Over the past few weeks, GOP Presidential hopefuls have been flipping answers to all of today’s ills from Medicare Reform to the Bombing of Libya to who should win American Idol. Every answer given is different, depending on the audience of the hour. At least they are consistent on being inconsistent.
At least one time or five times, each hopeful has shot themselves in the foot with an erratic response only to turn around and use the “Gotcha” moment statement, as if being set up to fail.
None, except Newt Gingrich, has given great insight into their ideas of policy and changes, except flipping on their previous ideas while in term as a Senator, Representative or even a Governor. Gov Pawlenty once favored Cap & Trade and now talks of its evils while Senator Rick Santorum is still running around looking for another Terry Schiavo to cuddle next too.
Newt Gingrich has currently called himself a “Washington Outsider” when talking policy, yet he is more inside then all the candidates combined tenfold. Last week, Newtie gave an impression on what he thinks of many voters with his “outside” thought, and I’m talking “outer space.”
Newtie, a man who is a cornucopia of historical knowledge, has called for a “Poll Test” of sorts for voters. To quote Newtie, “American citizens should have to pass a test in American history before they could earn the right to vote.”
Interesting thought, as I can say I believe we should test those running for political office at all levels, both intelligence and drug.
Yet Newtie is pointing his chubby Tiffany finger at “Young Americans” but not being age specific when giving that label. Most “Young Americans” are pretty darn knowledgeable of the comings and goings of our political figures and American history.
Although, what is taught in school of our history is periodical, mythical, and sometimes abbreviated for chest thumping purposes and no one gives more abbreviation to our history then those in or running for office and that of the opinionated news.
Test question #1: Did Paul Revere really ride all those miles exclaiming “The British are coming?”
But Newtie of all people should understand that by having Americans take a “test” of some sorts, can actually infringe upon one’s Constitutional right to Vote. After all, is this not a “Free Nation?”
So let’s look at what our Constitution states:
Amendment 15- Passed Congress Feb 26, 1869 - The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude
Amendment 19- Passed Congress June 4, 1919 - The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Amendment 24 – Passed Congress August 27, 1962- The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.
Amendment 26- Passed Congress March 23, 1971- The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age
Hmm, Newtie might be on to something, since Constitutional Amendments cover: Age, Race, Sex and Tax to vote. But there’s nothing listed about Intelligence or Cognitive thought or even if someone has Down syndrome or Autistic, heck physical deformation isn’t even covered. So really Newtie missed out on a large portion of Americans as well.
But, “Young Americans” can be assumed to cover those 18 years to (possibly) 24 years of age. Basically all those that would be attending College or even a Military boot camp of sorts. So what Newtie is calling for is “Intellectual Age Warfare” on voting rights.
I have to call into question the intelligence of our older generations as well. I noted above Down syndrome and those with physical impairments, so why not add those with Alzheimer’s as well?
It’s safe to say that many of Newtie’s lemmings receive their American history lessons from one of Newtie’s many books or even that of Glenn Beck, which is verbally distorted subjective history at best.
What Newtie should be calling for is Voter Identification regulations. There is no injustice or discrimination by asking someone to prove who they are. Aren’t we asked that anytime we are pulled over by a police officer or by the bank teller?
I am one to believe that there should be some sort of Voter ID. Now when I go and perform my Constitutional privilege of voting, I always make that sweet little blue hair lady check my registration card with my driver’s license. I also do the same when using my debit card, but hey that’s me.
You want to stop voter fraud, even though it has been dropping each and every election cycle, make everyone present their photo id before pressing the button. Or simply go to a form of National ID, an idea everyone is afraid of, which will have your info on it. Swipe the card and swipe your vote.
However, you cannot segregate a generation in voting. Many young Americans can drink the political kool-aid and become lemmings to the voice of these soapbox orators that spew promises yet give rhetoric in reality. That’s their decision to make, its democracy.
It’s been proven that many young Americans follow their parents political views until they reach their college life and…… hey wait a minute, I finally see Newtie’s true thought, either he still thinks kids are taught by Liberal professors (Newt’s original profession) that will influence their political thought or he’s afraid of those Delta House degenerates ruining his Pennsylvania Ave Parade on January 20th, 2012.
At least Dean Wormer had a better set of values on morals.
Answer Question #1: Revere never exclaimed “The British are Coming” on his journey, he use the term “The Regulars are coming” since everyone was still British at the time in America. Nor did he ride that far on his famous flight. Revere was also joined by 2 others. In truth, a Postal Carrier at the time names Israel Bissell rode further and longer then Revere, almost 6 days worth from Watertown to Boston down to Trenton and on to Philadelphia.
Thanks to Mr. Longfellow, for using fiction to create fact and selling many books.
usconstitution.net
Thinkprogress- Travis Waldron
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Keep my Religion out of your business
He’s a Christian. She’s a Muslim. You’re an Atheist. Wouldn’t you like to get some Religion too?
“That I am not a member of any Christian Church, is true; but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion in general, or of any denomination of Christians in particular.” – Abraham Lincoln
Funny how our 16th president’s religious beliefs are still being debated today? If you Google Abraham Lincoln’s religion, you’ll get about 16 unique links all debating whether he was a Christian, Universalist or an Atheist, even though we do know he was raised a Baptist.
My question is what does religion have to do with the Presidency?
