Talk of Secession

Yes. I just wasted about 20 minutes looking through the various petitions on the whitehouse page and typing up how many signers there were for each state's petition. These numbers are going up quickly so I'm sure by now there are a few thousand more at least, but here's the list I made:

Alabama- 30,325

Alaska- 7,939; 4,350

Arizona- 23,458

Arkansas- 23,109

California- 14,950; 2,319; 2,017

Colorado- 22,253
Connecticut- 3,784

Delaware- 7,667

Florida-34,736

Georgia- 32,021; 12,382; 8,270
Hawaii- 4,130

Idaho- 6,340

Illinois- 5,355; 5,272

Indiana- 21,544
Iowa- 5,114

Kansas- 8,661

Kentucky- 19,025

Louisiana- 36,955
Maine- 4,249
Maryland- 4,049

Michigan- 19,675
Massachusetts- 4,155
Minnesota- 5,645

Mississippi- 18,558

Missouri- 20,214; 13,779

Montana- 13,531

Nebraska- 7,255

Nevada- 10,523

New Hampshire- 5,552 

New Jersey- 14,280
New Mexico- 5,130

New York- 15,131; 8,428

North Carolina- 30,364

North Dakota- 11,571

Ohio- 11,827; 8,541; 4,636

Oklahoma- 18,101; 8,961

Oregon- 14,800

Pennsylvania- 13,714; 9,042

Rhode Island- 4,743

South Carolina- 24,320; 15,213

South Dakota- 6,582

Tennessee- 31,031

Texas- 117,214

Utah- 8,281; 6,975
Vermont- 2,508

Virginia- 8,863; 5,383; 5,014
Washington- 4,431; 3,825

West Virginia- 7,908

Wisconsin- 7,207

Wyoming- 9,186

No surprise that Texas has the most signatures.

What do I think of this? Well, if it wakes up our legislators to the fact that Americans are very unhappy with the status quo that would be great. However, judging from the comments I've been seeing about this I don't think that will happen. The majority of the comments I have read say that the signers are ignorant. foolish, and other bad things. Is that true of some of them? Sure. It is also true of some of the people who oppose the petitions. There are also two petitions calling for the deportation/exile/expatriation of all who sign the petitions for secession.

It is gonna get ugly folks.

*for states that have more than one petition I linked the name of the state to the petition with the most signatures and the other petitions to the number of signatures. I will try to update these numbers daily. They are going up quickly so likely what you see here is fewer than at present.

"Constitutional" Rights

I am seriously beginning to hate that phrase.


Let us be clear. The Constitution does not grant rights to the people. It was not written for the people, but to restrain the government. We have the rights of free speech, press, association, bearing arms, religion, etc, because we are human, not because we live in America. Jefferson said it perfectly, "...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..." The Constitution specifically enumerates the powers of the federal government and they are very limited. It was not intended to confer rights upon the people, only to acknowledge that the people had those rights inherently.


So please, stop claiming your 'constitutional' rights, and just claim your rights.

Pete Eyre arrested for wearing a hat.

Pete Eyre arrested for wearing a hat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynoUudh20A8

First reaction was to blame the one wearing the hat. Then I thought about it. Does failing to adhere to some custom warrant the treatment the man received? Without question the man was trying to cause trouble. Or was he? Why should there have been an issue? Is it really that important? It is not the law, it is just etiquette. Older people will say it is just good manners, and maybe it is, but not having good manners doesn't justify the wrongs and the bullying that is going on in government.

The fact that the police believed violence was an acceptable response to a breach of etiquette is disturbing to say the least. It is sad that our first response is always to side with the 'authorities', at least it is mine. Why should one cooperate with authorities that are violent without cause? Why should one give up rights and enable our government to get its power fix? Our government is intoxicated with power and uses things like this to assert its authority and subjugate the population.

So I think that we need more people like this who are willing to go through this to prove a point. We need to push back or we are going to be trampled.

Here are a couple more links about the same kind of thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHCkAk0WrPQ&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GskOXEX2wk&feature=player_embedded

I Despise Voter Guides!

Talk about a senseless killing of trees! They are absolutely useless. Unless of course you are a one, two, or three issue voter and you don't really care what a person actually does in office and care only for their rhetoric.

And tell me why the Commissioner of Agriculture's or the Commissioner of the General Land Office's or the Railroad Commissioner's position on abortion, gambling, divorce reform, sex education, or marriage has anything to do with the office they may hold.

The overly simplistic information provided doesn't tell the whole story and it doesn't surprise me that some candidates don't respond. I wouldn't.

