OLD VERSION
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.
MORAL OF THE OLD STORY: Be responsible for yourself!
MODERN VERSION
The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be
allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.
CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?
Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green...' ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the SEIU group singing, "We Shall Overcome." Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray for the grasshopper's sake, while he damns the ants. President Obama condemns the ant
and blames President Bush 43, President Bush 41, President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper's plight.
Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has
gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.
Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper.
The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't maintain it. The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again. The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and peaceful, neighborhood.
The entire Nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it.
MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in 2012.
Are you the ant or the grasshopper?
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Rep. Duffy's (WI-7) Plan for Health Care Reform
- Ends ACA and replaces it with a base of provisions in the President's plan.
- Combats waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare.
- Ends the denial of insurance based on pre-existing conditions.
- Controls cost of care without the arbitrary dropping of consumer's coverage.
- Adds limits to lawsuits against medical providers.
- Allows transportability of insurance across state lines.
Friday, May 4, 2012
If Anyone Accuses You Of ..
"If anyone ever says you are a "flat earther"- tell them you're gonna push them off." - @stephenkruiser
Thursday, May 3, 2012
White House Denies That Obama Feasted on Human Flesh
Obama joked about the difference between dog meat and human flesh at the White House Correspondents Dinner. We know the President ate dog, but has he ever eaten a hockey mom? Find out more about the Obama dog controversy, plus the Occupy strike and the details of the Chinese abortion dissident holed up in the US Embassy:
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Dale Folwell: The Leading Fiscal Conservative
Public Policy Polling released a new poll today showing that Dale Folwell is leading in the race for Lieutenant Governor at 20%, Dan Forest coming up second at 15%. I'm going to share a few thoughts here. There has been a BIG bru ha ha about Forest being the "tea party darling", how Folwell should not have even gotten IN the race because Forest had been campaigning since early last year, so forth. None of that has made any sense to me.
If you're "tea party", you are going to know the work that has been accomplished by Dale Folwell. There should not be a doubt in anyone's mind that he is FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. He has saved the tax payers of this state MILLIONS. Through the many bills he has sponsored and co sponsored, he has made the government more efficient:
We are watching Raleigh (and Washington D.C.) like hawks these days to see how they are spending our hard earned money. Something I have picked up since the 2010 elections is the desire to see how a candidate is spending the money entrusted to them by donors. So in light of today's recent polling, it struck me to look up both candidate's campaign finance reports to see how things were going.
Just in first quarter of this year:
Note only about $7000 of Dale's was raised before he announced he would be running for Lieutenant Governor. Oh but wait. There has been NUMEROUS debates in the social media community from the Forest side on how Dale should not have even entered the race, because Dan had already been campaigning for the position for almost a year. Lets examine that a little closer:
Last year, Dan:
So total for the Lieutenant Governor race, Dan Forest has collected (on record) a whopping $311,351.37, spent $308,640.61, netting a plus of $2710.76 ... and less than a week before the election, he is still five points behind in the polls and falling?
Is that a good return on donor's investments? Is he efficiently running his campaign? By these numbers Dale's leadership and insight proves to be the more fiscally responsible choice in this race.
If you're "tea party", you are going to know the work that has been accomplished by Dale Folwell. There should not be a doubt in anyone's mind that he is FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. He has saved the tax payers of this state MILLIONS. Through the many bills he has sponsored and co sponsored, he has made the government more efficient:
- How would you feel about a law that could lower your property taxes and cut down on your interactions with the government? See H1779 legislation
- Why should you pay for the lifetime medical bills of someone who only worked for the state for 5 years + 1 day? See S837 legislation
- Did you realize that with life expectancy, state employees could be retired with pension and healthcare benefits for longer than they worked? See H1221 legislation
We are watching Raleigh (and Washington D.C.) like hawks these days to see how they are spending our hard earned money. Something I have picked up since the 2010 elections is the desire to see how a candidate is spending the money entrusted to them by donors. So in light of today's recent polling, it struck me to look up both candidate's campaign finance reports to see how things were going.