Think about it.
In 2008, Gov Mitt Romney was campaigning to be the Republican Presidential candidate. One could say he was the closest thing to the perfect candidate.
He was a successful Republican governor in extremely liberal Massachusetts, successful in business, credited for making the Salt Lake City Olympics a success, and so on. He was the front runner for much of the campaign
Two things held Romney back, the first being his successful transformation of Massachusetts healthcare (a version of Universal Health Care) and the other was his Mormon faith.
Everywhere he went, people held off on their choice of Romney because of those two things, but a lot fell on his Faith.
Americans need to realize, Religion has nothing to do with the Presidency. If that was the case, John F. Kennedy would never have been president, no matter how much money the Kennedy clan threw into the campaign. People feared his Roman Catholic upbringing and were afraid that the Pope would give him marching orders.
Does anyone know the faith of Pres. Eisenhower followed as a child?
He was a Jehovah’s Witness as a child. Yes the very same people you hide behind the curtains from when they ring the doorbell. And I do believe Eisenhower turned out to be a damn good General and President. Just look at our nation's highway system. Thanks Ike.
What about Thomas Jefferson? You know, Thomas Jefferson, the man that wrote many of our sacred documents. Jefferson was raised Episcopalian, yet served with no denomination. Does that make him any much a bad president or better president than the other 43 that served?
Current President “O’s” religion comes up at every Christian holiday, because so many belief he is a Muslim because of his funny name and his father’s background.
Why is it people have a hard time believing someone’s faith? Are all African Americans Muslim? Why is it hard to believe that an African American could be Jewish? Or a Caucasian is a Hindu?
The Right Media opinionaters had to make controversy that President “O” never gave an Easter Proclamation, yet never mentioned neither did Bush 43, Clinton, and well no President gave an Easter Proclamation since 1980! Yet, there always must be controversy no matter the President.
The Shiloh Church that Pres “O” attended Easter service has a historical significance in our history. Look at the historical significance of other churches around the nation’s capital and in your hometown.
Yet, the Right Media opinionating machine had to find controversy with the Shiloh Church pastor and words he used years prior. Do you know what other priests, pastors, etc. are saying at each and every service over the past 10 years across our nation?
What if St Peter’s Church was the president’s destination on Easter Sunday and the pastor was just linked to gay slurs a month prior. Should he have switched destinations even though that Church may have some historical significance between the U.S. and the Catholic Church?
Or what of a particular church has been scandalous in a molestation charge? Should that Church be shuttered and the parishioners be scattered about town? No, they keep showing up every service. So should we not charge each member with negativity and slander for still going? Is that not what the tabloid Media is doing?
When someone says “Every Muslim is a Terrorist” (which is said quite often) for the many terroristic attacks worldwide. Would it be wrong to say every Catholic priest is a child molester or sexual predator? After all, there have been molestation charges worldwide within the Catholic Church.
See how easy it is to start a controversy over Media interpretation.
Where a person worships or what religion a person worships does make them illegalable to become President of the United States. I find that many people who put so much value on it either:
1. Do not attend church themselves
2. Have no faith in any religion
3. Are Lemmings that help fuel the Media machine
4. Belief in religion and attend church, but are extremely hypocritical for they do not follow the words of the Church in their private lives
Where and when someone worships in no one’s business except for that person and for those that need to know, need to find a better hobby.
I always remember the story of my Aunt Ernie. A lady with character is a light description of her. When I was young, I spent a Saturday night at her house. She told me, “You can sleep in on Sunday, I’ll try to be quiet as I get ready for Church in the morning.” As I woke up that Sunday morning I heard the television and walked into the living room. There was my Aunt Ernie, dressed up and watching a Sunday morning Church service on the television. I waited to ask her “I thought you were going to Church?” She replied “Just because I am not in the house of the Lord does not mean I am not attending the word of the Lord. As long as God is with you and invited into your house, you are in attendance and he is with you.”
Not bad coming from a little Italian lady that chain smoked non-filtered Kool brand cigarettes and thought Steelers QB Terry Bradshaw was a dream.
Back to Romney. Because of his Mormon faith and that of Media clown Glenn Beck, the Mormon Church has been going on an promotion frenzy, trying to get people to change their minds about the Mormon faith, to disspell all those past thoughts and actions that speak ill of its history.
Hmm, guess that's better then having an Inquisition, a political one at least.
“That I am not a member of any Christian Church, is true; but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion in general, or of any denomination of Christians in particular.” – Abraham Lincoln
Funny how our 16th president’s religious beliefs are still being debated today? If you Google Abraham Lincoln’s religion, you’ll get about 16 unique links all debating whether he was a Christian, Universalist or an Atheist, even though we do know he was raised a Baptist.
My question is what does religion have to do with the Presidency?
Think about it.
In 2008, Gov Mitt Romney was campaigning to be the Republican Presidential candidate. One could say he was the closest thing to the perfect candidate.
He was a successful Republican governor in extremely liberal Massachusetts, successful in business, credited for making the Salt Lake City Olympics a success, and so on. He was the front runner for much of the campaign
Two things held Romney back, the first being his successful transformation of Massachusetts healthcare (a version of Universal Health Care) and the other was his Mormon faith.
Everywhere he went, people held off on their choice of Romney because of those two things, but a lot fell on his Faith.
