Helping homeschooling and stay-at-home moms make well-functioning homes of peace, joy, beauty, and contentment.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Personal Responsibility is the GOP's Winning Issue For 2012
American Thinker: Personal Responsibility is the GOP's Winning Issue For 2012
I am for vouchers in these cases he mentions. Once we got used to controling our own government money, the amount of the vouchers could gradually be lowered so we would use less and less money that had been processed through government hands. It could work.
I am for vouchers in these cases he mentions. Once we got used to controling our own government money, the amount of the vouchers could gradually be lowered so we would use less and less money that had been processed through government hands. It could work.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Why Isn't Obama Talking About the Human Skulls?
American Thinker: Why Isn't Obama Talking About the Human Skulls?
My solution of the border:
First, reform immagration. It shouldn't take years and thousands of dollars to get here. And our quotas of how many can come in legally are way too low. Americans aren't having enough babies to supply a proper workforce and we need these immagrants!
Second, make it easier and quicker to get citizenship. Again, it shouldn't take years and thousands of dollars. These people from all over the world make a tremendous contribution to our country.
Third, end slavery. Yes you read that right. Our current situation has created an entire class of people living in this country that can not demand minimum wage nor their basic human rights. They are slaves. Maybe slaves who are better off than in their home country, but slaves non the less. We must crack down on all businesses and individuals who are caught hiring them and make the penilty HURT. (and isn't it a slap in the face to those who go to all the trouble to come here leagaly to let law breakers stay and even get citizenship faster? Doesn't it tell them that obeying the law is stupid?)
Only then can we address the border.
There we need to put up a fence and have our soldiers practice and train right their on the border. No one should have to live like discribed in the above article, especially legal Americans.
My solution of the border:
First, reform immagration. It shouldn't take years and thousands of dollars to get here. And our quotas of how many can come in legally are way too low. Americans aren't having enough babies to supply a proper workforce and we need these immagrants!
Second, make it easier and quicker to get citizenship. Again, it shouldn't take years and thousands of dollars. These people from all over the world make a tremendous contribution to our country.
Third, end slavery. Yes you read that right. Our current situation has created an entire class of people living in this country that can not demand minimum wage nor their basic human rights. They are slaves. Maybe slaves who are better off than in their home country, but slaves non the less. We must crack down on all businesses and individuals who are caught hiring them and make the penilty HURT. (and isn't it a slap in the face to those who go to all the trouble to come here leagaly to let law breakers stay and even get citizenship faster? Doesn't it tell them that obeying the law is stupid?)
Only then can we address the border.
There we need to put up a fence and have our soldiers practice and train right their on the border. No one should have to live like discribed in the above article, especially legal Americans.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
A brief on feminism, with a note on the deeper meaning of weddings... - BaylyBlog: Out of our minds, too...
Ok, a rather tasteless way of explaining it, but I did giggle.
A brief on feminism, with a note on the deeper meaning of weddings... - BaylyBlog: Out of our minds, too...
A brief on feminism, with a note on the deeper meaning of weddings... - BaylyBlog: Out of our minds, too...
Democrats' Hypocrisy on Race -- When Will People Wake Up? - Larry Elder - Townhall Conservative
Hubby was just saying last night that he simply can't understand why blacks vote democrat. They are obviously the racist party. I have seldom seen a Republican even discuss race, yet it is all the Dems seem able to see.
I have been wanting to ask all my readers "How do you know the Republicans/ Tea Partiers areracist? What proof do you have?" I certainly have never seen any, (oh there are individuals who say and do stupid things, but I see a whole lot more of that in the Dems.) No policy I have ever seen comeing out of the GOP or the Tea Party even addresses race. What am I missing?
Democrats' Hypocrisy on Race -- When Will People Wake Up? - Larry Elder - Townhall Conservative
A hominim attack- when you attack the person or characture of your oponent instead of their point in the issue at hand. A propaganda technique generally resorted to when you have no answer for your opponenet. Example: "You want to regulate Fanny and Freddie so they don't colapse? You're just racist." ( I have seen videos of the GOP begging the Dems in congress for regulation because they were afraid of a housing collapse that did happen jsut a short time later. They above is the Dems response.)
I have been wanting to ask all my readers "How do you know the Republicans/ Tea Partiers areracist? What proof do you have?" I certainly have never seen any, (oh there are individuals who say and do stupid things, but I see a whole lot more of that in the Dems.) No policy I have ever seen comeing out of the GOP or the Tea Party even addresses race. What am I missing?
Democrats' Hypocrisy on Race -- When Will People Wake Up? - Larry Elder - Townhall Conservative
A hominim attack- when you attack the person or characture of your oponent instead of their point in the issue at hand. A propaganda technique generally resorted to when you have no answer for your opponenet. Example: "You want to regulate Fanny and Freddie so they don't colapse? You're just racist." ( I have seen videos of the GOP begging the Dems in congress for regulation because they were afraid of a housing collapse that did happen jsut a short time later. They above is the Dems response.)
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Obama's Birthplace Mystery: The Real Issue
American Thinker: Obama's Birthplace Mystery: The Real Issue
Obama ran on the claim that he would be "The most transparent president/administration in history." His refusal to release all sorts fo personal papers that all other presidents and candidates have released says he was lying. This is the point of the whole issue (I don't expect there really is anything in the birthcertificate that will surprise anyone.)
He claims to have sat in a church for nearly 20 years and not heard a word the pastor said against America (that we have on video!) He is either stupid or thinks we are. Of course it's the later.
In fact that is the entire attitude of the left. They think they are smarter than us. If we disagree with them, we are "hillybilly, inbreeding, racists." They attak us instead of the arguments. This is called an "Ad Hominem Attack" and is an extrememly bad logic falacy and propaganda techneic usually employed by those who know they can't really answer the argument.
Obama ran on the claim that he would be "The most transparent president/administration in history." His refusal to release all sorts fo personal papers that all other presidents and candidates have released says he was lying. This is the point of the whole issue (I don't expect there really is anything in the birthcertificate that will surprise anyone.)
He claims to have sat in a church for nearly 20 years and not heard a word the pastor said against America (that we have on video!) He is either stupid or thinks we are. Of course it's the later.
