Post Scripts

From Harold…

Sen. Rand Paul explains in a video why the Senate’s approval rating is so low; they don’t even read the bills before they pass them!   Howstupid is that?

Paul has a novel idea…read the freaking bill before you vote on it!  If you author a bill, allow your fellow senators 24 hours per each 20 pages of the bill to review it and don’t try to slip in last minute changes after it’s been reviewed!

This is just common sense stuff to us normal people, but Congress has never been known for it’s logic.  Now please check out the video link blow, it’s a real eye opener:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=svGDZOW-brA

Posted by Tina

Last week we reported on a costly study to determine why lesbian women are fatter than their straight sisters. This week another costly lesbian study has been uncovered. CNS News reports:

(CNSNews.com) – The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has awarded $2.7 million to study why lesbians are at a higher “risk for hazardous drinking.”
The University of Illinois has received grants since 2009 for its project, “Cumulative Stress and Hazardous Drinking in a Community of Adult Lesbians,” which aims to develop “culturally sensitive” strategies to prevent lesbians from being drunks.

Thoughts whirling through my head…

Kids can’t tour the White House or enjoy a traditional Easter egg rolling activity but we can still fund another study like this?

AA has been around for years and serves the needs of all kinds of people with addictions…why are lesbians a special case and should government concern itself with every problem of every group?

Does it help or hurt people to take responsibility away from them by suggesting a built in medical/social excuse?

Is the money actually going to the study or is it being funneled to a cause or political party?

Have we gone totally bat-dirt nuts in this country?

This isn’t just about the two studies in the news this week that happens to be lesbian related. This is about our government telling us they must have more money and that everything government does is vital and cannot be eliminated!

The credibility of our government leaders can’t get much lower. What do you think?

by Jack

Today it’s the banks in Cyprus…tomorrow American banks.  Well, maybe not tomorrow, but it could happen here and don’t  ever think it couldn’t Bunky!

Cyprus is a big banking center for Russian oligarchs and mob guys.  These new robber barons use Cypress like our big time drug dealers use the Bahamian banks.   As a result, Cyprus has a lot of regular savings money as well as laundered Russian money in it — some estimates say that nearly a third of all deposits in Cypriot banks are from Russian nationals despite the fact that Russia has a simple flat tax system.   Funny that so many Russians are getting behind in taxes, but I digress.

by Tina Grazier

Newsflash: Hillary Clinton is definitely considering a run for the presidency. She issued a statement today in support of gay marriage:

“I support it personally and as a matter of policy and law, embedded in a broader effort to advance equality and opportunity for LGBT Americans and all Americans”

As I was contemplating what this means for her personally, I also had a few thoughts about the legal argument that the LGBT community is being denied a basic right if the Defense of Marriage Act, the law that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman, is upheld by the Supreme Court later this year.

Marriage is one way that people choose to define their lives but it isn’t the only way that people choose to abide together. Seniors that have lost a spouse often choose to live with another widow or widower to share expenses and companionship. Single persons often decide to “shack up”, rather than commit to marriage. Groups of people choose to live together because the economy or their personal financial situation doesn’t allow an independent living arrangement. The legal and traditional definition of marriage as a union of one man and one woman does not discriminate simply because any one man can marry any one woman and no one is forced into marriage.

Concerns expressed by the LGBT community center around tax advantages, healthcare coverage for dependents, and visitation and decision rights at hospitals that married couples enjoy. The LGBT community is correct that this isn’t fair. Our tax and healthcare (insurance) laws do discriminate. They discriminate against LGBT’s and they discriminate in a lot of other ways as well. Something should be done about it.

The logical solution would be to get the government out of people’s independent business. Our tax laws should not create categories of people so that different rules apply to different groups. Likewise any individual should be able to purchase healthcare coverage for any other person he chooses to cover and decisions about who can visit, or who will be a designated decision maker, when an individual is in the hospital should be private decisions.