Americans need to realize, Religion has nothing to do with the Presidency. If that was the case, John F. Kennedy would never have been president, no matter how much money the Kennedy clan threw into the campaign. People feared his Roman Catholic upbringing and were afraid that the Pope would give him marching orders.
Does anyone know the faith of Pres. Eisenhower followed as a child?
He was a Jehovah’s Witness as a child. Yes the very same people you hide behind the curtains from when they ring the doorbell. And I do believe Eisenhower turned out to be a damn good General and President. Just look at our nation's highway system. Thanks Ike.
What about Thomas Jefferson? You know, Thomas Jefferson, the man that wrote many of our sacred documents. Jefferson was raised Episcopalian, yet served with no denomination. Does that make him any much a bad president or better president than the other 43 that served?
Current President “O’s” religion comes up at every Christian holiday, because so many belief he is a Muslim because of his funny name and his father’s background.
Why is it people have a hard time believing someone’s faith? Are all African Americans Muslim? Why is it hard to believe that an African American could be Jewish? Or a Caucasian is a Hindu?
The Right Media opinionaters had to make controversy that President “O” never gave an Easter Proclamation, yet never mentioned neither did Bush 43, Clinton, and well no President gave an Easter Proclamation since 1980! Yet, there always must be controversy no matter the President.
The Shiloh Church that Pres “O” attended Easter service has a historical significance in our history. Look at the historical significance of other churches around the nation’s capital and in your hometown.
Yet, the Right Media opinionating machine had to find controversy with the Shiloh Church pastor and words he used years prior. Do you know what other priests, pastors, etc. are saying at each and every service over the past 10 years across our nation?
What if St Peter’s Church was the president’s destination on Easter Sunday and the pastor was just linked to gay slurs a month prior. Should he have switched destinations even though that Church may have some historical significance between the U.S. and the Catholic Church?
Or what of a particular church has been scandalous in a molestation charge? Should that Church be shuttered and the parishioners be scattered about town? No, they keep showing up every service. So should we not charge each member with negativity and slander for still going? Is that not what the tabloid Media is doing?
When someone says “Every Muslim is a Terrorist” (which is said quite often) for the many terroristic attacks worldwide. Would it be wrong to say every Catholic priest is a child molester or sexual predator? After all, there have been molestation charges worldwide within the Catholic Church.
See how easy it is to start a controversy over Media interpretation.
Where a person worships or what religion a person worships does make them illegalable to become President of the United States. I find that many people who put so much value on it either:
1. Do not attend church themselves
2. Have no faith in any religion
3. Are Lemmings that help fuel the Media machine
4. Belief in religion and attend church, but are extremely hypocritical for they do not follow the words of the Church in their private lives
Where and when someone worships in no one’s business except for that person and for those that need to know, need to find a better hobby.
I always remember the story of my Aunt Ernie. A lady with character is a light description of her. When I was young, I spent a Saturday night at her house. She told me, “You can sleep in on Sunday, I’ll try to be quiet as I get ready for Church in the morning.” As I woke up that Sunday morning I heard the television and walked into the living room. There was my Aunt Ernie, dressed up and watching a Sunday morning Church service on the television. I waited to ask her “I thought you were going to Church?” She replied “Just because I am not in the house of the Lord does not mean I am not attending the word of the Lord. As long as God is with you and invited into your house, you are in attendance and he is with you.”
Not bad coming from a little Italian lady that chain smoked non-filtered Kool brand cigarettes and thought Steelers QB Terry Bradshaw was a dream.
Back to Romney. Because of his Mormon faith and that of Media clown Glenn Beck, the Mormon Church has been going on an promotion frenzy, trying to get people to change their minds about the Mormon faith, to disspell all those past thoughts and actions that speak ill of its history.
Hmm, guess that's better then having an Inquisition, a political one at least.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
What’s in a name or Americanize me?
All across our great nation, state legislatures are either entering “Birth Certificate” laws or getting ready to vote on such laws.
Arizona, Louisiana, Maine, Wisconsin and so on will be voting on such laws. All because a guy with a funny name, who has a parent from another country, won the Presidency of the United States of America, Barrack Hussein Obama.
So as the “Birther” notion over the release of the long form birth certificate of Pres. “O” dissipates, another one begins.
Louisiana Gov. Piyush Jindal released his long form birth certificate over the weekend, but no one really noticed except a few newspapers.
Why?
Because Gov Piyush Jindal said he will sign the law, if it comes across his desk, that if you want to be on the state's election ballot, you must show your long form birth certificate.
Who is Piyush Jindal you ask? You might know him by the name “Bobby” Jindal, the once Republican Presidential hopeful of 2009.
Here’s the kicker, no one ever suspected “Bobby” Jindal of being anything other than American, maybe because he goes by the name “Bobby” and not his birth name of Piyush.
When Pres. “O” was young, he would go by the name “Barry” and one has to wonder, if he still went by that, would anyone care about his birth certificate? Would he be considered American with the name "Barry?"
Oh, the Tabloid Media went ape reporting the fact he went by "Barry" in his youth, yet no one said two words concerning Gov Jindal use of "Bobby" when he ran for one of many political positions.
Both the Pres and Louisiana Gov where born in the United States. But as Pres “O” mom was a natural born American from Kansas and dad was here on a student visa from Kenya, both of Jindal’s parents were here on 2 different forms of Green Cards. So does that make Gov Jindal an "anchor baby?"
