Written By D.
The portion of Americans who actually pay taxes are the new serfs of the Kingdom of Government Greed and Waste. I believe the Liberals call it Camelot and I guess if you are the one in charge of the largesse, it is Camelot, but for the rest of us it is just called Tax-A-Lot.
I thought a review might be in order since tax filing time will soon be upon us. A time when we get to gather our receipts and spend hours filling out software created tax forms or talking to expensive accountants. Not only does the government take your money, they make you go through grief in the process of giving it to them.
According to The Tax Foundation, in 2008 the average tax freedom day in the U.S. was April 23rd. If you live in Democrat Blue States, your freedom day is a lot longer, in New York it is May 5th, In New Jersey it is May 7th in Connecticut it is May 8th … you get the picture. Of course this only covers Federal, State and Local taxes. The hidden taxes like tolls, gasoline, heating oil, sales tax are variable for individuals, but I’m sure if they were added into the mix, the government would get at least a few more weeks of our pay out of us. So if you live in New York, chances are pretty good you work until late May for Tax-A-Lot. In Medieval times Serfs worked for their Lords approximately two to three days per week. In 2008 you worked for Tax-A-Lot over two days days per week.
What distinguishes you from a serf? Not much. We take baths, eat healthier, dress better, and receive better health care, well better health care for now that is, until they socialize medicine. So for quality of life, we have one up on the Serfs.
Let’s take a closer look. You are told how much money the government wants and they take it from you. Serfs were told how much work they owed their Lord and he took it from them. Serfs didn’t get to vote on the amount of work they would do for their Lord, neither do you.
If the Serf did not fulfill his obligation, he could be punished and have his possessions taken from him, so can you.
Their Lord made the rules and enforced them. The Serf had to follow any rule their Lord made in regards to land use, legal rights, commerce, etc. So do you.
A key difference between you and a Serf is that their Lord knew better than to overtax (overwork) his Serfs, lest they go elsewhere and attach themselves to a more benevolent Lord. We can’t do that. In Tax-A-Lot there is no end to the amount we can be taxed. So that’s one for the Serfs.
Serfs had direct redress with their Lord, which is something we lost long ago with our government lords who routinely ignores the wishes of the taxpayers in out of touch Tax-A-Lot. That’s two for the Serfs.
AND, looks like the Serfs win it by one.
In the movie “Monty Python and the Holy Grail,” Dennis the Peasant said to Arthur;
DENNIS: “What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior!”
ARTHUR: “Well, I AM king...”
DENNIS: “Oh king, eh, very nice. An' how'd you get that, eh? By
exploitin' the workers -- by 'angin' on to outdated imperialist dogma
which perpetuates the economic an' social differences in our society!”
Interesting that very few people know income taxes were Unconstitutional until they amended the Constitution in 1913 in questionable procedure some might call fraud: http://www.givemeliberty.org/features/taxes/notratified.htm Why? Because they knew they could get away with it … and they have been piling on those taxes ever since, adding newer ones along the way.
DENNIS: "You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship.
A self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes—"
I’ve always thought some of the best humor has an element of truth to it. Welcome to the New Serfdom of Tax-A-Lot and have a nice day!
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Written By D.
Written By D.
Illinois Governor Rod Blagovich appointed Former Attorney General Roland Burris to fill Obama’s US Senate seat and now the Senate Dems as well as the Pres-Elect don’t want him seated. The Senate Dems are vowing to fight it.
WAIT A MINUTE. Blago is still the sitting Governor and has the right to seat anyone he chooses. The Governor has only been charged and not yet convicted of any crime. The Senate has no right to interfere with this appointment. Many of these same Senators as well as the Pres-Elect supported Blago when he ran for Governor and helped him get elected. Now they want to distance themselves from him and play Kabuki political theatre with his choice of appointments simply based on the fact that the Governor appointed Burris, therefore, they reason, Burris is tainted.
With no regard to Burris or his merits they project guilt by association onto him. Well, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. I don’t imagine it has even occurred to them that if Burris is guilty by association, then they are just as guilty because they are also tainted by their associations with Blago. If we are to be expected to believe that the Pres-Elect is innocent of all taint through his associations with Blago, why should we be believe Burris is guilty? Either all are innocent or all are guilty.
The law is the law, even when you don’t like it or it doesn’t benefit you or your party’s agenda. Seat Roland Burris or risk losing any credibility. The stench from Illinois politics is bad enough without further violation of law – and the law is Blago gets to choose.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
I read an article about a week ago regarding this very subject. It made me think about mothers in the Middle East and it made me wonder about the choices that are being made there regarding the lives of their children. I'm not trying to judge here. I just don't get it. But it's a different culture, with different values. How to you convince people who are born and raised to believe that their neighbors are evil and must die that just maybe there is another way to look at things? How do you overcome a culture that teaches mothers that children will be exalted when they die as martyrs (suicide bombers) by taking out a street filled with Israelis or Westerners? At what point do mothers in these countries stand up and shout "Enough!"? This is exactly what this article, written by Mitchell Bard, addresses.