In fact that is the entire attitude of the left. They think they are smarter than us. If we disagree with them, we are "hillybilly, inbreeding, racists." They attak us instead of the arguments. This is called an "Ad Hominem Attack" and is an extrememly bad logic falacy and propaganda techneic usually employed by those who know they can't really answer the argument.
What's Behind Attack on Trig?
American Thinker: What's Behind Attack on Trig?
So much for the left being the "party of compasion."
So why in the world are the Left so afraid of Palin? Why are they targeting her so viciously?
"Anyone who scares the left so badly has my vote." - My hubby.
So much for the left being the "party of compasion."
So why in the world are the Left so afraid of Palin? Why are they targeting her so viciously?
"Anyone who scares the left so badly has my vote." - My hubby.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
5 Common Political Beliefs That Simply Aren't
5 Common Political Beliefs That Simply Aren't
The Problem with Employees (Compared to Family Entrepreneurship)
Remember, our choice is between cutting bennies and losing bennies (not between cutting and keeping the same) Cutting the Federal Budget Without cuts our nation will go bankrupt and there will be NO bennies.
The birther issue. I have heard over and over again how that the whole birther issue is "racist." I fail to see how demanding that the man show the same form of birth certificate every other candidate in history (since the birth certificate's invention) has done volentarily is racist. And really, shouldn't there have been laws on the books since 1776 requiering all candidates for every office to prove they are eligable? How is this racist? Such laws would affect future candidates of all colors and types. Please don't confuse disagreement with something so horrendous as racisim.
And you wonder why many fear government.
Another example of governmental tyranny.
Patients who enter hospitals are at high risk of potentially deadly infections or medical mistakes So if 1/3 of sick people get sicker in the hospital, why would a non-sick person (such as a pregnant woman) go in for a non-medical event (like child-birth.)?
The Welfare State and the Selfish Society Remember that capitalism rewards people for meeting other people's needs.
What is the Tea Party?
The Problem with Employees (Compared to Family Entrepreneurship)
Remember, our choice is between cutting bennies and losing bennies (not between cutting and keeping the same) Cutting the Federal Budget Without cuts our nation will go bankrupt and there will be NO bennies.
The birther issue. I have heard over and over again how that the whole birther issue is "racist." I fail to see how demanding that the man show the same form of birth certificate every other candidate in history (since the birth certificate's invention) has done volentarily is racist. And really, shouldn't there have been laws on the books since 1776 requiering all candidates for every office to prove they are eligable? How is this racist? Such laws would affect future candidates of all colors and types. Please don't confuse disagreement with something so horrendous as racisim.
And you wonder why many fear government.
Another example of governmental tyranny.
Patients who enter hospitals are at high risk of potentially deadly infections or medical mistakes So if 1/3 of sick people get sicker in the hospital, why would a non-sick person (such as a pregnant woman) go in for a non-medical event (like child-birth.)?
The Welfare State and the Selfish Society Remember that capitalism rewards people for meeting other people's needs.
What is the Tea Party?
Monday, April 25, 2011
"A Working man without a job is not a working man; he's a welfare man."
I have been watching the whole tax debate lately. I have come to the conclusion that the Dems Utopian ideas get in the way of them understanding human behavior. You see, they seem to believe that the rich will behave the same no matter what. So if Mr Richman earns $100 and is taxed at 25% the government gets $25 while if you raise the tax rate to 50% the gov will get $50.
An examination of federal income will tell us that the feds get about 20% no matter what the tax rates are. Does this make sense?
It does if you understand human nature.
The fact is that if you tax Mr Richman at 50%, he will do everything he can to avoid paying taxes: hire accountants, find loopholes, take his pay in retirement funds or company cars, etc.In fact with a tax rate of 50%, the feds would likely get only about 20% of his real income.
However, with a lower tax rate Mr. Richman won't think it worth the accountant fees to hide so much and will just pay the 25%.
So how is the government suppose to raise their pay when they need to?
Well, since raising rates does no good, they must raise the number of taxpayers. After all, 25% from 4 people is much more than 50% from one person.
But how do we do that?
Well, anyone who gets their pay from the government doesn't count as a tax-payer.
Why since they pay taxes like everyone else?
If I give you $100 and then take $20 dollars back, you are still costing me $80. So all PS teachers, social workers, policemen, firemen, road builders, welfare recipients, bailout benefactors, non-farming farmers are net losses to the government no matter how much their tax bill is.
So we must increase non-government jobs. Where do they come from?
Like it or not, they come from business.
A Working man without a job is not a working man; he's a welfare man.
How do we get businesses to make more jobs?
"I don't build factories in America because it costs BILLIONS more per year to run a factory their. No, it's not because of the higher wages. It's because of the payroll taxes, property taxes, business fees, capital gains taxes, regulation fees, etc. I can tell where I 'm not wanted. I'm not wanted in America." (As close to an exact quote as I can remember from an interview with an international business man.)
If we want to increase the Federal budget, we must increase non-government jobs.
If we want to increase non-government jobs, we MUST lower taxes on business.
(And isn't taxing the business AND the employee double taxation of the same money anyway?)
This will give them the money they need to either lower prices or hire more workers. Lowering prices raises Mr Consumer's standard of living and increases state sales taxes. Hiring more workers increases the Mr Workingman's standard of living (because he is no longer Mr. Welfareman) and makes more people to tax thus increasing the Feds income.
(Hint: Mr Consumer and Mr Workngman are the same person!!!!)
Everyone wins!
An examination of federal income will tell us that the feds get about 20% no matter what the tax rates are. Does this make sense?
It does if you understand human nature.
The fact is that if you tax Mr Richman at 50%, he will do everything he can to avoid paying taxes: hire accountants, find loopholes, take his pay in retirement funds or company cars, etc.In fact with a tax rate of 50%, the feds would likely get only about 20% of his real income.
However, with a lower tax rate Mr. Richman won't think it worth the accountant fees to hide so much and will just pay the 25%.
So how is the government suppose to raise their pay when they need to?
Well, since raising rates does no good, they must raise the number of taxpayers. After all, 25% from 4 people is much more than 50% from one person.
But how do we do that?
Well, anyone who gets their pay from the government doesn't count as a tax-payer.
Why since they pay taxes like everyone else?