Mr. Jindal’s parents, Raj & Amar came here from India in 1971. Jindal's father secured a working Green card as he was an engineer. Mrs. Jindal secured a spousal Green card and attended graduate school at Louisiana State University for nuclear physics. Mrs. Jindal was already pregnant when arriving in the US, giving birth later that year to little Piyush.
OK, stop there. Is this not what people are accusing foreign immigrants of doing today? Coming to the United States on student or working visas, then having a child born here so they can stay?
I'm not accusing Gov Jindal's family of doing so, just making a note that today that is the complaint of so many. Or maybe it's sectional, they are only complaining about those that don't give back and become a debt to society.
After all, the Jindal's were able to secure their Green cards due to a 1965 law that allowed people with "exceptional ability in the sciences or arts" to enter the U.S.
But why does he go by the name "Bobby?"
Well apparently when he was the age of 4, the Brady Bunch was the big hit and so "Bobby" comes from Bobby Brady!!
Seriously, they couldn't say "Bobby Kennedy" or any famous Bobby at the time? They had to use the whining Bobby Brady.
So, here's the question; If Barrack Obama went by the name "Barry" and his father became a US citizen would people still have raised the "Birther" notion?
I say "No," however the controversy would be whether he would have been considered an "Anchor Baby" even though his father was here on a Student visa and became a US Citizen.
Louisiana Senator David Vitter is introducing a "birthright citizenship" law. The law would restrict "birthright citizenship" to children born in the US to at least one parent who is a citizen, legal resident alien or active member of the US armed forces.
If the law passes, then both President "O" and Gov Jindal would be elligable for the "birthright citizenship" we so much love. Pres "O" since his mom is an American citizen born in Kansas and Gov Jindal because both his parents were here on 2 different forms of Green cards.
It's rather funny that even the outsourced jobs to India of telemarketing or debt collection have their employees go by American names when calling customers.
Why? So when you answer your phone, you think they have immigrated here and decided that changing their name was the "American" thing to do.
We are very close to having a President Maverick or a Vice President Apple considering how parents are naming their children nowadays. But those names are used by fans of the movie Top Gun or Gwenyth Paltrow
Will we then question the sanity of the parents for the naming of their child?
It's not that far away that older Americans will have to adapt to the idea of a foreign president in the terms of Gender and Race. Or can Americans be racist and not even know it?
Then again, it's only a name.
BigPoppa's cup has run dry. Click a link please
Huffpost.com
Reuters
Washington Post
Arizona, Louisiana, Maine, Wisconsin and so on will be voting on such laws. All because a guy with a funny name, who has a parent from another country, won the Presidency of the United States of America, Barrack Hussein Obama.
So as the “Birther” notion over the release of the long form birth certificate of Pres. “O” dissipates, another one begins.
Louisiana Gov. Piyush Jindal released his long form birth certificate over the weekend, but no one really noticed except a few newspapers.
Why?
Because Gov Piyush Jindal said he will sign the law, if it comes across his desk, that if you want to be on the state's election ballot, you must show your long form birth certificate.
Who is Piyush Jindal you ask? You might know him by the name “Bobby” Jindal, the once Republican Presidential hopeful of 2009.
Here’s the kicker, no one ever suspected “Bobby” Jindal of being anything other than American, maybe because he goes by the name “Bobby” and not his birth name of Piyush.
When Pres. “O” was young, he would go by the name “Barry” and one has to wonder, if he still went by that, would anyone care about his birth certificate? Would he be considered American with the name "Barry?"
Oh, the Tabloid Media went ape reporting the fact he went by "Barry" in his youth, yet no one said two words concerning Gov Jindal use of "Bobby" when he ran for one of many political positions.
Both the Pres and Louisiana Gov where born in the United States. But as Pres “O” mom was a natural born American from Kansas and dad was here on a student visa from Kenya, both of Jindal’s parents were here on 2 different forms of Green Cards. So does that make Gov Jindal an "anchor baby?"
Mr. Jindal’s parents, Raj & Amar came here from India in 1971. Jindal's father secured a working Green card as he was an engineer. Mrs. Jindal secured a spousal Green card and attended graduate school at Louisiana State University for nuclear physics. Mrs. Jindal was already pregnant when arriving in the US, giving birth later that year to little Piyush.
OK, stop there. Is this not what people are accusing foreign immigrants of doing today? Coming to the United States on student or working visas, then having a child born here so they can stay?
I'm not accusing Gov Jindal's family of doing so, just making a note that today that is the complaint of so many. Or maybe it's sectional, they are only complaining about those that don't give back and become a debt to society.
After all, the Jindal's were able to secure their Green cards due to a 1965 law that allowed people with "exceptional ability in the sciences or arts" to enter the U.S.
But why does he go by the name "Bobby?"
Well apparently when he was the age of 4, the Brady Bunch was the big hit and so "Bobby" comes from Bobby Brady!!
Seriously, they couldn't say "Bobby Kennedy" or any famous Bobby at the time? They had to use the whining Bobby Brady.
So, here's the question; If Barrack Obama went by the name "Barry" and his father became a US citizen would people still have raised the "Birther" notion?
I say "No," however the controversy would be whether he would have been considered an "Anchor Baby" even though his father was here on a Student visa and became a US Citizen.
