Winters in Politics

Open Letter to the Senate

2009-11-19T00:26:00.001-08:00

This is the letter I sent to 20 Senators tonight. I got a list online of the ones who may be influenced to vote against the Health Insurance Reform Bill. I don't know how accurate the list is, in terms of influence, but I feel I did my part. I sent each one personally addressed, and faxed it, so it was more likely to be read before it was deleted out of an inbox. Feel free to use it to contact your own senators. Don't wait!!! I'll also post the list to whom I sent it below.

--------------------------------------------------

The Honorable Ron Wyden
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Wyden,

I am a 28 year-old Oregon resident. I have a Master’s Degree that I have never used in the workforce because I have opted to be a stay-at-home mom. I am blessed that I am able to do so, but it has required certain sacrifices on behalf of my husband, children, and myself. We are on a tight budget, but we do provide for our children and ourselves. In short, you could pretty much label us as the average American family, trying to stay out of debt and do the right thing.

Unfortunately, I feel that my elected officials continue to make this more difficult. You also provide a very poor example for living within one’s means.

The choices this congress is making go so far beyond the scope delegated to it in the constitution. And in commanding that power, you are sentencing this country to continued financial difficulties, if not destruction. Already, in the decisions made by this congress, we have spent much more than we can afford. And now there is consideration for spending much much more.

The health care bill, in any current form, is one more brick in the path to financial ruin for this country. No matter how the numbers are crunched and then spewed back to the country, we do not have the money to pay for this. Even if there was a possibility that a federal government program could save the taxpayer money in the long run, or even stay within its original budget (you’re welcome to inform me of any instances of this happening), the fact remains that the country is broke. Adding any program at this point could be devastating.

This is before we touch on the outrageous length of the bill. With a piece of legislation that is guaranteed to impact every single American, there should be no rush to push it through, or create such sweeping change in one bill. Nor should it be anywhere near the length and scope of what it has become. The only purpose for this is pork-spending and special-interest legislation, at which I am appalled given the state of the nation currently.

Is change needed in health insurance? Absolutely. Should it come in the form of a monstrous bill that the average citizen (and most elected representatives) can’t even read? This seems like a gross misjudgment of the responsibilities delegated to you in the Constitution. In fact, the Constitution does not even allow for the Federal Government to enact such programs at all. This should be left up to the states, and the states alone.

Now, if you want to do something really worthwhile in reforming the health insurance industry, the federal government could lift restrictions on getting insurance from across state lines. That’s a good place to start. Once that has brought costs down substantially, there are other effective reforms that will not cost the taxpayer nearly as much, if anything. I’m happy to share those ideas, and would, if I felt that my letters were ever adequately read and responded to, to even make typing it out worth my time. Perhaps if the bills that are being pushed through congress were limited as to the size and scope (instead of being 2000 pages), our congresspersons would have more free time to dialogue with their constituents. As James Madison said:

It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be tomorrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known and less fixed? (Federalist Papers, No. 62, p. 381).

I plead with you for the sake of our nation, for my family, and even for your own job security. Do not pass any health care bill of the size and scope that is currently being considered. I am convinced it will have devastating and long-term ill-effects on all parties involved.

Sincerely,

Karli Winters

---------------------------------------------------

SENATE CONTACT INFO

Mark Begich (D-AK) 202-224-3004 – fax 202-224-2354
email(http://begich.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm_)

Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) 202-224-4843 – fax 202-228-1371
email(http://lincoln.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm)

Mark L. Pryor (D-AR) 202-224-2353 – fax 202-228-0908
Email(http://pryor.senate.gov/contact/)

Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) 202-224-4041 – fax 202-224-9750
Email (http://lieberman.senate.gov/contact/)

Thomas Carper (D-DE) 202-224-2441, fax 202-228-2190
Email (http://carper.senate.gov/contact/)

Bill Nelson (D-FL) 202-224-5274
Email (http://billnelson.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm)

Johnny Isakson (R-GA) 202-224-3643, fax 202-0228-0724
Email (http://isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm)

Evan Bayh (D-IN) 202-224-5623, fax 202-228-1377
Email (http://bayh.senate.gov/contact/email/)

Mary Landrieu (D-LA) 202-224-5824, fax 202-224-9735
Email (http://landrieu.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm)

Susan Collins (R-ME) 202-224-2523, fax 202-224-2693
Email(http://collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenato
rCollins.EmailIssue)

Olympia Snowe (R-ME) 800-432-1599, fax 202-224-1946
(http://snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorSnowe)

Max Baucus (D-MT) 202-224-2651, fax 202-224-9412
Email (http://baucus.senate.gov/contact/emailForm.cfm?subj=issue)

John Tester (D-MT) 202-224-2644, fax 202-224-8594
Email (http://tester.senate.gov/Contact/index.cfm)

Kent Conrad (D-ND) 202-224-2043, fax 202-224-7776
Email(http://conrad.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm)

Ben Nelson (D-NE) 202-224-6551, fax 202-228-0012
Email (http://bennelson.senate.gov/contact-me.cfm)

Ron Wyden (D-OR) 202-224-5244, fax 202-228-2717
Email (http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/)

Jeff Merkley (D-OR) (202) 224-3753, fax (202) 228-3997
Email (http://merkley.senate.gov/contact/)

Herb Kohl (D-WI) 202-224-5653, fax 202-224-9787
Email (http://kohl.senate.gov/contact.cfm)

Robert Byrd (D-WV) 202-224-3954, fax 202-228-0002
Email (http://byrd.senate.gov/contacts/)

Mark Warner (D-VA) 202- 224-2023, fax 202-224-6295
Email (http://warner.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact)

Tim Johnson (D-SD) 202-224-5842, fax 202-228-5765
Email (http://johnson.senate.gov/contact/)

Want a little ISM?

2009-11-07T10:35:00.000-08:00

Nick and I have recently started a nine-month course on the US Constitution and our founders. It has been an incredibly eye opening experience. We have departed so far from our founders' original intent, and the government has seized far more power than should ever have been condoned, all in the name of "helping." This cartoon below is from 1948, but illustrates the principles which are still applicable today. More updates to follow on what we're discussing in class.

How American Health Care Killed My Father - The Atlantic (September 2009)

2009-08-27T16:43:00.001-07:00

This is by far the best article on Health Care Reform I have ever read. Please share it with everyone you know. It is non-partisan and uses a down-to-earth common sense approach. It investigates what's really wrong with our health care system... not just the symptoms that we are experience (like high prices and lack of health care insurance). And after focusing on what's wrong, he provides great solutions.

