Friday, April 30, 2010

Not mollycoddling rude people any more.....

Parked my car (straight and secure in the dead center of my chosen parking place) and ran into two stores to quickly pick up some items.  Except it wasn't so quick because when I came out, some stupid git had parked so close to my car that there was absolutely no way to get into my driver's side door.  In addition she had parked cockeyed and I wasn't sure that even if I took the time to climb into the car through the passenger side that I would be able to pull out safely since she was at an odd angle right behind my back bumper.

So, instead of just settling for leaving a nasty note on her car and going through extreme contortions and possibly scraping up MY car (she was that close and I didn't give a rat's ass about her car), I went into the strip mall stores in search of her.  Luckily I hit paydirt on the second store (had the stores page the owner of a beige Toyota XLE).   Being as wide as she was tall, I can see why she gave herself so much room on HER driver's side door but the whole crooked parking thing is still a mystery.  However, she agreed, after waddling out and looking at the cars from another angle, that it was indeed a crappy parking job and moved her vehicle.  She was suitably apologetic, I was relatively polite and maybe she'll be more careful the next time.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

An eerie similarity.... Quincy Cops and Roman Guards

Apparently they called out the local cops in full riot gear to "quell" the totally peaceful demonstration yesterday before Obama's appearance in Quincy stumping for financial reform (and where he completely mispronounced Alexi Giannoulias' last name during his 'shout out', but that's not important right now).  It was really funny that all of the people were just standing there on the sidewalk watching these guys go by.  They were probably embarrassed at having to walk down the street like that too.

Let's do a quick comparison between the Quincy constabulary (ht, Hot Air) and the Roman guards in History of the World Part 1....

Quincy Constabulary:

Roman Guards (you only need the first 17 seconds of this one):

 The only difference between the two is that one is a comedy and the other is a farce.  You decide which is which.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Funny, this story on the New Jersey Education voting was kind of hard to find....

Had to hit the second or third page of a google search before I found an article in the New York Times that actually says that the voters of New Jersey voted to cut 58% of the budgets for their school districts.  With much wailing and gnashing of teeth, students walking out of classes in protest (hmmm....), and shouts of cutting programs and teachers close to the hearts of the students--music, athletics, etc. 

Oh the horror, some districts may have to raise classroom capacity to over 30 (all of my classes from grade school on up had at least 30 people in them), cut Advanced Placement courses (it's for the children, let's cut the courses that would maybe give them a chance at a college education), and cut the number of guidance counselors in elementary schools (why does an elementary school kid need a guidance counselor??).  One of these districts were asking for an over 7% tax increase and got shot down.

Good on the people of New Jersey for stand by their guns and for realizing that the spending frenzy of government has to stop.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Conceptual model/politics vs. Reality = FAIL

In the media-driven frenzy regarding the newly-passed Arizona law on illegal immigration enforcement, there have actually been some interesting tidbits hiding beneath the swastikas made of refried beans (live the stereotype, y'all).  The main reason this law had to be passed was because the Federal government intellectually recognizes the issue but since they don't have illegals scooting through their backyards in the middle of the night, it isn't real to them.  The reality is that if you entered this country without going through proper channels, you are here illegally and there are already laws against that and everyone knows it.  Arizona is using this law to bring a very real issue to the fore:  a law that is unenforced is useless.

Right now the Democrats need everyone (except white guys, apparently) to get out and vote in November, according to Obama, and by enforcing those laws already on the books, the Feds are going to piss off millions of (possibly illegally) registered voters.  But that doesn't help states that have been overwhelmed with illegals straining their domestic infrastructures.  So the Democrats would rather see the economies of the states go down the tubes and score political points rather enforce our immigration laws.   I firmly believe that if the laws had been enforced as they should be, that Arizona never would have had to take this action.

