Talking to Myself

Reflections on “Moneyball” and The Braves' 2011 Season

2012-02-13T01:34:00.000-05:00

I just finished watching “Moneyball” with my husband and his mother. I have enjoyed baseball since high school, when I started studying while watching the games on TBS. I lost interest when they started winning all the time- took the suspense out of the game- and when I moved to New Orleans. After moving back to Atlanta, and getting divorced, I reconnected with my now-husband and invited myself to a baseball game. My love of baseball was re-ignited and has grown from there. Scott and I have now been married for 3 years, and share season tickets with friends, attending at least 20 games a year, and listening to or watching most Braves' games.

My husband is a long-time fan of baseball, going back to elementary school. When he was in middle school, he won a trip to the Toronto Blue Jay's Spring Training in Florida,. He's been a member of the Society for American Baseball Research (SABR) for many years, and been published in their magazine as well as assisting in the local chapter and at the Atlanta Convention last year. My husband is my resource on all things baseball. If he doesn't know the answer to my questions, one (or more) of the books in his library will have the answers.

I have fibromyalgia and other health conditions that cause a lot of brain fog, so my brain can't handle a lot of the statistical details that my husband enjoys or that are central to the story of “Moneyball”. I have to simplify almost everything so that my brain can 'wrap around' complicated topics. One of the best aspects of “Moneyball” is that the writers were able to simplify the major themes so that most people who have no interest in baseball or statistics can still enjoy the movie. And that includes me. I get confused by a lot of the acronyms used in baseball; RBI and ERA are simple, but OBP, OPS, WHIP, WARP, FIP, DIPS... Yeah, those lose me, but my husband not only understands them, he can talk about them to friends almost as if they have their own language. I'm learning a lot from him, but sometimes I have to just stick to what I know.

There are some things I do know about baseball. At the simplest, in order to win, a team must score more runs that the other team does. To score runs, the team must either have home run hitters, or players who can get on base so another player can drive them in. And to keep the other team from scoring, the team needs good pitchers. But in baseball, even the best pitchers make the occasional mistake. And big hitters sometimes slump, and are hard to come by, as they cost so much. Which makes OBP, On Base Percentage, so important. The team that has the most players on base during the game is most likely to score the most runs. This is the strategy Pete pitches to Beene in “Moneyball”.

Which gets down to the Braves' 2011 season. While most of the season was fun to watch, the last month of the season was a nightmare. Game after game, the Braves kept losing. Our division lead went from 10 games to 9, then 8, then dwindled down to 0. Fans and players grew more and more frustrated. My husband says he saw the players' grips getting tighter and tighter on their bats. Week after week, our hopes fell, until finally there was no hope left.

Freddie Gonzalez kept saying he had faith in his players, that they had gotten us to the division lead, and would get us to the playoffs. He kept on keeping on. But the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. And Freddie kept doing the same thing until the very last game, as if his faith in the players was enough to get them through fatigue, desperation, injuries, and fan frustration. I can understand the first week or two of that final long month. But continuing the same thing for a full month in a sport that plays almost every day is the very definition of insanity.

The minor league season ends about a month before the major league season ends. And MLB has a rule that allows managers to call up minor league players to play in the majors for that last month, expanding the roster from 25 regular players to 40. This gives the team some extra energy and a break from the grind of the long season, as well as a boost to get through to the playoffs. Where was the Braves' expanded roster? The Braves are always talking about what a great farm system they have. But the only prospect I saw was a third catcher to help out McCann and Ross, who was never played! Gonzalez didn't even play Ross most of the time. If every other team is using the expanded roster, not using it leaves the team at a disadvantage. St. Louis, who knocked the Braves out of the Wild Card race, used their prospects heavily.

So where was Mauro Gomez? Mauro seemed to hit three run homers when there was only 1 person on base. What about Jose Constanza? Constanza brought a real spark to the team; even when he wasn't hitting as well, he still gave it his all. And where was the manager giving a movie-worthy speech. The only motivating speech we saw or heard about was the one Chipper gave to the team right before the final game. That speech fired up the team, so much that they came very close to winning. But the energy given by that speech died when the game went to extra innings, and the Braves lost the game and any chance for the playoffs. Why didn't Freddie give a rousing speech earlier? Why didn't he get Chipper to give his speech earlier in the month?

In life there are a lot of “If Only” moments, when you look back at an experience and wonder what might have happened. A lot of commentators and fans have been saying “If Only...” since that final game in September. There are almost as many theories as to how the Braves could have gotten to the playoffs. But to me, it filters down to the theme of “Moneyball”; the more players you get on base, the more likely you are to get the most runs. On Base Percentage. OBP. And the way to do that, when players are tired or injured, or frustrated and gripping their bats harder than ever, is to bring in new life to the team, with new players or new inspiration. And we Braves fans saw only insanity, and the third lowest OBP in the National League for the 2011 season.

The headline of today's Sports page at the AJC was “Braves stand pat”. Seems Freddie Gonzalez is doubling down on his faith in the team that got him here, and going with the insanity defense again.

My thoughts on Healthcare reform

2009-07-10T21:41:00.003-04:00

I've been watching the politicians talk about 'reforming' healthcare and reading what some friends have been saying on facebook, and I've been getting somewhat frustrated. I don't think the politicans care about reform- they only seem to want to place the federal government in charge of healthcare, and the only reason I can see for that is control.

As for the discussions between my friends, I am noticing a few false arguments, IMO. First, one friend mentioned that the conventional wisdom is that doctors get paid too much. I think it's more that doctors' offices charge too much, and that is more a result of high malpractice insurance premiums, administrative costs to file insurance paperwork and other costs of dealing with insurance companies or the government. I know many doctors offices that have to hire more than one person to file insurance paperwork and appeals. And the 'deals' that insurance companies make with those offices as to how much they will pay, in order for the doctors to be included in the 'in network' list of doctors, aren't very good deals. The Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement deals from the government are even worse- usually below the cost of providing services. In order to make that up, the doctors offices have to charge those not with Medicare or Medicaid, see more patients and find other ways to get money, such as charging copy costs for records. This is more true for hospitals, who cannot choose not to accept Medicare and Medicaid patients, and who must treat everyone regardless of ability to pay. They have to make up the costs elsewhere.

I was really troubled when one friend said that he doesn't understand how universal healthcare takes away freedom from anyone. I think that, anytime anyone other than the doctor and patient make healthcare decisions, freedom is taken away from the patient, and to a degree, from the doctor. The same is true with HMO health insurance plans. I personally will never take an HMO plan, as I want the freedom to choose my doctors. Currently, a large portion of my medical care is not covered by my health insurance plan, and I choose to continue that care, and pay for it myself. I don't think health insurance should determine what care is given- it should just be a tool to help pay for larger unexpected expenses. And healthcare decisions should not be made by bureaucrats anywhere, whether in an HMO or in the government. The stimulus bill included a department of Health Information Technology, whose purpose is to consolidate all medical records in one database and make decisions about healthcare nationwide based on efficiency. I think this should scare anyone who has even a cold, much less other health issues.

As to the argument that we give up freedom for fire protection, so why not for healthcare, I say that fire protection is a local issue, determined on a local level, by local taxes (albeit subsidized by the federal government), and as with the case of my friend who lives in a district with a volunteer fire department, is different based on where one chooses to live. Everyone can vote with their feet as to what level of taxes they want to pay for fire protection, and what level they want. However, with universal healthcare, the taxes are on a federal level, not local, and there is no way to leave, other than leaving the country, which is not an option of many people.

My thoughts on health care reform:
1) Health insurance needs to be Health Insurance- the discussions about healthcare seem to confuse healthcare with health insurance. Insurance is a tool for risk management- the basic principle is to pay a premium to insure that when larger events come along, the majority of the amount will be paid by the insurance company. Insurance is never intended to pay for everything- it should only pay for covered losses, and for items that are possibilities, not known events. And if insurance is used for small items, the premiums will necessarily increase. Pricing is therefore based on the probability of unknown events happening. One option for health insurance would be similar to catastrophe insurance, and would only pay out in the event of hospitalization or serious illness. Higher premiums would allow for lower deductibles, and could cover prescriptions, etc.

2) One of the largest costs doctors pay, is malpractice insurance. In some locations malpractice insurance costs are so high that doctors are choosing to either stop practicing medicine, or moving elsewhere. Tort reform would reduce the costs of malpractice insurance.

3) Government regulation greatly increases the cost of insurance. Because of lobbying, certain groups have ensured that their specialties will be included in all insurance plans, regardless of whether or not the insured wants to pay the premiums for that coverage. For instance, if I knew I couldn't have children, why should I pay for coverage that includes pregnancy care? If I don't want to pay for substance abuse care, why can't I exclude that from my plan? The premiums for plans that do include such coverages would have to account for more adverse selection, as, for example, those with plans to have children would choose pregnancy coverages. However, if I were to get pregnant, I would have to pay for the care myself. Because fewer people would have comprehensive insurance plans, doctors would need fewer people to process claims and appeals.

4) Possibly the most important reform is to separate health insurance from the employer. Employers receive tax benefits for providing health insurance to employees, and individuals do not receive the same tax benefits for obtaining health insurance on their own. In addition, if you work for a large company, you will get a better insurance plan than if you work for a small company, due the the larger pool of participants, and if you work for yourself or for a really small company, you may not even have the option of employer provided insurance, and if you lose your job, you lose that coverage. Insurance should not be tied to employment- to remove it from employment would level the playing field for everyone.

5) a great point from a friend, so I'm co-opting it: ensure that emergency rooms are used for true emergencies, not in place of doctors visits. Not sure the best way to accomplish this, although Urgent Care centers seem to help.

Conversations on Facebook about Healthcare

2009-07-09T16:40:00.004-04:00

M: Question for discussion: In what way does the German system to achieve universal health care coverage restrict freedom?FRONTLINE: sick around the world: interviews: karl lauterbach | PBS
Source: www.pbs.org
Lauterbach, one of Germany's foremost experts on health policy, is a professor of health economics and epidemiology at the University of Cologne and a member of the German parliament. Here he discusses ...
M: Love this pre-election quote from the German: "I think the Democrats will win the
election and they will then not change the system, is my personal view. Then they will lose a lot of credibility."

M: Geeks paid more, work less, & happier than doctors http://bit.ly/eCjVQ
J: does this apply to church geeks too?
M: its all anecdotal, so why not?
G: Powerful commentary. I wasn't smart enough to be a geek, I had to be a doctor. The "geek" in my med school class realized after blowing every curve we had that he was making more money in his side consulting business than he would ever make as a physician. Many docs are very happy, I love being a pediatrician, I have little expectation of ever making more than a comfortable life for my family. But tell me I am the cause of this healthcare mess and you can find someone else to take care of you.
M: the current "crisis" (scare quotes because I'm not completely convinced that we're at the crisis level) probably isn't the fault of pediatricians. And you can tell them I said that, Grant.
I'm still trying to understand why conventional wisdom says doctors earn tons of money when, just from a little research, I can see that isn't the case. Sure, they earn above average, but many plumbers or electricians make as much as a doctor. And there is more room to compete for plumbers and electricians (from what I can see) than doctors.
The real money isn't in medicine: it is in entrepreneurship. Medicine is (from what I can see) a relatively low-risk way for adequately intelligent people to make a comfortable (but not too extravagant) living.
Whereas the ones with tons of money (at the cost of a high chance of failure) are entrepreneurs. And, maybe it is my ignorance, but I don't see lots of room for entrepreneurs in medicine outside of snake oil salesmen.
G: the money in doctoring is on the business side, very astute observation. A poor business minded doctor is soon out of business. The very wealthy physicians are just like wealthy lawyers, they're either in real estate or doing goofy stuff on the side.
M: where "goofy stuff" is a euphemism for... not quite legal?
G: There is a difference between what is ethical and what is legal. Many things are legal that are not ethical. Giving patients antibiotics or pain meds because they want them when research and practice would not warrant them is perfectly legal and a great way to ensure repeat business, spend less time with the patient (ensure more patients per time slot) thereby making more money and is perfectly legal. In fact, much medical research in this area shows that the less time docs spend with patients the more money is spent, tests, medications, repeat visits. In models where physicians are paid for their time, costs go down due to more time to spend with patients to diagnose and educate. I feel very preachy..., Hex, it's been a great discussion!
M: Go on and preach. Your insight is helpful to an ignoramus like me ;)
I'm all for paying by time. I know that I work differently when I'm paid by the hour.
So, question: Pharmacists (I'm related to/know several) seem to be paid the same regardless of experience or negotiations. At least in hospital/retail environs. Which just seems so wrong coming from a field that tends towards meritorious in its compensation model....
In a hospital/clinical setting where the doctors are employees does compensation work the same way? Or is there something else going on? Or is the doctor-as-employee model not used much/at all?
G: Pharmacists that work for chains get productivity points for encouraging shoppers to try certain brands, switch to a particular generic etc. Hosp pharmacists are treated more like supervisors and so get paid that way. Employee physicians have all kinds of arrangements, but usually are less productive than owner physicians. If you don't have a stake in the outcome, why worry about it. This is really why university medical centers are so unproductive. Faculty without productivity incentives may only see 5-10 patients a day, where someone in private practice may see 20-40. Medical centers are starting to learn some economics in this new environment, but old habits die hard.
M: So I need to find a practice that has doctor/owners and bills by the time used.
Thanks, G!
G: You need to find someone you are comfortable with and you like. Someone who will spend the time answering your questions. As a pediatrician, I don't feel like I'm doing a good job until the parents feel like they are doing a good job.

M: US health care ranked 41st by CIA World Factbook. (i.e. not the best in the world) http://bit.ly/uF3JF
K: That's because they are ranking by health care outcomes, not profitability.
M: Dang, you saw through my subterfuge.
K: My health care is great. It could not be better. Of course I pay for the services I want and need
G: The problem with our costs is that what people want is not what they need. True healthcare reform is actually going to cost everyone more, and hopefully significantly reduce use of services like MRIs and medicines. I could talk about this for hours, but won't bore the public with yet another pundit's ideas of what should happen, since that is most certainly what will not happen. Lawyers and insurance companies have too much invested for there to be real reform.
T: My health care is managed by bean counters who frequently override my doctors' judgments. And I'm fortunate to have what is generally regarded as good health insurance.
M: K, your health care may be great, but are you happy to overpay?
I was lucky enough to have health care when I took a table saw to my hand. At the time, I was unemployed and almost had to use the Charity Hospital System in NOLA. Which probably would've gotten me the results I needed since they have great trauma care.
Luckily, I found out I was eligible for COBRA, so I was able to get surgery without humongous wait times. (Also, if you must go to a free hospital, try to make sure you're bleeding when you get there. Learned that one the hard way.)
But what do anecdotes prove? "My health care" is irrelevant, except to me.
Sure, most of us commenting are employed now and can afford the care we need. But that misses the point.
The market isn't providing the best solution (see CIA WFB) and we're over-paying. It doesn't matter whose fault it is.
S: Anyone who thinks they aren't already subsidizing health care for the uninsured/underinsured is fooling themselves. Your taxes are subsidizing it in a very inefficient, expensive way. Speaking as a close relative of an uninsured person with no money and multiple major health problems. He always gets care at the state-funded hospital, very good care, too.
G: Of course we pay a lot to subsidize care in the ER. That is where most of the cost drain is. With appropriate reform the ERs would be closed to non emergent care, everyone would have coverage to have care outside of a hospital where it is most expensive. But, the great part, is that the uninsured will also be paying into the system. Look to the Mass. plan. Everyone is expected to pay in, and that means reduced discretionary income, so maybe no meals out, no 4 wheelers, no fancy car. The people who have complained the most about the Mass. plan are contract workers and freelancers who are expected to pay in 10% of their income (a realistic expectation).

M: still trying to figure out how any health care proposals on the table reduce freedom
K: Reduce freedom for the poor to suffer?
L: As a person with family in Canada I can tell you that their socialized health system is oppressive and values cost over life. I believe our system here needs
reformed - but not socialized.
K: As a long-time American member of an HMO, I can say without reservation (and with some experience) that so does ours.
M: L, gotta say: Krista's right. But, again, I don't think any of the proposals on the table is for a Canada-style system.
K: Nah, a lot of the proposals are a lot more like Germany's system, actually, which, while confusing, seems to work. As a high-risk foreigner, I actually pay quite a bit, and if employed after my probationary period here, I'd still pay quite a bit unless I couldn't afford it, at which point I'd drop into the so-called public system, which has the same care, just paid for differently.
M: Excellent. German engineering applied to Health Care. What could go wrong?
T: There is a good Frontline documentary that covers some of this: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

Of course the health care proposals reduce freedom as do Medicare and Medicaid. If even one dollar of one's income is "redistributed" to pay for another's healthcare, freedom is trampled. Using "force" of any kind against another individual impairs that person's ability live a free life
M: Kristopher, so I'm confused. Are you saying we should eliminate taxes entirely?
K: No, we need taxes and government. We need a government that can protect me from those individuals (bad guys) or groups (terrorist organizations, invading countries,etc) that want to harm me or my property. We need a standing army, police, fire, and court system.
M: fwiw, in my area, the fire departments are all-volunteer.
So, you're willing to have reduced freedom to fund your fire department?
Isn't it "We the people" who get to decide what freedoms to give up (if we do, in fact, consider taxes a loss of freedom) in return for some benefit, be it police or a fair judicial system? If "we the people" decide we'd like better health care and are willing to pay for it with our tax dollars (i.e. "loss of freedom") then what is the harm? You've already decided you're willing to give up freedom for fire fighters.
K: Fire fighters protect personal property and save people from dying who are in a natural disaster.
M: And doctors save people who are dying of disease. If you're willing to pay for fire departments to "save people from dying", why not health care?
K: Why do doctors save people? For the fun of it? Maybe some. But the majority do it for a profit motive. The government fixes prices and reimbursement. Slowly over time smart and talented people will leave medicine. People who have resources are not clamoring to get their gall bladder out at Walter reed or an Indian hospital. No they go to the most talented skilled professional that their resources will buy.
M: Do you have any statistics to back up your assertion that "the majority do it for a profit motive"? I'm not questioning that people go into medicine for the money: but I don't think that is the primary reason "the majority" chooses the field.
Further, you're assuming that any change in the health care system would necessarily mean less pay for providers. I'm not going to argue that because in a free market system eliminating inefficiencies does reduce costs. If doctors are permitted to compete -- if health care were truly a free market -- then I would expect health care costs to go down and, yes, doctors would be paid less.
Either way, if the government mandates reform or if we institute a truly free-market approach, I would expect doctors to be paid less. The only way to avoid that is to keep the status quo.
K: I don't have any statistics to back up that doctors " do it for the money". We can do an experiment though. Next time u go to the doctor make it clear that u have no intention of paying nor do u think he or she should be paid what he is charging. Tell me about the care u receive or how quickly u are shown the door
M: What about the rest of what I said: that Drs will inevitably be paid less?
M: Also refusing to provide service if I refuse to pay is not the same as providing care only because of money.
K: That is already happening. Physician reimbursment has been falling for 20 years
K: If the only variable that changes is your refusal to pay, one must conclude that "they are doing it for the money"
M: Yet, somehow, people have been going into medicine still. Evidence suggests (http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1733) that there are too many doctors.
So, obviously, they are still paid too much. An over-supply means that there will be a reduction in costs.
M: but we've gotten off track: how does any of this support the idea that changing the health care system reduces freedom?

Letter regarding tea parties- get involved!

2009-07-07T09:08:00.001-04:00

Sent: 7/4/2009 9:04:25 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Tea Party Experience

Hi ya'll,

Well, yesterday I attended my first Tea Party (Taxed Enough Already) and learned a great deal.

One thing I learned was there are a lot of people who are really upset with the way things are going in Washington. They are beginning to do something about that and as a result there are many grassroots organizations popping up all over America, all having the desire to return America to our Constitutional Republic. This Tea Party was not put on by a political party. It was a purely volunteer effort.

Another thing I learned was that I am not alone. There were over 7,000 people attending (see attached pics). All of the people who spoke (except for the MC and the Key Note) were folks just like me...people with jobs, with families, with hopes and dreams. And each person who spoke did so because of the growing concern that our freedoms and liberties were being dismantled piece by piece. One thing all of the speakers had in common was a love of country and a love of liberty. This has motivated them to study, to learn, to stand up, and to speak out. One was a self-taught Constitutional expert/historian who spoke of our heritage. One was an Army Captain/Medical officer (retired) who spoke on the VA health care system as an example of government run health care. Another speaker was a 14 year old boy who was probably more knowledgeable on American history than everyone in the crowd.

Another thing I learned was it's not too late to stop the destruction of America as we know it. But, the only way for this to happen is for people like you and me to get involved. Most folks consider it their patriotic duty to vote at every election, and that is true. But then most folks sit back and don't stay involved or are even aware of what happens between elections. Well, and here is the kicker...Our government is "...of the people, by the people, and for the people..." (as Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address). That implies a bit more involvement. Congress works for us. The President works for us. If America were a true corporation we (the American people) would be fired! Why? Because we, the owners, have allowed the "employees" to run roughshod over the whole purpose and intent of our company. So, what can we do? How can we be heard? Do you feel impotent when it comes to impacting "our corporation"? Here are some suggestions: 1. Educate yourself on what goes on in Washington. What bills are being discussed? What direction are we going? 2. Educate yourself on American history. Read the Declaration of Independence. Read the Constitution. Read biographies of our founders. 3. Find out who your Congressman is and learn how to contact him/her. 4. Do the same for your two Senators. 5. Contact them regularly by phone, by email, by fax, and if you have the chance, in person. 6. Find others in your community who are like-minded and join them. 7. Get involved. 8. If you are in agreement with your Representative and Senators don't sit back and do nothing. Contact your friends and family about issues. Encourage them to contact their elected officials too (that's why I'm sending this to you). 9. Use the Internet to study, to learn, to become active and to make contact.

America is the greatest nation on earth. We are blessed with freedoms and liberty. That is why so many want to come here, and that is why so many want to tear us down. America belongs to its people. We are America. Let me encourage each of you to get involved. Let your voice be heard.

Slater

DHS paper- shows government afraid of patriotic movements

2009-05-01T22:47:00.005-04:00

The DHS paper on Right Wing Extremism was requested by the Bush administration, but not completed until this April,. and released just before the Tax Day Tea Parties.

Dprogram.net has an article about it and the other DHS paper on Left Wing Extremism.

While there is a legitimate argument that this paper was not requested by the Obama administration, I am still concerned about the timing of its release, and about the statements therein. I understand that there is a reason to be concerned about the fringe elements who are willing to use violence to obtain the results they desire. And there have been some militants who have caused deaths and damage with their actions. But I worry that DHS is demonizing certain groups. And I guess it could be argued that is exactly what DHS was created to do.

However, the most interesting part of this article is near the end (emphasis mine):

Demonizing and criminalizing the patriot movement – characterizing them as “rightwing extremists” and white supremacists with the help of SPLC and ADL propaganda – is a last ditch effort on the part of the globalists and international bankers in control of the government. Our rulers realize the threat posed by a large grassroots movement – especially one including veterans – demanding less government intrusion in our lives and a return to a constitutionally limited Republic.

And I think that our elected representatives, and those they have appointed, should realize this threat, because it is very real- we are very angry and we want our constitutionally limited Republic back. But I would say 99.9%, maybe more, of us, do not want to use violence to get our Republic back. Unfortunately, those .1% may cause problems for the rest of us. And I don't know how to stop them.

Darn fringiest of fringes- go home and shut up, please!

My facebook rant

2009-04-24T19:19:00.003-04:00

I accidentally retweeted the following tweet on facebook where I have a lot of liberal friends:

RT @KatyinIndy @MargieThiel: BO is a nightmare. a self-absorb ego-maniac who is putting our country at risk by his actions.

One friend replied:

Blame the one in power nevermind the chaos that was left behind by GWB.

The more I thought about his comment, the more I got upset, so here's what I sent him:

I blame GWB for some things, most especially for not being conservative enough (i.e. amnesty), I blame politicians who have been in power for too long and have forgotten who they represent, I blame the American people for being complacent and not speaking up, and I blame myself for not getting involved sooner.

But I blame Obama for pissing off our allies, and trying to be friends with our enemies thus giving them power in their fight against us and the American way of life. I blame Obama for putting imconpetent people in his cabinet like Geithner who can't pay his taxes but wants to tell us how to pay ours, or Hillary who apologizes for America everywhere she goes, or Napolitano who is in charge of Border security but can't tell you where the 9-11 hijackers came into the US.

I blame Obama for lying to the American people and saying his bill is stimulus when it is mostly (88% or so) going to thank those who got him elected (like unions) and to pork projects of democrat senators and representatives. I blame Obama for not respecting the office of US President, for bowing to a Saudi King (never before done by a US ... Read MorePresident), for not protecting the CIA thus hampering them in their fight against terrorists. I blame Obama for his administration's plan to tax energy which will cost the average household $1900 more per year (Cap and Trade).

I blame the media for not reporting the truth, for not even trying to hide their bias, and I blame the people who only listen to the main stream media, and refuse to think for themselves.

And I blame myself for getting angry instead of trying to have an intelligent dialogue.

I could have gone on for quite a while, but I've been tired today and my energy ran out. But I have issues with almost all politicians these days. I was reading an article by a liberal who was trying to understand why conservatives are tea-partying and it reminded me of some things that pissed me off about GWB: Medicare Part B, out of control spending and saying that deficits don't matter, cronyism, etc. This guy mentions that conservatives justified tax cuts in 2001 based on huge surpluses- I read somewhere that Reagan wanted to cut taxes so that the government wouldn't have as much money to spend, but it ended up bringing in more revenue. But tax cuts aren't about revenue as much as about where the money is going. Large tax increases to pay for pork or universal healthcare which takes away freedom from me and mine- those I disagree with. Large tax increases to pay for protecting the country- those I can get behind.

What if...

2009-04-23T00:48:00.002-04:00

I've had a lot of thoughts running through my head lately. Thoughts about what my place in the world is- where do I belong, what am I supposed to be doing.

I have a book I've been working on, but I've been preoccupied with Twitter and the political situation.

I've noticed a lot of people complaining, me too, and a lot of people are frustrated. Many people don't really understand what is going on, and are only repeating what they have heard, rather than trying to figure out the truth.

So I've been wondering about starting a website/blog/twitter account, something along the lines of waking up America. A site with suggestions for people to help them wake up; suggestions for how each person can make a difference in the world around them- volunteering, donating, looking at the world a bit differently, getting involved.

Maybe suggesting charities to get involved in, things anyone can do if they have an hour or two, or $10. New ways to look at old ideas. ways to improve the world around us.

I'll have more on this later. Still thinking it through.

Howard Kempf's speech from Savannah Tea Party

2009-04-19T00:59:00.001-04:00

To My Elected Leaders

Your constituents have raised their voices and it is time that you hear us and respond. The Government leaders, both Democrat and Republican, have embraced an attitude of superiority. Despite words of humility, I have seen both Democrats and Republicans do more of what was personally and politically advantageous than what was truly what the people wanted and in the peoples best interest. I understand that there are exceptions to that statement, but they are the exception. The majority of the blame falls on the citizenry who have allowed you, our elected leaders, to work with near impunity. How many members of our government have made a career out of “public service”? Far too many! In contrast, how many have actually experienced private life for more than a brief moment in their youth or in the beginning of their political careers and truly understand what it takes to make it day by day? Not enough! Though our founding fathers possessed many viewpoints and negotiated many compromises in the designing of the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution, the one thing that they all agreed upon was that the survival of the Republic depended not upon the abilities of the government but rather the involvement of its citizens.

