Julia – an Uninvited House Guest?

Tags

birth control, Life of Julia, NannyState

The Life of Julia hit me like a slap in the face when I first checked out the video. Funny, it hasn’t improved over time! To insinuate that any American women is incapable of graduating from high school, Conquering College (and paying for it) and taking the corporate world by storm, if she so chooses, without the aid of “NannyState” is completely underestimating the abilities, the tenacity, and the guts of the American Woman! I’m appalled!

And then, to further presume that any American women is incapable of carefully selecting her mate rather than spreading her legs for every Tom, Dick, or Harry that happens by is selling Women so far short, it makes me wonder what kind of women the president has known!

Any adult female in this country that cannot afford $9/mo for birth control, if the need is legitimate (i.e. available funds are not being spent irresponsibly), can easily acquire birth control through Medicaid.

Then there is the “compassionate” GENDER-CIDE pushed to poor, uncertain women as a way to control their family size and dimension! While the WH has stated opposition to a ban on sex-selection abortions, today the Republican controlled House, once again, came down on the side of Women and protected a woman’s right to be born even if the parent(s) wants the opposite sex! Guys, too!

Maybe, just maybe if we started asking MORE of ourselves – like a little SELF-CONTROL – we might find we are stronger than we ever imagined! But no, not this regime! This regime believes it is more “compassionate” to addict each of us to the government. If I work for it and pay for it, chances are very good I will take good care of it, and appreciate it!

Please realize who really has declared #WaronWomen!!! Come on, ladies, figure it out!

Also Read: Is THIS Julia? Do YOU Know Julia?

Advertisement

House takes up veterans funding bill

BY ANDREW TAYLOR
Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-controlled House Thursday debated legislation to boost health care spending for veterans and funding to compensate record numbers of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans claiming service-related disabilities as they return to the United States.

Roughly half of the $148 billion measure is for veterans’ pensions and disability payments over which lawmakers have little practical control. That includes a 20 percent, $10.5 billion increase for such payments.

The Associated Press reported earlier this week that 45 percent of the 1.6 million veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are now seeking compensation for injuries they say are service-related. About 1.2 million people are expected to file for disability claims next year – on top of a backlog of almost 1 million applicants. … MORE HERE

Obama’s Tall Fiscal Tales

Barack Obama continues to peddle the myth that he has been the most fiscally responsible president since World War II. The facts, however, are stubbornly against him. Meanwhile, Wes Pruden explores the “bigotry” of opposing Obama, the president explains what a nasty campaign he’s going to run, and some hateful leftists have messages for our Armed Forces for Memorial Day. Thank goodness we can finish it off with some humor.

The Foundation
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” –John Adams

Editorial Exegesis

“Mitt Romney ‘warned about a “prairie fire of debt.” That’s what he said,’ Mr. Obama said on the Des Moines fairgrounds on Thursday, as if he couldn’t believe it either. … ‘What my opponent didn’t tell you was that federal spending since I took office has risen at the slowest pace of any President in almost 60 years.’ … [P]ress secretary Jay Carney chimed in [saying] … to White House reporters that they should not ‘buy into the B.S. that you hear about spending and fiscal constraint with regard to this Administration….’ Mr. Carney the media critic deeply sourced his view to someone named Rex Nutting, who wrote an 856-word column for MarketWatch that argued ‘There has been no huge increase in spending under the current President, despite what you hear.’ … His accounting methods are, er, unusual. Mr. Nutting claims that Mr. Obama is only responsible for $140 billion worth of spending in his hyperactivist first year in office because … the fiscal year technically begins on October 1, 2009. Therefore he says Mr. Obama had no control over the budget, though in February 2009 he did famously manage to pass an $800 billion stimulus that was supposed to be a one-time deal. Mr. Nutting then measures Mr. Obama’s spending growth rate against an inflated 2009 baseline that includes the spending Mr. Obama caused but which he attributes to Mr. Bush. … The larger conceptual error of the Nutting-Obama-Carney troika is neglecting to compare the budget to the size of the economy. The best perspective on how outlays, tax receipts and deficits change over time is as a share of GDP. … Prior to Mr. Obama, the U.S. had not spent more than 23.5% of GDP … since the end of World War II. Yet Mr. Obama has managed to exceed that four years in a row: 25.2% in 2009, 24.1% in 2010 and 2011, and an estimated 24.3% in 2012, up from a range between 18%-21% from 1994-2008. … As for that prairie fire of debt, Mr. Obama can fairly blame $1 trillion or so of the $5 trillion debt increase of the last four years on Mr. Bush. But what about the other $4 trillion? Debt held by the public now stands at 74.2% of the economy, up from 40.5% at the end of 2008 — and rising rapidly.” —The Wall Street Journal

