This campaign season has been a great one. Both of the candidates worked very hard. Earl gave a valiant effort, but in the end it was the Brady bunch that won out.
Today all of the government students filled the 800 hall for a final vote. Each student elector had to line up next to their designated state and vote for their candidate. Scott Brady won by a landslide even going so far as to take California, a very unexpected yet pleasant surprise for him. In the end the vote stood at 14 Republican votes and 9 Democrat votes.
Good luck to everyone writing a bill. Remember that Brady is a more liberal republican than most. After all, he did start out as an Independent.
Democratic
Washington, Rhode Island, New York, Colorado, Ohio, Illinois, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Nevada
Republican
Arizona, Alaska, Alabama, Iowa, South Carolina, Florida, Texas, Louisiana, North Dakota, North Carolina, Michigan, California, Vermont, New Mexico)
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
The truth about the candidates.
Hello all!
With voting approching, I thought it would be a good idea to set the record strait about our two candidates. So far, both of the candidates have tried to show just how "great" and "honest" they are, but in actuality they both are hiding a dark and secret past. Through great effort on the parts of the official independent party dirt searcher team(me) we have uncovered the truth!
First we will take a look at the supposed "candidate for the minority" Dallin Earl. Mr. Earl has built his platform on equality, freedom, and justice, But did you know at one time Mr. Earl was a member of the extremist right-wing group "The Constitution Freedom Alliance"? Some of the groups most notorious activities include: stealing money from homeless people, going on frequent "gun parades" (or rather, walking up and down the streets with guns in their hands screaming the virtues of lifting of gun bans), reenact stories from the bible in city capitals(mostly with an anti-gay message), and perhaps most (in)famously, back on new years 1999, the group took to the rooftops and skeet-shot pro-choice pamphlets, bags of green tea, and adoption papers for gay couples, littering the ground with ideology. The group officially disbanded in 2003 when most of the members spent their life saving to move to Afghanistan to hunt down Osama Bin Laden by themselves.
And what about the other candidate Scott Brady? Is he anymore innocent than his opponent? Sadly he is not, Mr. Brady, now a staunch republican, was once known as the extremist left DJ: MC Government Handout. He is well know for many underground hits, including: the heavily plagiarized mo' carbon mo' problems, a song dedicated to raising awareness of global warming. No Sleep till Princeton, a song praising the college and his experience there. In 2003 MC Government handout released his last known song: "Give me your guns, I give you a hug", a departure from his previous work this hip hop ballad pleads to the Islamic terrorists to put down their guns and give peace a chance. In his last know public appearance, MC Government Handout, joined by Bono and Jane Fonda had an emotion filled funeral for a tree that had recently died in the woods behind Ms. Fonda's home. In 2005, MC Government Handout left the liberal hip hop scene after learning the Micheal Moore lied in the film Fahrenheit 9/11.
I truly hope that these 100% true facts about the candidates has opened your eyes and now you will vote with a more clear picture of who these candidates are.
-Ryan Colton
With voting approching, I thought it would be a good idea to set the record strait about our two candidates. So far, both of the candidates have tried to show just how "great" and "honest" they are, but in actuality they both are hiding a dark and secret past. Through great effort on the parts of the official independent party dirt searcher team(me) we have uncovered the truth!
First we will take a look at the supposed "candidate for the minority" Dallin Earl. Mr. Earl has built his platform on equality, freedom, and justice, But did you know at one time Mr. Earl was a member of the extremist right-wing group "The Constitution Freedom Alliance"? Some of the groups most notorious activities include: stealing money from homeless people, going on frequent "gun parades" (or rather, walking up and down the streets with guns in their hands screaming the virtues of lifting of gun bans), reenact stories from the bible in city capitals(mostly with an anti-gay message), and perhaps most (in)famously, back on new years 1999, the group took to the rooftops and skeet-shot pro-choice pamphlets, bags of green tea, and adoption papers for gay couples, littering the ground with ideology. The group officially disbanded in 2003 when most of the members spent their life saving to move to Afghanistan to hunt down Osama Bin Laden by themselves.
And what about the other candidate Scott Brady? Is he anymore innocent than his opponent? Sadly he is not, Mr. Brady, now a staunch republican, was once known as the extremist left DJ: MC Government Handout. He is well know for many underground hits, including: the heavily plagiarized mo' carbon mo' problems, a song dedicated to raising awareness of global warming. No Sleep till Princeton, a song praising the college and his experience there. In 2003 MC Government handout released his last known song: "Give me your guns, I give you a hug", a departure from his previous work this hip hop ballad pleads to the Islamic terrorists to put down their guns and give peace a chance. In his last know public appearance, MC Government Handout, joined by Bono and Jane Fonda had an emotion filled funeral for a tree that had recently died in the woods behind Ms. Fonda's home. In 2005, MC Government Handout left the liberal hip hop scene after learning the Micheal Moore lied in the film Fahrenheit 9/11.
I truly hope that these 100% true facts about the candidates has opened your eyes and now you will vote with a more clear picture of who these candidates are.
-Ryan Colton
PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
During the short time allotted during lunch, both candidates disputed their point of view on abortion and gay marriage. Though Scott Brady was the only one to receive an applause after his stance on abortion, he was the one to receive the most questions opposing his some what liberal stance. Dallin Earl spoke with ease often using direct quotes from our Constitution. Both spoke with charisma, intelligence, and passion, and for me somewhat closed the gap between the two candidates, putting both on an equal platform. The next session will continue on Thursday during lunch. Come and see what the future leader of your class has to say on your very own questions, and receive extra credit while doing it!