WE THE PEOPLE have been remiss.
We have allowed YOU our elected leaders to become complacent and comfortable.
We have allowed YOU our elected leaders to elevate yourselves above the PEOPLE.
We have allowed YOU our elected leaders to think of yourselves as American Nobility.

WE THE PEOPLE say NO MORE!

Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of your constituents, your bosses, the PEOPLE who elected you are coming together and meeting in all 50 states and D.C on April 15th, Tax Day (the most unholy day of the year on the American calendar), to come together as ONE VOICE. WE THE PEOPLE are tired and angry and are no longer willing to stand by while you dictate to us the terms by which you will govern those who elected you to govern.

WE THE PEOPLE have had enough of your empty campaign promises of remaking Washington DC - a political mantra I have heard as long as I can remember. With the exception of a few men and women, Washington is still the same as it has been for quite some time - selfish and self-serving. At a time when he could have become military dictator or King, George Washington relinquished power and submitted to the Continental Congress. Though weak and divided, the Continental Congress represented the will of the PEOPLE and, as such, was supreme in Washington’s eyes. Given similar circumstances, I wonder which of our elected leaders would gladly give up their office and the lifetime comforts and privileges therein, not denied them by the PEOPLE and most often afforded to themselves by their own hand, for the benefit of the Republic and the freedom and prosperity of the PEOPLE. I suspect that not many would. In my short 48 years, I have yet to see a politician relinquish their office, other than to avoid prosecution and/or further personal and professional embarrassment. Both Republican and Democrat need to take deep, introspective looks within themselves and have the personal courage and moral integrity to take appropriate action. There are few politicians, if any, that should consider themselves faultless as America now faces one of the most economically and politically fragile times in our history both here and abroad.

We have heard over the past few months our elected leaders, blaming not only each other, but also the PEOPLE, while each contending that they themselves are blameless and acting in everyone’s best interest. Now, like no other time in our history, we need elected leaders that value the ideals of LIFE, LIBERTY and the pursuit of HAPPINESS and the welfare of the Republic over their personal and professional goals. You sit in your offices, secure in your salary increases, your pensions, your life and medical insurance for life and your innumerable opportunities for financial prosperity resulting from the celebrity gained through your service, while WE THE PEOPLE work, struggle and produce all the wealth and opportunities from which your personal and professional prosperity is derived.

Well your time has come.

WE THE PEOPLE are tired of your campaign rhetoric and false promises.
WE THE PEOPLE are tired of the partisan blame game.
WE THE PEOPLE are tired of non-solutions, which cost more and do less.
WE THE PEOPLE are tired of programs that make us dependent on you.
WE THE PEOPLE are tired of big government and little people.

WE THE PEOPLE will no longer be silent, will no longer be content to live our lives and hope for the best. WE THE PEOPLE are standing up and saying to you:

Your political futures are looking grim. It is time to clean house from the White House to the State House to City Hall. It is time for you to take this seriously.

HEED THE VOICES OF WE THE PEOPLE
OR BE PREPARED TO SEEK EMPLOYMENT ELSEWHERE.

Yours in Liberty

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=607454645#/note.php?note_id=78271146174&ref=mf

My tweets so far

2009-04-14T18:21:00.002-04:00

eeyrehead
-@Katetheright I can do more! But I don't want to bog down anyone's twitter feeds. Why are you protesting? Can't put it in just one tweet

- got an annoying tweet from someone who didn't like my reasons for protesting- could have quietly unfollowed me or asked me to stop

- listening to Neil Cavuto and a liberal media rep- Bush spent but Obama is SPENDING trillions! I objected then, now I'm PROTESTING

- DHS paper warns about those who support state and local authority over federal- does that include McCain, a Federalist?

- @stwood1953 I'm from Canada, my parents are from England and Ireland

- The only other country I want to live in is Texas. LOL

- RT @HighPlainsBlogr: Making Legends http://twurl.nl/7nt6yc- Stage Mil Photo Op may be urban legend

- @AtlantaBytes may I ask what you find so annoying?

- I am protesting because... actions have consequences and the actions of this administration are having disastrous consequences

- I am protesting because... I believe if you don't stand for something you will fall for anything

- I am protesting because... I believe in free speech and will fight for your right to say what you think, even if I disagree with you

- I am protesting because... Freedom is not free, it must be fought for and cherished

- I am protesting because... welfare does not help anyone, it only enables them in their bad choices, and welfare should not be expanded

- I am protesting because... I believe everyone should have equal opportunity to pursue the American dream

- I am protesting because... I believe the rich are not to be reviled but emulated unless they are corrupt

- I am protesting because... I believe our President should not bow to anyone, nor should anyone bow to our President

- I am protesting because... our Founding Fathers created an amazing Constitution that is under attack

- I am protesting because... I believe our laws should be enforced and violators should be prosecuted

- I am protesting because... our military is the best, and needs to be funded and protected not de-funded and insulted

- At my citizenship ceremony, people were calling it the happiest day of their life! We are truly the greatest country in the world!

- @midlifechick I also realized how ungrateful I was for not becoming a citizen much sooner when people are fighting and dying to come here

- @midlifechick I lived her for 28 years and took it for granted. Then began to talk politics and realized I needed to follow through

- RT @midlifechick We must fight the good fight, with tireless commitment, resolve and integrity, knowing we are in the right

- @midlifechick Thank you for your message about not insulting, but trying to engage liberals. I think being positive works better

- I am protesting because.. those of us who have figured things out need to educate those who haven't. We need to wake up the American people

- I am protesting because... our Constitution allows it :) What a great country!

- I am protesting because... a stimulus bill that is 12% stimulus is not true STIMULUS

- I am protesting because... our President lies to us and laughs when journalists point out his lies

- I am protesting because... our leaders have forgotten who they represent, who they are working for

- I am protesting because... America is the greatest country in the world and I want to help keep it that way

- RT @itsonlywords: @sanuzis Our military rocks. AMEN

- MSNBC should be ashamed of their 'journalism'

- If MSNBC doesn't know why we are protesting, ask one of us! We have lots of reasons and reasoned arguments!!!

- MSNBC is so biased they don't do any research on the tea parties before bashing them as pointless and stupid.

- RT @BreakingNews: BULLETIN -- FIDEL CASTRO SAYS HE "DOES NOT QUESTION" OBAMA'S SINCERITY- Poor Castro really is sick

- RT @HeyTammyBruce: 'Rescue' Verbotten: Urkel 2x refused Navy permission to rescue Phillips outside of ROE. And vow to get a rescue dog? Yeah

- I was surprised the troops were that happy to see Obama- the truth: http://bit.ly/12FoSm

- RT @johnhawkinsrwn: Politicians will always sell us out if it's convenient. Our job is to make sure it's never convenient.

- @BiasedGirl oh so very true about Tax Freedom Day- guess we never really get out from under the taxes.

- Today-Tax Freedom Day but Deficit Freedom Day is not until May 29 http://tinyurl.com/cpe936

- RT @SheridanFolger: Justice Ginsberg Equates America to Nazi Germany http://ff.im/-25pdz - Sees no reason not to look at foreign law- ugh!

- RT @Conserv_Cal: Happy Easter to Christians celebrating Christ's resurrection after his death to pay the penalty of our sins. He is risen!

- Atlanta Braves are 5 and 1! Yippee!!!!!

- Fox News Blog: what we hope to accomplish with tea parties: http://tinyurl.com/deaohb

- @aby I thought IMHO was "In my humble opinion" but honest works too

- Obama's bow has been interpreted on Arab websites as "American president acknowledges superiority of Islam"

- RT @JediMaster_OPS RT @Politwitt: I wonder. why nuclear power is the only French idea that the left can't seem to embrace

- RT @ewerickson: Obama Bowed to Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, but not to Defender of the Christian Faith. http://bit.ly/20KCrt #TCOT

- The White House apparently can't see worth a d**m! http://tinyurl.com/dm2xzz

- @FunkyDung US is not a Christian nation, like Saudi Arabia is a Musltim nation, but we were founded on Judeo-Christian values

- @Politwitt Actually, if you watch the video, there were women but not near the Saudi king at the time - not that many female world leaders

- RT @Politwitt He was either bowing to the Saudi King or mooning his own country #tcot ROFLMAO!!!

- Ahmedinijad has a blog and his campaign tag line from 2005 was "It's doable, and we can do it". Hmmmm.. Obama the Builder-esque?

- What can we do to get rid of Acorn? Or not allow 13 Billion dollars to go to them or get them off the census- like that would be fair

- Just got Levin's Conservative Manifesto and Amity Schlaes' The Forgotten Man. Lots of good reading ahead.

- @WestleyAnnis btw I wasn't upset that you hadn't credited me with the article by Dwight Schulz, just excited that you had passed it on! tks

- Doesn't Obama have a protocol team advising him on what to do or not do? Like don't show the bottom of your shoe to an Arab, don't bow, etc

- RT @allapparel: My man! http://tinyurl.com/5cvfbs- I am a conservative because war sucks but there are things worse than war, like slavery

- @HeyTammyBruce @IBDeditorials But Marien-based Redistributor of Wealth would be something Obama would agree with, not fight

- RT @PatriotGams123 United we stand; Divided we fall. We're so divided right now. And, our enemies know this. Pray

- Fox News- From Syria's Bashar al-Assad to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Fidel Castro -the world's despots think they found a new listener-in-chief

- Kal Penn left "House" to be assoc director in White House office of public liaison. http://tinyurl.com/cszn5j

- George Packer and some other liberals seem to think Obama didn't go far enough, should have taken over banks, car industry, etc

- George Packer: Conservatives will not be able to understand the elusive nature of Obamism.. until they remove the impediment of own ideology

- Why do people hate 'the wealthy' and try to destroy them, instead of trying to become like them?

- Why would anyone with integrity and strong character want to be a politician? seems like you'd have to 'play the political game'- corrupts

- Reading the New Yorker, editorial on "Obamism" by George Packer: Obama lacks the courage of his activist impulses. Lol- not liberal enough?

- RT @jeffemanuel Kutner killed off on #HouseMD b/c Kal Penn leaving to be "assoc dir in #WH office of public liaison"! http://is.gd/r9cH #TV

- Trump is thinking about leaving New York because of the proposed tax increase

- Other words and phrases: sanctimonious, specious, hypocritical, chicanery, or my husband's fave, sophistry

- I've been trying to figure out how to describe Obama's words on North Korea's missile launch. Finally came up with Pharisaical- fits well

- Thomas Sowell: The poor do not need press agents. They need the truth. No one ever said, "Press agents will make you free."

- excellent column by Thomas Sowell: http://www.redcounty.com/re.... Herblock, Castro, Neville Chamberlain

- cartoonist Herblock: "You too can have the soothing feeling of nature's own baby-soft wool being pulled gently over your resting eyes."

- but Ravi also said that Christian principals are the only basis on which America could be founded

- Ravi said that America is not Christian in the same way that Saudi Arabia is Muslim

- Ravi Zacharias gave a talk called "Is America Really Christian" - you can find the dvd on rzim.org

- @tanstaaflWDM What if one passenger leans forward adn the other back- do they go in circles?

- Lessons from the 1920-21 recession http://www.reteaparty.com/2... H/T @mattbacak

- Is this how all politicians behave? http://www.politico.com/blo...

- RT @johnhawkinsrwn Instead of saying, "Liberals would say this if Bush did what Obama did," need to start saying the same things libs would.

- Daniel Hannan "British freedoms thrive best in America... I'll be staying here...working to repatriate our revolution."

- @tanstaaflWDM merci beaucoup, je pense

- from Bill Bennett: Americans... do not weaken at death when it is justified for a noble cause they believe in.

- @stwood1953 My friend thinks all O's actions are thanking those who got him elected, not actually his own wishes.

- @WestleyAnnis I tweeted that article by Dwight Schultz- isn't he awesome! Wish he wrote more

- Obama on N Korea- words must matter. What's the phrase I'm looking for? Ironic, much...No self awareness...Cognitive Dissonance...WTF?!?

- Had friend say he thought Obama would have to thank people for a couple of years before we''d see what he himself wants. What do you think?

- I think Obama should nominate all Senators and Reps so they will have to pay their back taxes!

- I love Dwight Schultz- he was always my favorite and now, I love him even more! Always knew he was smart :)

- Dwight Schultz of "The A-Team" on environmentalists http://bighollywood.breitba...

- to those tired of Michelle O fashion stories- could be worse- she could be talking! whew! Thank God for small favors

- @TPO_Hisself I don't think Obama was ever taught what Christianity really is. He may see himself as a Christian, but not have a clue.

- RT @BreakingNews Dow Jones Industrial Average closed above 8,000 for first time since Feb. 9; cap best four-week stretch since 1933.w00t

- @igeldard Thanks for the follow!

- @Katetheright Thanks for the follow!

- article is "Obama, the Other Huey Long" http://article.nationalrevi...

- One tab on my screen says "Obama, the other..." and all I can think is "the other white meat" lol

- Is Obama Il Duce Redux? http://spectator.org/archiv...

- Obama is 'Keeping score". He loves Saul Alinsky- who dedicated "Rules for Radicals" to Lucifer the first radical. That should scare us all

- If Obama says the Queen reminds him of his grandmother, does that mean he thinks she's racist?

- GOP budget plan not a bad start: http://www.heritage.org/Res...

- I would hope we won't le the Gitmo detainees go to Chavez- he'd probably let them go and encourage them to come here!!

- This is what happens when government gets involved: http://www.ajc.com/metro/co... So Sad

- We need to get back to our Constitution!! Where does it say the president can fire a private ceo?

- @stwood1953 I meant liberal president, but liberal press would be interesting too

- I think Obama is confused about who is real leader of Britain. Nicer gift to queen than PM.

- @JonathonSnyder Burris site doesn't say, 'See my tombstone'? lol

- RT @stevehandel Why do dem's get free pass on current deficit-were in charge for last 2 years of W term...people believe pres is responsible

- RT @bhdonovan If we stop consuming in USA, the lack of trade will kill econs of other countries... Obama sees nothing he doesn't want to see

- RT @michellemalkin NOTajoke: Obama illegal auntie Zeituni Onyango to stay. Only in America... http://bit.ly/1a8InQ- because it's not safe?

- every insane idea plausible- that's why the San Francisco Marsh Mouse in the stimulus was believable

RT @erickbrockway @jmp5329 Actually it shows how far left Obama has gone when every insane idea is plausible- lol too true

Reading "The President" by Parker Hudson. What if liberal pres becomes a true Christian? http://alturl.com/m8aj

@stevehandel Thank you for the links. however, I was wondering what others say about her- want some independent verification

@igeldard so we're gonna tighten the Canadian border, but not the Mexican border? Down is up, up is down?

"The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me." ~ Ayn Rand RT @toddschnickRT @carltonriddick

Attn Georgians- I was impressed with Karen Handel at AFP Day at the capital- anyone have links to more info about her?

yet another nominee has tax probs, pays back taxes. Can we nominate every politician so they'll finally pay their taxes? Might fund govt

Time to choose: http://tinyurl.com/cdc5vo from @jimmiebjr's blog

quote from email I received from Tim Phillips of Americans' for Prosperity "Save my Ballot" tour

If we want freedom to run our lives... live American Dream- we've got to roll up our sleeves do "hard work of freedom" or it will be lost.

to me, Integrity is doing the right thing regardless of what those around you are doing or saying

watch out for trolls like inthestimulus - they're trying to derail conservatives: http://alturl.com/nh7d

Angie Harmon- very intelligent. The rest here not so much: http://tinyurl.com/cu7ebk

@RightGirl Is that what happens when you turn the lights off for Earth Hour? Or when you don't? LOL

RT @conservogirl Reading :http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20090329/OPINION/903290336 Stand on Conservative principles!

Civil Disobedience ideas: http://tinyurl.com/cldk66

Some thoughts on Fairness: http://tinyurl.com/cs5kfe

How can people thing the teams of people on the streets with pledges to Obama is a good idea?

RT @igeldard Zimbabwe to arrest land grabbers http://hellotxt.com/l/tDXa PM opposes Mugabe- should be interesting

@seanhackbarth I have a friend who absolutely loves Munchkin.

RT @retiredfirecapt Why we're tea-partying: http://tinyurl.com/chl42m

I think it would be better to just ignore the Earth Hour tonight, as either turning on lights or turning off lights is a reaction to them

http://tinyurl.com/cmwv85

"greedy rich" owe their ill-gotten gains to 3 factors: they stay in school, work longer hours, and reside in 2 income households- link next

@EastCobbMom I've wanted to try Douceur de France, but never get around to it. what did you have?

Heard the space shuttle landing while watching the Braves' game

I'm liking Judd Gregg a lot the more I see of him

RT @wbaustin Gregg Goes From Bipartisan Symbol to Top Obama Critic: Sen who was Pres Obama's commerce sec pick.. http://tinyurl.com/cxbdkm

watching the Braves lose to the Yankees :(. But still, BASEBALL!!!!!

new UN ambassador told Clinton not to get bin Laden from Sudan? http://tinyurl.com/dhdvht

We need to fight for state's rights like her in GA: http://tinyurl.com/cjzbvb

cat is sitting on my chest kneading my stomach- not easy to type

Would GIVE act require 'volunteers' to counsel for abortions or work for ACORN? http://tinyurl.com/d2db4b

@calebhays good luck with your friend. I had a 1.5 hour talk with my cat's groomer- I gave him homework! Still hope for him

Daniel Hannan, UK MP, Jeffersonian conservative- very good read on our politics: http://tinyurl.com/d2vh7g

wish someone in DC would speak like in UK: http://tinyurl.com/clfvjk

RT @JediMaster_OPS People talk about "great divide" during Bush years...how about now? Obama has incited class warfare between rich and poor

oops I retweeted RT JediMaster_OPS wrong. I'l try again

@javantiger Actually, the EU is already in hell, they're just hoping we don't take them down further. What's below hell?

RT JediMaster_OPS People talk about "great divide" during Bush years...how about now? Obama has incited class warfare between rich and poor.

Take this job and shove it: http://tinyurl.com/cj4r9f

RT @snow4jc "Conservatives need to take over the Republican party." Mark Levin--- Amen

RT @johnboehner developing new solutions to help rebuild Americans' savings (http://is.gd/oTK3) & revive housing market (http://is.gd/oT6v).

RT @cody willard"We have to stop these boom and bust cycles." Trying to stop them only exacerbates and prolongs the booms and busts.

not so funny- Europe becoming more 'American' while America becomes more like socialist Europe

Wake up America! we need to take our constitution and American Dream back!

@JimDeMint Thank you for speaking out against forced 'volunteerism'.

New site- finding a role to taking our country back: http://tinyurl.com/d34u5v

@caseymercier I heard today that Frank runs pretty much unopposed. Wonder what we need to do to get him and others out

Sweden now has a right-leaning govt and won't bail out Saab: http://tinyurl.com/ch9arr

Am I the only one amused that when Mark Steyn says "America's anchorman" it comes out anger man?

Check out http://candoconservatives.com/ Great suggestions for conservatives to reach out to disabled. Also pro FairTax!

I'm in shock at what legislators are doing and people are believing. What happened to our country? Please God do not let this continue!

NH House won't vote on State's rights bill? http://tinyurl.com/cgdcd4

new post: AIG from the other side: http://tinyurl.com/dk7f4b

resting from a fun filled day, trying to figure out what to do tonight

Good grief- has anyone really tried to read HR1 stimulus bill? Just the outline is exhausting! http://tinyurl.com/cog8ax

MS House votes to override Haley Barbour on stimulus funds: http://tinyurl.com/9bzk44

Good advice: get involved @ grassroots level, educate everyone u know...don't B silent...go 2 a #teaparty. Bottom line: BE INVOLVED. #tcot

@TediscoCongress On Fairness Doctrine- bravo, well done, thank you

Lincoln on the role of government: http://quotationsbook.com/q...

RT @IndyEnigman @KenShepherd Dwight Schultz, my fave from The A-Team, is conservative W00t! http://tinyurl.com/c652yg #tcot #topprog

@coffeemaverick Don't worry, the Mexican restaurants will get there eventually, although maybe not until the US economy booms again

Resting after doing yardwork- hasn't been done for years so it's a big mess. Good time to catch up on Twitter :)

@palinsupporter The quiz says I'm a straight up Libertarian. But I disagree with Libertarians on several things, prefer small L libertarian

The Real AIG outrage: http://online.wsj.com/artic...

President Bush is a classy guy: http://tinyurl.com/c3rx6a

we need to have a dialogue about the role of government. What does the Constitution say? What should we be doing for ourselves?

@newtgingrich thank you Newt, that is what we need. That's what bankruptcy is there for, isn't it? This bailout stuff is nonsense

@Michelle_Moore That's so people will go into his civilian defense force instead of the military

@moms4sarahpalin What can we do? I'm praying my heart out, but I want to do more

AIG Bonuses 2) AIG is contractually obligated to pay them. Bankruptcy would have allowed them to renegotiate the contracts

AIG bonuses 1) they were announced a year ago, and the government knew about them

4 reasons people voted for Obama, and none of them good IMHO- http://alturl.com/9ag

I'm off to a tmj follow up appointment then yardwork with my parents. Happy St. Patty's day everyone!

Obama to defund military, charge wounded vets for care yet Mrs. Obama to focus on care of military families? More cognitive dissonance

Marxists assume wealth gets produced by itself: http://tinyurl.com/c8kacc

Is Obama a control freak? http://tinyurl.com/cllms2

So Switzerland is the new Houston due to taxes http://tinyurl.com/csfuj2

@tanstaaflWDM Happy Irish Day!

Why have bankruptcy laws on the books if we don't use them?

@markdkelly2 Don't Obama's opinions depend on who he is talking to? Or whichever will get him the most popularity?

@allapparel A friend described it as "Romper Room up there"

LOL-Obama teleprompter running for pres in 2012 http://tinyurl.com/df4kz4

Obama Budget tax increases: $1.6 trillion and counting! http://alturl.com/ei4

RT @heritage The Durbin Doctrine’s Assault on Free Speech http://tinyurl.com/c6ncqr #tcot

Horrible treatment of Islamic women in Britian: The Imam's Daughter: http://tinyurl.com/dh6jmt

@rightnick Barackarl Obamarx- I like that better than Obamugabe!

@pat_ess Not too confused. But I appreciate the notice.

Praying the first 100 days- today: http://tinyurl.com/9lkhqr (I'm a bit late starting)

RT@newtgingrich The two real parties in America are not Dem and Rep they're the party of big government and the party of the American people

@JadedByPolitics Condolences to you, but congratulations to him. I like the way you worded your update. Sending prayers your way

Does Obama know how to do anything other than spend? http://tinyurl.com/dz3gl3

My ideas for a plan of action: http://tinyurl.com/cnn7re

I love how Rush says "Obama's teleprompter told him to say..."

I disagree with a path to citizenship for illegals, but what about a path to a visa, then they have to apply. why jump straight to citizen?

Dennis Miller says waterboardign terrorists is heaven sent: http://alturl.com/92g

good morning, all. I'm getting started slowly today

RT @SheridanFolger- O's Former pastor was a Muslim: http://tinyurl.com/c54gs9

@wandafay Yay! Angels are rejoicing, as are we!

RT @Drudge_Report Actor, Political Activist Ron Silver, 62, Dies... http://tinyurl.com/b43frm

I was reading an article that mentioned the president doing something, and thought, Bush, then realized it's Obama- major disappointment

@HeyTammyBruce Your speech at WC sounds interesting- it's something I want to work on- educating about benefits of conservatism to all

What if Obama had promised this during the election?http://tinyurl.com/dgem36

Obamacare- false info http://tinyurl.com/d5zmdb

Using socialism to help revive a failing economy is like putting angry weasels down your pants because you need some rest. from www.imao.us

RT @powerlineblog ominous spending bill reverses O's order on allowing embryonic stem cell research: http://tinyurl.com/aq4nlm

"Hello, America, hang on to your lights: they're the only lights left in the world! " from "Foreign Correspondent"

@the_912_project Saw it last night- very impressive. Thanks Glenn Beck!

back from lunch, listening to the Braves' spring training game on the radio

with our own apples :)

baking tarts for the church lunch

@SheridanFolger Why does Obama think there should be NO restrictions on abortion? what is he thinking? Not even for parental notice?

@allapparel so what's the average expiration date for an Obama statement? About 8 days?

@gopscott That's the only good thing about the Obama presidency- the revival of the conservative movement. thanks for the good news

@rightnick I spent over $14K myself- lots of care wasn't covered by insurance. But I still don't want socialized/universal healthcare!

Nancy Pelosi claims she is not partisan, but that Republicans should have for the stimulus even without any concessions in it. I'm confused

the highlight of the trivia tournament was fishing a credit card out of the toilet. I washed it and my hands twice! Tourney sucked

Off to trivia tournament in Buckhead. Hope Taco Stand has more than just a stand- it's cold and wet out there!

RT @logankugler Thinking differently in education and life: http://tinyurl.com/59mxbn

trying to get the cat to calm down so we can sleep- crazy cat!

Americans are investors not just workers: http://tinyurl.com/dadtb6

wants to attend Sheep to Shawl at the Atlanta History Center April 11- anyone else interested?

Hi @tomllewis: Found you through @MrTweet. I'm supporting and praying for Tedisco. Love Sowell, Steyn, and Newt too

Checking out @MrTweet, my personal assistant who helps me discover great and relevant folks I did not know about! http://mrtweet.net?v=12

RT @DanEncarnacion CALL TO ACTION! Gov of SC Refuses to take dirty DC $$. Help stop effort to override him. http://tinyurl.com/ddqnfo #TCOT

president talks too much- not supposed 2b national guardian angel: http://tinyurl.com/asfpx4

Just because someone else started doing the wrong thing doesn't mean you need to continue doing it, or ramp it up to a new level does it?

RT @IndyEnigma @iuliusg Check out this crazy-ass bathroom stall: http://twurl.nl/tw5emt * if U ski... MUST see! :-{)

@itsonlywords Thank you for praying for our President. I try to pray for him, the Senate and House leaders, for wisdom, integrity, humility

is Obama the new coke? http://tinyurl.com/bqjrm9

@ericjodom What states are we missing?

@TheConservative: I see the same parallel that Sanford sees http://tinyurl.com/afhhe9

jobs Obama promised-they're overseas!http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/shocker_low_taxes_low_regulations_lead_to_in-sourcing_and_more_jobs/

Hey, Mexico is pissed at us too! http://tinyurl.com/avh58b

Gregg tells Geithner his budget forecast is a lie: http://tinyurl.com/bb7pn5

Obama Hides Death Tax Proposal in Footnote of 2010 Budget: http://tinyurl.com/bcz2zl

Am I the only one who thinks earmarks are more than just wasteful spending, it is taking local control and giving it to the federal govt?

RT @hotairblog The lame anti-Rush billboard — and a response: Smokin'! http://tinyurl.com/arhxgc

American Taliban's lawyer head of Justice Department's Civil Division: http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/arch...

RT @Heritage Foundry post: United Nations says to America: ‘You’re Deadbeats’ http://tinyurl.com/bhayya

@HeyTammyBruce I'm sure she'd do better than what we've had so far!

