Showing posts with label Current Events. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Current Events. Show all posts

Tuesday

On The Importance of a Comma

I read an enlightening article last night on Yahoo News.  It appears as if our president is a cross-dresser.  Specifically, he likes dresses from Gap.

You can see the entire article on Yahoo Shine.  Let me quote a specific section for you:
"On Friday, Obama left for Camp David with the president wearing a blue-patterned dress from the Gap."
This sentence proclaims, quite boldly I might add, that the president left for Camp David on Friday while wearing a blue-patterned dress from the Gap. 

The sentence would have been entirely different had they simply put a comma after the word "president".  Doing so would have then indicated that another Obama (Michelle would be assumed in this case) went to Camp David with the president...and that the OTHER person (as opposed to the president) was wearing the aforementioned blue-patterned dress from the Gap.

Who knows?  Maybe the absence of a comma was intentional because the author knows something that we don't.  Perhaps President Obama is attempting to reach out to cross-dressers in his own personal way.

Or perhaps they just forgot a comma.

Wednesday

Westboro aka Why I'm Ashamed of Americans

This isn't what you think it's going to be.  No.  Really.  It's not.  You might not even like me very much after I say what I'm going to say. 

Americans...I am ashamed by you.

As if it wasn't enough that there were such deplorable people as those at Westboro Baptist...there are those who think themselves so much better than those at Westboro that they have the right to threaten to KILL those of Westboro simply because they do not agree with their speech or their actions.

Really, people?  Really?

OUR response to people who are behaving in a reprehensible manner in the name of Christ...is to threaten to KILL them just because we don't agree with their speech or their actions?

Don't get me wrong.  I DO think those of Westboro are behaving in a reprehensible manner.  What they are doing is nothing close to Christ-like. 

However, someone ELSE'S reprehensible behavior does not excuse OURS.  And I DO find threatening to KILL someone utilizing an object that your 2nd amendment rights guarantee you JUST BECAUSE they are exercising THEIR 1st amendment rights to be reprehensible.

Here, I'll say it again.  Reprehensible.

Voltaire once said, "I disagree with what you're saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."  I find that appropriate here.  I don't agree with what Westboro Baptist does or says, but I DO defend their Constitutional right to say it.

Tuesday

SOS Mom Saver: How To Minimize the Impact of Rising Produce Prices

Back in January, the big news was that a freeze in Florida had destroyed much of their crops.  No biggie.  They'll just import more from Mexico.  And then the freeze hit Mexico and was so bad that it even took their greenhouse crops.

They say this could affect produce like green beans, eggplant, and asparagus.  The hardest hit is expected to be on cucumbers, various squashes and peppers, and tomatoes.  There's no panic expected here, but they do expect prices to go up significantly until they can re-grow the crops which could take as little as 60-90 days.  In the meantime, we could expect that prices will go up on cucumbers, squashes, green beans, and tomatoes...all favorites that are frequently used at our house.

You can't do much about the fresh produce.  If you want it, you'll have to pay the temporarily increased prices.  However, you CAN take fresh produce that you get now and preserve it so you at least have that produce in a fresh-frozen form to use in cooking.

I actually do this a lot and it takes very little time and no special tools!

My favorite things to pre-dice are onions and bell peppers.  I cut them as soon as I get them and toss them in the freezer in small baggies.  When I am in a hurry but want the "fresh" produce, they're ready to go...and don't require any pre-processing!

Any other produce will require blanching before freezing, but that is incredibly simple.  You cut the produce as you want it (shredded, diced, etc).  Once the produce is cut, you throw it in a pot of boiling water. After boiling for the required amount of time, you submerge the veggies in ice water to stop the cooking process.  Once that's done, you freeze.  This gives you fresh-tasting veggies from the freezer.  The "Southern Food" section of About.com gives detailed instructions on freezing just about any vegetable.

You can use glass jars to freeze things in (be sure to leave an inch of head space or empty room) or you can use baggies.  (You can freeze them in portion-sized small baggies then put those small baggies in a gallon freezer bag to prevent freezer burn.)

This can not only help you keep those veggies in stock even if prices go higher for a bit, but will also save you time on prep later!

Friday

"It Ain't America No More"

I hate to sound like a broken record or a political pundit here, but... (You know how they always say to ignore whatever came before the "but" because it doesn't really matter. Good. We're on the same page now.)

Apparently, according to an officer in Fairfax, VA, this "Ain't America no more". Thanks, chief! Glad to know YOUR thoughts on the matter.

I would assume prevailing thoughts like that are the very reason we have people being harrassed for refusing unconstitutional searches at public venues, why we have people being arrested for simply questioning the TSA at airports (as in ASKING a question!), and why we have people being told to put away their legally-obtained, owned, & carried weapons and SIGNS at PUBLIC events on PUBLIC grounds!



Until people get it through their heads that someone who disagrees with you STILL HAS ALL OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS...even if you don't agree with them, this country will continue its sharp fall into fascism.

How many times are people going to say, "It can't happen here. Not in America!" despite seeing evidence PROVING otherwise, before they wake up?

WAKE UP PEOPLE!! It's not about right or left! It's not about Republican or Democrat! It's not about Obama or Bush or any other ONE politician. It's about ALL of them, right & left, Republican & Democrat, Obama & Bush, utilizing the power they have to stomp all over our Constitutional rights!