Page Gunn as she asks
a difficult question on
abortion
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Abortion by Scott Brady
Brady: on Abortion
First off, I would like to apologize for not responding sooner to your inquests; I wanted to be sure that I had all of my facts straight before trying to tackle such a sensitive topic. Secondly, I would like to say thank you to Senator Earl for giving his views on the matter and letting the student body know where he stands, however there are some gaps in his rendition of the facts about abortion that I would like to clear up. Although there are those Democrats who say that it is the mothers Constitutional right to have an abortion, the chose is no longer up to either parent after conception, because a new life with individual rights has been added into the equation.
In Earls defense of abortion he stated that not allowing abortions is, “...violating the 14th amendment (section 1) of equal protection of the law” and that the right of a woman to have an abortion is, “guaranteed by the 9th amendment.” Both of these claims to amended rights are fundamentally unsound because the fact that another’s rights are involved were totally overlooked. The 14th amendment states that, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life...” After conception, no one can deny the unborn babies right to life. The same is true of Earls claim to the 9th amendment; if the mother is allowed to abort, then she would be violating the rights of her unborn baby, thus making the act of abortion, not only immoral but also unconstitutional.
Earl also says that anyone who claims that they are pro-life and still advocate abortion in the case of rape or incest are hypocrites and I agree. In the rare instances that pregnancy occurs in the acts of rape and incest, abortion is not the answer. Rape is a terrible and emotionally scaring experience and is a serious offence, however, so is the process of abortion. Even the less invasive use of a hormone blocker to initiate an abortion is still charged with emotional trauma. Furthermore, to those who believe that the act of abortion is a safe and harmless procedure, there are many risks to the mother with the use of any form of abortion ranging from residual bleeding to sterility. Also, the processes of abortion grizzly and inhumane acts that violate irreparably both the mother and the unborn fetus; I will not go into the details of what is done, but I encourage anyone who believes in the use of abortion to read the procedures used to rip an unborn child from its mother’s womb.
I do not make this argument lightly, I have researched the topic thoroughly and there is a reoccurring theme in every source that I consult: abortion does not cure rape. Even if the mother of a rape child doesn’t want to raise a baby, there is always the option of adoption. The only case in which I believe abortion to be acceptable is in the instance that the mother’s life would be in danger from completing the pregnancy. These circumstances are, thankfully, relatively uncommon and therefore not entirely relevant to the pro-abortionists arsenal.
Thank you for the question, and I look forward to more questions and comments.
Senator Brady
Ps. For more information on the facts of abortion processes go to: http://www.abortionfacts.com/literature/literature_9312ha.asp
(Warning: the description of the procedures are somewhat graphic, however they are the processes used by doctors today)
First off, I would like to apologize for not responding sooner to your inquests; I wanted to be sure that I had all of my facts straight before trying to tackle such a sensitive topic. Secondly, I would like to say thank you to Senator Earl for giving his views on the matter and letting the student body know where he stands, however there are some gaps in his rendition of the facts about abortion that I would like to clear up. Although there are those Democrats who say that it is the mothers Constitutional right to have an abortion, the chose is no longer up to either parent after conception, because a new life with individual rights has been added into the equation.
In Earls defense of abortion he stated that not allowing abortions is, “...violating the 14th amendment (section 1) of equal protection of the law” and that the right of a woman to have an abortion is, “guaranteed by the 9th amendment.” Both of these claims to amended rights are fundamentally unsound because the fact that another’s rights are involved were totally overlooked. The 14th amendment states that, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life...” After conception, no one can deny the unborn babies right to life. The same is true of Earls claim to the 9th amendment; if the mother is allowed to abort, then she would be violating the rights of her unborn baby, thus making the act of abortion, not only immoral but also unconstitutional.
Earl also says that anyone who claims that they are pro-life and still advocate abortion in the case of rape or incest are hypocrites and I agree. In the rare instances that pregnancy occurs in the acts of rape and incest, abortion is not the answer. Rape is a terrible and emotionally scaring experience and is a serious offence, however, so is the process of abortion. Even the less invasive use of a hormone blocker to initiate an abortion is still charged with emotional trauma. Furthermore, to those who believe that the act of abortion is a safe and harmless procedure, there are many risks to the mother with the use of any form of abortion ranging from residual bleeding to sterility. Also, the processes of abortion grizzly and inhumane acts that violate irreparably both the mother and the unborn fetus; I will not go into the details of what is done, but I encourage anyone who believes in the use of abortion to read the procedures used to rip an unborn child from its mother’s womb.
I do not make this argument lightly, I have researched the topic thoroughly and there is a reoccurring theme in every source that I consult: abortion does not cure rape. Even if the mother of a rape child doesn’t want to raise a baby, there is always the option of adoption. The only case in which I believe abortion to be acceptable is in the instance that the mother’s life would be in danger from completing the pregnancy. These circumstances are, thankfully, relatively uncommon and therefore not entirely relevant to the pro-abortionists arsenal.
Thank you for the question, and I look forward to more questions and comments.
Senator Brady
Ps. For more information on the facts of abortion processes go to: http://www.abortionfacts.com/literature/literature_9312ha.asp
(Warning: the description of the procedures are somewhat graphic, however they are the processes used by doctors today)
QUESTIONS FOR THE CANDIDATES?
If you have any questions for the candatites, here is the place to comment. They will be checking this part often and hopefully they will offer the answers to your questions!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)