I have been thinking about the article ever since I read it. Actually, not so much about the article as about mothers in general. It's easy for me, living here where I am relatively safe, to wonder how mothers in the Middle East could allow the questionable traditions of their forefathers to be passed on to their children when those traditions cause so much death and destruction.
Then it occured to me that maybe we are struggling with some of the same issues, albeit on a much different level. We have become a country divided. Especially in the political arena. One of the reasons this election has been so stressful is because it has seriously magnified the shifts in values and morals that our country is experiencing. There has always been a difference of opinion when it comes to how our country should be governed, that is nothing new. The difference lies in the way we handle our disagreements as a collective citizenry. Peaceful disagreement seems to be a thing of the past. Those seeking power or acceptance have resorted to manipulating the truth, name-calling, hateful and vindictive behavior and even violence to achieve an end result that has done nothing but reward criminals and put our freedoms and way of life in peril.
We also have our own brand of suicide bombers. Our suicide bombers don't strap on bombs and blow themselves and their conservative neighbors to smithereens in hopes of receiving virgins in heaven. Our suicide bombers fight for acceptance of immoral behaviors. They pass laws that undermine our constitution. They use public schools to teach our children about alternative lifestyles and to encourage socialism and other issues that have nothing to do with academics.
While our issues may not be exactly the same, the fact that our children are being subjected to the evils of the world is something all mothers have in common. How we protect our children is where the difference really lies. As Americans we have been blessed with a culture that has allowed us the opportunity to voice our opinions and offers us alternatives to violence when fighting for peace. The scripture Ephesians 6:12 says it best: For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. We understand that fighting against the policymakers will ultimately do more than blowing up a neighborhood. So we take to the streets, the polling places, the halls of Congress.
Mr. Bard points out in his article that part of the problem in Palestine is the lack of willingness by women there to take a stand. "Palestinian women as a group have never been willing to stand up to the men who send their children out to be suicide bombers. They have never said to their leaders that it is time to stop advocating violence against Israel, which has only brought their families misery, and negotiate a peace agreement that would allow two states to coexist side by side." Easy to say. Sometimes harder to do. But ultimately, for the sake of Palestinian and Israeli children, it has to be done!
Mothers have often been a force to be reckoned with. In Mr. Bard's article, he points to 2 or 3 different groups of women who organized and protested to bring about policy changes that they felt were better for their countries. We know from our own country's history that the Suffragettes are the reason that American Mothers have such a big say in our own electoral process! As mothers, we are a powerfulful group! We truly have the ability to help change the course that our country, even our world, takes. Mothers have power. Why? Because the love we feel for our children is deeper and stronger than any bond on earth. (Not that dads don't have that bond too. But we are talking about moms today. We'll do a dad post soon.) And that bond compels us to fight fiercely on their behalf when we feel they or their future are being threatened. We eat, drink and sleep our childrens' well-being! We dream for them and with them. We plan for them and with them. We strive to give them every opportunity to be successful.
Will they be grow up to be politicians and statesmen and work to promote peaceful communication and positive change? If we teach them how to deal with confrontation and differences of opinion without getting angry and using violence, then chances are they WILL become people who work to promote peace and positive change.
Will they become criminals and terrorists who justify poor decisions, inflict pain on others and use dishonesty as a means to an end? If they are taught to hate those who are different and hear negative, untrue and unkind words about others in their home, if unseemly behavior is ignored or rewarded, then they go out into the world filled with venom. They direct their unhappiness toward those who are different, those who are successful and those who seek to hold them accountable. And then chances are they will become terrorists, criminals or corrupt businessmen and politicians.
Our children will be who we teach them to be. Will there ever be peace in the Middle East? Until Palestinian children are taught to love their neighbors, or at the very least to tolerate or ignore their neighbors, Israel and Palestine will always be at war.
Will the United States continue to be riddled with corruption in high places? Will there continue to be hatred for those who believe in God? Will the unkind words and unseemly behavior become the norm, while courtesy, kindness and morals are mocked and spat upon? Until extreme Liberals quit confusing "tolerance" with complete acceptance, they will clash with religious Conservatives who stand by a set of core values. Until Americans start holding public officials accountable for dishonest behavior, we will be governed by criminals. Is this the legacy we want to pass on to our children? Do we want them to grow up to be adults who are afraid of their government and neighbors?
If we continue to ignore the policies being made in our country and simply hope for the best without taking a stand, are we doing any better than women in Palestine to protect our children? Aren't we sending our kids the same message? We are telling them that we would prefer them to be followers and accept a way of life that will harm them in the long run. And that can be just as bad as strapping a bomb to their little bodies. Maybe even worse, because by allowing them to succumb to socialistic, immoral behavior, we sentence them to a long, slow spiritual death. A little dramatic? For sure. But the point has to be made that conservative families will continue to be targeted and under seige until we love our kids enough to stand up and say "ENOUGH!"