Wednesday

I Pledge...

...to never pledge my allegiance to any politician.

I pledge allegience to the United States of America
And to the Republic for which it stands.
One nation, under God, indivisible
For liberty and justice for all (as opposed to just those with whom we agree)

For grins, I'll show you what (or shall I say who) Hollywood is pledging allegiance to...



Thursday

HR 3200: The Truth, Part 1

You’ve heard rumors. You’ve heard threats. Have you heard the truth? Have you actually read the legislation that so many are screaming about (on both sides of the fence)?

You’ve heard the Obama administration asking the American public to turn in anyone who speaks against (or as they say “incorrectly”) about health care reform. (You may turn me in. Please just promise me you’ll read until the end if you do. If you aren’t willing to read until the end, then you don’t have any business turning ANYONE in for fishy behavior except yourself…for failing to get involved in the future of our country.) FYI: They have now, reportedly, shut down the e-mail address so you can no longer turn people in; not even yourself. Rumor is that they had too many people playing games & turning in the President & members of Congress. I'm not even joking. By the way, this is not new. Bush did the same thing during his administration when he was attempting to pass medicare reform. Again, it's not about right or left. They're more alike than many of us would like to believe.

Despite my reasons for not supporting this legislation, I have been called "unpatriotic". Ironically, I can find nothing MORE patriotic than getting involved in legislation that is being put before our Congress; whether you agree with it or not. Our country was FOUNDED on dissent, and on us having the right to dissent in the future. Yet WE’RE the unpatriotic ones? Although frankly, with how they’ve made “Patriot” a dirty word, I’m surprised ANYONE would want to be considered one. Me?…call me “unpatriotic” any day! Still, through all of the threats, bullying, and name-calling from BOTH sides, have you heard the TRUTH?

How do I find out the truth? I dissect a bill. How do I dissect a bill? How do I decide if I will support a bill or not? Where do I get my information? From the legislation itself. That way, no one is coloring my view. No one is telling me what to think or why their way is better. I am reading the actual legislation itself; not someone else’s interpretation of it.

I must be honest here and tell you that I do not support universal health care in any form. Why? I don’t believe the federal government has the Constitutional right nor obligation to provide for the health care of the citizens of our country; and certainly not for those who have chosen to come here on an illegal basis. In other words, I really don’t care WHAT is in any bill that proposes universal health care. I don’t support it. That’s a huge reason why I have been relatively silent on this issue up until now.

I also don’t agree with the fact that they are attempting to push this bill through so quickly. This is no rumor, folks. President Obama said himself that he wanted it passed by the end of July before they went on break in August. It didn’t happen then, but I expect them to pick it back up in quick order once they return in September. The bottom line is that we HAVE to give our representatives, senators, and the American people adequate time to read legislation before it is voted on. Anything less is unacceptable!

That being said, there is a LOT floating out there on BOTH sides of the fence about this bill. Since there are many who DO support universal health care should the legislation be right, I feel it’s necessary to break it down line-by-line and find out exactly what this legislation (which is only one of several bills currently pending regarding health care) actually says.

Also, I have been accused of not being a patriot for the mere fact that I oppose this legislation. They say that many out there who are talking about why they don’t agree with the bill are lying.

So are they? There’s only ONE way to find out who is telling the truth about any particular piece of legislation. You must read it. (Unless you take into account the fact that what’s in the actual legislation is irrelevant to me because I oppose the very idea of universal health care on a federal level. But I digress.)

Shall we? The healthcare bill, in all of its 1100 page glory…line by line…with commentary by me. Because it’s still not illegal in this country to speak out against something. Due to the incredible (and excessively long) length of this bill, I will do this in several parts. (And please also note that what I dissect today may very well be different by the time our Senators and Representatives actually return to DC in September.)

Typically, I send you to Open Congress to find the full text of a bill.
Unfortunately, I have tried on many occasions over the course of a couple of weeks to access the full text on Open Congress to no avail. Alternatively, you can find the full text on the Library of Congress website.

Let’s start in the beginning. My notes will be in (parenthesis) and bold italics.
___________________________________________________________

Purpose: “To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes.” (“…for other purposes”? I don’t like when legislation doesn’t specifically state what it does or does not intend to do. This is not a good start.)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 100. (a)(2) BUILDING ON CURRENT SYSTEM- This division achieves this purpose by building on what works in today's health care system, while repairing the aspects that are broken. (Medicare, Medicaid, VA, & other military health care systems are seriously broken as is. The government is not acknowledging this. How can one fix what one does not acknowledge is broken?)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 100. (a)(3)(D) initiates shared responsibility among workers, employers, and the government (No one should be responsible for providing for our care but US. It is not the right nor the obligation of the government to provide insurance for us nor is it the right of our employers to do so. It is a privilege, but not a RIGHT for our employers to provide health coverage.)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 100. (a)(4) HEALTH DELIVERY REFORM- This division institutes health delivery system reforms both to increase quality and to reduce growth in health spending so that health care becomes more affordable for businesses, families, and government. (Increase quality? Anyone who has been in health care or who knows someone who receives government health care knows first hand that government health care and quality do NOT go hand in hand. Again, a key here is recognizing WHAT is broken. If you acknowledge that the kitchen faucet doesn’t work right, but then try to replace the sink to fix it, you ARE changing something RELATED to the broken problem, but you’re still not ACTUALLY fixing the problem. After the old sink is replaced with a new one, the faucet will STILL leak…because you didn’t fix the ACTUAL problem. Think that’s an illogical comparison? Tell me how it’s feasible for a government that is KNOWN for inadequate care and more red tape than we could ever imagine to take over our ENTIRE health system?)
___________________________________________________________

