It’s Embarrassing When You Don’t Practice What You Preach

2010-07-21 G550 NetJets CS-DKE EDDF 02

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday Bloomberg.com posted a story about Warren Buffett. It seems that despite his recent statements to the contrary, he hates to pay taxes as much as the rest of us.

The article reports:

NetJets Inc., the private-plane company owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A), was countersued by the U.S. over $366 million in taxes and penalties.

NetJets in November sued the U.S., saying the federal government had wrongly imposed taxes, interest and penalties totaling more than $642.7 million.

…NetJets Aviation Inc. owes more than $302.1 million, and another unit, NetJets International, is liable for $52.9 million, the U.S. said. Executive Jet Management Inc. owes $10 million while NetJets Large Aircraft owes $1.19 million, the U.S. claimed.

“NetJets doesn’t comment on pending litigation,” General Counsel Colleen Nissl said in a statement e-mailed to Bloomberg News.

I have no problem with a corporation legally cutting its tax bill, but I do find it ironic that the man who raised such a ruckus about the wealthy paying ‘their fair share’ of income taxes doesn’t necessarily think that statement applies to him.

Enhanced by Zemanta

March 12 In Northborough Massachusetts

Free Seminar

 ObamaCare

an American Catastrophe

 Monday, March 12, 2012, 7:00 p.m.

Northborough Free Library

_______________________________________________________

 

    Forcing ObamaCare (OC) on Americans

    Losing Your Choice of Doctors        

    Infringement on Religious Freedom

    “Death Panels”

    Collapse of the R&D for Life-Saving Drugs

    What if the Supreme Court Upholds OC?

_______________________________________________________

 Presented by Mike Stopa, Harvard University

~ Sponsored by the Northborough Tea Party ~

Public Welcome ~ Free Admission

   Information: John O’Mara, 508.393.2044

 www.northboroughteaparty.com

               

                “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil   is  

                    for good men to do nothing” Edmund Burke

Enhanced by Zemanta

Has Anyone Seen This In Their Newspaper Or TV News ?

 I realize that this is long, but please read the entire story. It is disturbing.

On February 26, the Frederick Douglass Foundation of New York released the following Press Release:

In Case You Missed It

13 Year Old Jada Williams Persecuted by the Rochester City School District  Over her essay on Frederick Douglass.

On Saturday, February 18, 2012, the Frederick Douglass Foundation of New York presented the first Spirit of Freedom award to Jada Williams, a 13-year old city of Rochester student.  Miss Williams wrote an essay on her impressions of Frederick Douglass’ first autobiography the Narrative of the Life.  This was part of an essay contest, but her essay was never entered.  It offended her teachers so much that, after harassment from teachers and school administrators at School #3, Miss Williams was forced to leave the school.
 
We at the Frederick Douglass Foundation honored her because her essay actually demonstrates that she understood the autobiography, even though it might seem a bit esoteric to most 13-year olds.  In her essay, she quotes part of the scene where Douglass’ slave master catches his wife teaching then slave Frederick to read.  During a speech about how he would be useless as a slave if he were able to read, Mr. Auld, the slave master, castigated his wife.
 
Miss Williams quoted Douglass quoting Mr. Auld:  “If you teach that nigger (speaking of myself) how to read, there will be no keeping him. It will forever unfit him to be a slaveHe would at once become unmanageable, and of no value to his master.”
 
Miss Williams personalized this to her own situation.  She reflected on how the “white teachers” do not have enough control of the classroom to successfully teach the minority students in Rochester.  While she herself is more literate than most, due to her own perseverance and diligence, she sees the fact that so many of the other “so-called ‘unteachable’” students aren’t learning to read as a form of modern-day slavery.  Their illiteracy holds them back in society.
 
Her call to action was then in her summary: “A grand price was paid in order for us to be where we are today; but in my mind we should be a lot further, so again I encourage the white teachers to instruct and I encourage my people to not just be a student, but become a learner.”
 