How American Health Care Killed My Father - The Atlantic (September 2009)

I'll be honest, it's a really long read. The first five pages are simply to establish his rationale. I think they're important to read, but if you want to just skip to his solutions, read page 6.

Shared via AddThis

Rules for Radicals

2009-08-13T23:01:00.000-07:00

Larry Elder : The Other 'Hispanic' Nominee - Townhall.com

2009-08-12T21:53:00.001-07:00

Larry Elder : The Other 'Hispanic' Nominee - Townhall.com

Shared via AddThis

I. Am. Astroturf.

2009-08-12T13:13:00.000-07:00

I went to the David Wu Townhall in McMinnville on Monday. There were seats for 126, and when we got in line 30 minutes early, there were 500 people in line in front of us. A majority of the people at the front of the line had all come together, and were wearing "Yamhill County Democrats" stickers. We obviously didn't get in, but we stayed outside the whole time, taking in the scene. The only people with professional signs were Pro-government health care. The rest of us were little pockets of people that had come with their friends and their handmade signs on tagboard. It was something else! I decided I could officially be counted as Astroturf, as I organized a group of my friends (2 of them!) and "bussed" them down to McMinnville in my minivan.

It was pretty hard to tell who had more people there. Once they closed the doors, a lot of people left. I did see a woman walking around trying to hand out Pro-Government Health Care signs, and wasn't having a lot of luck. She had a whole stack she couldn't get rid of. I would say that the majority of people there were against government health care, but not everybody had signs. Now, the majority of people that made it IN to the meeting were on the left, because they had the whole group there early. BUT, we pulled aside a guy on our side who was in it, and he said that because they pulled the names out of hat for who got to answer questions, that our side got a pretty decent change to ask questions. Nothing too raucous though.

The real travesty was at the Portland meeting today. My friend went with her two kids that are 4 & 2. She got in line about 2 and 1/2 hours early and was about 16th in line. The organizers told her that there were 80 seats set up, but they were only going to let 60 in because they needed a lot of room for the press. I couldn't believe that at a time when people want to have their voices heard, that they reserved 1/4th of the seats for the PRESS!!

My friend ended up waiting in line and getting the 3 tickets, and then handing them to people she knew who were on our side, as her kids were melting down. Pretty good deal... I suppose if that's what they mean by stacking the deck and "Astroturf" then, we're guilty as charged.

This is my absolute favorite sign from the rally. Mostly, because I agree with it 100%.

"Next November, let's INCREASE unemployment by 535"

How Obama Got Elected

2009-06-10T21:46:00.000-07:00

The video below is almost 10 minutes, but you can watch only a few minutes of it and get the basic gist. But if you're like me, you'll want to watch the whole thing. :)

This is part of an upcoming documentary, entitled Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Sarah Palin Was Targeted, by John Ziegler. Seriously scary. As I've said before, I don't care what you're views are, just make sure you know WHY they're your views.

For more information, see the website at http://www.howobamagotelected.com.

Happy Earth Day from Rush Limbaugh

2009-04-22T17:24:00.000-07:00

Heard this on the Rush Limbaugh show this morning, and found the whole thing fascinating. Enjoy!

RUSH: Now, we've just honored some great people on Earth Day, but here is a story from some newspaper called The Bulletin. It is an American paper, I guess it's Philadelphia, the Philadelphia Bulletin. "Today is Earth Day, a holiday created to honor the planet and to raise the consciousness of man's effect on the environment. Philadelphia has a very strong tie to this day. One of its native sons, Ira Einhorn, was a co-founder of the environmentalist jubilee. But Mr. Einhorn has another line on his resume. In addition to being a environmental guru, he is the Unicorn Killer. While a student at the University of Pennsylvania, Mr. Einhorn dated a Bryn Mawr College graduate by the name of Holly Maddux. When the affair ended in 1977, Mr. Einhorn went into a jealous rage and murdered her." This is a founder of Earth Day.

By the way, the Unabomber was an environmentalist as well. So was the Son of Sam. So is the most recently added name to the FBI's top ten most wanted list an environmentalist. But Mr. Einhorn "concealed his crime for 18 months by stuffing Ms. Maddux's body in a trunk that he kept in his apartment. The foul odor of the decomposing corpse coming from Mr. Einhorn's Powelton Village apartment caused neighbors to complain. In 1979, police found the trunk stored in a closet in Mr. Einhorn's apartment. Ira Einhorn, member of the counterculture pantheon, one of the founders of the environmentalist movement, icon of the liberal intelligentsia, was charged with murder. But it was not just a simple murder, it was a gruesome case of domestic violence. At the bail hearing, Mr. Einhorn was praised by a contingent of luminaries -- all testifying to his character. There were Ivy League professors, an Episcopalian minister and corporate executives who worked with Mr. Einhorn raising funds. They all stated under oath that he was a man of the greatest integrity."

Arlen Specter was Mr. Einhorn's attorney. "He managed to get the bail set at the unheard of amount of $40,000 for the suspected murderer. Only 10 percent was needed to free him. Barbara Bronfman, heiress to the Seagram liquor fortune, paid it. Proclaiming his innocence, Mr. Einhorn told all that he was framed. He said it was the CIA or the FBI who committed the murder and they were trying to frame him for it because of his political activities. Some will note that another notorious Philadelphia murderer, Mumia Abu Jamal, used this defense a few years later. Like Mumia, Mr. Einhorn had no shortage of leftist followers. Mr. Einhorn skipped bail and left Philadelphia in 1981." Founder, environmentalist movement and Earth Day. Just like the Unabomber, murderers, just like the most recent addition to the FBI's top ten most wanted list, a leftist environmentalist. And yet Janet Napolitano, head of the Department of Homeland Security, sends out this memo warning of returning veterans who might commit acts of terror in the United States.

RUSH: I got some e-mails from people who want the rest of the Ira Einhorn story. Here's the rest of the Ira Einhorn story: "More than a decade passed when the DA's office tried Mr. Einhorn in absentia after being unable to locate him. He was convicted in 1993. Several years after the absentia conviction, in 1997, Mr. Einhorn was located. He was living in France with a new girlfriend -- a Swedish woman. The District Attorney's office in Philadelphia immediately asked to have him extradited. However, the humane French refused to extradite Mr. Einhorn. French officals cited the use of capital punishment in Pennsylvania and the conviction in absentia as reasons for their refusal. Mr. Einhorn was able to convince the French courts not to extradite him until he received the promise of a new trial. A Pennsylvania legislator, Dan O'Brien, introduced a bill in the Pennsylvania General Assembly that allowed granting Mr. Einhorn a new trial, if he asked for it, and if the French extradited him. The bill did not vacate the original verdict. When France began extradition, Mr. Einhorn's representatives requested the European Court of Human Rights to review the case. The request was denied. He was extradited to Pennsylvania in July 2001. He was tried, convicted and sentenced to life in prison October 17, 2002."