(The rest of Section 100 consists of an outline. This section is what will be expounded upon later so we’ll skip the rest of it for now.)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 111 A qualified health benefits plan may not impose any pre-existing condition exclusion (This is pretty self-explanatory. The question to be answered here is what exactly constitutes a “qualified” health plan. This makes it sound like there will be some plans where you CAN be excluded based on pre-existing conditions.)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 113(a) In General- The premium rate charged for an insured qualified health benefits plan may not vary except as follows (They can’t raise your premiums…unless. Basically this is no different than what we have now. Your premium can be higher based on your age, where you live, & how many people are in your family.)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 116. ENSURING VALUE AND LOWER PREMIUMS.(a) In General- A qualified health benefits plan shall meet a medical loss ratio as defined by the Commissioner. For any plan year in which the qualified health benefits plan does not meet such medical loss ratio, QHBP offering entity shall provide in a manner specified by the Commissioner for rebates to enrollees of payment sufficient to meet such loss ratio. (Honestly, I have no idea what this means. It appears to be saying that if someone doesn’t spend a certain level on health care in any given year then they will be refunded a portion of their premiums. I could be completely off on this, though. Anyone?)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 122 (c)(1)There shall be no cost-sharing…for preventive items and services (as specified under the benefit standards), including well baby and well child care. (I take this to mean preventative services, which are thus far only clearly defined as including well-baby and well-visits, will be covered at 100% with no co-payments or co-insurance on our part.)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 122 (c)(2) (A) ANNUAL LIMITATION- The cost-sharing incurred under the essential benefits package with respect to an individual (or family) for a year does not exceed…
(B)…$5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family. Such levels shall be increased (rounded to the nearest $100) for each subsequent year by the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (United States city average) applicable to such year.
(C) USE OF COPAYMENTS- In establishing cost-sharing levels for basic, enhanced, and premium plans under this subsection, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent possible, use only copayments and not coinsurance. (This is basically the deductible for the plan. They will guarantee you that you will pay no more than $5,000 per person or $10,000 per family the 1st year. That amount will go up each year. Wonder if they’ll take into account how much they’re charging us in NEW taxes each year before they consider increasing the amount we’ll have to spend out of pocket?)
_____________________________________________________

SEC. 123. HEALTH BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.(a)(1)There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans. (I imagine that this is part of where people are getting that the government will determine what treatments you are and are not allowed to have. In a way they’re right. However, that’s something you’ll find with ANY insurance company. They all have a panel of “experts” who say what should and shouldn’t be covered. If this is what they’re saying is the “euthanasia” portion of the plan, I’m not buying it. This looks like a standard insurance benefits advisory committee.)
__________________________________________________________

SEC. 123. (b)(1)Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend…benefit standards…and periodic updates to such standards. …the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
(3) PUBLIC INPUT- The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
(4) BENEFIT STANDARDS DEFINED- In this subtitle, the term `benefit standards' means standards respecting--
(A) the essential benefits package described in section 122, including categories of covered treatments, items and services within benefit classes, and cost-sharing…(I included as much of this section as I did to further show that it really does appear that the purpose of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee is no different than it would be with any other insurance company. They decide what the plan will & won’t cover. We may not like their decisions, but again, that’s no different than it is with any other insurance company. There may be something later that proves the rumor of euthanasia concerns to be true. However, I’m not seeing it in this section.)
_____________________________________________________

SEC. 132. REQUIRING FAIR GRIEVANCE AND APPEALS MECHANISMS. (I’m not going to list this entire section here. The bottom line is that they will offer the ability to appeal decisions, coverage limitations, &/or air grievances. This section gives information on how and through whom that will take place.)
___________________________________________________________

SEC. 144. HEALTH INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN. (b) Duties- The Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman shall…
(1) receive complaints, grievances, and requests for information submitted by individuals;
(2) provide assistance with respect to complaints, grievances, and requests…including--
(A) helping individuals determine the relevant information needed to seek an appeal of a decision or determination;
(B) assistance to such individuals with any problems arising from disenrollment from such a plan;
(C) assistance to such individuals in choosing a qualified health benefits plan in which to enroll; and
(D) assistance to such individuals in presenting information under subtitle C (relating to affordability credits)...

(For those unfamiliar, the job of an Ombudsman is typically to be a patient-advocate. I don’t see this as being a bad thing to have; provided they actually advocate for the patient and not their employer. THIS is where I see a HUGE conflict-of-interest coming into play. As it stands now, Ombudsmen are hired by the state to speak &/or advocate on behalf of patients at private and government facilities. I can see a problem arising if the same company that hires the Ombudsmen (the government) is the one against whom the Ombudsmen has to advocate.)
_____________________________________________________

SEC. 161. ENSURING VALUE AND LOWER PREMIUMS.(a)Title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act is amended by inserting after section 2713 the following new section:
SEC. 2714. ENSURING VALUE AND LOWER PREMIUMS.
(a) In General- Each health insurance issuer that offers health insurance coverage in the small or large group market shall provide that for any plan year in which the coverage has a medical loss ratio below a level specified by the Secretary, the issuer shall provide in a manner specified by the Secretary for rebates to enrollees of payment sufficient to meet such loss ratio. Such methodology shall be set at the highest level medical loss ratio possible that is designed to ensure adequate participation by issuers, competition in the health insurance market, and value for consumers so that their premiums are used for services.
(b) Uniform Definitions- The Secretary shall establish a uniform definition of medical loss and methodology for determining how to calculate the medical loss ratio. Such methodology shall be designed to take into account the special circumstances of smaller plans, different types of plans, and newer plans.'

