Category Archives: National

The Real Housewives of the White House

Leave a reply

20120217-073843.jpg

I never really feel bad for victims of political mudslinging because running for any political office is not only a family decision but a privilege. So in the recent months of primary candidates spouses at the forefront of so many new articles, I have to ask: What is the role of the spouse of a political candidate?

We’ve all heard the recent annihilations of Karen Santorum with her anti-torte reform chiropractic lawsuit and her abortion-performing lover of her twenties. We’ve seen Callista Gingrich painted as ‘The Other Woman‘: classless and unfit for the White House and everyone anxiously awaited Gloria Cain’s response after reports of harassment and infidelity broke. And no one can deny the role that Marcus Bachmann’s pyschological clinic played in the demise of Michelle’s campaign.

So how much is too much? How heavily should we weigh the decisions, actions and lifestyles of spouses? I think it’s a really tricky question that I may not necessarily know how to answer. I don’t like Michelle Obama for a number of reasons but how big of a role should that play into my perspective of Baracks candidacy? Should we strike Rick Santorum as a potential Republican candidate because his wife was pro-choice in her earlier, pre-Rick life? Should we discredit Newt’s positive points because his ex-wife claimed he wanted an open marriage?

My concern is that the issue is a double-edged sword. I try to remind myself that the spouse isn’t running for office and if elected, said person will be surrounded by informed staff to help in decision making. But if you consider a typical family, so many choices are made as a team. At some point, I have to wonder how much influence a spouse could have over decisions and policy issues. Or more…does the spouse represent the true feelings of their political counterpart and they just publicly state otherwise? It’s a very fine line.

What I do find fascinating is the Bill Clinton effect on Hilary’s campaign. It was almost nonexistent. I’m not sure if people were just unwilling to beat a dead horse, if they thought Hilary was a strong enough woman to remain unaffected herself or of they simply didn’t care.

I think the lucky candidates are the ones whose wives (or husbands) don’t have a murky past or aren’t currently doing something controversial (I.e. Marcus Bachmann). Sure, the other candidates will look to dig up dirt wherever they can, but it often begins as a distraction effort and then spirals out of control and divert attention away from other things happening in the campaign. It’s certainly ridiculous to consider a spouse’s actions prior to a marriage when evaluating a candidate.

Teresa Heinz Kerry was at the center of the media in 2004 because her late first husband was a Republican and John McCain had a VERY outspoken daughter. Neither of these instances had significant impact on the ultimate direction of the campaign but they were nice distractions at the time.

Unfortunately, the media plays a strong role during election season in deciding what we see and hear about. I ask that you refrain from letting your own personal opinion of each candidate interfere with your evaluation of the role of the spouse and vis versa. I would also ask that you ignore the media reports pertaining to spouses and stay focused on the candidates that are so eager to distract and deceive you.

20120217-073900.jpg

STAY OUT OF MY LUNCH BOX!!

1 Reply

It appears I should change the name of my blog to The Perspicacious Choices, not Conservative…because all I really argue about anymore is the right to make choices for myself. I’m sure you’ve all heard by now, but a 4-year old’s lunch was sent home in North Carolina recently because a state inspector ruled it unhealthy. A turkey and cheese sandwich with a banana, potato chips and apple juice did not meet U.S. Agricultural guidelines.

Excuse me? What the hell are they talking about? That sounds like the lunch I ate everyday from age 5-18. Do you know what they replaced the child’s lunch with? Chicken fingers. I’m sure they were organic, unprocessed and free of any additives,right? We all know how healthy chicken nuggets are when purchased in bulk and frozen. AND they were charged for the cost of the school lunch!

Now, according to North Carolina CHILD CARE RULE .0901- Food from home- “When children bring their own food from home for meals or snacks to the center, if the food does not meet the nutritional requirements outlined in the Meal Patterns for Children in Child Care, the center must provide additional food necessary to meet those requirements.”. I’ll be darned if the school I send my children to will decide what they can and cannot eat….The state, with oversight from the federal government, WILL NOT dictate who eats what in my family.