We're talking here, if you just joined us, about the founder of Earth Day. But as the writer, Michael Tremoglie, at the Philadelphia Bulletin says, "There is a little mentioned irony about the Einhorn saga. Ira Einhorn was arrested for murder March 28, 1979, the day the Three Mile Island nuclear plant accident occurred. Ira Einhorn, environmentalist, was charged with murder during the same period as one of the greatest environmental accidents in United States history. But the real irony is that more people died in the apartment of Ira Einhorn, co-founder of Earth Day than at Three Mile Island. The environmentalist killed more people than the so-called environmental disaster. Happy Earth Day."

And not to leave this out, Investor's Business Daily, with a great editorial today called, "Save Capitalism," they say, "Wednesday's airwaves, print media, cable news shows and Webosphere will be filled with nonsense about the scourge of capitalism, corporations and humanity. All of it will ignore the real truth. ... Every year Steven Hayward, a scholar at the Pacific Research Institute and the American Enterprise Institute, compiles his Index of Leading Environmental Indicators. And every year, his findings contradict the alarmists' warnings that the world is on the edge of environmental cataclysm. From evidence 'that tropical rain forests may now be expanding faster than they are being cut down' to the improving health of U.S. ocean fisheries to better outdoor air quality in American cities with the worst air pollution, Hayward shows there's more to be optimistic about than there is to be troubled about. The Environmental Protection Agency has also published its own Report on the environment. Last year's report, the most recent, indicates outdoor air quality has improved, there's been a net gain in wetland acreage, public-source drinking-water problems are uncommon and forest land is expanding after declining for a century.

"Of the estimated 1 billion people who will observe Earth Day worldwide this year, few will know about the progress that has been made. Fewer still will know how it was made. The media, uninterested in looking at the real story, will simply credit the environmental movement for the improvements," when in fact it has been capitalism. Greener is richer.

Are You an "Extremist"?

2009-04-20T21:34:00.001-07:00

I found this article by Thomas Sowell, and rather than just linking it, I thought I'd re-post the whole darn thing so you don't even have to click anywhere to read it.

While the rest of us may be worried about violent Mexican drug gangs on our border, or about terrorists who are going to be released from Guantanimo, the Director of Homeland Security is worried about "right-wing extremists."

Just who are these right-wing extremists?

According to an official document of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, right-wing extremists include "groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration." It also includes those "rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority."

If you fit into any of these categories, you may not have realized that you are considered a threat to national security. But apparently the Obama administration has its eye on you.

According to the same official document, the Department of Homeland Security "has no specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence." But somehow they just know that you right-wingers are itching to unleash terror somewhere, somehow.

So-called "honor killings" by Muslims in the United States, including a recent beheading of his wife by a leader of one of the American Muslim organizations, does not seem to arouse any concern by the Department of Homeland Security.

When it comes to the thuggery of ACORN -- its members harassing the homes of bankers and even the home of Senator Phil Gramm when he opposed things that ACORN favored -- the Department of Homeland Security apparently sees no evil, hears no evil and speaks no evil.

Maybe they are too busy worrying about right-wing "extremists" who don't like abortions or illegal immigration, or who favor the division of power between the state and federal governments established by the Constitution.

In one sense, the Department of Homeland Security paper is silly. In another sense, it can be sinister as a revealing and disturbing sign of the preoccupations and priorities of this administration -- and their willingness to witch hunt and demonize those who dare to disagree with them.

Reportedly, the FBI and the Defense Department are cooperating with the Department of Homeland Security in investigations of returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan. That people who have put their lives on the line for this country are made the target of what is called the Vigilant Eagle program suggests that this administration might be more of a threat than the people they are investigating.

All this activity takes on a more sinister aspect against the background of one of the statements of Barack Obama during last year's election campaign that got remarkably little attention in the media. He suggested the creation of a federal police force, comparable in size to the military.

Why such an organization? For what purpose?

Since there are state and local police forces all across the country, an FBI to investigate federal crimes and a Department of Justice to prosecute those who commit them, as well as a Defense Department with military forces, just what role would a federal police force play?

Maybe it was just one of those bright ideas that gets floated during an election campaign. Yet there was no grassroots demand for any such federal police nor any media clamor for it, so there was not even any political reason to suggest such a thing.

What would be different about a new federal police force, as compared to existing law enforcement and military forces? It would be a creation of the Obama administration, run by people appointed from top to bottom by that administration -- and without the conflicting loyalties of those steeped in existing military traditions and law enforcement traditions.

In short, a federal police force could become President Obama's personal domestic political army, his own storm troopers.

Perhaps there will never be such a federal police force. But the targeting of individuals and groups who believe in some of the fundamental values on which this country was founded, and people who have demonstrated their patriotism by volunteering for military service, suggests that this potential for political abuse is worth watching, as Obama tries to remake America to fit his vision.

Taxed Enough Already

2009-04-17T17:39:00.000-07:00

We went as a family to Portland's Tax-Day Tea Party at Pioneer Courthouse Square. Such fun! I will say I was a bit nervous about carrying my conservative-leaning sign while we were taking the MAX (lightrail) into downtown, as you never know what kind of confrontation you may be eliciting. But there were no problems, and when we got there about 10 minutes late, the whole place was filled to the brim with people and their signs.

I had watched a bit of news coverage and clips leading up to and after the rally. And I think I realize why this country is so polarized. It has little to do with who the president is, or who is representing us in congress and how far left or right they are. What it really comes down to is everyone judging everyone else without trying to get to understand what it is they're really trying to say.

I'll be the first to admit, I know I'm guilty of this. BUT, I actually do try to sit down and have rational conversations with people who view things differently than I. In fact, that was my intent in starting this blog. What I have seen from most of the media in their portrayal of the tea parties what sickening and hardly qualifies as good entertainment, let alone news.

