Will Chris Christie step up and do the right thing? Dear Lord, I hope so!
I know Christie keeps saying he is not going to run in 2012, that it's not the time for him, that he's working to fix New Jersey first, blah, blah, blah. These rationales in times of stability for an up and coming political leader would be valid but time is not on Christie's side. More importantly, time is not on America's side much less New Jersey's.
Christie said himself that "leadership is not about waiting." So why would he wait to lead his country back from the brink of disaster when he knows he has a needed plan to implement now? He continues to fall back on, "you have to feel it in your heart and mind that you're ready."
Governor Christie, may I have a word in private with you?... Chris, dude, you're sounding like a groom getting cold feet. You are ready! If you want a New Jersey to exist that you would even recognize in the next 10 years, you better snap out of it and be the man. Remember, leadership is not about waiting.
Comb your hair, straighten your bow tie and get the hell out there to the alter where you belong. America is standing at the end of the aisle waiting to walk toward you (and she ain't getting any younger).
Chris, we all heard you. There is no other way to interpret it. Your latest speech was an out and out sincere proposal to America. A long engagement is no longer an option for the old gal and you know it.
I'm a crier, I admit it. But it could well be up to Chris Christie whether my tears are those of joy for a wedding or tears of sorrow at our country's funeral. Do the right thing, Christie. America has picked out the dress she wants to wear for you and I assure you, it's not a black one.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Public Education Schools Me On The Art Of The Shakedown
All of my children are in Catholic schools which is my choice. I am not happy that the government uses my local and state tax dollars to fund public government-engineered education but that is the current law and so, my husband and I elect to pay extra to send our children to a school with discipline, structure, and the open discussion of God.
Recently I went to see my daughter play basketball against a local public high school team. This was on a week night, not a particularly special game, but one thing was different than any of the games I'd attended this season. For the first time I was charged ADMISSION to see a JV Girls high school game with the proceeds going to support this PUBLIC SCHOOL.
Not only did I have to pay admission but so did my other daughter who came to cheer on her sister. There was no student rate for her since she didn't attend public school (though I certainly pay taxes for her to). So now I'm in deep for two admission fees to a JV Girls basketball game. My daughter is a good player, but are you kidding me? Though $10 is not going to keep me from feeding my children this week, it's the principle behind all of this.
To add another objection to this issue, for a public school parent who may well be financially strapped, this admission fee is conceivably hindering their ability to support their child. And the public schools wonder why they have parental participation issues? This is liberal hypocrisy at work, my friends.
To give you an idea of how obscene and shiftless this scam is, one of the mothers from my daughter's team showed up to the public school game with less than TWO MINUTES left to play. She was coming from work and knew she wasn't going to see much, if any of the game but wanted to be there to pick her daughter up so her daughter wouldn't have to return to our school on the team bus. Would you believe the public school wanted to still charge this mother full admission price with less than two minutes to go in the game?
The Catholic high school that my children attend have games going on in their gym all nights of the week and weekends but never, not once, not even during Catholic schools week has admission been charged. Our school is certainly far from being flush with cash yet gouging a parent who wants to see their child play just does not seem right.
What exactly are we getting for our tax dollars? In a time when public schools are getting more funding than they ever have, they resort to parasitic tactics rather than doing what the rest of us do, live within our means. What exactly are these public schools doing with the gobs of money they receive? The gym that I paid $10 to sit in was filthy, and the restrooms could only be described as the Black Hole of Calcutta.
When are we all going to wake up and realize our government is committing grand larceny on We The People? The test score standings in our public schools are horrendous but we pay more. The ideology that is spoon fed to our youth in these institutions borders on intellectual perversion and we pay more. Not all but in far too many of the public schools, students are in physical danger on a daily basis with metal detectors and guards walking the halls, yet we pay more to enable these sorts of environments to continue?
Government has NO BUSINESS in the education of our youth. They've had their chance for several decades. The product they provide simply sucks. We pay more and get less. What is the government's solution? For selfish citizens to give more money to the very people who have mucked this up in the first place? Come on!
Americans, we must take back our schools. When a public school with steady streams of public funds sees fit to charge parents admission to an ordinary sporting event while a privately funded financially lean school doesn't, something stinks in Denmark and it's not the gym socks.
Recently I went to see my daughter play basketball against a local public high school team. This was on a week night, not a particularly special game, but one thing was different than any of the games I'd attended this season. For the first time I was charged ADMISSION to see a JV Girls high school game with the proceeds going to support this PUBLIC SCHOOL.
Not only did I have to pay admission but so did my other daughter who came to cheer on her sister. There was no student rate for her since she didn't attend public school (though I certainly pay taxes for her to). So now I'm in deep for two admission fees to a JV Girls basketball game. My daughter is a good player, but are you kidding me? Though $10 is not going to keep me from feeding my children this week, it's the principle behind all of this.
To add another objection to this issue, for a public school parent who may well be financially strapped, this admission fee is conceivably hindering their ability to support their child. And the public schools wonder why they have parental participation issues? This is liberal hypocrisy at work, my friends.