If the 'Voters Guide' is your main source of information about candidates, do us all a favor and DON'T VOTE!!!

U.S. Funding Foreign Mosques (or "I Knew Obama Was A Muslim!!")

This article being bandied about by every conservative blogger and news outlet is getting very tiresome. And, unfortunately, it seems to be gaining steam. The senseless proliferation of the overstated implications of the funding of mosques is astounding to me. So, to bring some balance to the discussion...

First, the AFCP (Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation) was founded in 2001 under our glorious, godly President George W. Bush. And under Bush there was a lot of money donated to restore/preserve mosques and Islamic texts. Below is a link to the AFCP so that you can verify what will follow.

Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation

2001~ $14,942 for the preservation of Islamic texts; $14,500 to restore a mosque. For a total of: $29,442. Total AFCP payout for the year $2,858,662.

2002/2003~ $25,345 for mosque renovations; $24,475 repair for a Muslim mausoleum; $24,945 for restoration of a mosque/madrassa; $14,446 for mosque preservation. For a total of: $89,211. Total AFCP payout for the year $3,454,710.

2003/2004~$16,650 to preserve Islamic manuscripts; $33,310 to preserve a mosque. For a total of $49,960. Total AFCP payout for the year $2,344,815.

2004/2005~ $23,375 for exhibition of Islamic manuscripts; $9,345 to document Islamic heritage; $31,931 to restore a mosque; $16,100 to preserve Islamic culture; $31,015 for restoration of a mosque. For a total of $111766. Total AFCP payout for the year $3,261,251.

2005/2006~ $25,000 for preservation of Islamic texts; $24,000 to restore a mosque; $24,125 to restore a mosque; $24,700 to restore yet another mosque; $22,500 for a survey of Islamic architecture. For a total of $120,325. Total AFCP payout for the year $4,464,113.

2006/2007~ $25,589 to restore mosques; $60,600 to restore a mosque; $106,110 to restore a mosque; $37,676 to restore a madrassa. For a total of $229,975. Total AFCP payout for the year $5,026,328.

There was no information for 2007/2008 or 2008/2009.

Please bear in mind that these projects for mosques and Islamic texts and cultural preservation are only a small fraction of the overall money being spent.

Now I will agree that the government should not have been spending this money when we are having to borrow money from China, but to use this as an argument against Obama or to prove that Obama has Muslim sympathies is ridiculous; unless one is willing to admit that Bush also was a Muslim/Muslim sympathizer.

To my patriotic friends I say, Do not become sidetracked with this non-issue! That is exactly the kind of thing the government is hoping for so that we won't be watching what is really going on.

Elena Kagan and Prop 8

I must admit that I have not followed the confirmation proceedings for the newest Supreme Court Justice well. If I had wanted to be informed I am quite certain that I would not go to One News Now or any other Right-wing source for my information. This article illustrates my concern well. The 'experts' say that Kagan will be a solid vote for "homosexual 'marriage'" without bothering to give any real reason for that opinion. I have a feeling that what they mean is that she will not cast a vote to infringe upon the liberties of a segment of the population that the Christian Right disagrees with.

The whole Christian Right is in uproar over the CA judge that overturned the Prop 8 amendment. So was Judge Vaughn Walker correct? I am inclined to think that he was. And if the case does make it to the Supreme Court I hope that they will uphold his decision.

I read some of the text of the judgement, it is long, over 130 pages, so I didn't read every word. I am going to touch on some of the things I did read.

First for the conclusion drawn by Judge Walker.

"Conclusion
Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples.Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional."

The portion of the US Constitution he refers to is the 14th Amendment:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

If the law of CA recognizes marriage for heterosexuals it must also grant the same priviledge to homosexuals. The belief that homosexuality is sinful is a religious one. I agree with those on the right that homosexuality is wrong, but I don't want the government making moral judgements.

Part of the text in the judgement is:

"A state's interest in an enactment must of course be secular in nature. The state does not have an interest in enforcing private moral or religious beliefs without an accompanying secular purpose."

That is true.

The notion that homosexual marriage will degrade or in any other way affect heterosexual marriage is ridiculous. How can it affect my marriage? Homosexuals marrying will not change the commitment my husband and I have made. Homosexuals being allowed to have a marriage license and all of the rights, responsibilites, and privileges that go with it, "will not affect the number of opposite-sex couples who marry, divorce, cohabit, have children outside of marriage or otherwise affect the stability of opposite-sex marriages".