This offended her English teacher so much that the teacher copied the essay for other teachers and for the Principal. After that, Miss Williams’ mother and father started receiving phone calls from numerous teachers, all claiming that their daughter is “angry.”  Miss Williams, mostly a straight-A student, started receiving very low grades, and she was kicked out of class for laughing and threatened with in-school suspension.
 
There were several meetings with teachers and administrators, but all failed to answer Miss Williams’ mother’s questions. The teachers refused to show her the tests and work that she had supposedly performed so poorly on.  Instead, the teachers and administrators branded her a problem.
Unable to take anymore of the persecution, they pulled her from School #3.  Wanting to try another school, they were quickly informed that that school was filled and told to try “this school.”  During her first day at this new school, she witnessed four fights, and other students asked her if she was put here because she fights too much.
 
Long story short, they took an exceptional student, with the radical idea that kids should learn to read, and put her in a school of throwaway students who are even more unmanageable than the average student in her previous school.  To protect their daughter, her parents have had to remove her from school, and her mother has had to quit her job so she can take care of Miss Williams.
 
To date, the administrators of School #3 have refused to release her records, even though she no longer attends the school, and they have repeatedly given her mother the run around.  We at the Frederick Douglass Foundation have contacted school administrators in regards to this situation and have also been told to hit the pavement.
 

That’s what we intend to do.  If this school will sacrifice the welfare of an above-average student whose essay, that they asked her to write, they find offensive, we intend to make everyone aware of this monstrous injustice.  The school has a job, and it is not doing it.  We would like as many folks as possible to call the Principal of School #3 and complain about this injustice.  Her name is Miss Connie Wehner, and she can be reached at (585) 454-3525.  This treatment of Jada Williams cannot stand.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Defeating The Keystone Pipeline (Again)

Yesterday Politico reported on the vote in the Senate opposing a highway bill that would have allowed the Keystone Pipeline to move forward. The vote was 56-42. The 56 vote supported the Pipeline, but 60 votes were needed to break the filibuster.

President Obama had strongly lobbied the Senate to vote against the measure.

The article reports:

Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.) wryly congratulated Obama on his lobbying efforts.

“That was very strong work by President Obama himself, making personal calls to Democrats,” Lugar said. “He understood that a majority of the American public and a majority at least of the Senate are strongly in favor of this project.

“So I suppose you give credit to the president for once again blocking something, but I don’t think the president really wants to do that indefinitely,” he added.

“We got a majority in the Senate,” said amendment sponsor Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), who noted that two senators — Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and John Thune (R-S.D.) — were absent. “So we would have had 58 votes had all Republicans been able to be here.”

The fact that this vote was taken has a lot to do with election year politics, but it also has a lot to do with America’s energy independence. As Iran continues to threaten to close the Strait of Hormuz, we need to consider our energy needs and how to meet them without Middle Eastern oil. Alternative energy is not yet sufficiently developed to be a viable substitute.

I have no doubt that there will be more votes on the Pipeline as the November election approaches.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Common Sense Happens

The Daily Caller is reporting today that the New Hampshire Senate has passed a bill requiring voters to show identification when they vote.

This is in response to the following video:

 

The video was done by James O’Keefe and shows people giving the names of people who had recently died receiving ballots to vote. The legislation still has to be passed by the New Hampshire House.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Targeting Pollitical Diversity

CBN News posted a story today about the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting on the Tea Party now that the election season is here.

The article reports:

In what some believe to be an attempt to intimidate and silence the Tea Party, the IRS is sending letters to Democratic and Republican organizations seeking non-profit status looking to see if funds are used properly under tax law.

The questionnaires want organizations to provide all communications with legislative bodies, describe membership criteria and the nature of the relationship with any candidate for public office.

The move has prompted the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) to step in and defend about 20 Tea Party groups from what it’s calling government harassment.

