A View From the Fence

Show 43: For Those in Austin

lambo — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 14:34:18 +0000

Lambo goes on a rant and rumbles a bit about the TSA. He supports the rally currently happening in Austin for those supporting the passage of a TSA Anti-Groping bill.

NOTE: Very little editing was done for this episode

Here is a video link of Rick Perry dancing around the bush about the issue.

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Related items

Share on Facebook

Show 42: Nobel Prize = Libya?

lambo — Sat, 11 Jun 2011 08:32:00 +0000

Our Heroes return to discuss Libya.

Related items

Share on Facebook

AOD-Home Midwidfery Now Illegal in the Big Apple

lambo — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 21:38:13 +0000

So much for getting a bite of Freedom from the Big Apple.

Home Midwifery Now Illegal in the Big Apple

Related items

Share on Facebook

Essay 02: The Libyan Attacks

lambo — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 22:53:41 +0000

No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.
James Madison

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

Those words were spoken by then Senator Obama on December 20, 2007. It is interesting how a Senator’s perspective changes once they became President.

I’m trying to figure out how a Senator Obama who made a name for himself distancing himself from Hillary Clinton and then later John McCain establishing himself as a peace candidate. One of the first things that happened, once he moved into the White House was to start sending drones into Pakistan.

When the drone attacks first happened, I wondered if this might have been some left over Bush plan that somehow got implemented after Obama got sworn in. Did someone in the military not get the memo that they had a new commander-in-chief?

Well shortly later, President Obama wins the Noble Prize for Peace and while continuing the Pakistani drone bombings. It came clear to me that the drone attacks were all Obama.

Then his administration announced that they had the authority to kill an American Citizen abroad if they believe him to be a member of Al Queda. I’m under the impression that the Constitution still has the due process clause in it. I would also think a man who used to be a Constitutional Law Professor would know this. I guess President Obama needs to go back and take Professor Obama’s class.

Obama continued the Bush tactic of saying of how he was going to start bringing the troops home in two years of so. I suspect that the trend will continue when the time is up, he will make the same pledge again. Now, I do suspect he will bring some troops home and it will look all grand on the news highlights. However, I predict he will turn around and hire even more Black Water type people to take their place. So the number of official soldiers will come down, but the overall number of personnel will increase.

Recently, the United Nations Security Council voted in support of creating a No-Fly zone over Libya. The ruling was based on initial reports that Colonel Gaddafi was using his air force against his own people during the internal struggle within Libya.

Russia abstained from the vote. Their government disputed the initial report of the Libyan air force attacks. This doesn’t mean the Russians are telling the truth. They have an interest on what happens in Libya as well. They have not commented on later reports of more Libyan Air Force attacks.

However, the fact that Russia disputed the initial attacks means that someone is lying. The question is who? The US/Western leaders or the Russian leaders? The problem is that we really don’t know. Not like either side has a history of being honest with their people.

The Western Nations are using the UN Security Council vote with Arab League Support as their justification for the attacks. They are claiming that Gaddafi is a tyrant, hurting his own people and must be stopped. We must use military force to protect the Libyan people.

However, I find this as a hallowed argument. Many peace loving people have complained about China’s rule over Tibet… About the bloodshed in Dalfur. There were no UN Security Council rulings authorizing military force in these situations.

What’s the difference? One key difference: oil. It seems that if you have oil, the Security Council notices you. It is also oil that Europe desperately needs. How ironic that France who was the most critical voice of the United States in Iraq is now very vocal about Libya where they receive oil.

So now, a joint effort by France, the United Kingdom and the United States have attacked Libya to create a no fly zone. I have been surprised about recent statements made by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates saying we should not get involved in another Middle Eastern Country. Also, he spoke out against a no-fly zone for they will always lead to a more expanding military role.

So that brings up the next question… Why is the United States involved? Granted, the United Nations voted for it, but what about the US Constitution? The Constitution according to the then Senator Obama there has to be an actual or imminent threat to the nation. How does Libya while in the middle of civil war brings an actual or imminent threat to the United States?

Well simply, it doesn’t. Therefore, we can state that President Obama doesn’t have such authority regardless to what the United Nations Security Councils votes. Obama’s oath is to the Constitution, not the United Nations Charter. The former Senator Obama based on his earlier quote supported this concept.