There was one part of the argument against Prop 8 that I disagree with. "Religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful harm gays and lesbians." How is that? I've never harmed anyone who is homosexual. How can my belief that they are wrong for their sexual proclivity harm them unless they allow it to affect them? I know people who believe that somethings I do are 'sinful'. It does not harm me for them to hold that view.

So, to end. If Kagan would vote that a 'ban' on homosexual marriage is unconstitutional I believe that would be a good thing. If that is the only argument the Right has against her, it isn't much.

Opposing the 'War', but thankful for the troops

Whenever I voice my opinion about the War in Iraq or Afghanistan I usually hear a comment that sounds something like, "But so many our our soldiers have died over there. We have to keep fighting." or, "I'd rather it be over there than over here!"

By the logic of the first reply, we will keep fighting forever! or until...until what? Our president sent our troops over there for nothing! He was at the least acting on very poor intelligence or at worst just looking for a fight. There were no WMDs. War does not spread 'democracy' or Christianity.

And what if there had been WMDs? Should it matter to us? If they were not being used on us why should we care? Iraq was a sovereign nation. No matter what we thought of their leader, he was THEIR leader. We have no business messing in the personal affairs of other nations. The idea of 'rogue nations' is preposterous! Sovereign nations should be left alone as long as they leave us alone. I don't mean to say that we should not be ready to defend our nation, but preemptive war (a war about what might happen) is wrong.

The 'War on Terror' is as big a joke as the 'War on Drugs'!! You cannot fight a mindset, an ideology, a tactic, with guns.

The wars we are currently fighting (as is every military action the US has engaged in since WWII) is unconstitutional. There was no declaration of war. Only Congress can declare war. So the POTUS used a loophole.

As for the second response. How long do you expect it to stay 'over there'? If we continue to invade countries and kill their people? how long will they put up with it before they decide to 'turn it all into glass'? How much do you think they will take?

That is really off topic though...

I oppose the wars we are fighting at present. BUT I am thankful for the men and women who volunteer to fight in them. I honor their sacrifice and devotion to duty. I only wish our leader had enough guts to NOT send them to fight a senseless battle and die or be maimed, for nothing but imperialism! I wish our current POTUS would do the right thing and bring our troops home...not just send them somewhere else.

My step-dad served 23 years in the Marine Corps. My mother served 8. One of my stepmothers served 20+ years in the Air Force. My grandfather served some time (not sure how long) in the Navy. My father-in-law served over 20 years in the Navy.

I have friends who have been or are in the Armed Forces.

I am thankful that they are and were willing to serve their country. I support our troops...but I DO NOT support the wars that they are currently fighting.

Love Thy Neighbor

So who is my neighbor?

According to Jesus it is anyone in need. Remember the good Samaritan?

It disturbs me to see Christians use Patriotism and 'godliness' as a cloak for hatred.

So the shooter at Ft. Hood was a Muslim...so what? Are we to conclude that every Muslim in America is eagerly awaiting the opportunity to kill as many Americans as he or she possibly can? In the same way that we assume that every whack job 'Christian' who kills an abortion doctor is a good representation of Christianity? Or the 'Christians' who wish to exterminate all of African or Jewish descent?

Oh! But I remember now! Islam commands these Muslim haters to kill Christians!! That's right...

So what about the 'Christians' who have used the word of God to justify killing? Are there not passages in the Bible that seem to teach violence to unbelievers, like Deut. 13:15? Oh yeah, I forgot! Those are all taken out of context!! Silly me!

Okay, I think I'm done with the sarcasm...I think...

I was unfriended by someone on facebook who didn't like that my husband (using my account) called attention to the fact that even Muslims need Jesus. Big deal, no skin off my back...friends who can't take a little honest questioning of their position are not worth my regret.

It does worry me though that this seems to be the prevailing thought of most fundamental Christians. They don't want Muslims in America, but why? Could it be that they are afraid that God is not big enough to convert them? Or is it that they are being derelict in their duty to try and win these lost souls to Jesus Christ, because it is easier to spout hate and misinformation?

I am not a liberal who thinks there are many ways to heaven. There is one way, through the blood of Jesus Christ. If you reject God's provision then you go to hell. But does that mean that I should not have compassion on those who do not believe as I do? I think not!!! Does that mean that I should try to deny them the benefits and opportunities that should be available to every citizen of the United States of America? Seriously, I saw comments on a story about the Ft. Hood shooting that said that anyone who is a Muslim should not be allowed to be in the Armed Forces! Are you kidding me?! They are Americans!!!