Incompetence or a plan to destroy America? http://tinyurl.com/ccoseo

RT @mdrache, @MelissaTtweets: Obama's gift to wounded veterans: paying for their own treatment. pure genius. http://tinyurl.com/am4ng7

Police union accuses Ayers of bombing in 1974: http://tinyurl.com/dzo4tq

My husband has a great idea- we vote for a real Electoral college of smart thinkers who would choose the candidates. What do you think?

@HighPlainsBlogr That is a funny cartoon! Good find

I've discovered a new way to pass time especially when I can't sleep- praying for our leaders and media and thanking God for the good ones

Frank Schaeffer calls Rush "Hanoi Jane" http://tinyurl.com/c2l3tf

The missing Black-GOP Conversation from Star Parker and Ken Blackwell: http://tinyurl.com/bg9es4

This woman blames it all on O's staff: http://www.salon.com/opinio...

Obama will ignore the Cuba provision in Ominous Spending Bill-http://tinyurl.com/bnmfgr

@BobbyJindal Thank you sir for your support of our troups.

Would Obama's policies drive private insurers out of the market? http://tinyurl.com/dkzksf

Ooh, as a Canadian now American, this is good. Obama vs. Trudeau: http://tinyurl.com/c2aj52

Treasury is obviously a priority for Obama: http://tinyurl.com/ahvlhz

@TomCoburn Thank you for your vote

My husband thinks we may have to settle for some form of universal healthcare, we just need to rein it in. I disagree- any is way too much.

RT @allapparel "The Obama Deception" coming March 15. "The people strike back." http://tinyurl.com/bhl78z

RT @allapparel This is a "Government approved Prayer" http://tinyurl.com/bq3ln8

Holder reveals Obama position on Gun bans: http://tinyurl.com/d5ho7g

Catching up on articles and videos posted by the Twitterati

Off to celebrate my dad's birthday- 76! Woo Hoo! And still a child at heart

reading Obama as the Manchurian Candidate? http://tinyurl.com/c7wv9n

From Blackfive: http://tinyurl.com/bjhez3. I say we all thank Barry Zito (HT to @MelissaTweets)

RT Obama rescinded funding for alternatives to Embryonic SC research .http://www.lifenews.com/bio...

I saw a very scary thing Sunday- a hearse with the words "There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is His Prophet". Who would drive that?

O-butts! I love it! Where can i get one? http://tinyurl.com/ccdskt

This blog is absolutely hilarious:http://interestingni.blogspot.com/ Don't laugh too hard

USA Today says Illegals might get some of Stimulus jobs: http://tinyurl.com/abfryz

Made a good start on the book. Taking a break for laundry, dishes, and a snack

I'm thinking I don't need to work chronologically on my book- I can work on the parts that realy get to me. Like Katrina.

reading about Obama's political Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome: http://tinyurl.com/clolv5

It's hard to type with my cat on my lap, but I hate to disappoint her

Listening to Rush :)

I finally found caffeinated sodas made wiht cane sugar instead of corn syrup- Jones sodas and Red Rock. Much Excitement!

@tanstaaflWDM what about shirts?

laughing at my conservative identity, Free Marketeer. Check out the quiz on fightliberals.com

What I believe (more to come)

2009-04-01T09:22:00.006-04:00

I've been spending a lot of time figuring out what I believe and where I stand with regards to politics. So here's what I'm coming up with.

1) Integrity is #1, and it means doing the right thing no matter what anyone around you is saying or doing.

2) Personal Responsibility is #2. You are responsible for the decisions you make and for the consequences of that decision, NO ONE ELSE!

3) If you make a mistake, admit it.

4) If you have hurt someone, apologize and try to make it up to them, if possible, or at least try to not make the same mistake again.

5) There is a huge difference between helping and enabling. Enabling just encourages people to continue in bad behavior, expect to get more from others and blame others for their problems. Helping often requires 'tough love' or tough something, being responsible about what and how one gives to those in need, to help them help themselves.

6) The government is not supposed to save us, especially from ourselves.

7) Any money the government has, it has taken from the people of this great country. Therefore, the government, i.e. President and Congress, have a responsibility to be good stewards of that money, better even than with their own money. And they are not doing that!

8) When our elected leaders are not being good stewards of American's tax money, we need to get them out. That means putting a lot of our time and money into getting them out and getting in someone who will be a good steward.

9) My faith informs my values and my values inform my political views. I am not part of the 'Religious Right', but I am extremely far right because of my faith.

10) I believe that, the more the government, or others do, the less we will do ourselves. That includes helping those in need. If we have more than someone, we should want to help them (but see #4). If we see the government taking care of them, we are less likely to do that, especially if we feel the government is taking too much from us. My cat groomer said that our society has changed so it won't work for people to take care of each other. But why can't we change back? If people don't want to get directly involved, there are lots of charities to support with money and time. Start with family and friends, then neighbors and others you see.

11) Being considerate to others is essential and can make the world a better place. So can tipping an extra dollar every time you go out to eat- doesn't hurt you much, but can make the waiter's day.

12) I am very wary of extremist views, especially if they are purely ideological, with no allowing for facts. These include religious extremism, environmentalism and Obamism. Any movement that does not allow debate should be suspect.

13) Our Founding Fathers created a magnificent Constitution for us, that has held together very well for over 200 years in spite of the odds. That Constitution is what makes America the best place in the world to live. That is why so many people are trying to get here. And we must fight to keep our Constitution strong!

14) If you do not stand for something you will fall for anything. And some things have to be worth fighting for.

Celebrities good and bad

2009-03-30T10:39:00.002-04:00

Foxnews.com had an article about celebrity views of Obama. I absolutely love what Angie Harmon said- always knew she was smart- but Mandy Moore just reinforces her light-weight reputation.

Emphasis mine:

Angie Harmon is not afraid to come out and say she doesn’t like how President Obama is handling the job — but she’s sick of having to defend herself from being deemed a racist.

"Here's my problem with this, I'm just going to come out and say it. If I have anything to say against Obama it's not because I'm a racist, it's because I don't like what he's doing as President and anybody should be able to feel that way, but what I find now is that if you say anything against him you're called a racist," Harmon told Tarts at Thursday’s Los Angeles launch of the new eyelash-growing formula, Latisse. "But it has nothing to do with it, I don’t care what color he is. I’m just not crazy about what he's doing and I heard all about this, and he’s gonna do that and change and change, so okay … I'm still dressing for a recession over here buddy and we've got unemployment at an all-time high and that was his number one thing and that's the thing I really don't appreciate. If I'm going to disagree with my President, that doesn't make me a racist. If I was to disagree with W, that doesn't make me racist. It has nothing to do with it, it is ridiculous."

Speaking of dislikes, the starlet has also had enough of the double-standards in the media.

"I do think McCain would have done a better job, only because I think he has more experience. I also think if W or John McCain or Reagan would have gone and done a talk show, the backlash would have been so huge and in his face, and ‘What is our president doing? How unclassy!’ But Obama does it and no one says anything," Harmon said.

And in spite of the scornful opinions most of her Tinseltown counterparts have shared on Gov. Sarah Palin, Harmon remains a true fan.

"I admire any kind of woman like her. My whole motto is to know what I stand for and know what I don't stand for and have the courage to live my life accordingly and she does exactly that. The fact that this woman has made the decisions she's made and literally lived her life according to that and takes heat for it is absolutely disgusting to me," she added. "People cannot look at this woman. I really think they're afraid of her and her morals, ethics and values and the fact that she hangs on them. Is she the most experienced person in the world? But she was running to be the Vice President, so we then put the most inexperienced person as the President. That didn't make any sense to me."

However Harmon is definitely in the Hollywood minority when it comes to her criticism of Obama as other lasses at the Latisse party were quick to advocate their unequivocal support.

"The sort of criticism over the last couple of weeks is a bit unfounded, he's been in office for barely any time and I think he inherited a lot on his plate and he's doing a pretty remarkable job," quipped Mandy Moore. "I think it's cool that he went on Leno and I watched the "60 minutes" interview as well last week. The guy is just so articulate and he is so well versed in something that is so new to him and I think he has a good team around him. It sounds cliché, but he makes me feel proud to be an American."
Deborah Messing also told Tarts that our new President is not only meeting her expectations, but going far beyond.

"He is thoughtful and considerate and he gets all the information before he speaks which I think is a wonderful quality for the ruler of the free world to have," she explained.

The ladies of "Entourage" certainly showed their Obama-loyalty too.

"It's not an over night process. It's going to get worse before it gets better; we're all kind of in the same boat now. Everybody's broke and everybody's struggling and he makes me feel like I know him and that I know Michelle and that they’re like us and they’re out to try to save the USA. It's just an amazing period to watch him take on these challenges and everyday in the news to hear about AIG or possibly global currency changing, it's incredible. He's facing big challenges and he's got a lot of support and I'm just praying things get better," Debi Mazar said, while co-star Perrey Reeves added that Obama is a "wonderful leader" and she’s looking forward to his future endeavors.

So Debra Messing thinks Obama is the 'Ruler of the free world"- could explain a few things. And she thinks he gets all the information before he speaks- well, if she did any research, she'd know that he only gets 'all' the information he wants to get before he speaks, and that's with a speechwriter for his teleprompter.

As for Debi Mazar, she feels like she knows Barack and his wife, but she still prays that things will get better- does that mean that she thinks his policies won't make a difference?

No wonder Islamists want to destroy America if these celebrities are what they think all Americans are like.

link to list of senators whose term is expiring in 2011

2009-03-29T19:01:00.002-04:00

http://senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/two_column_table/Class_III.htm

Hitchens on Evolution

2009-03-29T18:26:00.001-04:00

Christopher Hitchens writes his thoughts on Evolution in Texas Schools:

But that is just my opinion. And I certainly do not want it said that my side denies a hearing to the opposing one. In the spirit of compromise, then, I propose the following. First, let the school debating societies restage the wonderful set-piece real-life dramas of Oxford and Dayton, Tenn. Let time also be set aside, in our increasingly multiethnic and multicultural school system, for children to be taught the huge variety of creation stories, from the Hindu to the Muslim to the Australian Aboriginal. This is always interesting (and it can't be, can it, that the Texas board holdouts think that only Genesis ought to be so honored?). Second, we can surely demand that the principle of "strengths and weaknesses" will be applied evenly. If any church in Texas receives a tax exemption, or if any religious institution is the beneficiary of any subvention from the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, we must be assured that it will devote a portion of its time to laying bare the "strengths and weaknesses" of the religious world view, and also to teaching the works of Voltaire, David Hume, Benedict de Spinoza, Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson.

Thoughts on Fairness

2009-03-29T16:11:00.003-04:00

Do people really think about what is truly fair?

I read complaints about how unfair it is that the AIG execs got such big salaries and bonuses. For those who were unscrupulous and who bankrupted the company, I agree, the bonuses are unfair, and frankly, there might need to be a lawsuit against them for mismanagement of funds.

For those who were doing their jobs the best they could, I don't really see any unfairness. They are doing a job that I wouldn't want to do. I might not be able to do them either. But I realized when I worked for RSUI that I did not want any more responsibility. I didn't want to work 10 12 or 14 hours a day. I didn't want to go into management, or spend hours studying for exams. I chose to stay where I was, and eventually to leave the company, as it wasn't a good fit for me.

I know there are some people who are not capable of doing some of the jobs I have done. Is it unfair that they could not get as much money as I did there? Should everyone be able to get the same pay regardless of what they do or how hard they work or how smart they are? Some people do receive greater gifts than others- maybe that's unfair. But I don't really believe that your intelligence and talents are the only thing that determine your success or your salary. I think hard work and willingness to try are part of success too.

So, should fairness be equal pay for everyone regardless of what they do or how hard they work, or how smart they are, or how talented?

Or is fairness giving everyone the opportunity to make the best of themselves.

If the first definition, what is the incentive to try to do better, to work harder, to learn new skills?

In the second, what happens to people who just can't do very much? There are some people with limited intelligence, who will never be able to really take care of themselves, and provide a good life for their families. Who should be responsible for them? Is that the government's job, or is it our job, as caring people, to help those less fortunate? In either case, what is the best way to help them?

And what about those who have made bad decisions in the past, but are willing and ready to try to make their lives better? What can be done to help them, without encouraging them in some way to fall back into old patterns. Is that something government CAN do? Or does government merely enable, help in a broad way, that would then make it harder to become a productive self-sufficient person? Is government capable of really helping someone? Do blanket programs or spending really help individuals, or just make bureaucrats feel like they are doing something to help?

Give us back our Country

2009-03-25T10:40:00.001-04:00

Give us back

Our Constitution,

Our Government,

Our Money,

Our American Dream,

Give us back our Country!!!

Revolution or mob rule?

2009-03-23T23:15:00.002-04:00

Chris writes on Peach Pundit

However, there are worse things than being ruled by kleptocrats. Historically mobs have done populations much worse. From gassing Jews, to seizing productive farmland leading to famine, mob rule murders millions. Mob rule also panders to our basest emotions. “Those people talk funny, dress funny, and don’t worship the same God as we do, lets kill them and take all their stuff”. I’ll take double digit inflation over worrying if my neighbor or I are the next ones to be loaded on a cattle car.

It is the reason I can’t stand John Oxendine. He panders to the mob. It is why I no longer support the FairTax. What was once a plan developed by the elites is now a rallying cry for the mob. It is why I’ve all but tuned out talk radio.

So do I want to see the heads of George W. Bush, Saxby Chambliss, John Linder and the rest of the US Congress on a pike? You betcha. Is that worth the damage the mob will cause to my county, party and Country? Hell No.

I've noticed at Tea Party rallies that there are a few people who I call fringe people. At the first one, I stood next to a woman who kept calling out "Impeach Obama". She may have said a few more violent things. And there are usually a few people who have crazy signs, instead of the intelligent well-thought-out ones with quotes from founding fathers, etc. "John" mentioned a video that Pelosi's daughter made at Republican rallies showing these fringe people. I wish they would shut up or go home.

But I don't think I'm ready to stop calling for people to get angry and do something to stop the people in Washington who are trying to destroy our country. I'd like them to be less violent, less unhinged. But how do you calm down a mob? Throw water on them? How do you find balance between firing up ordinary people and creating a mob? And is it better to sit back and stay away from the mob than to try to fight back?

Can Do Conservatives

2009-03-23T10:38:00.003-04:00

On Twitter, I found Can Do Conservatives.

The main page has an open letter to the GOP. The author, Brian Donegan of Lawrenceville, GA, expresses frustrations with Democrats who want to use "us as political pawns to advance their socialistic goals."

However,

There are many groups that Republicans are trying to reach out to (and rightly so - I don’t contest that). What about the disabled? I’ve never heard anyone mention this at all. I see a brighter future for me and for others with conservatism. Many of us are at the bottom rung of the ladder. We are nearly stuck. If we keep moving farther and farther towards socialism we will be stuck with no hope of making our lives better through hard work. I am on SSI disability but I don’t want to. However if I do go out and get a job I’ll lose my health-care which I desperately need. My only alternative is to go back to school and accept more Government aide that is robbed from hard-working people who have no say where that money goes. It could be going down a rat hole for all they know. It’s a catch 22 and I am sick of it! It makes me want to cry..and yes, sometimes I do but I keep hope alive. I’m a fighter. I will continue to carry on!

I see many groups of Conservatives/Republicans but I see little-to-no reaching out to the disabled. I think it is time to change the story! Of course, we are not going to get anywhere if I just tell you what is wrong and don’t offer any solutions. I have a few suggestions.

Within my community (which to be fair is the visually handicapped) we see the Democrats as our champion. It has to do with perception. Most of us are on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder and the overall perception of the Democratic party is that they care more about the little guy than the Republicans do. Perception unfortunately becomes reality. While not a whole lot more, the Democrats reach out more to the disabled in their message.

He has suggestions for the Republican party and for Conservatives:

So how should the Republicans reach out to those that are disabled?

1. Make sure campaign websites and materials are adaptive. Make sure the websites are able to be read by screen-readers and the text large-enough for the low-sighted to read. Campaign messages on Youtube could be closed-captioned for the hearing impaired. For example my best friend is totally blind and also supported Governor Huckabee’s presidential campaign. However Mike’s site could not be accessed by the standard of screen-readers for the blind, JAWS. Whenever he wanted to access the site to make a donation I had to do it for him.

2. Don’t forget the disabled veterans. Mike didn’t. He push for the Veterans Bill of Rights. I’m surprised that McCain, of all people, did not even come up with a similar plan. Mike was the lone conservative voice for our Veterans’ interests. They are true heroes. We owe them a lot for fighting for and protecting our freedoms.

3. Also there are other issues that need to be stressed. The FairTax and how the plan will allow us more freedom to make our lives better and advance up the ladder, if we work hard. Also health-care and education reform must be issues of importance because accomplishing them, through conservative means (pro-active health care and school choice) will improve our overall quality of life.

4. Republicans must go and speak to groups within our community, representing the Blind, deaf, and others.

5. For major state-wide and nation-wide elections coalitions are often formed. I saw coalitions for every interest group under the sun but I have yet to see one on the Republican side for the disabled.

Of course this isn’t a one-way street. This is going to take people, like me, speaking up for my community. I can “see” very clearly that I have made the first step towards this.

Brian Donegan, Lawrenceville, GA

I think he has very good suggestions and we as conservatives need to listen to him and find ways to get across this message, that conservatives care about the disabled and the poor and the disadvantaged, and that our policies will help them.

Did NH House deny bill on state rights?

2009-03-21T23:34:00.004-04:00

I was on Twitter, and found the blog about Bush's Third Term, about which I already blogged.

Since I liked it so much, I decided to look at the author's other posts.

I came across this speech at a Liberty Rally in Concord, NH, and my mouth fell open:

Most importantly I would like to thank Representative Itse and the members of the committee who co-sponsored hcr-6 which affirms states’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

What I find mind boggling is that hcr-6 was voted out of committee as “inexpedient to legislate.” Now I am not a constitutional scholar and I am certainly not an expert on New Hampshire’s constitution but this one seems pretty simple, pretty clear. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Or to the people.

These days, a lot of people have been chanting “yes we can.” fortunately, the 10th amendment and NH HRC 6 are there to remind the people how government is supposed to work. When it comes to usurping states’ rights and more importantly individual rights, no you can’t.

Establishing martial law within a state without the consent of the legislature of that state?

No you can’t!

Requiring involuntary servitude or government service? No you can’t!

Passing any act regarding religion, restricting freedom of speech or freedom of the press? No you can’t!

Further infringement on the right to keep and bear arms? No you can’t!

Now some people are calling HCR 6 and the amendments and resolutions that have passed or are being debated in dozens of states “radical.” Radical? While HCR 6 is the most comprehensive of the legislation I just referred to as it covers not only the 10th amendment but the first, second and ninth as well as the Federal Reserve, taxes, martial law, a draft and more, it actually seems kind of tame to me. It talks to further infringements, further restrictions, and further limitations on our liberties. Further? How about the ones we already bear, day in and day out?

While I support HCR 6, it’s not radical. All it does is draw a line in the sand and says “here and no further.” that’s not radical. It will be radical when we are not a few hundred people drawing a line in the sand but thousands and tens of thousands, moving mountains of sand and with it that line back to where the framers of the constitution intended it to be.

How could they not pass this bill? It's just reinforcing the Constitution of the United States.

I am so confused and horrified, and I think every American should too!

More on this bill here and here (see about halfway down left side) and here with pics from the rally.

Fed to purchase Zimbabwean Money (ROFLMAO)

2009-03-21T23:18:00.001-04:00

This satirical story from Interesting News Items made me laugh out loud:

HARARE, ZIMBABWE - Finance Minister Patrick Chinamasa announced that the United Stated Federal Reserve has offered to buy large denomination Zimbabwean currency. "We are delighted to sell our useless million and billion dollar notes." Chinamasa recently introduced a 100 trillion banknote, attempting to pace raising prices, which double every 1.3 days. "They [U.S.] will now have a fun currency," said Chinmasa, referring to the Fed's decision to purchase U.S. debt by printing trillions of dollars. "As I understand, they want to write 'U.S. MONEY' on our old bills and place them in circulation. This I admire. But they must pay us in Whoppers and iPods. We are not fools."

Obama says AIG like a suicide bomber?!?

2009-03-21T23:14:00.002-04:00

What the heck is going through Obama's head? Does he not know that one, we have bankruptcy laws that restructure businesses ALL THE TIME, and two, comparing an American company to a suicide bomber is extremely offensive?

But today, President Obama took that rhetoric in a different direction. He actually upped the ante explaining that AIG is like a suicide bomber.

“We had to step in, it was the right thing to do, even though it is infuriating,” Obama said, explaining why the government needed to bail out the troubled banks.

“The same is true with AIG,” he said. “It was the right thing to do to step in. Here’s the problem. It’s almost like they’ve got — they’ve got a bomb strapped to them and they’ve got their hand on the trigger. You don’t want them to blow up. But you’ve got to kind of talk them, ease that finger off the trigger.”

Yikes. Is Joe Biden writing Obama’s talking points now?

Wow! You can't make this stuff up! Not even the best writers could make this stuff up. And 52% of voters voted for him. Thank God some are realizing it was a big mistake.

The Third Bush Term

2009-03-21T22:19:00.002-04:00

I just found this on Twitter, and had to preserve it.

The Third Bush Term

Last year, a lot of people warned me that if I voted for John McCain there would be:

1. American troops in Muslim countries for as long as the eye can see
2. Non-stop partisan bickering in Washington
3. Undisciplined spending by the President and the Congress
4. A "not-a-clue" strategy in dealing with the financial system's problems
5. Unethical actions by senior administration officials
6. Catch-as-catch-can vetting for new the leadership of the new administration
7. Amateur, stand-up comedy mascerading as a White House spokesman.

WelI I did... and there is.

Maybe...just maybe we should have voted for the guy with some experience.Unfortunately we have Jimmy Carter's 2nd term...only worse.

AIG from the other point of view

2009-03-21T21:45:00.007-04:00

I mostly follow people on Twitter that are conservatives, but today there were a few ReTweets of people who voted for Obama but who aren't quite sold on everything Obama is doing.

Colorado46 may be one of the ones questioning her vote, so I decided to check out her articles. She wrote a post on the AIG debacle.

She said (emphasis mine):

What is wrong with these people? Not just AIG which of course is totally stupid. Why would you even TAKE the Bonuses? Do you have TV's? Of course you do? Don't you see people all over are struggling to feed their children? Yet you would take the money anyway?

I don't feel sorry for these people. I don't want them to get hurt, but when I look at my tool and die maker husband's unemployment check, after he has worked everyday for 33 years, I can't see the point in feeling sorry for people who are getting huge bonuses.

I guess she doesn't understand that these people will then spend the money which will grow the economy, provide jobs, help those people feed their children. And they might just donate to a charity that would directly help these people until things turn around.

In addition, they EARNED the money, and earned it in trying to keep the business solvent, which is why AIG was bailed out in the first place! I'm sure she didn't think that her husband shouldn't take any of the money that he earned. Just those evil 'rich' people.

But I guess she thinks it's unfair that someone else works every day for 33 years but doesn't make as much as those 'rich' people.

She goes on:

Then we have the Republicans who have made up their minds they are going to fight WHATEVER Obama does. Right, wrong or indifferent, they are determined that he will not succeed. Even at the cost of America. Even if there is no America, 10 years from now. They are killing America for their own sakes.

The only reason we are opposing everything Obama does is because everything Obama is doing will destroy America! We are trying to save America from his actions.

I hope someday she understands that.

She continues:

The next STUPID bunch is the Timothy Geithner group and the Congress. First, Geithner should be strung up and beaten beyond consciousness. What the hell was he thinking or trying to do? Why did Dodd and the rest go along with it?

America is fed up with politics and games and bull... America is looking for something better.

This whole AIG thing is absolutely unnecessary and totally beyond the realm of common sense.

Hey AIG, why does the Government have to tax you to get the bonus money back? Are you stupid or really that greedy?

JUST GIVE THE DAMN MONEY BACK STUPID. Why do you even have to discuss it? You don't deserve it, so why did you even take it to start with?

How does she know they didn't deserve it? Does she know what these people were doing? These are people just like she is!!! Yes they work for a big corporation, and there were some people who worked for AIG that made bad decisions, but she assumes that anyone who worked for AIG is guilty. Does that mean that her husband was guilty of anything that was done by the people who ran the company he worked for? Or the Enron people, are they not all guilty for the actions of the top few who did screw the country and especially the employees of Enron?

Once again, she conflates the company AIG with the people who work for it:

AIG and other BIG CORPORATIONS, Do you see what is happening? Don't be scared of getting killed now. You have screwed us 7 ways from Sunday. Stand up and be proud of being crooks, like you were proud of sitting in those offices and taking those big checks for doing nothing.

I believe there were 73 people who received bonuses- are they all guilty? And even if they were, do they deserve death threats and living in fear?

In conclusion she says:

America is so sad right now. We are headed for the rocks and nobody is manning their stations. We can only pray that somebody will actually wake up and take the wheel here. We thought it was going to be Obama.

Now we are forced to wonder and worry if we did the right thing. He seems to be on the same path as all of the other crazies we have sent to Washington.

We know it won't be the Republicans, whose main focus is making sure Obama fails. The American public can't fix it, they won't let us.

Common sense would say that with all of the supposed transparency and requests for comments and contributions, Obama's group would hear the America's outrage. It doesn't appear to be so. So now what?

Old fashioned thinking would dictate running them out of town on a rail or more drastic, a good ole fashioned tar and feather event.Hopefully, the violence will not win in this case. Even though that appears to be the only message anyone hears.

Now she says that she doesn't think violence should win out. But she is disappointed that Obama is not living up to the pedestal she put him on. And she obviously does not like Republicans even though she used to be one. She can't even see what Republicans are saying without assuming the worst. I'm not sure who is left for her to follow.

UPDATED: I just read Colorado46's second post on the AIG situation(emphasis mine).

Just Making Great Speeches is Not Enough
When Barack Obama announced his candidacy, my first gut reaction was "You have got to be kidding me". My husband,a lifelong Republican, sat back in his chair and said,"Republican or not, this guy could go all the way to the White House".

When Obama won, I was ecstatic. Not only had history been made, America may really have a chance with the attitude this guy has. Or so we thought!

Now it is March. As the TV gears up daily to spout all the happenings, AIG just got more bonuses. Chris Dodd comes out and claims partial responsibility and I read earlier that Timothy Geitner was actually the one who had them water down the deals for bonuses. Isn't this the same clown that just got put into his position after NOT paying his taxes?

Ok, we trusted you enough to stand in lines, change party affiliations, and take much abuse about electing an African-American President. Of course, the other choice was McCain">John McCain. Even Republicans weren't ready to wholeheartedly support him.
But we rallied and you are the President. Now what?

Are you going to allow politics as usual? Even with the fast, no holes barred actions you have already initiated, you are sinking fast with the AIG Bonus Scam. You are employing people who are not holding up to scrutiny. Timothy Geithner has already failed you and America.He has stood up for the Big Corporations once again. Once again, America is getting the shaft. Yet you insisted he could handle the job.

Mr. President, America is mad as hell and I don't think they are going to take this crap anymore. I think, just as with AIG employees being fearful of harm, the Government might rethink their actions. We could be in for a new revolution in this country.
This is crunch time Mr. President. This is the 4th quarter and we are coming up on the two minute warning. Are you going to stand up to the challenge, President Obama?

Where are you really taking America? Are you truly concerned? If so, why are you dropping the ball? Will the Bailout really work?

