Reverand Jeremiah Wright's Calculated Sacrifice by Chelle Stockman

Reverand Jeremiah Wright's Calculated Sacrifice by Chelle Stockman

 

Rev. Wright seemed to agitate everyone on television and off television through his rantings at the press club yesterday.  They all called for Obama to distance himself from his pastor.

While listening to my debate partners emotionally express themselves regarding this issue, it became apparent that the Reverend was acting out of character with his unusally persistent rantings.  I do believe the Reverend decided that Obama needed to show his strength and courage believing that Obama will do what is best for the Party and the nation even if it meant disavowing a long time friendship.  I believe he intentionally attacked Obama's character in order to bring to the light, the strength and grace of Obama's real character. So in essence, the Reverend sacrificed his own reputation and quite possibly, some of the rooted plants in his own garden in order for Obama to fill his purpose in life as the Reverend saw it.

So today, Obama did just that.  It left me wondering if Obama could see through this maneuver or if he had previously known about the Reverend's intentions, if he would have behaved in quite the same way.

None the less, the Media is fueling this big time and it does frustrate me a little that the Reverend has taken up airtime that Clinton might have otherwise been available to use. 

Such is the world of politics.

Homeland Security- a Sham By Chelle Stockman

This is a letter I've sent to my Representatives hoping that they will share with the other members of Congress.  I hope you find it interesting.

 

Senators Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer

 

 

Dear Senators, Honorable Ladies of Congress:

 

I was dismayed when I learned that the wide spread push for Liquid Natural Gas was the reason behind our high costs at the pump. So I wondered how those in D.C. would feel if we began extracting natural gas in their backyard, say beneath the Whitehouse.  I googled the phrase, “ natural gas beneath the Whitehouse.” Several links opened up and what I thought looked to be a reliable link popped up.

 

A complete map of the natural gas lines through out the United States as well as aerial shots of sites and intended sites popped up with it.  Then I got angry.  You see, many of you folks voted for the invasion of our privacy in the name of terrorism, suspecting terrorists could be communicating via emails and telephones.  So there goes one of our rights; yet you have done no legislation concerning real security.

 

How is it that I, a hairdresser, can so easily find a map of our natural gas lines online in just a few moments? Seems to me that terrorists and people with malicious intent might find those to be useful. Instead of allowing the goons and ghosts who haven’t proved to be trustworthy, who have not proved they have my best intentions in mind, those people who can say they suspect me of knowing or being a terrorist can by that very claim alone, gain access into my private life; why haven’t you people instead, legislated a measure to thwart the availability of information showing the pathways of our resources?  Only the people working on an area, like engineers for natural gas, should be privy to such information, but hairdressers have no business knowing the exact routes and placement of areas of  “interest”.

 

I’m truly disappointed in our Congress right now.  Most of you folks push forth a free market agenda that compromises not only our individual rights, but also our nation’s security.   Think about that one and seek to immediately resolve the issue wasting no time.

That’s all for now.

 

Chelle Stockman

 

Liberals Raise Taxes? by Chelle Stockman My response to NewsMax

News Max is blaming liberals for high prices and taxation.  They sent me a letter.  If you notice how it starts I want to ask a similar question of all of you and I want you to be thinking about the first question Newmax asks of us.  Question example offered:  How does an orange peel help to protect an apple?  Okay, now go read their letter and my response. 

Here is the first part of it:

Dear Newsmax reader,

How exactly do higher taxes help lower energy costs? (Hint: They don’t.)

It’s one question the Democrat leadership in Congress can’t answer, no matter how long they talk.

The truth is, the tax and spend crowd is just looking for ways to increase taxes on American consumers by targeting domestic energy production.  At a time when already high energy costs are weighing heavy on this country’s economy, and when signs are indicating that even more trouble may be ahead, why would Congress seek to pass legislation that will raise prices and increase financial hardships by strangling America’s energy supply?  Congress should be looking to cut taxes, not increase them.  Higher energy prices won’t avert or minimize a recession.  They’ll do just the opposite.