Essential Liberty

“The Origination Clause in Article I, Section 7 states: ‘All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.’ … The Founding Fathers required revenue measures to originate in the House because they wanted this authority to belong to the legislative body closest to the people. … Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has taken to thumbing his nose at this clear mandate. Recently, he publicly dismissed the Origination Clause as a ‘hyper-technical budget issue,’ raised by his Republican opponents as ‘a fig leaf to hide their blatant obstruction.’ … One unnamed Senate staffer even speculated that the House’s fealty to the Constitution ‘may be part of some Republican plan.’ … Liberal Senate leaders, it seems, are determined to do what they want when they want to do it, Constitution or no Constitution. … One of the chief operational principles of the current Senate seems to be, to paraphrase that famous line from Treasure of the Sierra Madre: ‘Constitution? We don’t need no stinking Constitution!’ That’s one more reason why the tea-party movement remains politically relevant more than three years after its birth.” —Heritage Foundation’s Michael G. Franc

Upright

“Barack Obama and his friends in the mainstream media, so called, can’t believe that anyone could vote against someone as wonderful as he is (and they are). Only a bigot would vote against such a wonderful president. … Sixteen states have offered Democratic voters an alternative to Barack Obama, either an actual candidate, ‘Uncommitted,’ or an opportunity to write in someone’s name. So far 15 percent of those Democratic voters have done so. In five states where there has been an actual opponent, 27 percent voted against the president. In New Hampshire, 1 Democrat in 10 wrote in an alternative. Twenty percent of North Carolina Democrats voted for ‘Uncommitted.’ That’s a lot of ‘bigots.'” –Washington Times editor emeritus Wesley Pruden ……MORE HERE

READ FURTHER:

Why Did Obama Lose his Base?

Greed belongs to those who have NOT … not to those who have!

Tags

baby boomers, Capitalism, Existentialism, greed, the "ME" generation, Union bosses

There sure are a few angry & uneducated Americans out there who haven’t a shred of understanding how Capitalism works. I’m not sure I should be the one to attempt to rectify that situation because I have a tendency to over-simplify things … like reducing them to their lowest common denominator >>> Anyone remember that? The lowest common denominator? I digress …

For many of us growing up in America, our first brush with Capitalism is the Lemonade stand we do for girl or boy scouts or helping out with a school or church (or synagogue) bake sale or rummage sale. Yup! THAT is Capitalism, my friends, pure & simple! Create a product or service, find a market, sell your service or product at a price the market can bear, reap the rewards, use some to continue or build the business, the rest is PROFIT. Please notice, profit is NOT a 4 letter word! You worked for it; you earned it. If you sell enough lemonade that you need a helper, then you share the PROFIT with that helper in some way (this is “overhead” – the cost of running the business). If you have a good product/service and if the price is right, your business will grow and more helpers will be needed. If, on the other hand, the product/service is NOT good or the price is NOT correct, your business will fail. From Main street to Wall Street, this is how capitalism works. On Wall Street, however, the business has achieved huge success because the owner has made good decisions, provides a Good product/service at an excellent price, but the concept is the same.

What happened somewhere along the way, is really not as complicated as many have said. It’s simple GREED! Union bosses, notoriously corrupt for decades, charge Union members DUES – meant as insurance in case of strikes, to cover the cost of … uh, Union bosses, etc. The vast majority of Union contracts include pensions. The Union members never knew when the pensions started that funding them would soon be a very real issue, but … no worries, every Union member deserves 30 days vacation, full medical benefits, dental, 401K … etc! Again, the majority of Union workers never gave a thought to where all this was coming from … who was paying? Then sometime in the 70’s, people started to ask.

So greed drove Union bosses to levy contracts with pensions without funding. OOOOPS! In the meantime, Corporate CEO’s, with an eye on the bottom line, began to get wise to the unreasonable cost of Union employees, and began to move jobs overseas. Union bosses drove the price of steel, for example, significantly beyond what the market could bear. As a result, steel mills shut down, jobs were shipped overseas because the product could be made cheaper there. It is CAPITALISM = all about the bottom line! Now, if the Union bosses had the foresight to promote EXCELLENCE in the product or service, a slightly higher price wouldn’t have been an issue, but most of us realized that Honda, and Suzuki, and Panasonic, and Sony … actually put out a better product AND cost less – at least in the 60’s – 70’s.