Louisiana Senator David Vitter is introducing a "birthright citizenship" law. The law would restrict "birthright citizenship" to children born in the US to at least one parent who is a citizen, legal resident alien or active member of the US armed forces.
If the law passes, then both President "O" and Gov Jindal would be elligable for the "birthright citizenship" we so much love. Pres "O" since his mom is an American citizen born in Kansas and Gov Jindal because both his parents were here on 2 different forms of Green cards.
It's rather funny that even the outsourced jobs to India of telemarketing or debt collection have their employees go by American names when calling customers.
Why? So when you answer your phone, you think they have immigrated here and decided that changing their name was the "American" thing to do.
We are very close to having a President Maverick or a Vice President Apple considering how parents are naming their children nowadays. But those names are used by fans of the movie Top Gun or Gwenyth Paltrow
Will we then question the sanity of the parents for the naming of their child?
It's not that far away that older Americans will have to adapt to the idea of a foreign president in the terms of Gender and Race. Or can Americans be racist and not even know it?
Then again, it's only a name.
BigPoppa's cup has run dry. Click a link please
Huffpost.com
Reuters
Washington Post
Friday, May 6, 2011
The partial hiding of the Republican "Big Brother" state
“Our #1 priority come this January (2011) is the Economy and Jobs”
Those words were spoken by Rep. John Boehner only five months ago and my question to him is “Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs you promised would be your #1 priority?”
It’s a simple question that no matter who in Congress you may ask, they will not give a simple answer too. So I’ll answer it for them, “we have no clue because we are busy trying to link Social Issues with the lack of job growth.”
The Bush Tax Cuts were created in 2003 to help job growth to which they did not produce. Republicans fought desperately to keep the BTCs in 2010 with the normal taglines. They won, but still no job growth.
Congress is too busy fighting Social Issues and we are struggling in America. Yet, Republicans biggest excuse for lack of job growth is Health care.
They have spent their political capital, if they had any, on repealing what everyone knows as “Obamacare.” And with all their hard work, what is their end result?
House Ways and Means chairman, Rep. David Camp announced on May 5 that “repealing ‘Obamacare’ is now off the table.” Seriously, this is their end result. After months of trying to repeal it, they give up.
So what’s the plan dear chairman? What are you going to do next?
“Beginning today, we attack ‘Obamacare’ and will repeal sections of it or modify it” per Chairman Camp.
And what about Budget master Paul Ryan’s plan for Medicare vouchers? Well Chairman Camp simply stated “The Medicare Voucher system is a no go.”
What a waste of taxpayer money, but that’s Congress.
No matter what party is in charge, everything circles back to the beginning with no results.
So this now gives the House time to work on H.R. 3, better known as “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions.” Now read that title regain, “No Taxpayer Funding” which aims at the campaign against Planned Parenthood, or so one would think.
As Republicans and their Media minions love to state that “Democrats have created a ‘Nanny’ State” with everyone depending on the Federal Gov to give handouts, then it’s easy to say Republicans can be accused of creating a “Big Brother State.”
This is not new news, they began their Big Brother overtures with the Patriot Act and then even moved in with No Child Left Behind, but their latest venture moves into your own private insurance.
Big Poppa did not fall off the barstool on this, its right in the H.R. 3 bill. Just you will not hear it in the Tabloid Media minions today.
H.R. 3 states “Federal funding will not pay for abortions.” Simple statement and makes sense. But Republicans could not stop there, they needed to appease their Pro Life base and added that it could be illegal for your own private health insurance to offer an abortion program, as well as deny tax credits for any small business that offers a health insurance plan with an abortion option.
So if I am paying for my health insurance, the Federal Gov can make certain aspects of my plan an illegal action.
This is what turns my stomach about the state of our country, stay the f@ck out of my personal life.
Under the “Obamacare” plan, I can keep my 22 year old child on my health insurance while they are still in college. That’s my business, not my neighbors and not the Federal Gov either. If I am paying for it with my own money, it’s my business, no one else.
Meanwhile, back to H.R. 3, to where it will allow doctors and hospitals to refuse to perform any abortion, even one that would be needed to save the life of a pregnant woman.
Currently, a pregnant woman with a life-threatening condition cannot be turned away by a hospital, even if her condition requires the doctor to abort the child. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act require hospitals that receive federal money to provide emergency treatment or transfer to a hospital that can.
H.R. 3 trumps EMTLA by allowing a doctor to deny an abortion to a woman with a life threatening condition and also the doctor can refuse to transfer that woman to a facility to where she may receive an abortion. It will leave to the hospital and doctor clear of any lawsuits.
Also added to H.R. 3 is that it would allow hospitals not to require training on abortions procedures to its staff, this way there’s no one there capable of helping the woman with a life threatening condition with an abortion.
So let’s look into this in a psychological way that could affect a woman for length of time
In Nebraska, Danielle Deaver, she and her husband tried many times to have a child, and was pregnant with her first child. Mrs. Deaver was 22 weeks pregnant when her water broke and the amniotic fluid began leaking from her uterus.
The baby was being crushed by her uterus and she wanted the doctors to remove the baby, knowing full well the baby could not survive outside the womb because the lungs were not developed.
Nebraska Law states the doctors could not perform an abortion because the baby still had a heartbeat and that Mrs. Deaver was not in any danger of dying herself. Basically telling her she had to carry the baby as far as she could, even if it meant to term.
