Category Archives: National

Everything You Think About Conservative Millennials Is Wrong


millenial cat


  1. a person reaching young adulthood around the year 2000; a Generation Yer.
    “the industry brims with theories on what makes millennials tick”
Unless you live in the stone age, you probably hear this term daily, but the majority of people associate it with the lazy working class of twenty-somethings who likely have no direction in life and whom also lack respect for anyone who would identify as a baby boomer. Don’t lie. You know that’s how you think of them us. Those kids you don’t want on your lawn.
But they we are an integral part of the political game. As cliché as it sounds, they we are the future and at some point, the baby boomers will have to stop shunning them us. We see the world differently, but somewhere in the mix of labeling and the desire to be right because you’re older, you stopped listening and wrote us off as “not conservative enough”.

Allow me to offer a few examples.

Last week, I attended a Peach Pundit Immigration forum where the diverse panel actually included ‘one of us’. Chairman of the Georgia College Republicans, Will Kremer, made a point that resonated with me immensely. “When you talk about immigration reform, and you refer to these people as ‘invaders’, it turns us off. We grew up with these people, we went to school with them.”
It’s true. Right, wrong or indifferent, current protocol puts these children, sometimes anchor babies, in school with us millennials and so we don’t see them or their families as the delinquents society is painting them to be. We see them as humans first. It doesn’t mean we don’t want tighter immigration policy, that we don’t want to secure the border or enforce the laws on the books. Maybe our view could open your mind a little bit when it comes to discussion because we see it differently.

Next, consider gay marriage. I challenge you to find one millennial -liberal, conservative, libertarian or independent who lists gay marriage as their number one issue. I would put money on the fact that it isn’t even in the top 5. You think it’s the demise of our country, we care about our national debt, the student loan crisis and whether or not we will have a job post-college/grad school. We may have our personal views on it, but it’s not what’s driving us to the polls.millennials_and_cause_infographic
Also, we don’t see the over-criminalization of drugs as an abuse of power because we are all a bunch of pot heads. We see it for what it is: a pathway of destroying lives of youthful and first time offenders who will likely never “re-offend.” This has become a taboo talking point. Stop shutting us down as druggie good-for-nothings because we don’t think a marijuana offense should ruin a career path. We just see it differently.
Finally, we don’t really like war. Not because we don’t want the strongest military in the world or we’re any less patriotic, but because as a nation, we choose poorly and you’re going to die and we will have to pay for it. And much to your denial, we are pro-life.

I’m not saying that millennials are right about everything. Most of us know we still have a lot to learn. But our hearts and minds are still open so we see things differently. We grew up differently. We have a different level of compassion and we have different reasons for supporting candidates. We tend to pick issues over party affiliation, but only because you’re alienating us. We aren’t going anywhere, I promise, so we at least deserve a seat at the table.

3 Deaf Mice: Obama, the Court of Appeals & Local Law Enforcement

yes we scan

In the wake of the Court of Appeals decision which ruled that surveillance on wireless service such as a cell phones and other mobile devices required a warrant, specifically in cases where law enforcement agencies were tracking cell tower pings, there now seems to be even more to the story.

The Obama administration is advising local law enforcement agencies to keep everything on the hush hush regarding their surveillance equipment. Specifically, the administration has asked that details surrounding the functionality of the equipment remain “unknown” to the public. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the new technology is fairly unknown and with that unknown comes the uncertainty of whether or not it violates some Constitutional rights. (You know, that pesky 4th amendment.)

“These extreme secrecy efforts are in relation to very controversial, local government surveillance practices using highly invasive technology,” said Nathan Freed Wessler, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, in a statement to the Associated Press. “If public participation means anything, people should have the facts about what the government is doing to them.” The ACLU is currently fighting for the release of such documents and has spearheaded efforts to put pressure on Congress to rein in unconstitutional surveillance practices.

