of laws, laws that our founding fathers considered adequate to provide “an” opportunity for the men and women of America who would no longer bow to taxation without representation.
Historical Fact: In 2006 retired vice president Albert Arnold “Al” Gore produced a documentary film entitled; …
The premise; “Global Warming” due to capitalism, greed and inconsideration, and/or, man’s inhumanity to man.
According to industry reports, Al Gore’s enterprise grossed $24 million in the United States and $26 million in the foreign markets.
Currently deriving my livelihood via the Social Security act of 1934, I am in no way shape or form qualified as an expert on wealth, albeit I am currently up-to-date on inconvenience, so I feel that I am totally qualified to speak to that issue…
..fifty million mini-portraits of George is by no stretch of my imagination, “inconvenient.”
According to Webster: “truth,” Conformity to fact or actuality.
Fact: (theoretically), in America if you break the law you will face consequences.
According to Webster: “con·se·quence,” Something that logically or naturally follows from an action or condition.
I am indeed well aware that someone, somewhere out there in “cyberville” will join my last two definitions and resort to a stupidity like; “Did I know that there was once a television show entitled;” …
..and of course my reply would be; “absolutely!”
(Ralph Edwards – circa 1940s).
Truth or Consequences is an American television show originally hosted on NBC radio by Ralph Edwards (1940–1957) and later on television by Edwards (1950–1954), Jack Bailey (1954–1955), Bob Barker (1956–1975), Bob Hilton (1977–1978) and Larry Anderson (1987–1988). The television show ran on CBS, NBC and also in syndication.
The premise of the show was to mix the original quiz element of game shows with wacky stunts. (Source, Wikipedia).
In the 1950s, a decade, that (at least for me) was the decade in which I spent the Lions share of my teenage years.
In the 1950’s, pretty much anyone, anywhere that was found to possess (any amount) of “marijuana” by law enforcement faced charges with sentences to include life in prison and the Second Amendment of our Constitution was revered.
Today, with progressive liberals running amok in our society, “American” society, our Second Amendment is under almost daily attack by the left wing while “hop-heads” can purchase marijuana in specialty shops from sea to shining sea.
Current federal law for cultivation or sale of less than 50 kg of marijuana is a “felony” punishable by five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
Current federal law for cultivation or sale of between 50 and 99 kg of marijuana is a “felony” punishable by twenty years in prison and a $100,000 fine.
(Atty. Gen. Eric Holder).
Firearms Transfer Offenses: 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(6) (“straw
purchase”), 922(d) (“prohibited person”), and 924(a)(1)(A) (“false statement in a record”).
Section 922(a)(6) makes it unlawful for any person in connection with the acquisition, or attempt to acquire, any firearm or ammunition from a licensed dealer to knowingly make any false oral or written statement intended or likely to deceive the dealer with respect to any fact material to
the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of such firearm or ammunition under any provision of 18 U.S.C. §§ 921 et seq. A violation of section 922(a)(6) is punishable by a statutory maximum term of imprisonment of ten years.
The foregoing legislation, (18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(6), …
..was violated under the code name “Fast and Furious” with purpose and forethought by the Obama administration, ..it was also violated by the George W. Bush administration via the code “Operation Wide Receiver.”
Question: Is America a Nation of laws, or is America (not) a Nation of laws?
According to Webster: (con·ven·ience,” (in context), Being suitable to one’s comfort, purposes, or needs.
Question: Is the law a matter of fact to Barack Obama, or is the law a matter of convenience?
According to Webster: “fact,” (in context) The quality of being real or actual.
Question: Does the U.S. Constitution allow for the President of the United States and the Congress to be exempt from the law?
Reality: Members of Congress are already subject to all of the same laws of our country. This exception is Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution, which states:
“They [Congress] shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”
Myth: The new health care law will not apply to Members of Congress
Reality: The law actually states, “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are created under this Act or offered through an Exchange established under the Act.”
Therefore, the only insurance the federal government will make available to Members of Congress and their personal office staff will be through a plan created by the law or on the Exchange.
However, there has been some controversy surrounding this provision because Congressional staff who work for Committees or Leadership (such as for Speaker Nancy Pelosi) are exempt, as are White House staffers.
Question: Can the President of the United States pass, alter or amend legislation?
Question: If that’s true, then Barack Obama had no authority to alter his signature legislation; the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010,” so why hasn’t Barack Obama been charged with an offence?
Why don’t we all ponder it?
Truth forges understanding, I’ll be back tomorrow