The argument against traditional marriage is not a civil liberties argument. It is a social engineering argument. There is no need to destroy the marriage definition to address the concerns of the LGBT community.

The American people have shown the LGBT community a great deal of tolerance and inclusiveness over the years following the exit from “the closet”. Both socially and in matters of legal decisions accommodations have been made. The question is, does the LGBT community have the same capacity for tolerance and inclusion of those who value traditional marriage to compromise and work to change the tax and healthcare laws to put an end to discrimination and to create greater equality in tax and healthcare laws?

Unfortunately the political energy may be too great for the left to allow this to be resolved. Hillary is depending on the posturing that Christians who defend traditional marriage are hateful rather than principled to help her get elected. Man it would be lovely to end the war on marriage and stop the divisive argument but I doubt this will end any time soon. Democrats ask conservative republicans to deny their faith in God…what of their core beliefs are they willing to give up son we can all just get along? None that I have ever noticed. So…it will continue to be a verbal war.

P.S. What’s Love Got to Do with It? – Tina Turner

“Absolutely Nothin”! – Temptations (re: War)

Passed along by RHT…

Lesson 1: Greece; Lesson 2: Cyprus – Pay Attention

by Tyler Durden on 03/18/2013 – 08:18 Deposit Insurance at a bank, any bank in Europe, is now meaningless.

By now you may know that the citizens of Cyprus just took a big haircut in having their deposits in their bank accounts seized for the common good.

Think it can’t happen here? Think again:

Take a look at the dollar bills in your wallet. See where it says Federal Reserve Note? The online financial dictionary says that a “NOTE” is:

“A contract stating the terms of a loan, such as the principal, the interest rate, and the payment schedule. A loan note states the rights and obligations of both the lender and the borrower. If one party does not fulfill his/her obligations, the other may sue for redress”

In this case your dollar bill is a “note” owned by the Federal Reserve banking system, backed up by the “full faith and CREDIT of the US Government”.

Yeah – ok—so what?  You ask.

So what happens when the credit rating of the US Government declines, and the Note is “called in” by the Federal Reserve? You think that green paper stuff in your bank account is YOUR money? [The Matrix: “You think that is air you are breathing now?”]

What happens when – for the good of the collective—the only FAIR thing to do is for all of us to “share the burden equally” and Uncle Sam reaches into your bank account – just like in Cyrus—and confiscates 10%—20 % of your ‘money’?

Think it through and pay attention.

by Jack Lee

Is the presidential election process too long?  I think so, but what’s your opinion?

Over the years the presidential election cycle has been stretched and stretched and stretched…where it’s now about 24 months long in full election mode.   That leads to a lot of fatigue, on us and candidates.  Of course the actual planning phase begins even sooner, typically several years before the campaigning. The strategy is hammered out, endorsements are lined up, deep pockets are recruited and a professional election team is hired and investigators are busy digging up dirt on all potential adversaries.  Is it any wonder the cost to run an effective election has skyrocketed in the past few decades?

Total spending for the 2012 presidential election blew away previous cycles with so-called super PACs laying down a staggering $629 million. When combined, Team Obama and Team Romney spent roughly $2 billion. The 2012 presidential cycle was the longest and most expensive in American history…but, just wait until 2016!

This begs the question, is all this really necessary?

Just how long should it take to inform your average voter before they’re ready to make an informed decision?  Maybe I should qualify the term [average].   There are two competing versions of [average].  That is, the ideal and real [average].  The ideal [average] voter has at least [average] intelligence.  He or she, is fairly eager to hear the candidates messages and it doesn’t take too long for them to hold an informed opinion.

Now for the real:  The real [average] is likely sub-par in smarts with many of them unable to read and write above the 3rd grade level.  They have a short attention span and an equally short memory; at least when it comes to political details and history.   Needless to say, they’re not deep thinkers!  They’re lucky if they hear the political sound bytes, never mind the whole speech! This [real] voter comes in two basic categories:  1. the partisan zombies or 2. (And equally as bad) They vote according to the last ad they heard.