I think the kicker for me was when I was listening to Don Wade and Roma this morning and someone called in on the subject of the Arizona law and they actually said "Being an illegal immigrant is not a crime."  DW and R had to walk this guy through it step by step before he realized that doing something that is called 'illegal' makes it a crime.  But he honestly didn't see it that way because 'no one gets thrown in jail for being illegal.'  All Arizona did was change that, at least within the borders of their state.  I hope that other states whose economies are being destroyed by illegals start taking the same action since it's very clear that the Federal government won't.

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Quote of the day from the Indomitable Og!

Spit shot alert:  Go here!

Stanford education FAIL

(ht:  Insty) The East Palo Alto school district has declined to continue Stanford's charter elementary school since it is the lowest scoring school in the district.  (articles here and here) Ironically, the top scoring school in the district is also a charter school, but below is the quote that tells the tale.  Aspire, the folks who run the top scoring school (same demographics as the Stanford school, BTW) tried to jointly run a high school with the Stanford folks.  According to Don Shalvey, the man who started Aspire:
The two cultures clashed. Aspire focused “primarily and almost exclusively on academics,” while Stanford focused on academics and students’ emotional and social lives, said Don Shalvey, who started Aspire and is now with the Gates Foundation.
The high school, now exclusively run by Stanford, is staying open and:
is considered more successful because 96 percent of seniors are accepted to college, but “average SAT scores per subject hover in the high 300s,” reports the Times. That suggests most graduates are going to unselective colleges to take remedial classes.
 So we have two models in the same demographic and geographic area.  One model concentrates on academics and is successful; the other has to get into the emotional and social lives of their student body and have academics as a corollary, then it fails.   Gee, why am I NOT surprised???

Friday, April 23, 2010

This isn't particularly surprising--those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.

Via Drudge, an article in The Boston Globe.  It discusses the fact that those under 30 don't know that socialism is a bad thing:  "When they hear “socialism,’’ they think Scandinavia, not Russia."  Additionally, most of the young folks in the article are students so they've never experienced the real world--don't know the ins-and-outs of taxes, aren't worried about health care (just wait until they have to start buying it whether they want to or not and they'll have a rude awakening), and don't realize exactly how far socialism impacts individual rights.  Per the article:
And if the health care reform bill actually were socialist? He shrugged off that concern. “Socialism itself isn’t terrible,’’ he said, unless it involves the abrogation of individual rights.
These are the products of 30 years of indoctrination in both the public educational system as well as the halls of higher ed.  No history, no idea of what freedom and individual rights are supposed to be.  Scary.......

One of the dumber things I've heard lately....

I was listening to Hannity on the way back from yoga last night and in a conversation between Sean, Juan Williams, and Stuart Varney, I think I heard one of the stupidest reasons for not reducing the size of the federal government.  Juan Williams said something about if we reduced the size of the federal budget through cutting taxes then all of those people would be out of work and therefore it would hurt the economy--this is a paraphrase because as much as I enjoy Hannity, I'm not going to pay the $ to become an insider and get to the show archives..

What Willams doesn't seem to realize or is deluding himself about is that, in many cases, the role of government workers is to create a reason that they are working, mainly by putting more regulations on taxpayers, who are paying their salaries so it's basically a double-whammy.  It would be cheaper to put those workers on the dole than it would be to keep them 'gainfully employed'.

When you have unions (teachers and SEIU) in Springfield, Illinois screaming 'raise my taxes'  (when what they mean is 'raise everybody's taxes to pay for my salaries, benefits, and raises'), then that's a sign that too many people are on the public dollar and that they don't realize that the pockets of those who are paying are not infinitely deep and filled with money.  It's interesting that thousands of these people being paid by the public were able to take time off of work to protest and demonstrate to get paid more.........

