Where Are Your Senators? Ted Cruz – Still Standing On Senate Floor- #MakeDCListen – Trending Twitter 13 Hours After Start of Filibuster – Why Cruz is doing His Job

Some may call the epic Filibuster of Ted Cruz against voting for Cloture on the Continuing Resolution without the one amendment to that bill, put forth by the Congress to Defund Obamacare grandstanding on the part of this Senator from Texas, but they, themselves are confused, or arrogant to believe that the only purpose of a member of the Senate or the Congress for that matter, is to tow a “party line”, or to put themselves and their political futures above the people who sent them.

Senator Cruz, still making sense after standing for a ridiculous and painful 13 hours, is battling for the Texans who sent him to the Senate. He is battling for the “lost generation” – those 18-25 year olds who are working part time, at lower wages, without the hope of having a home of their own, or an ability to move forward, get a better job, pay off their student loans, and participates in what once was referred to as the American Dream. He is fighting against the ability of one man, Harry Reid, the Senator from Utah and Majority Leader of the Senate, to run roughshod over the American people, time and time, by refusing to allow discussions on the subject of the monstrous bill made law – The Affordable Health Care Act.

Senator Cruz does not, at this point, appear to give a whit about what the media, or care about his political future, he is speaking from the mind and heart about the rights granted under the Constitution, for all citizens, both Democrats and Republicans. He is speaking of the reality of the economics of the Affordable Health Care Act, which some in the GOP and the DNC are politically avoiding voting against, as it does not apply to them personally – as they are the Political Class. He is speaking as a Patriot of the first order. Having read the Federalist Papers, and the biographies of the founders, Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, and their peers, as a history geek who learned to love the nuances of historical and political poetry at the feet of a grandmother who had emigrated to this great nation as a sixteen year old, following her dreams of prosperity and rights not available in an increasingly volatile Europe, it is difficult to imagine in today’s America, the fact that there are not more Ted Cruz’s to defend each and every citizen in this nation.

Those who rail against the establishment of a political class, so wealthy and powerful that the divide between the have’ s and have not’s is palpable, are considered by those who are part of that political class or wish to be, to be either “dangerous” or mentally less understanding than they are, or simply ill-informed and less educated. They are both Democrats and Republicans or Unaffiliated politically, they are educated or not, they may or may not have Ivy League degrees, they may or may not have wealth or jobs or careers that are tied to Washington’s largesse, they are simply put, in disagreement with the policies, and the bureaucracy and the Political Party System (so loathed by our founders), running roughshod over the Constitution of the United States and not giving a whit about the individual and the liberties granted under the Document that grants each and every one that is privileged enough to be a citizen of this nation, the rights contained therein.

Senator Cruz, and his peer, Senator Mike Lee of Utah, standing alone in the well of the Senate, speaking after hours and hours into the dawn of the day that the Senate must take up a vote of Cloture, begging, daring those absent colleagues to vote No on Cloture – they are asking for an up or down vote on the Legislation of the Act known as “Obama Care” – the Affordable Health Care Act. They understand, clearly, they are railing against the “system”, and it is not for political gain, it is for the people who sent them.

There is a reason that the founders felt that the formation of political parties, who might grow and obtain so much power that they would, in deed and in purpose, outstrip the values of a free Republic, and undermining the liberties granted under the Constitution.

These two Senators standing are impressive, historically, they are not stalwart followers of a Political Party nor a political class, they are, in words and in actions, following the paths of those long buried and most often forgotten founders of this nation.

Whether or not one would agree, politically, those who are avoiding this debate, those who the people from their State sent them to the Capitol to do their bidding, should be debating these gentlemen, and doing the job that, according to the Constitution and the laws upon which this nation has been founded, bound to take up.

The American citizens of these United States of America deserve to have those they sent, regardless of whether they are Democrats, Republicans, Socialist, Libertarians, or simply unaffiliated, stand up and fight, not for their political party, or their own political futures, but for the citizens of their given state; with honesty and integrity for their deeply held belief, one way or the other on this issue of the Funding of the Affordable Health Care Act, or any piece of legislation put before them.

It is true, that the odds of the aforementioned behavior happening are slim to nothing, given the sad State of this Union and the elected political class, but what a fine day it would be for all of the United States citizens and those hoping to become citizens, if that very scenario would occur. We all, regardless of political affiliation owe a debt of gratitude for the Senator’s Cruz and Lee, who are doing what their colleges should be doing. A few of them did, notably, Sessions, Rubio, Rand, and Durban, and they deserve the credit, not those who have done nothing, regardless of which “party “to which they subscribe.

These Senators standing make this individual, first generation, American year for a day when this call for debate is a norm, not an anomaly.