What many may find even more disturbing is the idea that the producers of such surveillance equipment designed this technology with secrecy clauses in regards to the FEC and have required local agencies to operate the equipment in cooperation with the FBI.

Is your tin foil hat buzzing just a little at this point?!

The FBI states that information cannot be shared because if it were, ‘they’ would no longer be able to “protect” us from terrorism. Yes. They really said that. Some states, such as Florida, have tried to trump the federal silencing through loose open-records laws, however, the U.S. Marshal’s Service confiscated the obtained documents.

So, to sum up…not only do we not know why or where such devices are being used, we don’t even know how the equipment that has been designed secretly and specifically to infringe upon our rights operates. We don’t know how much this equipment costs, we don’t know who all has them nor do we know with whom they are sharing information. And now we have an administration instructing local law enforcement agencies to “keep it that way”.

Are you worried yet?

Judges, Doctors Trumping Legal Contracts?

I will admit that sometimes I forget to keep up with news. Many days I rely solely on Facebook and Twitter for my ‘headlines’ and then go find out what’s going on. I don’t recommend this plan for information as you will generally miss out on many “non-trending” newsworthy items. So if, like me, you hadn’t been closely following the Jahi McMath case, you likely haven’t mulled over the legal ramifications of what is actually happening in the case.

A quick overview of the Jahi McMath illustrates a truly devastating case of a 13-year old girl put under for basic removal of adenoids and tonsils. After surgery, she began bleeding and went into cardiac arrest. She was later declared “brain-dead” by two physicians and one court-ordered physician (where this court-ordered physician came in, I’m still researching). Her heart and lungs continue to operate but she lacks brain activity. These functions are how cessation of life is determined and are also the cause of the conundrum in this case.

Little Jahi has been living (according to her family) in a ‘dead’ (according to medicine) state for 26 days (as of publishing). During a time when her family is not only grieving the damage to their daughter, they are amidst a legal battle which includes a restraining order [which is actually set to expire today at 5pm] against the Children’s hospital at which Jahi was originally admitted. She has since been transferred to an undisclosed location and is receiving intravenous nutrients as you read this.

I remember the Terry Schiavo case, though I was young for much of it, and I remember the legal battle and the slaughtering of both involved parties in the news for years and years. The problem then and the problem now is a moral one, not a legal one…and we ALL know you cannot legislate morality. Life care, medical decisions, these have personal consequences. And when no formal arrangements are made for their care, these things happen. Of course loved ones are going to hold on for as long as they possibly can. Parents have the right to do this for their minor children. Husbands and wives have the right to make these decisions, too. Any one designated as the ‘medical power of attorney’ has the right to do this. It is essentially a legal contract.

At the present time, the McMath family is not costing the California any money, either. Because Jahi was declared ‘dead’, insurance will not cover medical costs, however, pro-life and Catholic organizations as well as the Terry Schiavo Foundation have all funneled money to help cover costs.

My final concern doesn’t really warrant too long of an explanation but it is one of the most important questions we must ask: If the practiced religion of the McMath’s prohibit the removal of life support measures, should a Judge have the discretion and power to override that?

And what about the right to privacy?

It makes sense that this is one of the reasons the Affordable Care Act is so frightening. Any type of government intervention –on any level, for any reason– is a slippery slope. Where do we draw the line? Court ordered out-patient counseling? Judicial supervision and mandates for in-patient rehabilitation? Sterilization? Refusal of care against familial wishes that ultimately determine life or death?

I don’t know about you but I struggle with the desire for a legal responsibility and legal contract to be upheld and the complete insensitivity on behalf of the courts to demand people ‘pull the plug’. You cannot ask yourself what you would do in a similar situation because every case has different circumstances, emotions and religious beliefs that come into play. The question here is simple, but not simply defined: How much State is too much State?

Baby Steps for Accountability: Asbestos Fund Fraud

Sent to me via a friend, and not something I usually write about, but interesting and worth knowing about nonetheless. Plus, I like to throw people off with not-so-common topics every now and again.