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Quote of the Day: Bookworm from the Bookworm Room

I'm not quoting her Rush Limbaugh post, which was excellent and deserving of the attention it received--if you want to read it, go here.  The quote of the day is from her post regarding the Gay San Francisco Softball team that had its second place standing revoked because they were 'too straight'  Her comments regarding the detrimental effects of identity politics on our society cut right to the chase:
Identity politics is the antithesis of the individualism that was always the bedrock of the American identity.  I am the sum of my many, many parts, large numbers of which are, and should be, invisible to the public eye.  I refuse to have one of those parts be held as so overwhelmingly important that society forces me into certain belief systems and behaviors antithetical to the whole me.
When someone only identifies themselves by a specific trait, they are automatically negating the rest and aren't allowing anyone to see them as a whole person--they are basically a walking label and sometimes devolve into caricature.

Not poison ivy after all....

Mr. B called it this morning.  He was having a different reaction to the same thing that I got and the culprit is stinging nettle, which is all around the garden (unbeknownst to me until this morning when I saw the picture).  I was pulling it up and had on gloves and long sleeves but my sleeves apparently rode up and it stung me.  It does have a lot of medicinal uses and now that I know what it looks like I can be extra careful and will actually get some for the medicinal herb garden I'm planting.  The reaction and treatments are about the same for both poison ivy and stinging nettle so that's why the steroids worked last time.  So I'll keep slathering on the baking soda paste, which seems to really have an effect last night and work it through.  The article says up to a week of histamine joyfullness.

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Poison Ivy AGAIN!

Got poison ivy again, despite both Mr. B and myself being hyper-vigilant.  This usually necessitates a trip to the doctor for a nice steroid shot and a follow-up pac for a couple of weeks.  I'm trying my damnest to avoid this (but my arm is really, REALLY looking gross right about now--got a nice huge set of blisters) because the only time my GP has seen me in the last two years is to prescribe me steroids and put a shot in my butt and I'm sure it's not fun for him either. 

So I stopped by the local Walgreens and grabbed just about everything they had for poison ivy.  I'm trying a new (to me) product that's gotten mixed reviews on amazon, called Zenfel, followed up by Benedryl lotion.  What I'd really like to do, being the masochistic type and all, is break the whole thing open, slather it with baking soda paste and take my chances on a secondary infection since I've heard that it's about as effective as anything else.  Maybe some rubbing alcohol in the open wounds just to make it all as fun as possible.  Seriously, it would be better than just looking oozy and blistery.  At least it's not itchy but aside from that, it sucks big-time.

So tell me again HOW the MSM is not a propoganda tool for the government?

The Institute of Medicine came out with a report that recommends that the FDA should  create regulations--those things with the force of law that no one votes on--limiting the amount of salt that can be put into food  (sugar is next).  ABC last night ran a story on the horrible amounts of salt used in food and NPR ran a story this morning.  Both of those propaganda pieces are going to be followed up by stories on the evils of sugar.  What's interesting is that the stories (which echo each other) are all relating salt and sugar to 'wide-spread' health issues. 

Hmmmm... so we have this huge horrible bill regarding health care that passed despite the will of the citizens of the United States; we have the FDA being 'recommended' to regulate salt and sugar; AND we have news stories linking salt and sugar to a variety of  'health issues' based on schlock-science (please to see Climategate for science following a meme rather than a meme following science).   This equals a clusterfuck in the making (larger than any we've seen before).

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Christie strikes again!

Apparently it's School Budget voting time in New Jersey and Gov. Christie has come out swinging (ht Jammie Wearing Fool).  Christie is accusing the teachers union of 'using the students like drug mules' in order to squeeze more money out of the taxpayers in New Jersey.  According to Christie, the union and its members have been using the classrooms as bully pulpits and 'homework' assignments as data-gathering devices.  The quote:
"Scaring students in the classroom, scaring parents with the notes home in the bookbags, and the mandatory 'Project Democracy Homework' asking your parents about what they're going to do in the school board election, and reporting back to your teachers union representatives, using the students like drug mules to carry information back to the classroom, is reprehensible."
The culture of corruption is everywhere and I think it is more prevalent in the educational systems of this country than anywhere else.  And that's what's so scary about it--these morally bankrupt thugs are the ones who are nominally supposed to be teaching the youth of this country.  And they are failing miserably and are trying to drag more money out of the taxpayers in order to fund their mediocrity.  Don't get me wrong, there are some smart, educated teachers out there who really want to help kids to learn.  But they are bogged down by the detrius of the rest and are forced to become mediocre so that the others don't 'look bad'.