If I give you $100 and then take $20 dollars back, you are still costing me $80. So all PS teachers, social workers, policemen, firemen, road builders, welfare recipients, bailout benefactors, non-farming farmers are net losses to the government no matter how much their tax bill is.
So we must increase non-government jobs. Where do they come from?
Like it or not, they come from business.
A Working man without a job is not a working man; he's a welfare man.
How do we get businesses to make more jobs?
"I don't build factories in America because it costs BILLIONS more per year to run a factory their. No, it's not because of the higher wages. It's because of the payroll taxes, property taxes, business fees, capital gains taxes, regulation fees, etc. I can tell where I 'm not wanted. I'm not wanted in America." (As close to an exact quote as I can remember from an interview with an international business man.)
If we want to increase the Federal budget, we must increase non-government jobs.
If we want to increase non-government jobs, we MUST lower taxes on business.
(And isn't taxing the business AND the employee double taxation of the same money anyway?)
This will give them the money they need to either lower prices or hire more workers. Lowering prices raises Mr Consumer's standard of living and increases state sales taxes. Hiring more workers increases the Mr Workingman's standard of living (because he is no longer Mr. Welfareman) and makes more people to tax thus increasing the Feds income.
(Hint: Mr Consumer and Mr Workngman are the same person!!!!)
Everyone wins!
Don't Fix it if it isn't Broken
Why do we say "We got fixed" when what we really mean is "We had the doctor break a system that was functioning exactly how He designed it to?
I have been reading this book. It is the one that started the whole "Quiverfull" movement.
This book boils down to asking one question:
Is God really Lord of ALL your life?
I find that most Christians think He is but have a definite blind spot when choosing how many eternal souls (babies) they will allow God to bring into this world through them.
If you want to know why so many are now having larger than average families, why the Duggers are like they are, What the Bible says about babies, then read this book. The Hesses answer all the questions you would expect: overpopulation, finances, health, etc. that are given as reasons to limit family size.
I highly encourage EVERY Christian couple to read either "A Full Quiver," "Be Fruitful and Multiply," or "Children: Blessing or Burden?" You already know the anti-child, small-family side of the argument. At least find out the reasoning behind the other viewpoint.
Oh, and PRAY ABOUT IT!
If I accomplish nothing else, If I get you to honestly seek God's will about the size of your family, I have succeeded.
I have been reading this book. It is the one that started the whole "Quiverfull" movement.
This book boils down to asking one question:
Is God really Lord of ALL your life?
I find that most Christians think He is but have a definite blind spot when choosing how many eternal souls (babies) they will allow God to bring into this world through them.
If you want to know why so many are now having larger than average families, why the Duggers are like they are, What the Bible says about babies, then read this book. The Hesses answer all the questions you would expect: overpopulation, finances, health, etc. that are given as reasons to limit family size.
I highly encourage EVERY Christian couple to read either "A Full Quiver," "Be Fruitful and Multiply," or "Children: Blessing or Burden?" You already know the anti-child, small-family side of the argument. At least find out the reasoning behind the other viewpoint.
Oh, and PRAY ABOUT IT!
If I accomplish nothing else, If I get you to honestly seek God's will about the size of your family, I have succeeded.
Mom Plays God: Brings Good from Evil - Frank Turek
Mom Plays God: Brings Good from Evil - Frank Turek - Townhall Conservative
Point made in this piece is that if you know what evil is, there must be a God. If you want more information, let me know. I have an excellent pamphlet from Rev Pearl that explains how the atheists constantly prove the existance of God.
The intolerence of the "Tolerent."
Point made in this piece is that if you know what evil is, there must be a God. If you want more information, let me know. I have an excellent pamphlet from Rev Pearl that explains how the atheists constantly prove the existance of God.
The intolerence of the "Tolerent."
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Dear Unionized Teachers: Quit Yer Bellyachin' - Kyle Olson - Townhall Conservative
Dear Unionized Teachers: Quit Yer Bellyachin' - Kyle Olson - Townhall Conservative
The average teacher makes more than the average American (and twice their private sector counterparts) for a mere nine months work per year (compared to most Americans who work 11 1/2 months work) with killer bennies (full health, retierment, etc.). And they can't be fired once they have tenur.
And the product they produce is the worst in the field (Now really, would anyone argue that private schools do a worse job than public schools? If you did, I can pull out the test scores that say differently (which is why the NEA doesn't like to evaluate students by testing). And we all know that homeschoolers have proven themselves more than academicly suffiecint.)
Education is 40-50% of EVERY state's budget. More than half of that is salaries. This means that 1/4 of every states budget goes to education salaries.
Most of our states are on the border of being bankrupt. They MUST cut somewhere or all public employees will loose their entire pensions, their jobs and the rest of us will have no police or fire service. As big of a piece of the budget as the teacher's salaries are, it won't do any good to cut everything else without also cutting them.
Yet when Gov Walker tried to negotiate a deal that would save their jobs, the teachers walked out (he made really evil sugestions like that thye pay for 14% or their helth care instead of the 5% they currently are paying [private secter employees pay about 20%])
There have been many times in history when unions have "held the line fo rtheir people" only to drive their employers out of business.
It's happening again.
The average teacher makes more than the average American (and twice their private sector counterparts) for a mere nine months work per year (compared to most Americans who work 11 1/2 months work) with killer bennies (full health, retierment, etc.). And they can't be fired once they have tenur.
And the product they produce is the worst in the field (Now really, would anyone argue that private schools do a worse job than public schools? If you did, I can pull out the test scores that say differently (which is why the NEA doesn't like to evaluate students by testing). And we all know that homeschoolers have proven themselves more than academicly suffiecint.)
Education is 40-50% of EVERY state's budget. More than half of that is salaries. This means that 1/4 of every states budget goes to education salaries.
Most of our states are on the border of being bankrupt. They MUST cut somewhere or all public employees will loose their entire pensions, their jobs and the rest of us will have no police or fire service. As big of a piece of the budget as the teacher's salaries are, it won't do any good to cut everything else without also cutting them.
Yet when Gov Walker tried to negotiate a deal that would save their jobs, the teachers walked out (he made really evil sugestions like that thye pay for 14% or their helth care instead of the 5% they currently are paying [private secter employees pay about 20%])
There have been many times in history when unions have "held the line fo rtheir people" only to drive their employers out of business.