What has happened in the last few decades? More of the same. the Rich get richer because they know how to do it, they know how to provide a product, how to market a product, how to price a product. They are willing to work long hours, in odd places around the clock and around the nation, or even the globe to push their product/service. At some point, it is no longer about the money, but about the “deal!” The high rollers, as we might call them, are all about the “deal,” the bargaining, the trying to out-smart, out-think, out-gamble the other players. GREED? Not really! Greed belongs to those who have NOT … not to those who have!

The turmoil now … the unrest, the angst against the RICH? All based on … you guessed it, GREED! Because Existentialism has been the religion of choice for colleges and universities since the 60’s – maybe earlier, a large segment of our population had their heads filled with the hopelessness and purposelessness that fills what some call good literature. People, however, cannot survive long without a purpose, so … ENTER … well, we can call it SELF-pity, SELF-loathing, or SELF-destruction. After all, we were the “ME” generation. We were ripe for re-programming! In creeps the socialist “fairness” theories. In walks the misplaced anger. Frankly, I think maybe some of us were moving in the phase of indestructibility, thinking America had become indestructible! America could handle our angst no matter how we screwed things up!

Whatever our thoughts, after the “Establishment” was been torn down, we found out there was some value in that Establishment! We wanted the peace and serenity our parents knew. No, not world peace, but inner peace – peace with ones SELF!

Found it yet? If you’re chasing your tail for a bigger bone, or bigger piece of the proverbial pie, I can tell you it will not satisfy! Nothing, no fancy car, no mansion, no gorgeous clothes can FIX what’s broken until you and I come to grips and admit something IS broken. If I am not content with who I am,

A> It is my own fault/responsibility, and

B> No one can make me content.

It is something You and I must do for ourselves. If we manage to conquer this, GREED will not be an issue any longer. And that’s my 2 bits for today!

One of the most dangerous beliefs in western thought is that STUFF and the accumulation of such is the measure of success (or contentment!)

Success consists of going from failure to failure
without loss of enthusiasm.
Winston Churchill

Federal Government Ad: Get In Shape With Food Stamps

President Obama wants not only to get as many people dependent on our nanny government as possible, but at the same time, break the system by flooding it!

Can you believe this? We have a government ad, paid for by the tax payers, to promote food stamps. Worse than that it leads one to believe that food stamps aid in one’s fitness that can actually help you lose weight. Tax payer ads are bad enough, but if the Obama administration is going to waste the tax payers money with promotional ads with the debt this country faces, at least have ads that promote getting a job, or getting off drugs, but please don’t waste our tax money promoting food stamps. Remember this ad isn’t telling someone in need how to apply for food stamps, or where they can get food stamps. This ad is implying food stamps are a good thing to strive for. The two ladies discussion at the end of the ad was sickening. They were laughing when they said: “oh, you get food stamps too.” Like that was something to be proud of.

I am not saying in this post that people in true need should not receive some aid to get food they can’t otherwise get. All I am saying in this post, this should not be something the government promotes. What the Obama administration should be doing is getting out of the way of the private sector so jobs can be created. Then there could be an ad telling people how to get off food stamps because of the good jobs available. I’m not holding my breath on that ad.

As Fox News contributor Wayne Rogers said on the “Cashin’ In” segment, the worst part of this ad is that “the tax payers are paying for an ad that promotes something the tax payers are also paying for.” READ MORE

WATCH BECK’S EPIC RADIO SEGMENT AFTER HEARING TAXPAYER-FUNDED FOOD STAMP ADS

Maybe you’ve heard food stamp public service announcements before. Maybe you haven’t. But when Glenn Beck did on Tuesday, he couldn’t contain himself.

Beck’s co-host Pat Gray brought up the commercials on Beck’s radio show. While the commercials have been around since 2008 — with the help of your tax dollars — the Beck radio team couldn’t resist having some fun with the spots after Gray heard them in the car recently.

In the taxpayer-funded radio commercials, you can hear paid actors talk about how they are “making a healthy meal together with a little help from SNAP [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program],” or how the program “helps you eat right when money’s tight.” READ MORE

As Glenn said on the air, government assistance is kinda like heroin addiction. Once you’re hooked, it’s hard to shake loose because there’s an art of us that enjoys FREE STUFF and because we all feel just a little bit “entitled!”

It’s GOVERNMENT vs LIBERTY

Can’t trust both!