My Response to them was this:

Members of Congress are not responsible for the state we are in anymore than you and I are.  That goes for conservative, moderates, and liberals.  However, as Milton Sinclair (meant to say Milton Freidman while thinking of Upton Sinclair, but oh well, I blew it again, kinda like Oberman does) pointed out so long ago, the Free Market Economic policies we have in place are directly responsible.

 

Truth is, pump prices will change as we convert to using mostly Natural Gas.  Many Republicans and Democrats are in collusion to bring us what they call Alternative Energy when real alternative energy does not use carbon based sources.  Their ideas of green energy involve the color money. 

 

Regarding taxation, you do not lower taxes when you are spending so much.  The war outside our country and homicides in our country, the building of bridges and tunnels instead of shoring up our current infrastructure, these things determine our level of taxation. 

 

That's my way of interpreting the knowledge I have.

 

Chelle Stockman

 

Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.

Move on, Moveon by Chelle Stockman

My response to Moveon.org's request from me regarding support of Senator Obama.

 

You are barking up the wrong tree.  Obama voted down the line for Cheney-Bush Energy Policies.  Prices rising at the gas pumps?  Won't be long before we are extracting natural gas here at home wrecking our environment and making war with our neighbors, vying for position for the lucre in the Oman Gulf, the Caspian Sea, Equatorial Guinea, Zimbabwe, etc.  Check out the commercials from the United States Department of Energy.  Well boys and girls, so much for "alternative" energy.  When John and Barack align themselves with "green" energy, they are referring to $$$. 

So, please go fertilize another field with your Obama poop.

Senators McCain and Obama: Pimps of Cheney-Bush energy policies by Chelle Stockman

Tired of the climbing prices of Gas at the pumps?  Wait, there's more to follow.  Your water resources are dwindling, your food resources in jeopardy and that's nothing compared to the "environmental allergies" cloaked under names such as the "flu-season".  All are related to Liquid Natural Gas, boys and girls.  Yup, LNG, the new "alternative" fuel, both John McCain and Barack Obama are making possible. 

200 years of supplies(!) they tell us. Oh joy, 200 years of more war to fuel our levels of consumption.  They promise us more green ($$$) energy.

Sources in the United States for LNG can be found in the shale lands, deep within coal mines (methane gas, anyone?), and on earth's crust beneath the ocean floors (we want the artic caps to melt so we can get to the methane on the ocean floors.). 

Both John McCain and Barack Obama ignored the science pertaining to carbon based fuels figuring that Natural Gas would be a friendlier commodity to oil.  We have exhausted our black oil resources, they tell us; but hell, we have gobs of natural gas!  So this is their idea of "Alternative" energy and a profitable long-term plan they refer to as a solution.

Both of these men have said they were against pork in legislation and in bills, but this is rather like a mating call.  They lie to us via and when they make there case prior to voting and when they don't vote, they let the others lie for them.  I hope you all watched this morning's House session from the Transportation Committee on C-Span. (4-24-2008)

The House members doing the bidding for LNG were so upset about our Coast Guard- their ineffectiveness.  Seems we don't have enough of them or enough of their ships to do what the Coast Guard is supposed to do and while allowing them (diverting them) to escort the LNG ships into port. So why don't we redistribute the cash in order to better equip and train our Coast Guard to do not only the job they are supposed to do, but also to do the job of being an escort to private corporations who ignore environmental responsibility. 

The threat the Congressional supporters of the Energy Bills of Cheney and Bush issue to us, will go like this: if our government doesn't seize full control of this now and begin the funding process, all the control and profits will go to private companies.  Like they ever cared one way or another.

Wake up people.  John McCain and Barack Obama are not on the up and up.  John is working the Republicans while Barack is working the Democrats.  It reminds me of George 41 and Bill 42, all over again, only more nefarious than before. 

They sell it, you boys and girls buy it. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Obama the Politician by Chelle Stockman

Obama the Politician by Chelle Stockman

Barack Obama calls himself the candidate of change.  I guess his supporters are as exploited by his claims as Americans in general were about Bush's "average man" image.  Bush brought us change and it really is no wonder Barack claims the same.