The object of the tea parties was to give people to an opportunity to express their frustration with the run-away spending that is going on in congress right now. There is a great many people that feel that we're at a dangerous turning point, from which it might take a very long time to recover if we don't get this right. These tea parties were a chance for these like-minded people to come together, to meet one another, and find some common ground to begin further political change.

But even in our disagreement with our government, there was still respect. There were no signs calling for the death of any officials, there were no riots, and at the end of the rally, the organizers emphasized that we needed to leave the place cleaner than we found it, so there was virtually no clean-up for city. Now that's just cool.

So we got together, made some friends, signed up on some sign-up sheets, and all pulled out our cell phones at the same time to call congress. We shut down the circuits, but got through to a few representatives to send the message that the spending has got to stop. No country on earth has ever spent its way to prosperity, and it's not going to work this time. And we had fun reading the signs. My favorite were:

"Spread my work ethic, not my wealth."

"Go Kosher, repeal the pork."

"My piggy bank isn't your pork chop."

"I spent my middleclass tax break on this sign."

"Government gone wild (with a picture of Obama, Pelosi & Reid dancing in swimsuits on a pile of money)."

"Save a tree - stop printing money."

"I'll pay my taxes when Timothy does."

"Not all pirates live in Somalia."

"Liberty is all the stimulus we need."

"Only God is too big to fail."

and

"Debt Star (with a picture of the Death Star with an Obama logo on it)."

Crowd Shots:

Our first family rally experience

Little patriot

The Medical Community Needs Our Help

2009-04-03T10:07:00.000-07:00

This is a repost of an article by Diedre McQuade on the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops website.

Doctors practice medicine to diagnose, treat, and prevent illness for their patients. They pledge to "do no harm." Yet many face tremendous pressure to participate in abortion and sterilization.

Informed Catholic health professionals understand that such procedures are not authentic medicine. They are not therapeutic, as they treat no disease or pathological condition. An unborn child is not a disease to be "cured" through abortion; and sterilization stops a healthy reproductive system from functioning properly.

Medical personnel, like all citizens, have the right not to be forced to participate in practices that offend their deeply held moral and religious convictions. This is a fundamental human right long recognized in our democracy.

But the right of conscience is under serious attack. Pro-abortion groups are pushing hard to undermine conscience rights in health care so nothing will stand in the way of maximum access to abortion. They call abortion a "free choice" -- but what is more coercive than forcing people to perform or refer for an act they find morally abhorrent? Such coercion strikes at the heart of medicine's healing mission.

Existing federal laws forbid government bodies and federally-funded hospitals, medical schools and research programs to discriminate against health care providers for exercising their conscience rights on abortion and sterilization. Unfortunately, these protective laws are widely unknown and unevenly enforced. Those who experience discrimination often do not know where to turn. To protect medical personnel, health care institutions must be held accountable to existing law.

The Obama Administration has issued a proposal to weaken current legal protection of conscience in health care, rescinding a recent Bush Administration regulation that helps implement the protective laws. The public has until Thursday, April 9 to write to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) urging it to retain the regulation.

Our voice is needed right now! But what can we do? Go to www.usccb.org/conscienceprotection to get informed, take action, and spread the word.

First, go to www.usccb.org/conscienceprotection to learn more. Watch new videos by Cardinal Francis George, a registered nurse, a doctor, and med students explaining the need for conscience protection – including one in Spanish. Read the helpful Q&A "Defending the Conscience Rights Regulation." See the action alert posted by the USCCB's partner organization, the National Committee for a Human Life Amendment (NCHLA).

Second, take action. Click on the "Act NOW!" button on the conscience protection web page to send an e-mail message to HHS by Thursday, April 9. The NCHLA Action Center provides a preset message, to which the sender may add personal comments.

Finally, encourage others to get involved. Forward this column to your e-mail network or re-print it in a newsletter. Post links to www.usccb.org/conscienceprotection and the YouTube videos on Facebook, or embed our free web banner ads on other digital outlets like personal blogs. Or use the bulletin announcement in your parish the coming two weekends: March 28-29 and April 4-5.

Doctors and nurses have long cared for us. Now it's our time to help them. Thank you in advance for spreading the word!

Deirdre A. McQuade is Assistant Director for Policy & Communications at the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

2009-03-30T15:06:00.000-07:00

This is from an email I received from the watch-dog group, Citizens Against Government Waste.

Tell Congress: Reject the President's Record-Shattering Budget!

President Obama has proposed a record $3.6 trillion budget for fiscal year 2010. This massive spending proposal comes on top of the $787 billion "economic stimulus" package; $410 billion fiscal 2009 omnibus spending bill that was loaded with more than 8,000 earmarks; and the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street, Detroit automakers, and homeowners who took out mortgages they can't afford.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has predicted that the Obama budget will push the federal deficit to a mind-numbing $1.85 trillion this year and pile up $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, on top of the existing $11 trillion national debt! CBO called these deficits, which would never fall below 4 percent of our economy's gross domestic product, "unsustainable."

Nonetheless, the House and Senate Budget Committees have largely adopted the President's tax and spending priorities in tact, and both chambers are scheduled to vote on their budget resolutions the week of March 30.

That's why it's urgent that you tell your U.S. Senators and Representative today to vote NO on their budget resolutions!

President Obama's budget would raise income taxes on individuals and small businesses by $636 billion over 10 years. It creates a $634 billion "reserve fund" for nationalizing healthcare that would be paid for with a combination of tax increases and cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. His budget would also impose a "light bulb tax" on all Americans by implementing a cap-and-trade energy policy, where companies would have to pay the federal government to use oil, natural gas, and other fossil fuels. That tax alone could cost American families as much as $3,100 per year in higher prices for electricity, gasoline, and other products and services.

Not only would these tax increases further drain American families and businesses of income during the recession, they will stifle economic growth, just when our elected leaders should be enacting policies to promote it!

As reported by the Washington Post, President Obama is right now marshalling his grassroots network of campaign supporters to ram through Congress his far-reaching changes to our healthcare, energy, and education systems with little debate.

We must counter their efforts before they bankrupt this country!

Please tell your U.S. Senators and Representative today to reject their budget resolutions, which will move America down the path of becoming a social welfare state.

And as if the President's and Congress' disastrous tax increases and spending plans weren't bad enough, the leadership of the House and Senate want to adopt a parliamentary maneuver called "budget reconciliation," which would allow the Senate to pass nationalized healthcare, a cap-and-trade energy policy, and changes to education with a simple majority rather than the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. Tell your Senators and Representative that you oppose this undemocratic plan to stifle debate, along with the tax and spending priorities in their budget resolutions, today!