I hope the taxpayers of New Jersey show the same sense that got Christie elected and will side with him on this.

Friday, April 16, 2010

Tea Party stuff

Mr. B and I attended a Tea Party on April 14 (you can see his blogposts here and here).  It was a good time and a good crowd.  But it lead to a rather interesting conversation with a friend of mine.  I was telling her about the Tea Party and such and she said something about 'teabaggers'. 

Well, I've known this woman since she was a girl (almost as long as I've known Mr. B) and I know that she would never knowingly use a pejorative term towards any group.  So I asked her if she knew the origins of the term as it relates to the Tea Party movement.  She was HORRIFIED when I gave her the details (Anderson Cooper and his denigration of the movement when it started) and I was not-terribly-thrilled to have to explain exactly what teabagging (the sex act) is to her.  I told her that most Tea Party Protesters would take umbrage at the use of the term teabagger (not knowing her the way I do) and she's now deleted that from her lexicon.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

The Difference between Dems and Republicans on Education budgets

I was listening to Don Wade and Roma this morning and they had Gov. Pat Quinn on their show.  He was trying to tout his reform of the teachers' pension fund but the conversation quickly turned to the one percent income tax increase (he kept calling it a 'surcharge') that would be dedicated specifically for education so that a bunch of teachers wouldn't be fired come September. 

Contrast that with Gov. Chris Christie's tactic of freezing the pay INCREASES for teachers in the state of New Jersey (discussed in a previous post) so that he won't have to raise taxes in a state whose economy is very similar to that of Illinois right now.  Christie is not talking about firing teachers, he's not talking about cutting anything really.  He's just asking that the teachers forgo a pay increase for a year in order to bring the budget under control. 

Higher education has been using that tactic for years to good effect (not good for the employees but having a job is better than not having a job).  One of my former places of employment had a 1/2 percent increase ONCE in the five years of my employment there.  Many state institutions in Indiana are freezing pay increases due to budget constraints.

The main difference between these two approaches is this:  Quinn can't even contemplate bucking the unions and would rather squeeze the taxpayers of the state of Illinois to pay for what basically is a budget crisis in the Chicago schools (he kept saying in the interview that 'we're a billion dollars in the hole' which is the figure that the Chicago school system requested from the state legislature).  Christie, on the other hand, understands that in order to balance a budget and reduce deficits, then some things have to happen.  Quinn would rather raise taxes (and if that doesn't work, see teachers lose their jobs) than just have the unions hold off on a raise for a year (or two or three) and have everyone employed without putting the burden on everyone else.

I've gone more than one year without a raise.  I know a lot of small business owners who will cut their personal salaries in order to keep their folks employed.  Why would teachers and their unions rather see their constituencies/colleagues unemployed rather than forgo an increase in a time of crisis??

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Go Christie Go!!

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is taking on the New Jersey teachers union and is taking the fight to the public.  It looks like the union will no longer be able to hide behind the 'it's for the children' meme since in this case, the money definitely is not.  Per this article:

Christie added that $820 million in state aid cuts, primarily for school lunches, art teachers and language classes, among other programs, wouldn't have to go if the teachers union would agree to a one-year pay freeze and to pay 1.5 percent of their salary toward their medical, dental and vision benefits.
"That would save $800 million and wipe out all but $20 million of our cuts, and there'd be no layoffs, there'd be no program cuts, and all of the stuff is about the union's greed rather than putting the kids first," Christie said.
Even the union's thinly veiled death threats aren't making Christie back down.  I hope the public who elected him will recognize that the teachers' union is the problem and is not the solution.

Friday, April 9, 2010

The New Jersey Teacher's Union is on a par with gangs....