It sounds like this woman understands that Obama is not doing a good job, in fact his actions are the wrong actions. I think she sees the need for revolution, but she still thinks Obama is right, just the people around him are wrong.

On a side note, I'm not sure what abuse she got for "electing an African American president".

She goes on to say:

All of these questions are the things American's wake up to each and everyday. The Americans who get up every morning and go to a real job. Not a job that they get paid outrageous amounts of money to do absolutely nothing, sort of like AIG and Congress.

As I look at my tool and die maker husband's unemployment check sir, I hesitate to comment. A man who has worked for over 30 years, lost his job recently. He can't find another one locally, where we just bought a house last year. Yet, AIG employees who may or may not have worked for two or more years, just walked away with enough money for my husband and I to retire.

Your administration let it happen. Why? The man that YOU stood in front of America and said, HE will take care of this economic crisis, has turned around and back stabbed America. He has spit in YOUR face and OURS.

Yet, you are his BOSS.

She is getting a large portion of the situation correct, but I think her husband's situation is affecting her considerably. I feel bad that her husband got laid off after working so hard for so long, but that does not mean that the bonuses earned by AIG employees are unfair.

I had to laugh out loud at this part:

You have made history sir. America has put aside their crappy, racists attitudes, their disbelief in CHANGE in our Government, and their mistrust of anyone but themselves to take a chance that there may actually be ONE PERSON that truly is honest and concerned about the rest of America.

Apparently I and those who feel as I do, are wrong in not believing that Obama is the one person that is honest and concerned about America. Yet, Obama has not shown his concern about America, except in words. And if his actions do not match his words then the words are false. Had anyone else acted as Obama has, she would most likely have thought they were as false as I think Obama is.

At least she realizes how important this is, but she thinks the blame will be on the Republicans, the people she used to be a part of:

Now, this mess is happening.

A mess that makes all of those ideals go straight out the window. A mess that if you don't clean it up and get this right will cost America more than faith.It also gives the nay sayers more ammunition to continue to tear America apart. The Republicans will sink America to prove you wrong.

Mr. President, as a previous Republican and more important, an American who loves her country and proudly tries to support it from A-Z, I beg you to get this right. Not only will the backlash be felt among the up and coming African American young people, but it will be a killer among your millions of supporters.

The responsibility you bear, is greater than any President before you. I pray that you see that and that you will do what you have said. No more sneaking secret agendas in on bills. No more letting this clown Geithner do what he wants. Truly, he should be fired for this AIG thing. No more bad decisions and lack of honesty and transparency. No more Nancy Pelosi type screwups.

At least she sees that he has been sneaky and not honest or transparent and not a good leader with regards to Geithner and the financial decisions being made by Obama's administration. But she refuses to see that Obama is not honest. If your actions are not honest and are sneaky, and you don't do as you said you did, then you are NOT HONEST.

She goes on to conclude:

America is weary of War, Big Corporations, Bad Government and Screwups. They are tired of Wall Street and it Speculators, losses on 401K's, jobs going out of the country and everything else that I have failed to name. America is just plain tired, Mr. President.

Is this something that matters to you for real? Please show us then. If for nothing else, how about, "Just for Grins"?

I think she might be getting close to losing her faith in The One Person she mentioned above. I pray she and others discover the truth about their choice for President and join us in fighting back.

(On an amusing note, the last page of her article had an ad that said "Socialism, Trickle up Poverty". Ironic, no?)

UPDATED AGAIN: I didn't even bring into this post that AIG was contractually obligated to pay the bonuses, and that Geithner, Dodd and others in Washington already knew about them, a long time ago (the latest info I have is that they knew about them in November, but they were announced a year ago). Had the government not 'Bailed out' this company, they would have had to file for bankruptcy protection, during which the contracts could have been renegotiated. The blame for this entire situation lies on Geithner and Dodd, and the congressmen and senators who voted for the bailouts. Not on the people (not Big Corporation- Individuals!) who received bonuses for their efforts to keep AIG going.

This post has a lot more logical thinking than I did on the AIG bonuses.

A Nation of Notions

2009-03-19T23:21:00.001-04:00

President Obama undoubtedly won over some of those who voted for him with promises to “restore science to its rightful place” and, more generally, to be a data-driven, pragmatic leader capable of transcending the old toxic politics with new solutions. At this point it is hard to see any evidence that he has anything to offer other than a more skillful delivery of politics as usual. But then, despite his words, President Obama probably isn’t interested in evidence.

“Restoring science to its rightful place” could mean many things. It could apply, for example, to contesting attempts to teach creationism along evolution in public schools. Evolutionary theory relies on a combination of heredity and mutability as the factors which govern how species develop over time, and these factors taken together certainly can explain changes in species. In fact, “a combination of heredity and mutability” is so vague as to explain pretty much anything that might happen-it’s not falsifiable. Have all the proponents of evolution wrestled with the issue of exactly how evolutionary changes are transmitted and emerged confident in their theory, or do most of them “just know” that the theory is correct, and if so, how is that different from a religious belief like creationism?

Unfortunately, President Obama seems not to be data-driven, but rather a skillful sophist who feels he can make a case for any point of view that is useful to him at the time. His frequent use of the word “notions” often is meant to denigrate ideas he doesn’t like, but it could also be taken to mean that he isn’t very interested in ideas and only sees a world of notions, to be used or scorned as convenient. He might quote Hamlet and say “there is nothing either good or bad but thinking make it so,” if he thought it would play well.

President Obama is hardly the only American not to be data-driven. Most people think in term of stories rather than statistics, and stories can teach us as well as entertain us. But Obama’s life story, compelling as it may be, does not tell us anything about his ability to govern. He may instead be an example of the Peter Principle-he had the skills to get the job, but not the skills to do the job.

The Founding Fathers did not intend for the president to be elected directly, which is why we have the Electoral College. Many people feel that it should be done away with now. Quite the contrary. The best way to diminish the toxic politics is to change the Electoral College from a proxy for the popular vote in each state to what it was meant to be. The Constitution gives the states the power to decide how electors are chosen, so let the voters in each state elect respected citizens from each state to meet and choose the next president every four years. Larry Sabato has written extensively about how to reform government-he could run for the Electoral College in Virginia, and help reform along by finding a less partisan, more qualified candidate than we’ve seen lately. George Clooney wouldn’t have to be coy about which presidential candidates he’s called-he could run for the Electoral College from California and possibly help choose the next president. If this seems too elitist a system, consider that we now effectively choose our next president from the very small pool of candidates that the media deigns to cover adequately. A politician who is known only to his constituents and colleagues is not likely to attract much media attention no matter how well he or she is respected. A candidate with a decent chance to be the first female president or first African-American president will attract copious press coverage, as will members of political dynasties like the Bushes or Kennedys. This may make for good stories, but it can also make for bad government.

Are these the reasons people voted for Obama?

2009-03-18T23:29:00.003-04:00

I've been trying to figure out why people voted for Obama, as it is quite incomprehensible to me.

I understand that liberals would vote for him, as I can't really see a liberal/democrat voting for a conservative, even a moderate conservative like McCain. I understand support for Hillary Clinton a lot better than support for Obama. However since I don't understand most liberal policies, I don't see that much difference between a moderate liberal, a power-hungry woman, or a big government is the answer liberal.

But, as far as I can tell there are 4 reasons non-Democrats voted for Obama.

1) Black people voting for the first black president. Can't say I fully blame them, but why him???? Why a socialist, Alinskyite, radical?

2) White people voting for the first black president to assuage their own guilt.

3) Those who did only basic research at a site like http://glassbooth.org/ where you answer a few questions and it tells you which candidate agrees with you most. It doesn't tell you anything about who the candidate really is, and if you can trust what they say. And apparently, if you care most about the environment, it will tell you to vote for Cynthia McKinney. Anything that tells anyone their first choice is Cynthia McKinney, who knows anything at all about Cynthia McKinney, should know to ignore anything and everything from this source. The only reason she was on the Green Party platform is because no one else would accept her as a candidate.

4) People who bought into the "hope and change" without thinking about what that meant, or who were inspired by what he said. Those who thought Obama was a new kind of politician, a new kind of man. Someone who would change everything, and pay their mortgages for them (apparently if you can speak at a townhall meeting, he just might do so) and cause the oceans to stop rising.

Now, I will admit that some people might fall into more than one category, in fact some might fall into all of them (but that could be pretty weird).

But I can't see these as good reasons to vote for Obama. What I see when I look at him is a man with no moral center. A man who does not believe in absolute truth; truth is whatever he thinks people want to hear or will give him the most benefit at that time. His truth changes from minute to minute. And therefore he doesn't have to keep promises as they do not mean anything to him. The only think I think he really cares about other than himself is his family. The fact that so many people can not see this in him, scares the crap out of me.

I know that all politicians lie, or break promises, or 'play the political game'. I expect a certain amount of it. However, I think that character is very important, and someone who does not have a moral center scares me. If someone who is known to not tell the truth, or to change his position over and over, promises to do something, what would make him keep that promise? What would make him do what he said during the campaign that he would do? Is it better to choose someone who says what you want to hear, but most likely doesn't mean a word of it, or someone who says what you don't want to hear, and you know he'll keep at least some of his promises?

Obviously I don't think we were given a very good choice this election. I had liked McCain more than Bush in 2000, but when he came up with McCain-Feingold and joined the "gang of 14" I started to distrust his decisions. He was able to accomplish something which is more than a lot of politicians can claim, but the accomplishments weren't ones I agree with. During this campaign, I don't think he was honest and his stories changed (part of the game?) but I feel he does have a moral center- there are some things he believes are right, no matter what happens.

In addition, knowing that he might have enacted some of the things Obama has enacted- well, that would be harder to take from a 'conservative' than from a liberal. So maybe the Obama presidency is better in that respect, but also from the point of reinvigorating conservatives.

But I'd really like to see a true conservative candidate in the 2012 election. If only I could articulate what that is :). Next project, I guess.

(Post re-written after I had some time to cool down and received a very helpful post from my friend Amusing. Hope this is less patronizing)

More cognitive dissonance- but that's his plan

2009-03-16T18:45:00.002-04:00

Betsyspage calls it "The Obama 3-Step"

Rich Lowry describes the political maneuvering that Obama is mastering.
First: Denounce your presidential predecessor for a given policy, energizing your party's base and capitalizing on his abiding unpopularity.

Second: Pretend to have reversed that policy upon taking office with a symbolic act or high-profile statement.

Third: Adopt a version of that same policy, knowing that it's the only way to govern responsibly or believing doing otherwise is too difficult.

Repeat as necessary.
In addition to Obama's issuing of his first signing statement, the examples abound.
Obama has executed versions of his three-step on terrorist surveillance and the Iraq War, and perhaps on Gitmo and interrogation (although the final disposition of those two is not clear).

On congressional earmarks, Obama's three-step was so obvious and clumsy he had to repeat Step 2 - making another promise to fight earmarks even as he accepted 8,500 of them in the omnibus spending bill.

Usually, Obama puts the emphasis on the second of his steps, to augment the difference with Bush. But in defending his economic policy recently after a reporter asked if it constituted socialism, Obama inadvertently highlighted the third step. He sought cover for his approach by pointing out that Bush had bailed out the banks and spent irresponsibly.

Of course, that sounds awfully familiar. On the economy, Obama is arguably giving us a massive dose of even more of the same - more money to banks and industry, more unsustainable entitlement spending, more deficit spending, more uncertainty about how to handle the toxic assets in the banks - with promises of higher taxes layered on top.

If the economy falters over the long term, this is continuity that people aren't going to believe in.
As Lowry points out, Newt Gingrich is utilizing the ultimate political jujitsu crack at Obama by referring to the Bush-Obama economic policies. Slash.

I glimpse into Saul Alinsky's mind

2009-03-16T17:06:00.003-04:00

Phyllis Schlafly's February newsletter is titled "How a Community Organizer Became President"
She explains how Obama spent years 'being trained in the saul Alinsky system for community organizing and then practicing what he learned'.

Alinsky's organization was based in Chicago, nestled under the protective wing of the Democratic political machine, but his reach extended all over the country from New York to California. Hillary Clinton wrote her Wellesley thesis on Alinsky, who then offered her a job (which she turned down to enroll in Yale Law School).

Americans who care about our nation and its future should study Saul Alinsky and what is known today as "the Alinsky ideology and Alinsky concepts of mass organization for power." These were the lessons he taught his eager students. He died in 1972, but he left behind a cadre of community organizers who had been trained how to carry out the political strategies described in Alinsky's frank and elegantly written book called Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals (originally published by Random House in 1971).

The tone of this book and its obvious determination to change America are made clear by this dedication printed at the very beginning:

"Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins — or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer."

Who would look up to Lucifer as a role model for anything?

She continues:

Saul Alinsky's worldview was that the United States is an oppressive and racist society where most people (the Have-Nots) are the victims of economic injustice with a future of despair. He wanted a radical change of America's social and economic structure, and he planned to achieve that through creating public discontent and moral confusion. His goal was not to arrive at compromise or peaceful solution; his goal was to crush the Haves and transform society.

Alinsky developed concepts to achieve power through mass organization. Organizing was his word for revolution. His 1946 book, Reville for Radicals, had already made clear that he wanted to move the United States from capitalism to socialism, where the means of production would be owned by all the people (i.e., the government). A believer in economic determinism, he viewed unemployment, disease, crime and bigotry as byproducts of capitalism. So he called for massive change.

To achieve this, he sought local community organizers who projected confidence, vision and change. Barack Obama fit the profile. Alinsky didn't want just talkers; he wanted radicals who were prepared to take bold action to organize the discontented, precipitate crises, grab power, and thereby transform society. He taught these radicals how to infiltrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties, gain influence in them, and then introduce change.

http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2009/feb09/09-02-06.html

Does Obama know how to do anything other than spend?

2009-03-16T16:03:00.004-04:00

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann have an article on Obama's incompetence.

They ask, does Obama "know how to do anything other than spend?"

I'm not sure Obama OR is administration know how to do anything other than spend.

The mortgage rescue plan seems a waste of time and money:

Incredibly, it excludes anyone who has lost their job and can't afford to make their payments even if they were to spend 31 percent of their income trying to do so. If you can't come close to affording your mortgage, even if only because of a (hopefully temporary) loss of employment, forget about it: Obama is not going to help you.

Nor will he help you if your mortgage exceeds your home's value. One out of five mortgages now falls into this category - and the continued fall in property values will put more and more homeowners in it. But they can expect no help from Obama's rescue plan.

Why would a liberal be so callous? Why would he leave so many out in the cold? Could it be that the administration simply can't figure out how to help these folks? That the president couldn't devise a counter to his financial advisers, who presumably wanted to exclude these folks?

So, who exactly will this plan help? People who don't really need the help?

I'm guessing he really does think that if you throw money at people willy-nilly, it will be enough to save the economy or help a lot of people; that you don't need to make smart decisions, just spend.

Sends chills up my back.

My Action Plan

2009-03-16T15:00:00.002-04:00

1) Pray for our leaders and our media
-Wisdom
-Integrity
-Freedom from Fear
-Open hearts and minds
2) Re-learn our conservative principles
3) Support leaders who represent us
-Financial Support
-Express gratitude
4) Call to account those that do not represent us
5) Educate, inform, get the word out

Aaron Schock impresses me

2009-03-16T12:43:00.001-04:00

In his own words:

Friday, September 05, 2008
Aaron Schock's comments to Republican National Convention

If Peoria Republican Aaron Schock is elected this November, he will be the youngest member of the U.S. Congress. For two minutes before prime time viewing, Schock addressed the Republican National Convention Thursday night -- "a unique honor," his campaign manager said.

Because of young Schock's hard work, commitment to conservative values and his ability and willingness to reach into traditionally Democratic communities, some wonder if in 2012 he'll be the Republicans answer to the Democrats' 2004 Barack Obama. Mr. Schock's words:

I have long been inspired by John McCain's unconventional ways.

You see, he is a different type of Republican.

He reaches out to all Americans, including those inner city residents not accustomed to seeing Republican candidates.

That is why I stand here as a State Representative and a nominee for Congress at age 27.
I represent an inner-city area of Peoria, Illinois - a district that has NEVER elected a Republican.

Four years ago, I narrowly defeated a veteran incumbent.

The conventional wisdom was that a district that was majority Democrat, one-quarter African-American, and has 20,000 people on food stamps could not be won by a Republican.

But, by trumpeting the timeless principles of our party, we turned the conventional wisdom upside down.

I won by 235 votes!

After winning, I worked tirelessly to reach out to every constituent. I worked to resolve problems for the most needy in our community.

Often I would get a comment "Why are you doing this, you are a Republican."

I always respond, "This is what the Republican Party stands for - a leg up, not a hand out... helping impoverished folks become self-sufficient, contributing members of society."

By embodying John McCain's unconventional ways, I was re-elected with 39% of the African-American vote, up from 4% just two years earlier.

As a candidate for Congress, I look forward to serving in John McCain's army, and helping spread our message of freedom and prosperity to all Americans.

On the Good List

2009-03-16T12:20:00.001-04:00

Govs. Rick Perry (R-TX), Mark Sanford (R-SC), Bobby Jindal (R-LA), Haley Barbour (R-MS), and Bob Riley (R-AL) have all rejected federal unemployment stimulus money that would have forced them to permanently expand their states unemployment programs.

Dennis Miller says waterboarding is 'Heaven Sent"

2009-03-16T10:28:00.003-04:00

Dennis Miller was on the O'Reilly Factor in January talking about waterboarding and thanking President Bush:

Dennis Miller: Waterboarding Terrorists is ‘Heaven-Sent,’ Feels ‘Privileged’ Bush Was President
By Brad Wilmouth (Bio | Archive)
January 16, 2009 - 17:59 ET

On Wednesday’s The O’Reilly Factor, during the show’s regular "Miller Time" segment, Dennis Miller defended the practice of waterboarding terrorists to save the lives of Americans, calling the technique "heaven-sent." Miller: "Something that takes somebody who's willing to strap a bomb on and yet freaks them out to the point where they'll tell you where the next bomb is by pouring water down their nose and they don't even die, I think, wow, this is heaven-sent." He also heaped praise on President Bush for "keeping this country safe in the interim seven years" since the 9/11 attacks. Miller: "That's what I admire about him. He's willing to be hated for the rest of his life to do the right thing. And I just want to look in the camera. This is the last time I’ll be on this show when he's my President and my Commander-in-Chief and say, ‘Thank you, sir. I feel privileged that you were the President during this time in American history.’"

Emphasis mine

Republicans have a new budget plan

2009-03-15T19:06:00.003-04:00

Cassy Fiano participated in a conference call this week with two Republican Representatives, Mike Pence of Indiana and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, and documented her notes. Here are a few things I found interesting:

Rep. Pence started out the conference call explaining that House and Senate Republicans are working on a bicameral alternative to the overwhelming taxing, spending, and borrowing coming out of the White House. Washington just doesn’t get it. The President is spending too much, he borrows and taxes too much. This is the first time that one generation will raise the burden of debt for future generations. Rep. Pence stressed that the taxing, spending, and borrowing will cost Americans jobs, and will especially affect small business owners. Republicans don’t see this as a path to recovery, but to recession. The Democratic Party is saying no to growth, not the Republican Party.

Rep. McMorris Rodgers echoed many of the same sentiments. She says that Republicans are planning on using blogs more, something I hope they actually will do. One of the best statements that I thought she made was when she mentioned the tale of two cities. Right now there is a tale of two cities. On Main Street, small business owners have to make tough decisions: laying off employees, tightening their belts, but in Washington D.C. for Congress it’s a different story. Congress is showering themselves with money, and these levels of spending are not sustainable. They are the highest spending levels since WWII. She went on to illustrate that if we continue this kind of spending, we will double our debt in the next five years, and triple it in ten. In just fifty days of the Obama administration, we’ve spent $1 billion an hour. Americans are having bailout fatigue. Wasteful government spending is out of control, spending money on pet projects that have nothing to do with growing the economy. Republicans want to help small businesses, but Congress has done nothing to help small business growth.

Mike Pence: Republicans will be giving a subsitute and an alternative by working closely with the budget committee by formulating a bold and clear budget alternative. We will make a case that there is too much spending, borrowing, and taxing, and we will expose that. Then we will fully unveil our alternative. We will bring our budget to the floor and get people’s votes on record. Are they for a responsible budget, or more taxing and spending?

Cathy McMorris Rodgers: What’s happening now is an entire restructuring of our economy to an overall federal approach. We need to go back to the principles that made America strong. We need to get back to belief in the free market and the belief in the private sector. This current budget is a huge takeover of our economy by the federal government.

Cassy sums up by saying:

One of the best parts was how they completely hammered Obama. They had one message concerning him and they stuck to it, over and over again: the President is spending too much, borrowing too much, and taxing too much. If they repeat that message continually for the next four years, it will sink in.

Amen, sister!

Hey ladies: you can train your husband like you train your toddler!!

2009-03-15T18:59:00.002-04:00

Hey ladies: you can train your husband like you train your toddler!!

Posted using ShareThis

Attacking men in America

2009-03-15T18:51:00.002-04:00

I have noticed several bloggers talking about how men are treated in America, notably Dr. Melissa Clouthier. The trend seems to be that women are given the benefit of the doubt, but men are not- men are not given respect by a lot of women and the media. There's a lot of men-hating out there.

Cassy Fiano, another of my favorite bloggers, wrote about a woman who felt she could train her husband just like she trains her toddlers

This article was e-mailed to me, and I knew I was in for a good one when I saw the title: “Parenting techniques to try on your spouse”. I automatically knew that spouse really meant husband, and as I read the article… I saw that I was right!!

Read more to see how much that writer despises her husband, and Cassy's response. Cassy is a great writer and I really enjoy reading what she has to say.

Stimulus bill is at least partly unconstitutional

2009-03-15T18:40:00.004-04:00

The part of the stimulus bill that changes state laws has to be unconstitutional, so the question is, is all of it unconstitutional or just that part (emphasis mine):

Last month, Congress enacted the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, popularly called "the stimulus plan." It gives billions of dollars to the states, but the gift has strings attached. One of its unique provisions changes state constitutions! That provision is unconstitutional, and its defect raises problems about the whole enterprise.

The aphorism, he who pays the piper calls the tune, is one that Congress understands quite well. If the state accepts funds, it also accepts a host of restrictions. For example, the plan increases, temporarily, the money it sends to states to fund various welfare programs. To receive that money, states have to add thousands of new people to the welfare rolls. In two years, the federal largesse stops, but the new welfare recipients are still there.

Consequently, several governors have said that they might simply refuse the money. Most are Republican, but recently the Democratic governor of Tennessee has joined the chorus. The stimulus bill, for example, gives $7 billion to the states to add to their unemployment trust funds, but to receive this "gift," a state has to change its formula so that it makes more people eligible for benefits, which leaves a long-term obligation on the system.

Because some governors might not accept the money, Congress added a unique provision, in subsection 1607(b): "If funds provided to any State in any division of this Act are not accepted for use by the Governor, then acceptance by the State legislature, by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to provide funding to such State."
If state law does not give the state legislature the right to bypass the governor, how can Congress just change that law? Where does Congress get the power to change a state constitution?

It might appear quaint to note that the U.S. Constitution does not create a central government of unlimited powers. Congress only has those powers that the Constitution gives it either expressly or by implication. That's a lot of power, to be sure, but it's not unlimited.

The two main sources of power that might justify subsection (b) are Congress' power over interstate commerce and its power to tax and spend. The commerce power does not support this law. The commerce power is very broad indeed, but there are limits. One important one is that Congress can only use the commerce power to subject the states to "generally applicable" law. For example, if Congress sets the minimum wage at $7 an hour for all workers in interstate commerce, that law can include state workers in interstate commerce. But subsection (b) is not "generally applicable." By its very nature it only governs states.

The second main source of federal power is the spending power, allowing Congress to bribe the states to take certain actions. For example, years ago Congress told states that it would reduce federal highway funds to any state that did not increase its legal drinking age to 21. The court upheld that law, with Justices William Brennan and Sandra Day O'Connor dissenting.

The spending clause does not work here. Congress is not telling a state, "You must change your state constitution before we will give you a dime." Instead, Congress is simply telling the state, "We have changed your state constitution so that we give more power to the state legislature, without any pesky interference from the governor."

It is unlikely that subsection (b) will survive constitutional challenge. Does that mean that the entire law is unconstitutional or only subsection (b)? That depends on whether Congress considered the entire bill to be a uniform whole, so that if one part must fall, all must fall. Or, did it want the courts to sever the unconstitutional part of the law and leave the remainder intact?

It may seem silly to worry about such matters when we know that Congress was in such a hurry to enact this bill that a great many congressmen—perhaps all of them—did not have a chance to read all of it. But, the courts will still have to decide the severability issue and invalidate more than subsection (b).

Some people incorrectly think that "state's rights" is an anachronism. The purpose of state's rights is not to protect the "states" from the federal government; it is to protect us from the federal government. As Justice Hugo Black reminded us over 40 years ago, "The proceedings of the original Constitutional Convention show beyond all doubt that" the framers denied Congress "the power to veto or negat[e] state laws," but that is exactly what subsection (b) does. To give Congress such power "distorts our constitutional structure of government." But that is what subsection (b) does.

Ronald D. Rotunda is a professor at Chapman University School of Law.

A convsersation at church

2009-03-15T17:19:00.002-04:00

I went to Mom and Dad's church and had a really good conversation about dating, although I was a bit disturbed to find out that some of the younger church members do not keep up with politics and current events. They are annoyed at additional taxes though, so there's hope for them yet.

L told me about her daughter's newest date, who seems nice and they are very compatible, but J is (understandably) wary of men. She met her first husband when she was 15, and she was bowled over by him. She absolutely adored him. And he basked in the adoration. They got pregnant very early on, and while she was unable to go out- pregnant or with the twins- he went out all the time. He was very much a playboy type. L said that J can't tell her even today what it was that made her go out with him.

Now, J is dating someone nice, but she doesn't want to get serious. She isn't quite finished with school though so isn't in the best place to be getting into a relationship. L said that she is almost to the point where she wants to give up on dating.

I think that might be a good place to get to- when you decide that you don't want to date, you focus more on who you are supposed to be and where you are supposed to be. And then, if someone wants to go out with you, they have to convince you to reconsider dating. That's what Scott did with me, so of course I'm for this strategy, but from what I'm learning about most men, it is good for them to try to earn your respect. If women make it too easy for them, they (generalization of course) tend to slack off. If we women expect a certain level of behavior and don't settle for less, then men have to step up, be real men.

I know I thought that no one would want to be with me, so I grabbed the first man that did want me. I wasn't picky, and didn't expect much from my first husband. Consequently, he never felt he had to win me over. That desire to impress a woman can encourage a man to be a better person.

S told me her last boyfriend had returned from Iraq, but he'd gotten possessive and controlling, so she kicked him to the curb. Good for her! She is now spending time with a guy who doesn't want them to be dating, but wants to spend time with her. I asked if he was treating her well and if they were having fun and he was being honest with her, and she said yes, at least as far as she knew. It sounds like he's gotten burned before and is wary of the term 'girlfriend'. He wants to be with S but if he labels her his girlfriend, she might hurt him the way his last one did. So long as S is okay with this, with just being with him, hopefully it won't be too bad, but I hope he won't stay like this for long.