Refuse to Participate in the Recession

2009-03-28T13:15:00.000-07:00

Enough With the Change

2009-03-18T15:57:00.000-07:00

So, I know we're only like 60 days into this thing. As the ticker to the right will show you, it's going to be a LONG four years. But here's the thing. It's time to put my money where my mouth is. It's easy to sit here at my desk, with the kids sleeping, and whine and complain about the TERRIBLE things that the idiots in Washington are doing (and seriously, every day it becomes more and more obvious just how stupid they are). It's an entirely different ball game for me to decide to get involved. After all, I have two small children and all of the various obligations that go along with living. We all do.

But have you seen what's happening?

Should it really be legal for congress to pass sweeping legislation that involves trillions of taxpayer dollars without even having the ability to READ the whole thing? What does that create? It creates AIG giving million dollar bonuses to its employees (yes, it was in the legislation). It creates a fund for people in California to have the government pay for their tattoo removal. Seriously. It does. It allows Congress to tell us that if they don't hurry and pass it TODAY without reading it, the country will fall to pieces. And yet, with each additional piece of legislation that passes like this, the country falls to pieces a bit more. Interesting.

If you aren't aware of what is going on with the stimulus package(s) right now, please educate yourself. And if you start to believe that it is the fault of greedy corporations, please come post a comment. Corporations act based on what they are allowed/told to do by the government. It is congress that caused the housing bubble and the banking crash. It is congress that has been throwing our money around in the wind, without a clue where it is going. If you believe more government restrictions and control on business by the people that have never run a business in their lives will make our economy better, well, I've got couple of articles for you to read.

Prosperity Lost, by Walter Williams

Why I Love Big Government, by Jerry Agar

But I digress...For my part, I am going to get involved. No more just sitting and writing for me. My first step? I will be attending a Taxpayer Tea Party. In reverence to the Boston Tea Party, 2009 Taxpayer Tea Parties are all about letting the government know that we are not happy with what they are doing with our money. They are being staged in cities all across the country, both leading up to and following April 15th (Tax Day). You can find one (or organize one) near you by going to IamwithRick.com. Come and join me in Salem on April 15th! It'll be fun.... :)

Let's Be Fair

2009-03-10T17:02:00.000-07:00

I want to take a little poll.

How many of you remember Sarah Palin's confusion over Charlie Gibson's question about the Bush Doctrine? Raise your hands. How could you forget, right? It was plastered over the news and blogs for weeks. Never mind that Gibson didn't even know the correct definition for the Bush Doctrine, and she was right to be confused by the question.

Okay, next.

How many of you remember real live newscasters making a big story about how Sarah Palin didn't know that South Africa was a country or that Africa was a continent? Yup, that one was around for weeks too. And do you remember what they based this story on? Anonymous tips from McCain insiders. No actual recordings of her saying anything silly, no proof that she is the dunce that the media portrayed her to be for weeks after the campaign, in an effort to say, "See, we told you so!" And yet, this was headline news.

Okay, question three.

How many of you have heard from the mainstream media about Hillary Clinton's recent trip around the world? Oh, you have? Heard it was a big success, perhaps? Maybe you even heard mention about this funny story:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had an embarrassing moment when she presented a gift to Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov that was intended to display the Russian word for "reset" -- a reference to Vice President Joe Biden's statement that the U.S. wants to reset relations with Russia.

The gift read "peregruzka."

Mrs. Clinton said, "We worked hard to get the right Russian word. Do you think we got it?"

The Russian diplomat answered nyet. Peregruzka means "overcharged," he explained.

"Reset" is "perezagruzka." U.S. officials said they would fix the gift.

And final question.

Have you heard the one about the American who goes on a PR tour of Europe and tries to tell the Europeans that we've had a democracy for longer than they have (nanny nanny boo boo)? Here's the story:

Hillary Clinton came to Brussels on a mission: to show Europe that the days of America thinking it is bigger, better, brighter than everywhere else were over. But her strenuous efforts were undermined by a series of minor gaffes that left the officials scratching their heads.

At a lunch, Mrs Clinton bungled the name of the EU external relations commissioner, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, calling her Benito, of all things. Javier Solana, the EU foreign policy chief, became Solano from her lips.

But what froze hearts at the European Parliament was the moment Mrs Clinton spoke about the complexity of multi-party democracies in Europe (compared with just two in the US) while adding, astonishingly, that democracy in the US "has been around a lot longer than European democracy".

The best explanation was exhaustion after a week that had taken her from China through the Middle East and to Brussels. Her efforts seemed to work. Nato foreign ministers fawned and clapped. And the renamed Benita Ferrero-Waldner declared: "Now we have the US with us." Last night in Geneva she had dinner with the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov. At least his names have only two syllables.

Now, really. Be honest. If President Bush, or even Sarah Palin had made those errors, don't you think they'd be an outright embarrassment to our nation... threatening our freedom, our world standing? They would be blasted all over newspapers and headline news for weeks, with people calling for an impeachment of the idiots. And yet, even the foreign news coverage chalks Ms. Clinton's remarks up to "exhaustion after a week that had taken her from China through the Middle East and to Brussels." Right, because I'm sure running a country for eight years doesn't lead to exhaustion. And being on the campaign trail doesn't lead to exhaustion that might cause one not to be on the top of her game on every question.

We spend weeks on whether or not Sarah Palin knows if Africa is a continent based on hearsay, and we chuckle and laugh off an embarrassing incident where Hillary Clinton is not only wrong, but claims to have "worked hard to get the right Russian word". Worked hard? I googled free translation websites, and the first four I went to gave me two different translations for "reset" (one translated as "dump" and the other as "recovery"), but none gave me the word for "overcharge."

I will never expect the media to be fair. That's not the point of this post, because that is an impossibility. But I do ask that consumers of media to think beyond what's being spoon-fed to them by major news networks and other outlets. If I had a nickle for every person that believed the Palin South Africa story because it was so widely publicized that it must be true, then I'd have the funds to go visit the place myself! Realize that the stories your told will never be the whole truth, so do your homework! Research! Think! And be fair. Let's not claim that one whole party is a troupe of Keystone Cops and the other is chalked full of intellectual superiors who just get tired from time to time. Let's call a mistake a mistake, a gaffe a gaffe, and have a chuckle about it, regardless if it's from the left or the right.