A Tale of Two High School Students

TEXAS STUDENT CHALLENGES SCHOOL’S POLICY
OF STANDING DURING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

A student at Cypress Springs High School in Cypress, Tex., says he’s being “singled out” by his teachers because he wouldn’t stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, according to KHOU.com.

“It’s very uncomfortable,” said Ray Jones. “I’m wondering what they’re going to say next.”

The trouble started last month on a day Jones decided to jog to school. According to his mother, the 17-year old was so wiped out by his run that he was incapable of standing for the nine seconds it takes to say the Pledge.

“He was tired, dripping with sweat, exhausted,” LaTonya Ellison said. “He just, on that particular day, did not feel like standing up.” READ MORE

The above student was just too tired to stand for the Pledge, and apparently, there will be no penalty for this now that his mom has written a “note” excusing him from the requirement … The student below was exhausted and failed to sow up for school and is being made an example of by a left-leaning judge.

HONOR STUDENT JAILED FOR MISSING SCHOOL:
ASK THE JUDGE TO CANCEL HER FINE & SENTENCING!

Diane Tran isn’t like most seventeen-year-old girls her age. Sure, there are many honors students taking dual credit U.S. History, dual credit English Literacy, College Algebra, and Spanish Language AP. Sure, there are some who work part time and full time jobs like Diane does at a dry cleaners and a wedding venue.

But, since Diane’s parents have moved away, Diane does all of this to support herself and her two siblings.

For a student facing these challenges, a teacher or authority figure should have reached out to her and made sure she didn’t slip through the cracks. Despite her situation, she’s not just an extraordinary worker and student, she’s an extraordinary human being with a fighting spirit. MORE HERE

YOUR THOUGHTS???

Individuality vs the Collective

Tags

Collective, Divide and conquer, individual, liberty

The history of the United States of America is written in the lives of remarkable people who believed each individual was endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. The fledgling nation, after the War for Independence, sought to provide safety for settlers and travelers, availability of commerce for merchants, and no restrictions on trade or worship. In essence, their idea was to permit each individual the liberty to chase his or her own dreams, to build his own kingdom.

For the last 236 years, that has been America. Each individual bore the responsibility and rewards of achieving his or her own dreams, and also the consequences of failure. Wars have been fought to preserve the individual’s right to pursue happiness and to free people from the tyranny of governments’ attempt to control the people, sometimes ruthlessly. Immigrants from many nations over the decades endured harsh difficulties to get the “chance” America offered and arrived in the thousands.

Today, in America, we stand on a precipice. For the most part, our current Congress and White House, with only a handful of exceptions, are owned by higher corporate/political/ideological powers. These invisible powers govern “collectively” and push the “global” agenda at the expense of the individual. Notice the antipathy raised recently between Right and Left, between gay and straight, between rich and poor, between generations, races, and college/no-college groups. With the help of a lap-dog media, the various groups – the “collectives” – have been turned against one another. Divide and conquer! The ideology that the collective (the group) is superior to the individual is working out of the White House. President Obama is not concerned with the individual rights guaranteed us in our Constitution, but believes he and his “disciples” are smarter and know better what is best for America and Americans. Hard to believe, but true.

OUR DECISION: Are we Individuals who seek autonomy to make our own decisions, and pursue our own dreams? Or are we a “collective” incapable of taking care of ourselves? The results of Election 2012 reveal the frightening truth: we chose to be a “collective” submitted to the rule of a would-be dictator.

As Americans, we have to right to “correct” our government when it gets out of hand and over extends its power. We can do this by voting out those with whom we disagree. At this point in time, because of the depth of corruption, it will take time and deliberate acuity to dispose of all lethargic or self-serving incumbents, impose term limits, and start fresh. We must also realize other options may be necessary.

I urge you today, as we honor those who have fallen in service to the cause of Freedom, to cling with tenacity to the liberties guaranteed by our Constitution, to honor the fallen by matching their willingness to engage in the process of our Constitutional Republic.

American Minutemen – Armed and ready to support & defend the Constitution of the United States of America

“Individualism regards man — every man — as an independent, sovereign entity who possesses an inalienable right to his own life, a right derived from his nature as a rational being. Individualism holds that a civilized society, or any form of association, cooperation or peaceful co-existence among men, can be achieved only on the basis of the recognition of individual rights — and that a group, as such, has no rights other than the individual rights of its members.” — Ayn Rand HERE

READ MORE:

The American Self

Defining Personal Freedom and our National Identity

COLLECTIVISM vs. INDIVIDUALISM

Does the USA Still have a Legal North Star?