Hillary Clinton – Love Her or Not – What’s a Decades Old Sex Tape Between her Husband and His Intern Have to Do with Anything at all?

Hillary Clinton - image from charles city today dot com

From the website Radaronline (via The Drudge Report), headlines blare: “Secret Sex Tape: Monica Lewinsky Caught On Explicit Recording Telling Bill Clinton, ‘I Could Take My Clothes Off…’, the article goes into some details, and suggests the “scoop” by the National Enquirer, might somehow harm Hillary Clinton’s chances should she seek the Democrat Party nomination for President in 2016. What is particularly annoying about trivial junk such as this is that it is blatantly sexist. One must assume that the wife (spouse or partner) is somehow cheapened by the antics of their other half (usually referred to as the better half). The fact that one is in a relationship, especially a marriage, with children involved, puts the onus, not on the victims (spouse, children), but the protagonists (cheating husband and his “flame”). Regardless, the personal heartbreak, and or rage felt by the “wronged” individual, especially if the event took place decades ago, has nothing to do with their ability or inability to apply for a job. The fact that this is a woman at the focus of an article that suggests Sec. of State Clinton would somehow be harmed in her career because of someone else’s actions, (a man-her husband) – suggests a sexists overtone.

Here come the critiques of hairstyle, clothing choice, and anything but where Hillary Clintons stands on the issues. The whole affair and subsequent impeachment had, at the time, and now in the present, done zip to harm the Clinton family, except privately.

These “startling revelations” may sell a few more copies of the tabloid in a grocery store, or Wal-Mart, however, what does it matter in the greater scheme of things?

There is plenty to question politically and ideologically regarding Hillary Clinton and her future plans as a Presidential contender, which would be more germane. There will be multiple candidates from both major parties, and hopefully candidates from a third party - one which will demand some attention due to the distaste for polarization directly tied to the two-party system, and the continual election of members of the political class, or in some cases political dynasties. The problems that Hillary Clinton faces will be scrutiny over decisions made while working for the Obama administration, the fact that she is a woman, unfortunately, can be a challenge, but less so than in previous elections. She is not only part of the permanent political class, but also part of a political dynasty. One might suggest a Bush-Clinton matchup in 2016 would be enough to make one look hard and long at any third party nominee.

There is, as far as one can determine, no suggestion that a royalty of sorts should have evolved from those families who serve our nation. It should be the individual, who is willing to put for their time and treasure as outlined in the U.S. Constitution.

From this perspective, a choice between Hillary Clinton, a third party candidate (with actual qualifications – someone such as Dr. Ben Carson, for instance) and Jeb Bush, would make the third party candidate appealing. The political benefit of electing a third party candidate to the highest office is multiple – it would lessen the power of the permanent two party system, bring a perspective to the Congresses that getting along and finding compromise would be beneficial, and it would devastate the special interests that pervade the nation, from the PAC’s to the lobbyists. That’s for starters.

Therefore, it is not what has happened in Clinton’s personal life past, but what her accomplishments, or failures have been in her political offices. The muddying of the waters by downright stupid reporting, whether it is what she wore, how she looks, detracts from her ability to perform as a candidate. This does a great disservice to the nation – something that the mainstream media, the major parties, and their affiliated sycophants are counting on.

An unrelated article, but a must read: From Huffington Post Black Voices, the article “A Message to Trayvon Martin Sympathizers” by contributor Romany Malco. Reach the full article at www.huffingtonpost.com/romany-malco/a-message-to-trayvon-mart_b_3612231.html. It is, without a doubt, one of the smartest articles written regarding the education system, the media, and reality that one might read this month.

I would suggest, hwoever, that a majority of what Mr. Malco is stating, is applicable not only to the African-American community, but to the entire population, regardless of race or ethnicity.

Paul Ryan suggests a Clinton Presidency would have solved nation’s fiscal crisis - The Political Class and Economics – Hell Freezes Over, Fox’s Hannity and New York Times on Same Page!

Photo from the Washingtonian online - article indicates the Next two frontrunners - however, is there a difference?

An article this morning from newsbusters.org, highlights a recent “Meet The Press” segment where, former V.P. Candidate, and budget wonk of the Congress, suggested that if Clinton had been President, the fiscal mess the government faces would have been dealt with by no. (Paraphrasing). The articles goes on to note that they were not sure which Clinton Ryan was speaking of – however, one look at the way Hillary Clinton voted in her tenure at the Senate, (see Thomas.gov – search by congress, and then by name of Senator), she was a) bi-partisan, working with both Republican and Democrats on a variety of bills, secondly, she was more pro-military, and defense, working on bills with Hutchinson of Texas as well as Rick Santorum – keeping children safe, credits for small businesses, and the list goes on. It is no wonder therefore, that with the Progressives in control of the Democrat Party, a moderate, such as Clinton, who may, at times, trend to the Conservative side (which Democrats were at one point), was not going to be nominated, even if she did win the popular vote going into the DNC Convention.