Congressmen Blake Farenthold (R-TX) and Jim Matheson (D-UT) are sponsoring bi-partisan legislation, the FACT Act (Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency).
Harold Kim wrote an article for Free Enterprise detailing the specifics of nonexistent people receiving funds from Asbestos trusts. Thousands and thousands of dollars intended for real victims being dispersed to faulty trusts and placed in undeserving hands. Imagine that.

Kim notes,

the trusts’ opaque operations open the door to abuse. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal revealed that an employee of a California law firm filed a claim with a trust in the name of someone who didn’t even exist.  Five weeks later, he received a $26,000 check from the trust. The same firm also filed trust claims on behalf of clients who were nurses. They allegedly were exposed to asbestos while chipping paint from boilers – not exactly a typical duty for nurses.

The Wall Street Journal also found that,

In its analysis, the Journal found 2,689 [Johns Manville bankruptcy trust] applicants through 2005 who claimed to be working in various labor-intensive occupations while under the age of 12. Among them were 753 people who claimed their exposure to asbestos began while working in construction before turning 12; 356 people who said they were metal workers; and 184 chemical workers.”

The FACT Act requires more transparency by requiring quarterly reports to be filed for examination by courts and trusts. A small opportunity to demand more accountability, but certainly worthwhile. Baby steps when we can, right?

My TSA Grope-Down

Yesterday, upon leaving Colorado, I had the pleasure of experiencing the TSA at it’s finest. I found myself in the line with the new full-body scanners. With a few extra minutes to spare, I decided to “opt-out” of the radiation and “opt-in” for a pat-down. I’ve flown a handful of times since the scanners were implemented but have somehow managed to avoid them. Not so lucky today…

I removed my shoes, my jacket, my jewelry and loaded everything onto the x-ray belt. When the agent realized that I was not going to go through the scanner, he shouted, “WE NEED A PAT DOWN ON 2!” as surrounding people turned to watch. Um…sorry that I’m not interested in the guy literally 3-feet away sneaking a peek of what’s under all my clothing. I waited patiently but inquired about my things that had now exited onto the other side of the x-ray belt. The TSA agent stated, “This is my checkpoint and I cannot leave my mark. There are cameras everywhere, your stuff will be fine.” Ah- yes, your mark. Please don’t leave it. Naturally, I was irritated and started the usual huffing and puffing and swaying from side to side with my arms crossed. Eventually he literally breaches security and has me come through to the other side without any x-ray machine, scanner or pat down. I could bolt, but I don’t. The agent tells me to ‘stay right here and don’t move’ while they continued to search for a female agent. I guess I was allowed on the other side of the barrier so I could keep a closer eye on my belongings.

Eventually a woman about 50 appeared with blue gloves and waved me over. She collected my things and I walked barefoot (disgusting) across the floor. She asked if I had everything and then gave me a brief speech that went a bit like this: “You understand that the machines you opt-ed out of are not harmful. You still have the option to return to the machine. If not, I will use a gloved-hand starting at your head and down to your toes. I will use the back of my hand, bracing my self on your hip, while checking between your legs and on your behind. I will also brace myself on your hip while I feel around your bra with the back of my hand. You have the option to do this in private. Do you understand?”

While I began to fully understand the grossness of the pat down to come, my nervousness came out in laughter. (Mostly because I couldn’t imagine going into a private room- that seems MORE inappropriate! Let all these folks be witnesses.)  The agent offered my patient mom a seat (which she of course declined) and began what seemed like one of those 5-minute-mall massages. She flattened my hair (which irritated me) and then talked about Plexiglas (she wanted to know if I knew that you could see through it) and some article she read about the lack of dangers of the TSA scanners. Really, lady? She also asked if it ‘opt-out’ often and why- none of your darn business. It ended abruptly after about 3 minutes and she stepped to the side to wipe her gloves with some special paper. She told me to wait because she was checking my clothing for radioactive and explosive residue. She joked about how to say those two words with the agent next to us the entire time she was ‘processing’. She then said, “You’re good to go!” and walked away.