To give you an idea of how obscene and shiftless this scam is, one of the mothers from my daughter's team showed up to the public school game with less than TWO MINUTES left to play. She was coming from work and knew she wasn't going to see much, if any of the game but wanted to be there to pick her daughter up so her daughter wouldn't have to return to our school on the team bus. Would you believe the public school wanted to still charge this mother full admission price with less than two minutes to go in the game?
The Catholic high school that my children attend have games going on in their gym all nights of the week and weekends but never, not once, not even during Catholic schools week has admission been charged. Our school is certainly far from being flush with cash yet gouging a parent who wants to see their child play just does not seem right.
What exactly are we getting for our tax dollars? In a time when public schools are getting more funding than they ever have, they resort to parasitic tactics rather than doing what the rest of us do, live within our means. What exactly are these public schools doing with the gobs of money they receive? The gym that I paid $10 to sit in was filthy, and the restrooms could only be described as the Black Hole of Calcutta.
When are we all going to wake up and realize our government is committing grand larceny on We The People? The test score standings in our public schools are horrendous but we pay more. The ideology that is spoon fed to our youth in these institutions borders on intellectual perversion and we pay more. Not all but in far too many of the public schools, students are in physical danger on a daily basis with metal detectors and guards walking the halls, yet we pay more to enable these sorts of environments to continue?
Government has NO BUSINESS in the education of our youth. They've had their chance for several decades. The product they provide simply sucks. We pay more and get less. What is the government's solution? For selfish citizens to give more money to the very people who have mucked this up in the first place? Come on!
Americans, we must take back our schools. When a public school with steady streams of public funds sees fit to charge parents admission to an ordinary sporting event while a privately funded financially lean school doesn't, something stinks in Denmark and it's not the gym socks.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
What's In A Name?
Following my recent posting entertaining the idea of Donald Trump as America's next president, I had an interesting conversation with my mother. I had not gotten her take on "The Donald" before my post but was pleased that her sense of him was the same as mine.
For anyone who knows my mother, she has been, is, and will always be a person who shoots from the hip. 99.999% of the time I've found her instincts about people to be dead on (at times, to my dismay).
She had thought through the Donald Trump notion to the point of already picking his perfect running mate, that being Col. Allen West, Florida's new Republican Congressman from the 22nd district. My mom made the case why West would be the ultimate compliment to Trump with West's stellar military service and calm, easy confidence that only a first rate military man is graced with. The gravitas of this combination would be overwhelming.
The more I thought of this ticket, the more I too believed in it's brilliance. A Donald Trump/Allen West ticket would reduce an Obama/Biden ticket to little more than Tweedles Dee&Dumber. The final selling point for me came when I looked up the meaning of both men's names. Having a brother named "Donald" I was aware of it meaning "great chief". The word "trump" in the dictionary had several variances of meanings all denoting a win with a trump along with one definition stating trump being a dependable and exemplary person. So far, so good.
Upon looking up the name "Allen", it too was promising with the simple but poetic meaning of "ROCK". "West" seemed obvious with it's directional relation to America being the epitome of all things "west" however a certain definition amongst the directional citings jumped out at me. The definition stated "west" as meaning the noncommunist countries of Europe and America. I suppose I always assumed that when the term "west" is used but the fact "noncommunist" is specifically used has greater weight in this "progressive" climate of "change" more than ever. Further down, "west" also relates to the liturgies of or relating to the Roman Catholic or Protestant segment of Christianity. Coincidence? That's for Republicans to pick and America to decide.
If there's truth in a name, and Republicans choose two men to run in 2012, one who is a GREAT dependable CHIEF capable of winning over any card played matched with a ROCK that exemplifies all things noncommunist, the Republicans will take the White House and America will take a huge sigh of relief as she is released from the shackles of progressive bondage and restored to being the country where men live the bold ideals of self-responsibility and self-determination once again.
For anyone who knows my mother, she has been, is, and will always be a person who shoots from the hip. 99.999% of the time I've found her instincts about people to be dead on (at times, to my dismay).
She had thought through the Donald Trump notion to the point of already picking his perfect running mate, that being Col. Allen West, Florida's new Republican Congressman from the 22nd district. My mom made the case why West would be the ultimate compliment to Trump with West's stellar military service and calm, easy confidence that only a first rate military man is graced with. The gravitas of this combination would be overwhelming.
The more I thought of this ticket, the more I too believed in it's brilliance. A Donald Trump/Allen West ticket would reduce an Obama/Biden ticket to little more than Tweedles Dee&Dumber. The final selling point for me came when I looked up the meaning of both men's names. Having a brother named "Donald" I was aware of it meaning "great chief". The word "trump" in the dictionary had several variances of meanings all denoting a win with a trump along with one definition stating trump being a dependable and exemplary person. So far, so good.
Upon looking up the name "Allen", it too was promising with the simple but poetic meaning of "ROCK". "West" seemed obvious with it's directional relation to America being the epitome of all things "west" however a certain definition amongst the directional citings jumped out at me. The definition stated "west" as meaning the noncommunist countries of Europe and America. I suppose I always assumed that when the term "west" is used but the fact "noncommunist" is specifically used has greater weight in this "progressive" climate of "change" more than ever. Further down, "west" also relates to the liturgies of or relating to the Roman Catholic or Protestant segment of Christianity. Coincidence? That's for Republicans to pick and America to decide.