American Center for Law and Justice Chief Council Jay Sekulow stated that he would answer the questions that the government can legitimately ask, but will not answer those questions that are unconstitutional. The ACLJ has stated that it is prepared to take the matter to court and that it has called for Congressional oversight hearings.

For more information, please watch this video:

It

The video is an interview of Attorney Sekulow that explains exactly what has been happening.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Where Is The Accountability To Taxpayers ?

Breitbart.com is reporting today on where some of the stimulus money went.

The article reports:

A portion of an $11 million grant to help 400 low-income Detroit citizens purchase “business attire” for job interviews helped exactly two people, a city audit reveals.

The audit revealed that the clothing program was supposed to help 400 people. Instead, two people were helped. The people asking for the clothing were required to have a job interview scheduled. Part of the audit included an investigation into the purchase of $182,000 worth of high-end furniture for a department office. In 2009, the department received more than $11 million in stimulus funding and created a service center. 

The article reports:

The center, at 1970 Larned, included the Customer Choice Pantry, the New Beginnings Clothing Boutique and a call center that had the capacity to service 60,000 families in need. The boutique was to provide business attire for low-income residents for job interviews. 

This is sad. The money could have been used to help people out of poverty. Instead it is used to build government infrastructure. Until we have a poverty program that has incentives for government bureaucrats to get people out of poverty instead of building their own facilities and job security, we will never end the poverty cycle.

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Is Not Something America Should Be Supporting In Any Way

Chief Justice Shinwani from the Supreme Court ...

Image via Wikipedia

I probably would not qualify as a feminist by today’s standards. I believe women should be able to do any job they are qualified for and should be paid equally for their work, but the current definition of feminism has left that concept far behind. However, I have very strong ideas about how women should be treated. Some of those ideas come from spending part of my childhood in the American south, where chivalry and manners can still be found. Thus, I was very disturbed when I read the following article.

The Toronto Star posted an article today about recent comments by President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan.

The article reports:

In remarks made Tuesday, Karzai backed a “code of conduct” written by the Ulema Council of 150 leading Muslim clerics. It could dramatically restrict women’s daily lives and threaten a return to the dark days of Taliban rule.

“Men are fundamental and women are secondary,” the council said in its statement released last week, and later published on Karzai’s own website.

…It says women should not travel without a male guardian or mingle with men in public places such as schools, offices or markets. It also allows wife-beating in the case of a “sharia-compliant” reason, although it rejects forced marriage and the bartering of women to settle disputes.

In Kabul, Karzai said that the council had not put “any limitations” on women, and that it was only stating “the sharia law of all Muslims and all Afghans.” But some Muslim scholars have disputed the clerics’ strict interpretation.

This was what Afghanistan was like under the Taliban. I remember the joy when people took out their radios and danced when the American troops arrived. Have the people of Afghanistan forgotten their own recent past?

The article further reports:

Before the 2001 invasion, Afghan women were confined to their homes and forced to wear burkas. Girls were not allowed to go to school, and females could not get medical attention from male doctors.

Since then women have made large strides, returning to work and school, starting businesses and taking part in the political process. But their lives are frequently at risk, and have become more difficult as security has frayed in recent months.

“Sixty-five per cent of the population is under the age of 25, and young women are not prepared to take it any more,” says Toronto author and journalist Sally Armstrong, who has written on Afghan women’s rights. “They are brave, and they march in the street. The message is ‘Karzai must go.’”

Karzai has been backtracking on women’s rights in recent years, as Western countries began to roll up their military operations. By 2014, most will have left the country, although they have pledged to continue support for its development.