Today a presidential candidate’s message is repeated tens of thousands of times.   It’s on TV, radio, in the news, on talk shows, public debates, public forums, stump speeches, town hall meetings and dozens of direct mailings.  It is therefore with great chagrin that this massive communication effort to sway an electorate, too often comes down to those perpetual last minute [undecideds].   They are the confused, low information, voters who wait until the 11th hour of the election to decide the fate of the nation.   Well screeeeeew them! Because we’re sick and tired of candidates catering (ad nauseum) to the lowest common denominator. Speak to us (the ideal voters), because we matter most.  Leave those others behind to wallow in their confusion.

In this day of information overload everything we need to know about a candidate for president can easily be put into 6 months of campaigning. If that short election cycle results in some people to missing the vote on election day because they were confused or too busy scratching their butts, then fine, it’s no loss! We don’t want or need them involved…leave electing up to the informed who have done their due diligence.  Speaking in the vernacular of the low information voter, when it comes to the presidential election cycle more is not better, less is more better!

by Tina Grazier

I don’t know about you but it seems to me that the only method progressives understand for making or getting money is to take it from others. Additional words and methods that apply would be to steal, to confiscate, to tax, to assess a fee or fine…to devise new methods under the law for separating people from their money.

Likewise the only method or concept for investment that progressives understand is the redistribution in the form of welfare and the government grant. I can’t think of a single policy or program that progressives have designed, touted, or implemented that doesn’t depend on taking money from others for redistribution. In the private world this concept is called theft.

Progressives do not understand, or do not care, that of our government has become Mr. Big…the guy in the neighborhood that everyone must “contribute to” or get his legs broken. Government does not produce wealth or financial security. It produces massive debt and a constant need for more cash. The public is treated like a hamster trapped on a wheel; we run and run and yet we do not get anywhere. Progressives have convinced people that the rich are responsible. This is a ruse. The rich invest in businesses that create wealth and offer opportunity to others. The rich also pay the largest portion of federal taxes. Mr. Big Government sits in front of a massive DC banquet. Mr. Big government is living large, handing out peanuts, wasting massive amounts of money and creating debt that surpasses the economy…we owe more than the country can produce.

Everyone understands that government requires a certain amount of money for the defense of the nation, for the court system, and to support leadership and maintenance of government structures. What we have failed to fully realize over the decades is that everything else can be accomplished more effectively and efficiently outside of government.

Do you have any idea how big the federal government has become? Go here and here for information.

Over the weekend the Cyprus government froze all bank accounts in their banking system in anticipation of a vote to assess a tax, “6.75 percent on all bank deposits under (EURO)100,000 ($131,000) and 9.9 percent over that amount,” to “save the country from bankruptcy”. This is what out of control spending leads to…the actual theft of money out of the peoples accounts to pay for the irresponsible mismanagement of the people’s money!

God help us to educate the people of this great republic lest we follow in the footsteps of Greece!

Posted by Tina

“You don’t have to be a brain surgeon or a rocket scientist to understand that if we continue to spend ourselves into oblivion we are going to destroy our nation. You know, if I were going to try to destroy this nation…if you just…let’s say you just magically put me into the White House (lengthy applause) I take it back…but let’s say somebody were there and they wanted to destroy this nation…what would you do? Let me tell you what I would do, first of all I would create division among the people, I would have everybody pitted against each other because a wise man by the name of Jesus once said a house divided against itself could not stand, and then I would encourage a culture of ridicule for basic morality and the principles that made and sustained the country, and then, I would undermine the financial stability of the country…drive it so far into debt that there was absolutely no chance that it could recover and I would weaken the military and destroy the moral of the military…that’s what I would do and I guarantee you it would work. Now, the question is…it appears, coincidentally, (laughter) that those are the very things that are happening right now. And the question is, how do we stop it? Can we stop it, or must we inexorably follow the same kind of path that other pinnacle nations have followed before their destruction…because all of those things that I just mentioned are the things that happened to other pinnacle nations before their fall and you know this is not something that has just started in the last four or five years this has been going on for quite some time now so lets not lay all the blame on any one particular person but lets the fact of the matter is we all have responsibility to recognize what’s going on and to use our influence to correct some of these things.”