I direct your attention to the Constitution...Article 6 section 3 "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

A person being elected for government office cannot be given a religious test and neither should someone entering the military. To do so would blatantly violate a Constitutional principle!

So Christian, when was the last time you passed out a gospel tract or witnessed to someone about the saving power of Jesus Christ? When was the last time you showed compassion to the unsaved so that they could see Jesus in you? Until you are diligent about the Father's business, you have no business complaining about the Muslims 'taking over'!!

Obama poised to sign away US sovereignty

Christian Political Action Committees

Are they really a good thing?

Why do Christians seem to want to use the government to promote religious views? There's the American Family Association, the Right to Life, and Christian Coalition of America, Moral Majority, and many others!

My main beef with the CPACs is that I do not believe that it is the government's responsibility to legislate a moral religious code.

Yes, I agree that homosexuality is immoral. I believe drug use is a bad idea. I believe pornography perverts what God intended to be a wonderful thing. I believe that alcohol is bad to drink. I believe that people should get married and then stay married instead of shacking up. I believe abortion is the most awful thing a person could do to the unborn.

But all of those things are my religious views. I believe those things because I believe in God and I believe the Bible is His word. They are, at their heart, religious views. I have no right to impose those views on others who do not hold the same.

The essence of Liberty is that every person, as long as the do not hurt another, should be allowed to live in the manner they desire. Whether I agree with it or not.

Think about history. The times of greatest Revival were when people were trying to separate the Church from government, not trying to join the two. The Reformation, the Great Awakening. The latter especially came about because of Baptists who believed that the government had no business involved in religion, hence the 1st Amendment! It was because of that Great Awakening that we had the liberty in America to worship as we chose. And now the Christian Right is trying to take it away!

Jefferson said that it didn't matter if a person worshipped one God or 100 as long as that person would faithfully obey and uphold the Constitution. How a person views the Constitution is a much better measure of how that person will be in a position of authority than how well they can spout Christian Right rhetoric. For example, I know that Obama will be a bad president simply because he does not believe the Constitution means what it says, or that it is even a good governing document. That's enough for me. His religious affiliation or social views are irrelevant. His position on the Constitution is enough to know that he will not govern well. Incidentally, there is a clause in the Constitution that says that no religious test would be given to those seeking public office. The Founders made it clear that one's religion should not be the defining characteristic of whether one was fit for public office.

But this post isn't about Obama. It is about Christians using the government to spread the gospel.

How can Christians really think that making laws will make people turn to Christ? It won't. Just like having too many rules in a church as a condition of service (legalism) will eventually kill the church. It destroys liberty.

True revival starts with the individuals in the church, not through government intervention. If Christians honestly wish to see a return of the American people to a Biblical worldview, they must stop using the political podium as a bully pulpit. I am in no way suggesting that Christians stop preaching the word or passing out tracts or witnessing. I am saying that using politics to do so is wrong.

Christians need to stop thinking that the Republican party is the moral party. It is not, if the people involved at the top are any measure. Christians need to do their duty and vote, not for the religious candidate but for the Constitutional candidate.

Christians must, to some degree, separate their religion from their politics. Our religion ought to make us honest and trustworthy in our political dealings-in all our dealings with others. It ought to make us willing to do our duty, and not shirk it (that includes jury duty!!). It is our duty to be engaged in politics. To make an educated decision about who to vote for, not an emotional one. It is our duty to obey the law, and to oppose those laws that violate the ultimate authority of our land, the Constitution (not the Bible).

It seems that many Christians believe that the final civil authority in America is the Bible. Actually, that would be the Constitution! Yes, the Bible should be the final authority for Christians in their personal lives. It is not, however, our final civil authority. This is what makes it hard for Christians I think. I know it was for me. How can we 'advocate' homosexuality or abortion? Shouldn't we seek laws to curb such immoral behavior? NO! The proper place to rail against those things is in the pulpit at church, not the political podium. Those things are personal decisions and ought to be left to an individual's conscience. I hear you, But...but...its WRONG!!! And? So is divorce or lying or lust or... Do you, Christian, want to make divorce illegal? or adultery? or fornication? Those things were also punishable by death in the Old Testament.

Step back, take a breath, consider...why do Christians wish to make America a "Christian" nation? Even John Adams, likely the most pious Founder, signed a treaty that said we were not! (that was a treaty with Morocco) Why cannot they distinguish between a nation of Christians and a Christian nation. Do you, Christian, really want a theocracy? Really? Like Rome? Or any number of Muslim nations?