The story brought back memories of 7th grade when I was called to the Principals Office for wearing a sleeveless turtleneck sweater with jeans. The Principal saw me in the hall in between classes and quickly established that my outfit was “too revealing”. (A turtleneck? Really?) The issue was soon put to rest when my mom showed up to school, livid and wearing the same sweater in another color. Yes, a professional, working woman wearing a sweater in the workplace but it was not appropriate for middle school. Mom sent me back to class as she battled with the Principal. The issue was never brought up again.

There is simply too much discretion and regulation in schools. Each child is different and who knows them better than their own parents? And who is obligated and rightfully the ones to make those decisions? Parents.

We, as a society, get to make fewer and fewer decisions for ourselves every day. Think of all the things that are regulated by discretion: the Internet, roads, schooling, zoning permits, architectural plans, dog shots & registrations, cars, food, clothing, real estate, alcohol…….

America….Land of the Free!!!!

The Karen/Komen Stunt

Leave a reply

 

I have avoided the Pro-Life/Pro-Choice argument because on both sides, most people are pretty set in their ways and there’s no sense in trying to convince people one way or the other. That being said, I’ve about had it with Karen Handel, Komen and Planned Parenthood.

A couple different aspects to consider:

Karen Handel: She is a quitter, so naturally, she would resign from Komen. She quit Commissioner for Secretary of State. She quit Secretary of State for her run for Governor. She also wasn’t the one to propose the defunding of planned parenthood (it was a decision made long before entrance into the organization) but she is suddenly the conservative hero for resigning. This is her M.O….on to something better. No one should be surprised.

The stance of Mrs. Handel, on behalf of Komen, during this debacle has been that Planned Parenthood cannot receive funds from SGK because while they are earmarked for services related to breast cancer testing and awareness, the organization than has available funds to perform and advocate abortion, something Mrs. Handel is vehemently and openly against.
However, in 2005, while serving on the Fulton County Commission, Karen Handel voted to funnel federal funds through the county to Planned Parenthood, but “not for abortion funds”. Isn’t this a direct contradiction of what she JUST said last week?

How many of you donated to Komen before this big mess?My guess, based on the wealth of the organization, is millions.

It just goes to show you: no one does research for organizations they offer donations to. Komen has granted funding to Planned Parenthood for years. Cuisinart,the NFL they all support Komen and you support those companies. And there are HUNDREDS of other organizations and corporations that do the same. Here are just some of the other Planned Parenthood contributors:

  • American Express
  • American Home Products (chef boyardee, Pam cooking spray, Advil, Chapstick, etc)
  • AT&T
  • The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
  • Buffett Foundation
  • Ben & Jerry’s
  • Bristol Meyers Squibb (ironically, the makers of Enfamil and Gerber foods)
  • Citicorp
  • Disney
  • Dayton Hudson (owner of Target)
  • eBay
  • General Mills
  • Hewlett Packard
  • Johnson & Johnson
  • Liz Claiborne
  • March of Dimes
  • Nationwide Insurance
  • Nike
  • Pepsi
  • Rotary International
  • Quaker Oats
  • Whirlpool
  • Whole Foods

Now what, folks? Many of the above have earmarked their funds to NOT be used for abortion, but like Mrs. Handel has stated, it frees up other funds to advocate abortion.
So, are you going to follow  through with boycotting all of these organizations as well? Are you going to cancel your AMEX., switch from Lucky Charms to Frosted Flakes, stop going to Disneyland? If you’re going to talk the talk and annihilate Komen, then walk the walk and be an equal opportunity hater. If not, understand how corporations and organizations work.

It was all a publicity stunt and both sides are milking it, as is Karen Handel. The losers in this story?  The people who are still uninformed.