It's happening again.
Trust and Freedom
Actually trust is inherent in any system of government. The difference is who you trust.
Conservatives trust the people to care for themselves and, fo rthe most part, not to harm anyone else.
Liberals trust the humans in government to make the right decisions for everyone else and to properly force them to behave. As if somehow being elected to an office somehow suddenly makes that person divinly perfect and virtuous.
American Thinker: Trust and Freedom
Conservatives trust the people to care for themselves and, fo rthe most part, not to harm anyone else.
Liberals trust the humans in government to make the right decisions for everyone else and to properly force them to behave. As if somehow being elected to an office somehow suddenly makes that person divinly perfect and virtuous.
American Thinker: Trust and Freedom
My Journey to Conservatism
American Thinker: My Journey to Conservatism
All voters should do the same research this woman has done.
All voters should do the same research this woman has done.
Friday, April 22, 2011
Jesus Did not Want to Die
Read the Bible. He begged to be let out of it. But He loved us SOOOO much that He went willingly. He could have called an army of angels to rescue Him. But He didn't.
He didn't want to suffer and die, but He did want to save us from Hell. He went willing...
For You.
Why The Constitution's Tenth Amendment Matters So Much
He didn't want to suffer and die, but He did want to save us from Hell. He went willing...
For You.
Why The Constitution's Tenth Amendment Matters So Much
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Don't Believe Anything you see on the TV or in the paper.
...At least not until the"news" is at least a week old.
Case in point;
"GE Paid No Taxes!"
My first response was "I highly doubt that. They employee 287,000 people around the world. I lay you odds they are paying tens of millions in payroll taxes. They are also paying property taxes at the least, most likely totalling in the millions of dollars also. This is nothing more then 'Hate the rich' propaganda."
Then the House passes their budget surrender.
"Ahhh, The media was prepping people not only to hate and envy the rich, but to hate the Republicans. I bet there is more to this than they are reporting."
I was right.
That "Tax cut for the rich" was a lowering of the highest tax bracket, true. But the House also closed many of the loopholes. This means that if the Senate will pass the House's bill, most rich will be paying more in total dollars even if they are paying less in percentages.
And now the real kicker: The whole "GE paid no taxes" was a down right lie! Some blogger wrote up a piece making that claim and wired it to the news companies. They ran the story without checking it out. Why would they do that? Because even if the story turned out to be false, most people would forever believe that GE paid no taxes in 2010. In other words, the media (TV and most newspapers) is the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party and they are engaging in warfare.
The truth is that, yes, GE did not file any taxes on April 15th. However, few businesses did. They are required to file and pay every three months and that seldom actually falls in April. GE has been paying their taxes all year long, just like other businesses of all sizes.
Now they did take a big tax break. Between their loss this year (few or no profits) and the tax incentives the DEMOCRATS insisted on passing for working on alternative energy, GE got a big reduction. They were also able to defer a bit of their bill to next year in hopes of actually making enough money to pay the bill by then.
This is not the first case of propaganda I have caught the media in.
I saw the verdict of the Iran-Contra trial live. Then I saw a report of the verdict. The report showed a judge saying "President Reagan made a mistake." The original verdict said, "President Reagan made a mistake, but other presidents have made much worse mistakes." That half a sentence changes the whole meaning of the verdict!
Every 10 second clip you see represents hours of interviews. The media picks and chooses which clips best support their view, not the ones that represent the truth like we are led to believe. Case in point; A report was done on the argument between pro and anti abortion people. The pro person was shown in his air conditioned office, in an expensive three-piece suit, with expensive law books in the background calmly and quietly saying how important it was to protect a woman's right to control her own body. The anti leader wanted to be filmed in his office but the TV station insisted it would make a better show to put him at the protest going on. It was summer in Arizona. So his clip showed him yelling (to be heard over the protesters) in a plain dress shirt with sweat stains saying "We must end abortion!" I lay odds he laid out a very reasoned argument on why abortion should be stopped but they only showed what looked like his lunatics rant.
I also understand that when Palin resigned from governor, a bunch of reporters hightailed it to Alaska to get the true story. They sent articles to their editors BEFORE THEY EVEN LANDED IN ALASKA saying "...An FBI indictment is expected any day now." Imagine their disappointment when they landed and talked to the FBI who told them "We're not investigating Palin. We never have investigated Palin." (From a FBI department that just a couple of years before had sent several Alaskan congress members from both parties off to wear orange jumpsuits and pick up trash by the side of the road. They are not a lax branch of this department.) The reason she resigned? The open warfare that was being waged against her was keeping her from doing her job as governor and she felt it wasn't right to keep getting paid for not doing the job. All those ethics claims filed against her? It costs nothing to file. The filers would then tell the media they had filed (which is illegal). She had to hire a lawyer to defend herself. All but one claim was found to be- well- stupid. She was found Innocent of the one that did see a judge. But conviction wasn't the point. They ruined her reputation and nearly drove her into bankruptcy defending herself. That was the point. A conviction would have just been ice cream.
This isn't the first conservative politician they have done this to.
Have you ever noticed how often Republicans, especially really conservative Republicans, get brought up on ethics charges and how seldom Dems do? The world view for most liberals is that morals change with the season. Thus there is no absolute right and wrong. This means there is nothing wrong with destroying your opponent any way you can. Repubs Generally believe there is absolute, timeless morals. A victory won dishonorably is no victory. Thus the Dems play dirty but the Repubs generally won't (if they do try they are accused of being racists, fascist pigs who hate women, babies and butterflies, so they can't win anyway. the Media is in the Dems pocket.) I am not saying the Repubs are more righteous. I doubt either party is any different on that front. I just see that the Dems are better at using the media as a weapon.
Anyway, the point is, when watching the news don't believe what you see or hear. Wait a week or so and then look up the other side of the fence. Put the two together and examine the evidence. You will come closer to finding the truth that way.
Certainly don't believe what you see.
Case in point;
"GE Paid No Taxes!"
My first response was "I highly doubt that. They employee 287,000 people around the world. I lay you odds they are paying tens of millions in payroll taxes. They are also paying property taxes at the least, most likely totalling in the millions of dollars also. This is nothing more then 'Hate the rich' propaganda."