(I’m going to show my extreme ignorance here. I have absolutely NO idea what this is talking about. It appears to me as if they’re saying that if a certain amount is not spent in a year then they will refund a portion of the premiums to consumers. Maybe that’s what I’m DREAMING it’s saying. Can anyone give further clarification here? I’d greatly appreciate it.)
_____________________________________________________

SEC. 162. ENDING HEALTH INSURANCE RESCISSION ABUSE. (b) Secretarial Guidance Regarding Rescissions- Section 2742 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-42) is amended by adding at the end the following:
(f) Rescission- A health insurance issuer may rescind health insurance coverage only upon clear and convincing evidence of fraud described in subsection (This is saying that your insurance; whether a government, employer-provided, or private policy, cannot be cancelled unless you have committed fraud.)
_____________________________________________________

SEC. 163 (This section talks about making pretty much everything we can electronic although this is nothing new. Most of that was done in the stimulus plans that have been passed in the past year. They also assure us that all information received will be protected as it currently is under HIPPA & will be held secure and not used for any purpose other than is necessary to process claims and provide health care.)
_____________________________________________________

That brings us to Section 201. I’ll pick up where I left off later. If you have any questions, please feel free to e-mail me at amy@thoughtsofTHATmom.com. In an effort not to be too overwhelming with legislation that is over 1,000 pages long, I’ll be breaking this up into at least 4 parts covering Sections 100, 200, 300, & 400. If I find I need to break it up further from there, then I’ll do so.

Wednesday

Men Receive 23 Quadrillion Dollar Surprise!

This week, Jon Seale of Texas and Josh Muszynski of New Hampshire received the surprise of their lives.

No. They didn't win the lottery. Although they may need to.

These men received credit card statements this week reflecting charges of OVER 23 quadrillion dollars. That's not a typo. 23 quadrillion!

That looks something like this: $23,000,000,000,000,000.00.

Can you imagine? That's more than our national debt!

It was an error that is being corrected, but with they way our country's been spending since the 1930's, I'd have been a little worried if I'd have received that statement!

-Me

Must. Spend. $1.5 Trillion. Today.

How on God's green earth can our Congress be trying to RUSH spending $1.5 TRILLION...AGAIN???!!??

Perhaps it's because it's not THEIR money they're spending?

Here's a thought, boys and girls. Let's stop for a minute. Or even slow down.

Here's another thought. I know, it's probably crazy, but I'll give it a shot anyway. Let's, just for fun, actually R.E.A.D. a multi-TRILLION dollar bill BEFORE we pass it. Crazy. I know. I really should get off whatever it is I'm apparently smoking.

And before someone ELSE cries "CRAZY REPUBLICAN" to me. (The only insult greater would be calling me a "Crazy Democrat".) May I please remind you that the Republicans have also pulled this kind of crap. And I screamed about it JUST as much then too! So save your time and write your representatives with your whining instead of me. 'Cause if you're just going to scream right/left, republican/democrat, conservative/liberal, then I'll exercise my right to hit "delete". Come back and talk to me when you know there's more to it than that. THEN we'll have something to talk about!

The cold, hard truth is that they don't care what party they're from. They just want their agenda pushed through. NOW! And preferably before any of us has had the time to actually read and protest what they are trying to push through. They'd rather we see it after it's too late to do anything about it. And I don't know about you, but that's NOT okay with me!

Transparency, Obama? Transparency? THIS is what you call "transparency"? No thanks. I'll pass.

Rushing yet ANOTHER multi-TRILLION dollar bill through without giving those who will be voting on it time to read it let alone those who will actually be affected by and will pay for said bill is a travesty close to treason. In fact, I cannot think of a greater act of treason in the United States than undermining EVERYTHING this country was founded upon by taxing us without actual representation. And before someone cries, "We HAVE Representatives". Yes. We do. In name. When those same representatives, however, vote for bills AGAINST the will of the people, then they are no longer acting on behalf of the people, but for their own interests and desires. THAT, my friends, is NOT actual representation.

Back to health care. If healthcare is such an important issue, then why try to push it through in a couple weeks time? Why not extend the session? (You know, NOT take vacation?) If it's THAT important, then might it warrant NOT going on break in August? We wouldn't want what's best for the people to suffer JUST because you didn't want to miss your vacation now, would we?

My point, folks, is that their intention is NOT to do what's best for the people. Their intention is to pass through legislation that will furthur THEIR agenda, but also not to miss vacation.

Which is more important? Frankly, I'm not sure. Their agenda DOES rank pretty high, but then again so does their vacation. The priority of their vacation is evidenced by the fact that they're not about to let petty things like reading a multi-TRILLION dollar bill BEFORE they pass it get in the way of their having said vacation.

