-
play_arrow
The CRUSADE Radio Network CRUSADE Radio Network
-
play_arrow
The Mike Church Show-Radio Would Have Thwarted The Trump Assassination Attempt The KingDude
-
play_arrow
Audio Post Format TheKingDude
The Unconstitutional Hullabaloo of State of The Union 2013
Mandeville, LA – Mike Church’s daily Pile of Prep, chock full of State of The Union reaction and other [r]epublican stories used to perform the Mike Church Show on Sirius/XM Patriot channel 125. “The sympathy between the people of the United States and France, born during our colonial struggle for independence and continuing today, has received a fresh impulse in the successful completion and dedication of the colossal statue of “Liberty Enlightening the World” in New York Harbor–the gift of Frenchmen to Americans.” – President Grover Cleveland – SOTU speech, 1885
Grover Cleveland was one of those Presidents who took the SOTU SERIOUSLY and his SOTU message from 1885 looks like Einstein’s relativity formula next to Obama, Bush & Clinton’s feeble attempts to not explain their egregious Oath of Office violations
Unconstitutional issue by unconstitutional issue breakdown of Obama/Rubio/Rand Paul State of The Union speeches and sales pitches
The highlight reel from Rand Paul: Transcript – video of Senator Paul’s speech via Tea Party Express – count how many times Paul uses the word “party” and see which “party” you think he was speaking about, the REPUBLICAN party or the TEA party?
Today’s Latin phrase: “Memento, homo, quia pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris.” – Remember, man, you are dust and to dust you will return.
Rubio’s response highlight “I believe in federal financial aid. I couldn’t have gone to college without it. But it’s not just about spending more money on these programs; it’s also about strengthening and modernizing them.” He BELIEVES in federal-read national-financial aid!? Good grief
“Hey Mac, can I get a drink down here!?” – Senator Rubio dusts off his RNC speech and what appears to be his regret that his father was a bartender, an issue I have commented on before
This VIDEO is all wet: Maybe Senator Rubio could have used his dad being there to serve him a tonic and lime?
Dueling Machos: We’ll learn more about Rubio vs Paul with the Senate vote on Chuck Hagel’s nomination than we will from last night’s SOTU (I do not agree with this, Paul didn’t endorse federal largesse as Rubio did)
DeceptiCONNED on Video: Texan via Israel Ted Cruz is reprimanded by Senator for his over the line lust of non-interventionist blood, that of ACTUAL war-hero and veteran,. Senator Chuck Hagel
Ron Paul makes deal to produce daily podcasts. “Longtime Texas congressman and former presidential candidate Ron Paul will begin a deal to produce two daily one-minute features with the help of libertarian talk radio pro Charles Goyette as sidekick. Paul says, “I am very excited to have this opportunity to take the message of freedom to more people than ever, especially now when our country needs it so much. Radio and podcasting are a much more powerful means of communication than speaking on the floor of Congress. I welcome this chance to work with Norm and Courtside and interact with America in a new way, delivering a message that is timelier than ever and a philosophy that people are clearly hungry to hear more about.”
Similar posts
Post comments (2)
Featured post
Latest posts
Kamala Harris: The Shape Of Modern Evil, A Halloween Commentary
Mike Church Show- Review of 2016 Al Smith Dinner That Invited Killary
The CRUSADE Channel & Mike Church Show Achieve Milestone of Episode 2,000! Celebrate “Y2K-D” With Us!
Tuesday Pile of Prep – The Great Debate is Set: The Don vs The Demon’s Dame
The Constitution Hour Episode 13-Why Trump IS A Natural Born Citizen & Cruz Is Not-Why The Founders Chose republicanism Over Monarchy
Current show
Wil Shrader Jr. on February 14, 2013
I propose we stop talking in “trillions” and start using “1000 billions” or even “million millions”. People only hear or understand the relatively small “6”.
Duane Cunnningham on February 13, 2013
Mike,
Senators Rubio, and Paul really show the two contending sides for the heart of the Republican party. Those, who like Paul and his father, bring the Constitution into the arena for discussion, and as a basis for laws, liberty, and thought. And those like Rubio, appear logical, and rational, but are less likely to use the Constition in forethought before action or in political decisions. Is it of either ignorance or disinterested with the Constitution and or rebuplicanism? Choosing, instead speak of it’s “values” versus it’s actual application and understanding? Rubio is interested in protection of freedoms to the extent he can garner votes, or to secure power for the Republican Party to continue on. The value of freedom for him maybe strong, but the relativism he regards it as varies as the subject, or postion does.
Both men appear to me as good Christian gentlemen. Is our mistake to choose the side of an argument based on the man, and not the consequenses of his ideology? For many, it is the man, being ignorant of the reality, and or consequences of that man’s actions, and consequences of those actions. Look at Obama, for the best example. So in the end, we are weakened by an electorate that allows itself to be manipulated, in those things that are beyond their scope of cognition, or choosing not to put forth the effort for an understanding, but allowing themselves to accept what is given. This is our biggest problem…
Rubio would offer that student loans are good for the Federal Government to do, but then complain of too much government and spending. Why does he not see the duplicity of his position? He fails in this one simple example as many of the Republican party do, in that they have accepted “Laviathan” for whatever reason or rational, as enevitable, and must therefore mitigate it to a point that is palatable to the electorate or the “low information voter”. He is a good man but why can’t he see this? Why does this process even continue? Does he think it is moderation, or consensus building? Why do many not use the Constitution and republicanism as the foundation to apply to a political argument? If it is wrong, we can change it..
Paul has the better argument, which is point of freedom and liberty, and Constitution. Can there really be any other way? Or we are doomed to eventually callapse, like described in Plato’s Republic moving from failed democracy to strong man tryanny.