Manchurian Candidate

2009-03-10T15:14:00.000-07:00

Here is an awesome piece by Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute. I really only disagree with one point that he makes:

"It’s clear that President Obama wants the best for our country. That makes it all the more puzzling that he would legislate like a Manchurian Candidate. "

I'm going to have to argue that it's not clear that President Obama wants what is best for the country. The only thing that's clear is that he wants what's best for Obama. What is puzzling is that he would choose to legislate in such a way that would in fact harm the country, and, in the end - after a short-lived honeymoon period (which is turning out to be shorter than I ever dreamed possible), the country will see through him and most likely turn against him. It's beyond me why he doesn't have a better sense of self-preservation. That is, unless, he is hoping to ram everything through before we even have a chance to blink, and by the time we realize what is happening it will be too late to go back. Wake up, everyone! And pay attention!! Not just to the words, and the carefully scripted statements. Pay attention to the man, his actions and his character. I, for one, am terrified by what I see.

Order Now!

2009-03-01T20:41:00.000-08:00

Okay, so in general, I really wanted my posts on here to be fair and balanced. No, strike that. I wanted them to present my conservative/libertarian view point with room for discussion. But since I have approximately 4 readers, and said readers probably already lean to the right; and because of all this craziness that is happening in the government right now (which is frightening me to no end and causing me not to be able to make real posts because I don't even know where to begin), instead, I have resorted to posting funnies and jabs at the left. I know, I'm sinking to a new level. Forgive me. But really, I don't care who you are, these have to make you chuckle. And if they don't, you take yourself to seriously. I mean, I liked Bush, but even I could laugh at clever Bush-hating bumper stickers. These new bumper stickers are available now at Patriot Depot. Get 'em while they're hot!

If I Can't Laugh, I'm Gonna Have to Cry...

2009-02-14T22:22:00.000-08:00

Eventually I do plan on writing my own thoughts instead of passing on others'. But some things are just too darn good not to share...

The Stimulus Package that isn't

2009-02-02T13:33:00.000-08:00

Democratic congressional leaders and the Obama Administration have hyped the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as an urgent and essential "economic stimulus" package. This bill would be more aptly titled, the Pelosi-Reid Borrow-and-Spend Act!

The Senate is planning to vote on S.1, its version of the "stimulus," this week. We can defeat it if all of the Republican members of the Senate vote NO, as their Republican colleagues in the House of Representatives did. I urge you to send a powerful message to your U.S. Senators today that you oppose this bloated, ill-conceived plan!

The $819 billion "stimulus" package approved by the House last week and the nearly $900 billion version now under consideration in the Senate would add to a federal deficit already projected to reach a record $1.2 trillion this year. This bill is not only one of the largest spending measures ever to pass through Congress, it will cost more over two years than we've spent to date on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan!

The bill's ability to fulfill its stated mission of stimulating the economy is also questionable at best. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has concluded that more than half of the hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure spending contained in the bill, such as $26 billion of the $30 billion allocated for highways and $15.5 billion of the $18.5 billion for renewable energy projects, will not take place for more than two years -- long after economists predict the current recession will have ended.

What's more, the tax cuts in the package are narrowly targeted, with the largest portion going to more rebate checks, a strategy that failed to reverse our economy's slide last year.

Even worse, the bill contains all sorts of special-interest and congressional pet spending projects that have virtually nothing to do with economic growth. As just one example, it allocates $335 million to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. Not only will this "healthcare" spending do nothing for the health of our economy, CDC has a track record of using such funds for events like a transgender beauty pageant in San Francisco and a conference, entitled "Got Love? Flirt/Date/Score," that taught participants how "to flirt with greater finesse."

Rather than burdening today's and tomorrow's taxpayers with this massive government spending spree, Congress should create more incentives and opportunities for private-sector jobs and growth by cutting government spending and enacting across-the-board tax cuts for individuals and businesses, like those that helped reverse economic slumps in the 1960s, 1980s, and earlier this decade.

If the Senate follows the House's lead and passes this borrow-and-spend "stimulus" bill, it will waste record amounts of tax dollars, provide virtually no benefit to the economy, and only add to our nation's soaring liabilities.

Please tell your Senators today that you want them to vote NO on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act!

From,
Citizens Against Government Waste President
Thomas A Schatz

Just Say NO to Timothy Geithner

2009-01-26T08:09:00.000-08:00

In case you haven't been watching any news, the Senate may be voting as early as today on the confirmation of Timothy Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury. It was recently revealed that over the course of four years Mr. Geithner "neglected" to pay over $34,000 in taxes over the course of four years which he chalked up to a simple mistake. Based on the information that has been revealed, his "oops" story is incredibly hard to believe. However, even if it is true, do we really want a man who doesn't understand the tax system in charge of the IRS? Especially when his company handed him (and made him sign) explicit instructions of how to pay them?

If you agree, PLEASE contact your senators TODAY. It's a very simple process of an email or phone call. Go here to find the contact information for your senators, and feel free to use my words below to do so, if you find it difficult to put your request into words. If you need more convincing, try Mike Huckabee's post on the topic.

Here is what I told my Senators:

I may be too late in my request, but I am writing to urge you NOT to confirm Timothy Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury. His confirmation would be an insult to law-abiding tax payers who are struggling under the high tax burden in this country, but who continue to pay faithfully, because we believe paying taxes is not only important but patriotic. The Senate may think that we, as tax payers, believe Mr. Geithner's story about "accidentally" forgetting to pay over $34,000 in taxes over the course of four years, but even if his story is true, someone who does not understand how that process of paying taxes worked with a company that spelled it out for him, is obviously not intelligent enough to run the IRS. I urge you to show your constituents a modicum of respect and do not vote to confirm Mr. Geithner. Thank you.

I Guess I Must Be a Liberal

2009-01-23T00:59:00.000-08:00

...according to John Stossel, anyway.

I'm BAAACCCKKK!

2009-01-23T00:51:00.000-08:00

It's obvious from the flood of hits this site gets that all three of you have been anxiously awaiting my return. Well, it's a new year and a new president, and I feel the political fire starting to burn my fingertips.

I will admit, I've been in a little bit of a political depression. Most of that was centered around the fact that my dear dear mentor (I use that word loosely, as I've only met the man once for about 30 seconds), Michael Medved, was recently taken off the Portland radio airwaves. Well, not so much him, as the entire talk radio station on which his show was broadcast. But I finally caved and bought myself a subscription to his podcasts, and now I'm in much better spirits.

