United Liberty

Our Presidential Debate liveblog went great so we plan on doing another for the VP debate tomorrow. It has been posted on the sidebar, but an official blog was not created - my bad.

The liveblog will start around 8:30 pm and be a very open format. Last time it turned into more of a discussion so I recommend that everyone be tuned into the debate along with the liveblog.

I will do my best to provide straight coverage within the discussion setting.

See you all there!

VP Debate Liveblog & Discussion
Oct. 2 (Tomorrow)
8:30 pm EDT

We all may have breathed a sigh of relief two days ago when we realized the bailout bill had been defeated, but the truth is, the battle is not yet over.  The Senate votes on the bill this evening, and if it passes it will come back to the House on Thursday for another vote.  It will only take a few Representatives to change their vote in order for the bill to pass and it’s imperative that we do not allow that to happen.  We must continue to keep up the barrage of phone calls, emails and faxes to both Houses in order to keep it from passing.

The website track.nocashfortrash.org has been set up in order to help us keep track of how our Congresspersons voted.  I encourage all of you to visit it and note how your rep voted. If that information isn’t available yet, you have the ability to enter the information yourself.  A simple phone call to your candidate’s office will give you the answer and the opportunity to either thank them or berate them.

I’d like to share with all of you what my friend Michele recently reminded her TN Congressman after learning that he had voted yes for the bailout.  He told her that despite his constituents adament opposition against the bill, he had voted yea because he felt it was the best thing for TN and the country.  This was Michele’s response-

Cooper,

You don’t get it…I said “vote no.” I don’t care what YOU think is best for me or TN. You are an elected official who is to represent the opinion of your constituents. You idiots think that despite a 100-1 disapproval rating of ANY bailout plan that you know better. Well, you don’t. Government cannot fix anything by definition, nor is it your job. In case you are unsure of what your job description is, allow me to enlighten you. Under the United States Constitution, you are allowed the privilege of serving the citizens of this country in the following ways: “ALL bills for raising revenue shall originate in the HOUSE (not the executive); Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes for the defense and general welfare of the US BUT it must be uniform throughout the US (NOT pandering to corporations nor people unable to pay their debts); you are able to borrow money on the credit of the US (the implication is from foreign countries NOT a private central bank); you are able to COIN money.” Those are essentially your duties regarding debt and money that Congress is limited to. By the way, have you ever even read The Constitution?

Vote “no” to any and all bailouts…period.

Many of our Congressmen have forgotten that they are our employees and that they serve at our pleasure.  It’s time we reminded them.

By: Rev. John Killian

This week, one can hardly open a discussion without hearing fearful comments on the economy and the recent attempt by Congress to bailout investors in the housing market. No question, failure to pass a bailout package will create short-term problems in the stock market, hence, retirement plans and pensions will suffer.

But the bottom line is that dropping a safety net under investors is an antithesis to the free market system. Free enterprise finds a way to make investment and initiative work, while socialism uses the force of government to bring about a contrived result.

A dear friend who blogs from left of center, made a statement a few months ago that with a Republican President and Republican Congress, we have seen as conservatism did not work. I responded that conservatism had not been tried. The Republican Congress failed to get a grip on the super growth of government and our Republican President did little to challenge the growth of the size of government.

Now, critics are saying that the free market has not worked. I maintain that the free market has not been tried. Government has manipulated the market and now we see the failure caused by big government competing with private enterprise and propping up those entities which were failing on the free market. Taking tax dollars from taxpayers to supplement failure is just plain wrong! While the failure to pass a bill may bring some negative consequences, the very nature of our free Republic is at stake. I am proud of the Congressmen who voted NO on the bailout and pray that these Members of Congress will maintain their positions on the issue. Appreciation is due to Alabama Congressman Robert Aderholt, the one Alabama Congressman to vote NO on the bailout.

Please take three minutes to listen to Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana. Speaking on the floor of the House, Pence gave a pro-free market argument for sinking the bailout plan. Pence’s reasons for opposition included:

1. Economic freedom means the freedom to succeed but also the freedom to fail
2. This bill gives the government the right to interrupt free markets
3. The bill forever changes the relationship between the government and the markets
4. The American people will have to foot the bill for Wall St.’s mismanagement

By: Shana Kluck

Obama seems to remain in trouble because of his choice in jewelry.  First, he caught flack for not consistently wearing his flag lapel pin.  According to some critics, this was a sign of his lack of patriotism, and not just a simple fashion choice.

But now that Obama’s flag pin appears to be firmly in place (anyone else notice that McCain was not wearing his during the debate?), the question of which candidate truly supports the troops is being determined by the bracelet each wears.  Both candidates were given a bracelet by the family of a fallen soldier.  Obama was asked by the mom to make sure that no other mother would have to suffer as she has.  Since then, he has been accused of wearing it for purely poltical purposes.

McCain, on the other hand, was asked by a different mom to please ensure that her son’s death was not in vain.     Both are legitimate requests that pull at the heartstrings of Americans everywhere.  The question is, can both be honored?

I have no interest in debating whether or not our soldiers have died in vain; however, the question of whether those deaths were avoidable is an entirely different discussion.

And I believe that the best way to support and protect our troops is to get them out of harm’s way as soon as possible- herobracelets are optional.