Reactions by American People have been mixed. The neo-cons and social conservatives are actually supporting President Obama. With some exceptions, most on the left have been silent. The only ones I have seen who have spoken out against these actions are the Libertarians or Libertarian leaning Republicans.

The first reports disclosed that French planes initiated the attack. However before any reports about any US involvement, a Social Conservative complained about how Obama embarrassed the United States for not taking the lead. I’m amazed by some social conservatives who yell about the Constitution when it comes to their individual perspectives, but ignore it when it is convenient for them.

I also find it interesting how the anti-war left for the most part has been silent. Not only over Libya, but also since Obama has kept up the Bush foreign policy. The same people who had no problem making Bush posters with a likeness of Hitler. The same people who complained the loudest when the Tea-Partiers made Hitler looking Obama posters themselves.

For the record, I have no problem with either side making these posters because I do support the First Amendment.

Again, why has the left been so silent? They did argued that we have to leave Iraq and Afghanistan? However, they now say we have to stay to protect woman’s rights in Afghanistan. The only logical explanation for change of attitude is because now there is a Democrat in the White House instead of the Republican. I doubt the left would be so quiet if this exact situation happened during the last year of Bush.

Now the next set of questions… If we during the attacks managed to kill Gaddafi, are we morally justified? Do a group of nations have the right to come together and force their will on another?

Did we consider that among the rebels, we may get someone worse?

I do understand that we as human beings are compassionate. We don’t like to see violence or the victims that violence often produces.

The problem is: We really can’t interfere with the internal workings of other nations. We are allowing for a precedent for other nations to interfere inside of ours.

Also when we interfere and when the dust settles, the end result is often worse.

Related items

Share on Facebook

AOD-Excuse me, the First Amendment

lambo — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 03:49:07 +0000

An article from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution…

About 35 Arrested at Rally for Wikileaks Suspect

I think that the military and police need to be reminded that all of the United States (and the world if you believe in natural rights) is a Free Speech zone.

Also, would someone please explain to me how a lowly Marine Private had access to all this classified information?

Related items

Share on Facebook

Well, do we or don’t we?

lambo — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:03:15 +0000

Here is an interesting article from the UK’s The Telegraph.

US backing of a for a world currency stuns markets.

No doubt, the dollar being the world reserve currency has giving the United States benefits.

Considering the history of the IMF, I would be very leery of a global currency controlled by them.

Related items

Share on Facebook

Essay 01: Do We Really Want a Working, Bi-Partisan Government

lambo — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:41:09 +0000

Recently on one of the Sunday morning pundit shows, hosts from both the left and right perspectives argued that Americans want a working, bi-partisan government. Both sides pointed to recent poll gains that President Obama has enjoyed since the lame duck session and the Arizona shooting of Congresswoman Giffords.

They explained that Obama’s willingness to work with those on the other side of the aisle during the lame duck after getting his “shellacking” back in November 2010. I would add that regardless of political beliefs, it’s hard to argue that Obama was in his full glory during his speech in Arizona. His poll numbers got a boast there as well. However, his State of the Union speech got mixed reviews usually being tied back to the political views of the one giving the review.

Does this mean that the pundits are correct in their claims that Americans really want a working, bi-partisan government?

On the surface, this would appear correct. Who could really argue that we want our elected officials just to argue and bicker without accomplishing anything? However, there is one major fact that most pundits and Americans often overlook: Congress is often an reflection of ourselves.

There is no doubt that most pundits that achieve some level of success on network television are well-educated and well-read. Most of us can accept that these pundits have a blind spot of seeing things outside of their perspective. They will often concede the point that they don’t share the view with the person, who usually sits across from the table from them.

A well-paid, well-trained pundit is more than capable to counter the opposing views of a opposing pundit. However, what if there is a different take on things? Could there be an another view they don’t even recognize? Should we be concerned when the mainstream pundits actually agree on something?

One problem with the modern pundits, they are pre-conditioned and pre-coached on the left versus right mentality. If President Bush believes in something, Chris Mathews has to disagree. If President Obama believes in a different cause, Glen Beck has to disagree. They fail to understand things outside of the left versus right paradigm.

So back to the question, do Americans really want a working, bi-partisan government?