President Karzai is hedging his bets because foreign forces are leaving his country, and he is faced with making friends with the Taliban or being literally left hanging. The mistake made early in our dealings with Afghanistan was allowing Sharia Law to be written into the country’s constitution. Until their constitution changes, Afghanistan will never truly be a free country.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Something To Think About In November

Daguerrotype of the south front of the White House

Image via Wikipedia

I was listening to Bill Bennett this morning and MarcThiessen was one of his guests. Bill Bennett is one of my favorite radio shows because issues are discussed–not screamed. Mr. Thiessen was discussing his recent article in the Washington Post.

The article deals with some of the consequences (unintended and intended) of a second term for President Obama.

The article states:

Electing a transformational conservative president may not be in the cards this November — but stopping a transformational liberal president still is. Consider the consequences if Obama gets a second term: Obamacare will not be repealed. The unprecedented levels of spending in Obama’s first four years will become the new floor, as America sets new records for fiscal profligacy and debt. Job creators will face massive tax increases, and more Americans will come off the tax rolls — resulting in fewer citizens with a stake in keeping taxes low and more with a stake in protecting benefits. Government dependency, already at record levels, will continue to grow. Four lost years in dealing with the entitlement crisis will become eight — digging us into a hole from which we may not be able to emerge. Obama, unworried about the impact of gas and electricity prices on his reelection, will finally wage the regulatory war on fossil fuels the left demands. He will unleash the Environmental Protection Agency to impose crushing new burdens on U.S. business. His administration’s assault on religious freedom will go on and expand to new areas. The Defense Department will be gutted, with cuts so deep that America will no longer be a superpower. Obama could have the opportunity to appoint more liberal Supreme Court justices, ending the Roberts court in all but name for a generation.

Oh, and the oceans will continue to rise.

If President Obama is elected in November, the America that we have all grown up in will not exist by the end of his second term. Even if you do not believe me, there are enough non-partisan people saying similar things to at least cause you to pause and consider the idea. Unless you are willing to take that risk, please vote Republican in November.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Aside From The Bad Manners–This Is Just Tacky

The Atlantic Wire posted a story yesterday about President Obama’s scheduled press conference today. This is the President’s first press conference in five months, and it just happens to fall on Super Tuesday, the biggest day of the Republican primary.

The article reminds us:

USA Today speculates that the topic(s) will be Iran and Israel. Or the economy. Or the GOP race itself. But that’s all beside the spotlight-swiping point. We saw Obama create a similar scheduling conflict last Tuesday, during the Michigan and Arizona primaries, when he gave a chest-trumping speech to UAW workers. (A speech that, Carney insisted, was “not at all” a campaign speech, even though no one—including us—treated it as such.) Then again, it’s not like the president hasn’t shown a willingness to step aside and let his rivals have the stage: In August the White House announced a major jobs speech scheduled against a Republican debate, but later rescheduled it. That was nice of them.

This is just bad manners on the part of President Obama. He just can’t stand the idea of the Republicans actually having the spotlight for a day unless he controls the narrative.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Consice Summation Of A Really Dumb Story

Hugh Hewitt (my favorite talkshow host – on the internet at Townhall.com) posted an article at the Washington Examiner that I think totally sums up the recent Rush Limbaugh dust-up. The headline of the story is “Nothing shocks when anything goes.”

Mr. Hewitt states:

There is one standard for all commentary, and it ought to apply to Palin and Ms. Fluke, to President Obama and President Bush, to Justice Thomas and to Justice Kagan.

So credit nothing of a condemnation from anyone who has not first articulated his or her standard, preferably backed up with a reference to the rebukes they have handed out to themselves and their own team, and only if that standard condemns all of the profane, the vulgar and the bigoted.

Can we now get back to the real issue of a government forcing an organization to provide services that go against their religious beliefs?

Enhanced by Zemanta

He Who Pays The Piper Calls The Tune

As Nancy Pelosi stated, “We need to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.” Well, there is another ‘what’s in it’ that is more than a little troubling. Power LIne posted an article yesterday about a provision in the Obamacare bill that provides prenatal testing. Sounds good, unless you take a closer look.