By: Austin Wilkes

A quiet scattering of Republicans have begun to express concern about the ability of the party “messiah”, Sarah Palin, to counter the one major sticking criticism - her lack of knowledge of policy issues or at least the ability to articulate them effectively when the spotlight is on. Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker has publicly said Palin should step aside. National Review editor Kathryn Jean Lopez last friday, while not going as far as Kathleen, did express sympathy to the idea and said in response to Palin, “something’s gotta change.”

Palin rose to fame almost instantly with followers knowing little to nothing about her but still treating her as the next Ronald Reagan. She was - and still to some extent is - seen as a woman who could reforge the old alliances and bring in new allies at the same time, something no politician has accomplished in recent years no matter how hard they tried or how much money they spent (cough - Romney). Everyone from libertarian anarchists to king neoconservatives to feminists liberals has on some level spoken highly of her nomination. When the surprise selection became known to the mass media they immediately went on the offensive, not necessarily because they disliked who she is and what she stands for (though many pundits adamently do), but mainly because they were not given a chance to give a traditional “vetting” to her as a potential candidate, thus reducing their power and influence in the race immensely. The attacks backfired. Americans, except those that were inclined to judge based on ideological alignment, did not believe what was being said about Palin.

Fast forward 3 weeks and the dynamics are fairly similar to where they were around the time of the convention, only the ethusisasm (and hatred) have subsided to an extent. The media is still upset because they do not get a substantial level of access to the candidate that provides their networks with above average ratings. The reason they do not get access is obvious; she is not ready to be let off the leash and give non-teleprompted interviews. The campaign has been “forced” to allow her to give a handful of interviews, the latest with Katie Couric, of which have been seen as decent at best, failures at worse. It is almost as if they campaign is specifically using her few significant appearances to dumb down pre-debate expectations, as opposed to having Palin knock the interview out of the park.

It is this sub-par performance that is making conservatives feel, even if only slightly, less enthusiastic about their Vice Presidential Candidate and her ability to lead the Republican Party and the conservative “real America” movement over the next 4 to 10 years. Conservatives will by no means abandon Sarah in November, but with McCain being closer to 80 than 70 by the next election, many questions and skepticisms remain. For now the principle of wing walking is probably the best way to assess the conservative relationship with Palin - you stick with what you got until you have something better to hold on to.

Below is the entirety of my correspondence from Senator Dianne Feinstein. I know she wrote this letter and gave this speech prior to the vote this morning. So now Dianne, with all you know about our opposition, and the congress shooting the bill down, where do you stand? Now is your chance to turn things around and oppose the bailout.

Dear Mr. Avila:

Thank you for your letter expressing concern about Congress’ consideration of a plan to meet our Nation’s credit crisis with financial help from the Federal Government. This is a difficult situation for which there are no perfect solutions, and I would like to share my thoughts and concerns about this issue with you. On September 19, 2008, Secretary of the Treasury Henry M. Paulson, Jr. announced a legislative proposal to use $700 billion to purchase illiquid mortgage-related assets from ailing financial institutions. Secretary Paulson’s three-page proposal was a non-starter, and without critical changes it has no chance of approval from Congress. This proposal would have given a blank check to an economic czar who would have been empowered to spend it without administrative oversight, legal requirements, or legislative review. Decisions made by the Treasury Secretary would be non-reviewable by any court, agency, or Congress. The proposal also lacked a requirement for regular reports to Congress on the status of the program. This was simply untenable.

According to a MSNBC article, Tina Fey dug in her heels when proposed with playing Sarah Palin:

On the Emmy red carpet, Fey revealed to Access Hollywood’s Billy Bush she actually refused to play her political look-a-like when it was first proposed.

“I was fighting them all week on it,” Fey said. “I kept saying, ‘I don’t want to do it, I’m not an impressionist.’ I kept telling (‘SNL’ producer) Lorne (Michaels), ‘No! I’ll show up … I’ll do anything except play her. I can’t do it.’ Then, I was worn down. Lorne wore me down by the end of the week.”

Fortunately, Palin’s weird accent got her energized:

“Sarah Palin has a crazy voice. I would say, not since ‘Sling Blade’ has there been a person who’s really easy to imitate, so I got really lucky on that one,” Fey said.

Not since Will Ferrell played Janet Reno have I seen a politician so well defined on Saturday Night Live. Tina Fey is Sarah Palin. A benefit to a McCain presidency would be seeing her play Palin regularly.

From the group’s press release:

Thousand Oaks, CA — A national caucus of Republican activists has urged GOP legislators to stand firm against the “Paulson Bailout” of a corrupt financial regulatory system. “This proposal is a government takeover of the entire U.S. economy,” says Republican Liberty Caucus Chairman William Westmiller, “whose only purpose is to rescue those who made risky bets on bad mortgages.”

The Caucus [www.RLC.org] opposes any taxpayer payoff to rescue those who made bad investments in any sector of the economy. “The problem is not a lack of government control,” says Westmiller, “but rather the decades of market distortions imposed by Congress through subsidies, mandates, guarantees, andconstraints on free-enterprise mortgage offerings.”

The Paulson proposal grants the Secretary of the Treasury total control over all mortgage-related financial instruments, nearly a trillion-dollars in discretionary funds, and the power to nationalize or deputize every financial institution in the nation. “This isn’t a rescue plan,” says Westmiller, “it is an economic police state.”

By: Dr. David T. Beito

If he had a chance, this probably blew it. McCain should have let Obama, Pelosi, and Frank own the Billionaire Bailout. By signing on, he has given them all the cover they need. Everything at his point probably rides on Palin.