And which version of Christianity do you wish to impose? The Mennonite one? Where women have to wear a head covering and the same style of dress all the time. The Catholic one? Where one must confess one's sins to a priest. The Mormon one? Where drinking Coke was a sin. The Jehovah's Witness one? Where celebrating any holiday or birthday is forbidden. The Puritan one? Where neglecting to pay the preacher or not going to church on Sunday landed you in jail. You see the trouble one can get into?

Morality is for the individual to decide, that is called soul liberty. One can choose to believe or not. We should not use the government to decide which morality is right. The government already has its hands too much in our personal lives! And it has a hard enough time handling what it is supposed to!

Christians deprive themselves of some wonderful allies for Constitutional governance because they draw a line in the sand that says, "If you aren't a Christian, you cannot be a true American." I doubt Jefferson could stand up under the scrutiny of the Christian Right! And yet he was a great Patriot!

I'll end with a quote. Thomas Paine said, "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

Continental Congress 2009!!

Delegate election in this Saturday October 10! (Can it really be October already?!)

If you are not helping at a local polling place do get out and vote!! If you are not helping but would like to contact your local coordinator!

Linkies!
http://givemeliberty.org/user/congress/Region.aspx?state=TX
http://www.cc2009.us/

Town Hall with Mac Thornberry

I went this morning early, 8:30 am. to a town hall. Of course we knew that the main subject would be health care reform. I didn't want to know about that since I am pretty sure I know where he stands already. Anyway, it was okay. Not many hard questions or even many original thoughts. There were a few amusing moments and a few infuriating ones and many eye roll moments.

There was one lady that had some good things to say about health care and I agree with her on some of that. She said that we don't need another government agency, but that we need to better use what we have. I like her idea of a sliding scale for premiums and co-pays with medicaid. That idea is very appealing to me. We cannot afford private ins. but I hate using medicaid because then I pay for nothing and others pay for it all. That doesn't sit well with my libertarian ideals.

I asked a couple questions. One was for someone else that couldn't be there. Not sure that person will be happy with the answer.

My own question was, "Considering your vote for the 'bailout' last year and your vote for the PATRIOT ACT, how can we trust that you will do as you vowed on taking office to uphold the Constitution? How can we trust that you will represent the people and that you will not vote for anything that violates the constitution?"

His response the bailout part was justification. Saying how the President and his advisors were saying that something MUST be done. and that the amended bill was more palatable. He didn't really answer my second question. But he did say he disagreed with me about the PATRIOT ACT. I asked, "So, you don't think that it infringes on our 4th amendment rights?" He replied, "No, not at all."

Well thank you Mr. Thornberry for making me even more sure that I was glad I didn't vote for you in the last election!!

President Obama's health care speech

I read the transcript last night and then watched it this morning online.


As I watched I jotted down stuff as it came to mind during the speech. I will elaborate on what I wrote.

I was irritated by the long applause at the beginning, before he had even started speaking. Let's get to what we came to hear please! I counted 20+ standing ovations, most started by Pelosi, one by Biden, and another by someone else. I wish people would contain themselves and actually listen to what is being said instead of reacting to the tone of voice being used. It did seem to me that even the Pres. was getting tired of it by the end.

Obama claimed that the 'stimulus' had brought our nation 'back from the brink' of economic collapse. I really don't think that is the case, since much of that money hasn't been spent and what has hasn't been accounted for very well.

I contend that America is not wealthy. We have the appearance of being so, but being on the verge of bankruptcy is not my idea of being wealthy. I think every legislator in Washington needs to read Dave Ramsey's book, "The Total Money Makeover" and apply it to our nation's finances. We are $11 trillion + in debt, that is not wealthy!! We are enslaved to foreign lenders!!!

I do agree with the President that insurance companies are part of the problem. They will not cover those who need it most because it hurts the bottom line, but then they are businesses and they are in it to make money not for philanthropy.

Obama spoke about the rising costs of health care. I contend that much of that cost is because of insurance companies and also because of the regulation, licensure, and taxes and all associated costs.

Obama said that an average of $1000 of insurance premiums for those who have it, goes toward paying for those who don't have insurance. That will not change because of this plan. Those who have will still be paying for those who don't through the public option and subsidies. So people won't be saving, their money will just be spent a little differently.

Why would a transition to single-payer disrupt coverage? I don't think it would. And if that is what he would really like to have why not go for it?

I agree with the President's disapprobation of scare tactics and the fact that our polarization into ideological camps are wrong and do not get anything accomplished.