State of Ridiculousness

1 Reply

The President’s State of the Union is always painful to listen to, especially when we have a Democrat and everything is spend! spend! spend! I seriously wanted to smash the TV 85 times last night…once for every applause interruption. The only nice thing I can say is that Michelle Obama looked like she lost a couple pounds….which she needed to do. 🙂

The entire transcript can be found here. But let’s go through a few of his high (read:low) points:

“We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world”….heroes. Yes. Safer? Maybe. More respected? Doubtful. Over the course of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq we have only alienated allies or caused conflict in other countries.

“Americans had a chance to share – the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement.”
-This still happens today, under the same circumstances you state, Mr “0”…if you work hard.This country was not based on handouts and up until the New Deal legislation, millions of people made it on their own without the help of the government. You are given the chance, what you do with it is up to you and ONLY YOU.

“We can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.”
-We all know what he’s referring to….TAXES!! But his statement is ridiculous. If the goal is “fairness”, how is me paying a larger share of taxes for 20 people who don’t pay at all fair? How is my increased student loan interest fair when I will eventually pay more because others take the loans knowing they’ll never pay them back. How is it that my medical costs are higher even when I have insurance because they are overcompensating for the illegals who receive free care? THAT’S not fair and there’s nothing I can do about it (which is also not fair!).

“Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories.”
-Not by any help from you O! They didn’t take the bailout money and they’ve always been dedicated to American values. Please don’t try and take credit for this.

“First, if you’re a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn’t get a tax deduction for doing it. That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home….First, if you’re a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn’t get a tax deduction for doing it. That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home.”
-Son, PLEASE!! You talk about fairness and equality, except for businesses? Businesses should have the freedom to practice and produce wherever it is most cost efficient and shouldn’t be taxed more because of WHERE they are producing. You’re overstepping your bounds, Mr. Oblahblah. And stop redistributing money, let Master Lock fend for themselves.

“And if you want to relocate in a community that was hit hard when a factory left town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers.”
-Where is that money coming from? More subsidies? More taxes on the upper class?

He also announced the creation of the Trade Enforcement Unit and Financial Crimes Unit. Super. More units to do what other Departments are already designated to do (but won’t or can’t do)… Which in turn means more government jobs, more costs and more oversight.

Finally, and I’ve spoken about it before: higher education. “So let me put colleges and universities on notice: If you can’t stop tuition from going up, the funding you get from taxpayers will go down. Higher education can’t be a luxury – it’s an economic imperative that every family in America should be able to afford.”
-Not everyone is meant for college. Not everyone should have a higher education. Some are meant for trade schools and other focused jobs. This creates diversity. Giving away post-secondary education makes it less meaningful for those who work hard and pay for it. Also, The cost of tuition continues to rise because so much of it is subsidizes and reduced. What do you expect universities to do? They can’t operate for free. Next you’re going to tell me it’s important that everyone have a law degree, a Masters or a PH.D.

Basically, it was all a big campaign speech so while on the campaign trail, Obama can say “I TOLD REPUBLICANS TO DO _____ AND THEY DIDNT” or “America needs me to finish the job”. I can’t wait for the primary season to be over so that the nominee can debate and debate and debate Obama until he is blue in the face….because he hasn’t done squat. And the proof is everywhere. I do have confidence in his ability to be a one-term president.

20120125-083907.jpg

Girl Scouts: Stay Away

1 Reply

Since I was a Girl Scout back in the 90’s, things have changed. A LOT. The Girls Scouts have been plagued with bad publicity for accepting funding from and partnering with Planned Parenthood, releasing statements through the Gay and Lesbian Alliance, formulating a “radical feminist agenda“, the “optional” use of God in the oath,  and more recently the inclusion of a transgendered child into a Colorado troop.

Now, before we move on…let me be clear about my irritation about the transgendered children in the Girl Scouts.
1. The child is 7 (as many of the newly inaugurated members are). Personally, I think that is extremely too young to be making significant life choices regarding gender and sexuality–things most children don’t know about at age seven.
2. IF for some reason, the parents of this children felt strongly that their child needed to dress and live as a girl, though genetically and physiologically a boy, why draw attention to the child by insisting this child partake in a GIRL’S organization.
These ideas make me wonder how much of this is a setup, how much of this is a publicity stunt on behalf of the parents and where the actors are trying to steer this fiery bus.