Do most Democrats want Obamacare repealed? Do the Republicans want the States to drop their lawsuits that is against it which is working it way through the courts? With the current financial difficulties, how far will Republicans be willing to cut funds from the defense budget? Will they go as far as the Democrats would suggest?

Are not Americans themselves divided on these issues as much as Congress? It would appear so. So do we really want a working, bi-partisan Congress? I think not!

Anyone who has checked various forums or Facebook posts has seen a heated divide growing in our country.

While we argue if we should be in the middle east, best way to handle the budget deficit, the Constitutionality of Obamacare, the union debates in Wisconsin… We are overlooking the heart of these issues.

The central theme of all these debates is: what is the role of government in our society? One that plays an active role in our lives versus one that plays very little.

I do have worries that this divide could collapse our country. If you disagree with me, please, consider this scenario:

A state like California wants a bail out from the federal government. The Feds already have a huge debt, and can’t agree on how to do it. Also, there is a problem that the more fiscally conservative states will not want to bail out California. They would argue about why their tax dollars should go to a state that can’t manage their own budget properly.

The current make up of the House of Representatives will not support such a move. So if the Feds won’t do it directly, what might happen then? There is nothing stopping the Federal Reserve from bailing out California. This move would also hold all American taxpayers liable to the annoyance of those same conservative states

The same conservative states which are already annoyed by anti-gun laws, EPA regulations, Real ID, and Obamacare. I think this could be an issue that starts the flame of a wildfire that we will not be able to control.

So back to the question, do we really want working, bi-partisan government? Way things are between the big government and small government types, the answer is clearly no.

A View From The Fence Facebook Page

Voice Mail Line: (206) 309-3528

Please review us on iTunes

Technorama #300

Related items

Share on Facebook

AOD-FBI Visits Granny

lambo — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:28:54 +0000

From NBC Connecticut

Elderly Woman Threatens Castration

I can understand why the FBI needs to visit. I support (Pardon the pun) cutting the funding for Planned Parenthood. I just hope that the FBI realized the threat was serious pretty quick and didn’t bother the woman too much.

Related items

Share on Facebook

Show 41: Bunch of Crap

lambo — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 15:21:40 +0000

Lambo is Ragmanless for this episode.

He talks on and on and on and on about various recent issues.

Election Results
TSA
Gun Case
Food Bill
Bush Tax Cuts

Can we shoot him?

BTW

New Voice mail line!

(206) 309-3528

Please, give us a call!

Also, please review our show on iTunes!

Related items

Share on Facebook

Looking at the Tea Leaves

lambo — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 03:38:41 +0000

I doubt anyone will think I am sticking my neck out by saying that tomorrow’s election will be a big day for the Republicans. Most analysts have already stated that the House of Representatives will change hands to the Republicans.

The debate has been over the number of seats that will change. I have seen statements from the low forties to low sixties. Personally, I think it will get in the fifty range, but exact number is hard to pin down. A lot depends on how big the tidal wave for the Republicans will be.

The Senate is a much different story. The more liberal leading media and some conservatives claim that the Senate will stay Democrat, but everyone believes that Republicans will make significant gains. However, there are some more conservative analysts claiming that the Senate could be taken by the Republicans.

The last Rasmussen poll states for the Senate that solid results for Democrat is 48, an for the Republican is 45 while 7 are still to close to call. If the Republicans can take 6 of these 7, they will control the Senate.

A preview of the toss up Senate races:

West Virginia

I find West Virginia Senate Race is one of the most interesting ones. A popular Democratic Governor, Joe Manchin in a close race because West Virginia is very Anti-Obama. West Virginia is a coal state so Cap-n-Trade isn’t popular there. Manchin has tried to distanced himself from Obama.

Challenger John Raese (R) has ran a tough race, but Manchin currently leads in the polls 49-46. (+/- 3) Raese was actually leading the race, but Manchin took the lead in recent weeks. If Raese manages to win, this could be a sign that the Republican Tidal Wave is going to be huge.

West Virginia is in the Eastern Time Zone so it will be one of the first toss up states for us to know the outcome. What kind of impact would a Republican win here might have on the elections on the west coast? Will it make the Democrats more determined to come out to win those states, or discourage them to vote?

Prediction: Democrat Joe Manchin. Note: If Raese wins, expect a long night for Democrats.