Just in first quarter of this year:
Donations | Money Spent | Difference | |
Dale Folwell | $142,349.58 | $125,951.30 | +$16398.28 |
Dan Forest | $92,108.80 | $118,358.13 | $-26249.33 |
Note only about $7000 of Dale's was raised before he announced he would be running for Lieutenant Governor. Oh but wait. There has been NUMEROUS debates in the social media community from the Forest side on how Dale should not have even entered the race, because Dan had already been campaigning for the position for almost a year. Lets examine that a little closer:
Last year, Dan:
Collected | Spent | Difference | |
from 1/1/11 to 6/30/11 | $100,201.67 | $38,771.71 | +$61429.96 |
from 7/7/11 to 12/31/11 | $119,040.90 | $151,510.77 | -$32469.87 |
Year end difference being: +$28960.09 |
So total for the Lieutenant Governor race, Dan Forest has collected (on record) a whopping $311,351.37, spent $308,640.61, netting a plus of $2710.76 ... and less than a week before the election, he is still five points behind in the polls and falling?
Is that a good return on donor's investments? Is he efficiently running his campaign? By these numbers Dale's leadership and insight proves to be the more fiscally responsible choice in this race.
America at Risk: The Importance of Military Readiness
Because it must be seen:
Sarah Palin Saw That Coming A Mile Away
By Maggie Gallagher
Sarah Palin was the first to recognize the problem: By participating in President Obama’s signature education initiative, Race to the Top which pushed the Common Core standards, Alaska would lose control over its own curriculum.
On May 31, 2009, then-Gov. Palin announced Alaska would adopt a “watch and wait” attitude:
“If this initiative produces useful results, Alaska will remain free to incorporate them,” Gov. Palin said, adding that “high expectations are not always created by new, mandated federal standards written on paper. They are created in the home, the community and the classroom.”
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, to his credit, was the next to recognize a federal boondoggle when he saw one: “I will not commit Texas taxpayers to unfunded federal obligations or to the adoption of unproven, cost-prohibitive national standards and tests,” Gov. Perry wrote in a Jan. 13, 2010, letter to U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan.
In the ensuing two years, it’s become clear that Perry and Palin — two core conservative figures whose intelligence is routinely mocked by liberal “sophisticates” — were brilliantly prescient, indeed prophetic.
Common Core Standards turn out to be like Obamacare — you don’t really know what’s in it until after you pass it and are mired in its tentacles.
Today, even more states are waking up to discover that they have lost control of both curriculum and costs for a program that is untested and unlikely to improve student performance. A February study by the Pioneer Institute conservatively estimates that Obama’s Common Core Standards will costs the states at least $16 billion — money that could be used to promote education in other ways.
This past week, Education Week’s blog published a review of criticism for Obama’s Common Core initiative. The shocking thing is how many liberals are now acknowledging Common Core comes at a high cost for little or no return. Tom Loveless of the Brookings Institution, for example, wrote, “(T)he most reasonable prediction is that the Common Core will have little to no effect on student achievement.” Joanne Yatvin, a past president of the National Council on Teachers of English, writes, “Taken together, the standards and the criteria project an aura of arrogance and ignorance in their assumptions about how and why children learn.”
Four education experts came together at the Heritage Foundation on April 17 to comment on more problems emerging with the Common Core Standards. A blog post describing the expert panel, titled “Why States Should Hop Off the National Standards Bandwagon,” states:
“When ‘states signed on to Common Core Standards, they did not realize … that they were transferring control of the school curriculum to the federal government,’ explained Sandra Stotsky, 21st Century Chair in Teacher Quality at the University of Arkansas’ Department of Education Reform.
“Theodor Rebarber, CEO and founder of Accountability Works, explained, ‘States did almost no cost analysis’ when they signed on to adopt the Common Core Standards, although Rebarber noted, the Pioneer Institute report he authored conservatively estimated the overall national cost for implementing Common Core at a hefty $16 billion.
“Jim Stergios of the Pioneer Institute warned that the standards create ‘a disincentive to innovators long term.’ Federal involvement in curriculum, as attorney Kent Talbert of Talbert and Eitel explained, may even be illegal because three federal laws prohibit ‘federal direction, control or supervision of curricula, programs of instruction and instructional materials … in the elementary and secondary school arena.’”
A pivotal moment in the history of American education will quietly occur on May 11 in Charlotte, N.C., when the board of the influential (and under fire) conservative American Legislative Exchange Council will meet to decide whether or not to accept its own education task force’s recommendation of model legislation blocking implementation of Obama’s Common Core.