After gathering all of my things, my mom and I giggled and conversed about the lack of professionalism and the obnoxious scene they create in an effort to humiliate people who opt out of the scanner.

I walked away feeling a little violated, in need of some hairspray and as a new member of the “no-fly” list.

Why I Stand With Israel: A Timeline


Recently, Stevie Wonder cancelled a planned concert for an organization that works to raise money for the Israeli military. He was to play for Friends of the Israeli Defense Force on December 6th but backed out after pressure from the UN claiming that someone with such a title should not support the Israeli Army. (This is just days after the United Nations overwhelmingly voted to recognize Palestine as state, and a few months after our own Prez denied talks with Netanyahu)
Mr. Wonder released the following statement, “I am respectfully withdrawing my participation from this year’s event to avoid the appearance of partiality…As a Messenger of Peace, I am and have always been against war, any war, any where. In consistently keeping with my spirit of giving, I will make a personal contribution to organizations that support Israeli and Palestinian children with disabilities.”

Mr. Wonder…you state that you’re against war. Please tell me more about why supporting a benefit for a force that is simply protecting its own people is war.
This nonsense, coupled with some recent Facebook shenanigans, compelled me to create a timeline of events regarding the Conflict with Israel & Palestine.

Note* The term “Palestinian” is fairly new relative to history and fabricated.

The ‘land in question’ has been conquered and re-conquered many of times but belonged to the Israelites dating back to 1250 BC. In 586 BC, the Jews were exiled by the Babylonians and waited 70 years to return to rebuild their Temple after it had been destroyed. Then a bunch of Greek stuff happened (that I’m not well-versed on) but Judea, the Jewish state in the Roman province of Palestine was established in 63 BC after another conquering.
Somewhere around 120 AD, Jews were initially allowed to return to Jerusalem after more Temples had been destroyed, but – after another Jewish revolt in 133 – the city was completely destroyed and its people banished and sold into slavery.
Some 500 years pass and the region is ruled by those of Muslim faith until the fall of the Ottoman empire in the 1900’s.

1897: Zionism emerges, primarily in response to anti-Semitic beliefs in Europe. Roughly 65,000 people of Jewish faith resided peacefully alongside Muslims for the next 20 years.

1917: Balfour Declaration: Britain aims to create a home for the Jewish people in a new area called Palestine.

1920’s- Violence erupts as the Jewish population rises to 11%. It surges when, in 1929, 133 Jews were killed by Palestinians and 110 Palestinians died at the hands of the British police (NOT JEWS)

1937 Finally in the late 1930’, Secretary of State for India, Lord Peel, recommends partitioning the land into a Jewish state and an Arab one. Both side rejected this suggestion.

1947: Britain forfeits power and hands it over to the UN. The Jews now consist of roughly 33% of the population. They were also dealing with a significant displacement of Jews following World War II and the Holocaust.

The UN set up a special committee which recommended splitting the territory into separate Jewish and Palestinian states. Palestinian representatives, known as the Arab Higher Committee, rejected the proposal; their counterparts in the Jewish Agency accepted it.

The partition plan gave 56.47% of Palestine to the Jewish state and 43.53% to the Arab state, with an international enclave around Jerusalem. The plan was never implemented, even though a UN vote supported it.

1948: (May 15th) The State of Israel is proclaimed. The next day, five Arab armies from Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq immediately invaded Israel but were resisted, and the Israeli army crushed pockets of confrontation.

1967- A year of war on all fronts, Israel eventually expanded their territory. The Arabs, displeased fled to Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. This also marks the shift in UN support for Israel.

1968- Yasser Arafat Fatah-backed forces inflicted significant casualties on Israelis in Jordan.

1972: 11 Israeli athletes are killed at the Olympics

1973- Still mad about 1967, Egypt & Syria launched major forces against Israel on Yom Kippur. Israel made gains in this war as well, but eventually re-released them. Egypt and Syria jointly lost an estimated 8,500 soldiers in the fighting, while Israel lost about 6,000.