It is not strictly true that there will be no change in coverage. There is a commission in the bill that will decide what constitutes 'basic coverage' and to determine what coverage a company must provide.

I agree that we need to make it so that those with pre-existing conditions can get affordable coverage.

Not so sure about the routine procedure coverage. I see this as a way for practitioners to milk the system.

I like the idea of the exchange, but I worry about corruption and how practical it will really be.

I don't really like being required to have coverage. I really don't think auto insurance should be required either.

I wish that employers would not be required to carry it for employees. I think this may over tax some smaller businesses that don't qualify for the exemptions.

There are a few things that the right is insistent about that I've not been able to verify, namely 'death panels', coverage for illegals, funding for abortions, and no freedom of conscience. Those on the right are adamant that these things are true and yet I've found no citations to show me exactly where in the bill these things are. If there is a loophole for illegals, we need to get it closed up. Surely if these concerns are brought up and addressed there would be less opposition from the right.

Obama said that the public option would not cost taxpayers money, I wonder if he really believes that? How can it possibly not cost the taxpayers money? Where will the funds come from? Even if it is from 'savings' in other areas, it is still taxpayer money. All the money the government has is from the taxpayers!

I dislike his insistence that this MUST be done NOW and in the way that he wants. The president can suggest things to Congress but he cannot mandate. Article 2 section 3 of the US Constitution says, "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; ..."

I mentioned above about my incredulity that this will not cost the taxpayer money, it most certainly will. Government programs ALWAYS cost more, much more, than projected.

Some of the deficits that he deplores were because of his votes in Congress. He did vote for spending for the Iraq war and for the 'bailout' bill.

How does the President propose to completely do away with fraud? Does he really believe that we will be able to eliminate it completely? How ridiculous!

I do agree that 'politicking' is a large part of the reason that we cannot come to an agreement on health care reform.

Why is it that so many politicians do not seem to understand that it is government getting involved that has gotten us here. The reckless spending and the manipulation of our economy and money by the FED (and yes I do realize that the FED is not really a government agency).

So there you have my thoughts on the President's speech on health care.

For those who oppose it for the reasons I mentioned above, if you have some proof that those things are true, PLEASE show me where in the bill it is! I really do want to believe the very worst of this piece of legislation!

Pres. Obama's speech tomorrow

I plan on having my kids watch it tomorrow. Linky to the live stream, in case you want to watch it too! I embeded the livestream on the bottom of this page also.

I read the text and there is nothing in it that I think is wrong. It is just your basic 'do your best' admonition.

We will of course discuss it after! ;)

I really do neglect this blog!

It has been nearly a month since my last post! I had such grand dreams of blogging at least once a week! LOL

I have been busy with the garden. I think I killed the cantaloupe...I was trying to 'help' it! :( One of the bell pepper plants died and one of my last two remaining corn stalks was attacked by Wes. But the tomatoes and the peas look great! We've even eaten some of our peas! :D It has been constant work to keep the grass out of the beds. The weeds are easy, but GRASS! UGH! I hate grass! :P

Peas

One of the tomato plants

Corn

Sara is just beginning to walk! She has taken as many as four consecutive steps before falling! Won't be long now and she'll be running after her big brothers.

Sara standing on the trampoline

Kyla has been very busy with CYIA (Christian Youth In Action). She completes her training on Friday and they are all going out for pizza that evening. She will be helping with 5-day clubs during the rest of the summer. She will also be taking a class at the college starting next week. She is growing so fast! Next time I blink she'll want to be leaving home or getting married! :-O

Cora is busy with gymnastics and doing very well.

The rest of the kids are doing well and growing.

We are planning a trip to D.C. in Sept (for the 'Tea Party). I am excited and hope that everything works out for us to go. My mom will be going with us and that will be nice.

I have a new job!! I will be pet-sitting. It should be mostly fun...the animals I am watching starting this week are just too sweet! One of the dogs is just so nice! She laid her head on my lap when I bent down to pet her! If she wasn't so big, I could see her being a very cuddly lap dog. :) I am so thankful for the opportunity! I had been praying that the Lord would provide a way for me to make a little extra money and then my friend called and asked if I was interested. It is great because it really isn't a rigid schedule and I won't have to be long from home at any one time. And if I absolutely must I can have the kids ride along with me and they can wait in the van while I feed and water the animals. It is very convenient having two girls who are old enough to babysit!