If there's truth in a name, and Republicans choose two men to run in 2012, one who is a GREAT dependable CHIEF capable of winning over any card played matched with a ROCK that exemplifies all things noncommunist, the Republicans will take the White House and America will take a huge sigh of relief as she is released from the shackles of progressive bondage and restored to being the country where men live the bold ideals of self-responsibility and self-determination once again.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Why America Should Consider Playing the TRUMP Card
Donald Trump spoke at CPAC this week and made a splash. That's not a surprise. Trump wouldn't do anything unless it was going to make headlines. Three years ago, I would have scoffed at the thought of Donald Trump being considered elected to any office, much less President. But in the last two years so many unthinkables have happened in America, the notion of a President Trump seems almost mundane.
Never did I think America would be laughed at. Hated, sure but never laughed at. The world is playing us for fools and all we seem to be doing is begging for more abuse. Our current leadership is taking us down a path that could permanently eradicate the American ideals of individual's rights and liberties.
We "free people" enjoy a mandate for health insurance whether we need it, want it, can afford it. TSA employees now legally grope honest citizens at will. Black panthers harass people at polling stations with no consequences and border guards are jailed for roughing up a drug smuggling illegal thug. A prohibition on one type of light bulb goes into effect while a toxic, dangerous, mercury laden green variety gets forced into American homes. Of course, technically you still have a choice...candles. It's good to be free.
To undo all of the damage Obama and the socialist agenda of the last 50 years has done to our country, we need a person of vast experience and zero reason to be a politician. Enter stage right, Donald Trump.
Though I don't think Trump is a staunch conservative across the board, he is fiscally. This is key since there is one aspect that needs to be addressed now or better, yesterday. As Clinton said, "It's the economy, stupid!" As opposed to Obama's more modern liberal, social justice cry of, "It's the stupid economy!"
Trump knows what to do to resuscitate this gasping free market. He would put us back in control of the China trade relationship by taxing Chinese goods until they fairly regulated their currency. He'd open up our country's natural oil and gas reserves causing an instant job boom as well as putting OPEC on notice. He would keep taxes low and ease corporate regulations allowing profits to rise and jobs created.
But not all is perfect regarding the Donald.
There are a few things that bug me about Trump:
His cotton candy comb-over
His brash egotistical manner
His insistence that he is always right
Here's what I like about Trump:
His cotton candy comb-over... because he doesn't give a damn, he likes it, so what
His brash egotistical manner... because he backs it up with real accomplishments
His insistence that he is always right...and because of it he will not bend to China, Iran, Korea or any other dictator scum
Several things about Donald Trump are an absolute given. Donald Trump will not let anything he's associated with financially fail. He is shrewd, worldly, and determined. If he is elected President he would never bow to another leader or apologize for America's ways. He would bring glory back to these United States. Trump will tell us the hard truths of what has to be done without concern about being re-elected.
Donald Trump does not have my vote yet but he's made me consider it, cotton candy comb-over and all. Besides, he's really the only possible candidate who could legitimately turn to Barack Obama and say, "You're fired."
By the way, Trump is right. Ron Paul could never get elected.
Never did I think America would be laughed at. Hated, sure but never laughed at. The world is playing us for fools and all we seem to be doing is begging for more abuse. Our current leadership is taking us down a path that could permanently eradicate the American ideals of individual's rights and liberties.
We "free people" enjoy a mandate for health insurance whether we need it, want it, can afford it. TSA employees now legally grope honest citizens at will. Black panthers harass people at polling stations with no consequences and border guards are jailed for roughing up a drug smuggling illegal thug. A prohibition on one type of light bulb goes into effect while a toxic, dangerous, mercury laden green variety gets forced into American homes. Of course, technically you still have a choice...candles. It's good to be free.
To undo all of the damage Obama and the socialist agenda of the last 50 years has done to our country, we need a person of vast experience and zero reason to be a politician. Enter stage right, Donald Trump.
Though I don't think Trump is a staunch conservative across the board, he is fiscally. This is key since there is one aspect that needs to be addressed now or better, yesterday. As Clinton said, "It's the economy, stupid!" As opposed to Obama's more modern liberal, social justice cry of, "It's the stupid economy!"
Trump knows what to do to resuscitate this gasping free market. He would put us back in control of the China trade relationship by taxing Chinese goods until they fairly regulated their currency. He'd open up our country's natural oil and gas reserves causing an instant job boom as well as putting OPEC on notice. He would keep taxes low and ease corporate regulations allowing profits to rise and jobs created.
But not all is perfect regarding the Donald.
There are a few things that bug me about Trump:
His cotton candy comb-over
His brash egotistical manner
His insistence that he is always right
Here's what I like about Trump:
His cotton candy comb-over... because he doesn't give a damn, he likes it, so what
His brash egotistical manner... because he backs it up with real accomplishments
His insistence that he is always right...and because of it he will not bend to China, Iran, Korea or any other dictator scum
Several things about Donald Trump are an absolute given. Donald Trump will not let anything he's associated with financially fail. He is shrewd, worldly, and determined. If he is elected President he would never bow to another leader or apologize for America's ways. He would bring glory back to these United States. Trump will tell us the hard truths of what has to be done without concern about being re-elected.