A website called The Public Discourse posted an article last year on the impact of prenatal testing for Down Syndrome.

The article pointed out:

Discussions of HHS’s new regulation have focused on the required availability of free contraceptive services under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The regulation is the result of HHS’s adopting, in its entirety, the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) report on Clinical Preventive Services for Women. Buried in the IOM report is the recommendation for no-cost well-woman visits; these visits include prenatal care—and thus prenatal testing for “genetic or developmental conditions.” The regulation was issued as part of the PPACA’s coverage of preventive services. This prompts the question, how does prenatal testing prevent Down syndrome?

The IOM report defines preventive services “to be measures . . . shown to improve wellbeing, and/or decrease the likelihood or delay the onset of targeted disease or condition.” Down syndrome occurs at conception. Prenatal testing simply identifies whether a pregnancy is positive for Down syndrome—a prenatal diagnosis after which most women choose to terminate their pregnancy. A prenatal test does not decrease the likelihood of Down syndrome in a person; it does allow for a decreased likelihood of a person with Down syndrome surviving beyond the womb. If this is how HHS is justifying prenatal testing for Down syndrome as preventive care, then HHS has ushered in a program meant to target future children like Juliet.

If you are shaking your head and saying it won’t be a problem, keep reading.

The targeted elimination of people with Down syndrome is, in fact, the goal of other countries that have adopted nationwide prenatal testing programs—a goal some other countries are now realizing. Indeed, according to the Copenhagen Post, Denmark “could be a country without a single citizen with Down’s syndrome in the not too distant future,” due to its nationwide prenatal screening program, in place since 2004.

This is not where we want to be as a nation. Remember that since the government is paying the bill, they will recommend the treatment.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Defunding Life

In his 2013 budget, President Obama has defunded the Embryo Adoption Awareness Campaign. Yesterday the Washington Times reported that the Department of Health and Human Services has requested that the Embryo Adoption program will be discontinued in FY2013.

The article reports:

“I think that daily we talk to people about … embryo donation and adoption, and we hear the response, ‘Really? I didn’t know that was even possible,’” said Ron Stoddart, executive director of Nightlight Christian Adoptions, which in 1997 pioneered the process of infertile couples “adopting” the extra embryos that another couple’s in-vitro fertilization process inevitably produces.

Hannah Strege, the first of these frozen, unique “snowflake” babies, was born in December 1998. Researchers think as many as 50,000 of the 600,000 cryogenically preserved embryos in the U.S. eventually could become available for adoption.

The fate of the embryo-adoption awareness program is not known. As with all White House budget requests, congressional appropriations committees will decide whether they become law.

The article further reports:

The HHS report said the reason to end the $1.9 million embryo-adoption awareness program is “limited interest.” Only a “very small pool of applicants, many of whom are repeat recipients,” are seeking the grants, it said.

Mailee Smith, staff counsel at Americans United for Life, said such a decision is more evidence of “the pro-abortion slant of this administration.”

“Why would the Obama administration cut $2 million for adoption awareness, but keep $1 million a day for Planned Parenthood?” she asked.

Also, having hundreds of thousands of frozen human embryos in storage “is a devastating situation” for many people, Ms. Smith said.

This is purposeful funding (defunding actually). The frozen embryos have so far produced more than 100 snowflake babies. This is a way for couples who cannot have children to become parents. It is a wonderful program that declares the sanctity of all life and needs to be continued.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Losing Our Focus In The Koran Burning Case

CNS News posted an article today stating that Jan Kubis, head of the U.N. Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and secretary-general Ban Ki-moon’s special representative in Afghanistan, has said that the U. S. troops who accidentally burned the Koran should be disciplined. Note that the Koran was accidentally burned.

As Andrew McCarthy pointed out on February 25 (rightwinggranny.com):

The facts are that the Korans were seized at a jail because jihadists imprisoned there were using them not for prayer but to communicate incendiary messages. The soldiers dispatched to burn refuse from the jail were not the officials who had seized the books, had no idea they were burning Korans, and tried desperately to retrieve the books when the situation was brought to their attention.