The will of the people? The same people whom they purport to represent? Ah. Will, smill. Whatever. Get out of the way please so we can pass our agenda...and then get on with our vacations. Don't pester us with what YOU want. Really! You think we have time for THAT? HA!

-Me

Tuesday

Two Words: Health. Care.

And that's all I'm going to say about that. Except what I've already said.

Until later. 'Cause I'm gearing up. Just fair warning. And I have a sneaky feeling it won't be pretty.

Your thoughts?

-Me

Thursday

Senator...Ma'am?

I for one am absolutely floored that a General would show such GRAVE disrespect as to call someone "Ma'am". Really! What was he thinking? Well. All I can say is thank GOODNESS Ms. Barbara Boxer (D, CA) was there to set him straight! Where would our world be without her?



Ms. Boxer. I would like to have a few words with you myself; if I may. Last time I checked, YOU hadn't worked hard for ANYTHING! You have been elected by the people of California to represent them in the United States Senate. It is an honor and a privilege for you to serve in the United States Senate. It is a title that the people of California choose to give you. You should wear that title recognizing that it could (and from what I've seen probably should) be stripped away from you when you come up for re-election.

Perhaps, ma'am, you should spend less time focusing on correcting and belittling others and more on what your constituents hired you to do!

Monday

Do We Really Have a Right to Liberty?

Occasionally, I'll come across a blog post that inspires me. Usually, it's about a new resolution before Congress and is full of the rumors regarding what that bill does or doesn't contain. I'm inspired by that blog to find the truth, and will head to Open Congress to find it by reading the actual resolution myself.

Today, though, I was directed to a blog that was written so well, I find I can do no better than them. They're not saying anything profound, but rather posing profound questions. I'd encourage you to consider them.

My thanks to Veda at Purple Oak Politics for a well-written blog!
"Here’s a question:
Do we have a right to liberty?

Here is part of a quote (author will remain anonymous): '…I understand that people want liberties, but creating some national standards enforced by the Federal Government I think are necessary while others are handled better by the individual states…'

Here’s the question, do we merely want liberties? Are we to ask our government for liberties? Is it our governments place to decide on our liberties? Does the Constitution grant us liberty?

Or.. were we born with liberty? and if that is so, then is it justified for any governing body to interfere with, infringe upon or devalue that liberty? When you are born, who owns you?

…and finally, what does liberty actually mean? If it is different for everyone does that promote anarchy? Or does a society need to be regulated in order to ensure
proper behavior.

Is a society capable of moral and ethical behavior without a central governing body enforcing guidelines and providing a definition of said “moral behavior”?

Do the vast majority of people need herding (as sheeple) in order to do the 'right' thing? And who defines what is 'right?'

What say ye?"
What say I? That sometimes it's only in posing the right questions that we find the right answers.

Your thoughts?

-Me

Thursday

Will We REALLY Audit the Fed? HR 1207

I have a breaking news update!!!! I just heard that HR 1207 will be going to the house floor!!!

My usual source of confirmation, Open Congress, has yet to show the status move. However, according to their Twitter, they do have the information and are working on updating it as quickly as they can.

A resolution can find its way out of committee and onto the house floor in one of two ways. The committee can vote for it to be pushed on to the floor, or the bill can get enough co-sponsors that it passes a majority and therefore is automatically put to a house vote.

Today, HR 1207 which is a duplicate of a resolution Ron Paul has proposed for FIVE years in a row reached 222 co-sponsors surpassing the needed 218 and will, therefore, be going to the house floor for a vote!!!!

Praise God! This is definitely a step in the right direction!

We have an incredible opportunity here! For those who are unfamiliar with HR 1207, it is a resolution that will require a full audit of the Federal Reserve.

You can read the press release on Ron Paul's site here. The Campaign for Liberty lists the new co-sponsors here.

-Me

Tuesday

Warrant Issued for Mom's Arrest...

...because her son has refused chemo and she and her husband are supporting his decision. You can read more here.

Anyone who reads my blog knows that I am a STAUNCH supporter of parental rights.

I also STRONGLY believe that those rights extend to being able to dictate your child's healthcare (or lack thereof). We were initialy delayed vax parents. However, after years of being unable to obtain the separate serum vaccinations that would be best for our children, we have unofficially become non-vaxing parents. I reserve the right to refuse vaccinations for my children. When they are adults and have stronger immune systems then they can decide for themselves whether they want to receive those vaccinations or not.

I believe parents also have the right to choose alternative healthcare for their children if they deem it necessary (or better than "traditional" treatments) after research.

Certainly even if one doesn't believe in parental rights, then they believe in the rights of the child...right? That's what many in leadership are fighting for as they push for ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. They claim that the child has more rights than the parent and should get to dictate what they do and don't do with their lives whether their parents agree or not.

So...going on THAT horrendous argument for a minute...this child (of 13) is wanting to refuse the chemo for HIMSELF and instead elect to have alternative treatments. Therefore, he should get what he wants because he's the child and he has rights.

In other words, whether you support parent's rights or children's rights, you should support the decision being made jointly by the son and his parents to refuse chemo.

Note, they are NOT refusing treatments, they are merely choosing an alternative treatment. Could it have side effects? Yes...as any treatment (ESPECIALLY chemo) could and does. Could it work? Yes. An alternative treatment might work as well as or better than chemo. Could it fail? ABSOLUTELY!!! As could chemo, radiation, bone marrow transplants, etc. ANY treatment could work or fail based on the body of the person receiving the treatment and any other underlying conditions they may have.