So...do mothers hold the key to peace on earth? YES! Mothers do hold the keys to peace on earth. First we create it in our homes. Then we take it to the streets. We stand up and shout "ENOUGH!" when the corruption begins to take hold and our children begin to suffer from its effects. When women gather in support of a cause, there is no stronger force on earth. Mothers have effected change in all parts of the world as they stand resolute in the desire to create a better world, whether that world be their own little village or an entire continent.
Do I believe there can be peace on earth? Yeah. On a global scale? I don't know. But I do know when mothers love their children enough to call for an end to hatred and violence, corruption and tyranny, lies and dishonesty, peace will come. It may take awhile for places like Palestine and Israel. They have a lot to overcome. But it shouldn't take as long for us here in the United States. In fact, in 2 years, we should have a bunch of new Congressmen in place. And 2 years after that, we should have a new president in place who will help us in our quest to create a safer world for our kids. We have freedom on our side. We have the constitution and knowledge and truth on our side. So this is a call to arms, Moms!! If you can't change THE world, at least try to change YOUR world. And pray for Moms in Palestine to have the courage to be the catalysts for change in their own country.
Peace, my bloggy friends. It's what's for dinner.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Written By D.
Decided to name names and wish all a very Merry Christmas. Yes, it is called Christmas, it is on December 25th and that is what we are celebrating. I am so tired of the politically correct “Happy Holidays.”
Best wishes to you and yours!
Posted by D at 12:27 PM
Written By D.
New York Governor Paterson wants to add an 18% tax on non-diet soft drinks. Would you believe he wants to encourage drinking diet soft drinks to help fight obesity? I guess we could call it the obesity prevention tax. I am truly amused that he wants to fight obesity with a tax. But apparently we are now being told by researchers that both non-diet and diet soft drinks are unhealthy and drinking more than one per day can have negative health consequences including obesity. Oops!
So now that all soft drinks are bad for us, I guess Governor Paterson has two choices, tax all soft drinks at 18% or skip the tax altogether. Which do you think he would choose? I think he will ignore the information and just stay on the obesity prevention tax superhighway, just like global warming advocates ignore the fact that the planet is getting cooler.
It is bad enough that forty new taxes are being added to the already overburdened taxpayers of New York without insulting taxpayer intelligence by telling them that a tax is going to help them make a healthy choice which, turns out, isn’t even true. Why not just tell it like it is? Something like, “We are broke, but unwilling to make any cuts in our bloated (as in obese) budget, therefore you suckers (as in taxpayers) will just have to pay more. We don’t intend to sacrifice our pork, so you’ll just have to suffer.”
When politicians tell us they are helping us by hurting us, I’d say be sure to remember them when they run for election or re-election. Bailing out on these “tax and spend liberals gone crazy” at the polls will be the best way to help yourself. People who advocate “behavior modification taxes” need to be sent a message.
By the way, I love Coca-Cola, I drink at least one per day, I’m drinking one right now. I am not obese and I don’t really believe soft drinks cause obesity or other major health problems that a person wouldn’t already be predisposed to genetically. Hmmm … now I’ve gone and done it … I can just hear them tax and spenders thinking now … how about a tax on defective genes? After all, everyone has a few defective genes, what a great source of new revenue.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Written By D.
Deep Throat has passed away, many people never heard of Deep Throat, Watergate was a long time ago. Except for a few radicals, still clinging to Watergate, Richard Nixon’s legacy has been pretty much rehabilitated, especially in the area he cared most about, foreign policy. He wasn’t that great with the economy, but he knew his world politics.
Besides the word “impeachment” doesn’t have the same sting to it, after all when Clinton was actually impeached (Nixon never was) people yawned about it. Plus, there have been so many more significant crimes and scandals committed by the Democrats since Watergate that it really is quite insincere for liberals to try and take the high road and get all huffy about Tricky Dick. It seems like our Presidents can get away with anything these days if they are Democrats.
My one very liberal friend used to bring up Watergate every time I talked to him, which was more tiresome than anything. But even he got the message when I finally broke down and warned him that if he brought up Watergate ever again, I would counter with the Clinton impeachment every time.
I grew up with Nixon in politics. I don’t remember politics without him. I always felt sorry for him because he seemed to be a fish out water with people. I don’t know if he was shy or felt inferior or what, I just sensed that he did not enjoy being in the public spotlight, it was the backroom that he longed for where he could play the ultimate world chess match with his considerable talent in strategy and tactics.
Nixon actually defined the modern Vice-President. He traveled the world as Ike’s eyes and ears. He was a real participant in government, not just a stand-by. And who can forget the Kitchen Debate?
