Thank God It's Friday: Stephen Colbert goes Live on Congress!

Picture from  Saul Loeb, AFP/Getty Images.

 



By Briana Booker




 Although the concept of the Rally at the end of October is a political satire of the failures of our society, I promote comedian Stephen Colbert going before the House subcommittee on immigration and American employment. Colbert stays in character as a outspoken conservative. It is purely refreshing.

In Colbert's testimony he addressed the following:

To make the point that Americans will not settle for grueling agricultural jobs.


Some members of Congress thought his appearance in front of Congress was a waste of taxpayers' money,but I respect him using his rights as a citzen. We are wasting tax money on  a variety of things we do not request of daily, what is the problem with one more?

Republican Steve King, R-Iowa stated that immigrant workers recieve thousands of dollars in public services and that American citizens in the same labor circumstances would have decent pay for their hard labor.

Staying in character, Colbert mentioned his one day of hard labor...and stated to them never to make him do it again. " It's really, really hard." He mentioned the labor experience was back-breaking and requested rectification for the experience.


The best part for me was when Colbert was asked how many illlegal immigrants were in the fields working the one day he worked. Colbert says the following:

" I didn't ask for their papers, though I had a strong urge to." - Stephen Colbert.

One word- Epic.

Thoughts on Congress deal on Financial regulatory reform.

By Briana Booker

 A deal on financial regulatory reform by Congress is definitely a solid fist pump for President Obama as mid-term elections are on the way! However, does the average American citizen know the impact of such reform? I doubt it.

The usage of derivatives have been the target source of blame for our present financial crisis. Basically derivatives allow market players, such as big corporations and banks, to hedge their risks with your financial investments.

 Is the best tactic to prevent business firms from intertwining banking business activity from trading propriety? The banks and the firms are the only ones being enriched by combining the two.

Should not the customer be served first, also known as you? I think so. But then again, that infringes on business firms and banks much needed capital to finance operations and hedge their investments. Poor rich people. Sigh.

I truly believe this reform has potential because it allows an increase in transparency of our financial flows as a nation. When transparency is available, it is easier to correct errors in any circumstance. We need that more than ever in this country.

Besides, who does not want to know when big business and politics use us for their own agenda?

I look forward to the progress of this reform. Any thoughts?

Having our say: Tea Party complaints vs. Real complaints.

By Zachary "Buddha" Bernstein


You know what I hate most about the Tea Party?  How they claim that they are suffering under taxation without representation.  Are you, now?  No, my hyper-caffeinated friends – you are suffering under taxation without the representation you want.  Depending where you are from, you may be in the majority on that opinion, but hey, at least you have someone to vote out of office and yell at for voting the wrong way on the health care bill.
      I, on the other hand, am a lifetime resident of Washington, DC.  You want taxation without representation?  Well, when you stop in here for your tax day protests, check our license plates.  “Taxation without Representation,” right there at the bottom. We actually do have this dilemma.  We pay federal taxes, just like you.  We bitch about it, just like you.  We, however, do not have a vote in Congress – unlike you.
      Of course, if the Washington Post is to be believed – and are they, that liberal rag? – That may not be the case for long.  One day before the tax day protests, they reported that congressional leaders plan to reintroduce a bill that would give Washington, DC a vote in Congress for the first time in centuries.
      Before you start whooping and hollering about democracy for all, there is the caveat from hell: The bill will likely, according to the Post, include language stripping the city government of most restrictions on gun-related issues.  Concealed carry?  Check.  Assault rifles?  Check.  Local control?  No check.
      And while our non-voting delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, is trying to water that language down as much as possible, she is quoted as saying this “is the best chance we’ve had to get a House vote for D.C. in my lifetime.”  So expect some of that language to stay in the finished product.  If we want a vote, we will probably need to take all the gun restrictions too.
      What really sucks about that part of the bill is that it was inserted by people from other states who were more concerned about forcing their views on a government they have no relation with, against the wishes of the people who actually live here.  To all the people who live somewhere other than Washington – how would you feel if we used our vote to force you all to convert to Scientology?  Pretty peeved, right?  Trust me when I say I know how you feel.
      And to be sure, the battle does not end here.  If the bill somehow passes Congress, it will be reviewed by the Supreme Court. 
 I know they are supposed to be the fair and final arbiter on Constitutional matters, but I trust these nine with nothing right now.  It could easily be rejected, even though it easily passes muster.
      But at least we are taking a step in the right direction.  We are going to step on a few thorns in doing so, but as an American living in the last American colony, I think it is  probably worth it.
      Suck on that, Tea Partiers.