1974: Harold Saunders,(U.S. State Department Official) acknowledged for the first time that “the legitimate interests of the Palestinian Arabs must be taken into account in the negotiating of an Arab-Israeli peace”. This was after Arafat made an appearance at the UN referencing his “olive branch and his freedom-fighter gun.”

1977: First Arab leader recognizes Israel, Egypt’s Anwar Sadat. Fellow Arab nations boycotted Egypt for negotiating peace with Israel.

1982: After an attempted assassination of an Israeli ambassador, Israel invaded Lebanon. This was in response to the perpetuated violence of Hezbollah.

Mid-1980’s: Israel faces Palestinian uprising which result in Palestinian deaths. Some news outlets will attempt to convince the world that this is a fault of Israel, however, this was a result of Palestinian violence in addition to general boycotts, graffiti, barricades and stone-throwing demonstrations.
After this incident, PLO decided they DID want to negotiate a two-state plan, but Israel declined.

The Palestinians (PLO) supported Iraq during the Gulf War and alienated a significant base of people.
Early 1990’s: PLO again is in a vulnerable position (still from supporting Iraq) and attempts to reconcile with Israel. During the Oslo Peace Process, PLO agreed to recognize Israel as a state if they de-occupied current Palestinian territory. Negotiations culminated to a Declaration of Principles.

Peace didn’t last long. After a year of Palestinian recognition, dozens of Israeli’s were killed by Palestinian militants. Oslo II was signed, granting 72% of territory to Israel, 21% under joint occupation and 7% under Palestinian control.

1996- Hamas begins to gain strength and carries out dozens of suicide bombings against Israelis.

Early 2000’s- Israel continues assassinating Palestinian militants, air strikes and incursions into Palestinian self-rule areas. Palestinian militants stepped up suicide bomb attacks in Israeli cities.

2004: After 3 bombings in August and September and abundant Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli towns, Israel launched a major and bloody incursion into northern Gaza.

The last 8 years has consisted of perpetual violence against Israelis as they continue their attempt to barricade and block Palestinian violence and control. Even so recently as November, Hamas violated ceasefires and continued sending rockets into Israel.
There is a consistent pattern of Jewish persecution (I don’t think I really need to name specific events, as anyone aware of the last 100 years could pin point my references). And just recently in Hungary, the parliament called for Jews to be registered on lists as threats to national security. Since when is this kind of behavior okay?

I stand with Israel and the people of Jewish faith.
*I’d like to note that until the current administration, the United States has been an avid ally of the Israel and a strong supporter of their peace, safety and freedom. Presidential statements include…

JFK—“Israel was not created in order to disappear—Israel will endure and flourish. It is the child of hope and home of the brave. It can neither be broken by adversity nor demoralized by success. It carries the shield of democracy and it honors the sword of freedom.”

Jimmy Carter—“We have a special relationship with Israel. It’s absolutely crucial that no one in our country or around the world ever doubt that our number one commitment in the Middle East is to protect the right of Israel to exist, to exist permanently, and to exist in peace. It’s a special relationship.”

Bill Clinton—“Our relationship would never vary from its allegiance to the shared values, the shared religious heritage, the shared democratic politics which have made the relationship between the United States and Israel a special—even on occasion a wonderful—relationship.”

Bush II—“Israel is a small country that has lived under threat throughout its existence. At the first meeting of my National Security Council, I told them a top foreign policy priority is the safety and security of Israel. My Administration will be steadfast in supporting Israel against terrorism.and violence, and in seeking the peace for which all Israelis pray.”

So that group that hates Israel, and people of Jewish faith….there’s a name for them. We call them anti-Semites. And the ACLU would say it’s a hate crime.

Why Do Liberals Hate Success?

Ding Dong, the Ding Dong’s Dead.