Many people who don’t know their history, may not realize that Nixon actually won the 1960 Election, but Chicago politics stole it from him with “mucho” voter fraud and it was an openly known fact. He was urged to contest the election, but he refused on the grounds that it would damage the country.
After he lost the 1962 California Governor’s race, the press were told they wouldn’t have Dick to “kick around anymore.” But I knew he wouldn’t be able to stay away. Times change and 1968 was his time. He won big in both ’68 and ’72.
But then, Watergate was never about Watergate. It was about Alger Hiss. The socialists in government had been out to get him for a very long time. Nixon teamed up with ex-communist spy Whittaker Chambers and blew Hiss out of the water. Exposing the communists in government really upset them and their friends in the press. Their first attempt at destroying Nixon in 1952 by making his perfectly legal “so called slush” fund into an issue backfired mightily on the press when he pulled off the Checkers speech and he cruised into the Vice-Presidency.
They finally nailed him on a two bit break-in and made the cover-up sound like a really big deal, when it was really only politics as usual in DC (The Democrats broke into the GOP HQ more than once.) Was it wrong? Yes. Was it important? Not really.
The socialists finally got their pound of flesh. But so did Nixon. After the fall of the Soviet Union, it was proven conclusively that Hiss was a communist spy, despite Hiss spending a lifetime of proclaiming his innocence.
As for Deep Throat, who apparently was passed over for head of the FBI by Nixon but denies it had anything to do with illegally ratting out Nixon during Watergate, well I doubt anyone will remember him, except a few historians. He apparently got indicted later for illegal break-ins into the homes of members of the Weather Underground http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081219/ap_on_re_us/obit_felt The libs in the Carter Administration went after him, but Reagan pardoned him and Nixon approved of the pardon and even contributed money to his defense. There is some kind of irony in that pardon. The most amusing thing about it is Deep Throat’s daughter convincing him to come out of the closet with his identity so he could make money with a book deal. I didn’t bother reading that book, I set a higher standard for people to qualify as my heroes.
Deep Throat gave Woodward and Bernstein their ten minutes of fame, but except for an old movie, no one will remember them either. It is probably because they are unimportant. I don’t read any of their stuff either, nor do I read the Washington Post.
The reason I have not mentioned Deep Throat’s real name throughout this writing is simple, it is not really important enough to mention. But I do think Deep Throat’s family should thank Nixon’s family as well as the entire country for the money they made on the book deal. That was a lot of grief we all had to go through because one man violated the trust of the government position he held. There were legal ways to go about addressing Watergate, but he chose to do his business in the shadows. I wouldn't choose to be in a foxhole with this guy, ever. But Nixon would be welcome in my foxhole anytime.
I’ll remember Nixon best for ending the draft thereby effectively ending the college protest movement. It disappeared overnight because he knew it wasn’t really about the war, it was about the draft and the possibility of being sent to fight in the war. Thanks to Dick, the socialists haven’t been able to get a good protest movement going since then. So I guess Tricky Dick gets the last laugh.
I read the complete transcripts of the Nixon tapes and my favorite part is still all the “expletive deleted.” I guess that is the term I would use in describing my feelings about Deep Throat.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Written By D.
My mother grew up during the depression. I won’t call it the “Great Depression” because depressions aren’t so great to the people who live through them.
Mom always told me that she never knew anything but the depression until she reached adulthood and WWII happened. As with most anyone who had a parent that lived on the poor end of the depression the tales of poverty abound. My Mom had it better than some because she lived on a farm and they could grow their own food. My grandfather also hunted, so they could get meat and they had a cow for milk. But still, it was no picnic. There were ten children to feed and clothe. Yes, they walked miles to a one room schoolhouse, wore hand me downs and slept at night in a room without heat, using hot bricks under the covers to keep them warm.
My mother was a dye in the wool FDR Democrat. Her father was President of the local Democrat Club. She told me they really believed in FDR almost to the point of worship. They thought he was helping them get out of the depression with all his “three letter” programs.
Looking at it from her point of view and vulnerable station in life and having studied this period of time in our history extensively, I can honestly see how her family believed in FDR. They needed to believe in him because they needed to believe things would get better. His sunny disposition and cocky self-confidence must have had a very calming effect for people living on the edge of survival.
She gave up the Democrat party long ago in young adulthood. But I have always teased her about it, calling her the family liberal, because you could still detect the FDR indoctrination in her opinions. Theirs was a whole generation of Democrats raised on FDR’s socialistic policies and that is hard to shrug off.
My mother recently told me she thinks we are heading into another depression. She said this is how it starts and it only gets worse. But this time she thinks “FDR like” government intervention is a really bad idea and will only prolong the problem because she realizes now that FDR was wrong. That is the first time I ever heard her criticize FDR.