My opinions aside, the recent controversy has not gone without a response.

A California teen recently posted a YouTube video expressing her disdain with the direction of the Girls Scouts. Having been a member for 8 years, she is calling for everyone to boycott Girl Scout Cookies. Why you ask? It seems that the Girl Scouts are now allowing transgender children from kindergarten through twelfth grade to join the organization. “If the child identifies as a girl and the parents present the child as a girl, Girl Scouts will welcome the child”, the organization stated. Don’t you think this is making a mockery of the organization that USED to represent good community-based values? Still not convinced? Decisions are made on a case-by-case basis without proof or verification of gender. Would you like your little girl going on overnight camping trip with boys, or young men? And you know soon enough there will be male troop leaders, in an effort to be more accepting. Or better, males living life as females for troop leaders. How about sharing bathroom facilities (since these children are now identifying and acting as girls). All that aside, don’t you think this will open the door for a whole plethora of questions that your child may not have been exposed to? Her video is below:

If you search for the topic, you will see an extraordinary number of videos in response to this young lady’s message, with ones including attacks on her figure, her heritage and her values. Classy.

You can read more on the overall issues here.

It seems that Girl Scouts USA is just another progressive organization aimed at destroying family values, distancing children from faith and instead, indoctrinating young girls (and now boys!) with advanced and complicated values at way too early of an age. I’m sad to see that a previously positive organization has been infiltrated in this fashion.

Boycott the Girls Scouts. Boycott the Cookies. (Besides, Keebler makes ‘generic’ Thin Mints, Samoa’s and Tag-a-longs anyways).

Our Government Is Not Legitimate

1 Reply

Last night, I solemnly began my Public Finance class that addresses metropolitan fiscal issues, past, present and future. I thought the class was going to be bad, but I had no clue what I was in for. As my teacher, who has immigrated here from another country (note: this would be fine if he’s aid teacher was not shredding the liberties of America) spoke on socialism, big government and The need for every kind of social program, I began to sweat, choke and have heart palpitations.

He explained to us that the functions government are:
ALLOCATION- to levy taxes and assess fees. It’s important to assess fees when taxes fall short. (speeding tickets, tag fees, license fees, etc.)

DISTRIBUTION- to redistribute the levied monies so that there is no income and living gap. He referred to it as “income maintenance”. That was a new term for me, but I plan to continue using it out of ridiculousness.

STABILIZATION- This is vague and so I’ll leave it alone-for now. But basically, stabilization is the efficient working of government and it’s programs. ( LOL)

Sarcastically, I raised my hand and said “If distribution is a function, then we have no need for the nonprofit sector. Isn’t the nonprofit sector supposed to bridge the gap between public sector and the private sector voluntarily?” My teacher responded by saying that the nonprofit sector is AN EXTENSION of the federal government and when you pay nonprofits, you’re paying the 3rd arm of government. Why don’t you try telling that to all the private corporations and citizens who donate to nonprofits.

Now, in Political Science 101 you learn about the legitimacy of government. In a democracy, government legitimacy derives from the popular perception that the elected government abides democratic principles in governing, and thus is legally accountable to its people. So democratic principles are derived from The Constitution and the abill of Rights, meaning, thats where these democratic principles derive. Where are allocation and distribution in The Constitution?

Until the 16th amendment was ratified in 1913, we had no federal income tax. Our country went 124 years before we had an income tax. It was not in The Constitution and it was not a priority of our Founding Fathers. So tell me, why do we have it? According to my professor, we need income taxes to provide social programs. Okay, so what page in the Constitution does it say we shall provide social programs? Oh. It doesn’t? Hmm…so TWO of the three stated functions of the federal government are unconstitutional and illegitimate. Interesting.