Donald Trump does not have my vote yet but he's made me consider it, cotton candy comb-over and all. Besides, he's really the only possible candidate who could legitimately turn to Barack Obama and say, "You're fired."
By the way, Trump is right. Ron Paul could never get elected.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Chick-Fil-A...Anti-Gay? Or "Cheep" Leftist Play?
There is an effort in the leftist circles to make trouble for the successful fast food outfit, Chick-Fil-A. Apparently this company, a private enterprise in the United States of America, is brash enough to promote, of all things, CHRISTIAN VALUES! And it gets worse. One franchise went so far to DONATE some chicken sandwiches to a PRO-FAMILY organization! This must be STOPPED...according to the socialist, atheist, sniveling cowards on the left.
On a daily, perhaps hourly basis, Americans are bombarded with media messages that glorify the gay lifestyle, presenting it as pervasive and as common place as a straight existence. The gay lifestyle is by far the minority practice of sexual orientation but that fact is buried by what is seen and read in the American media.
Ironically, if a person or business has a Christian, Pro-Traditional values bent, THEY are marginalized. They are played as the oddball, out-of-step, backward thinking tool. The American media spin presents Christian values as a small fringe group who are the minority that SHOULD be condemned.
If a private organization like Disney can have "Gay Days" in their parks (which is their right) then a private company like Chick-Fil-A should be just as welcome to promote Christian values and give free sandwiches, corporate sponsorship or scholarships to whomever they chose. When Disney promotes a day for gay people, that does not equate them to being anti-heterosexual, does it?
Chick-Fil-A can promote Christian values and has the freedom to support traditional groups who champion a mother/father family unit WITHOUT being Anti-Gay. Why does the left want to conflate support of tradition as proof of discrimination against gays? Methinks the left can not win if they have to face honest examples of lifestyle choices. The left feigns open-mindedness while in fact being the most suppressive, one-mind, movement there is.
Chick-Fil-A is not a Government agency and has the legal right to be selective where their profits go. Their corporate tax dollars are SURELY going to fund things the company would probably never support like Planned Parenthood but that's the law regarding tax dollars. From what I know, Chick-Fil-A pays their taxes.
The left is against all Government funding of organizations that hold Christian beliefs but if the worship is the religion of secularism, in the world of the hypocritical left, that's okay to take peoples tax money to fund. For pimps and under aged prostitutes, the left offers helpful advice to continue operation. Protection of minors at the hands of pedophiles? Not so much.
The left can squawk all they want against Chick-Fil-A and companies like them but it would be nice if reality were used in their complaints. My first request would be for the left to make up their minds! Are they pro-gay or pro-Islamist extremists? The same left wing activist can be read or heard within the same day backing both causes.
Hello! The two can not be supported by the same person with any amount of intellectual honesty or mental stability. What's next, a ban on all B-B-Q joints since they discriminate against Muslims by daring to serve PORK? This is why I question what is REALLY at the heart of the Left's duplicitous "support" for gays, Islamist extremists, stealth abortion outfits (where minority girls and babies are the number one clients). But remember, the left is always working for the benefit of minorities and women. NOT!
The only thing that is clear is the fact the left is deathly afraid of the Christian message. The left knows as long as a Christian mindset exists to the level it does now, they will never control the masses like the cattle they imagine the masses to be. The left knows that no matter how cool and slick they package their agenda, the juxtaposition of a leftist role model such as Hugo Chavez, Barney Frank, Cindy Sheehan or any of the Hollywood train wrecks du jour, against the lives led by people such as the golfer, David Feherty, actor, Gary Sinise, Florida Congressman, Allen West or South Dakota Congresswoman, Kristi Noem, is a no-win for the left.
Many more people, not all, but a considerable majority of Americans would chose to be like the later than the former. Of course, there are plenty of "Christians" in the public eye who are not so admirable but they are either phonies using the cache of Christian to make money or honest Christians who are struggling with their personal demons (who isn't?) as a celebrity for all to see.
At the end of the day, the left is free to be WRONG when they paint Chick-Fil-A as Anti-Gay. Being wrong is not a crime. Most Americans know that being for Christian values does not equal discrimination against Gays just as pro-Gay action should not be viewed as Anti-Traditional Family. Let the cases for all stances be honestly presented. Free-thinking people will make their own determinations from the facts.
As for me, all this has made me hungry. Chicken sandwich here I come! Of course, if I discover any of the chickens used to make the sandwiches were actually lesbian chickens, I may have to re-evaluate this whole argument. Cluck off!
On a daily, perhaps hourly basis, Americans are bombarded with media messages that glorify the gay lifestyle, presenting it as pervasive and as common place as a straight existence. The gay lifestyle is by far the minority practice of sexual orientation but that fact is buried by what is seen and read in the American media.