So my New Presidency Resolution is to make at least one political post a week, and to drum up as much talk and controversy as possible. So don't forget to read and to speak up! Because you know I will.

Medved Mania

2008-12-21T10:27:00.000-08:00

Last week, Nick and I took a date night to drive over to Clackamas to go to a book signing by Michael Medved, for his new book, The 10 Big Lies About America. Michael Medved, in my opinion, is one of the most knowledgeable people about American history that I've ever heard or read. Though I haven't had a chance in the Christmas craziness to delve much into his book, I did want to get the chance to meet him and have him sign it. The turnout was crazy big for Portland, and all of us standing in line kept commenting how we had no idea that this many conservatives actually lived in the greater Portland area. We got there about 20 minutes before it started and we had to wait in line for about an hour and 20 minutes. When we came back by a couple hours later, there were still people in line. It was fun, though, and something different than we normally do for a date night.

Over the next few weeks, once I actually get a chance to sit down and read the book, I will share some of the highlights here. For now, here are the pictures to enjoy!

Couldn't Have Said It Better Myself

2008-11-13T18:41:00.000-08:00

This post by John Stossel (of ABC's, 20/20 fame) really does say it all. John Stossel has been among my top ten in the practical wisdom department for a few years now. Enjoy.

Freedom of Choice Act

2008-11-12T13:22:00.000-08:00

With a one-party control that will exist at the Federal level as well as many state levels for at least the next two years, it is very important that all citizens stay well informed on what issues are coming down the pike, lest they be swept through without a proper debate and dialogue. I intend to do my part on this blog to keep myself and my friends apprised of what's happening. You definitely don't have to agree on my take, but you should make sure to search out the facts for yourself.

Currently, I am concerned about the Freedom of Choice Act. President-elect Obama has stated that signing it into law is the first thing he will do as president. Whether or not this was an empty campaign promise, it is something to be concerned about. The Freedom of Choice Act is, in a nutshell, legislation intended to lift most (if not all) restrictions currently placed on abortions. This includes state restrictions on parental notification, legal protection for those who refuse to perform abortions, and federal restrictions on government-paid abortions.

This blog could be a forum for discussing the morality of abortion. As I've said before, I believe we should measure when life begins the same way we measure when life ends (when there is/is not a measurable heartbeat and brainwaves). But I'm a pragmatist. The likelihood of coming to a unanimous conclusion on that topic is unlikely.

My main concern with this act is it's overreaching power over states rights. I am a states-rights girl all the way, which is why I think Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. I also believe that the government IN NO WAY should be using tax payer dollars to pay for things that a majority of people find morally reprehensible.

There are some who, at this point, try to point out that many people find war morally reprehensible, and yet our tax dollars fund this. True statement, but there's a difference. First, our tax dollars fund the military and there are few people that find an existence of the military to be a moral issue. But even if we're talking funding of wars, the decision to go to war is a duty expressly given to the government by the constitution. In electing politicians, we are intentionally choosing people and instilling in them the power to make those decisions regarding where our military tax dollars will be spent. The same cannot be said for other moral issues, most especially abortion.

The following is a short list of the practical impact of FOCA, as delineated at Americans United for Life. I urge you to contact your representatives if this is something you feel should not be enacted.

What is the Practical Impact of FOCA?

In elevating abortion to a fundamental right, FOCA poses an undeniable and irreparable danger to common-sense laws supported by a majority of Americans. Among the more than 550 federal and state laws that FOCA would nullify are:

Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003
Hyde Amendment (restricting taxpayer funding of abortions)
Restrictions on abortions performed at military hospitals
Restrictions on insurance coverage for abortion for federal employees
Informed consent laws
Waiting periods
Parental consent and notification laws
Health and safety regulations for abortion clinics
Requirements that licensed physicians perform abortions
“Delayed enforcement” laws (banning abortion when Roe v. Wade is overturned and/or the authority to restrict abortion is returned to the states)
Bans on partial-birth abortion
Bans on abortion after viability. FOCA’s apparent attempt to limit post-viability abortions is illusory. Under FOCA, post-viability abortions are expressly permitted to protect the woman’s “health.” Within the context of abortion, “health” has been interpreted so broadly that FOCA would not actually proscribe any abortion before or after viability.
Limits on public funding for elective abortions (thus, making American taxpayers fund a procedure that many find morally objectionable)
Limits on the use of public facilities (such has public hospitals and medical schools at state universities) for abortions
State and federal legal protections for individual healthcare providers who decline to participate in abortions
Legal protections for Catholic and other religiously-affiliated hospitals who, while providing care to millions of poor and uninsured Americans, refuse to allow abortions within their facilities

Notably, pro-abortion groups do not deny FOCA’s draconian impact. For example, Planned Parenthood has explained, "FOCA will supercede anti-choice laws that restrict the right to choose, including laws that prohibit the public funding of abortions for poor women or counseling and referrals for abortions. Additionally, FOCA will prohibit onerous restrictions on a woman's right to choose, such as mandated delays and targeted and medically unnecessary regulations."

What's Wrong With This Picture?

2008-11-10T16:56:00.000-08:00

Seems harmless on first glance, right? So what's wrong with it? Did you catch the interesting choice of words she used? The co-chair of Barack Obama's Transition Team, Valerie Jarrett, said that "given the daunting challenges that we face, it's important that president elect Obama is prepared to really take power and begin to rule day one."

Excuse me? "Rule?"

I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt. I'm going to chalk it up to a gaffe, which we all know have been prevalent throughout the last eight years as well as the campaign. And like I've said before, I'm going to wait and see.

But I do hope that Mr. Obama and his staff remember that it is not the job of the president to rule. It is theirs to govern. We do not live in the mother country. We live in the greatest nation the world has ever seen, and it is a government of the people, not of royalty.

One Reason to be Happy

2008-11-05T10:36:00.000-08:00

...that you still live in this country. Can this be for real? In the U.K., they've got local councils trying to veto the use of Latin and Greek words, because some people don't understand them (i.e., ad lib, ad hoc, etc., etc). What ever happened to "go look it up in the dictionary?" Especially in this day and age when you don't even have to know how to spell it to look it up! You just have to type it in to the computer and Google asks, "Did you mean Status Quo?" Yes, when something is too challenging, it's always good to lower the bar. Geeze.