Mrs. Deaver’s pregnancy lasted another eight days. The baby, to whom they named Elizabeth, lived for 15 minutes, gasping for breath with her malformed lungs, dying in her mother’s arms.
Imagine the pain this family, this young lady had to go through, knowing she was carrying a baby that once born would suffer in great pain and not survive. Imagine the pain the newborn felt gasping for air.
Who has the right to determine the fate of this child, outside of the parents? Apparently Nebraska and now our Fed Gov believe they wield such power.
We hear the fight over repealing Roe V. Wade every campaign season. Promises and promises that it will be repealed. Here’s a fact, it will never be repealed for the fact that it will mean repealing many Privacy policies. Roe V. Wade wasn’t about the right to have an abortion, it was about a person’s personal privacy and how the law was intrusive into it.
However with legislation on the Congressional calendar like H.R. 3, Republicans are finding inventive was to circumvent your privacy laws. Soon, I can see laws from the 1970’s returning, for example to outlaw pornography.
Wonder how much revenue Comcast, Verizon or whatever cable company is out there will lose when their Pay-Per-View Adult channels become illegal in one form or another to some sort of circumvented privacy law?
So is this the “New Right 2011” movement of thinking? One can only wonder what form of “Big Brother” has been born.
Those words were spoken by Rep. John Boehner only five months ago and my question to him is “Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs you promised would be your #1 priority?”
It’s a simple question that no matter who in Congress you may ask, they will not give a simple answer too. So I’ll answer it for them, “we have no clue because we are busy trying to link Social Issues with the lack of job growth.”
The Bush Tax Cuts were created in 2003 to help job growth to which they did not produce. Republicans fought desperately to keep the BTCs in 2010 with the normal taglines. They won, but still no job growth.
Congress is too busy fighting Social Issues and we are struggling in America. Yet, Republicans biggest excuse for lack of job growth is Health care.
They have spent their political capital, if they had any, on repealing what everyone knows as “Obamacare.” And with all their hard work, what is their end result?
House Ways and Means chairman, Rep. David Camp announced on May 5 that “repealing ‘Obamacare’ is now off the table.” Seriously, this is their end result. After months of trying to repeal it, they give up.
So what’s the plan dear chairman? What are you going to do next?
“Beginning today, we attack ‘Obamacare’ and will repeal sections of it or modify it” per Chairman Camp.
And what about Budget master Paul Ryan’s plan for Medicare vouchers? Well Chairman Camp simply stated “The Medicare Voucher system is a no go.”
What a waste of taxpayer money, but that’s Congress.
No matter what party is in charge, everything circles back to the beginning with no results.
So this now gives the House time to work on H.R. 3, better known as “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions.” Now read that title regain, “No Taxpayer Funding” which aims at the campaign against Planned Parenthood, or so one would think.
As Republicans and their Media minions love to state that “Democrats have created a ‘Nanny’ State” with everyone depending on the Federal Gov to give handouts, then it’s easy to say Republicans can be accused of creating a “Big Brother State.”
This is not new news, they began their Big Brother overtures with the Patriot Act and then even moved in with No Child Left Behind, but their latest venture moves into your own private insurance.
Big Poppa did not fall off the barstool on this, its right in the H.R. 3 bill. Just you will not hear it in the Tabloid Media minions today.
H.R. 3 states “Federal funding will not pay for abortions.” Simple statement and makes sense. But Republicans could not stop there, they needed to appease their Pro Life base and added that it could be illegal for your own private health insurance to offer an abortion program, as well as deny tax credits for any small business that offers a health insurance plan with an abortion option.
So if I am paying for my health insurance, the Federal Gov can make certain aspects of my plan an illegal action.
This is what turns my stomach about the state of our country, stay the f@ck out of my personal life.
Under the “Obamacare” plan, I can keep my 22 year old child on my health insurance while they are still in college. That’s my business, not my neighbors and not the Federal Gov either. If I am paying for it with my own money, it’s my business, no one else.
Meanwhile, back to H.R. 3, to where it will allow doctors and hospitals to refuse to perform any abortion, even one that would be needed to save the life of a pregnant woman.
Currently, a pregnant woman with a life-threatening condition cannot be turned away by a hospital, even if her condition requires the doctor to abort the child. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act require hospitals that receive federal money to provide emergency treatment or transfer to a hospital that can.
H.R. 3 trumps EMTLA by allowing a doctor to deny an abortion to a woman with a life threatening condition and also the doctor can refuse to transfer that woman to a facility to where she may receive an abortion. It will leave to the hospital and doctor clear of any lawsuits.
Also added to H.R. 3 is that it would allow hospitals not to require training on abortions procedures to its staff, this way there’s no one there capable of helping the woman with a life threatening condition with an abortion.
So let’s look into this in a psychological way that could affect a woman for length of time
In Nebraska, Danielle Deaver, she and her husband tried many times to have a child, and was pregnant with her first child. Mrs. Deaver was 22 weeks pregnant when her water broke and the amniotic fluid began leaking from her uterus.
The baby was being crushed by her uterus and she wanted the doctors to remove the baby, knowing full well the baby could not survive outside the womb because the lungs were not developed.