Ironically, if a person or business has a Christian, Pro-Traditional values bent, THEY are marginalized. They are played as the oddball, out-of-step, backward thinking tool. The American media spin presents Christian values as a small fringe group who are the minority that SHOULD be condemned.
If a private organization like Disney can have "Gay Days" in their parks (which is their right) then a private company like Chick-Fil-A should be just as welcome to promote Christian values and give free sandwiches, corporate sponsorship or scholarships to whomever they chose. When Disney promotes a day for gay people, that does not equate them to being anti-heterosexual, does it?
Chick-Fil-A can promote Christian values and has the freedom to support traditional groups who champion a mother/father family unit WITHOUT being Anti-Gay. Why does the left want to conflate support of tradition as proof of discrimination against gays? Methinks the left can not win if they have to face honest examples of lifestyle choices. The left feigns open-mindedness while in fact being the most suppressive, one-mind, movement there is.
Chick-Fil-A is not a Government agency and has the legal right to be selective where their profits go. Their corporate tax dollars are SURELY going to fund things the company would probably never support like Planned Parenthood but that's the law regarding tax dollars. From what I know, Chick-Fil-A pays their taxes.
The left is against all Government funding of organizations that hold Christian beliefs but if the worship is the religion of secularism, in the world of the hypocritical left, that's okay to take peoples tax money to fund. For pimps and under aged prostitutes, the left offers helpful advice to continue operation. Protection of minors at the hands of pedophiles? Not so much.
The left can squawk all they want against Chick-Fil-A and companies like them but it would be nice if reality were used in their complaints. My first request would be for the left to make up their minds! Are they pro-gay or pro-Islamist extremists? The same left wing activist can be read or heard within the same day backing both causes.
Hello! The two can not be supported by the same person with any amount of intellectual honesty or mental stability. What's next, a ban on all B-B-Q joints since they discriminate against Muslims by daring to serve PORK? This is why I question what is REALLY at the heart of the Left's duplicitous "support" for gays, Islamist extremists, stealth abortion outfits (where minority girls and babies are the number one clients). But remember, the left is always working for the benefit of minorities and women. NOT!
The only thing that is clear is the fact the left is deathly afraid of the Christian message. The left knows as long as a Christian mindset exists to the level it does now, they will never control the masses like the cattle they imagine the masses to be. The left knows that no matter how cool and slick they package their agenda, the juxtaposition of a leftist role model such as Hugo Chavez, Barney Frank, Cindy Sheehan or any of the Hollywood train wrecks du jour, against the lives led by people such as the golfer, David Feherty, actor, Gary Sinise, Florida Congressman, Allen West or South Dakota Congresswoman, Kristi Noem, is a no-win for the left.
Many more people, not all, but a considerable majority of Americans would chose to be like the later than the former. Of course, there are plenty of "Christians" in the public eye who are not so admirable but they are either phonies using the cache of Christian to make money or honest Christians who are struggling with their personal demons (who isn't?) as a celebrity for all to see.
At the end of the day, the left is free to be WRONG when they paint Chick-Fil-A as Anti-Gay. Being wrong is not a crime. Most Americans know that being for Christian values does not equal discrimination against Gays just as pro-Gay action should not be viewed as Anti-Traditional Family. Let the cases for all stances be honestly presented. Free-thinking people will make their own determinations from the facts.
As for me, all this has made me hungry. Chicken sandwich here I come! Of course, if I discover any of the chickens used to make the sandwiches were actually lesbian chickens, I may have to re-evaluate this whole argument. Cluck off!
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
The Bait (and Switch) of the Union
Allow me to begin on a positive note: the intermingling of D's and R's in the audience was a very good idea. It cut way down on the annoying clapping, both in the number of interruptions as well as length of clamor. No matter what party is in office, that clapping stuff sucks. So, on that point, last night's SOTU address got a thumbs up from me.
Now to the speech itself. I found Obama's address to be one of two things, delusional or deceptive. Logic and intellectual honesty were given the night off while he spoke. Obama framed his vision with the rhetoric of American ingenuity, productivity, invention, the concept of achievement of any individuals dream being possible here in America, unlike any other country on earth. What American doesn't support these ideals?
Obama, however, employed these inspiring words (in Reaganesque fashion) to conversely make the argument for BIGGER Government, MORE tax dollar spending, LESS personal choice (ala Jimmy Carter). With not much stealth, he uses code words to describe these actions, ie, protection of the public equals BIGGER Government, investment equals tax dollar spending or worse borrowed Chinese money, alternative energy sources equals less personal choice and forced higher prices to heat homes, drive cars, buy groceries, turn the lights on. What American DOES support these ideals?
With all of Obama's clever wording, he still came off like an alcoholic justifying that next round of mixed drinks for himself and EVERYONE in the house. He pretends that substituting a yummier cocktail of peach schnapps and vodka for the much harder to swallow scotch, neat, as addressing the addiction problem. Mr. President, a pay freeze at the obscene levels you've already raised them to is NOT a solution to the addiction problem of Government spending. Obama's ploy is clear. If the addict can get us all hooked then he no longer has to deal with roadblocks to his and now our shared poison.