PROGRESS vs US CONSTITUTION

From Belief to Conviction: I Believe Freedom is Worth Fighting for! Do You?

Never Forget

Tags

Independence Day, July 4th, Memorial Day, Veterans' Day

A Memorial Day Challenge

Tags

Memorial Day 2012

It’s one thing to REMEMBER the sacrifice of others … But, you know, these folks were willing to give everything – even their very lives to preserve the FREEDOMS set forth in our Constitution! The pathetic part is we sit by and watch, many without even noticing, as these very FREEDOMS are stripped away by powerful men & women who have lost sight of their Oath and their responsibility!

On this Memorial Day, I challenge you (and me) to rise to the challenge and Match the sacrifice, the commitment of our Veterans, Active Duty Military, and First Responders by getting involved! For our form of government to work well, the PEOPLE need to be engaged and informed in the effort for FREEDOM.

The FY2013 NDAA and Domestic Detention—Now With More Misdirection

Tags

FY2012 NDAA, Gohmert Amendment, NDAA 2013

By Steve Vladeck
Thursday, May 17, 2012 at 12:03 AM

Ben is a far better wordsmith than I—”a little cowardly” communicates a lot more in a lot less than my post from Tuesday afternoon about why the House Armed Services Committee’s version of the FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act does absolutely nothing to ameliorate the domestic detention concerns voiced from both ends of the political spectrum in response to the FY2012 NDAA. Moreover, I think Ben hits the nail on the head in suggesting with respect to the HASC bill that “its very purpose is to be inconsequential.” But it’s not just that the language in the HASC version of the FY2013 NDAA is designed to be inconsequential; it only works if it can at once (1) be inconsequential; and (2) look like it does a great deal. Without (2), one couldn’t argue that there’s simply no need for proposals like the Smith-Amash amendment (of course, one might still object to such proposals on substantive grounds, but alas, that’s another matter).

It seems that the secret may be out:

An amendment being proposed by Rep. Louis Gohmert is rumored to be circulating as a suggested “fix” to the Chairman’s Mark—as doing what the original bill did not do, i.e., adequately protecting the rights of individuals within the United States. On my reading, the Gohmert Amendment makes three material changes to the Chairman’s Mark:

• It narrows the scope of the statutory habeas protection to individuals “lawfully in the United States when detained,” as opposed to those “detained in the United States.”
• It adds a new notification provision requiring that the President notify Congress within 48 hours of subjecting to military detention an individual “lawfully in the United States when detained.”
• It specifies that “A person who is lawfully in the United States when detained pursuant to the [AUMF] shall be allowed to file an application for habeas corpus relief in an appropriate district court not later than 30 days after the date on which such person is placed in military custody.”

Just to be clear, the Gohmert Amendment does nothing whatsoever to address the central objections to the Chairman’s Mark vis-a-vis domestic detention, which are that it (1) merely provides by statute a remedy that is already available to individuals detained within the United States; and (2) says nothing about the circumstances in which individuals might actually be subject to military detention when arrested within the territorial United States (that is, whether individuals using the provided-for remedy might actually prevail). Anyone within the United States who was subject to military detention before the FY2013 NDAA would be subject to it afterwards, as well, at least under the Chairman’s Mark (and with or without the Gohmert Amendment).

Moreover, in my view, the Gohmert Amendment actually makes things worse in two very significant respects: First, it introduces uncertainty regarding whether individuals arrested within the United States but out of immigration status are entitled to pursue habeas relief (never mind the countless immigration cases where such relief has historically been available—and the compelling constitutional arguments supporting that jurisprudence). Second, the 30-day provision would arguably allow the government to preclude a detainee’s access to court (or counsel) for 30 days, whereas under current law, the detainee may file the moment he is “in custody under or by color of the authority of the United States.”

As I wrote on Tuesday, the only way to address the concerns folks have about the potential domestic application of the AUMF and the NDAA is to do so explicitly by delineating with precision who may, and who may not, be subjected to military detention when arrested within the territorial United States. Whatever else one might say about the Smith-Amash amendment, it does exactly what the Chairman’s Mark, the Gohmert Amendment, and a host of the other proposals on the table refuse to do: It takes this central substantive issue seriously.

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES ASAP!!!

READ MORE:

Virginia attempts to nullify the National Defense Authorization Act

Obama’s Broken Promises

NDAA 2013: Now Featuring Propaganda And War With Iran

NDAA 2013: Congress approves domestic deceptive propaganda