Then the House passes their budget surrender.
"Ahhh, The media was prepping people not only to hate and envy the rich, but to hate the Republicans. I bet there is more to this than they are reporting."
I was right.
That "Tax cut for the rich" was a lowering of the highest tax bracket, true. But the House also closed many of the loopholes. This means that if the Senate will pass the House's bill, most rich will be paying more in total dollars even if they are paying less in percentages.
And now the real kicker: The whole "GE paid no taxes" was a down right lie! Some blogger wrote up a piece making that claim and wired it to the news companies. They ran the story without checking it out. Why would they do that? Because even if the story turned out to be false, most people would forever believe that GE paid no taxes in 2010. In other words, the media (TV and most newspapers) is the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party and they are engaging in warfare.
The truth is that, yes, GE did not file any taxes on April 15th. However, few businesses did. They are required to file and pay every three months and that seldom actually falls in April. GE has been paying their taxes all year long, just like other businesses of all sizes.
Now they did take a big tax break. Between their loss this year (few or no profits) and the tax incentives the DEMOCRATS insisted on passing for working on alternative energy, GE got a big reduction. They were also able to defer a bit of their bill to next year in hopes of actually making enough money to pay the bill by then.
This is not the first case of propaganda I have caught the media in.
I saw the verdict of the Iran-Contra trial live. Then I saw a report of the verdict. The report showed a judge saying "President Reagan made a mistake." The original verdict said, "President Reagan made a mistake, but other presidents have made much worse mistakes." That half a sentence changes the whole meaning of the verdict!
Every 10 second clip you see represents hours of interviews. The media picks and chooses which clips best support their view, not the ones that represent the truth like we are led to believe. Case in point; A report was done on the argument between pro and anti abortion people. The pro person was shown in his air conditioned office, in an expensive three-piece suit, with expensive law books in the background calmly and quietly saying how important it was to protect a woman's right to control her own body. The anti leader wanted to be filmed in his office but the TV station insisted it would make a better show to put him at the protest going on. It was summer in Arizona. So his clip showed him yelling (to be heard over the protesters) in a plain dress shirt with sweat stains saying "We must end abortion!" I lay odds he laid out a very reasoned argument on why abortion should be stopped but they only showed what looked like his lunatics rant.
I also understand that when Palin resigned from governor, a bunch of reporters hightailed it to Alaska to get the true story. They sent articles to their editors BEFORE THEY EVEN LANDED IN ALASKA saying "...An FBI indictment is expected any day now." Imagine their disappointment when they landed and talked to the FBI who told them "We're not investigating Palin. We never have investigated Palin." (From a FBI department that just a couple of years before had sent several Alaskan congress members from both parties off to wear orange jumpsuits and pick up trash by the side of the road. They are not a lax branch of this department.) The reason she resigned? The open warfare that was being waged against her was keeping her from doing her job as governor and she felt it wasn't right to keep getting paid for not doing the job. All those ethics claims filed against her? It costs nothing to file. The filers would then tell the media they had filed (which is illegal). She had to hire a lawyer to defend herself. All but one claim was found to be- well- stupid. She was found Innocent of the one that did see a judge. But conviction wasn't the point. They ruined her reputation and nearly drove her into bankruptcy defending herself. That was the point. A conviction would have just been ice cream.
This isn't the first conservative politician they have done this to.
Have you ever noticed how often Republicans, especially really conservative Republicans, get brought up on ethics charges and how seldom Dems do? The world view for most liberals is that morals change with the season. Thus there is no absolute right and wrong. This means there is nothing wrong with destroying your opponent any way you can. Repubs Generally believe there is absolute, timeless morals. A victory won dishonorably is no victory. Thus the Dems play dirty but the Repubs generally won't (if they do try they are accused of being racists, fascist pigs who hate women, babies and butterflies, so they can't win anyway. the Media is in the Dems pocket.) I am not saying the Repubs are more righteous. I doubt either party is any different on that front. I just see that the Dems are better at using the media as a weapon.
Anyway, the point is, when watching the news don't believe what you see or hear. Wait a week or so and then look up the other side of the fence. Put the two together and examine the evidence. You will come closer to finding the truth that way.
Certainly don't believe what you see.
School Vouchers
There are many who don't like the thought of vouchers. Here is my opinion (as if that is really important to anyone, lol);
1) The current set up is unfair to those who privately educate their children. I pay the same property taxes, sales taxes and "fees" that everyone else pays. 40% of those state taxes go to public schools. Yet none of my children have ever been in a public school. Hubby and I have paid for every penny of their education out of our own pocket (well, I have had some very odd birthday gifts from Grandma. Who knew math manipulative could so appreciated, lol?). This means we are paying twice for our children's education; once through our taxes and again through private means. This is not fair.
2) Whether liberals like it or not, capitalism works. The current set up is a monopoly pure and simple. The schools have no reason to preform well except for some vague, undefined "for the sake of the child" idea. When the rubber meets the road, the threat of losing those students (with their accompanying paycheck) makes even the public schools preform better.
3) I find it quite racist and elitist to demand that poor people can only attend the poor schools that the government assigns them too. Every child deserves a private-level education.
4) We would save money. We could give parents one third of the gov money (about $3000 on average. The average private school costs about $3000/year), bank one third, and still send one third to the public schools. "Worst case scenerio" and all the parents used their vouchers on private education, the schools could sell all their property and still pay the teachers for doing nothing!
I think vouchers, if carefully controled by the voters, would be a great way to ease us into 100% private education.
New Poll Shows Senate Bill 1 Favored Among PA Likely Voters FreedomWorks
(I have people tell me that they have a "right" to send their children to public schools when they find out I am for gradually ending government envolvment in education.
1) "Where exactly do you find such a "right"? It's not in the Bible or the Constitution, our two sources that list rights.
2) "You mean you think you have the "right" to force me with the threat of jail (tax evasion) to pay for your child's education? Really? Does this give me the "right" to demand that you pay for my children's housing? Tax money comes from your neighbor, not Santa Claus. You are taking money out of his pocket with every entitlement program.