“We eagerly anticipate that the ALEC Board will affirm the task force vote,” said Emmett McGroarty, who works with the American Principles Project, which co-sponsored the Pioneer study and which lobbied for model legislation at ALEC. (Full disclosure: One of my projects, the Culture War Victory Fund, is also housed at APP.)
Obama’s Common Core Standards violate federal laws in order to take over control of curriculum, on behalf of an unproven education initiative that leaves states $16 billion in debt.
Sarah Palin and Rick Perry are proven to be prophets. ALEC, you know what to do.
Maggie Gallagher is co-founder of the National Organization for Marriage.
Originally posted at American Principles Project
Sarah Palin was the first to recognize the problem: By participating in President Obama’s signature education initiative, Race to the Top which pushed the Common Core standards, Alaska would lose control over its own curriculum.
On May 31, 2009, then-Gov. Palin announced Alaska would adopt a “watch and wait” attitude:
“If this initiative produces useful results, Alaska will remain free to incorporate them,” Gov. Palin said, adding that “high expectations are not always created by new, mandated federal standards written on paper. They are created in the home, the community and the classroom.”
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, to his credit, was the next to recognize a federal boondoggle when he saw one: “I will not commit Texas taxpayers to unfunded federal obligations or to the adoption of unproven, cost-prohibitive national standards and tests,” Gov. Perry wrote in a Jan. 13, 2010, letter to U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan.
In the ensuing two years, it’s become clear that Perry and Palin — two core conservative figures whose intelligence is routinely mocked by liberal “sophisticates” — were brilliantly prescient, indeed prophetic.
Common Core Standards turn out to be like Obamacare — you don’t really know what’s in it until after you pass it and are mired in its tentacles.
Today, even more states are waking up to discover that they have lost control of both curriculum and costs for a program that is untested and unlikely to improve student performance. A February study by the Pioneer Institute conservatively estimates that Obama’s Common Core Standards will costs the states at least $16 billion — money that could be used to promote education in other ways.
This past week, Education Week’s blog published a review of criticism for Obama’s Common Core initiative. The shocking thing is how many liberals are now acknowledging Common Core comes at a high cost for little or no return. Tom Loveless of the Brookings Institution, for example, wrote, “(T)he most reasonable prediction is that the Common Core will have little to no effect on student achievement.” Joanne Yatvin, a past president of the National Council on Teachers of English, writes, “Taken together, the standards and the criteria project an aura of arrogance and ignorance in their assumptions about how and why children learn.”
Four education experts came together at the Heritage Foundation on April 17 to comment on more problems emerging with the Common Core Standards. A blog post describing the expert panel, titled “Why States Should Hop Off the National Standards Bandwagon,” states:
“When ‘states signed on to Common Core Standards, they did not realize … that they were transferring control of the school curriculum to the federal government,’ explained Sandra Stotsky, 21st Century Chair in Teacher Quality at the University of Arkansas’ Department of Education Reform.
“Theodor Rebarber, CEO and founder of Accountability Works, explained, ‘States did almost no cost analysis’ when they signed on to adopt the Common Core Standards, although Rebarber noted, the Pioneer Institute report he authored conservatively estimated the overall national cost for implementing Common Core at a hefty $16 billion.
“Jim Stergios of the Pioneer Institute warned that the standards create ‘a disincentive to innovators long term.’ Federal involvement in curriculum, as attorney Kent Talbert of Talbert and Eitel explained, may even be illegal because three federal laws prohibit ‘federal direction, control or supervision of curricula, programs of instruction and instructional materials … in the elementary and secondary school arena.’”
A pivotal moment in the history of American education will quietly occur on May 11 in Charlotte, N.C., when the board of the influential (and under fire) conservative American Legislative Exchange Council will meet to decide whether or not to accept its own education task force’s recommendation of model legislation blocking implementation of Obama’s Common Core.
“We eagerly anticipate that the ALEC Board will affirm the task force vote,” said Emmett McGroarty, who works with the American Principles Project, which co-sponsored the Pioneer study and which lobbied for model legislation at ALEC. (Full disclosure: One of my projects, the Culture War Victory Fund, is also housed at APP.)
Obama’s Common Core Standards violate federal laws in order to take over control of curriculum, on behalf of an unproven education initiative that leaves states $16 billion in debt.
Sarah Palin and Rick Perry are proven to be prophets. ALEC, you know what to do.
Maggie Gallagher is co-founder of the National Organization for Marriage.