This is a false issue. Where are the Muslim apologies when they burn Bibles (which they routinely do in Muslim-ruled countries)? To punish these soldiers would be to put Sharia Law above the U. S. Constitution, which they are sworn to defend. Is that really what we want to do?

The article at CNS News points out:

“It was natural that after such a grave mistake we saw expressions on the side of the people of Afghanistan, how they reject this desecration of holy Qur’an,” Kubis said. “We were very glad to notice that the majority of the demonstrations – and they are legitimate and expressions of rejection of this desecration – were peaceful.”

He also criticized the deadly violence, which he said was provoked by “irresponsible elements,” but made no call for the perpetrators to be brought to trial.

So, let me understand this, the soldiers who accidentally burned the Korans that the Muslims had defaced should be punished, but the Afghans who murdered people in cold blood should not be punished? Seems a little one way to me.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Bringing The Issue Back Into Focus

CNS News reported today:

Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, sent a letter on Friday to all the Catholic bishops of the United States reasserting the conviction of the Catholic Church that it will not yield to the Obama administration’s command—issued in the form of a Health and Human Services regulation implementing the president’s health-care plan–that Catholics and Catholic institutions must violate the teachings of their faith by purchasing and providing health insurance plans that pay for sterilizations, contraceptives and abortifacients. 

Despite all the misdirections we have heard this week about Rush Limbaugh’s comments and contraception, this is the issue. Do Catholics, other people of faith, and various people with moral convictions have the right to live out their beliefs?

The Cardinal’s letter stated:

We have made it clear in no uncertain terms to the government that we are not at peace with its invasive attempt to curtail the religious freedom we cherish as Catholics and Americans,” Cardinal Dolan wrote his brother bishops.

“We did not ask for this fight, but we will not run from it,” he said.

“Since January 20, when the final, restrictive HHS Rule was first announced,” Cardinal Dolan wrote, “we have become certain of two things: religious freedom is under attack, and we will not cease our struggle to protect it.”

In the vernacular of the day, “He gets it!”

The article further reports:

Cardinal Dolan then said that the so-called “concession” President Obama had offered in February—that he would order insurance companies working with Catholic institutions to provide sterilizations, contraceptives and abortifacients to the workers at those institutions for free—did not solve the problem.

“For one, there was not even a nod to the deeper concerns about trespassing upon religious freedom, or of modifying the HHS’ attempt to define the how and who of our ministry,” wrote the cardinal.

“Two, since a big part of our ministries are ‘self-insured,’ we still ask how this protects us,” he wrote.  “We’ll still have to pay and, in addition to that, we’ll still have to maintain in our policies practices which our Church has consistently taught are grave wrongs in which we cannot participate.

“And what about forcing individual believers to pay for what violates their religious freedom and conscience?” he wrote. “We can’t abandon the hard working person of faith who has a right to religious freedom.

“And three,” he said, “there was still no resolution about the handcuffs placed upon renowned Catholic charitable agencies, both national and international, and their exclusion from contracts just because they will not refer victims of human trafficking, immigrants and refugees, and the hungry of the world, for abortions, sterilization, or contraception.”

This is a battle for religious freedom, and all churches need to take part. Otherwise, none of us will be free to live out our faith in the public square.

Enhanced by Zemanta

When Government Interferes In The Free Market

There will probably come a time in the future when we are not driving cars with internal combustion engines. I don’t know when that time will come, but I know it will come when an alternatively-fueled car becomes practical and economical. We are not actually there yet.

On Friday the Washington Examiner posted an article stating that General Motors is temporarily laying off 1300 employees due to lack of sales of the Chevy Volt.

The article reports:

The car company had hoped to sell 45,000 Chevy Volts in America this year, according to the Detroit News, but has only sold about 1,626 over the first two months of 2012.