I'm blessed with a wonderful husband who is not afraid of his feelings or talking about them. We've had a lot of discussions about relationships, including our own, so I always knew where I stood. Not everyone has that benefit. I doubt S's 'friend' would want to talk about it much. Eventually though he'll have to either 'date' her for real, or she will have to move on. I understand her feeling that men can be a pain, but when you find one that you don't have to chase, it's a lot better. My man is the best!

Obama report card

2009-03-15T17:03:00.003-04:00

I found an interesting blog with a combination of politics and religion. One post is a report card for Obama's medical care:

President Obama recently signed his first major legislative accomplishment, a $787 billion dollar economic stimulus bill. However, the President’s win is beginning to look more and more like a Pyrrhic victory. In fact, in just 30 days on the job, the new president has alienated Independents, small business leaders, young voters, Catholics and Republicans on a number of legislative issues.

According to a recent ATI-News/Zogby poll, 66 percent of Independents think Obama’s stimulus bill spends too much money on items that will not improve the economy. Fifty-three percent of young voters (age 18 to 29), 60 percent of small business leaders and 93 percent of Republicans all oppose the bill for the same reason.

While President Obama gets an “A” from voters on style, only Democrats give him a passing grade on substance, and barely at that, as only 55 percent of Democratic voters think his stimulus bill spends money in the right places.

During the inauguration and even today, President Obama is seen as a young, handsome family man with movie screen elegance. But now that it’s time for substance, things aren’t going so smoothly.

President for a month, Obama is already working on his fourth choice for Commerce Secretary.

In addition, he reversed a federal law that prohibited foreign governments from using U.S. taxpayer dollars for abortion. While President Obama won the support of 54 percent of Catholics in the election, according to ATI-News/Zogby, 55 percent of Catholics are opposed to this action.

And, although closing the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay earned him high praise, reality dictates that it was largely a symbolic move, as the center remains open and will remain open until President Obama decides what to do with the roughly 245 suspected terrorists who occupy the center.

Here is a brief synopsis of President Obama’s first 30 days:

● President Obama has now officially taken ownership of the recession.

President Obama fought incredibly hard for what a majority of Americans think is a pork barrel stimulus bill that isn’t likely to turn around the economy. According to a recent ATI-News/Zogby poll, 58 percent of Americans think that too much money in the bill goes toward non-stimulus expenditures, while only 30 percent think otherwise (12 percent are not sure).

As passage of the bill became more difficult, President Obama’s rhetoric became more dire and urgent. According to the Wall Street Journal, Obama “turned fear mongering into an art form,” and “repeatedly raised the specter of another Great Depression.” By resorting to such rhetoric, President Obama officially took ownership of the recession – for better or for worse.

● President Obama has increased the partisan divide in Washington.

According to Congressman Dan Boren, a Democrat from Oklahoma, “The problem is that [the stimulus bill] became a Democrat bill and not an American bill, because [Obama] didn’t use any of the Republican ideas.” During the campaign, President Obama promised to change the sharply partisan nature of Washington and govern in a bipartisan fashion. Likewise President Obama promised to “change the way Washington works” and “reach across the aisle” to “bridge partisan divides.” However, his final stimulus bill was rejected by seven Democrats and supported by only three Republicans. This is not exactly what he promised during the campaign.

● President Obama is losing one of his core constituencies: young people.

According to an ATI-News/Zogby poll, voters age 18-29 years old, a majority of which helped elect President Obama, are beginning to show signs of jumping ship. The poll found that 53 percent of such voters think President Obama’s stimulus bill will make economic recovery harder to achieve, while only 31 percent believe in his plan. The same was almost identically true for voters age 30 to 49 (53 to 30 percent).

● President Obama is losing the Americans that should have the biggest hand in the recovery: small business leaders.

According to the same ATI-News/Zogby poll, 56 percent of mainly small business leaders think President Obama’s stimulus plan will make economic recovery harder, not easier. Only 32 percent thought it would be helpful to the economy. A staggering 60 percent of business leaders think that the President Obama’s bill spends too much on non-stimulus pork items, as opposed to real measures that will improve the economy. This is crucial, as these business leaders are the ones who will ultimately create the jobs, wealth and commerce that will turn around the economy. It is troubling that a clear majority of them see President Obama’s plan as a hindrance, not a help.

● President Obama is talking down the economy at the worst possible time.

By repeatedly telling Americans that we’re on the cusp of another Great Depression, President Obama showed he was willing to employ fear mongering to gain a political victory. His comparison of today’s environment to the Great Depression is not only historically inaccurate, but it also threatens to have the very real effect of dampening Americans’ hope for the future. President Obama’s Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, also looked unprepared and offered little more than partisan rhetoric in his recent pitch for President Obama’s plan to save the banks (the immediate fallout from Secretary Geithner’s rhetoric was a 400 point drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average).

● President Obama is now working on his fourth Commerce Secretary in only one month’s time.

According to Republican aides close to the situation, President Obama’s pick for Commerce Secretary, Republican Senator Judd Gregg, withdrew his nomination in large part because he was angered that Republicans were shut out of the process. Gregg withdrew his nomination shortly after the ATI-News/Zogby poll was released, which showed the small business community’s negative perception of Obama’s stimulus effort. Gregg was President Obama’s third pick to run the Commerce department after New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson was forced to withdraw his nomination, and Penny Pritzker publicly stated she did not want the post. President Obama will now have to find yet another to fill the role of Commerce Secretary.

● President Obama’s high standard for cabinet appointees never materialized.

During the campaign, President Obama stumped frequently about the high purity standards that his cabinet and advisors would have to meet. However, this standard never materialized, as Obama has nominated numerous people with tax problems and lobbyists to fill out his top-level staff. Indeed, there have been few exceptions to this “purity standard” that the Obama administration has not been willing to make.

● President Obama has effectively undone many of the strides America has made on welfare reform.

Many of the provisions in the stimulus bill are actually designed to reverse gains made on welfare reform. As Michael Tanner writes in the New York Post: “[T]he bill would reward states for increasing caseloads, even if the growth came because the state had loosened its requirements for recipients to work. This is radical change. States that succeed in getting people off welfare would lose the opportunity for increased federal funding. And states that make it easier to stay on welfare (by, say, raising the time limit from two years to five) would get rewarded with more taxpayer cash. The bill would even let states with rising welfare rolls still collect their ‘case-load reduction’ bonuses.”

Victory frequently comes at a cost, but rarely is the price tag this steep. Small business leaders, young voters, Independents and Republicans are now asking: Will President Obama’s stimulus bill create jobs, spur investment, free up credit and save the housing industry? This is how his economic recovery plan will be judged, and only then will he know if it was worth the tremendous personal, political and capital expense.

As you probably know from reading my blog, or talking to me, I give O a failing grade.

Just because someone else started doesn't mean you have to do the wrong thing, does it?

2009-03-13T16:52:00.002-04:00

In this article from the Washington Times, Obama is quoted as saying that

"I did think it might be useful to point out that it wasn’t under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks. It wasn’t on my watch. And it wasn’t on my watch that we passed a massive new entitlement -– the prescription drug plan -- without a source of funding. And so I think it’s important just to note when you start hearing folks throw these words around that we’ve actually been operating in a way that has been entirely consistent with free-market principles and that some of the same folks who are throwing the word 'socialist' around can’t say the same."

Just because Bush started the intrusions into free markets, doesn't mean that Obama has to continue and even expand that intrusion, does it?

Starting a list of good and bad politicians

2009-03-12T17:58:00.002-04:00

Top 10 RINOs
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31018

Incompetent or a plan to destroy America?

2009-03-12T16:21:00.002-04:00

My wonderful husband thinks that Obama and his peeps are incompetent. That his presidency is the Peter Principal at work- he had the skills to get the job, but not the skills to do the job.

While I don't discount this as a possibility, I feel the incompetence is so great that there is no way that many people have no clue, when there are examples to follow, or people who've gone before to advise.

For instance, the Gordon Brown visit. There are protocol experts in the White House, aren't there? I would think there would have been someone to tell O what he should do when state leaders, especially our friends, visit him. But then, he doesn't think President of the United States is all that great a position, does he? After all, he didn't think it would be a big deal to meat with the head of Iran without conditions- that devalues the Presidency quite well.

And one of his advisors said that Britain is just like all 190 other countries out there, no more special than, say, Iran? or Laos?

I believe the liberal plan is to take as much wealth from the rich and middle class as possible, to destroy the rich, and to make as many people as possible dependent on the federal government, so as to ensure the perpetual power of Democrats, as those dependent on the government tend to continue to vote for the people who promise them free money.

I also have a question as to whether there is a deeper underlying goal as well- that of destroying America as a world power and making her dependent on the rest of the world. The One World Government idea, if you will. I believe this is one of the goals of the UN, and many of the world's liberals, and therefore the real reason they want us to adopt the Kyoto Treaty, the International Criminal Court, etc. The end goal being to make America less great, in fact just like every other country.

I remarked before about Bobby Jindal's rebuttal to Obama's speech to Congress- Jindal talked about how great our country is, but I don't think liberals want America to be better than any other country. There is a lot of guilt there that we have more than others. Instead of trying to lift other countries us to our level, they want to tear America down to the level of socialist countries.

In addition, Mr. Obama has spent his whole life constantly working towards the next job, as soon as he gets one. However, where else can you go after President of the US, other than UN Secretary General, or King of the World (for which I recommend he find a ship's prow and re-enact Titanic)? O does not spend much time in any job, so why else would this position be any different. (Or maybe that's one of the reasons he's so tired- disillusionment that there's no where else for him to go.)

There are so many reasons to think that there must be an underlying conspiracy, an overall goal that Obama is part of, that to think that there are merely this many incompetent people and they are all concentrated in and around Obama and his staff, seems somewhat naive.

Gun bans?

2009-03-11T10:53:00.004-04:00

My parents forwarded an email they received about fighting back against the administrations gun bans. I'm not sure about the legitimacy of the group, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and don't want to give them money until I know for sure, but the email had some good points:

Obama Lies To Gun Owners As Holder Reveals Gun Attack Plan

As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama deliberately and repeatedly lied to America's 90 million gun owners across the country when he insisted that he would not try to take away anyone's firearms, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, reacting to yesterday's remarks by Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder that the president will seek to reinstate the ban on semi-automatic firearms, said Obama "knew he was lying to the nation because his own website touted his plan to revive the gun ban and make it permanent."
...
"We warned America that Obama's 'support' for the Second Amendment was empty rhetoric," he stated, "and now Holder's disclosure has confirmed it. Obama was lying, and now gun rights may be dying."

Several times on the campaign trail, Obama told voters "I'm not going to take your guns away." He said it at rallies in Duryea, Pennsylvania and in Boise, Idaho. He also told a news conference that "Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I think people can take me at my word."

"Right now," said Gottlieb, "I wouldn't take Obama's word if he said it rains a lot in Seattle. Apparently, law-abiding gun owners have nothing to fear unless they own sport-utility rifles, semiautomatic shotguns, handguns and any other firearm that Obama and his anti-gun attorney general don't like.

"Thanks to Eric Holder, who has been far more honest than his boss about his anti-gun philosophy, it is now clear that the new president doesn't support the Second Amendment at all," he observed. "American gun owners should remind Democrats in Congress that the Second Amendment means what it says, especially when the president doesn't."

Illegals might get Stimulus jobs

2009-03-09T18:42:00.002-04:00

WTF!!?!???!

Rush linked to this article on USAToday.com

It looks like Illegals might get some of the Stimulus jobs, which makes the whole thing even worse.

Here's what Rush says:

RUSH: What is our unemployment rate, 8.1%? Unemployment is 8.1, 8.2%. We have over 600,000 people losing jobs every month now, correct? So would somebody explain this headline in USA Today: "'Illegal Immigrants Might Get Stimulus Jobs, Say Experts.' -- Tens of thousands of jobs created by the economic stimulus law could end up filled by illegal immigrants, particularly in big states such as California where undocumented workers are heavily represented in construction, experts on both sides of the issue say. Studies by two conservative think tanks estimate immigrants in the United States illegally could take 300,000 construction jobs, or 15% of the 2 million jobs that new taxpayer-financed projects are predicted to create." Boy, do I have a lot of problems with this story!

First, I do not accept the premise that the Porkulus bill is going to create two million jobs. Obama just saved 25 cop jobs in Ohio last week, Columbus. But two million jobs, the mythical infrastructure jobs? How is it that illegal immigrants are going to get 300,000 of this mythical two million jobs? "Experts on both sides," to answer your question, "experts on both sides fault Congress for failing to require that employers certify legal immigration status of workers before hiring by using a Department of Homeland Security program called E-Verify." Oh, they just happened to forget that? Who runs Congress? Don't the Democrats run Congress, and didn't the Democrats write the stimulus bill without any Republican participation? And didn't very few members of Congress even read the thing, including President Obama? So who in the world would stick in this bill a failure to require employers certify legal immigration status? Why, I think the Democrats would do that. So if this is true they could have deterred this, but they chose not to. So they purposely left it open that illegal immigrants can apply and get so-called jobs in the infrastructure rebuilding of America in construction. It just slipped their mind! You know, it's sorta just like oversight of TARP money. "Damn it, we weren't thinking about that when we were in such a hurry."

Pisses me off too!

Articles I'm looking at today

2009-03-09T18:03:00.001-04:00

Charles Krauthammer talks about Obama's policies of deception

From American Thinker, Obama's Political Munchausen By Proxy Syndrome:

In the political arena President Obama has purposely recreated a version of Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome by following the Hoover/FDR model of economic destruction, increasing taxation and regulation during a recession. Obama is compounding the damage by destroying the domestic nuclear, oil and coal industries at the same time...
Franklin D. Roosevelt pioneered the Democrats' model of the political version of Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome by exploiting uncertainty in the aftermath of the stock market crash of 1929, and by refusing to work with the Hoover Administration on the severe economic problems then facing the Country.

Rush talks more about his CPAC speech and his definition of conservatism as well as the policy, philosophy and principles.

How Obama's soak-the-rich plan will hurt the middle class. I'm not sure how Obama can crack down on foreign tax havens, but it looks like he wants to bar the use of them by US corporations to avoid US corporate income tax. If he wants that, shouldn't he lower our corporate income taxes so the corporations won't have to hide it?

Victor David Hanson on Obama the Great Divider Ha!

In short, while the rhetoric was often inspirational, I found no real reason then--or now--to believe that Barack Obama wishes to be a uniter. And nothing in his first five weeks of governance has disabused me of that first tough impression.

From the Times Online UK

Then came his near-$4-trillion budget last week. It is a manifesto to usher in a new age of government activism that involves levels of borrowing and spending never before seen in the US and is a document of such staggering ambition and risk that even some of Mr Obama's Democratic supporters are suddenly beginning to feel a little queasy.

A keen poker player, Mr Obama is gambling not only his own presidency, but the future wellbeing of the country. If he pulls it off, they might find room for him on Mount Rushmore. If he fails, he could bankrupt the world's largest economy.

Are we all Socialists Now?

The United States may have a substantially smaller welfare state than European nations, but neither have we had anything resembling "pure capitalism" for a very long time, and neither Reagan nor the Republican Congress were able to substantially reverse government growth. Social Security and Medicare are "socialism," and whatever their (substantial) economic flaws, they have proved politically untouchable; a major expansion of Medicare—prescription drug coverage for seniors—was enacted on Bush's watch. Even outside Medicare, the American health care system is no "free market" but an often unwieldy mix of market and regulation. Obama's proposed education initiatives expand, but hardly revolutionize, the federal role...
No sane person today would argue the merits of communism or Soviet-style socialism vs. democratic capitalism. But the size and role of government in democratic capitalist societies is very much a subject of legitimate debate. Most people favor some balance between security and flexibility, more equality and more individual opportunity. We proponents of small government should be able to argue for flexibility and opportunity without painting the other side as evil—and to criticize the Democrats' proposals without resorting to a Red Scare.

Vanity Fair has an article on what the American Dream became

...the author shows how the American Dream came to mean fame and fortune, instead of the promise that shaped a nation.

From the Weekly Standard Another day, another broken campaign pledge

Mark Steyn on Obama and the US relations with the world:

I would make a modest prediction that in 2012, after four years of the man who was supposed to heal America’s relations with a world sick of all that swaggering cowboy unilateralism, those relations will be much worse. From Canada to India, the implications of the Obama ascendancy are becoming painfully clear.

Mona Charen says Stand up for Capitalism

Big Hollywood has an article about the Common Sense of Rush Limbaugh

For all those critics on the right who find it so fashionable to oppose Rush Limbaugh, they would be hard pressed to challenge his political analysis which, day in and day out, is as sound and thoughtful as any conservative writing today.

I found another blogger I like

2009-03-09T17:30:00.003-04:00

There are a lot of good bloggers out there, and I'm really enjoying reading them. It's hard to stay on top of all of them, but LittleMissAtilla had a great statment:

So don’t blame me: I voted for the cranky old white-haired dude whose arms move funny.

I'm getting sicker and sicker of the Obama people

2009-03-09T00:14:00.003-04:00

I just finished reading an article from the UK Telegraph about how tired Obama is.

There has been an uproar about the gifts and reception given to the British Prime Minister.

Apparently one of Obama's peeps doesn't think America has a special relationship with Britian:

The real views of many in Obama administration were laid bare by a State Department official involved in planning the Brown visit, who reacted with fury when questioned by The Sunday Telegraph about why the event was so low-key.

The official dismissed any notion of the special relationship, saying: "There's nothing special about Britain. You're just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn't expect special treatment."

Let's just insult our friends and make friends with terrorists and wackos and our enemies. That makes a lot of sense.

2009-03-08T21:28:00.003-04:00

My Conservative Identity:

You are a Free Marketeer, also known as a fiscal conservative. You believe in free-market capitalism, tax cuts, and protecting your hard-earned cash from pick-pocketing liberal socialists.

Take the quiz at www.FightLiberals.com

Link from Retired Fireman

These are the other options:

You are a Faith-Based Fighter, also known as a religious conservative. You believe in Judeo-Christian values, restoring God’s rightful place in the public square, and in showing all the unwashed and unsaved liberal sinners the path to salvation, or at least to the GOP.

You are a Flag-Waving Everyman, also known as a patriot. You believe in freedom, apple pie, rooting for America at all times, and that God gave us a two-day weekend so we could enjoy football and NASCAR.

You are a Values Guardian, also known as a social conservative. You believe in serving on the front lines of the culture wars to restore traditional values and protecting America against condom-dispensing, stem cell-sucking sodomites from Hollyweird.

You are an Anti-government Gunslinger, also known as a libertarian conservative. You believe in smaller government, states’ rights, gun rights, and that, as Reagan once said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’”

You are a Freedom Crusader, also known as a neoconservative. You believe in taking the fight directly to the enemy, whether it’s terrorists abroad or the liberal terrorist appeasers at home who give them aid and comfort. (This one's my husband)

Geithner is worse than we thought

2009-03-08T21:16:00.002-04:00

Rick Moran has a post on AmericanThinker.com about Timothy Geithner, tax cheat and new head of the IRS.

Apparently, he was the author of the IMF policy for Indonesia, that "destroyed the Indonesian economy".

I thought being a tax cheat was bad enough- but this is so very much worse!

The Abortion President?

2009-03-08T21:06:00.003-04:00

President Obama has the most extreme views of Abortion of any politician in the Unites States that I am aware of. He has a perfect score from NARAL, and even voted against the "Born Alive Infant Protection Act".

He is pushing for the Freedom of Choice Act to be passed, which would remove all state restrictions on abortion, such as Parental Notification.

On American Thinker, there is an article about all the Catholic hospitals in the US closing if FOCA is passed:

Some Catholic bishops are looking seriously at shuttering all 624 Catholic hospitals in the United States if the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act" (FOCA) becomes law.

Basically, the logical outgrowth of the bill's passage would be no federal funds for hospitals that did not perform abortions. And since the Catholic church would view the selling of hospitals to secular companies as "fostering evil," they would have no other choice except to close their doors.

Foxnews.com had an article on Friday about a Congressman calling Obama the "Abortion President":

One of the most outspoken abortion opponents in Congress labeled President Obama the "abortion president" on Friday in response to news that Obama intended to sign an executive order Monday lifting restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., accused Obama of launching two attacks on pro-life measures. In addition to lifting President Bush's stem cell restrictions, Obama intends to lift regulations from the Bush administration that allow health care providers and institutions to refuse to participate in abortions on grounds of conscience.

Smith labeled Obama's stem cell policy an expansion of "human embryo experimentation."

"Why does the president persist in the dehumanizing of nascent human life when better alternatives exist? Human embryo-destroying stem cell research is not only unethical, unworkable and unreliable- it is now, demonstrably unnecessary," Smith said.

His voting record during the 143 days he was in the Senate before looking for his next job showed that he would be doing this. Is anyone surprised?

Knight or Senator, his choice?

2009-03-08T21:03:00.001-04:00

Teddy Kennedy was just given an honorary knighthood by the Queen of England.

According to Cassy Fiano, the Constitution says he has to either

accept the O.B.E., and step down from public office, or he can refuse the O.B.E., and continue as a United States senator. That is, of course, assuming that he wants to be in keeping with the Constitution, and knowing liberals, if this is even ever brought up he’ll likely just make some bullshit remark about how the Constitution is a “living” document.

Poor Obamugabe

2009-03-08T20:49:00.002-04:00

He's tired. Rick Moran says:

A little more than a month in and our president already needs a vacation...

Maybe he is spending a little too much time watching basketball games and movies at the White House, going to Washington Wizards games, flying to Chicago for dinner with Michelle and, as Richard states, flying around to swing states in campaign mode. Maybe he should start his day in the Oval Office at 7am like Bush, instead of 9am.

Apparently there's a lot more work than he thought there would be, and he doesn't have enough time or energy to focus on both domestic and foreign affairs.

I remember some ads before the election that asked if he was ready to lead. A big concern was that this would essentially be his first real job. I read somewhere (and later commented) that he had the arrogance of someone who had never failed, and that it would not be pretty if the first thing he ever fails at is as President of the United States.

Unfortunately these horrific predictions appear to be coming true.

That rumble you hear is Atlas Shrugging

2009-03-08T19:25:00.004-04:00

That was one of the Vents in the AJC recently (or something like that).

I found an article talking about the increase in interest in Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged. One person said "The Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy" is a better choice. lol.

One of the signs at the protest was about reading Atlas Shrugged, and I've heard of people trying to cap their income at $249,999 so as to not have increased taxes under the Obama administration.

I don't think giving up or "going John Galt" is the right answer- I think we should be doing what is right for our country, and that is fighting and educating and working towards 2010 and 2012 when we can reverse some of the policies enacted this year. When we can get politicians that will represent the people instead of their own personal interests.

I just had to laugh at this one

2009-03-08T19:22:00.002-04:00

On Foxnews.com yesterday, there was an article about Chavez urging Obama to embrace socialism, but the author has a good sense of humor and a geeky side:

In a plea evoking Darth Vader's attempt to turn Luke Skywalker to the dark side, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Friday urged President Obama to join the socialist movement

Can't you just hear it?

A conversation with my sister-in-law

2009-03-08T01:08:00.002-05:00

We were in Florida last weekend, for spring training games and then to visit Mom and Dad in PCB for a couple of days. We had dinner with my brother and his wife, and during dinner I commented that I've gotten to the point that I don't trust anything Obama says anymore.

My sister-in-law said, "Did you ever?"

That got me wondering. I realized that, no, I didn't really ever trust anything he said. I don't trust most of what politicians say. But with Obama it's a bigger issue.

Not only does he seem to mean the opposite of whatever he says, his actions show that he does not mean his words, and that he does not think words have any meaning at all. In my experience, when someone has a view like that, they also assume that other people have the same view. My ex and his family did not believe that there is absolute truth-Truth was whatever they thought people wanted to hear at the time, whatever would get them the most benefit. And they assumed that everyone else was doing the same thing. They did not understand, even scorned, those who actually backed up their words with actions.

In addition, I think with most politicians, I have hope that they have some integrity, that they believe at least some of the words they say. But now, I have lost all hope that Obama means anything he says.

I learned about Cognitive Dissonance recently, and that's what I get from everything Obama says. And it hurts my brain.

Another Feisty Conservative Protest Babe

2009-03-07T23:53:00.001-05:00

Since I'm now a protest babe, I want everyone to know I'm not angry, I'm just feisty.

Here's another one of us feisty protest babes.

We're in a fighting mood. Watch out!

I love WSJ's Opinion Journal, Best of The Web Today

2009-03-07T23:50:00.002-05:00

Everything Seemingly Is Spinning Out of Control

"Cadbury Tackles Burping Cows to Reduce Milk Chocolate Carbon Footprint"--headline, DailyReporter.com, March 2
"Britain's Clown Shortage: Visa Rules Hit Circus"--headline, Time.com, March 6
"Cellphones May Spread Superbugs in Hospitals: Study"--headline, Agence France-Presse, March 5
" 'The US Has More Frozen Embryos Than Living People' "--headline, Times of Malta, March 4
"Octuplet Mom Says Hormones Drove Wild 911 Call"--headline, Associated Press, March 5
"At 50 Years Old, Barbie Gets Tattoos--and a Megastore in China"--headline, Los Angeles Times, March 6

I almost died laughing

Articles on the Budget, economy, and stock market

2009-03-07T11:37:00.004-05:00

Here are a few articles I found on the financial issues facing our country:

Obama's radicalism is killing the Dow

Obama's soak-the-rich plan will kill hte middle class

Betsyspage has a post about how much blame Obama should take for the stock market decline. She mentions Jim Cramer of Mad Money with Jim Cramer, who has turned against Obama's policies, and stated that Obama's budget 'may be one of the great wealth destroyers of all time." Obama is also losing other supporters like Christopher Buckley and Stuart Taylor

Henninger on Rush and Reagan

2009-03-07T11:34:00.001-05:00

Daniel Henninger wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

What Rush Limbaugh was trying to tell that conservative audience in so many words was, Don't be embarrassed. Don't be embarrassed about embracing the world of free markets, competition, entrepreneurship and profit. If you don't know how to talk about it, reread the apostles and evangelists of private economic growth -- Ronald Reagan's "A Life in Letters," Milton Friedman's "Free to Choose," Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson."

Politics, it has been recently demonstrated, is about ideas and language. The conservative movement is not at a loss for proven ideas, and in the U.S. the most powerful of these -- running in an upward line since the Industrial Revolution -- is the idea of private economic growth. The Democrats don't want the private economy anymore and conservatives have forgotten how to talk about it. Democrats are betting their opponents will forget even where Ronald Reagan is buried. They should be so lucky.

Rush Limbaugh at CPAC

2009-03-07T10:03:00.002-05:00

Rush Limbaugh gave a wonderful speech at the CPAC Conservative Political Action Conference.

He spent a lot of time defining Conservativism. Here are a few of my favorite quotes:

Let me tell you who we conservatives are: We love people. [Applause] When we look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don't see groups. We don't see victims. We don't see people we want to exploit. What we see -- what we see is potential. We do not look out across the country and see the average American, the person that makes this country work. We do not see that person with contempt. We don't think that person doesn't have what it takes. We believe that person can be the best he or she wants to be if certain things are just removed from their path like onerous taxes, regulations and too much government.

He said "We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be." and that conservatives think Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are under assault.

We don't want to tell anybody how to live. That's up to you. If you want to make the best of yourself, feel free. If you want to ruin your life, we'll try to stop it, but it's a waste. We look over the country as it is today, we see so much waste, human potential that's been destroyed by 50 years of a welfare state. By a failed war on poverty.