1) The current set up is unfair to those who privately educate their children. I pay the same property taxes, sales taxes and "fees" that everyone else pays. 40% of those state taxes go to public schools. Yet none of my children have ever been in a public school. Hubby and I have paid for every penny of their education out of our own pocket (well, I have had some very odd birthday gifts from Grandma. Who knew math manipulative could so appreciated, lol?). This means we are paying twice for our children's education; once through our taxes and again through private means. This is not fair.
2) Whether liberals like it or not, capitalism works. The current set up is a monopoly pure and simple. The schools have no reason to preform well except for some vague, undefined "for the sake of the child" idea. When the rubber meets the road, the threat of losing those students (with their accompanying paycheck) makes even the public schools preform better.
3) I find it quite racist and elitist to demand that poor people can only attend the poor schools that the government assigns them too. Every child deserves a private-level education.
4) We would save money. We could give parents one third of the gov money (about $3000 on average. The average private school costs about $3000/year), bank one third, and still send one third to the public schools. "Worst case scenerio" and all the parents used their vouchers on private education, the schools could sell all their property and still pay the teachers for doing nothing!
I think vouchers, if carefully controled by the voters, would be a great way to ease us into 100% private education.
New Poll Shows Senate Bill 1 Favored Among PA Likely Voters FreedomWorks
(I have people tell me that they have a "right" to send their children to public schools when they find out I am for gradually ending government envolvment in education.
1) "Where exactly do you find such a "right"? It's not in the Bible or the Constitution, our two sources that list rights.
2) "You mean you think you have the "right" to force me with the threat of jail (tax evasion) to pay for your child's education? Really? Does this give me the "right" to demand that you pay for my children's housing? Tax money comes from your neighbor, not Santa Claus. You are taking money out of his pocket with every entitlement program.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Parents, don't dress your girls like tramps - CNN.com
Parents, don't dress your girls like tramps - CNN.com
I think the whole "dress like tramps" tren is due to us not being allowed to show we are women in any other way.
Our mothers could devote energy to developing their cooking, baking, sewing and homemaking. But thanks to the feminists we aren't allowed to call these things "female." So the only thing left for a girl to show she is a womanlett is her sexuality.
Very sad.
I think the whole "dress like tramps" tren is due to us not being allowed to show we are women in any other way.
Our mothers could devote energy to developing their cooking, baking, sewing and homemaking. But thanks to the feminists we aren't allowed to call these things "female." So the only thing left for a girl to show she is a womanlett is her sexuality.
Very sad.
Palin power: Fight like a girl - Washington Times
DECKER: Palin power: Fight like a girl - Washington Times
Ok, I can't help it. I like this woman. I do have things, important things, I disagree with her about. But I like her style. I don't think I can say that of any other candidate I have ever seen.
I just finished her book "Going Rogue." I really enjoyed except the part where she tells about the horrindiously unethical warfare the dems fought against her and how the McCain group tried to gag her. Those parts made me mad.
I don't generally like women in politics. I think they have more important things to do. But the book left me with one very interesting thought;
If you want to "clean house" in DC, maybe you need to send a woman to do it!
(PS side note; If I ever run for an office my campagin goal would be to pass a law saying it was illegal to campaign for offeice more than six months before the election! Gee people! It's A YEAR AND A HALF until the next presidential election!)
Ok, I can't help it. I like this woman. I do have things, important things, I disagree with her about. But I like her style. I don't think I can say that of any other candidate I have ever seen.
I just finished her book "Going Rogue." I really enjoyed except the part where she tells about the horrindiously unethical warfare the dems fought against her and how the McCain group tried to gag her. Those parts made me mad.
I don't generally like women in politics. I think they have more important things to do. But the book left me with one very interesting thought;
If you want to "clean house" in DC, maybe you need to send a woman to do it!
(PS side note; If I ever run for an office my campagin goal would be to pass a law saying it was illegal to campaign for offeice more than six months before the election! Gee people! It's A YEAR AND A HALF until the next presidential election!)
Routine Cesareans Not Better for "Extreme Obesity"
The Well-Rounded Mama: Routine Cesareans Not Better for "Extreme Obesity"
I find myself mor and more a homeschool, homebirth, fatty advocate. Kind of weird! LOL
I find myself mor and more a homeschool, homebirth, fatty advocate. Kind of weird! LOL
Monday, April 18, 2011
You Can't Say That!
American Thinker: You Can't Say That! Yep. The "Tolerant" are the most intolerant people I have ever met. You can't even suggest a different point of view without being called names.
Cesarean Rates by State, 2009 - The Unnecesarean -
How does your state rate? Mine, not so good:-( (We're tied for 16th). Remember that a c-section is MAJOR ABDOMINAL SURGERY! God really did know what He was doing when He designed the female body. The vast majority of women really can birth vaginally. Fully ONE THIRD of all babies born in America today come into the world through man's way instead of God's way. And the numbers are higher every year. The World Health Organization says no country should have a c-section rate higher than 10-15%. Many think this number is too high (most midwives run between 5 and 10%. Mine has a 3% c-section rate!:-). Too high of a number means too many women are being subjected to the unnecessary risks of surgery (yes, there are risks to c-sections.) It also means too many babies are being subjected to the meds necessary for surgery, certainly not good for them if their life isn't threatened (which it obviously isn't because the neo-natal death and injury rate isn't declining one twit as our c-section rate climbs. In fact, if anything it is getting higher.) (Now due to The FAll some c-sections really are necessary to save Baby or Mommy's lives. But these are really rare.) Cesarean Rates by State, 2009 - The Unnecesarean Risks of c-section: Infection: Infection can occur at the incision site, in the uterus and in other pelvic organs such as the bladder and is the second leading cause of maternal death. Hemorrhage or increased blood loss: There is more blood loss in a cesarean delivery than with a vaginal delivery. This can lead to anemia or a blood transfusion (1 to 6 women per 100 require a blood transfusion). Hemorrhage is the leading cause of maternal death. Injury to organs: Possible injury to organs such as the bowel or bladder (2 per 1002). (This means the doctor accidently cuts the wrong thing!) Adhesions: Scar tissue may form inside the pelvic region causing blockage and pain. This can also lead to future pregnancy complication such as placenta previa or placental abruption which can cause hemorrhage. Extended hospital stay: After a cesarean, the normal time in the hospital is 3-5 days after giving birth if there are no complications. A few hours to 1 day is the norm for a vaginal birth. Extended recovery time: The amount of time needed for recovery after a cesarean can extend from weeks to months, having an impact on bonding time with your baby (1 in 14 report incisional