See video of the speech here.

Posted by Tina

“More background checks? Dandy idea, Mr. President — should’ve started with yours.”

Posted by Tina

“A nation that can’t control its energy sources can’t control its future.” ― Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream

In an amazing power grab President Barrack Obama is seeking even more influence and power over the energy future of the country. He is determined to “control” energy sources and flows even if his actions create roadblocks for job creation and economic growth. His Majesty has decided he should decide what constitutes the American Dream.

Investors.com comments on a Bloomberg report:

Anti-Industry: The president reportedly will tell federal agencies they can’t approve major projects until their impact on global warming has been weighed. Why halt commerce in an economy in dire need of more? According to Bloomberg media, “President Barack Obama is preparing to tell all federal agencies for the first time that they should consider the impact on global warming before approving major projects, from pipelines to highways.”

The latest policy will “expand the scope” of Nixon-era EPA laws intended to conserve our environment and protect against egregious failures and abuses. Legislation that was designed to protect has in his hands become a tool for presidential manipulation and flagrant corporatism. None of this is necessary for protection of the environment. It is an abuse of power.

Since Nixon first signed environmental legislation establishing the EPA thousands of regulations have been put in place in the name of protecting the environment:

While there is no concrete figure, there are an estimated 300,000-400,000 environmental laws, statutes and mandates believed to be in circulation nationally. Many can land a person in prison, regardless of whether another person, plant or animal is harmed.

The President’s power grab doesn’t make sense from the standpoint of protecting the environment. What does make sense is a plan to stifle some industries in favor of others…surprise, surprise. In January of 2012 AEI reported the following:

Despite widespread political support and large direct and indirect subsidies from both the federal and state governments, renewable electricity—wind and solar power, in particular—produces only 3.6 percent of US power generation.

The green energy industry is unable to meet our countries energy needs. Even with massive subsidies it will be a long time, if ever, before this untested industry will significantly contribute to our energy supply. Efforts to force it on the citizenry will result in further economic collapse and human suffering. The President’s scheme to bypass Congress to push the green agenda is overreach that is very destructive. He is creating a red tape nightmare that will slam the overall economy and act as another barrier to job creation.

Those who might think I’m talking through my hat should consider a study released today that targets ways to develop for the future so that carbon use is aggressively reduced. I’m sure most of you will recognize the ideas contained in this report that are currently being foisted upon all of us by planners in many local governments. CNS News filters out the pompous and perverse in the study to arrive at a distilled summary:

(CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration envisions a “low-carbon, low-petroleum” future where Americans tele-work, tele-shop, walk, bike and use carpools or mass transit if they must leave the neighborhood at all. A study released Friday says the U.S. has the potential to reduce petroleum use and pollution in the transportation sector by more than 80 percent by 2050. In other words, gasoline-powered cars may go the way of the dinosaur, and many Americans may end up living in planned, mixed-use, “walkable” neighborhoods, built along mass transit lines.

While this idea sounds sweet and fresh and lovely, it is greatly offensive to the basic American ideal of freedom. It is also offensive that our president and his minions believe they have been given the power and right to FORCE their vision for the future on all Americans through presidential control and manipulation without input from our elected representatives in congress. It is offensive that any amount of damage to private business or individual citizens is justified and necessary for some assumed future nirvana that will likely never actually come about.

This policy weakens America! It makes us more vulnerable to insane extremists as well as our legitimate economic competitors around the world.

Barrack Obama warned us of his vision in the run up to his first term in 2007. He was very clear about his intentions even if he cloaked his ideas in highly emotional, positive sounding speech. Americans have suffered four years of economic policy failures. But will the American people continue, immobile and speechless, under the audacity of this man who offers the average citizen so very little hope?