I'm Not Sure What to Make of It

2008-11-05T10:17:00.001-08:00

But has anyone noticed how much lower voter turnout we had across the nation than in 2004? According to CNN, with current numbers, there was almost 2 million less votes in 2008. That is so odd! What happened to the anticipated historic turnout? I honestly cannot fathom how anyone chooses to stay home to begin with, but in this incredible election? Weird.

And One More Thing...

2008-11-05T01:03:00.001-08:00

Can someone please, in actual sentences, define for me what it means when someone says, "We've lived in hell for the last eight years"? Really? Hell? Because I've been hearing (er, reading) a whole lot of people say that tonight, and I'm really trying to figure out what that means. Because the last time I checked, there was still mass immigration happening to the U.S. throughout the last eight years. And, the economy, up until quite recently, has been pretty darn good. For the most part, people can buy what they want, do what they want, say what they want. And the unemployment rate has stayed relatively low. So, I'm really just not getting that whole "hell" comparison.

Now, don't get me wrong. I do know it's frustrating having to live with a president you don't agree with for eight years (um, hello - Clinton?). And I can remember the relief of having it switch. But come on, can we tone down the dramatics a bit? When we talk about what it's like to live in hell, maybe we should remember the people in countries that live in squalor and don't get the opportunity to vote. Now that would be hell.

So if you know someone that feels as though they're emerging from hell, can you please send them here and have them comment? I'm looking for real examples of how living in this country for the last eight years really could have been hell. And just disagreeing with a world view doesn't count.

An Aptly Named Blog

2008-11-04T22:41:00.000-08:00

Well, here we are. We've come to the end of a long and grueling campaign. So join with me and jump for joy that we can start watching real commercials again - you know, the kind that use sex to sell children's toys and cleaning products. In any regard, I will be gracious and say congratulations to the Democrat party, and to President-elect Obama. He delivered a moving speech this evening, and if he is able to stick to those ideals, more power to him. If not, we are indeed heading into a Winter in Politics, and we all better hunker down and get ready.

I do find it interesting that everyone seems to be reporting that by his election, the country "finally" has the chance to come together and heal. What? Did everyone already forget that he only won the popular vote by 4%? It's no "Reagan" landslide, for sure, so I'm not seeing where the country - that was again split almost down the center - has a whole lot of middle ground to stand on. But do we really need that middle ground? Is it the best thing for us all to grab hands and sing kum-ba-yah? God's plan necessarily calls for an opposition in all things. And America, like her mascot, needs both the right and the left wing to fly. Debate is not a bad thing. It is ingrained in our nation's founding and indeed, it keeps us moving forward.

In any regard, I do believe that half of our nation is going to be absolutely stunned. Either Obama will indeed be as middle-of-the-road as he has suggested through his campaign speeches, and McCain supporters will be shocked. Or he will follow his actual record and be one of the most left-wing presidents this country has ever seen, especially when paired with a painfully liberal congress, and those who thought they were voting for a moderate will be in for a big surprise. It's a win-win for me, however, because if he goes with the first option, the country might be better for it. If he goes with the second, I can say "I told you so!"

What really gets to me though, is NO ONE knows which way he will go. One of the first articles published after the race was called was in the LA Times, entitled Which Barack Will Govern? Seriously? Shouldn't this bit of information be determined BEFORE we elected him? Aren't we supposed to KNOW what we're getting when we elect a president? I mean, no, we don't know the specific decisions a president will make, but wouldn't it have been a good idea to know if we were getting the ultimate moderate or the quintessential socialist? The fact that adamant Obama supporters couldn't and still can't answer this question is an anomaly that is much too far above my paygrade for me to make sense of.

Still Haven't Voted?

2008-11-04T15:03:00.001-08:00

Yes, it's a bit late - wish I would have seen this earlier. But you MUST read this blog post, entitled Why I'm Voting Against Me.

Thanks!

2008-10-27T22:29:00.001-07:00

After much traffic and response to my political musings, my husband politely requested that I reserve our Family Blog for family matters. So, I was encouraged to create a new outlet for such musings. I am grateful to everyone who read and responded to my post on My Top Five Reasons for Nobama. I was surprised at the number of comments that agreed with me, and a little surprised at the lack of disagreement. Though it is flattering to think that my powers of persuasion worked on all who happened across my blog, I know this is not the case. So I encourage all those with opinions to share them!

I did want to take a moment to respond to the comments I did receive, however. Thank you to those of you who took the time to comment and link my blog to yours! I'm so flattered! Please, let's get the word out, because it's not too late!

ISSUE: Abortion
Thank you for the discussion here! It is true that I do not want government telling me what I can and cannot do with my body. However, once life is defined as "having begun", it is government's responsibility to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

Thank you to Brandy for suggesting the current article on the LDS Church's stance on abortion, which can be found here, and which contains the following:

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has consistently opposed the practice of abortion. More than a century ago, the First Presidency wrote, "We again take this opportunity of warning the Latter-day Saints against those … practices of foeticide and infanticide."

"Early in his presidency President Spencer W. Kimball (1895–1985) said: “We have repeatedly affirmed the position of the Church in unalterably opposing all abortions, except in two rare instances: When conception is the result of forcible rape and when competent medical counsel indicates that a mother’s health would otherwise be seriously jeopardized.” Current policy now includes two other exceptions—incest and if the baby cannot survive beyond birth, as determined by competent medical counsel. Even these exceptions do not justify abortion automatically. It "should be considered only after the persons responsible have consulted with their bishops and received divine confirmation through prayer.""

In general, those who are "anti-abortion" or "pro-life" rarely believe that it should be banned in all cases. In fact, in October 2007 poll, only 4% of respondents thought abortion was never okay. I also believe that in those circumstances as described above, it is most definitely the woman's choice. I recently read an article in Brain, Child magazine about a married woman with two children. She got pregnant unintentionally with a third, and felt as though she could not have it, even though her husband desperately wanted it. Within a year after her abortion, she got pregnant again, and this time willingly had the baby. I appreciated the torturous decision she had to make, and it was difficult for her. But I still can't say that was her choice to make. Especially considering she waited so long to make it, and well into the second trimester. Even in reading her story, it still felt as a "convenience" option.

I do believe we all have the right to choose, but our choice takes place far before the two cells ever meet. So, perhaps it's not that I'm against choice, but I guess you could say I'm "Pro-Choice and Accountability" as it were.

Regardless, Obama has argued against the "Born Alive Act" in which infants who survive abortions should not be resuscitated. At this point, we're no longer talking about a woman's right to make decisions about her own body. Indeed, it is pure infanticide in the ugliest sense.