Chemo as a treatment is a CHOICE!!! Just as any other treatment is. No child or parent should be forced to obtain a treatment because a doctor, social worker, or judge feels they should obtain a certain treatment!

This is a DANGEROUS road that we do NOT want to go down!

-Me

Friday

Bilderberg

Ever heard of it?

Neither had I until about a year ago. Even then, I was still blissfully unaware of the full scope of it.

I am no longer naive. I now know.

And I have some questions.

Why haven't we heard anything about it? I found out through a non-media source and went searching from there.

I find i tincredibly hard to believe that in 57 years of Bilderberg meetings, there hasn't ever been even ONE major media outlet covering the event. Not one. Ever. In 57 years.

The closest I've found to a "major" media source is the NASDAQ; which apparently has a news section to its website. I found this on their site.

Things that make you go...huh?

How can we have not heard about this? Why havent' we heard? What is Bilderberg? Why are they meeting? What are they discussing? Why? What are their intentions?

I know what the initial "Bilderberg" was. It was the site of their initial meeting and is where their headquarters are housed today. That's about all that has been confirmed by the group themselves.

There are conspiracy theories out about this group. They abound anywhere there is secrecy; right or wrong. I would encourage you to find the answers to those questions yourself. You can get started with the NASDAQ article.

I'll also answer another question for you: Who? Who is meeting at Bilderberg? Past, current, and future American and world leaders. Obama was there last year. The Clintons have been many years. It's rumored that at least Bush Sr. went as well; although I've not been able to confirm that.

I've heard that it's tradition for the sitting president to abstain from the meetings for security and privacy reasons. Have no fear, though, representatives of our current administration are there...as they always are for every administration. Among those who attending this year are Tim Geithner and Kathleen Sebelius. Bernake attended last year.

You can find a partial list of supposedly-confirmed attendees here.

If a meeting of this kind has been going on for this long involving key world leaders and not drawing media attention doesn't concern you; then I'm not sure what else to say. I know it won't concern some, and that scares me.

And that's all I have to say about that...for now.

-Me

Wednesday

President Obama Just Sent Me An E-Mail!

Okay. To be honest, he (or his "handlers") DID send me an e-mail. However, it didn't JUST go to me. It went to everyone on the WhiteHouse.gov mailing list. If you'd like to receive e-mail updates as well, you can sign up here.

I would HIGHLY encourage everyone to stay abreast of what's going on; whether you agree with our current president or not. This country is still yours and you still have a say in what goes on; even if your guy didn't win.

What did this e-mail say? Was anything important said?

ABSOLUTELY!

Our president hopes to pass a comprehensive health care reform bill by July 31st of this year.

That disturbs me. On many levels. Largely because of the current administration's views on health care. I am a STRONG opponent of nationalized health care. However, our current president and many in Congress are just as strongly for it.

This is definitely one to keep a close eye on. I'll be praying for God's guidance for all of our leaders on all sides regarding health care.

-Me

Saturday

Martial Law?

For a couple of years now, I’ve heard those who were saying martial law was on the horizon. I’ve also heard MANY, MANY people say they were crazy. I’ve never said they were crazy. I’m not so na├»ve as to think our government wouldn’t do something to attempt to bring martial law down.

I saw first-hand accounts (via video) of people losing their Constitutional rights shortly after Katrina. I watched in horror as men searched houses without permission despite being told by the occupants that everyone there was fine. I also watched in horror as they took weapons away from people because it was an emergency. These people had committed no crime. They had made the decision to stay in their homes, there was no immediate danger or flooding in their homes (nor was there), and they were legally holding their legally purchased weapons in their homes. It IS legal to use a gun in defense of your home should someone try to break in. However, in crime-ridden New Orleans, these law-abiding citizens were stripped of the right to defend their homes…yet the criminals still had THEIR guns.

I am again watching in horror. Last Tuesday (April 28th), the Massachusetts Senate approved S18. This bill still has to go to the house for approval and then must be signed by the governor of the state. I would encourage you to read every word of this bill. It is what martial law will look like.

In short, “they” (meaning anyone whom the government places in authority) will have the supposed “right” to force entry into your home to inspect your home, its contents, your family members, and your pets. They can also force innocluations and decontamination. If you refuse, you will be placed in forced quarantine which may or may not be in your residence. Also, while you can initially refuse, they will send orders up to get your forced to comply while you are in quarantine. In other words, if you don’t, you’ll get away with it for a bit…but then, you’ll have to really do it.

Healthcare providers will be forced to do these searches, decontaminations, &/or innoculations or face losing their license.

Honestly, this makes me sick to my stomach. I would encourage you to call the state house and governor of Massachusetts as soon and often as you can to protest this bill! You don’t think it will apply to you because you’re not in that state? Think again. What happens in one state often filters down to others. You can find a complete list of all of the state house members here.
I believe the area code is 617.

-Me

Wednesday

Resolutions Before Congress (i.e.-My Afternoon)

Two of my kids are at the neighbor’s house. One is laying on the bed because she’s tired.

Me?

I’m having an incredibly busy afternoon. I’m at my computer reading what Congress is trying to do with (to?) our country right now.