We want the country to succeed, and for the country to succeed, its people -- its individuals -- must succeed. Everyone among us must be pursuing his ambition or her desire, whatever, with excellence. Trying to be the best they can be. Not told, as they are told by the Democrat Party: You really can't do that, you don't have what it takes, besides you're a minority or you're a woman and there are too many people that want to discriminate against you. You can't get anywhere. You need to depend on us.

I like the way he puts this:

For those of you just tuning in on the Fox News Channel or C-SPAN, I'm Rush Limbaugh and I want everyone in this room and every one of you around the country to succeed. I want anyone who believes in life, liberty, pursuit of happiness to succeed. And I want any force, any person, any element of an overarching Big Government that would stop your success, I want that organization, that element or that person to fail.

Rush spoke about Obama and the gifts he has been given, and how he is wasting them:

President Obama is one of the most gifted politicians, one of the most gifted men that I have ever witnessed. He has extraordinary talents. He has communication skills that hardly anyone can surpass. No, seriously. No, no, I'm being very serious about this. It just breaks my heart that he does not use these extraordinary talents and gifts to motivate and inspire the American people to be the best they can be. He's doing just the opposite. And it's a shame. [Applause] President Obama has the ability -- he has the ability to inspire excellence in people's pursuits. He has the ability to do all this, yet he pursues a path, seeks a path that punishes achievement, that punishes earners and punishes -- and he speaks negatively of the country. Ronald Reagan used to speak of a shining city on a hill. Barack Obama portrays America as a soup kitchen in some dark night in a corner of America that's very obscure. He's constantly telling the American people that bad times are ahead, worst times are ahead. And it's troubling...

President Obama is so busy trying to foment and create anger in a created atmosphere of crisis, he is so busy fueling the emotions of class envy that he's forgotten it's not his money that he's spending. [Applause] In fact, the money he's spending is not ours. He's spending wealth that has yet to be created. And that is not sustainable. It will not work. This has been tried around the world. And every time it's been tried, it's a failed disaster.

The war on poverty essentially started in the '30s as part of the New Deal, but it really ramped up in the '60s with Lyndon Johnson, part of the Great Society war on poverty. We have transferred something like 10 trillion, maybe close to 11 trillion, from producers and earners to nonproducers and nonearners since 1965. Yet, as I listen to the Democratic Party campaign, why, America is still a soup kitchen, the poor is still poor and they have no hope and they're poor for what reason? They're poor because of us, because we don't care, and because we've gotten rich by taking from them, that's what kids in school are taught today. That's what others have said to the media. You know why they're poor, you know why they remain poor? Because their lives have been destroyed by the never-ending government hay that's designed to help them, but it destroys ambition. It destroys the education they might get to learn to be self-fulfilling. [Applause] And it breaks our heart. It breaks our heart. We lose track of numbers with all of the money, with all the money that's been transferred, redistributed, with all the charitable giving in this country.

And it's gotten so out of hand now that what worries me is that this administration, the Barack Obama administration is actively seeking to expand the welfare state in this country because he wants to control it.

George Will once asked Dr. Friedrich Von Hayek, tremendous classical economist, great man, 1975, George Will, Dr. Von Hayek, why is it that intellectuals, supposed smartest people in the room, why is it that intellectuals can look right out their windows, their own homes and cars and look at their universities and not see the bounties and the growth and the greatness of capitalism? And Von Hayek said: I've troubled over this for years and I've finally concluded that for intellectuals, pseudo-intellectuals, and all liberals, it's about control. It's not about raising revenue. You think Obama has any intention of paying for all this spending? Folks, if he had any intention of paying for it, he wouldn't do 90% of it because we don't have the money. [Applause]

They don't care about paying for it. All that's just words. All that's just rhetoric paying for it because he knows you have to worry about paying for it. He knows we all have to be concerned -- oh, except, wrong again. Except the words of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who were given homes that everybody knew they could never pay for, and now Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, the architects along with Bill Clinton of the policy that gave us the whole sub-prime mortgage crisis, get to sit around and act as innocent spectators to investigate what went on when they largely had the biggest role in causing it.

Congressman Frank's definition of affordable housing is you get a house you don't have to pay for that everybody else in the neighborhood will pay for. Why? Because it's unfair that some people can have a house and some people can't. Geez, it's just unfair. So here we have two systems. We have socialism, collectivism, Stalin, whatever you want to call it, versus capitalism. Admittedly over on the right side capitalism there will be unequal outcomes because we're all different. And some of us care more and have more passion and we know what we want to do and others are still struggling for it. Some people are just going to work harder than others. Okay. You get what you work for. Those who have a genuine inability for whatever reason are taken care of. We're compassionate people. On the left side when you get into this collectivism socialism stuff, these people on the left, the Democrats and liberals today claim that they are pained by the inequities and the inequalities in our society. And they believe that these inequities and inequalities descend from the selfishness and the greed of the achievers. And so they tell the people who are on different income quintiles, whatever lists, they say it's not that you're not working hard enough, you could have what they have, perhaps, if you applied it. They're stealing it from you...

President Obama, and take your pick of any Democrat, love to say we've tried it your way. Meaning Reaganism. We've tried it your way. We tried it your way in the '80s and it didn't work. We tried it your way eight years, the last eight years and it didn't work. Excuse me. Excuse me. Have you ever noticed those of you watching around the world in my first international address to the world, Fox is on some international satellites. They're watching this in the UK right now going (cringing). When Obama talks about past economies, he somehow always leaves out the recession of the '80s as worse than this one. Why does he leave it out? Because you know why he leaves it out, America? He leaves it out because we got out of that recession with tax cuts. [Applause] For those of you watching at home, I'm not nervous it's just really hot in here. These people are wired. We got out of the 1980s recession with tax cuts. Do you know that President Obama, in six weeks of his administration, has proposed more spending than from the founding of the country to his inauguration?

Now, this is not prosperity. It is not going to engender prosperity. It's not going to create prosperity and it's also not going to advance or promote freedom. It's going to be just the opposite. There are going to be more controls over what you can and can't do, how you can and can't do it, what you can and can't drive, what you can and can't say, where you can and can't say it. All of these things are coming down the pike, because it's not about revenue generation to them, it's about control. They do believe that they have compassion. They do believe they care. But, see, we never are allowed to look at the results of their plans, we are told we must only look at their good intentions, their big hearts. The fact that they have destroyed poor families by breaking up those families by offering welfare checks to women to keep having babies no more father needed, he's out doing something, the government's the father, they destroy the family. We're not supposed to analyze that. We're not supposed to talk about that. We're supposed to talk about their good intentions. They destroy people's futures. The future is not Big Government. Self-serving politicians. Powerful bureaucrats. This has been tried, tested throughout history. The result has always been disaster. President Obama, your agenda is not new. It's not change, and it's not hope. [Applause] Spending a nation into generational debt is not an act of compassion. All politicians, including President Obama, are temporary stewards of this nation. It is not their task to remake the founding of this country. It is not their task to tear it apart and rebuild it in their image.

It is not their task, it is not their right to remake this nation to accommodate their psychology. I sometimes wonder if liberalism is not just a psychosis or a psychology, not an ideology. It's so much about feelings, and the predominant feeling that liberalism is about is about feeling good about themselves and they do that by telling themselves they have all this compassion. You know, if you really want to unhinge a liberal it's hard to do because they're so unhinged now anyway, even after -- but all you have to do is say you know that the things you people do, the things you people believe in are cruel. That's the last way they look at themselves. They are the best people on the -- they're the good people. You tell them that their ideas and that their policies are cruel and the eggs start scrambling...

bipartisanship occurs only after one other result, and that is victory. In other words, let's say as conservatives liberals demand that we be bipartisan with them in Congress. What they mean is: We check our core principles at the door, come in, let them run the show and agree with them. That's bipartisanship to them. To us, bipartisanship is them being forced to agree with us after we politically have cleaned their clocks and beaten them. And that has to be what we're focused on. [Applause] Why would any of us in this room who hold the core beliefs we believe, somebody tell me where is the compromise on all of this spending? Where is the compromise on all this punishment of the achievers. I don't know. [Laughter] [Applause]

Where is the compromise between good and evil? Should Jesus have cut a different deal? Serious. From the standpoint of what we have to do, folks, this is not about taking a policy or a process that the Democrats have put forward and fighting around the edges. If we're going to convince the minds and hearts of the American people that what's about to happen to them is as disastrous as anything in their lives in peacetime, we're going to have to discuss philosophy with them. We are going to have to talk about principles, because our principles are not present in what's happening here. So where the hell do we go to compromise what we believe in when our principles are not their principles, they're just the opposite of what's happening?

We're not quitting. We are not giving up. The country is too important. [Applause] There are certain realities. We don't have the votes in Capitol Hill to stop what's going to happen. What we can do is slow it down, procedure, parliamentary procedures, slow it down and do the best we can to inform the American people of what's really on the horizon. I know it's going to be tough. At some points, I don't think it can happen even right now. This is still the honeymoon period, and there's a lot of devotion to the Obama administration. It doesn't have anything to do with intellectual thinking, it's feelings. It's going to take some time for this to play out. But I spoke to David Keene, interviewing him for my newsletter. I asked him about this. He said they're going to overreach. Wouldn't you say they have? [Laughter].

They're going to overreach. At some point, at some point people have got to realize none of this is possible. You can't have people living in homes they don't pay for. You can't have people driving cars they don't pay for. I mean, you can for a while. But after a while the people paying for it -- screw this. We're not putting up with it. And you're going to see -- you're already starting to see evidence of these. All the tea parties that are starting to bubble up out there. Those are great. Fabulous. [Applause] And here's the big question. Here's the big question. And I ask this again in the context of my first address to the nation. [Laughter] You don't know how I love saying that, how excited I am about this. Aside from the bastardization of the Constitution that the Obama plans are, that TARP is, it's not constitutional. Aside from that, where is the evidence that the people offering all of this have ever succeeded in any similar plans before? There's none. There is no evidence it works.

So you say how is he getting it done? Dumb down public education. Emotions. And the ongoing -- this is why I think it's such a waste for a man as gifted as President Obama with the communications skills, you know he could wipe out the Republican Party. He can wipe out the Republican Party if he would inspire this country to be the best it could be, but we don't have to worry about that because that's not what he wants. He wants people in fear, angst and crisis, fearing the worst each and every day because that clears the decks for President Obama and his pals to come in with the answers, which are abject failures, historically shown and demonstrated. Doesn't matter. They'll have control of it when it's all over. And that's what they want. Because they think they can do it better...

They've created class envy in so many average Americans that they love hearing that. Yeah, you get even with those bank guys. How is it going to improve here? Let me ask a question for those of you watching my first national address. Take the favorite villain you've got, maybe it's John Thain at Merrill Lynch, because he used his own money, his company's own money, his company's own money, to redecorate a bathroom in an office for $1.2 million. By the way, to do that he had to hire a contractor. They got paid. Had to hire a designer and buy furniture, that's called stimulus. And he did it.

But all of a sudden John Thain's thrown out. John Thain is thrown out. He's humiliated and embarrassed; how dare he? He did it a year before they took the TARP money. And all these Congressmen are standing up saying this is not going to happen. We are not going to watch these people capping executive pay while Obama tries to live like one. You know, he's trying to emulate the lifestyle he is attacking. That's what liberals do. Two sets of rules: One for them; one for everybody else. But it's coming. See, if you think that John Thain or the Northern Trust CEO, if you love them getting attacked, if you love them being ripped, ask yourself the next day, do you have any more money in your pocket? Is your life any better because that guy got taken out or down by some haughty senator from Massachusetts?
If you ask yourself this, you'll realize your life is no better off. That the Democrats and Obama are asking you to feel better simply on the basis that they're going to get revenge for you, but your life isn't going to improve, somebody else's is just going to be destroyed and they want you to be happy over that. That's sick. And that is not the United States of America...

Now let's talk about the conservative movement as it were. We, ladies and gentlemen, have challenges that are part and parcel of a movement that feels it has just suffered a humiliating defeat when it's not humiliating. This wasn't a landslide victory, 52 to, what, 46. Fifty-eight million people voted against Obama. There would have been more if we would have had a conservative nominee. [Applause] I don't mean that -- I mean that in an instructive way, as a lead-in to what I'm talking about here. No humiliating defeat here. I can't -- sometimes I get livid and angry. We do have an organizational problem. We have a challenge. We've got factions now within our own movement seeking power to dominate it, and worst of all to redefine it. Well, the Constitution doesn't need to be redefined. Conservative intellectuals, the Declaration of Independence does not need to be redefined and neither does conservatism. Conservatism is what it is and it is forever. It's not something you can bend and shape and flake and form...

On Obama's meeting with 'conservative media pundits' at the home of George will in January,

Does anybody really think that Barack Obama had dinner with a bunch of conservatives hoping they would change his mind?

CROWD: No!

RUSH: Hell, no. His purpose -- and his purpose really wasn't to change theirs -- his purpose was to anoint them as conservative spokesmen. These are the people that Obama's willing to break bread with. These happen -- some of the people there happen to be the people who think the era of Reagan is over, who believe that conservatism needs to be redefined

I really like this part:

Conservatives are naturally happy. We seek happiness. We pursue it. It's part of who we are. So what can you do? Live your life. I swear, folks, you do not know in just the everyday life that you live in your homes, your neighborhoods, the favorite word of this administration, your "communities." Remember the root word there is "commune." [Applause] Be happy, live your life according to your values and principles. Know you're going to fail, no human being is perfect, you're going to make mistakes, but live your life -- you'll be stunned at how many people you impress. Don't be afraid to tell children that they're wrong. They don't know what you do. They simply haven't lived long enough. It's not their fault, but they're being fed a bunch of garbage in school and don't be afraid to tell them that they're wrong.

Don't go the Oprah route and say gotta be friends with my parents, my kids, first and foremost. Understand they're going to hate you for a while and they're going to rebel against you and someday they're going to think you're the smartest person they ever met. But you owe them the truth. You owe them the truth about things. You owe them the truth about morality. You owe them the truth about values. [Applause] You owe them the truth about politics. Next thing, we've got to stop treating voters as children. [Applause] Somebody says they want something that's bad for them, do you give it to them just to be nice? Or do you tell them, regardless of their age, no, you shouldn't have that? Well, it's none of your business. Maybe not. And then you back out of it. But you still have to have the ability to tell people what's right and wrong. And that's not authoritative. That's not authoritarian. And it's not trying to deny somebody a good time. It's not trying to interrupt somebody's hedonism, pleasure, it's about all of us with shared values trying to make sure that people live the highest quality lives they can. Ultimately, it's their decision as to what they do. But the point is, don't treat them -- especially voters -- as kids just -- they say they want it okay we'll come up with a plan to give it to you...

The president's stimulus package, the TARP, the whatever, the budget, relies on one thing for its success. Well, aside from authoritarian government power. It relies on the complacency of the American people. It relies on their belief that they can convince the American people that there's such a crisis that only government, the only entity that can fix it is government, as Obama has said. So they get complacent and they sit around and they wait. See, this is something liberals will never understand about the United States of America and it's right under their noses, right in front of their faces, we are a competitive people. We strive, enough of us do, to be the best. We strive to win. We strive to avoid defeat. Enough of us still do. Don't believe otherwise. The liberals have made efforts to shut that aspect of our nature down. Wherever you live, I am certain that you, when you were a child or your kids today in youth sports are told not to keep score, because the losers, it's just not fair. They'd be humiliated, especially if one girl's basketball team can defeat another one 100 to nothing. And let's fire the coach who put that game together. It's so unfair. So let's not keep score. Well, here's the dirty little secret. The kids are keeping score. [Applause] You know they are. They don't want to lose. They know what winning and losing is. They're saying, well, why go out there and put on the pads and play football or T-Ball if the objective here is to not keep score. So they're keeping score. They get in the car with mom and dad and they tell mom and dad: Yeah, we kicked their butts tonight. Wait a minute, I thought you weren't keeping score. They weren't officially. They keep score. We're competitive people. Adults are doing the same thing.

It didn't take long for people to get fired up when they figured out that they're going to be paying mortgages for people who should never have been lent money in the first place for the bogus excuse of maintaining property values in the neighborhood. This is something that -- the complacency of the American people is something they're going to rely on along with their authoritarian efforts to control it. But they will not succeed at this. Because we're not quitters. We don't acquiesce. We're not going to give up the American dream and watch idly while it is restructured and transformed...

On wanting Obama to fail, he said:

Now, about my still-to-me mysteriously controversial comment that I hope President Obama fails. I was watching the Super Bowl. And as you know, I love the Pittsburgh Steelers. [Cheers and Applause] So they have this miraculous scoring drive that puts them up by four, 15 seconds left. Kurt Warner on the field for the Cardinals. And I sure as heck want you to know I hope he failed. I did not want the Cardinals to win. I wanted Warner to make the biggest fool of himself possible. I wanted a sack, I wanted anything. I wanted the Steelers to win. I wanted to win. I wanted the Cardinals to fail.

This notion that I want the President to fail, folks, this shows you a sign of the problem we've got. That's nothing more than common sense and to not be able to say it, why in the world do I want what we just described, rampant government growth indebtedness, wealth that's not even being created yet that is being spent, what is in this? What possibly is in this that anybody of us wants to succeed? Did the Democrats want the war on Iraq to fail!

CROWD: Yes!

RUSH: They certainly did. They not only wanted the war in Iraq to fail, they proclaimed it a failure. There's Dingy Harry Reid waiving a white flag: [doing Harry Reid impression] "This war is lost. This war is" -- [Cheers and Applause] They called General Petraeus a liar before he even testified. Mrs. Clinton -- [Crowd Booing] -- said she had to, willingly suspend disbelief in order to listen to Petraeus. We're in the process of winning the war. The last thing they wanted was to win. They hoped George Bush failed. So what is so strange about being honest to say that I want Barack Obama to fail if his mission is to restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundation? Why would I want that to succeed?

And his conclusion:

there's some people you can't say you want the President to fail. Ladies and gentlemen of the United States, the Democrat Party has actively not just sought the failure of Republican presidents and policies and now wars for the first time, the Democrat Party doesn't stop at failure. Talk to Judge Robert Bork or Justice Clarence Thomas about how they tried to destroy lives, reputations and character, and I'm supposed to say I don't want the President to fail? [Applause] We're in for a real battle. We are talking about the United States of America -- and there will always be an America, don't misunderstand me -- we're talking about it remaining the country we were all born into and reared and grown into. And it's under assault. It's always under assault. But it's never been under assault like this from within before. And it's a serious, serious battle.

So as you leave here, as you leave here optimism, confidence, not guilt, it's not worth it. There's nothing to be guilty about. Don't treat people as children. Respect their intelligence. Realize that there's a way to persuade people. Sometimes the worst way is to get in their face and point a finger. Set up a set of circumstances where the conclusion is obvious. Let them think they came up with the idea themselves. They'll think they're smart that they figured it out. Who cares how you persuade them, the fact they can be persuaded is factually correct, it's possible. But the main thing to do here is stop thinking that we are a minority. Stop thinking that it is being in the minority that liberates you. It is your beliefs. It is your core principles, it is your confidence that liberates you. It's not being in the minority.

Lobbying

2009-03-07T09:53:00.002-05:00

From Wikipedia:

It can be argued that lobbying is undesirable because it allows people with particular interests which represent a minority to gain special access to law-makers and through contributions and favors have controversial relationships with representatives. This is a danger to democracy as described in Article 22 of the Federalist Papers.

I like the Federalist Papers, think they are very important, and want to read them and learn more about them.

I generally like Thomas Sowell's views, so I'll have to look into this, also from wikipedia:

Economist Thomas Sowell defends corporate lobbying as simply an example of a group having better knowledge of its interests than the people at large do of theirs.

Wow, it looks like some politicians want to regulate grassroots lobbying, or when ordinary Americans contact their representatives to ask them to support or oppose issues. From wikipedia again:

For example, in January 2004, the U.S. Senate considered S. 1, an omnibus "ethics reform" bill. This bill contained a provision (Section 220) to establish federal regulation, for the first time, of certain efforts to encourage "grassroots lobbying." The bill said that "'grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same." This provision was opposed by a broad array of organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Right to Life Committee, and the National Rifle Association, who argued that attempts by constituents to influence their representatives are at the heart of representational democracy, and that neither such contacts nor efforts to motivate such contacts should be considered "lobbying." On January 18, 2007, the U.S. Senate voted 55-43 to strike Section 220 from the bill. However, other proposed regulations on "grassroots lobbying" remain under consideration in the 110th Congress.

The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected congressional efforts to regulate grassroots communications as a form of "lobbying," on constitutional grounds. In 1953, in a suit involving a congressional resolution authorizing a committee to investigate "all lobbying activities intended to influence, encourage, promote, or retard legislation," the Supreme Court narrowly construed "lobbying activities" to mean only "direct" lobbying (which the Court described as "representations made directly to the Congress, its members, or its committees"), and rejected a broader interpretation of "lobbying" out of First Amendment concerns.[14]. The Supreme Court thereby affirmed the earlier decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which said:

“ In support of the power of Congress it is argued that lobbying is within the regulatory power of Congress, that influence upon public opinion is indirect lobbying, since public opinion affects legislation; and that therefore attempts to influence public opinion are subject to regulation by the Congress. Lobbying, properly defined, is subject to control by Congress, . . . But the term cannot be expanded by mere definition so as to include forbidden subjects. Neither semantics nor syllogisms can break down the barrier which protects the freedom of people to attempt to influence other people by books and other public writings. . . . It is said that lobbying itself is an evil and a danger. We agree that lobbying by personal contact may be an evil and a potential danger to the best in legislative processes. It is said that indirect lobbying by the pressure of public opinion on the Congress is an evil and a danger. That is not an evil; it is a good, the healthy essence of the democratic process. . . .

More at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbyist

Defining important terms

2009-03-07T09:41:00.004-05:00

I've been wondering about the definitions of different terms that most people seem to take for granted as simple to understand.

terms like Pork. It's not just that the government is spending a lot of money, it's that it is determining where the money should go on a federal level when it should be on a local level. And of course, these earmarks are usually paying back someone for a favor.

And Lobbyist. I believe that lobbyists have too much power in Washington- a powerful lobbyist can get laws changed that benefit their friends, but which might hurt others, or leave out a lot of Americans. But they also serve an important function that helps our voices get heard. And I believe the Fair Tax will take power away from lobbyists and return it to the American people.

I was reading about the Depression, and it seems that groups with big lobbyists were able to get federal funding for their constituents, but if you didn't have a lobbyist, you didn't get anything. Hence, coal miners got a lot of help, but other miners didn't. That doesn't seem fair at all.

But, my friend Virginia works for Americans for Prosperity. She is a lobbyist. She stated that she is one of the few lobbyists who try to get legislators to spend less money.

So what is the proper role of lobbyists in our government? I would assume that any lobbyists who contribute financial to election campaigns, then receive federal money for their pet projects would not be beneficial to our country.

For the most part, I don't think most politicians or even most people really understand the terms they use every day. Or if they do, they don't know how to explain it to others in understandable ways.

So I am spending some time looking at these terms and trying to define them, and explain them for others.

The Pork is the thing

2009-03-06T23:42:00.003-05:00

I don't think most people understand what pork is, in the context of politics.

From Wikipedia:

Typically, "pork" involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated in a particular area but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects, certain national defense spending projects, and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples.

Citizens Against Government Waste[6] outlines seven criteria by which spending can be classified as "pork":

Requested by only one chamber of Congress;
Not specifically authorized;
Not competitively awarded;
Not requested by the President;
Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the previous year’s funding;
Not the subject of congressional hearings; or
Serves only a local or special interest.

I was reading an article about Former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, in which the author listed the benefits Alaska received because of Stevens' work in getting earmarks for his state, and that without him in the Senate, Alaska would hurt. And I thought that there was something wrong with the statement. If he could benefit his state, is that not what he was supposed to do as a Senator for Alaska?

But then I realized that it is not the federal government's job to decide where the federal money goes for local projects- that should be the local government's job- the state, the city, the county.

When Sarah Palin talked about the Bridge to Nowhere, that was an earmark in a spending bill, possibly obtained by Stevens, she said "Thanks, but no thanks." I read a complaint from someone, that she accepted the money and used it elsewhere. But that is her job as the governor of Alaska- to make the decisions about the money that is spent in her state.

The federal government is supposed to spend money on defense, interstates, and other national issues. If they give money to the states, the governor is supposed to make the decisions about how to spend it. That is the way our Constitution is written. Any rights not enumerated in our Constitution, belong to the States.

The problem I saw in Jindal's speech

2009-03-06T23:26:00.003-05:00

I read Jindal's rebuttal to Obama's address to Congress last week and noted two things.

One, he did not articulate a plan to reform health coverage in America. And I think he should have a good idea of how to do that as he has worked in the field in Louisiana.

But the main issue that I had with Jindal's speech, is that he said we are a great country, the most powerful country, in the world, and we want to stay that way.

But Liberals seem to feel guilty that we have so much and others don't have as much. So you're not going to win over liberals by talking about keeping America great. You're not going to win over anyone who has any guilt about having more money than the poor people in Africa or Asia.

Of course, you're not going to win over liberals anyway, but we as conservatives need to explain how keeping America great helps out all these other countries in the world. When America is in trouble, she cannot help Africa- we give more to fight AIDs in Africa than any other nation. We give more to help the world than any other nation. But if we are struggling, not only does our poor economy push down the world's economies, but we have less that we can give to help other countries. That's a double whammy if the liberals and Obamugabe succeed in destroying our economy. And that is what they are trying so desperately to do.

Okay, so I need a better name than Opposite Man

2009-03-05T12:57:00.003-05:00

There's 0'Bama as in Zero-Bama, The big Zero.

There's "The Pinocchio Administration".

But I think I like Obamugabe.

What do you think?

Who'd want to date someone who refused to date a Limbaugh listener?

2009-03-05T00:40:00.002-05:00

At trivia tonight, the dj said he listened to Rush Limbaugh's show a bit today, and his friend said uh-oh, he'd never get a girlfriend that way.

The way I see it, if someone refused to date a Rush Limbaugh listener, they aren't a good person to date.

I'm not saying that everyone has to listen to Rush, although that's a pretty good idea. But wouldn't it be better to date someone who has similar views, or who isn't opposed to your views on principle?

I say, find a Rush Limbaugh listener to date. There have to be other smart conservative women out there!

Some people just make me so very angry

2009-03-05T00:27:00.005-05:00

I was looking at the AIM dashboard and found a story about a little girl who was treated so horribly, it makes you want to be sick, or beat up the mother, or leave her in a dirty diaper in a small room and cover her with roaches.

http://www.tampabay.com/features/humaninterest/article750838.ece

I don't know how anyone could treat their child, or any child, the way this child was treated.

When I was in high school, my favorite teacher had our Psychology class read a book called "No Language But a Cry"- it's about a girl whose parents were junkies and when she cried, they fried her in a frying pan. The story is told from the point of view of the social worker or psychologist who worked with her in a group home. She started out not talking to anyone, and with his help, and with multiple surgeries, she became a functioning human, and a wonderful person.

The girl in this story has no chance, but her adoptive parents are taking wonderful care of her.

But I still get pissed. The birth mother has an iq of 77 or so, but even 'simple' folks know how to take care of their children, often better than the more intelligent among us.

This child should have been helped long before the age of 6, and the older brothers too. And the mother should have had some kind of help, but if she turned it down, what else could have been done for her?