Now to politics! :D

For those who live in Texas- CALL THE GOVENOR! and tell him to veto SB 1440 the bill that will give CPS license to take children and 'interview' them without court permission and without the parents' knowledge or consent (which they already do enough of) and the stipulation that CPS must show compelling evidence has been removed. This would be a huge blow to parental rights. So call!

For the rest of the nation- There is just too much that is highly disturbing going on in Washington...I don't have the energy to keep up with it all! It is discouraging. :( The president who was going to 'change' things in Washington isn't following through...he is accomplishing large changes but not in how things run...it is the same old political game with the same disregard for the will of 'the people' and more government grabs for power. Very disheartening!

So on that happy note I will end for now! :P Have a blessed day!


P.S. Sara has this weird bump on her head. It is on the left side and is about the size of a quarter. It is not red or inflamed and doesn't seem to be sensitive to touch at all. It is not hard but feels kind of like bubble wrap (sorry that's the most accurate description I can come up with). I don't recall her hitting her head. I called the ped last night when I noticed it and then ended up taking her to the ER, just because it is so strange. The ER doc said it is just a hematoma and didn't reccomend doing a CAT scan since she seems fine otherwise. Has anyone else every seen anything like this? I really am trying not to worry about it...I have seen PLENTY of head bumps with the kids but this one is just...well, weird! Anyway enough of my hypochondriac mommy moment! LOL

TheHill.com - Not all senators warming to Obama cap-and-trade ...

TheHill.com - Not all senators warming to Obama cap-and-trade ...

This is a way to get revenue for the government. This will increase the cost of everything we buy! And Obama knows this. He knows that this will cause hardship, especially for those "low-wage earners" he professes to care so much about, and he doesn't care! This increases the size and scope of government and will send more companies looking for other places to produce their products and thereby increase unemployment. How can he continually spout how much he is concerned about the 'poor' and then turn around and do something he KNOWS will hurt those very same people?! His 'tax cut' (I won't go into what a crock that is right now) for 95% of Americans will be completely offset by the projected increase in living expenses ($700-$1,400 per household).

As anyone who has ever studied economics at all should know the companies who must pay the carbon tax (and that is what it is) will pass on that cost to the consumer! That is us!! That is the people that Obama has given a 'tax cut' to! How will this help the economy? How will this help America recover? How is this upholding the Constitution?

I sincerely hope this doesn't pass, but I am afraid it will because "The One" is used to getting his way!

The Tea Party protestors are racist?!

I listened to this whole thing and these are the thoughts I had as she spoke:
1) I am not a racist
2) I am not part of the 'right-wing'
3) I am not a redneck
4) I am NOT a racist
5) I do not hate Obama because he is black
6) I am not a 'white power' activist
7) I do not have a neurological problem
8) I am NOT A RACIST!!
9) I do know my history
10) I don't watch FOX news
11) I am not a racist!
12) I am not a member of the Klan (don't even approve of such nonsense)
13) I have no objection to a black man being in the white house.


I cannot believe that she said that so many times! And then the part about it being a neurological disorder. The left is NEVER guilty of spinning stuff and working up the 'rabble'!! And a Democrat NEVER started a war! Do these people even have a brain? Or have they just been brainwashed by the leftist news media? Has SHE read history?"

Let's see...
WWI Woodrow Wilson-Democrat
WWII Franklin Roosevelt-Democrat
Korea Harry Truman-Democrat
Vietnam Eisenhower- Republican (note: this was continued by two Democratic presidents and ended by a Republican one. Eight of the fifteen years we were in Vietnam a Democrat was in the White House.)
Kuwait- George HW Bush- Republican
Serbia- Bill Clinton-Democrat
Iraq- George W Bush- Republican

There are many more times that our troops were sent overseas for military action, but those are the biggies. As you can see neither party can claim that the other is 'warmongering' since they are both guilty. There is a comprehensive list of all military action abroad here if you really want to find out which party used the military more.

As for the Republicans being the 'racist' party see THIS link.
Another
and another

I am not a Republican, but I do hate lying! by anyone! Unless our politicians start being honest (which they won't) there is no hope for our Republic.

The Obama Deception

Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat or a Libertarian or a Constitutionalist you need to watch this whole video. InfoWars is non-partisan. They have also done documentaries exposing Bush. The POTUS is just a front man for who is really controlling the economy and the politics of our country. Jesse Ventura says, "...it's just showbiz...". Sad but true.

America is being handed to socialists, PLEASE America don't let that happen. Now is the time to stand up, get involved, and stop our country's slide to communism. Socialism/Communism has never worked anywhere! It has only served to enrich the elites and to further impoverish the masses.