pain six months or more after surgery4). Reactions to medications: There can be a negative reaction to the anesthesia given during a cesarean or reaction to pain medication given after the procedure. Risk of additional surgeries: Such as hysterectomy, bladder repair or another cesarean. Maternal mortality: The maternal mortality rate for a cesarean is four times greater than with a vaginal birth. Emotional reactions: Women who have a cesarean report feeling negatively about their birth experience. In fact one researcher discovered that "Post Partam Depression" has EXACTLY the same symptoms as "Post Tramatic Stress Syndromn" which is suffered by veterans and rape victims. She also discovered that the more medical interventions a woman has in a birth the more likely she is to suffer PPD (PTSS) with c-sections being the ultimate in interventions. Mom may also have trouble with initial bonding with their baby. Risks and Complications for the Baby: Premature birth: If gestational age was not calculated correctly, a baby delivered by cesarean could be delivered too early and be low birth weight. And doctors wonder why our premie rate has gone up along with the rate of c-sections. Breathing problems: When delivered by cesarean, a baby is more likely to have breathing and respiratory difficulties. Some studies show an increased need for assistance with breathing and immediate care after a cesarean than with a vaginal delivery. This is even more true when there is NO emergency but the c-section was entirely planned. Low APGAR scores: Low APGAR scores can be the result of anesthesia, fetal distress before the delivery or lack of stimulation during delivery (vaginal birth provides natural stimulation to the baby while in the birth canal). Babies born by cesarean are 50% more likely to have lower APGAR scores than those born vaginally. Fetal injury: Very rarely, the baby may be nicked or cut during the incision (1 to 2 babies per 100 will be cut during the surgery). (See This page for the original list) All in all, do whatever you must to avoid a c-section if at all possible. Visit ICAN (International Cesarean Awareness Network). Your baby deserves God's best which in most cases is NOT to start life with surgery.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Musings
You know, a workingman without a job is not a working man. He's a welfare man.
Jobs come from business. If we want jobs, we must support business.
Now, we should be diligent to eliminate all corruption, backroom deals, favoritism, and government handouts.
But we should be just as diligent to remove as many regulations as possible so the small and medium businesses (the main employers in the US) can compete with big business (big business can afford to met unnecessary regulations. Smaller enterprises can't.)
Lowering taxes on business also puts more money in the hands of those who create jobs.
In fact, we need to make this society even more capitalist. Why? In capitalism those who meet others needs are the ones who get rewarded through their business profits. Those profits are then used to either expand their business (make more jobs), or raise the standard of living of the owner.
Newsflash: Those yachts and limos owned by the rich are built by WORKING MEN! Either way, more jobs.
In fact, would some rich people please move to our area and build some luxury homes? Hubby's business specializes in institutions (casinos, schools, etc.), but they are really good at luxery homes too! We could really use a raise:-)
Jobs come from business. If we want jobs, we must support business.
Now, we should be diligent to eliminate all corruption, backroom deals, favoritism, and government handouts.
But we should be just as diligent to remove as many regulations as possible so the small and medium businesses (the main employers in the US) can compete with big business (big business can afford to met unnecessary regulations. Smaller enterprises can't.)
Lowering taxes on business also puts more money in the hands of those who create jobs.
In fact, we need to make this society even more capitalist. Why? In capitalism those who meet others needs are the ones who get rewarded through their business profits. Those profits are then used to either expand their business (make more jobs), or raise the standard of living of the owner.
Newsflash: Those yachts and limos owned by the rich are built by WORKING MEN! Either way, more jobs.
In fact, would some rich people please move to our area and build some luxury homes? Hubby's business specializes in institutions (casinos, schools, etc.), but they are really good at luxery homes too! We could really use a raise:-)
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
Loving the Pastor’s Wife | The Resurgence
Thankfully, we don't have any of "those women" in our church now, but we have had in the past. Being a PK I have seen these things all the time.
Thankfully, we don't have any of "those women" in our church now, but we have had in the past. Being a PK I have seen these things all the time.
American Thinker: The Coverup of Abortion's Real Risks Breast cancer Uterine infection Pre-mature birth of future siblings PTSS "This is so ugly that it makes corporate tobacco kingpins look saintly in comparison."
Friday, April 08, 2011
Thursday, April 07, 2011
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
Becoming Midwives: Fetal Pigs
The only thing I would add is to ask those same students so broken up about the life of a fetal pig if they felt the same way about the lose of the life of fetal humans in abortion. Becoming Midwives: Fetal Pigs
Friday, April 01, 2011
Clarify My position on PUblic schools
Phylisophycal: Public schools were founded with the intent, not of educating the people (we had a 98% literacy rate at the time), but to indoctrinate the people into the "modern, advanced, socialist" mindset. The entire system is designed to remoe power from the parents and give it to "experts." It is designed to make good, obedient little robots out of us all.
Since atheism is a religion, it is a clear violation of the Constitution for government to be involved in any aspect of education (you can't teach with God in the curriculum without teaching religion and you can't teach with God out of the curriculum without teaching the religion of atheism. The government can't legally teach...period.)
Government forced schooling violates someones basic rights. I am threatened by the liberal who wants their idea taught in the schools because that indoctrinates my children into thier belief system. I am a threat to the liberal because my ideas violate their rights to have their children taught their belief.
It is stealing to threaten to send men with big guns into your house to force you to pay for my child's education. Don't think this is happening? Try not paying your taxes sometime.
Now, the path we, as a whole people, should follow (this is when we are discussing politics): Outlawing public school today would create so much chaos that the backlash would leave us with a worse system than we have now. This is simply not a wise course for us to take at this time.
The wiser path would be to begin seperating the funding of education from the control of education. Much like Food Stamps gives money to people to buy food with but doesn't tell them whether to buy fruit or bread, and the AFDC program gives money to families but doesn't tell them whether to spend it on rent or utilities, the government should issue it's Educational Charity money to the parents themselves and let them choose the best school for their children. Atheists will pick atheist schools, Christians will pick Christian schools, Jews will pick Jewish schools and no parent will be threatened by the choices of other parents. Children who need more recess time and less artsey classes can go to schools that offer more recess time. Children who need music lessons or intense History studies can go to those schools. The parent knows better than anyone else what their particular child needs. Schools that do a poor job educating will shut down.