Those talking heads, who are now saying Clinton would be a shoe-in in 2016, obviously have no idea of who the Progressives will choose to be the next woman to run on the ticket – but one might be watching the newly elected Senator from Massachusetts, the Oklahoman born, Elizabeth Warren – or the Progressives next Barack Obama.

That aside, one has to wonder, with the constant struggle in Washington, and the “deadlock” that is faced consistently – when one reads the Congressional record, one see’s a lot of bills sponsored, and co-sponsored by those on both sides of the ails, there appears to be some comradery – and the balance, as they say –is for show.

There was an interesting video shown on Fox News Sean Hannity with documentary producer Bannon – from the New York Times:

9 P.M. (Fox News) BOOMTOWN: WASHINGTON, THE IMPERIAL CITY In this edition of “Hannity,” the host, Sean Hannity; Peter Schweizer, the president and co-founder of the Government Accountability Institute; and Stephen K. Bannon, the executive chairman of Breitbart News and co-founder of the Government Accountability Institute, investigate what they call crony capitalism among the city’s power elite and the tactics used by lobbyists, bureaucrats and legislators to finance their lifestyles with taxpayer money.

In watching the program, which is segments of a file, followed by discussion, one begins to get the feeling that the “rapid Republican “Hannity, has gone over the Libertarian Ledge – or perhaps Occupy Wall Street, where there is a total disgust and distrust of the new Washington, where regardless of the party – lobbyists and politicians’ have combined to create the wealthiest and productive city in the nation – on taxpayers dollars. It’s shocking itself, the concept that there is now a permanent aristocracy that rules the U.S. and its money, and basically we, the poepole, send them “tribute”.

In other words, all of those who have tenure, (2 terms or more) are in this political class – and from the sounds of the program, there is nothing to be done!

(Unless, of course, the Public decides to throw them all-out, baby with the bathwater style, and start over.)

Most shocking take on this: From the New York TimesWashingtonEconomic Boom Financed by You”

We’re in trouble when Hannity, Bannon and the New York Times agree on something. The Premise of what has happened to our once valued institutions of Democracy is that using taxpayers funds, and lobbyist funds, there is a great divide between the haves and the have nots – specifically centered In Washington DC and around the government, where – as anyone with a brain knows, as Washington Produces nothing worth value, that can be sold or traded, then the taxpayer foots the bill. This created a political aristocracy, and it is a bi-partisan fleecing of Americans.

Or perhaps, the media itself, or certain segments, are now either so concerned or disgusted or both there will be additional stories about what goes on in the nations capital. Either that or Ailes now owns the New York Times.

One then finds those dueling senators and congressmen, through the congressional record, getting along just fine when it’s behind closed doors. Conspiracy theory or a situation where the public needs to think long and hard about changing the old for the new, from the top office down. At this point, taking people off the street might not be a bad idea.

Therefore, when Paul Ryan suggests that Hillary would have done a better job, be sure of it, he would know, he’s worked with her long enough, and with all the inner power struggles of both parties, there are occasional bright spots, that will be demonized for telling the truth about one another, in the typical partisan way. It is a shame and it is a sham at the same time.

Articles of Interest: The Alaska Dispatch – health care and Americas rising income inequality – Washington DC

2012 Update – The Natural Order in Campaigns – Gingrich as the Non-GOP Establishment Candidate - Obama Campaign Hubris In the Face of the Inevitable

Gingrich, Paul and Romney - The Nominating Process Begins in Four Weeks - image cnn.com


It goes without saying that a political campaign, much like a beauty pageant, is nothing more or nothing less than a contest, albeit one of immense import. The fact is that candidates in a primary must compete against one another for the top slot and that will evoke mud-slinging in the hopes of gaining points, especially as there are only weeks left before the primaries and caucuses begin. Therefore, one will find that lower tier and top tier candidates will release ads “knocking” one another, or if one candidate is in the lead, knocking one only. These advertisements and press releases, becoming more frequent, sound more desperate than honest – specifically as the aforementioned become more shrill and or “informative” as the time to vote draws nearer. (See: ”Game-Iowa GOP Attacks Target Gingrich” (Yahoo News) . It’s a game that is as old as the nominating process, and one can anticipate much the same in a national election (as the mud-slinging was just as, if not more, egregious when there were only thirteen states).