Obama is not to blame for our addictions to entitlements, pensions and the fairytale of a Government who takes care of us in the most excellent manner. Bush, Clinton, even Reagan had a hand, to differing degrees, in creating this crippling addictive scenario as well as presidents going back as far as Woodrow Wilson. Obama has only taken the role of Pusher to an exponentially outrageous level at possibly the most dangerous time in history to do such.
Our president tells us all to go for the American dream, be entrepreneurs, innovate yet turns around and suggests millionaires should cough up the funds to "save our schools". With logic like that, who wants to EVER achieve millionaire status if it means you are to be painted as the evil success story, responsible for the poor staying poor?
No, it's GOVERNMENT that has robbed us all blind, kept the poor, poor, that enabled Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to pull off fraud so insipid, even the U.N. would blush. Did you know we TAX PAYERS are paying the legal fees to DEFEND the Fannie and Freddie Executives who defrauded...we, the tax payers? How dumb do they think we are? Maybe they're banking on the fact we were educated by the U.S. Government public school system that now needs evil millionaires to save it.
The Government has mis-managed our schools, not millionaires. It is the GOVERNMENT who has taken power away from parents and communities, turning our educational institutions into high priced day care centers where socialist theory is the only point of view presented. We don't need any regulations to protect the people from big business, it's our GOVERNMENT and their mind-numbing "free education" we need protection from. Even Obama wouldn't dare subject his daughters to the Government controlled education he pushes on the rest of us. The Government needs the reigning in, not free enterprise, not capitalism or successful individuals.
Obama spoke of creating jobs, cutting pork, transparency in Government as if he just came up with these ideas last night. Excuse me Mr. President but you promised all these things over two years ago but did just the opposite. The stimulus was a fiasco. Billions still sit, not funding anything, creating zero jobs yet our debt rises.
Cutting pork was not accomplished when Obama signed the Health care legislation, laden with very expensive, unnecessary, untraceable streams of waste, setting up state budgets to fail in the funding of these programs and our debt rises.
Transparency occurs in this administration only after the fact. Perhaps on this item Obama is being honest because he said on the new website we will be able to see where all the tax dollars are going, not where they are proposed to go. Providing transparency ahead of time is never good in socialist societies. That might give the people the ability to disagree and stop wasteful spending before it happens. And our debt rises.
I had to hold back laughter when he went into the whole SPUTNIK riff. He wants us to "do big things" like mind blowing advancements such as solar roof tiles, toxic mercury light bulbs, high speed trains (that can't ever be go over 70 mph due to the other train traffic on the rails but why bother with that little factoid) all the while he guts NASA, the very agency capable of "big things"... instead turning them into an agency assigned to promote Muslim self-esteem. Big things? Did Obama's literature teacher EVER explain the term irony to him? Just asking.
Obama used all the right words to mean all the wrong things. If he had started out saying, "Hello, I am Barack Obama, and I am a spendaholic, Fabian socialist, narcissistic front man", then, then I might have believed the rest of his long-winded pontification. Delusion or deceit. Which is it?
But again, that seating idea was really good.
Now to the speech itself. I found Obama's address to be one of two things, delusional or deceptive. Logic and intellectual honesty were given the night off while he spoke. Obama framed his vision with the rhetoric of American ingenuity, productivity, invention, the concept of achievement of any individuals dream being possible here in America, unlike any other country on earth. What American doesn't support these ideals?
Obama, however, employed these inspiring words (in Reaganesque fashion) to conversely make the argument for BIGGER Government, MORE tax dollar spending, LESS personal choice (ala Jimmy Carter). With not much stealth, he uses code words to describe these actions, ie, protection of the public equals BIGGER Government, investment equals tax dollar spending or worse borrowed Chinese money, alternative energy sources equals less personal choice and forced higher prices to heat homes, drive cars, buy groceries, turn the lights on. What American DOES support these ideals?
With all of Obama's clever wording, he still came off like an alcoholic justifying that next round of mixed drinks for himself and EVERYONE in the house. He pretends that substituting a yummier cocktail of peach schnapps and vodka for the much harder to swallow scotch, neat, as addressing the addiction problem. Mr. President, a pay freeze at the obscene levels you've already raised them to is NOT a solution to the addiction problem of Government spending. Obama's ploy is clear. If the addict can get us all hooked then he no longer has to deal with roadblocks to his and now our shared poison.
Obama is not to blame for our addictions to entitlements, pensions and the fairytale of a Government who takes care of us in the most excellent manner. Bush, Clinton, even Reagan had a hand, to differing degrees, in creating this crippling addictive scenario as well as presidents going back as far as Woodrow Wilson. Obama has only taken the role of Pusher to an exponentially outrageous level at possibly the most dangerous time in history to do such.
Our president tells us all to go for the American dream, be entrepreneurs, innovate yet turns around and suggests millionaires should cough up the funds to "save our schools". With logic like that, who wants to EVER achieve millionaire status if it means you are to be painted as the evil success story, responsible for the poor staying poor?