“GM blamed the lack of sales in January on “exaggerated” media reports and the federal government’s investigation into Volt batteries catching fire, which officially began in November and ended Jan. 21,” the Ann Arbor (Mich.) News reported.

Under President Obama’s proposed budget for next year, the government subsidy for people who purchase a Chevy Volt will be raised to $10,000. I am not sure that will pass or will help if it is passed. I suspect the only way to sell them is to drop the price to about $20,000, which is about what average people actually pay for a car. Meanwhile, I wish the auto bailout money had stayed in the taxpayers’ pockets. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

How Does This Woman Find Time To Study ?

 Rush Limbaugh has come under fire recently for his rather crude comments of the moral character of supposed co-ed Sandra Fluke. Although I might not agree with his words, he was telling the truth and making some good points. There does seem to be more to the story. Gateway Pundit posted an article yesterday detailing some of Sandra Fluke’s biography.

The article reports:

The Democrat’s token abused college coed is actually a 30 year-old hardcore women’s rights activist.

Sandra Fluke is also the past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.

The Democrat’s token abused college coed is actually a 30 year-old hardcore women’s rights activist.

Sandra Fluke is also the past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.

Jammie Wearing Fool reported on Sandra Fluke’s status as a student:

I put that in quotes because in the beginning she was described as a Georgetown law student. It was then revealed that prior to attending Georgetown she was an active women’s right advocate. In one of her first interviews she is quoted as talking about how she reviewed Georgetown’s insurance policy prior to committing to attend, and seeing that it didn’t cover contraceptive services, she decided to attend with the express purpose of battling this policy. During this time, she was described as a 23-year-old coed. Magically, at the same time Congress is debating the forced coverage of contraception, she appears and is even brought to Capitol Hill to testify. This morning, in an interview with Matt Lauer on the Today show, it was revealed that she is 30 years old, NOT the 23 that had been reported all along.

In other words, folks, you are being played. She has been an activist all along and the Dems were just waiting for the appropriate time to play her.

It gets worse. CNS News reported some of her testimony and did the math:

“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school,” Fluke told the hearing.

…So, they can earn enough money in just one summer to pay for three full years of sex. And, yes, they are full years – since that could translate into having sex nearly three times a day for three years straight, apparently.

At a dollar a condom if she shops at CVS pharmacy’s website, that $3,000 would buy her 3,000 condoms – or, 1,000 a year. (By the way, why does CVS.com list the weight of its condom products in terms of pounds?)

Assuming it’s not a leap year, that’s 1,000 divided by 365 – or having sex 2.74 times a day, every day, for three straight years. And, I thought Georgetown was a Catholic university where women might be prone to shun casual, unmarried sex. At least its health insurance doesn’t cover contraception (that which you subsidize, you get more of, you know).

I will admit that I was married before the ‘sexual revolution’ and that I don’t really understand how things work today, but why is it the government’s responsibility to pay for contraception? And why is the Obama Administration so desperate to get rid of the conscience clause in medicine? On Monday, RedMassGroup pointed out that the healthcare plan proposed by Hillary in 1994 recognized a religious and moral right of healthcare insurers and workers to refrain from providing healthcare services that violated their consciences. Why is Obamacare different?

What I need to say in conclusion is that we have all been sidetracked. The battle is for the right of conscience and the right to live your life in accord to your religious and moral convictions. The battle is not about how a talk show host describes the sex life of a supposed co-ed.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Coming Soon To Your Pocketbook If President Obama Wins In November

 

Tax

Tax (Photo credit: 401K)

Heritage.org posted an article yesterday about the hidden tax increases in President Obama’s proposed budget. Hang on to your wallet.