Parents who want to send their children to "public schools" would have to present their voucher at the door making even "public school" simi-private schools and definitly subject to the laws of supply and demand. If they do a poor job, they face closing their doors.
We could begin offering these vouchers to those families below the poerty line and every year raise them to a certain percent above (5% this year, 7% next year, 9% the year after that) until all childrne receive vouchers. Since the average private school is only $3000 a year (with some as low as $1200) even a voucher worth 50% of the federal money would go a long way to getting poorer families into better options. The gradual increase in money available for private schools would fuel the building of more private schools. Eventually, when everyone is getting a voucher, the "public schools" could be totally converted into private schools and all government regulations removed.
The next step would be a gradual reduction of vouchers. This would all take several decades, but would be worth the eventual results: total academic and thus religious freedom.
Now if I am talking to individual parents I will tell them to get their children out NOW! In the richest, freest country in the world there is no reason the vast majority of parents can't find some way to privatly educate their children. Yes, it will mean sacrafice. You might have to live in a smaller house or drive an old car, but it IS possible. I have known mom's on welfare and disability that found a way to afford homeschool curriculum. I've known of others that found ways to afford private school even when they were living well below the poverty level. For goodness sake, parents in Africa living on flats in the city sewer/swamp find the money for private school! It is possible if you really think it is important enough.
Let's do some imagining: Since I know I have a number of public school employees that read my blog, let's imagine you get a job paying exactly what you earn now. Now imagine that all Public funded education were outlawed. Public schools simply don't exisit anymore.
What happens to your children? Do they roam the streets or would you find some way to continue to educate them.
The fact is you would find some way to get them some kind of education. It might be private school. Or it might be a hired tutor, virtual school, homeschool, or some option that hasn't been invented yet because it isn't needed yet. Whatever way you went, you would do SOMETHING, right? You wouldn't just leave your kids to fend for themselves.
Now I ask you, If you could find a way in case of such unrealistic emergancy, why can't you find a way now? The answer is because you just don't think it is as important as whatever you are spending the money on now.
So how bad do the schools have to get before you do think it is important to get your kids out? Do they need to openly teach homosexuality? Sexual exploration? Gender nutrality? Situational Ethics? God is a liar? ALL of our public school text books teach these things now.
Is there anything the schools could do that would make you make the sacrafices necessary to get your kids out?
So what would it take?
Since atheism is a religion, it is a clear violation of the Constitution for government to be involved in any aspect of education (you can't teach with God in the curriculum without teaching religion and you can't teach with God out of the curriculum without teaching the religion of atheism. The government can't legally teach...period.)
Government forced schooling violates someones basic rights. I am threatened by the liberal who wants their idea taught in the schools because that indoctrinates my children into thier belief system. I am a threat to the liberal because my ideas violate their rights to have their children taught their belief.
It is stealing to threaten to send men with big guns into your house to force you to pay for my child's education. Don't think this is happening? Try not paying your taxes sometime.
Now, the path we, as a whole people, should follow (this is when we are discussing politics): Outlawing public school today would create so much chaos that the backlash would leave us with a worse system than we have now. This is simply not a wise course for us to take at this time.
The wiser path would be to begin seperating the funding of education from the control of education. Much like Food Stamps gives money to people to buy food with but doesn't tell them whether to buy fruit or bread, and the AFDC program gives money to families but doesn't tell them whether to spend it on rent or utilities, the government should issue it's Educational
Parents who want to send their children to "public schools" would have to present their voucher at the door making even "public school" simi-private schools and definitly subject to the laws of supply and demand. If they do a poor job, they face closing their doors.
We could begin offering these vouchers to those families below the poerty line and every year raise them to a certain percent above (5% this year, 7% next year, 9% the year after that) until all childrne receive vouchers. Since the average private school is only $3000 a year (with some as low as $1200) even a voucher worth 50% of the federal money would go a long way to getting poorer families into better options. The gradual increase in money available for private schools would fuel the building of more private schools. Eventually, when everyone is getting a voucher, the "public schools" could be totally converted into private schools and all government regulations removed.
The next step would be a gradual reduction of vouchers. This would all take several decades, but would be worth the eventual results: total academic and thus religious freedom.
Now if I am talking to individual parents I will tell them to get their children out NOW! In the richest, freest country in the world there is no reason the vast majority of parents can't find some way to privatly educate their children. Yes, it will mean sacrafice. You might have to live in a smaller house or drive an old car, but it IS possible. I have known mom's on welfare and disability that found a way to afford homeschool curriculum. I've known of others that found ways to afford private school even when they were living well below the poverty level. For goodness sake, parents in Africa living on flats in the city sewer/swamp find the money for private school! It is possible if you really think it is important enough.
Let's do some imagining: Since I know I have a number of public school employees that read my blog, let's imagine you get a job paying exactly what you earn now. Now imagine that all Public funded education were outlawed. Public schools simply don't exisit anymore.
What happens to your children? Do they roam the streets or would you find some way to continue to educate them.
The fact is you would find some way to get them some kind of education. It might be private school. Or it might be a hired tutor, virtual school, homeschool, or some option that hasn't been invented yet because it isn't needed yet. Whatever way you went, you would do SOMETHING, right? You wouldn't just leave your kids to fend for themselves.
Now I ask you, If you could find a way in case of such unrealistic emergancy, why can't you find a way now? The answer is because you just don't think it is as important as whatever you are spending the money on now.
So how bad do the schools have to get before you do think it is important to get your kids out? Do they need to openly teach homosexuality? Sexual exploration? Gender nutrality? Situational Ethics? God is a liar? ALL of our public school text books teach these things now.
Is there anything the schools could do that would make you make the sacrafices necessary to get your kids out?
So what would it take?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Women who get an abortion between the ages of 18 and 30 have twice the risk of breast cancer than women who never have an abortion. Wome... -
What is Quiverful? Nothing I say here is in condemnation of those that are infertile through no fault of their own. Some infertility is the...
-
Chapter 53 1Who hath believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? Who will choose to believe the prophets o...