I’m currently reviewing the following bills:
  • HR956: HealthCARE Act of 2009
  • S21: Prevention First Act
  • S179: Health Information Technology Act of 2009
  • HJ5: Repeal the 22nd Amendment (Presidential Term Limits)
  • S350: Health Information Technology for Economical and Clinical Health Act
  • HR881: Right to Life Act
  • HR676: United States National Health Care Act or the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act
  • HR1205: Achieving a Better Life Experience Act of 2009
  • HR1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
  • S773: Cyber Security Act of 2009
I’d love to see what (if anything) others are saying about these bills. If I see anything of concern myself, I’ll be sure to let you know.
If you don’t currently do so, I’d encourage you to head over to Open Congress yourself and check out legislation that is currently pending &/or has been recently passed.

-Me

Tuesday

Why I Don't Support the Parental Rights Amendment

I’m sure many of you by now have heard about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Many of you have also heard about the Constitutional amendment to guarantee parental rights that was proposed by none other than my representative, Pete Hoekstra (R, MI-2). This amendment also has 70 co-sponsors in the house; every one of them is a Republican. The amendment currently sits in the House Judiciary committee. There is also a senate version that currently sits in the Senate Judiciary committee.

The House resolution to which I’m referring is House Joint Resolution 42 (or HJR 42). The Senate resolution is Senate Joint Resolution 13 (or SJR 13). All this means is that someone from the house and someone from the senate both agreed to present this resolution to their respective chambers at or around the same time. They are the exact same resolution.

The purpose of a joint resolution is typically to speed things up. This ideally works because the resolution can be passed by the Senate and the House at the same time thereby saving a step (of having to go from one to the other with the respective necessary waiting periods in between). Once both chambers have approved the resolution, it then goes straight to the president; provided of course that they were both passed as is without any amendments. You get the idea.

The reason they proposed a joint resolution with this particular amendment is because this amendment is intended to protect us from the UN Convention on the Rights of a Child which is expected to be signed by our president sometime this spring or summer.

You can find detailed info regarding the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child including a full text of the resolution at the Parental Rights homepage. The resolution to amend the constitution, on the other hand, is quite simple. I’ll give you the full text here:

"Section 1. The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of
their children is a fundamental right.

Section 2. Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe upon this
right wIithout demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the
person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.

Section 3. No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international
law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights
guaranteed by this article."
Many look at this and think it would be a great solution to protect us from the UN Convention on the Rights of a Child (UNCRC). Then there those of us who say we shouldn’t pass the UNCRC in the first place; with or without protection from an amendment. Yet others will counter saying that having the amendment is better than not because we cannot stop the treaty from being passed. While I understand what they are saying, I completely disagree.

Why all this worry about a UN treaty? An amendment to our Constitution says that any international treaty ratified by a 2/3rds majority of our Congress will take precedence OVER all of our existing state and federal laws. The only document it cannot override is the Constitution. Hence, the amendment to ensure that our rights are protected against this treaty.

Why the worry over THIS treaty specifically? If you haven’t read it yet, I would encourage you to do so…HIGHLY! Like now. If you do not understand the danger with the UNCRC treaty, then you cannot possibly understand why anyone would even want an amendment to our Constitution guaranteeing protection of our rights in the first place. You must understand one to understand the other. In a nutshell, the treaty says that the CHILD is the head of the family. If your child doesn’t want to go to church (at 5), he/she doesn’t have to. If you discipline your child by saying he can’t go to out with his friends, but your child still wants to go out with his friends…you must let him. If you don’t, you are violating his rights. See where I’m going? This is DANGEROUS territory into which we do NOT want to go!

The problem with passing this amendment to fix the problems the treaty would bring is that it is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It looks good on the surface, but trouble lurks beneath. It gives power to the federal government that the federal government would not otherwise have. It says that your rights are protected unless the government decides they shouldn’t be. When would that be? What will be the governments unit of measure? How will they decide when they can and cannot take away our rights?

So what do we do? How do we protect ourselves against a treaty which the leaders in our government have said they will pass? How do we ensure our Constitutional rights on paper?

I do NOT have a problem with a Constitutional amendment. Frankly, though, I think it should be more open. What I’d like to see is either a repeal of the portion saying that an international treaty takes precedence over our state and federal laws. If that cannot be done, then I’d like another amendment saying that we will abide by international treaties so long as they are not in conflict with our federal or state laws at which point our they are our governing authority.

I firmly believe we must look more deeply at anything the government proposes. Remember, we must look at what any proposed resolution will have the ABILITY to do, not at its current intent. By doing so, we ensure we are happy with its results now AND in the future when a different set of people is in charge.

-Me

Sunday

Swine Flu Consipracy

Fine. You twisted my arm. You want to talk about the swine flu? Okay! You got it!

However, I must warn you that you very well might not like what I have to say.

Why?

Because, folks…wow. I can’t believe I’m actually going to admit this. Alright. Here it goes. I am now, officially, a conspiracy theorist. I never considered myself much of one before now. This, though. This did it.

I am truly saddened by what I see. What’s even sadder, though, is that the conspiracy is SO blazingly obvious…yet many cover their heads refusing to see the truth.

Can YOU handle it?

First let me give you a few facts. Perhaps you can put the pieces together from there. No? We’ll see.