Originally posted at American Principles Project
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Farmers Barely Avoid New Child Work Rules
A new Department of Labor rule would have prohibited kids from working "in storing marketing and transporting farm product raw materials." Public outcry caused bureaucrats to back down, but what plans does the Obama administration have in store for us? Also, should the government get involved in banning child labor?
- Less than 2% of the U.S. population lives on farms
- Ideas and Capitalism brought children off the farm and into the schools, not the government
- There are roughly 2 million farms in America
- Child labor is NOT the reason our food is abundant and affordable!
Monday, April 30, 2012
Is Martin Bashir Advocating For Drunken Presidents?
Chris Matthews lectured former Governor Michael Steele about the KKK. (ironic, right?)
Hear what Steele had to say in response. Martin Bashir even went so far
as to take issue with Mitt Romney's sobriety, but did he advocate for
drunken presidents? Hear what Kruiser (from PJTV) thinks. Do a million kids die each
year from malaria because of a misguided environmental agenda? (YES) Find
out. (emphasis mine)
Virginia Foxx Meme: College Loans
House Votes to Stop Student Loan Rates from Doubling
Have you heard?
The House "ignored a veto threat" and passed a measure to stop new student loan rates from doubling this summer. The bill pays for extending current rates by cutting a slush fund the president himself proposed cutting from ObamaCare -- a law that's making it harder for small businesses to hire new workers, including recent college graduates. Read more: http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?postid=293226
The House "ignored a veto threat" and passed a measure to stop new student loan rates from doubling this summer. The bill pays for extending current rates by cutting a slush fund the president himself proposed cutting from ObamaCare -- a law that's making it harder for small businesses to hire new workers, including recent college graduates. Read more: http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?postid=293226
Destroying Latin America: Populism, Protectionism, and Prohibition
I just finished watching this speech by Journalist Mary O'Grady. I was so impressed I immediately sought out her feed to add to my reader so I can read more of her work. I'm the first to admit I have a LOT to learn about foreign policy, the Fed, etc but this speech was a real eye opener as she explains socialism as it is already playing out in Latin America. I do not want that to eventually be US! The speech is 15 minutes, and the Q&A period is 15 minutes. I strongly suggesting you grab a snack, kick back, and listen to this speech!
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Rep. Starnes (Caldwell Co.) needs to have a staff meeting
"Rep. Starnes' supporters at the polls need to calm down and cease and
desist with the blatant and vile attacks and lies on my character and on
my poll workers, especially considering that they were women and
children. I am a born again Christian and to stoop to such a low level
to lie and call me a homosexual because you dont want me to win and then
to use racist and bigoted attacks on my poll workers who are hispanic
but legal Americans is very low and dirty politics. You reflect very
badly on Rep. Starnes who I don't believe would agree with that type of
campaigning."
-- Jordon Greene
https://www.facebook.com/greenefornchouse
-- Jordon Greene
https://www.facebook.com/greenefornchouse
Thursday, April 19, 2012
The Eligibility Resolution
It seems we are just running in circles over that stupid birth certificate issue. A non politico asked me today "... if they KNOW he's not a natural born citizen due to both his parents not being born in the US ... and a confessed fake birth certificate, why won't they even consider throwing [him] out?"
The answer is here-
Is this a "too easy" answer? Why don't all the states pass laws saying that you have to be a natural born citizen, and proof must be furnished?
I wonder how the admitted forgery is going to muster in states that do require proof.
Thoughts?
The answer is here-
"Hill tried to dismiss the suit because, while the U.S. Constitution limits the office of president to only those who have a “natural born” citizenship status, New Jersey law does not require a candidate to furnish proof of his or her status.
According to the Tea Party Tribune, Hill went on to admit that the long form birth certificate released online by the White House in April 2011 is indeed a forgery that did not originate from an actual paper document and therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status.
The issue of the birth certificate is “irrelevant to his placement on the ballot,” Hill contended."
Is this a "too easy" answer? Why don't all the states pass laws saying that you have to be a natural born citizen, and proof must be furnished?
I wonder how the admitted forgery is going to muster in states that do require proof.
Thoughts?
Question: Judges Voting History = Good Job?
When looking at judicial candidates, is it important to you that they are active voters?
Would you be inclined to vote for someone for a district court position based on their voting frequency, if that is what differs them from their opponents?