Now to the other extreme; my daughter, privately schooled, very highly educated at the top colleges in the country , who never suffered a day of want in her entire happy life and raised as a conservative Republican, told me the other day that she and her highly educated friends have discussed the matter and believe things are not so bad and will turn around in a year or two.
Now here I am, stuck in the middle of two generations of women. My rural childhood is actually more closely related and identified with that of my mother, without her poverty. My adulthood is more closely related to that of my daughter, without her self-confidence.
After hearing their opinions, I began to think why were they so different in their conclusions about the economy? Could it be by virtue of education? Could it be that the young are just more optimistic than the old? Could it be that our opinions are truly based on our life experience, so that those who have suffered will always believe more suffering is to come and those who have never suffered cannot imagine it happening? Could it be that the young are whistling in the dark but those who have seen the dark do not fear it, and so can more easily accept it and adjust their eyes to the darkness?
I don’t know the answer. I have mixed emotions about what will happen and maybe because I am stuck in the middle I believe what will happen will not be as terrible as my mother thinks and not as good as my daughter thinks.
But I definitely believe there will be a whole generation of the “vulnerable” people, not unlike the Democrats of my mother’s generation, who will look for someone to believe in and who will blindly embrace socialistic programs. It won’t be as a result of reading and embracing Marx, it will be to seek security in their lives, looking to the government as a father figure. They will not even realize they have become socialists. And even if they move to the right later in life, they will never quite be able to entirely shake off these beliefs. The socialism of Wilson and FDR is still with us and our country appears to be headed further down that road. Unfortunately, this time, I think it will be at the expense of freedom.
Maybe that is why the socialists see this economic disaster as their opportunity.
I never forget what Whittaker Chambers told us in his book; “Witness”
“Sooner or later, one of my good friends is sure to ask me; How did it happen that a man like you became a Communist? Each time I wince, not at the personal question, but at the failure to grasp the fact that a man does not, as a rule, become a Communist because he is attracted to Communism, but because he is driven to despair by the crisis of history through which the world is passing.”
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Written By D.
1. Greed does have a down side. When promised large returns on investments always be very suspicious. If it is too good to be true, it is too good to be true.
2. Trust but verify. That just about applies to everything, especially where money is involved. If these investors had done even a little homework, they could have saved themselves a lot of grief.
3. Never mix business with pleasure. Just because you have cocktails with someone or belong to the same club, doesn’t mean you should think the person you are dealing with thinks the same way you do. When it comes to money, think anti-social and just because your pal Chip is investing with Tad and raving about him, doesn’t mean Chip knows beans.
4. Easy come, easy go. A lot of the investors made their money during boom times, when any dummy could hardly miss making dough, but I guess it didn’t occur to them that it is a lot harder to make money during times of bust and it can disappear real fast.
5. Put a little away for a rainy day. Never spend beyond your means and stash some cash in safe places that won’t pay out much in interest but will be there when you need it.
6. Don’t ever rely on the government or any agency it creates. You will always end up disappointed that they haven’t lived up to even your lowest expectations. Always assume they will not do their job properly, if at all, and that their mere participation is reason for suspicion. The conservatives are born knowing this one.
7. Big political contributors are not being altruistic. When someone throws big political contributions around they want something in return … always. But then, you libs knew this one already, greasing wheels is your stock and trade.
8. Don’t expect a bailout. Just sell your mansion, Mercedes and your yacht and move on.
9. Chalk it up to experience. We’ve all had our share of ups and downs.
10. The Reagan “greedy eighties” are looking good right about now. All you libs complained about it, while pocketing huge sums of cash and accusing the rest of us of being greedy, what say you now?
Posted by D at 10:53 AM
Written By D.
Powers of the weak are always fascinating. The people who run political blog sites, henceforth called “leaders,” are really trying to amass power through numbers. They solicit new members, or “suckers,” by taking up a cause and voicing opinion whether liberal or conservative. If enough suckers buy into it, the leaders control “X” amount of suckers and leverage them into a seat at the power table. This could lead to TV and radio appearances, book deals, advertising dollars, and adoring attention from fans and invitations from the real political power players. I especially love the sites that brag about how “important” people in Washington read their posts. But I imagine really important people don’t have the time to read all the thoughtful garbage out there.
Most of these site leaders are just weaklings trying to make themselves more important than they really are but with the proliferation of these sites this power becomes more and more diffused. Very few new sites will make it to the big time because they really have nothing new to offer. And I imagine even established sites will lose readers as time goes on because people will tire of them and go elsewhere.
Those who began sites several years ago certainly still have the advantage simply because they have established a readership. But they play God on their sites and it stokes their ego to allow or disallow membership in their group. The members (suckers) tend to suck up big time to these leaders in hope that they will be a featured blogger on their site or be looked upon with favor, possibly being graced with a reply or comment by the “leader.” Heaven forbid if a member dares to constructively criticize anything they do or say, they will get thrown off the site. Yet, they claim to be set up to voice free opinion for a cause. Just proves that no opinion is ever free.