Tea Party

The kids and I went to our local 'Tea Party' on Wednesday. This morning I watched the news coverage of it online.

It was encouraging to see so many people show up. There were at least 300 people at each one (there were two locally one at noon and another at six). I was disappointed by the news. The news people introduced it as a protest against Obama. That was not what it was really about. These people are not upset only because of Obama's economic policy, although that is a big issue, they are upset because the government is consistently overstepping it's Constitutional bounds. Both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of that.

We want our Republic (not democracy) preserved. We want the government back in it's box!

I do wish that Repulicans who were at the tea parties would open their eyes a little more to the wrongs done by their own party. When they reduce their argument to partisanship they destroy their credibility. The GOP is not the answer to the Constitutional crisis our country is in. Republicans are part of the problem!! Can we say "Patriot Act"?! And lets not forget that the GOP had the White House and both houses of Congress for at least two years and did basically nothing! Bush did not use that time to fulfill any of his campaign promises, like privatizing Social Security.

Someone at the C4L (Campaign for Liberty) meeting last night said that the one good thing about Republicans is their determination not to be parted from their guns. They have put a line in the sand and that is good. I agree. I don't think that the Obama administration will put an outright ban on guns, but that they will make it so difficult and so expensive that will effectively be a ban while they will still be claiming to uphold the second amendment.

I hope that Americans are really waking up, it may be too late already, but I hope not.

Blog Fodder

I haven't blogged in quite awhile. There have been too many things I wanted to blog about.
The "Stimulus" Package. The AIG bonuses. The MIAC report. The Continental Congress. Homeschooling. Gardening. Kids.

There has been plenty said about the so-called "Stimulus Package", but here's my two cents anyway. The government is broke. It has no money. Just because the FED promises to print more funny money and increase inflation, thereby hurting the 'little guy' Obama claims to be trying to help, doesn't mean that the government actually HAS that money. Obama said that if there was no lending the economy would fall apart. That is a BIG FAT LIE!!

If there was no debt the economy would prosper! Imagine, people running businesses in the black!! All the time! Wouldn't that be a good thing?! Wouldn't that be creating REAL, not pretend, wealth?! Not according to Mr. Obama. My husband owns a company. He has not borrowed any money to run it. Sure, it is a squeeze sometimes to make payroll, but he has. Of course, the income tax the company owes will likely put him out of business this year, but that is a whole other story! (It is funny how the government defines 'profit')

The whole 'stimulus' thing is just a way for the federal government to exercise more control and become a bigger monster that steals, yes STEALS, more of the people's money.

One down.

The AIG 'bonuses'. (disclaimer: I have not studied this thoroughly so my understanding may not be complete) AIG was under contractual obligation to pay these bonuses. If they did not they would be sued. I do not, not even for a second, believe that Obama (or any other person who voted for or asked for the bailout) did not know that from the start. He knew. Geithner knew. They all knew. But the taxpayers found out and they got mad because it was their money that was being paid out; so now Obama and his henchmen must save face and while saying that he accepts responsibility makes sure that we know that it was really Bush's fault.

Do we really want our government to decide to make void contracts at will? Really?!
As for the idea of taxing the bonuses at 90%, I would remind the Congress that Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution says, in part, "No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." The kind of targeted taxation Obama is asking for is unconstitutional.

Two down.

The MIAC report. If you haven't heard about it, Google. To sum up the Missouri law enforcement officials believe that those who support third party candidates or want the Constitution to be upheld or who are patriotic are violent terrorists. Of course after a huge public outcry Missouri retracted that statement. Gotta keep the rabble happy.

Three down.

The Continental Congress 2009. I believe that this is the movement every American that wants to see the continuation of our freedom MUST get behind. All the smaller groups, while all valuable, must coalesce; and this is where to do it. My entusiasm for this is very great. This is our only chance of getting the government to hear.

Four down.

Homeschooling. Well...unschooling. Really not much going on of note. Ellis has learned to read a few words and Gilbert is learning to write letters. Kyla can do the multiplication tables in chinese.

Five down.

Gardening. It is very hard work!! I managed to get plots for corn, tomatoes, watermelon, cantaloupe, peas, and bell peppers tilled 10-12 inches deep. What a job! My muscles were so sore!! I am glad that I hadn't put any plants out yet. We got about 6 inches of snow yesterday. In a couple weeks we will plant and then the really hard muscle work will be over...I think.

Six down.

Kids. Kids are so much fun, and at the same time a challenge. I have more to say on that but I am tired and my mind is fuzzy so I'll save it.