This morning on CBS Sunday Morning, Bill Flanagan of MTV did a segment on the death of the Twinkie. (You can see the full clip here). These 3-minute commentaries leave me yelling, shouting and throwing things at the television almost every Sunday morning. The intensity of the ’tilt’ to the left is beyond my comprehension. Here is a small excerpt of the commentary:

“Is it possible in this noble Constitutional republic…corporate interests intent on breaking every last union have stooped so low as to cancel production of the Hostess Twinkie, the Devil Dog, and the Reindeer? Has Capitalism sunk this far? Will the President bail out Hostess as he did General Motors?…Who is the heartless corporate CEO who pulled the plug…”

At least he got the first sentence right…”Constitutional republic”…that we are. Aside from that, it really got me thinking…why do liberals hate success so much…but not celebrities?

Every where you turn, there is a shaming for success. Liberals hate pretty much all wealthy white men. They are blamed for most of the issues concerning American right now. They have stigmatized the “1%” because they have worked hard…and often times play hard. But why the disconnect?

Someone posted a picture of a Twinkie funeral on my Facebook page with the caption “The Truth Will Come Out. Unions: Hostess CEO received 300% raise before bankruptcy. Labor blasts ‘myth’ that union strike killed Twinkies” Then, in a back and forth, came to this:
Somewhere, someone, decided that it’s not okay to be successful. Someone decided that it’s wrong for a CEO to make more money than a blue collar worker. Someone decided that we need unions to constantly challenge executives because they earn more. Someone decided that it’s not okay to have more money than someone else …but ONLY on the basis that they also don’t have that same large amount of money. And what’s more interesting is that they don’t want to be equal on a high earning scale, they want everyone to be equal on a low-earning scale. They want upper middle class and upper class people to be yanked down to their level.

But why are liberals so angry? It can’t be because conservatives don’t share their earnings. They do. It’s called a donation. (Here is the definition, since many liberals don’t understand the difference between a tax and a donation) There have been several articles describing the charitable giving on behalf of conservatives and it’s a known fact that liberals prefer the oh-so-trustworthy, ever-so great-at-handling-cash government to redistribute funds as opposed to nonprofits. In fact, research says wealthy AND red states are much more likely to donate to charity. Even the Huffington Post tried to twist conservative giving by unsuccessfully trying to claim that donations to churches don’t count. So what of it? If they’re sharing –just not with the government- why do liberals hate success? And why do they give a pass to the entertainment industry?

And why do they give a pass to the entertainment industry? Why don’t they go after their ‘own’? Take a look at someone of the wealthiest liberals:
Bill Gates $54 billion
Larry Ellison of Oracle $$27 billion
Michael Bloomberg $18 billion
Jeff Bezos of Amazon $12.6 billion
Anne Cox Chambers of Cox Enterprises $12.5 billion
George Soros- $14 billion
Barack Obama
Bill & Hilary Clinton
Not to mention the plethora of celebrities that endorsed the Democrat platform during the last election: 50 Cent, Lady Gaga, Ellen Degeneres, Will Ferrell, Brad Pitt, Vanessa Williams, Reese Witherspoon, Bill Cosby…here is the list of HUNDREDS of them.

Someone, please tell me why. Why are liberals shaming success? And why are they so forgetful of all the ‘success’ on their side when they’re criticizing and degrading successful conservatives? Who do they think is paying for all their dependency and entitlement programs? Why is it okay for Bill Cosby to rake in millions but not a CEO?

Why Needy Women Embarrass Me

I am so gosh darn tired of hearing about contraception I could just vomit. “Women need contraception to be equal.” “Women need contraception to get a good job. ” “Women need contraception to be free.” “Contraception keeps women from suffering in the working world.” “Stop the War on Women!” It was a driving topic in the election. Sandra Fluke. Lena Dunham. Now the UN has come out with a statement (joy!) declaring the need for globalized contraception. The US offers 22% of UN funding so not only do I have to pay for someones birth control here in the United States under ObamaCare, I now have to pay for the globalized initiative to send contraceptives around the world. The statement from the UN claims that making it difficult to access birth control is an infringement on women’s rights………………..