Certain things I have noticed on conservative sites (I don’t visit liberal sites so I wouldn’t know about them) is the rehash effect. One of the big sites I like to visit is “Hot Air.” It amuses me that when they post something, all of a sudden all the “me toos” jump on it and basically the same information is rephrased in slightly different words going round and round. There is very little that could pass for original thought coming out of these “me too” sites. Certain leader bloggers are so stuck on their own rhetoric that it is actually painful to read, especially when they advocate mean spirited sniping. More words do not a thoughtful commentary make.
Another thing I noticed is every time there is a real call to action, it usually gets ignored. These sites are static places that are really going nowhere. The leaders have no interest in action only self-interest.
An observation I’ve made is when one of the members posts a good blog, the response they get is not measured by the quality of it. For instance, if the blog is posted by the site “leader” it will get positive responses no matter how stupid or vile it’s content, whereas if one of the “suckers” were to post the same thing, they would get no responses or negative ones. I actually see “suckers” post things and get no response then the “Leader” takes the same information, rewrites it as their own post and get tons of responses and praise. Proves the old adage, “It’s not what you know, it’s who you know.”
There are a few good sites out there “American Thinker “ comes to my mind. They are an excellent source of information and they do their homework. They also tend to be very tolerant of the civil opinions of others. Maybe that is why they are a successful site.
On a purely psychological level, it is fascinating to watch how easily the “suckers” are manipulated into believing how important it is to actually have a seat at a particular table, when in reality they are just being used for someone’s personal gain. I guess even though it’s not written in the Constitution, you do have the right to be a sucker! But just remember you suckers are the real power givers because if enough of you choose to go elsewhere then the leader becomes powerless. There are lots of other sites to choose from who might serve you better because their leaders are better.
I have high hopes for Smart Girl Politics. They really do have something new to offer “words AND action!” They also offer civility and leadership that listens and responds. If you are tired of being someone else’s sucker on the static line, come join us. And, it is not just for women, you guys are welcome too! You don’t have to be a sucker and settle for the “me toos.”
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Posted by Geri at 7:22 PM
Friday, December 12, 2008
Written By D.
Obama’s plan to make the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) a priority may backfire mightily causing a crisis in healthcare. He wants to force all hospitals to perform abortions on demand.
The Catholic Church, which is the major power player in the sheer number of hospitals they control, is going to be force fed FOCA despite the fact that it goes against their religious beliefs. Apparently the Liberals believe the right to have an abortion, though not written in the Constitution, trumps the Constitutional right of Freedom of Religion. And those Doctors and Nurses who object to being a part of such practice because of their religious beliefs will be denied their freedom of choice.
Now I would assume FOCA can be achieved only because hospitals accept payment from federally funded entities like Medicaid and Medicare. Not unlike the Mafia, if you accept money from the government, then you are beholden to play by their rules whether they violate your Constitutional rights or not. (This is yet another good argument against socialized medicine.)
The Catholic Bishops have threatened to close their hospitals or, at the very least, close their OB/GYN wards before submitting to FOCA http://www.lifenews.com/nat4568.html The closing of these hospitals, many of which provide care to inner city patients would be devastating to our system of medical care provider facilities. Yes, they are that important and this is no small matter. It could create a crisis in healthcare. But there doesn’t seem to be any willingness for compromise on the part of Obama, probably because he doesn’t believe they will act upon their threat. So the question is whether they are really serious about their threat.
In some ways, I blame the Catholic Church for this credibility problem. For years they have turned a blind eye to politicians who claim to be Catholic yet support Choice. If excommunication is their tool to remove members who violate church principles and they do not use it consistently, then how do they expect to be taken seriously? They are now suffering the consequences of their own hypocrisy. They have made it too easy to say you are a Catholic without actually practicing Catholicism.
The Catholic Church really needs to win this one because it is a real threat to the practice of their membership beliefs which is the basis of Freedom of Religion. They need to actively get their members involved in a vocal and highly visible campaign to fight FOCA. They need to enlist the help of other religious groups and the Pro-Life movement as well. They have to use the excommunication tool in a very public way to demonstrate that they are serious about this issue and not allow those who do not adhere to Church doctrine to claim they are Catholic. They have to make sure government knows they are not bluffing on this issue.
If the state decides to dictate abortions on demand, then let those who want abortions go to a clinic that performs them. But no church, doctor or nurse should be forced to do something that goes against their beliefs simply because the facility accepts federally funded payment for medical care. The church did not start these federal programs and they are not the ones who blurred the separation of church and state with federal dollars, so they should not be punished or have their rights and beliefs violated as a result. It is time to draw a line in the sand.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Written By D.
Lately, when I wake up in the morning I actually dread reading the news. If you have witnessed a car wreck, you understand. You can see it happening, there is nothing you can do to prevent it and mostly, you just can’t believe what is unfolding in front of your eyes.