Pennsylvania

I have seen polls going for both candidates from this state. Rasmussen has Pat Toomey (R) leading Joe Sestak 50-46.

One thing to keep in mind, the Governor’s race here with Republican Tom Corbett has a significant lead over the Democrat Dan Onorato: 52-43. If the Governor’s race is leaning that way by that kind of margin, you could expect the Republican Senate Candidate to get a bit of a kick of support as well.

Prediction: Republican Pat Toomey

Illinois

Republican Mark Kirk has a four point lead over Democrat Alexi Giannoulias: 46-42. Kirk has pretty much lead in the polls. Giannoulias is also being hurt by Green Party Candidate, LeAlan Jones who has 5 points.

Again, there is a Governor’s race here as well. Republican Bill Brady has a significant lead over Democrat Pat Quinn: 45-37. Again in theory, this should boast Mark Kirk.

Democrats must be annoyed by Jones who must be stealing votes away from Giannoulias. However, could potential Green Party voters go Democrat on election day?

However, President Obama and former President Clinton made recent stops in Illinois to energize Democrats to turn out. Also, the state has a history of being Democratic so that might help Giannoulias.

Prediction: Republican Mark Kirk

Colorado

Republican Ken Buck is leading Democrat Michael Bennett: 48-44. Bennett did make some ground after some of Buck’s gaffes. Will this trend continue to election day?

Again, this is another state with a Governor’s race. Democrat John Hickenlooper is leading (Not Republican but) American Constitution Party Tom Tancredo: 47-42. The thing to note that Tancredo has made significant gains in recent weeks. What about the Republican? Dan Maes (R) has only 5 percent of support.

I don’t see any Governor race coattails here. If anything, it might be the other way round.

Prediction: Republican Ken Buck

Nevada

One thing about this election, regardless of who wins or loses expect this to be taken to the Nevada Supreme Court with allegations of voter fraud. This one has been nasty all along, and I think it will finish that way as well.

Currently in the polls, Republican Sharron Angle is leading over Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid: 49-45. They were neck and neck just a few weeks ago. I suspect the reason for the Angle bump was the last debate where even liberal leaning commentators said that Reid had a poor outing.

There is a Governor’s race here as well, and has an interesting twist. Senator Reid’s son, Rory is running for Governor and is getting spanked. Republican Brian Sandoval is leading Rory Reid (D): 58-35.

You have to think with Senator Reid’s growing NATIONAL unpopularity that Rory Reid would picked a better time to run for Governor. So Senator Reid can’t expect any Governor Coattail effect.

Prediction: Republican Sharron Angle and to be determined in the courts later.

California

Senator Barbara Boxer (D) has a slight lead over her Republican opponent, Carly Fiorina: 49-46. This has been a tough race from the start. Both women have fought hard.

California is also having a Governor’s race. Since the Governorator is leaving office with an approval rating in the toilet. I would think that would give a boast to the Democrats. In the same way that Obama got a boost from Bush’s low ratings.

Currently, former Governor Jerry “The Fossil” Brown (D) is leading Republican Meg Whitman: 49-45.

So both races are too close to call and not sure if there would be a coat tail effect either way. I will assume that both spots will be taken by the same party. Also, California historically leans Democrat.

Prediction: Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer will retain her seat.

Washington

Oh my!

This is a tight one!

I have seen polls that go both ways. However, Rasmussen has Republican Dino Rossi with a slight lead over incumbent Democrat Patty Murray: 48-47.

I think this one falls into how big the Republican Tidal Wave is. If it looks like the Republicans are slaughtering the Democrats than expect this one to go Republican. Also, it may be days before an official winner is announced.

There is no Governor’s race that could impact the results either.

According to Rasmussen, “neither candidate has held a lead greater than five points in 15 surveys conducted since January and they’ve been within two points of each other nine times.”

Wow.

Prediction: Lambo has no clue! Gun to the head prediction? Since I expect this to be a big night for Republicans and with the anti-incumbent mood… Dino Rossi.

Conclusion

That has my predictions 5-2 in favor of the Republicans. Guess what that means?

If I am correct, 50-50 tie in the Senate.

However, I do think I laid out other possible scenarios so it really can go in many directions. Again, the key… How big of a Republican Tidal Wave will occur?

Related items

Share on Facebook