No, it's GOVERNMENT that has robbed us all blind, kept the poor, poor, that enabled Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to pull off fraud so insipid, even the U.N. would blush. Did you know we TAX PAYERS are paying the legal fees to DEFEND the Fannie and Freddie Executives who defrauded...we, the tax payers? How dumb do they think we are? Maybe they're banking on the fact we were educated by the U.S. Government public school system that now needs evil millionaires to save it.
The Government has mis-managed our schools, not millionaires. It is the GOVERNMENT who has taken power away from parents and communities, turning our educational institutions into high priced day care centers where socialist theory is the only point of view presented. We don't need any regulations to protect the people from big business, it's our GOVERNMENT and their mind-numbing "free education" we need protection from. Even Obama wouldn't dare subject his daughters to the Government controlled education he pushes on the rest of us. The Government needs the reigning in, not free enterprise, not capitalism or successful individuals.
Obama spoke of creating jobs, cutting pork, transparency in Government as if he just came up with these ideas last night. Excuse me Mr. President but you promised all these things over two years ago but did just the opposite. The stimulus was a fiasco. Billions still sit, not funding anything, creating zero jobs yet our debt rises.
Cutting pork was not accomplished when Obama signed the Health care legislation, laden with very expensive, unnecessary, untraceable streams of waste, setting up state budgets to fail in the funding of these programs and our debt rises.
Transparency occurs in this administration only after the fact. Perhaps on this item Obama is being honest because he said on the new website we will be able to see where all the tax dollars are going, not where they are proposed to go. Providing transparency ahead of time is never good in socialist societies. That might give the people the ability to disagree and stop wasteful spending before it happens. And our debt rises.
I had to hold back laughter when he went into the whole SPUTNIK riff. He wants us to "do big things" like mind blowing advancements such as solar roof tiles, toxic mercury light bulbs, high speed trains (that can't ever be go over 70 mph due to the other train traffic on the rails but why bother with that little factoid) all the while he guts NASA, the very agency capable of "big things"... instead turning them into an agency assigned to promote Muslim self-esteem. Big things? Did Obama's literature teacher EVER explain the term irony to him? Just asking.
Obama used all the right words to mean all the wrong things. If he had started out saying, "Hello, I am Barack Obama, and I am a spendaholic, Fabian socialist, narcissistic front man", then, then I might have believed the rest of his long-winded pontification. Delusion or deceit. Which is it?
But again, that seating idea was really good.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Diamonds Are Forever
I had a very interesting conversation with my teenagers recently. We were talking about how so many people who call themselves conservative or liberal or Christian, Muslim, etc. will profess the high ideals of their group yet turn around and live their own lives with disregard, even contempt for the ideals they publicly profess. This being so often the case, why should we believe, support, live by any doctrine whatsoever? Why not live each moment of life in a way that benefits a person the most personally rather than ever making a choice of morals over what results in immediate satisfaction or individual success? Why shouldn't we all be hedonists? At least we'd cease being hypocrites, right?
As a person who approaches life similar to a Libertarian philosophy, live and let live, I don't have a problem with any person choosing to be a hedonist. However, of the hedonists I've known, all resulted in self-destructive behaviors that did not end well for the hedonist nor those who surrounded them. So the question goes back to why do so many high-profile people profess the moral attributes of their group yet don't live their own lives as such? Does this mean the morals, beliefs and philosophies are false, pretend, worthless?
These are the questions we must all answer for ourselves. Most people attempt to find out the answers but make their first mistake when they begin their investigation by looking at those claiming to be the personification of the mindset. Many people investigating a particular mindset will judge the mindset, philosophy, belief, strictly by the actions of an individual rather than the substance of the thought.
Here's the metaphor I used with my children...If there exists a truly brilliant, flawless diamond and it is worn by a good person, does the good person make that diamond more precious? If the good person dies and the diamond is then worm by an evil person, does that evil person make the diamond less precious? The wearer of the diamond is not the point. The diamond was precious and brilliant before anyone wore it, good or bad and it remains the same diamond after the wearing is long over.
Further, does the diamond hold powers for the person who wears it? Ironically, the wearer or possessor of the diamond is the one least likely to benefit from its true worth. People often have the misconception that possessing something, like the flawless diamond, translates into their own superiority, their right or justification to control the lives of others. If that is the motive behind wearing the diamond, it will never truly serve the person who wears it. The power of the diamond is in the pure inspiration and appreciation of its beauty which the diamond alone possesses, not the wearer. Those who can witness the diamond, regardless of who is wearing it, and be awed by its brilliance, be inspired by its clarity but have the SELF control to NOT need to possess it or fawn over the person who currently wears it, these are the people who actually receive the precious gift the diamond offers.
Every now and then, there is a person who can wear the diamond with the true knowledge of why they are wearing it... not to enhance their own power but to provide more access to more people to witness the beauty and inspiration of the diamond. These wearers are called LEADERS.
Sadly, we have many, many more people today wearing the diamond as a means to dupe the ignorant innocent. Conflation of possession with authority over all those not in possession is the lie peddled now as it has been in times infinitum. These sort of wearers are called TYRANTS, DICTATORS, and an array of other titles that sound nicer but result in the same thing. These are the people who have never received the gift of SELF CONTROL. They are so lacking in SELF CONTROL that they become ravenous for the much easier false substitute, that being the perceived control over another human. Ironically, the more people they "control" the less satisfied the controllers become. Why? Because the control they have is imaginary and deep down, they know this. Talk about a vicious circle!