Our latest collective national car wreck is the bailout mania of Pelosi, Reid and all the Liberal special interest flakes. And it is truly getting out of hand. These people are a symptom of a much greater problem. The government is out of control and the spending spree they are on is going to bring us all down.
I have never seen a group of people so bent on throwing good money after bad solutions. The danger they pose to our economy is of a proportion that cannot be measured. The house of cards they are constructing cannot stand for long because it is built upon the poor judgment of people who seem barely qualified to screw in a light bulb, yet seem to think they are expert in all things. I cringe when I hear Pelosi and Reid speak because neither seems capable of putting together a coherent sentence let alone a sensible solution to a problem and the insult to my intelligence is just too much.
The auto bailout is the latest car wreck that makes a strong case for term limits. They are going to effectively trash an already ailing industry for the benefit of their union pals. They weren’t fooling anyone with their show trials to bash the auto executives before giving them billions of dollars. This bailout dog and pony show proves that professional politicians are the real disaster to governance in our country. These politicians are a wholly owned subsidiary of special interest groups who exchange money and perks for legislation and, now, bailout bucks.
Therefore, no one should be surprised that Blago is accused of trying to sell a senate seat. That’s just business as usual and not just in Chicago. The best part about it is that the Democrats don’t want him to resign because of any wrong doing. They want him to resign so they can be sure to avoid a special election and get a Democrat seated in the Senate. Yep, the standards have sunk that low. After all they didn’t ask Jefferson to resign, despite the cold cash in the freezer, because there was nothing for the Democrats to gain from it. This insanity has to end.
Two terms in the US Senate and six terms in the House are more than enough time in Washington, DC because the longer they stay, the more damage they do to our country. Pelosi and Reid should be the poster children for term limits. They have been feeding at the public trough way too long. How many more car wrecks can we withstand?
Posted by D at 4:04 AM
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Amazing story about the Governor of Illinois being indicted today over the open Senate seat, no? Sadly, not so surprising anymore! Illinois/Chicago politics continue to be a cesspool of corruption and this is just one more example of why our state and federal governments are falling apart. Until Americans are willing to take a stand and start forcing these guys out of office, we will continue to hear story after story about corrupt politicians who are wiiling to sacrifice the well-being of their constituents for their own power and gain and in the end most will suffer very few consequences for their actions. Why? Because fully half the country is willing to excuse the behavior. I personally don't get it. I have no idea why more people are not screaming bloody murder when it comes to these guys getting away with criminal activity! Is it because it takes effort? Is it because they don't think they can make a difference? Is it because they really don't understand the ramifications of letting a corrupt government run roughshod over its citizens? Or is it a differnce in definitions regarding what constitutes criminal behavior? I have a feeling it's all of the above, along with thee double standard that has been set for politicians regarding their culpability when it comes to anything they touch. We have lost control of the people who are supposed to be working for US, folks. This latest news from Chicago is a perfect example of how power can corrupt.
Another story from Chicago...the factory that shut down due to Bank of America's decision to withhold credit has been granted an extension of needed credit by bank of America. Hmmm...let's recap. The workers got laid off and decided to send a message by staging a PEACEFUL and COLLECTIVELY UNITED protest and guess what? They made a difference! Bank of America realized it is in their best interest (especially since they just received 25 billion in bailouts) to do the right thing. This is proof positive that there is power in numbers, that the "little people" can and do make a difference and that we have the ability to take back our country! Kudos to all of those employees who were willing to put forth a show of solidarity and suffer some personal discomfort in order to get their message heard. It paid off. Unity in ideals and purpose can change the tide of any battle. Liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, it is going to take a united citizenship to turn the tide of corrupt politics in this country, but folks in Chicago just showed it can be done. David just slew Goliath.
So, rumor has it that Caroline Kennedy wants Hillary’s Senate seat. Wait a minute, the same people who are thrilled by this prospect, were the ones who claimed Sarah Palin was not qualified for VP.
What qualifies Kennedy? Nothing that I can see. Oh yes, she is a Kennedy, so it must be her devine hereditary right to serve in the US Senate. Democrats are like the Loyalists of the American Revolution, they love all things royal. Since New York was the center of the Loyalist camp during the Revolution, I’m sure they will love having a “Princess” as their Senator.
The Loyalists can spend endless hours expounding on her virtues, run old JFK tapes and cry their eyes out over Camelot lost. Of course her hair and clothes, or any other criticism will be strictly off limits. That is only reserved for the low born like Sarah Palin. I can’t wait to hear the Katie C. tear jerker interview questions. It will probably be all about legacy and nothing about representing the little people of NY.
And it is so convenient, that the “Princess” will not have to run for the office. She would be appointed or in this case, anointed might be a better word. That’s a relief. She won’t have to come into contact with the great unwashed masses.