He says he voted against the war while still an unknown to most of us as he served in the Illinois Senate but while running for the U.S. Senate in July of 2004, he told us, "There's not much difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage. The difference in my mind, is who's in a position to execute."   In fact, every chance he had to urge a withdrawal, he instead avoided the subject of Iraq.

As the Republicans sought to pass appropriation bills for the Iraq war, Obama voted in favor of every one.  Then he, like most of the senators, including Clinton, voted for Dr. Rice to be confirmed as Secretary of State, though she was responsible for the lies that originally led us to vote in favor of war in the first place.

He is, excuse me, was a civil rights lawyer; yet he voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act in July of 2005 which was a direct violation to every citizen's right to privacy, our right to be protected from invasion of our property.

He says he will bring our troops home ASAP yet he still keeps saying he plans to add 100,000 combat troops to the military. Think those young ladies and gentlemen in colleges who voted for him will enlist? His position regarding the Iraq war is duplicitous at best.  He knows few of us will research the truths, because a great many of us never wanted to go to war in the first place.  Many of us have loved ones in the military.  Many of us have family outside this country who are being depicted as "enemies" of our country while they face an oppressive government that allows foreign military forces to occupy their countries. For those of us, the Iraq War, more over, the lies sold to our Congress, its truly an emotional issue of importance. Even Rachel Maddow has said this.  Yet, the duplicitous senator, Barack Obama, exploits the votes of his opponent as if its any different than his own, or most everyone elses in the Senate at the time those votes came down.  The only who had balls enough to vote against the presented evidence, was Senator Russ Feingold.  God Bless you Senator Feingold.

Obama, as I've said in previous letters and blogs, voted in favor of the Class Action Fairness Act in 2005, which was a Republican sponsored bill.  Yes, he reached out in a "bi-partisan" way to ensure the favors of big-business backed legislation under the guise of thwarting frivolous lawsuits.

When you hear MSNBC or their kind saying the GOP would love to have McCain run against Clinton, don't you believe it.  The GOP has been very busy hedging their bets, that if McCain can't carry a victory, their "boy" Obama surely will.  Sorry to offend some of you who resent that kind of terminology, but you had better know that is exactly how the GOP has always thought.  Don't you dare think that because we have a near messiah running for high-office, the GOP will repent from their long standing traditions.  They are the leaven that leaveneths the entire lump.

He was loathe to explain his stance on interest rate caps on credit cards, which he voted against, but told us he voted against it because it was poorly written,--you know, like most pork ladened "legal" documents are, the stuff lawyers read and write on a daily basis. Feingold and Clinton voted for it in order to give we, the average consumer a break in hopes we wouldn't have to file bankruptcy.  This is Barack Obama, the NEW WONDER BOY, ladies and gents, the one most of you are so fascinated with.

It is apparent to me, that you folks won't be holding him to any standards, that you are willing to overlook his records even after he ordered us all to go check out his actions to see if they matched his words.  Obama is very much like Bush, just younger, cuter, smarter and more articulate.

I didn't vote for Bush. How can I justify voting for Obama? I have the right to vote for the one I believe has our most precious rights in mind.  I'm not a politician, I'm just as, Tim Russert and the NBC/MSNBC folks say, " A white woman over 50 earning under 50 grand that doesn't have a degree." And, I'm a lovely woman with a keen wit and a nurturing soul.  I'm a warrior in quest for truth and kindness. Life is interesting and worth living and I really wish that soon, we'll actually insist on representation we think we are voting for.

Chelle Stockman

Letter to my Son regarding foreign currency by Chelle Stockman

Hi you.

I've not been going up North because every single time I do, you call.  It has been a few weeks now and you haven't called!!!  Do I have to leave to hear from you???

I've been volunteering for things like the binding arbitration stuff going on in our town. So, once again, I'm out knocking on doors for signatures.

Our town is going bust pretty much and making national news while we are at it.  I guess we are the barometer for the rest of the nation when it comes to our economy.