That is the most I’ve ever learned in a graduate class. Thanks prof!!

Directions to the Nearest Abortion Clinic

2 Replies

This week, the new Planned Parenthood ‘Sexting’ Messaging Program began in Denver.

Inquisitive youth can now text “ICYC” to 66746 followed by a question and a Planned Parenthood Community Education staff member will answer questions within 24 hours.

Planned Parenthood has emphasized that they will NOT answer questions about ‘how to have sex’. But if you think you may be pregnant, want advice on contraception or need directions to the nearest abortion clinic, texting 66746 is your solution.

Planned Parenthood is also given the ability to circumvent parents, religious beliefs and family morals to reach minors. Brilliant.

How could I even go on about this issue?.

OWS Donations & Stupidity

1 Reply

It was reported on Friday that Occupy Wall Street has collected more than $665,000 since the September 17th commencement.

So if you donated to OWS, how are you helping the movement? As of December 13th, OWS had spent $162,169. Among some of the purchases are:
-$100 button making
-$1,200 materials to treat protestors in Zuccotti Park
-$17,002 (between 11/23-11/30) on food, laundry and medical after the clearing of Zuccotti
-$5,073 on metro cards & transit.
-$4,240 on food
-$1,132 on office supplies and phone cards {This is an interesting one to me}
-$2,210 on medical & herbal remedies
-$2,852 on cleaning & laundry
-$447 on ‘other’
I’d like to know where the Occupiers purchase their food, office supplies, phone cards and ‘other’ items. Places like Kroger, Publix, Staples, Office Depot all have CEO’s who are possibly part of the 1% that they hate so much. And the items they purchase? Kraft? Nabisco? …..Should I assume that Occupiers are purchasing all of their products from local & small businesses so as not to support the very establishment they are protesting?

At the peak of their incoming donations, OWS was collecting nearly $20,000 a day. This week, donations sunk to $98 per day. So what does this mean for the OWS movement? Is it slowing down, losing steam, feeling sluggish in the cold?

I don’t care, but I do have some other questions for the occupiers.
Did they file a 501(c)3? And if so, what’s the name of that non-profit organization?
If you didn’t file a 501(c)3, whose name is on the bank account?
Where are you banking? Surely it’s not Bank of America, SunTrust, Wells Fargo, or any of the like.
And if they’re not a 501(c)3 and are operating like a business, surely they plan to file taxes in 2012, correct?

Just a few facts about New York City:
$105,368…the minimum income of a member of the NYC 10%
$493,439…the minimum income of a member of the NYC  1%.
$2,247,515…the average income per filer
71.2%…the percentage of city personal income tax that the top 10% pays (dispersed among 345,169 people)
43.2%…the percentage the top 1% pays for City income taxes. (~34,598 people)
1.18 million…the number of FILERS in NYC that don’t pay income taxes at all (Scan.IBOIncomeDistributionLetter)
—-The Occupy Wall Street Movement ….Americans disgracing the meaning of America.

Birth Control: We Can’t Afford it!

3 Replies

Amidst the health care debacle and the ensuing arguments over the last 2 years, a few themes have been recurring: women’s health care rights. There has been a huge movement to, in the new health care law provisions, grant all women access to birth control for free. But who is going to pay for this?

According to the US Census, 2010, there were 308,745,538 {documented} people in the United States. 50.8% of those people were women (156,842,733) and studies show that roughly 80% of women have used birth control at some point. So…125,474,186 women. Granted, not all of those women would concurrently be taking birth control, so let’s take Age 2000 estimates of 81.5 million women ages 15-49. According to US News-Money, birth control pills cost on average $160 to $600 annually. On the low end, you’re looking at:
      $160/year X 81.5 million women= $13,040,000,000 A YEAR!

Fighting for exceptions to allow for coverage for the pill for women who suffer from disorders is one thing. An argument claiming that all women should have the pill covered – at the expenses of others- for them is another. Women already have free access to birth control – it’s called saying no, or at least “not until you put a condom on”. Why should taxpayers, who morally and religiously don’t agree with the concept, be forced to pay for others’ irresponsibility? Okay, that’s a tangent. Bottom line: It’s too expensive!!!