It's the same situation with mentally ill people who are now living on the street. We used to put them in group homes or mental institutions, but that was determined inhumane, so now we do very little for them, as it is assumed they can make their own decisions about treatment and take care of themselves.

I think we need to find alternate ways to take care of them. but I haven't the faintest idea where to start.

My heart breaks for the children though.

Is Obama the new Mugabe?

2009-03-04T14:23:00.005-05:00

I'm listening to Rush Limbaugh, and he states that Obama is trying to return America and its profits to their rightful owners, the poor and mistreated, like he was. Because it's Fair. And he doesn't care who gets hurt in the process.

You don't raise taxes in a recession; you don't punish achievers; you don't tell achievers they're going to be punished in the middle of a recession. None of this makes any sense if your objective is a genuine private sector recovery. But it does make sense if you have another agenda. If you have an agenda to destroy the private sector economy and replace it with a government economy that runs the show, owning as much of the means of production as possible, then this makes total sense what Obama's doing. Also, it helps to understand what Obama heard when he was in that church for 20 years, and what Obama heard when he was growing up, and who his influences and mentors were. You see, we in the New Media, Mr. Clemons, we thought that was all important. The other media didn't. Here's why I think it's important. I think he comes into office with a grudge. I think there's a chip on his shoulder and I think the best way to explain what's happening here is a very simple little phrase, one sentence: In Obama's eyes, the wealth of our nation is being returned to its rightful owners.

Now, what do I mean by that? Well, it's very simple. In Obama's world, and in much of the left -- and they have said this when they oppose trickle-down, supply-side, Reaganism, whatever, they have said that the wealthy in this country have stolen it. They have taken an unfair share. You see, Mr. Clemons, this is something your economic friends need to know. Obama looks at the world, our economy, as a zero-sum game. It's a never-changing size pie. Somebody gets hired, somebody has to get fired. Somebody earns a dollar, somebody loses a dollar. Nobody can earn two dollars separately at the same time. That's not how they view the world. So in Obama's world -- and this is what he's been taught growing up, this is what he was taught in school. He was taught that the wealthy, the rich, got it in unfair ways. They had advantages. They took money that was actually intended for the middle class and the poor. So what Obama's doing here is very simple, he's returning, in his mind, the wealth of the nation to its rightful owners. That's the only sensible explanation for Obama's economic policies. He doesn't care about the stock market. He said so. Doesn't even understand it, doesn't even understand that a PE ratio is price-to-earnings ratio, not profits-to-earnings ratio. He doesn't understand it. To him it's a tracking poll, and he ignores tracking polls, he's ignoring this. Stock market is the nation's wealth, one measure of it, and it ain't fluctuating. It's plummeting.

That sounds a lot like Mugabe. Does that mean we'll have trillion percent inflation too?

Is it all a game to politicians? This is our lives!

2009-03-04T13:23:00.002-05:00

It seems like everything is a game to politicians.

I'm reading Betsyspage.blogspot.com, and a lot of the posts are about the tricks and gimmicks that politicians are using to get their agenda passed.

She states that Bush used budget gimmicks to keep the Iraq war off the main budget. But Obama is going to put his plans, non-budget plans, on the budget, so it can't be filibustered.

Obama has turned our lives into a game, more than Bush ever did.

These are our lives! This is our way of living, our country, our government.

We must fight! We can't let Obama play games with the American people and the American Constitution.

Who's with me?

Dammit, Obama doesn't want us to have choice in charitable giving either

2009-03-04T13:18:00.003-05:00

Betsyspage has a post about charitable donations.

In Obama's budget, charitable donors would only be able to deduct gifts at 28% instead of at 33 or 35%, depending on their tax bracket.

This means that charities would receive less money.

The budget also has a government fund that would make up the difference, but with restrictions.

This man is the most insidious president ever! Well, maybe not ever, but he has no shame.

California is what Obama wants the nation to be

2009-03-04T12:53:00.003-05:00

Betsyspage has a post about the situation in California, which is exactly what Obama wants the nation to look like.

California spends far more than it takes in, despite having some of the highest taxes in the United States. It is hostile to business, and the middle class is fleeing in droves. It runs huge deficits every year, yet the Dem dominated legislature refuses to do anything effective to cut spending.

Now one in ten Californians is unemployed. Does any of this sound familiar? It should. It’s what Obama and the Democrats have in mind as a “solution” for the rest of the country.

I wouldn't want to live in California. I like to visit, but I could never live there. They also have a lot of democrats representing them. And Hollywood crazies.

I really like Georgia- mostly Republican, Christian, and much prettier :).

(original Link via dailypundit.com and Instapundit)

Another reason not to move to England

2009-03-04T12:30:00.003-05:00

They just gave Ted Kennedy honorary knighthood.

Does that mean they like his positions?

I appreciate that he has worked his whole life in public service.

If only he'd actually done something to help Americans instead of hurting them.

I don't wish him ill, I just wish him out of politics.

I thought Obama didn't like trade

2009-03-04T12:25:00.002-05:00

I thought Obama didn't like trade, but he wants to open up trade with Cuba.

But he doesn't like NAFTA or a Columbian Free Trade Agreement?

Why does Obama want to negotiate with the bad guys, the bad countries, trade with them, but not trade with our allies?

I'm going to have to start calling him Opposite Man.

Everything he says, we should do the opposite. Everything he says, he means the opposite. Everything he wants, the opposite is what's good for our country.

I'm a protest babe!

2009-03-04T10:45:00.003-05:00

My picture made it to a website of pictures from the Atlanta Tea Party.

And they called me a protest babe!

I had to reassure Scott that I'm his protest babe though, but I'm good at protesting!

Scott said I shouldn't be so confrontational, so here's the actual email to Mr. Obama

2009-02-26T19:13:00.005-05:00

Mr. President,
Your election has shown that our country has rejected our racist past, but you are disappointing the people who elected you by failing to deliver on the promises of a new era of bipartisanship and problem-solving, instead looking to huge government programs as the solution to everything.

You tell the American people that you don't believe in big government, but then your every action increases the size of government far beyond a level we can afford.

You say you care about the deficit and stopping spending, yet you allow Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid to continue the out of control spending in Washington. The Stimulus plan, budget bills, Bailouts- they will all make our economy worse in the long run, and won't do much to stimulate in the short run.

You have blamed Bush for starting the spending yet you want to spend more money than he ever tried to spend.

You tell the American people that the Republicans and conservatives do not have an alternate plan, but you have rejected the plans they brought forth.

We, the American people, are watching, and we are praying for you, that you will be the President, the man, you promised to be.

Elisabeth

Email I want to send to the President

2009-02-26T19:07:00.002-05:00

Mr. President,
You have broken every promise you have made to the American people, and you have laughed at those who try to hold you to account. You say you care about the deficit and stopping spending, yet you allow Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid to continue the out of control spending in Washington. The Stimulus plan, budget bills, Bailouts- they will all make our economy worse in the long run, and won't do much to stimulate in the short run.

You tell the American people that the Republicans and conservatives do not have an alternate plan, but you have rejected the plans they brought forth.

I believe, based on your actions prior to becoming President, and especially since you took the oath of office, that you want to destroy the American economy and free markets and make the American people completely dependent on your government.

Your election has shown that our country has rejected our racist past, but you are betraying the people who elected you and those you say you want to listen to. We, the American people, are watching, and we are praying for you, that you will be the President, the man, you promised to be.

Elisabeth

Email I sent to Saxby Chambliss

2009-02-26T18:04:00.002-05:00

Mr. Chambliss,
Please do everything in your power to stop the spending in Washington! The Stimulus plan, budget bills, Bailouts- they will all make our economy worse in the long run.

The American people are getting very angry about all the spending and the irresponsibility of our politicians. President Obama has broken every promise he has made to the American People, and he has laughed at those who point out his lies and inconsistencies. I believe, based on Obama's actions, that he wants to destroy the American economy and free markets and make the American people completely dependent on his government- this is Socialism, and the American people don't want Socialism.

We are counting on you to fight for the founding father's vision of our country. Please do everything you can to fight with us, and we will fight with and for you.

Other bills we would like you to join us on:
-Vote against the so-called "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE"as well as any attempts to impose Localism to shut down opposition on radio or the internet.
-Vote against the NO CHOICE "CARD CHECK BILL" which would allow intimidation in votes for unionization.
-Vote for the SECRET BALLOT PROTECTION ACT

Thank you for all you have done so far in our fight to keep America great!
Elisabeth

Obama is a demagogue

2009-02-25T18:41:00.002-05:00

If you doubt me, look at this definition of Demagogy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogy

I'm surprised there isn't a picture of "The One" on this page.

Hmm, it's wikipedia, maybe I can change it.

Okay, try this link: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/demagogue.

I'm sure he would prefer the second definition, but he fits the first definition to a T.

Mr. Obama has proven that his words mean nothing, and that he doesn't have to be held to account for anything that he says. In fact, he has laughed at reporters who try to hold him to account. He says his promises were just heated campaign rhetoric.

In my opinion, based on listening to Obama's words and seeing his actions, there is not truth to him.

If that does not scare you, there is something wrong with you.

Universal Health Care

2009-02-25T18:29:00.004-05:00

When the government starts butting its nose into my healthcare, which I pay for, I get my hackles up.

In the so-called Stimulus bill, which had maybe a drop of stimulus and a ton of non-stimulus to thank all the people who got Obama elected, the part that worries me most is the Health Information Technology Director.

I can understand that having medical records online and organized in one place would make it easier for one department to make a decision on what health care is needed.

BUT, that should not be a government department.

The insurance company has a right to say what treatment is covered, based on the policy which was agreed upon between the policyholder and the company, because of that agreement, and because they are paying for a large percentage of the treatment.

I still don't like having someone else tell me what treatment I can get. The truth with insurance is that, if the insurer says I can't have some treatment, I can choose to pay for it myself.

The Health Information Technology Director would have the authority to say treatment would not be available to anyone, if they determine so, regardless of who is paying for it.

So there would be someone somewhere in an office making decisions about my health and healthcare, based on what is efficient and whether or not I am worth spending that money on. And I could not do anything to get that treatment here.

So, I am very scared. I have heard so many horror stories, from people I or my parents know, of universal health care in Ireland, the UK, and Canada, and I do not want it!.

Why would I want anyone else to tell me what I can have done, or more likely, what I can't have done? Why would I want to wait for a long time for care, even if I don't have to pay for it?

And what business is it of the government?

Stay the hell out of my health care decisions!

For more reading on the matter: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/02/socialized_medicine_here_we_co.html

We need to say NO, to fight back against big government

2009-02-25T18:27:00.000-05:00

http://townhall.com/Columnists/LauraHollis/2009/02/24/the_taxpayers_mantra_no_we_wont

I do not understand why anyone worships Obama

2009-02-25T10:25:00.003-05:00

First of all, Obama is a man, not a messiah. His presence can not change the world, bring world peace, end global warming, etc. His actions can change the world, but the actions he has made so far will not change the world for the better.

Second, the Obama worshipers don't care about integrity or honesty. They don't care that everything Obama says has an expiration date. They don't care that he wants to take away their freedom and make everyone dependent on the government. They don't care that he doesn't believe in free markets or capitalism, and wants to make America more like Europe and Canada, or even Cuba and the Soviet Union. They don't care that Obama thinks they are all stupid, or at least not as smart as he is, and therefore need someone to tell them what to do. They don't care that he wants to grow government, and even change government.

I am a pretty logical person. I understand that not everyone is as logical as I am, but I do not think that feelings that defy logic are safe as the basis of decisions. I understand that people want hope and want to feel like the difficult things in their lives will go away. But even if Obama was the person or superhero that they think he is, he cannot pay all their mortgages or put gas in all their cars. Only hard work and making our country open to freedom and entrepreneurship will grow the economy to make people's lives easier.

It does not take a lot of intelligence or logic or understanding of history to realize that growing the government, and taxing the rich, and de-funding the military, and growing welfare, will not grow the American economy. They will not make people's lives better. Eventually the evil rich will either have no money, or will not let any of it stay in the US, and the government will have to increase taxes on the middle class and even the lower class. Eventually the money will run out in America, and will be elsewhere. I'm tempted to move to another country, and want to do everything I can to keep Obama from getting any of our money, and we don't have all that much!

Historically, socialism and communism have not succeeded. If you look at France, the unemployment rate is very high, there is no incentive to work or to try to create money, to try to grow the French economy. If you look at Canada, people are coming to America for healthcare and for opportunity. Unemployment is higher, and taxes are ridiculously higher. There is a reason why more people are trying to get in to the United States than any other country in the world. And there are a lot of people and countries that will have no where to go for healthcare or opportunity, if the US stops being the best country on earth.

I remember being told in high school that FDR's New Deal was the reason for the end of the Depression. But the truth is, the New Deal extended the Depression for 7-8 years, which means it doubled the length of the Depression. I was also told that I shouldn't read Ayn Rand. When I finally read "Atlas Shrugged" a few years ago, I couldn't understand why I was told not to read her books! I don't remember who told me that, but I think it might be because Rand did not believe in religion or God, and her views are somewhat anti-religion. But it's possible I was told not to read her because I might learn that the government and the fat cats in washington are killing prosperity in our country, and I might start to fight back.

So if I, as a fairly well-educated, fairly intelligent person, had so much teaching to fight against to learn the truth, imagine what those who aren't as intelligent or educated have to fight against to see truth! It is very important that these self-serving views of government lovers be counteracted in some way. We need to educate people, or at least teach them to think for themselves.

I for one will try to educate. I do not trust a word that Obama says, and I will try to open eyes and minds to the lies he says and the dangerous policies he is implementing.

Frustrations

2009-02-25T09:44:00.004-05:00

I get frustrated when I hear conservative talk show hosts lie or mislead the public. I know they have their points that they want to get across, but they aren't always listening to their callers.

I was listening to Mike Gallagher's show yesterday, and one guy called to say he didn't like being lumped with the losers on the housing bailout issue. He had lost his job and was committed to doing everything he could to keep his house, and wasn't looking for a handout, and was offended that anyone would say he was looking for a handout. Gallagher, who I love, didn't show this man that his definition of loser did not include this man, or those who are being responsible, although he did touch on not including responsible people in the loser category.

Rush Limbaugh talks about poor people, but he really means those who don't want to work, and would rather have the government and taxpayers take care of them instead of taking care of themselves. Rush doesn't separate the two categories. There are some people who have had bad luck, or who are working very hard and refusing charity. We need to come up with solutions that will help them, not enable them, and not lump them in with those who are lazy. Should Rush call them the lazy poor? Or the Greedy Needies, like they say at CAMP Ministry?

The mainstream media does even worse. I read one article in the AJC about people who are losing their health insurance and have to take care of themselves. I feel for them, but I don't think we need insurance, especially for small things like colds. But the poster boy for this particular article was a guy who sprained his ankle and had to ice and wrap it himself and take OTC painkillers. Generic even! But going to the doctor for something you can take care of yourself is one of the reasons our health costs have skyrocketed. Why go to the doctor and spend a copayment and make them fill out insurance paperwork and charge the insurance company for something that needs only an ice pack, a wrap, and ibuprofen? The message should have been, ways to take care of yourself, whether or not you have insurance, but if you don't, what can you do? Not 'oh poor me, I couldn't get a professinal to wrap my ankle'. I'm sure there are lots of people who don't have health insurance because of losing their jobs, but this article didn't talk about serious issues.

I also get frustrated when people don't use logic to make their arguments. There was an op-ed in the AJC today about Sunday alcohol sales. The lady's point was that allowing these sales would increase the number of DUIs and crashes and more people would end up on the states' medicaid and other government programs and we would all have to pay more than we would take in in taxes. She also said that studies have shown that when alcohol sales are allowed on Sunday, more people choose to not go to church and get drunk instead. That does not make any sense to me at all. Does that mean that 25% of church-goers (per the study she included) only go because they can't buy alcohol? And to me, there is no sense in trying to keep those people from leaving church, just because you think they should go to church instead, if her statistic is true.

Why do so many people feel like it is their responsibility to be parents and nannies to everyone? I feel that if you make rules for everything, to save people from themselves, you are keeping them from the consequences of their actions and they will never learn or grow up. Why would anyone want to do that? It takes enough energy to live your own life without trying to live everyone else's.

Granted, I want to shake people who don't seem to have a thought in their head, who want someone else to make all their decisions. People who don't believe in taking responsibility for themselves. So I guess I want to change them. But when their actions are causing me pain, and not just to me, but to those who are responsible, I get mad, and want to fight. Or educate. But fighting often seems more attractive than just calmly educating. I'm angry, I'm frustrated, and I want to do something!

Finally Americans are wising up

2009-02-25T09:40:00.002-05:00

Obama's approval ratings are going down and the American people are getting angry at the rampant spending and taking away our freedoms.

It's about damn time!

Obama is trying to kill the economy, kill capitalism, and make everyone dependent on the government. And we need to stop him.

We need to find ways to get people involved in fighting back. The Chicago Tea Party is a good place to start, but we need more.

And I can't sit by and not do anything, so I'm looking at ways I can educate Americans and further conservative principles.

More later.

Taking offense

2009-02-18T09:38:00.002-05:00

A black (African American) man called Michael Medved's show yesterday to complain that the term "Islamo-Fascist" was offensive to him, just like the N word would be for him.

Medved didn't explain very well that Islamo Fascist doesn't refer to all Muslims but to those who believe in fascism and want to kill Americans and other Westerners. He did say he calls them that, or Islamo-Nazis (due to their anti-Semitism) because that is what they believe.

But i think this guy doesn't know the difference between terrorist Muslims and Muslims who are peace-loving.

But Scott talks about these people who get offended easily- what gives them the right to not be offended? Who promised them that they could not be offended?

There are many things that offend me in this world. But I don't feel that I should get rid of them because they offend me. I'd have to get rid of a lot Obama supporters if that were true :).

Selling your soul for eight bucks a week

2009-02-16T11:49:00.002-05:00

And political power.

Or selling the American way of life for eight bucks a week.

Supposedly 38% of Americans support the spending bill. and all they will get for it is eight bucks a week, maybe 13, for about 6 months. And a worsening economy long-term. And more government control in their lives.

And the politicians- this bill was about using a crisis to get funding for their favorite projects. Or about thumbing their noses at Republicans. About blaming Bush for all the ills of the economy.

There are those who say we shouldn't question whether Obama is a Christian, as he says he is. But the Bible says you can judge a Christian by his fruit. And Obama's fruit is rotten or nonexistant. He does not know what the truth is, uses everything and everyone for his own purposes, more than any politician I've ever seen, even more than Clinton. He is sneaky and manipulative, and cares only about himself, his power, and the one thing that might save him, his family.

Many people are praying for him and for the other politicians in DC. And prayer can change things and people. My heart is very cold toward these politicians, so my prayer has been that hey will know humility and be brought to their knees.

Political Mad Libs

2009-02-13T18:43:00.000-05:00

THis is like Mad Libs- i especially like my use of "where the sun don't shine" and "Them".

Enjoy! we're laughing our asses off

Barack Obama's Inauguration Speech

My fellow Americans, today is a articulate day. You have shown the world that "hope" is not just another word for "newt", and that "change" is not only something we can believe in again, but something we can actually eviscerate.

Today we celebrate, but let there be no mistake – America faces fluffy and hopeful challenges like never before. Our economy is ecological. Americans can barely afford their mortgages, let alone have enough money left over for notions. Our healthcare system is poopy. If your big toe is sick and you don't have insurance, you might as well call a proctologist. And America's image overseas is tarnished like a horse's ass flag pin. But changing together we can right this ship, and set a course for where the sun don't shine.

Finally, I must thank my shiny family, my dank campaign volunteers, but most of all, I want to thank Them for making this historic occasion possible. Of course, I must also thank you, President Bush, for years of striding the American people. Without your nuanced efforts, none of this would have been possible.

http://www.atom.com/spotlights/inauguration_speech_generator/

This poor guy

2009-02-13T18:41:00.001-05:00

I heard you had to listen to the inauguration. Were you at the school in Wisconsin? http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_012209/content/01125112.guest.html

Scott and I listened to it, but it didn't do anything for us. My best friend, a libertarian who hates to discuss politics, put on her facebook status that she was moved by the speech. I'm very disappointed by her. But this amused me greatly: http://msunderestimated.com/2009/01/21/daily-show-what-differences-between-bush-obama-video/
A lot of what Obama is saying and doing, is just like Bush. Only he says it better. He makes it look different. He's gonna close down Gitmo, but he's going to put the prisoners into military prisons. He's outlawing torture, but he hasn't defined torture, and he's leaving open the definition of interrogation techniques. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/01/22/obama-issues-directives-detainees-interrogation-guantanamo/

Great quote:
Obama has said he wants to end the military commissions process but does not have anything to replace it. So, sources say, the administration will seek recommendations within the next six or seven months on how to try them.

Like the guy in the video says, it might be the same words, but with Obama he hopes he doesn't mean it. Funny that- the hope that Obama says things he doesn't mean, and that Bush doesn't mean what he says.

Paterson's choice to replace Hillary is very interesting- she voted against teh financial rescue package last fall, and she's been endorsed by the NRA: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/22/new-york-gov-paterson-rep-gillibrand-clintons-senate-seat/
The best part of this article is the second last paragraph.

Chavez has already said that Obama has the same stench as Bush, and now Hamas is saying Obama will make the same mistakes: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,481684,00.html. I thought Obama was going to change the world, or at least the reputation of America. So far, two dictators/terrorists don't see any difference between Bush and Obama. And the mullahs in Iran have set conditions for meeting with Obama, which he didn't think were necessary for meeting with them.

It's a pretty good time to be a comedian. Someone said something about it being easier when the other side has to take the responsibility.

Jonah Goldberg said something about what Obama does for the conservative movement, or the damage he does to the liberal movement:
http://townhall.com/columnists/JonahGoldberg/2009/01/21/what_obama_brings_to_conservatives

we had a question at trivia tonight (don't tell anyone we go to the 'other' trivia sometiems) about Obama's two books. I figure my next book will be "The Audacity of Dreams under the Obama Presidency".

I do hope your experience Tuesday won't harm you permanently.

*******************************************************

Okay, I feel for you, and the indoctrination thing with your niece- definitely not cool. I just discovered this and I'm getting pretty pissed off- it's a good thing I won't ever come into contact with Obama: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/23/obama-quit-listening-rush-limbaugh-want-things/

Could he be more arrogant? (said in Chandler-speak of course)

My dad always warned us about cults- they use Bible verses to suck people in, but they use them out of context, and/or for their own means. And people think, if there's a Bible verse, they must be Christian, but they really aren't. Kind of like the book "The Secret". Obama does that with both Christianity and with the conservative talk, like on that video from the Daily Show. It's a cult. And more and more people are drinking the coolaid.

The attitude on the left is that the divisiveness over the past 8 years was caused by the conservatives beign in power. Now they are in power, they think it will end. And their attitude is just increasing the divisiveness. We're going to a dinner tomorrow with my best friend of the facebook comment, and another friend who is very liberal, and I really don't want to hear anything about "The Messiah".

I really don't think conservatives rubbed the winning of the Presidential election in the face of the liberals quite like this- do you?

We listened to Hannity's America tonight on FoxNews- didn't really help wiht my feelings about the subject. But my brother's wife asked if I want to contribute to their political blog after the last email I sent you- I sent it to her with some modifications, knowing that she feels similarly, and has a hard time being a conservative professor at UCLA. At least most of the people around me are conservative, so I don't hav e to put up with this s*** much. I guess I shouldn't expect any humility from "The One".

Maureen Dowd said to larry King that, at that meeting they had with O, he told her that just because he doesn't respond to something doesn't mean he didn't hear it and isn't thinking about it, that he has a very even temperament, and htat she shouldn't make judgment calls about him. Apparently he's sensitive about his ears, so asked that she not reference them again. Sounjds like we should mention his ears as often as possible.

I said I wasn't going to do to him what the lefties did to Bush, but boy is that tempting. Argh!!!!!!!!! And I have to get up early in the morning to help a friend. Grumble, grumble, grumble...

Email to Dr. Mayo

2009-02-13T18:25:00.001-05:00

I found this about the prayer you had from Billy Graham- turns out it wasn't his but it's still a good prayer.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/prayernation.asp

This amused me greatly: http://msunderestimated.com/2009/01/21/daily-show-what-differences-between-bush-obama-video/
A lot of what Obama is saying and doing, is just like Bush. Only he says it better. He makes it look different. He's gonna close down Gitmo, but he's going to put the prisoners into military prisons. He's outlawing torture, but he hasn't defined torture, and he's leaving open the definition of interrogation techniques. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/01/22/obama-issues-directives-detainees-interrogation-guantanamo/

Great quote:
Obama has said he wants to end the military commissions process but does not have anything to replace it. So, sources say, the administration will seek recommendations within the next six or seven months on how to try them.

Like the guy in the video says, it might be the same words, but with Obama he hopes he doesn't mean it. Funny that- the hope that Obama says things he doesn't mean, and that Bush doesn't mean what he says.

Paterson's choice to replace Hillary is very interesting- she voted against teh financial rescue package last fall, and she's been endorsed by the NRA: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/22/new-york-gov-paterson-rep-gillibrand-clintons-senate-seat/
The best part of this article is the second last paragraph.

Chavez has already said that Obama has the same stench as Bush, and now Hamas is saying Obama will make the same mistakes: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,481684,00.html. I thought Obama was going to change the world, or at least the reputation of America. So far, two dictators/terrorists don't see any difference between Bush and Obama. And the mullahs in Iran have set conditions for meeting with Obama, which he didn't think were necessary for meeting with them.

It's a pretty good time to be a comedian. Someone said something about it being easier when the other side has to take the responsibility.