Nebraska Law states the doctors could not perform an abortion because the baby still had a heartbeat and that Mrs. Deaver was not in any danger of dying herself. Basically telling her she had to carry the baby as far as she could, even if it meant to term.
Mrs. Deaver’s pregnancy lasted another eight days. The baby, to whom they named Elizabeth, lived for 15 minutes, gasping for breath with her malformed lungs, dying in her mother’s arms.
Imagine the pain this family, this young lady had to go through, knowing she was carrying a baby that once born would suffer in great pain and not survive. Imagine the pain the newborn felt gasping for air.
Who has the right to determine the fate of this child, outside of the parents? Apparently Nebraska and now our Fed Gov believe they wield such power.
We hear the fight over repealing Roe V. Wade every campaign season. Promises and promises that it will be repealed. Here’s a fact, it will never be repealed for the fact that it will mean repealing many Privacy policies. Roe V. Wade wasn’t about the right to have an abortion, it was about a person’s personal privacy and how the law was intrusive into it.
However with legislation on the Congressional calendar like H.R. 3, Republicans are finding inventive was to circumvent your privacy laws. Soon, I can see laws from the 1970’s returning, for example to outlaw pornography.
Wonder how much revenue Comcast, Verizon or whatever cable company is out there will lose when their Pay-Per-View Adult channels become illegal in one form or another to some sort of circumvented privacy law?
So is this the “New Right 2011” movement of thinking? One can only wonder what form of “Big Brother” has been born.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Well that was a quick dose of Patriotism
Well that was a quick dose of Patriotism.
As news broke Sunday night of the assassination of Osama bin Laden, crowds gathered around our nation for a redemption cheer. Proud Americans, put aside their political strife for a moment of national closure, a closure that was some 9+ years in the making after the Sept 11, 2009 tragedy. But as we have seen all too often, that resurrected feeling of “Patriotism” fell apart within nanoseconds.
It took all of 7 hours before conspiracy theories came about and for complaints of who deserves and does not deserve credit for the assassination of Osama bin Laden. Why is it, with every good that happens, someone must come along and trample that feeling?
By Monday evening, the opinionating media outlets were fighting over who deserve credit for the capture and death of Osama bin Laden. The Right opinionators were dissecting President “O’s” every move from Friday’s visit to tornado torn Alabama to his comic relief at Saturday’s Journalist dinner to the fact he only played 9 holes of golf Sunday afternoon.
The Left opinionators were not far behind on their analyzing of why it took so long to happen and how President “W” prolonged the event by cutting the Afghanistan force by ¾ so they could enter a war in Iraq in 2003 and how in 2005 he is quoted as saying “I really don’t think of Osama bin Laden too much.”
Oh but the fun doesn’t stop there. Conspiracy jackwads like Andrew Breitbart and Alex Jones have come out stating that “Osama bin Laden has been dead for years, his body was frozen. It’s political ploy to save Obama.” Or those who say that Obama timed his press conference with the ending of Donald Trump’s “The Apprentice” because Obama and Trump do not like each other.
First off, if you become easily upset over any type of Reality TV interruption, you need to watch the movie WALL-E for your life has become a giant immobile blob.
Secondly, I’m trying to figure out why anyone listens to Breitbart and Jones any way. Both are blowhard jackwads that spew more political crap then is needed. And Jones is a 9/11 Truther! He believes it was an inside job. Why isn’t Glenn Beck attacking him for notion? Beck goes after Van Jones for signing a 9/11 Truth petition, but not Alex Jones! Or maybe there’s a link between 9/11 Truthers and Socialists. Quick to the magic Beck blackboard…..
These people make me sick. These are the people that find it revolting to give credit when credit is due. Both President “O” and “W” deserve the credit on Presidential decisions and if you disagree with me, bring it on.
In 2008, during a Presidential debate, then Senator Obama stated if the intelligence was valid, he would make the decision to enter any country to capture Osama bin Laden. His opponent, Senator John McCain then mocked “O” for this strategy. Hmm, looks like “O” kept his word.
President “W” deserves credit for putting the footwork in motion to this end result. He deserves the credit for pushing forward into Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks and ridding that country of the Taliban regime and their harboring of al Qaeda.
The end result is simple that President “O” sacked up and made the decision necessary to capture Osama bin Laden. President “W” never wanted to cross over friendly air space if intelligence came about.
President Clinton used legal precedence for not taking Osama bin Laden when offered, even after he was implicated in the Embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya and the bombing of the USS Cole.
We as Americans, we need a face to give credit too. Unfortunately for those that planned this year long operation, those clandestine actors in the CIA, Navy SEALS Team 6 and so forth are the ones that deserve 95% of the credit, as President “O” merely said “Get it done.” Yet, it happened under his watch, therefore he gets credit for the decision.
It’s hard for the opinionating media jackwads like Shultz, Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest to divorce themselves from their usual banter to give praise to someone they politically loathe. Even VP Dick Cheney’s face twisted and contorted when he gave a symbolic “at a boy" to the Obama Administration for closure.
But here’s a thought many have not elaborated on. What if this operation had ended with an opposite result, say like that under President Carter and the Iranian hostage situation. What if the American casualties were not Zero as they were on Sunday, but 12 or 20 Americans dead and Osama bin Laden seen on video running for the hills?