Avoiding pregnancy is not a difficult concept to grasp. It really pushes on the concept of necessities versus luxuries, or rights and privileges.  Don’t get me wrong: I believe people should have the access to whatever contraception they deem appropriate (i.e.- birth control should not be banned) however, it cannot be at the expense of taxpayers.

This brings up another interesting aspect that is often forgotten: Nonprofits. Nonprofit organizations are supposed to be the bridge between the public and private sector. They often fail because they seek federal grant money which muddies the water of religion, morals, etc. (Example: Planned Parenthood using federal monies). If nonprofits sought private donations and provided to these underprivileged women, it would no longer be a burden on the taxpayers nor would be a government issue. To go full circle, the government has no business in health care especially if you look at it from a simple financial standpoint.

I like one rebuttal to the feminist notion that women are entitled to birth control: “Frankly, it paints a pretty dim view of women to claim that they need access to the pill in order to prevent unwanted pregnancies. They should be strong enough and smart enough on their own to avoid doing that before they are ready.”

Student Loans: A Free Investment In Your Future?

7 Replies

Any discussion about student loans gets me very fired up, mainly because the concept is so broadly misunderstood. I’m often offended by the desire of others to ‘write off’ or default on their student loans….because I have them!

Student loans are an investment in your future. And just like a home loan or a credit card, or the services like I need Money Today ASAP – you are borrowing on the condition that you will pay it back. I don’t know of any circumstances where you pay your mortgage every month for 18 years and one day your lender calls and says, “You don’t have to pay any more! The house is yours!” It just doesn’t happen. Obama’s recent “Student Loan Overhaul” is a real slap in the face to faithful borrowers. Of course, if you work for the government for 10 years, your debt will be relieved. But now, after 20 years of faithful repayments while working in any sector, the government will excuse your loans. How does this make sense? And how is it fair? It increases the costs of future loan holders who will essentially be repaying the debt of those who were pardoned from paying.

Sure, it all goes back to the morals and current direction of our country. What are we teaching youth? It’s okay to default. You don’t have to fulfill contractual agreements to repay funds. The government will bail you out and pay it for you.


Just this morning I read a Huffington Post article detailing the new movement to ‘Occupy Student Debt”. The movement is asking that borrowers default on their student loan payments after one million individuals have similarly signed the debtors’ pledge. Are you kidding me? I understand that there is high unemployment, and yes, things are a little cut throat out there. But you can’t just throw your hands up and say “We quit!”. Why don’t you use the ambition you had in attaining all that post-secondary education and use it to find a job. Our economy is struggling and you have $500+/month student loan payments and you think you are above working at Chick-fil-a or driving a delivery truck?

This Occupy Student Debt movement also wants to draw attention to the increased cost of tuition. The movement seeks interest-free loans from now on and relief of all current debt. This movement is a true disgrace to those who took out student loans and make a legitimate effort to pay them back every month-until they are COMPLETELY repaid. There is no accountability. If $200,000 in student loan debt sounded unreasonable, maybe another, less-expensive school choice was in order. Or maybe work a little and save money, THEN go back to school. Or maybe maintain a job while in school and pay your own expenses instead of taking out loans to cover tuition, housing, AND entertainment. Don’t tell me it can’t be done.

Bottom line: It’s obnoxious for students or recent graduates to go around complaining about student loan debt. It was a choice. Undergraduate, Graduate and Doctorate level educations are not a right, they are a privilege. And they’re not for everyone. The -high- cost of education is a barrier to entry: not everyone needs a post-graduate degree and it allows for diversification in the work force. Don’t expect any of these “solutions” to rectify the “problem”. That is, if you define a ‘problem’ as fulfilling a contractual agreement.

I liked one of the comments on the article “If you throw away the loan, they should take back the degree”.