Crazy as it sounds, throngs of people believe in the lie that whomever wears the diamond IS superior. These people willingly submit themselves to the servitude of these egotistical scam artists with the hopes of falling into favor with the wearer, FALLING being the operative word. Unfortunately, there are also souls who unwillingly fall under the false control of diamond wearing scum. These victims become servants to the control freaks due to a host of reasons, i.e., lack of maturity, lack of access to the truth, lack of intelligence, to name a few. They do not know that there is only ONE type of actual control, that being self-control. All other forms of control are artificial. As long as a person retains their mind, they retain the prize their false masters truly want. A person's mind can only be controlled with the consent of the individual. Never forget that.
At the end of the day, each of us must use our own mind to look past the wearer of the diamond and examine the DIAMOND for its cut, clarity, carat, brilliance and authenticity.
NOTE: There's loads of cubic zirconium out there so take your time examining!
We must each decide for ourselves if we are inspired by a diamond's natural beauty, a beauty that existed before it was ever worn and will exist well after the last wearer takes their final breath. We are all free to look for the diamond, not to possess it necessarily but to behold it and accept its true gift...or reject it. Regardless of your individual choice, diamonds are forever, leaders and tyrants are not.
As a person who approaches life similar to a Libertarian philosophy, live and let live, I don't have a problem with any person choosing to be a hedonist. However, of the hedonists I've known, all resulted in self-destructive behaviors that did not end well for the hedonist nor those who surrounded them. So the question goes back to why do so many high-profile people profess the moral attributes of their group yet don't live their own lives as such? Does this mean the morals, beliefs and philosophies are false, pretend, worthless?
These are the questions we must all answer for ourselves. Most people attempt to find out the answers but make their first mistake when they begin their investigation by looking at those claiming to be the personification of the mindset. Many people investigating a particular mindset will judge the mindset, philosophy, belief, strictly by the actions of an individual rather than the substance of the thought.
Here's the metaphor I used with my children...If there exists a truly brilliant, flawless diamond and it is worn by a good person, does the good person make that diamond more precious? If the good person dies and the diamond is then worm by an evil person, does that evil person make the diamond less precious? The wearer of the diamond is not the point. The diamond was precious and brilliant before anyone wore it, good or bad and it remains the same diamond after the wearing is long over.
Further, does the diamond hold powers for the person who wears it? Ironically, the wearer or possessor of the diamond is the one least likely to benefit from its true worth. People often have the misconception that possessing something, like the flawless diamond, translates into their own superiority, their right or justification to control the lives of others. If that is the motive behind wearing the diamond, it will never truly serve the person who wears it. The power of the diamond is in the pure inspiration and appreciation of its beauty which the diamond alone possesses, not the wearer. Those who can witness the diamond, regardless of who is wearing it, and be awed by its brilliance, be inspired by its clarity but have the SELF control to NOT need to possess it or fawn over the person who currently wears it, these are the people who actually receive the precious gift the diamond offers.
Every now and then, there is a person who can wear the diamond with the true knowledge of why they are wearing it... not to enhance their own power but to provide more access to more people to witness the beauty and inspiration of the diamond. These wearers are called LEADERS.
Sadly, we have many, many more people today wearing the diamond as a means to dupe the ignorant innocent. Conflation of possession with authority over all those not in possession is the lie peddled now as it has been in times infinitum. These sort of wearers are called TYRANTS, DICTATORS, and an array of other titles that sound nicer but result in the same thing. These are the people who have never received the gift of SELF CONTROL. They are so lacking in SELF CONTROL that they become ravenous for the much easier false substitute, that being the perceived control over another human. Ironically, the more people they "control" the less satisfied the controllers become. Why? Because the control they have is imaginary and deep down, they know this. Talk about a vicious circle!
Crazy as it sounds, throngs of people believe in the lie that whomever wears the diamond IS superior. These people willingly submit themselves to the servitude of these egotistical scam artists with the hopes of falling into favor with the wearer, FALLING being the operative word. Unfortunately, there are also souls who unwillingly fall under the false control of diamond wearing scum. These victims become servants to the control freaks due to a host of reasons, i.e., lack of maturity, lack of access to the truth, lack of intelligence, to name a few. They do not know that there is only ONE type of actual control, that being self-control. All other forms of control are artificial. As long as a person retains their mind, they retain the prize their false masters truly want. A person's mind can only be controlled with the consent of the individual. Never forget that.
At the end of the day, each of us must use our own mind to look past the wearer of the diamond and examine the DIAMOND for its cut, clarity, carat, brilliance and authenticity.
NOTE: There's loads of cubic zirconium out there so take your time examining!
We must each decide for ourselves if we are inspired by a diamond's natural beauty, a beauty that existed before it was ever worn and will exist well after the last wearer takes their final breath. We are all free to look for the diamond, not to possess it necessarily but to behold it and accept its true gift...or reject it. Regardless of your individual choice, diamonds are forever, leaders and tyrants are not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)