What did women do before the government gave everything out? Hell, What did women do before contraception was invented? ( I don’t actually want the answers to these questions because it’s a societal thing, and the evolution is sad.) The results of sex are not new and $10/month is not outrageous. Birth control is not mandatory preventative care. (And to be perfectly honest, synthetic hormones and chemicals aren’t really that good for you any way- but that’s a whole different rant.) Also, please don’t tell me that it’s cheaper for taxpayers to pay for birth control than it is to pay for a child. The government shouldn’t be doing that either.

Let’s get a grip and focus. I respect the right to do whatever you please in your own bedroom, whether it be moral or not. I’m not judging. But seriously, for the love of Pete…stop telling the government to stay out of your bedroom and uterus, and then demand them to pay for the insurance to cover the lady parts. That’s called hypocrisy and I’m tired of it. We’ve got more important things to worry about.

Blue State of Affairs

America has failed.

I’m not talking about why I think the Republican party is broken and I’m not talking about why I don’t think Mitt Romney was the BEST candidate. I’m also not talking about why I can’t stand a lot of liberals. It is all irrelevant at this point. (Well, actually, it’s not. But for the sake of this post it is.) I’m talking about the fact that we are so far from our roots that we are truly almost unrecognizable.

I took some heat on my Facebook page (surprise!) the other night because I said, “My heart is aching for my country. I don’t understand how people can be so stupid. My respect for anyone who identifies as a liberal dwindles daily- regardless of the outcome.” But 24 hours and several arguments later, I still stand by my words.

The truth of the matter is…Liberals & Moderates: I’m judging your actions and your thought process. Please…do show me in the Constitution where you are awarded birth control, health care, phones, housing arrangements, abortions, higher education, cars, anything!….where it says we should have legislation like the PATRIOT Act, the NDAA, No Child Left Behind and ObamaCare. SHOW ME. I’ve read it several times. I still can’t find that in there.

Conservatives lost the election to social issues. Liberals encouraged women to vote with their lady parts and for “revenge” while Republicans allowed the election to focus on Big Bird, Binders and Bill Clinton recommendations. The fact that voters were driven by body parts and social ideas is perplexing. I’m not okay with it. I don’t know why our elections aren’t more focused on the Constitution. Even taxes were twisted into class warfare talk and demographics when, in reality, a tax is a tax is a tax regardless of who is paying it. Do you think we had the Revolutionary War, Constitutional Conventions and people dying for our country so you could have free things at the expense of others? Absolutely not. Our Constitution sets us aside from other countries because we have the freedom to excel as far and as high as we so please. We have the freedom to speak, pray, associate, carry a gun, and most importantly, to question our government. We have protections from the Federal government through our states. Why is no one talking about this? I’m sure our Founders fought for this country 1) based on their strong faith in God and 2) their strong belief in personal responsibility.

Someone from class told me I was an “outlier” because I am a staunch Constitutionalist and respect what our forefathers laid out for us. This person told me that I am “so far from everyone else that I shouldn’t be on the political spectrum” and that I am a “1 on a scale to 10″. Really, sir? I beg to differ. I believe in everything that we started with…all the way back in 1776. I liked what America stood for. So wouldn’t that make YOU the outlier? All you 4-10 people. The people who have “progressed” so far from our foundations? [I'll say that 2's and 3's are okay because , in my metaphor, they are likely the number which extended the right to vote to all races and women.]

But I am bewildered by the idea of attaining anything for “free”. You know things don’t just jump into existence…You know SOMEONE has to pay for those free things, right? In a lot of places, when something is taken from one and given to another, it is called theft. Why do you think it’s okay for you to have some of mine just because you have less? I don’t steal you’re free time because I have less while working so hard to support you. The only thing the Constitution guarantees ALL of us is freedom (different variations of course, but certainly no entitlements.)