Excuse me if I don’t get all excited over the prospect of yet another royal Kennedy lording it over us with that special self-righteous attitude born of a lifetime of unearned privilege.
Perhaps she would be better suited to the House of Lords.
Posted by D at 7:01 AM
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Written By D.
There have been so many political races over the years whose outcomes were determined by the misdeeds or missteps of the incumbent. The challenger wins, not because he had a better campaign or was a better candidate. He wins because the other guy is so bad.
In NJ Whitman didn’t beat Florio, Florio did. Whitman was a toss away candidate who was expected to lose. In Alaska, Stevens beat Stevens.
We are too quick to list races as unwinnable because during the course of a campaign, anything can happen. The trick is to be prepared with a viable candidate who can capitalize on it and to be able to provide the resources to assist them.
Also, there have been many Reps in the House who had to run more than once to get elected, including Newt Gringrich who got elected on the third time he ran.
I think we write candidates off too quickly. First, the party encourages them to run because they want to have someone on the ticket in every race, but then they are left out there on their own without resources. They become the self fulfilling prophecy. They often end their campaigns in debt and discouraged, and certainly unwilling to take on another campaign, when in some cases, that is exactly what they should do.
If a candidate manages to get 40% of the vote in an election, you could say, “Well he got beat good 60 to 40.” Or you could say, “Let’s spend the next couple years finding the 10% + 1 more votes we need to win this race.” Selecting the best candidates is important but supporting them in a continued effort is equally important.
I don’t live in la la land and I understand that the party’s limited resources have to be spent on the most competitive races. But when I was a kid my grandfather used to take me to the racetrack. He’d sit there studying the racing form and in each race he’d make a bet on two horses - one would be listed among the favorites and one would be a long shot. One day I asked him why he bet that way. He told me that while, over the years, he had won more races betting on favorites, he actually had won more money betting on long shots. He also told me it was a lot more thrilling to win on a long shot!
I figure if the party bets on some long shots and takes the “we are in it for the duration” approach to making inroads we might just start making some inroads. It sure beats abandoning the field of battle and throwing good people away.
My suggestion would be that the RNC form a special group of contributors who are willing to bet their money on the long shots. There are always gamblers out there! I also would suggest that they tap the resources of retired political consultants who would be willing to donate free time to advising candidates in these races.
My grandfather was right … of all the many political races I consulted over the years, winning the long shots were the most thrilling for me!
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Written By D.
When I first started out in politics I worked for a GOP County Chairman. The Chairman and his sidekick assistant taught me just about everything I needed to know about politics. It was a first rate education that no poli-sci degree can hope to match.
They had a few simple sacred rules that you had to follow. There was one rule in particular that rang true for me throughout my career and which I have shared with every candidate I have ever worked with; The Pandering Rule; “Never risk losing the votes you have by going after the votes you can never get.”
It is a simple truth. When McCain got the nomination for Pres, I really didn’t want to vote for him, although I did. He would have been my last choice on any list. My GOP County Chairman would have recognized him as destined to lose because he pandered to voters who would never vote for him and sacrificed his base voters assuming that they would vote for him … just because he was the party candidate. If the powerful County Chairmen system had still existed as it did back then, McCain would have never got the nomination.
You see, I don’t think we lost because the campaign was particularly bad. We lost because McCain violated one of the sacred rules of politics and then tried to package it as “Maverick.” Yes, he did throw the base a bone in the form of Sarah Palin, but she was not the top of the ticket and could not cover for his past transgressions against the party. The trouble was compounded when she was gagged by the campaign because they really didn’t want her to express her conservative views. But for McCain to expect the GOP base to support him, despite his many years of flying in our faces, while chumming it up with the Democrats, was unrealistic. There were enough votes out there to pull it off, but they just didn’t want to come out and vote for him. I don’t think I have ever heard so many Republicans say they could not bring themselves to vote for their party nominee.
Political Parties have always had their ups and downs, sometimes through situations we cannot control. In this election, we had the added burden of the economic downturn. But another rule my County Chairman taught me was; “It is good to do a self exam after every election, win or lose. Find out what you did right and what you did wrong and next time, make it better.”
We don’t need to bash ourselves or others around us. We are a political party not a self-flagellating mea culpa religious order. My County Chairman would have thought this a waste of time; after all, bashing is the job of your opponents. He believed that you should always act like a winner and talk it up, even if you don’t really believe it. It is akin to “never let them see you sweat.” That is what I did during the election and I don’t regret it.
By the way, yesterday in Georgia, Sarah Palin would have scored big points with my County Chairman. She demonstrated a lot of class and a true understanding of party unity by saying nice things about John McCain. Palin didn’t have to do that and it certainly didn’t earn much applause. If my County Chairman were still around, I know he would say, “Watch that one, she’s going places.” This election year, choosing Palin is the main thing the campaign got right. Now it is up to the party and rejecting a gift like Palin would be very foolish.