Jonah Goldberg said something about what Obama does for the conservative movement, or the damage he does to the liberal movement:
http://townhall.com/columnists/JonahGoldberg/2009/01/21/what_obama_brings_to_conservatives

What's in the Bill

2009-02-13T18:24:00.001-05:00

What's in the Bill [NRO Staff]

Tom Coburn yesterday:
We are going in exactly the wrong direction. We ought to be standing on the principles that made this country great. There ought to be a review of every program in the Federal Government that is not effective, that is not efficient, that is wasteful or fraudulent, and we ought to get rid of it right now. We ought to say, Gone, to be able to pay for a real stimulus plan that might, in fact, have some impact.
I would be remiss if I didn't remind everybody that next week we are going to hear from the Obama administration wanting another $500 billion. Outside of this, they are going to want another $500 billion to handle the banking system. Still not fixing the real disease—the pneumonia—we are going to treat the fever or treat the cough, but we are not going to treat the real disease. Until we treat the real disease, this is pure waste. It is worse than pure waste. It is morally reprehensible, because it steals the future of the next two generations.
I am going to wind up here and finish, but I wanted to spend some time to make sure the American people know what is in this bill. I think once they know what is in this bill, they are going to reject it out of hand. Let me read for my colleagues some of the things that are in this bill. The biggest earmark in history is in this bill. There is $2 billion in this bill to build a coal plant with zero emissions. That would be great, maybe, if we had the technology, but the greatest brains in the world sitting at MIT say we don't have the technology yet to do that. Why would we build a $2 billion powerplant we don't have the technology for that we know will come back and ask for another $2 billion and another $2 billion and another $2 billion when we could build a demonstration project that might cost $150 million or $200 million? There is nothing wrong with having coal-fired plants that don't produce pollution; I am not against that. Even the Washington Post said the technology isn't there. It is a boondoggle. Why would we do that?
We eliminated tonight a $246 million payback for the large movie studios in Hollywood.
We are going to spend $88 million to study whether we ought to buy a new ice breaker for the Coast Guard. You know what. The Coast Guard needs a new ice breaker. Why do we need to spend $88 million? They have two ice breakers now that they could retrofit and fix and come up with equivalent to what they needed to and not spend the $1 billion they are going to come back and ask for, for another ice breaker, so why would we spend $88 million doing that?
We are going to spend $448 million to build the Department of Homeland Security a new building. We have $1.3 trillion worth of empty buildings right now, and because it has been blocked in Congress we can't sell them, we can't raze them, we can't do anything, but we are going to spend money on a new building here in Washington. We are going to spend another $248 million for new furniture for that building; a quarter of a billion dollars for new furniture. What about the furniture the Department of Homeland Security has now? These are tough times. Should we be buying new furniture? How about using what we have? That is what a family would do. They would use what they have. They wouldn't go out and spend $248 million on furniture.
How about buying $600 million worth of hybrid vehicles? Do you know what I would say? Right now times are tough; I would rather Americans have new cars than Federal employees have new cars. What is wrong with the cars we have? Dumping $600 million worth of used vehicles on the used vehicle market right now is one of the worst things we could do. Instead, we are going to spend $600 million buying new cars for Federal employees.
There is $400 million in here to prevent STDs. I have a lot of experience on that. I have delivered 4,000 babies. We don't need to spend $400 million on STDs. What we need to do is properly educate about the infection rates and the effectiveness of methods of prevention. That doesn't take a penny more. You can write that on one piece of paper and teach every kid in this country, but we don't need to spend $400 million on it. It is not a priority.
How about $1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs? That might even be somewhat stimulative. New sewers. That might create jobs.
How about $150 million for a Smithsonian museum? Tell me how that helps get us out of a recession. Tell me how that is a priority. Would the average American think that is a priority that we ought to be mortgaging our kids' future to spend another $150 million at the Smithsonian?
How about $1 billion for the 2010 census? So everybody knows, the census is so poorly managed that the census this year is going to cost twice—in 2010 is going to cost twice what it cost 10 years ago, and we wasted $800 million on a contract because it was no-bid that didn't perform. Nobody got fired, no competitive bidding, and we blew $800 million.
We have $75 million for smoking cessation activities, which probably is a great idea, but we just passed a bill—the SCHIP bill—that we need to get 21 million more Americans smoking to be able to pay for that bill. That doesn't make sense.
How about $200 million for public computer centers at community colleges? Since when is a community college in my State a recipient of Federal largesse? Is that our responsibility? I mean, did we talk with Dell and Hewlett-Packard and say, How do we make you all do better? Is there not a market force that could make that better? Will we actually buy on a true competitive bid? No, because there is nothing that requires competitive bidding in anything in this bill. There is nothing that requires it. It is one of the things President Obama said he was going to mandate at the Federal Government, but there is no competitive bidding in this bill at all.
We have $10 million to inspect canals in urban areas. Well, that will put 10 or 15 people to work. Is that a priority for us right now?
There is $6 billion to turn Federal buildings into green buildings. That is a priority, versus somebody getting a job outside of Washington, a job that actually produces something, that actually increases wealth?
How about $500 million for State and local fire stations? Where do you find in the Constitution us paying for local fire stations within our realm of prerogatives? None of it is competitively bid—not a grant program.
Next is $1.2 billion for youth activities. Who does that employ? What does that mean?
How about $88 million for renovating the public health service building? You know, if we could sell half of the $1.3 trillion worth of properties we have, we could take care of every Federal building requirement and backlog we have.
Then there's $412 million for CDC buildings and property. We spent billions on a new center and headquarters for CDC. Is that a priority? Building another Government building instead of—if we are going to spend $412 million on building buildings, let's build one that will produce something, one that will give us something.
How about $850 million for that most ``efficient'' Amtrak that hasn't made any money since 1976 and continues to have $2 billion or $3 billion a year in subsidies?
Here is one of my favorites: $75 million to construct a new ``security training'' facility for State Department security officers, and we have four other facilities already available to train them. But it is not theirs. They want theirs. By the way, it is going to be in West Virginia. I wonder how that got there. So we are going to build a new training facility that duplicates four others that we already have that could easily do what we need to do. But because we have a stimulus package, we are going to add in oink pork.
How about $200 million in funding for a lease—not buying, but a lease of alternative energy vehicles on military installations? We are going to bail out the States on Medicaid. Total all of the health programs in this, and we are going to transfer $150 billion out of the private sector and we are going to move it to the Federal Government. You talk about backdooring national health care. Henry Waxman has to be smiling big today. He wants a single-payer Government-run health care system. We are going to move another $150 billion to the Federal Government from the private sector.
We are going to eliminate fees on loans from the Small Business Administration. You know what that does? That pushes productive capital to unproductive projects. It is exactly the wrong thing to do.
Then there is $160 million to the Job Corps Program—but not for jobs and not to put more people in the Job Corps but to construct or repair buildings.
We are going to spend $524 million for information technology upgrades that the Appropriations Committee claims will create 388 jobs. If you do the math on that, that is $1.5 million a job. Don't you love the efficiency of Washington thinking?
We are going to create $79 billion in additional money for the States, a ``slush fund,'' to bail out States and provide millions of dollars for education costs. How many of you think that will ever go away? Once the State education programs get $79 billion over 2 years, do you think that will ever go away? The cry and hue of taking our money away—even though it was a stimulus and supposed to be limited, it will never go away. So we will continue putting that forward until our kids have grandkids of their own.
There is about $47 billion for a variety of energy programs that are primarily focused on renewable energy. I am fine with spending that. But we ought to get something for it. There ought to be metrics. There are no metrics. It is pie in the sky, saying we will throw some money at it. Let me conclude by saying we are at a seminal moment in our country. We will either start living within the confines of realism and responsibility or we will blow it and we will create the downfall of the greatest Nation that ever lived. This bill is the start of that downfall. To abandon a market-oriented society and transfer it to a Soviet-style, government-centered, bureaucratic-run and mandated program, that is the thing that will put the stake in the heart of freedom in this country.
I hope the American people know what is in this bill. I am doing everything I can to make sure they know. But more important, I hope somebody is listening who will treat the ``pneumonia'' we are faced with today, which is the housing and mortgage markets. It doesn't matter how much money we spend in this bill. It is doomed to failure unless we fix that problem first. Failing that, we will go down in history as the Congress that undermined the future and vitality of this country. Let it not be so.
02/05 05:05 PM
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWUyOWRhMDBkNzkwMzhmNTM3MTFmOTMyNDhiYmZmNjk=

I caused a stir on facebook

2009-02-13T18:09:00.001-05:00

I put as my status on facebook "Elisabeth is wondering what I can do to fight the growth of socialism in America".

I got a "C'mon Elisabeth.....really!?" from a cousin of Scott's who already said she had a crush on Obama.

I got a "I hope all you people yelling at our government realize that Republicans put us in this situaiton. Are you going to refuse any of the money that you may receive?" from a friend from high school days, who later put his status as "wondering if Republicans were this vocal about Bush's "stimulus" plan?"

I seem to have stirred up a bit of a stink. I sent the guy an email explaining calmly why I'm so upset, or at least part of it. I really dislike the part about a bureaucrat making my health decisions for me.

Anyway, I've found some interesting articles, etc, I thought you might be interested in:

the conservative underground has created a petition to get the stimulus bill online for people to read for one week before the final votes: http://www.tcunation.com/profiles/blogs/petition-post-the-stimulus
The Wall Street Journal estimates that only 12% of this bill will actually stimulate anything except the government and egos, and the Congressional Budget Office says doing nothing would be more beneficial to the country.
Michelle Malkin calls the bill TurBaconDuckEn- Turducken wrapped in bacon. makes a lot of sense: http://townhall.com/Columnists/MichelleMalkin/2009/02/13/the_tiny_trillion-dollar_turbaconducken_you_dont_care_about.
I'm also wondering if the "Buy American" provision is still in the bill- it's pissed off Canada, Europe, and China.
This is funny- the title is "Pigeons, Rats, and Democrats" http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/pigeons_rats_and_democrats.html

I agree with Dave Barry that squirrels are trying to take over the world, so this blog name amuses me, but this is also a letter to conservatives about what we can do- finally someone has something positive rather than just negatives abotu what's going on in DC: http://www.conspiracysquirrels.com/conspiracysquirrelscom/2009/02/from-the-desk-of-an-eternal-optimist-an-open-letter-to-conservatives.html

This one is quite depressing and angry- basically how I was feeling yesterday. http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/murphys_law_the_peter_principl.html

J.R. Dunn- one of my new favorite writers- talks about mercantilism, which I think I really need to look at a lot more. Seems to be a good description of Obama, Pelosi, et al: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/post_22.html

I'm so very glad to hear that Craig dropped out of the Commerce Secretary position. Nice to see Republicans growing a conscience and a voice.

David Limbaugh thinks it's just about time to panic: http://townhall.com/Columnists/DavidLimbaugh/2009/02/13/the_worst_of_all_worlds

I was thinking about the Octuplet mother and thinking Obama probably likes her- she'll single-handedly make more people dependent on the government. Frank Pastore talks about her, and how america has largely been doing what Suleman did, only obviously not to the same degree: http://townhall.com/Columnists/FrankPastore/2009/02/12/the_stimulus_bill_a_nation_of_nadya_sulemans

I've read several summaries of the mistakes and such of Obama's short term in office, but this one seems to be pretty comprehensive: http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/change_the_first_three_weeks_1.html.

And someone else compared Obama to Eddie Haskell. Best description I've heard so far :). I think Obama is holding "Hope" for ransom- if we do what he wants, we can have Hope. Otherwise, we're SOL.

You know, if the consequences weren't so dire, the past few months would be pretty amusing.

Not just PMS

2009-02-13T18:05:00.002-05:00

Nope, this isn’t just PMS

It sneaks up on me sometimes.

This time, I started to get annoyed at my mom for some statements she made about my hair or my weight. And this so-called stimulus bill that will create a departrment to ration health care, and will ruin our economy and bring us closer to socialism- it’s depressing the hell out of me. I just figured it was pms.

Wednesday night at trivia, I started to wonder what my place in this world is. Why am I here, what am I supposed to be doing? What am I really good at? I don’t really help at trivia, definitely wasn‘t that night, and Tuesday night I kept us from getting 1st place (okay, 2nd place isn’t bad, but we could’ve won if I hadn’t pushed to drop Missouri).

And I’ve been making stupid mistakes with money, not watching my balances or my due dates. Which makes me feel very bad about myself. And that I can’t handle money. And then Scott got the home equity line to pay off my debt. I feel like such a horrible, expensive wife.

Last night, I was wondering if Scott still loved me. Definitely not feeling very lovable. And not like an asset to my Beloved.

At volunteering this morning, I got really irritated at the people who try to get more than they are allowed to get, even though we are pretty generous- 60 clothes items per year per person- that’s more than I get! And this is all free, provided by donations. Some people are just really selfish, and piss me off. There are some really nice ones who won’t take something they don’t need as it will keep it from someone else. But the bad ones still get under my skin.

I guess I should have noticed that I was being extra irritable. At Mom, the politicians who seem to want to Socialize the country, the “greedy needy’s” as Janice calls them.

There is a job opening for a Clothing Closet Supervisor at CAMP Ministry. I’ve thought about getting a part time job to provide spending money and so I don’t feel as guilty when I have to spend some. I talked with Scott about it- he said I don’t have to get a job, but he wouldn’t say no to increased cash flow. Today, I felt really uncomfortable working with the clients. I’d much rather be in the warehouse or organizing something. I’m used to working at a computer. Or working with my hands. That’s one of the things I like about the ministry- I can stay busy with the clothes and the donations and tidying up and restocking. I like that. But dealing with the clients- I don’t like that as much. And today I felt kind of useless, but I didn’t help as much as I could. I don’t like working at the front in the Clothing Closet. I’d rather be in the back. I don’t really like handing out the jewelry. The new position is for supervisor, which means I’d be supervising the volunteers, and making sure that things get on the racks, etc not necessarily working the front counter, but I would have to do that if someone didn’t show up.

Right now, I’m feeling like I don’t know who I am or what I am good at. I can write fairly well. Can do a lot on a computer. Can help people out fairly well- Mom for one. I help Mom and Dad with their computer. I can fix things like couches and some appliances. I can take care of a house- laundry, dishes, etc. (which reminds me, I need to do the dishes). I make fun crafts that are good gifts. I’m pretty smart and fairly well educated. I can help people feel good about themselves. I can bring attention to important issues- talking about them, emailing, blogging.

I don’t feel like I’m a good employee though. I get bouts of depression far too often. I’m not very good with follow-through. If I don’t want to do something, I tend to avoid it, even if it’s very important. I guess I don’t feel I’m very reliable. Sometimes I do better with that than others.

I wish...

2009-01-21T12:35:00.003-05:00

I wish I could be inspired by Obama's inauguration. I wish I could be excited.

Of course, I wish Obama was trustworthy and not trying to change our government and our way of life and make us 'volunteer' and keep us from questioning "The Great O".

I don't trust him. I think he's very sneaky and underhanded. On one hand he makes an effort to pacify his opponents, but then his policy decisions are as far to the left as possible. He thinks the answer to everything is government with him in charge. He has never had any doubt that he should and deserves to be president- that concerns me, especially since he also thinks the position isn't all that important- we don't need to set pre-conditions to meetings with the president. Doesn't that downplay the importance of the position? Yet it is what he has always wanted to be.

Obama says we need to remake America- the biggest reason we have to remake America is that so many voted for this man.

And the media and the Obama supporters- often the same people- act as if this one man will change everything in the world, not just in our country. They don't see the hypocrisy and arrogance of this man, and the emptiness of his words. They don't see how scary the idolatry of this man is. The unwillingness to look at who he really is. The blind adoration.

It scares me. I wish I wasn't so scared, too. Scared that Obama will change our government, will force everyone into doing what he wants. Scared that we will end up in a socialist country. Scared that Obama is as liberal as his voting record.

Obama Test

2009-01-06T23:53:00.000-05:00

Barack is very disappointed with me!

I only scored 27 on the Obama Test

Introduction

2008-12-19T13:02:00.002-05:00

My life is incredibly blessed. I am incredibly blessed. I am married to the most wonderful man, I have the best friends and family, and the opportunity to find out what I want to do with my life.

I haven't always had so many blessings. I don't even know why God has chosen to bless me so much now. But I realized that the journey I've been through is inspirational to those around me. And if I can help others, help them understand that there is hope for a better life, then the difficulties I went through are less painful for me. There is a reason for them or a benefit that can come out of them.

I know I don't have all the answers. And the answers I give today, might be different from the answers I give in a few months. I am constantly learning, learning about who I am and what I am capable of. Learning about who God is, and how much He loves me. Discovering what lessons I've learned in the past two and a half years that I didn't realize I had learned. Finally understanding what makes some people tick, what motivates people, how the world works.

I feel like I have been blessed with an insight, or insights, that have helped me be happier and I'd like to share them with anyone who might listen. I want others to be as happy as I am, as peaceful as I am.

My place in this world

2008-12-19T12:57:00.002-05:00

I've been trying to figure out what I'm supposed to do next, who I'm supposed to be when I grow up.

I've come across several things that really interest me.

Writing my book about the lessons I've learned.

Hope mentoring or something like it- encouraging others.

Disaster Relief first response work- possibly with Billy Graham's ministry.

Showing people how conservative politics can help the working class- getting back to the conservative basics. Not the republican party, but through another conservative thinkgroup, perhaps.

Volunteering with Sweetwater Camp ministries or something like that- direct help to people who need it.

But I've been really interested in finding a way to help combat sex trafficking around the world, but haven't been sure of what I can do.

Since we're setting up a party for Mom and Dad, it suddenly hit me that I have a network of people that I can contact, through my parents. Maybe I can help spread awareness of the issue, maybe coordinate something, that can help fight this horrible epidemic.

I'm definitely going to have to look into it.

Real help, real hope

2008-11-27T05:16:00.003-05:00

I was reading in the New Yorker's pre-election issue about a woman in Ohio who was living paycheck to paycheck and who really didn't feel like she could survive any change to her situation.

I know what that's like. I was fortunate that I could leave New Orleans and move to Atlanta and get a better job. But most people don't have that option. Or the options they have would involve more risk and have a lower likelihood of improving their situation.

I realized that, although even the poorest people in our country are richer than the richest people in some countries, our 'system' has a built in cost to everyday life that cannot easily be escaped, unless you already have a certain amount of money.

Each person or family has certain costs, certain expenses that are unavoidable. Rent or mortgage, utilities, car, car insurance, health care (unless you are healthy), food, gas, etc. If you have already eliminated all the lifestyle luxuries from your life, like cable tv, or a cell phone, or coffee at Starbucks, how do you cut back on these items? If you live in an area with good public transportation, you could use it instead of having a car, but that does take away a certain amount of freedom. And likely, cell phones are a necessity these days. There's some flexibility in plans, but lots of costs to changing them. I suppose she could turn down the heat in her house and wear more sweaters.

So what can be done to help this woman, and the many others like her? She could be given housing credits. Taxes could be lowered. She can get food from a food bank, but that is charity, which she might not want to accept. For her children, she might. There are a few small things that can be done for someone in such a situation.

But I honestly believe the best thing that can be done for this woman is to grow the economy and lower taxes. If there are more jobs and better ones, this woman can earn more. If taxes are lowered, she will keep more of her money. She will be able to save for the future, or get some of the things that were luxuries before. She will be able to breather again.

The answer is not in giving this one woman a handout. The answer is a plan to help all people in a situation like this. And to do it in a way that doesn't encourage sitting back and waiting for another handout.

I think the FairTax would solve pretty much all of this woman's problems, and would help the country as a whole.

Other than that, what can be done? I don't think throwing money at people or programs is that answer- I think that just complicates it, encourages sloth, and costs the taxpayers more, which means taxes need to go up.

But I don't think her problem is one we can ignore.

Scott's thoughts

2008-11-27T05:12:00.003-05:00

I talk about politics a lot.

So last night, Scott suggested I put my political views, and what I've learned as regards politics, in my book.

Since my personal views inform my politics, I think that makes a lot of sense.

So I think I'll take his advice.

He's got wonderful ideas- I love the way his brain works!

Growing up, or just finding my place

2008-11-27T04:49:00.002-05:00

I've been joking lately that I'm trying to figure out what I want to do when I grow up. I'm not sure I want to grow up, though.

But I do want to find my place in this world.

And I think it's somewhere between faith, politics, and helping people.

The thing that drives me most is giving hope to people. Not the empty Hope that Obama talks about. But hope that life can be better, that God can help us through difficult times, and bring us to a better place.

Giving hope to people is more than just a faith thing though. It's about how conservative principles and policies can help people.

I can't really articulate it very well, but the three things that matter to me can all work together to make people's lives better, and I want to find a way to do that. I think I can get involved in politics in some way, so as to help more people, as well as helping more directly by volunteering at SV CAMP or Must Ministries or something like that. And I can help further God's word in the world by volunteering with Ravi Zacharias' ministry, or another organization like that. And I can volunteer or study and plan to help counsel or encourage people individually.

But that is my plan. I don't know what God has planned for me. I've heard that when we make plans, God laughs. So I'm waiting for His leading. And trying to remember that maybe right now is a good time for me to focus on my health and my relationship with Scott and on adjusting to married life, getting our house set up, etc.

But I'm also looking at options, and trying to find out who and what organizations best fit with what I'd like to be able to do. And then figuring out what I can do to help them.

Atheists and proselytising

2008-11-24T11:58:00.003-05:00

Mike Gallager had a 'militant' atheist on his program this morning, Dan Barker of Freedom From Religion.

Dan used to be a minister, apparently an evangelical preacher, and is now a proselytising atheist, who seems to want to save all religious people from their folly.

How does someone go from being an evangelical preacher to hating anything to do with religion and a 'higher power'? What happened to make him so mad at God?

Dan said that he thinks most Christians today are more moral than Jesus was. He said that anyone who uses a threat of violence, aka hell, to motivate people, is morally bankrupt.

He wrote a book called "Godless",not to be confused with Ann Coulter's book about liberalism. It would be interesting to know what it was that turned him away from God. I don't think I want to read the book though. I would bet that he is blinded by hate. And I don't want that to touch me. But I also don't want to give any money to him or his cause.

Obama and the gym

2008-11-24T11:44:00.002-05:00

I am listening to the Mike Gallager show, and he brings up an interesting point.

Since the election, Obama has not gone to church. On Sundays, he instead goes to the gym. Mike thinks this is important, since Obama spent a lot of time talking about his faith and his beliefs.

But I think this means something more.

I read a couple of articles on the Corner at National Review Online by John Derbyshire. he was trying to figure out what Obama's Big Five scores are- the five psychology aspects often used to analyze people: Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeablemess, Neurotocism.

Derbyshire received a response from a professor of psychology giving good insight into Obama's personality as we can see it.

He comments under neurotocism about Obama's fitness obsession:

And so, paradoxically, is his compulsive fitness — there is a weak, self-indulgent fat man inside of Mr. Obama struggling to be unleashed, and who is flagellated daily in the gym. I suspect that there is deep unhappiness beneath the flawless exterior.

I think the fact that Obama is spending so much time at the gym now that he is President-Elect is a sign of how stressed he is about his new responsibilities. And that he is not going to church- that's a sign that he is looking to himself for the answers, rather than his Savior.

Just my point of view.

Reactions in a crisis

2008-11-24T09:52:00.002-05:00

I discovered that I react in a pretty set way to a crisis.

At first, I get depressed, or spend a lot of time in confusion. After the election, I spent 2 days just absolutely depressed and wondering how the country could have been so stupid as to elect Obama.

But after those first 2 or 3 days, I turn a corner and start thinking about what to do next. Thank God I don't stay in that funk for longer than a few days!

This next stage, which I am in now, after that unfortunate election, is where I start thinking about options. What can we do next? What can I do next.

I've been reading articles and blogs, etc, online. There are a few people who are still sitting around wondering how this happened. Remember those people, like Gore, who are still talking about how Bush stole the election 8 years ago?

Then there are those who are talking about how stupid people are. There's a lot of "I told you so!"

Then there are the people who are trying to figure out what to do next, and how. What do we need to do to get back to the values we need for this country. How do we get conservative leaders back in power, so we can stop these socialists?

This is the group I want to be a part of. I want to work towards restoring conservative values to this country, to rebuilding what really matters, rather than what will make the liberals feel powerful.

Now, I need to figure out what I can do to help the conservative movement. Wish me luck.

I'm confused

2008-11-17T16:16:00.003-05:00

I am reading The New Yorker, and there is an article about John McCain and the reasons he lost the election.

They detail the ads McCain ran that said "Who is the real Barack Obama?" The truth is, we don't know who the real Barack Obama is. Nor do we know all we should about his history, his past friends and acquaintances, past allegiances. Obama has not been transparent about them. He hides the truth about himself.

There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical of what he says he is, of who he says he is, especially since his statements are extremely vague, and often change.

So the ads were true.

This article says Frak Schaeffer said "If your campaign does not stop equating Sen. Barack Obama with terrorism, questioning his patriotism, and portraying Mr. Obama as 'Not one of us,' I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence."

Was there another way to get out the information, or lack thereof, about Obama? The media wasn't doing it, and if anything was uncovered, there was no way to let the people know. Obama himself should take some of the blame for the need to make such ads, but moreso the media for not doing their job and vetting Obama. Obama has such things in his background as Marxists, Ayers and Dorhn, socialism, lying, etc. If he does not believe those things, should he not say, this is something I did in the past, but regret, or don't do anymore? Should he not have said that he had studied the Koran in Indonesia and was listed as a Muslim student, rather than saying that he had never been a Muslim? Should not some blame be laid at the feet of a man who hid so many things from the American people while trying to become their president? We deserve to know these things. he could have even lied about how he currently feels about socialism- that would have been better than saying he never embraced it.

Yes, it was a desperate move my a candidate who could not seem to gain ground. But not something for which to vote for Obama.

I oppose Obama for the people in his background, his lack of honesty and transparency, the things he says especially when off-script about America and his true beliefs. I don't think Obama likes America, I don't think he likes the American people in general, I think he thinks he's smarter than we are and that he's just snowed all of us. He thinks he can or has a right to tell all of us what to do- he talks of mandates and requirements, rather than suggestions, and incentive plans. I think he wants to change our constitution and our country in ways that we may never recover from. There is a reason why our form of government has succeeded for over 200 years, when the governments he seems to prefer have not. He also wants to grow our government and spend more money and raise our taxes- all things I disagree with. He acts as if our country has not been good until he came along, and that he alone can change everything. Yet, he doesn't really say how he'll do that, except throwing money at different programs, and just being president, and the whole country, heck, the whole world, will be perfect. Granted, his campaign did start downplaying his perfection and heal-iness when they realized they wouldn't be able to do everything they promised. Another thing I disliked- his statements have expiration dates. Somewhere around and average of 8 days. Sometimes just one day. His campaign talks about how they didn't change anything they did- maybe that is true with the general strategy, but not the statements Obama made in speeches and debates. By the last debate, Obama was sounding like McCain, only more eloquent. His positions mirrored Obamas.

I supported McCain because he is a hero, because he is conservative(-ish), loves America, loves our form of government, wants to shrink government, truly reform it. I like that he's not just any old politician- he was a maverick, he did try to reform washington. I also liked his attitude on taxes- he didn't want to raise any of them, and he wanted everyone to become rich. His health care reform proposal was very good, even if he didn't know what it was. I also liked that he is a federalist.

On the other hand, I did not support many things McCain has done over the past 8 years. In 2000 I liked him better than Bush. then I saw what he did with campaign finance reform and with the amnesty bill, as well as the group of 14 who made a deal on approving judges. Granted, that last one did accomplish some good things. But in general, I didn't like that he crossed the aisle so much. i think he compromised too much. He definitely wasn't conservative enough for me. I wish he had opposed the bailout, although he did possibly help get some of the pork off the bailout, especially money for ACORN and student loan bailouts. But he did get things done, which most politicians or at least Senators and Congressmen can't say of themselves.

I liked a few things that Obama said, but I don't believe anything he says. I don't trust him. I don't trust the media, and I think he uses them to his own ends. It is a bad combination that is very dangerous for the American people.

Faced with a choice on election day, we could vote for Obama- an unknown and untrustworthy man, McCain- a hero and trustworthy man, and a third party, which would most likely give Obama the victory, how could anyone vote for Obama? How could a conservative write about supporting Obama in light of all of this? I can understand not supporting McCain. And maybe they wanted to make a point, but to throw support behind Obama? To give stupid inane reasons for supporting Obama, rather than saying just that they could not vote for McCain? That makes no sense to me. In a battle for conservative principles, how can you support the side that wants to get silence conservative voices? That wants to change our government?

There is no choice here- I had to vote for the one man who could possibly beat Obama. I wish others had had the same sanity and courage. Whatever ills McCain suffers from, are not Obama's more? And since we don't know that much about Obama, is it not pure folly to vote for him and 'hope' that he won't do all the things you think he might, or you think he could do? Better the devil you know than the one you don't.

The only thing good that I can see now, is that true conservatives can take power back from the moderates we've had for 8 years. Bush acted more like a Democrat than a conservative on a lot of issues like immigration and spending. So maybe we can get better leaders now. But what a way to do it.