We are so lost. My generation has become such a group of leeches who think everything should be handed to them. They don’t even know the first 10 amendments. How un-American and unacceptable.

I cried for my country last night. I cried because if we are this unrecognizable now…where will we be in 2016? Will we remember what freedom feels like?

My November 2012 Ballot

I know many of you have already voted, so for some this may not apply, but here are my voting suggestions for Tuesday. Everyone is very focused on the Presidential race–as they should be– but it’s important to research your local and state candidates as well. Feel free to comment or e-mail with any other questions. I skipped candidates who had no opposition.

-I am voting to keep Chuck Eaton (R). Chuck Eaton is the only candidate who reached out to me during the primary and the general election. Personal interactions matters, folks.

-I am voting for David Staples. He is the Libertarian candidate and I support him not only because of beliefs but also because Stan Wise had complete disregard for informing voters during both the primary and the general election by refusing to show up for debates or participate in forums. I’d like to see him voted out.

While I no longer live in the 5th district, I am so happy to see a Republican with more conservative leanings running against (too)-long-time-incumbent John Lewis. For that reason, I would suggest voting for Howard Stopeck. {I would like to thank John Lewis for for voting “No” to the NDAA in 2011, though. It’s one of the few things I can say he has done correctly in representing the American people}.

I grew up in the 6th district and have many family and friends who still reside there. I would select Tom Price, even though he voted in favor of the NDAA. Unless you are a proponent of the ‘write-in’ option, your other choice is a Democrat by the name of Jeff Kazanow. I know nothing about him so I can’t recommend him. I can still muster support of Tom Price because of his adamant fight against Obamacare and push for repeal. (And, I like his wife, Betty, who was a supporter of Andrew Wordes)

I was recently added to the 11th district so my choice is Phil Gingrey. I did not support him in the primary, however, it’s important to vote red.

I am voting for Hunter Hill. I could not, would not, should not support Doug Stoner under any circumstance most importantly because of his support of the TSPLOST. I would like to congratulate both candidates on sending the largest number of mail outs in one election cycle. I often times received more than one from the same candidate on the same day. (For future reference, I think that diminishes effectiveness.) But Go Hunter!

If you’re reading this blog, you know what I think. Next.

I am voting for Edward Lindsey. He is my current State Rep and while I disagree with him on the Charter School amendment, he has done a great job representing the people of Buckhead and Sandy Springs. I also had the opportunity to work with him during the 2012 Legislative Session and I can say he is truly a good person.

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! Under no circumstance, in no context, for any reason, do I support the expansion of government. The Charter School Amendment isn’t about the kids. It’s about government and oversight. If this amendment passes, a state board will be allowed to override the decision of a local school district to deny a Charter. In that situation, a local school board will have to deal with the ramifications of a new school that they once denied. What kind of environment do you think THAT will make for the kids? You can read more about why you should oppose the Charter School amendment here and here.

Yes. I like outsourcing and privatizing things when using tax funds.

NO!!!!! If you live in Roswell, you need to open your darn eyes and look at what’s happening to your city. Your government is corrupt beyond measure. Please please please vote no on this bond referendum. The City has already allotted for it in their 2013 FY budget because they are going bankrupt. This is NOT the solution. There are several different pages you can read about the bond and other corrupt activities linked to this bond. Vote NO and the move to Alpharetta.

There is a lot I’d like to say about Cobb, but I will refrain. If you live there, Phil Daniell is running in the 41st House District and needs your support, as does long-time great representative Sam Teasley in the 38th.

There are a couple things I’d like to note. I helped my boyfriend with his Absentee ballot from Florida. I was FLOORED by the steps the state took to protect citizens from Federal initiatives AND how much was put to citizen vote. I’d really like to see more of that in Georgia. (We do a pretty good job– we did defeat the TSPLOST)

But like I always say…Do your duty, shake your booty and get out and vote!