Update (4/20/12 10:13am): There is a judicial candidate running in Forsyth County, NC who, according to the board of elections, did not vote in the 2010 elections. Would this impact your decision to even consider this candidate?
Would you be inclined to vote for someone for a district court position based on their voting frequency, if that is what differs them from their opponents?
Update (4/20/12 10:13am): There is a judicial candidate running in Forsyth County, NC who, according to the board of elections, did not vote in the 2010 elections. Would this impact your decision to even consider this candidate?
What's going on with the NC Democrat Party?
Non- politicos are probably wondering what's going on with the widespread talk about sexual harassment in the NC Democratic Party. If you work eight hours a day, cook once a day, do your dishes and laundry, hearing "sexual harassment" isn't going to make you run to the computer to find out what's going on.
Here's the deal:
N&O reports:
(Thanks Piedmont Publius!)
Here's the deal:
N&O reports:
A former staffer accused the state Democratic Party’s executive director of showing him a picture of male genitals, caressing his leg and discussing his sexual exploits, according to new documents obtained by The News & Observer.Party Chairman David Parker is still refusing to resign, calling for a party referendum on his chairmanship, a plan that Gov. Bev Perdue called unacceptable.
The sexual harassment allegations are detailed in a Dec. 8 letter from Adriadn Ortega, a former party staffer, to then-Executive Director Jay Parmley. Ortega claimed he was “fired in retaliation for my complaints of sexual harassment” and asked for a severance equal to his annual pay and health care coverage for a year.
..In the letter, Ortega says Parmley:
• Frequently gave him unwanted shoulder rubs despite verbal objections.
• Pointed to his crotch area and asked how his crotch looked in his pants.
• On July 28, detailed his past sexual activities.
• On July 29, showed Ortega a picture of a penis.
• On Sept. 6, caressed Ortega’s leg as they drove back from a Democratic convention kick-off in Charlotte.
(Thanks Piedmont Publius!)
Friday, April 13, 2012
Hilary Rosen: Connecting the Dots
"What's striking about Rosen's latest ideological sniper attack is that she is not some lone-wolf operative on the fringes of Beltway influence. She works with former White House communications director Anita Dunn at the D.C.-based strategic communications consulting firm SKDKnickerbocker. That's the same company that promoted the anti-Palin smear movie "Game Change" and that represented liberal Georgetown law school student activist and manufactured War on Women poster woman Sandra Fluke. Smack dab at the intersection of progressive agitation and Democratic Party campaign-season maneuvering.from Townhall.com
White House visitor logs (which nonpartisan watchdogs point out are woefully incomplete) show that "Hilary B. Rosen" or "Hilary Rosen" has visited 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. at least 35 times, including several direct meetings with President Obama (5); White House senior adviser and consigliere Valerie Jarrett; senior adviser David Axelrod; senior adviser turned 2012 campaign manager Jim Messina; and a parade of communications/media team officials in both the West Wing "surrogate booking" office and the East Wing.
Axelrod and Messina, who took to Twitter immediately Thursday night after the social networking site exploded with a conservative mom backlash, scrambled to disassociate themselves from their frequent visitor. POTUS and FLOTUS followed suit. But when you collect and connect the dots, Rosen's role as a surrogate hit-woman for the White House is unmistakable."
First- has anyone seen the movie "Game Change"? We watched it a few weeks ago, and even my non-political husband said "Wow, that makes her look like a total idiot.". It is so obvious that movie was meant as "SOP", playing on people's lack of motivation to actually seek and find the truth. Anyone who has ever heard Sarah Palin speak or read her writings know the portrayal of her in this movie was biased in a GIANT way.
Second, I wonder if they believe that conservatives are going to let this "war on stay at home moms" go just because she apologized ... seriously? I don't believe for one second this woman, or the people behind her is actually sorry for what she said. I believe she's sorry she got called out on it.
Hopefully, America will start paying attention to comments such as these, because it is revealing.
The comment that flamed this firestorm in the first place:
"His wife has actually never worked a day in her life ... She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of women in this country are facing in terms of how do we feed our kids? How do we send them to school? And why we worry about their future." - Hilary Rosen
To which Ann Romney responded: "All moms are entitled to choose their path."