But dig this, Son.  Huge corporations, about a decade ago during the Clinton Administration, took American dollars and converted them to Euros and other foreign currency.  So much of their capital gains were diverted from our taxation radar and converted, a sort of global money laundering, if you catch my meaning.  Last week, by Wednesday, they began huge pull-outs of foreign currency and began converting back to American dollars.  Just as their actions contributed greatly to the loss in our capital reserves,  they will surely do the same to the currency exchange rate in the other countries.  If you know anyone who converted their cash into foreign currency, you tell them to convert it into American dollars right away or it won't be worth what they originally exchanged it for.  I do believe that by December, the value of our currency will begin shooting higher than the Euro and other such currency.  It isn't being spoken of, but every so often, you can see it trailing past on the lower tickers that constantly scroll by on news stations.  Still, the money experts have not mentioned it. Man, Halliburton, Trident, GE, even, they all cleaned up!!    I cannot fathom the profit they made.  I wonder where they'll hide it.  They'll have to hide it for awhile until they can reintroduce it back into our economy.  Maybe they plan to exchange it for the gold that was never accounted for in the trade center's destruction.  This is so darn fascinating, and not good, but fascinating.

Let me know when you expect to be visiting, please Son.   I sure do miss you.  Give your fellow soldiers my hellos. 

Bye for now.

Love,
Mom

Reply to Michael Moore & the DNC by Chelle Stockman

Dear Friend:

 

Senator Obama has said many times that you can know him by his actions.  I've been busy going through his records in the 109th Congress.  He tends to site Senator Clinton's voting record in the 107th and 108th Congress, but since he wasn't involved until the 109th, I could only judge his actions from that point on as it pertains to our nation.

 

It's amazing what I found.  He differed from Senator Clinton whenever he voted in favor of Bush policies.  In fact, he voted for what is now known as the Cheney/Bush Energy Bill.  I have heard him say in his speeches, not to be confused from his pulpit-style messages, that he was for alternative energy. I guess he made a mistake when he said that.  So, "clean" coal (strip mining) it is. So, leasing out the shale lands is where its at.  Drill in the Artic, no one really hikes there anyway.  Oil, Coal and Natural Gas must be where it's at; that's what Senator Obama's vote tells me.

 

After all the letters I wrote to the  Democratic Committees, news stations and morning news shows, it was interesting to wake up to CNN pundits scrambling to find out "safe" votes only to find his most noble records are in his current proposals not yet voted on, the ones that deal with loans pertaining to education.

 

As for the rest of his record, he is quite a lot like both McCain and Clinton, no great differences there. 

 

So, Friend, I can respect that you are supporting Senator Obama, but just so you know, I am not.

 

Chelle Stockman

Obama votes for Big Oil by Chelle Stockman

More often than not, Senator Obama of the 109th Congress has voted in favor of Big Oil.  In fact, he appears to vote in favor of Cheney/Bush Package deals.

He is on record as voting for oil drilling in the Artic, voting to obliterate rivers and streams on the west coast, mainly in Oregon (californians kicked them out) in the name of LNG.  This was part of Cheney's and Bush's Energy Bill. Senator Obama continuously tells us that we need to move towards "alternative" energy plans, yet he votes in favor of the current energy forces for things like "clean coal" as if there were such a thing that would not hurt the environment, liquid natural gas, leasing of the shale for purposes of extraction, and drilling for oil in our country which would reverse the environmental protection acts that had to be enacted due to past pollution and destruction. 

Obama, unfortunately, is pandering to every direction disclosing only ideology that fits a territory while ensuring by way of his vote, that current corporations in control have no reason to worry--business as usual.  Guess that's why we see so many warm fuzzy commercials uniting liberals and conservatives in the name of energy.  It is apparent that Obama has no intention of moving us away from carbon based fuels.  In addition, he has voted for anything that would promote ethanol, which means farm subsidies that deplete our food supply and erode the soil its all grown in. 

My thoughts are if you are going to support policy that revolves around science, you better know your science and know that graphs and stats are used only for marketing purposes.  The moment you see such marketing tools, know that you are the intended sucker.

By the way, Hillary voted against these bills.

Just thought some of you might value a little truth.

Chelle Stockman