Imagine the worldwide impression set on the United States. Imagine how the opinionating Media would be reacting. Limbaugh and Hannity would have month’s worth of “see this proves Democrats are weak…” As well as Shultz and Maddow with “see, if President ‘W’ had only finished what he started weeks after 9/11…” Imagine what your new found “Patriotism” would emotionally produce?
Many Americans so called Patriotism comes within minutes of the 3 day holiday weekend of Memorial Day or 4th of July, when they can get that 18 pack of Hamburger buns for $1.99 or get a free Hot Dog at the local Chevy Dealer that’s having a deal on the new Mexican built Impala.
Then again, nowadays, Patriotism lasts only a nanosecond and people forget the word.
“My country,' tis of thee,
sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing;
land where my fathers died,
land of the pilgrims' pride,
from every mountainside let freedom ring!”
As news broke Sunday night of the assassination of Osama bin Laden, crowds gathered around our nation for a redemption cheer. Proud Americans, put aside their political strife for a moment of national closure, a closure that was some 9+ years in the making after the Sept 11, 2009 tragedy. But as we have seen all too often, that resurrected feeling of “Patriotism” fell apart within nanoseconds.
It took all of 7 hours before conspiracy theories came about and for complaints of who deserves and does not deserve credit for the assassination of Osama bin Laden. Why is it, with every good that happens, someone must come along and trample that feeling?
By Monday evening, the opinionating media outlets were fighting over who deserve credit for the capture and death of Osama bin Laden. The Right opinionators were dissecting President “O’s” every move from Friday’s visit to tornado torn Alabama to his comic relief at Saturday’s Journalist dinner to the fact he only played 9 holes of golf Sunday afternoon.
The Left opinionators were not far behind on their analyzing of why it took so long to happen and how President “W” prolonged the event by cutting the Afghanistan force by ¾ so they could enter a war in Iraq in 2003 and how in 2005 he is quoted as saying “I really don’t think of Osama bin Laden too much.”
Oh but the fun doesn’t stop there. Conspiracy jackwads like Andrew Breitbart and Alex Jones have come out stating that “Osama bin Laden has been dead for years, his body was frozen. It’s political ploy to save Obama.” Or those who say that Obama timed his press conference with the ending of Donald Trump’s “The Apprentice” because Obama and Trump do not like each other.
First off, if you become easily upset over any type of Reality TV interruption, you need to watch the movie WALL-E for your life has become a giant immobile blob.
Secondly, I’m trying to figure out why anyone listens to Breitbart and Jones any way. Both are blowhard jackwads that spew more political crap then is needed. And Jones is a 9/11 Truther! He believes it was an inside job. Why isn’t Glenn Beck attacking him for notion? Beck goes after Van Jones for signing a 9/11 Truth petition, but not Alex Jones! Or maybe there’s a link between 9/11 Truthers and Socialists. Quick to the magic Beck blackboard…..
These people make me sick. These are the people that find it revolting to give credit when credit is due. Both President “O” and “W” deserve the credit on Presidential decisions and if you disagree with me, bring it on.
In 2008, during a Presidential debate, then Senator Obama stated if the intelligence was valid, he would make the decision to enter any country to capture Osama bin Laden. His opponent, Senator John McCain then mocked “O” for this strategy. Hmm, looks like “O” kept his word.
President “W” deserves credit for putting the footwork in motion to this end result. He deserves the credit for pushing forward into Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks and ridding that country of the Taliban regime and their harboring of al Qaeda.
The end result is simple that President “O” sacked up and made the decision necessary to capture Osama bin Laden. President “W” never wanted to cross over friendly air space if intelligence came about.
President Clinton used legal precedence for not taking Osama bin Laden when offered, even after he was implicated in the Embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya and the bombing of the USS Cole.
We as Americans, we need a face to give credit too. Unfortunately for those that planned this year long operation, those clandestine actors in the CIA, Navy SEALS Team 6 and so forth are the ones that deserve 95% of the credit, as President “O” merely said “Get it done.” Yet, it happened under his watch, therefore he gets credit for the decision.
It’s hard for the opinionating media jackwads like Shultz, Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest to divorce themselves from their usual banter to give praise to someone they politically loathe. Even VP Dick Cheney’s face twisted and contorted when he gave a symbolic “at a boy" to the Obama Administration for closure.
But here’s a thought many have not elaborated on. What if this operation had ended with an opposite result, say like that under President Carter and the Iranian hostage situation. What if the American casualties were not Zero as they were on Sunday, but 12 or 20 Americans dead and Osama bin Laden seen on video running for the hills?
Imagine the worldwide impression set on the United States. Imagine how the opinionating Media would be reacting. Limbaugh and Hannity would have month’s worth of “see this proves Democrats are weak…” As well as Shultz and Maddow with “see, if President ‘W’ had only finished what he started weeks after 9/11…” Imagine what your new found “Patriotism” would emotionally produce?
Many Americans so called Patriotism comes within minutes of the 3 day holiday weekend of Memorial Day or 4th of July, when they can get that 18 pack of Hamburger buns for $1.99 or get a free Hot Dog at the local Chevy Dealer that’s having a deal on the new Mexican built Impala.
Then again, nowadays, Patriotism lasts only a nanosecond and people forget the word.
“My country,' tis of thee,
sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing;
land where my fathers died,
land of the pilgrims' pride,
from every mountainside let freedom ring!”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)