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Dale Folwell CAN Solve Illegal Immigration in NC
This is what I love about this candidate- he has such clear vision that the solutions to our state's problems is so obvious you cannot deny it. He listens to the problems, and seeks to find the solutions. He has the experience and convictions to make North Carolina successful.
SBA List Endorses "The Lesser"
It seems like the endorsements are going to come out of the woodwork, now that it appears Romney has the nomination in the bag. (Even if it isn't, we all know the nation is going to act like it until the convention.) We all, who pay attention, that is, recognize how pivotal the November election is going to be. Now, a message is being sent to those who might not pay as close attention through the message of endorsements. I personally do not put a lot of stock into endorsements, when you consider the left leaning newspaper in my area endorsed a STRONG conservative in the 2010 elections. (If people voted based on endorsements alone, there would have been a LOT of conservative votes lost that year!)
However, the single issue voters are going to be paying a little more attention now, because the Susan B. Anthony List has endorsed Mitt Romney, and has vowed to spend $10-12 Million to defeat President Obama this year. This endorsement says a few things to me. One, it shows the typical politics as usual stance, in that most in this country will go with who they think "will win", whether that person actually reflects their values or not. Lets examine this closer:
As the Christian Post points out-
So why would an organization turn their backs against a candidate who done exactly what they asked, for one who refused? Politics. Jane Abraham, chairman of the SBA List Board of Directors said: "It is the responsibility of all pro-life voters to now unite behind Governor Romney. Together we can put a pro-life leader in the White House.". If they were acting upon values, would they not use their influence to get behind a candidate who truly reflected their values? After all, Romney did list a number of reasons why he refused to sign the SBA pledge (which I applaud, I personally do not believe in pledges such as, and agree with Romney's reasoning for NOT signing it).
In the end, one could say Romney stuck to his values, and the Susan B. Anthony list compromised theirs for the sake of doing what they believe needed to be done to get Obama out of the White House. He is, after all, the MOST pro abortion president in our history. Anything is better than a baby being born and left to die because it's mother never intended for it to be born in the first place.
Right?
However, the single issue voters are going to be paying a little more attention now, because the Susan B. Anthony List has endorsed Mitt Romney, and has vowed to spend $10-12 Million to defeat President Obama this year. This endorsement says a few things to me. One, it shows the typical politics as usual stance, in that most in this country will go with who they think "will win", whether that person actually reflects their values or not. Lets examine this closer:
As the Christian Post points out-
"... Romney has not always been seen as a Republican who was willing to fight for pro-life causes. In 1994 when Romney ran for the U.S. Senate against the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, he adopted a pro-abortion position with the permission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.The group initially endorsed Rick Santorum, who discontinued his race this week. It has appeared based on the presentation of the media that it has been a two man race. The SBA list has blatantly disregarded the candidacies of two other individuals, and this makes one ask- why? Politics as usual, of course. Go with who you think will win. It is questionable Gingrich's stance on life, considering he recently said in an interview with Jake Tapper that he did not believe that life began at conception. Meanwhile, if you look at Ron Paul's stance as an OB GYN, he is unashamedly pro life in every sense of the meaning. Not only had he signed the SBA pledge that Romney refused, but last June 3rd at a Faith and Freedom Coalition conference said- "As an OB [Obstetrician] doctor, let me tell you, life does begin at conception." *
However, when he ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2002, he had changed his position to one of opposing abortion in most cases."
So why would an organization turn their backs against a candidate who done exactly what they asked, for one who refused? Politics. Jane Abraham, chairman of the SBA List Board of Directors said: "It is the responsibility of all pro-life voters to now unite behind Governor Romney. Together we can put a pro-life leader in the White House.". If they were acting upon values, would they not use their influence to get behind a candidate who truly reflected their values? After all, Romney did list a number of reasons why he refused to sign the SBA pledge (which I applaud, I personally do not believe in pledges such as, and agree with Romney's reasoning for NOT signing it).
In the end, one could say Romney stuck to his values, and the Susan B. Anthony list compromised theirs for the sake of doing what they believe needed to be done to get Obama out of the White House. He is, after all, the MOST pro abortion president in our history. Anything is better than a baby being born and left to die because it's mother never intended for it to be born in the first place.
Right?
Labels:
Election 2012,
Pro Life,
Romney,
Ron Paul,
Santorum
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
George Zimmerman to be charged in Trayvon Martin case
WASHINGTON POST -- Florida special prosecutor Angela Corey plans to announce as early as Wednesday afternoon that she is charging neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman in the shooting of Trayvon Martin, according to a law enforcement official close to the investigation.