However, if the establishment political class (those who are in government) and a media hostile to one political ideology and/or party, attempt to knock a front-runner this close to the beginning of the voting process, one can bet the House (and possibly the Senate) that there is good reason – that individual is most likely not going to “play ball” with those entrenched, those elite, and those who would crown a “king” over allowing the “masses” to decide whom they felt would best lead the nation forward. It is obvious that the anti-establishment candidate is one Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, the current GOP front-runner, and the individual preferred by the political class is one Mitt Romney, the former one-term Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts who has in recent weeks received endorsements from U.S. Senators, the Bush Family, Dan Quayle (former President H.W. Bush’s, Vice President), numerous pundits and the Fox News Network (which may explain the sudden surge in audience share that CNN is experiencing.)

In an AP article via the Boston Globe “Gingrich Surge Unnerves Some Republican Lawmakers” one is under the impression that Gingrich’s Peers of twenty-odd years ago (that is an established politician – or entrenched.) are horrified at the prospect of Gingrich as leader of the Free World, and notwithstanding, leader of the Republican Party. These few politicians (the five that are named), are not all in the Congress, but in the Senate where they would not have worked quit as closely with Gingrich over his entire career. They point to personal issues, and make statements that are vague or not particularly germane (given the time Gingrich has been out of the Congress) but nevertheless demeaning - and to a man they all support Mitt Romney. As one reads the second page, however, one runs into a similar group - this one a bit more pragmatic; recalling a different Gingrich, one who was focused, one who broke Gridlock. That is the Gingrich the political class fears – one who will get the job done, whether it fits their agenda or no.

In an email from the Romney Campaign, both Mitt Romney and former Governor of New Hampshire John Sununu and Senator Jim Talent will hold a press conference call outlining the many issues those three might have with Newt Gingrich’s “record”. That record is available online at The Library of Congress, and anyone can go back through Newt Gingrich’s entire career to find – baseless allegations being made by those who are in a political campaign.

It is interesting that there is little mention of the fact that the Massachusetts Secretary of State is making available correspondence from Mitt Romney’s time in office. These are hard copy documents, as the then, Romney Gubernatorial staff, purchased Commonwealth Computers and summarily wiped all email correspondence from the hard-drives (see article:here>). This is the type of politics that those living in the 16th and 17th century would find somewhat average, a bit of backstabbing, fabrication and business as usual.

It is for Gingrich, if he is to continue to be the front-runner, to either ignore or answer – to date, he has focused more on policy rather than political attacks on his record dating back two decades. What voters need to ask themselves, and one can believe they may have already done so given the polls, is “Can man (or woman) truly change their minds on an issue in twenty years?” The answer is obvious: anyone with an once of common sense understands that human nature and age and the factors of changes in society, advances in science and technology, allows individuals to change their minds, religion and even political affiliation. Changing one’s mind over the course of two decades is, therefore, not unusual. What is unusual is a change of heart and mind over a period of a year, or a month – that would be someone who could be categorized as a political opportunist.

What is perhaps the most amusing take on the rise of Gingrich and Romney as "underdog" comes from the New York Times in concert with the Obama Campaign Manger, David Axelrod. Axelrod seems to believe that the Democrats are somehow able to influence the Republican Race. That is, of course, somewhat possible (See Mitt Romney accusing Deval Patrick for leaking Romney’s staff erasing their computers contents to the Boston Globe as “politically motivated”.) Then again, with a historically low approval rating, four weeks before the primary and caucus season begins, the Presidents’ campaign should be doing their best to undercut the opposition, down to the last candidate, at the lowest level. The odds are not exactly in their favor, and it is David Axelrod’s job to say the “darndest things”.

What history has proven is a man in last place in any major political party primary, may end up being the winner - that a party will have a clear winner at a nominating Convention and choose to use a method involving “Super Delegates” (those of the political class), to choose another candidate (One who would more easily “fit” what the political “party leaders” desired, rather than say, nominate the woman who actually won the nomination). It is certain that poll numbers can and do change, and that the fortunes of a candidate do not necessarily ride on the polls (unless they have a 20 point advantage four weeks from the actual primary or caucus - then one can make a fairly safe bet on the front-runner). The aforementioned are historical and statistical facts. As we round the corner of December, with two debates scheduled for the GOP, (the next on the 12th of December (Saturday) on ABC at 8:00 Eastern, in Iowa and sponsored by the Des Moines Press Register) it will be those debates and the candidates performances that will reach the millions who will eventually decide who has the mettle to lead. It is part and parcel of the process - it is what makes these United States such an amazing country in which to reside as a citizen. This because, a “ruling political class” can be pushed, and reformed by the simple act of voting, and a leader can emerge by the will of the people, rather than by the will of a “class” pushing one candidate over another. (Of course, as a feminist, one is compelled to mention one more time, that one example where the people’s choice did not materialize, that of the 2008 Democrat Convention).