Recently, Walgreens began spreading rumors about ending their rebate program and easy saver rebate books. The rebate program, complete with an extra 10% back if you take your rebate on a gift card and the easy saver book replete with dozens of fantastic store coupons were relied upon by Walgreen’s shoppers across the nation. When the news was announced, shoppers became outraged.

Fearing the further backlash from consumers, Walgreens KNEW they had to do something. What, though? It had to be big enough to distract the people from their actions yet somehow bring money into their stores as well. The big wigs at Walgreens thought perhaps an illness would kill both birds with one stone…so-to-speak, of course. Avian flu? No. Too obvious. People are expecting that. Cow flu? No. Never been done before. Then, they came up with the genius idea to re-introduce the swine flu. Not only would it distract people, but they would get money as scripts were filled for anti-virals such as Tamiflu. GENIUS!

See. I told you it was obvious. HOW can people turn their heads? I would like to officially put Walgreens on notice: I am not fooled! I know what you are doing and I am NOT happy! If you hope to keep us happy during and after this change perhaps you should take a cue from CVS. At the VERY least make your register rewards good for a full month after receipt. Please?

(Potential Legal Note: I mean absolutely NO disrespect towards those who have contracted the swine flu nor those who have lost their lives from it. We are praying for the friends and family of those lost as well as those currently battling the illness. And no, I do not really think that Walgreens caused the swine flu. It was in jest. I promise. I’m of the belief that if you don’t laugh, you’ll cry…so I laugh. Because I can.)

-Me

Saturday

It's Not About Left or Right!!!

When will people get this? Am I naive to think they will?

It's NOT about black or white! It's not about left or right! It's not about Democrat or Republican! It's about a government that has been slowly taking away our rights, freedoms, and money for YEARS! This didn't start with Obama. This didn't start with either Bush. This didn't start with Clinton! Some say it started with FDR and the New Deal; others believe it goes even furthur back than that.

I am NOT partisan! I could care LESS what party someone is from! I care about their ideals as evidenced by their previous voting history and history (or lack thereof) of keeping their word. I will vote for a Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian, Constitutional, Green, or any other party candidate...as long as they will TRULY uphold our Constitutional rights!

I am SO sick of the right trying to co-opt a just message to the government and attempting to turn that message into an anti-Obama cry! The message of the Tea Party was not originally an anti-Obama cry. I will concede that Fox News and the right media turned it into that (or tried to in some cases). However, the original message was outrage over unchecked, unfettered government spending without TRUE representation of the people.

Do we have elected officials? Yes. There are people whom we have elected to represent us. However, previous history has led me to believe that we do not have TRUE representation. If those people (Republican, Democrat, or otherwise) vote according to their pocketbook or what they feel will best benefit their sponsors &/or just plan ignore those who elected them, then they are NOT truly representing the people. They are merely symbols...an appearance of true representation. The fact that we voted for them does not mean they will represent us. Unfortunately, one does NOT automatically equal the other.

I am not someone who is upset with Obama because I liked Bush. I didn't like Bush! I don't like how he & the standing Congress at the time passed the first stimulus measures with no regard to the thoughts or opinions of the people of the United States who were crying out for them not to be passed. I also don't like how Obama pushed through his "emergency" stimulus without even giving those whom we elected to represent us a chance to read it first...let alone the American people. (Something he promised in his campaign.)

I'm also tired of those saying neither president had any other choice but to attempt to pass these measures in the manners in which they did. If I cussed, I'd have a great word for that right now. I believe it's also a popular card game. Instead, I'll say this: What a load of crap! IF these measures where such true emergencies then why did many of our representatives vote down the first one and only agree to pass it after manipulation, threat, and fear from the president (Bush)? IF the first stimulus Obama passed was SUCH an emergency, then why did it have more pork than your local pig farm?

I don't know about you, but when I'm in an ambulance because of an emergency, I don't want the paramedics stopping for gas, doing their laundry, paying their electric bill, etc. on the WAY to take me to the hospital. I don't want the doctors in the ER to check the labs for a non-emergent patient they saw before me, stopping to go potty, or ordering that a barber come in & cut my hair. I want them to tend to my EMERGENCY!!!!...and ONLY my emergency until said emergency has passed! During an emergency is NOT the time to do extra things. It's the time to do only what is necessary in order to save a life (or in this case...the country). Anything extra can wait until later.

Might I need a haircut? Might the doctor need to use the restroom or check the other patient's labs? Might the paramedics need gas? Might they need to do their laundry or pay their electric bill? Sure. Those things might even need to be done soon. However, they are NOT an emergency and therefore should not be tended to during an emergency situation, but only AFTER the emergency has passed!

This abuse of terms (emergency) and misuse of power leading to a literal financial rape of ALL Americans is what we are enraged about! THAT is what we were protesting! I'd have protested if McCain, Bob Barr, or Ron Paul were in office and were taking the same actions.

Once again, I will say it. This is NOT about left or right! When I attend the Tea Parties on July 4th, I pray there won't be one anti-Obama sign. I fear I may approach one of them and hand them a copy of this blog. I'm sure they'll assume I'm a liberal just as those who hear I don't support Obama's policies thus far assume I'm conservative. When, oh WHEN will people realize there are more than two parties and more than two ways of doing things?

Lord, please help this country! We need your help! Desperately!

-Me
 
ss_blog_claim=5f12071e297865b5da7de79fc3eee05b