It was not immediately clear what charge Zimmerman will face.
Full Story - Washington Post.com
It was not immediately clear what charge Zimmerman will face.
Full Story - Washington Post.com
Hunger Games in one, short paragraph
One of my (Christian) soccer mom friends posted the trailer to the Hunger Games last October on her Facebook page. She was beyond excited, so I replied to find out what the big deal was. She highly recommended reading the books. During basketball season, one of the (Christian) basketball moms mentioned it, and also highly recommended it. Since this particular friend is completely on my level when it comes to books, I decided this had to be a book I needed to read. She was so sure I would love the story, she lent me all three of hers. The week before the movie was to come out, I read them. Yes. All three. In a span of four days. (When I get sucked into a book series, I get sucked in!)
(Oh you're looking for the one short paragraph? Click here.)
(Oh you're looking for the one short paragraph? Click here.)
I've seen several descriptions of this story. I was most amazed at the relentless concern (especially in Christian circles) over children killing children. Is children killing children right? Of course not. Thou Shalt Not Kill. I was amazed because the games in this story, is but one part of a MUCH larger picture! Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water. I have yet to see the ongoing narrative in Christian circles about concern over popular Xbox games. The emulation of war. Killing for sport- for the sake of killing. If we're going to be concerned about violence, should we not be concerned about violence such as this? It seems pretty selective, if you ask me.
I've seen the comment that as Christians, we should only be dwelling on what is good and pure (Philippians 4:8), and that is why the Hunger Games shouldn't be read. I believe having a heroine that is ready to lay her life down for her sister is pretty good and pure, if you ask me! I believe having a best friend who is already the sole food provider for his mother and siblings, love you so much he is willing to make sure your own mother and sister do not starve, is pretty good and pure! I believe putting your own life in danger to ensure a friend survives, is good and pure!
I've seen comments that troubled teens already thinking of murdering their peers, do not need to have their fans flamed by a graphic fantasy. Something tells me if a teen is going to shoot up their school, there's something deeper going on than a book they've read. Perhaps a lack of Christian love and influence in their lives? I even saw a comment that said the books had no "moral of the story". I'm not sure what book they actually read, because there were a number of morals throughout the books (see above)!
I've seen comments how 'children's fantasy' can be harmful if it plunges a child into the world of murder. I can rent that. (That might be why this book series is written for teenagers. It's not children's fantasy.) Will I allow my ten year old read these books? No. For her personality, it's too much detail. Will she see the movie? Yes. The movie is balanced in a way she can appreciate the themes without being overwhelmed by the details of it all. Would I have let her older brother (13) read it when he was ten? Yes. He can handle such details. Has he seen the movie? Yes. He went opening weekend and loved it. Do I fear my children will be tempted to harm another child because they've been exposed to this story? No. Well, yes. Maybe each other. But not anyone else. However, they were tempted to hurt each other before the Hunger Games come in to their lives. Fortunately, I am afforded the freedom to choose what my kids read and watch without them having any fear of being judged or ridiculed by their peers.
The bible says "I will set no wicked thing before my eyes" (Psalm 101:3), but this verse cannot be used against the Hunger Games. It would be different if the author wrote the story in such a way that all the characters gloried in the killing of teenagers between the ages of 12-18. That would be sadistic and twisted. However, that is not the TRUTH, the MORAL, this story.
Tabitha Hale, political activist, wrote an article that summed up the reality of what the Hunger Games is, including spoilers for the entire book series. If you tempt easy and are remotely thinking of seeing the movies or reading the books, I do not advise clicking to her article but trusting in this one paragraph that summarizes what the story is actually about:
"The Hunger Games" is a story about freedom. It shows how a destructive culture, lack of truth-telling media, and centralized power destroy a society. It has clearly struck a chord. Read it. Understand it. THEN go see the movie.
If you do not like action fantasy, do not read it. If you do not get into post apocalyptic stories, then this story is not for you. However, just because your taste in literature does not include such stories, does not mean the people who DO appreciate these stories are unholy or out of touch with God. If I actually believed the accusations made against this story without reading the books for myself, I would be guilty of incorrectly, and unjustly judging others for their choice in literature. God forbid, I ever do that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)