The article reports:

EXCLUSIVE: It could be said that President Obama has never seen a tax hike he doesn’t like — whether it’s letting the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire, insisting on higher taxes for job creators, and yesterday calling on Congress to raise taxes on the oil industry. But as much as the President wants to raise taxes, Heritage has discovered that there are even more tax hikes hidden in his budget, adding up to a total of $2 trillion in higher taxes.

In a new report, Heritage’s Curtis Dubay uncovers Obama’s hidden tax hikes and finds that the President’s proposed $1.561 trillion tax increase over 10 years is much bigger than advertised. In fact, the President wants to raise taxes by $1.689 trillion – that’s $128 billion more than was reported by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the President’s FY 2013 budget proposal.

What’s to account for the discrepancy? Dubay explains that OMB reports the tax hikes in areas other than the tax section, misleading readers into believing that the President’s tax hikes are smaller than they are in reality. Among them are the “Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee,” better known as the bank tax, which adds another $61 billion to the President’s tax hike total; a $44 billion tax hike from allowing the IRS to adjust a program integrity cap; a $48 billion increase of the unemployment tax; and a $1 billion hike of user fees for commercial navigation of inland waterways.

As long as you don’t work, drive, go boating, have a bank account, or use energy to heat or cool your house, these new taxes won’t effect you.

Please follow the link to Heritage.org to read the entire article.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Using The Government For Political Purposes

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article today on some of the thuggery being used by Democrat candidates to raise money.

The article reports:

Democrats on K Street are warning their corporate clients: Give to Republican challengers in the 2012 election, and you’ll regret it come tax reform time.

Lobbyists are getting that message from allies of powerful Democrats such as Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who is closely watching support for Rep. Denny Rehberg, a Republican challenging Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). Baucus supporters fear that if Rehberg ousts Tester, Baucus could be next to face a serious Republican challenge in the state.

One K-Streeter close to the Baucus operation said the senator considers a gift to Rehberg a contribution against him. Another Democratic lobbyist told a client to take his name off a Rehberg fundraising event because it would be hurtful to his company, according to sources.

The credibility of these threats are partially the result of the Obama Administration’s policy of using the tax policy to pick winners and losers in the private sector.

The article further points out:

Jim Pethokoukis notes that the Bush tax rates would be a goner in a second Barack Obama term, with no subsequent election to leash his inner tax-hiker — and that Obama would let all of the Bush tax rates expire.

Ed Morrissey concludes at the end of his article:

Seems to me that the real message to K Street — and everyone else — will be that the only way to avoid getting hammered with economy-killing tax hikes will be to replace as many Democrats as possible in the fall, starting at the White House and going all the way down to state legislatures.  That way, Baucus won’t be running the committee any longer, and Obama won’t have the opportunity to pass the biggest tax hike in American history.

If by some awful twist of fate, President Obama is reelected, he will no longer have to worry about running for office again. He will be free to follow his heart–more taxes and more spending. Please remember this when you vote.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Washington’s New Math

Ed Morrissey posted an article at Hot Air about the additional $111 billion in Obamacare costs requested in the President’s budget for next year. Keep in mind that Obamacare is not even fully implemented yet and it’s cost to taxpayers have increased by 33%. Wow. That is amazing math!

The article reports:

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., wants to know by Monday why the estimated ten-year cost of helping millions of middle-class Americans buy health insurance has jumped by about 30 percent. …

At issue are subsidies that will be provided under the health care law to help middle class people buy private coverage in new state insurance markets that will open for business in 2014.

The response of the Obama Administration:

Administration officials say the big increase from last year’s estimates is no cause for alarm and that the administration is not forecasting an erosion of employer coverage or higher insurance costs.

About two-thirds of the increase is due to effects of newly signed legislation that raises costs for one part of the health care law, but still saves the government money overall. The rest is due to technical changes in Treasury assumptions about such matters as the distribution of income in America.

Does anyone actually believe that after Obamacare is fully implemented, it’s costs will go down. We need to repeal Obamacare as soon as possible!

Enhanced by Zemanta