Apparently the New Jersey Teachers Union wants to play for keeps.  Union leadership sent out a prayer calling for Gov Christie's demise in response to his calls for cuts in education funding.  Hopefully after this, he will start following Rhode Island's excellent example.

Why am I not surprised?? Are our educators duplicitous or just ignorant??

An AOL article on how poorly US colleges and universities teach about US history, key texts (Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, etc.), and our institutions (ht Jerome Darnell at American Thinker).  What's frightening is the 'before picture'.  According to the article, half of the incoming freshmen (14,000) failed an exam on history/civics (getting half of the 60 questions or fewer correct).  The article does not look closer at this piece of information, but it clearly shows that our K-12 public education system is dropping the ball.  

This goes back to my theory that teachers in the K-12 system do not know their history and if the books are incorrect (and there is some indication that primary texts being used in K-12 have either incorrect data or are deliberately biased against our country), the teachers have no personal knowledge-base to critically look at the information in the books.

What's scary is this lack of knowledge is not being corrected in at the post-secondary level.  It's interesting to note that most of the universities cited as doing poorest at correcting the inadequacies of K-12 teaching are considered to be top-tiered schools:  Johns Hopkins, Cornell, Yale, Brown, Duke, Princeton, Georgetown, etc.  Not only did they not make up the difference, their students actually went BACKWARDS in their knowledge of US history/civics. 

Now think about this....  most of our top-level politicians are Ivy-League--Harvard (whose students didn't make over 69% on the test), Yale, Princeton (students scored lower going out than coming in).  They are not learning any information about our country, its founding documents, the institutions (I'm betting that they're not learning about checks and balances and they sure as hell don't know anything about the Constitution) and yet they are running this country.  I think that people are starting to realize that advanced degrees don't necessarily equal advanced knowledge, but this information gives the issue a much broader dimension.

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Quote of the day...

Jim Hoft (Gateway Pundit) in this blogpost has a great turn-of-phrase!

One thing we can all agree on about President Obama… He focuses his attention where it is needed least. Americans want jobs – He nationalizes health care. Americans see an emerging threat in nuclear Iran – He signs a nuke agreement with Russia.
That’s what you get when you elect an inexperienced far left radical weaned on Marxism.
 Follow the link in the quote also--some interesting reading.  Not anything that we didn't really already know but it's nice to have documentation.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Obama is a Poseur!

I heard about this yesterday and Insty has a bunch of links to posts about it, but good grief.....  Obama throws out the first pitch (like a 5 year old girl) at the Washington Nationals game (after cleverly putting on his White Sox hat) and then  completely proceeds to muff some slow-pitch questions, such as "who is your favorite White Sox player?" (Couldn't name ANYONE).  He then says something along the lines of "I'm a South Side guy" (since when?).  Loves to catch a game at Kaminsky Field. (that was from a previous interview)   I'm not from Chicago (and don't claim to be like he does) and I know better.

So WHY dear readers, do I care about this at all??  I don't care about Obama's baseball knowledge or lack thereof.  I do think that what happened at the game and the subsequent interview again show that the man has absolutely no substance, but we all know this.  He's a metrosexual, pseudo-intellectual who tries to put on the macho and fails miserably.  I've got bigger balls than he does and I'm a chick.

The term poseur 'describes a person who adopts the dress, speech, and/or mannerisms of a group or subculture, generally for attaining acceptability within the group, yet who is deemed to not share or understand the values or philosophy of the subculture.'  Obama has shown repeatedly that he cannot relate to any of the culture of the United States (maybe because he wasn't raised here), except for that very small subculture to which he was indocrinated (Ivy League socialist).  The more he tries to look like a regular guy, the worse he looks (the 17 minute reply to a simple question).   I think the term fits.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Obama as the Goblin King??? Or would that be Pelosi??

I saw this blogtitle " Submission to authoritarianism is freedom!" from Classical Values and immediately flashed to the movie Labyrinth with David Bowie.  Eric has put together a great blogpost that discusses the nature of authoritarianism and the fact that it's actually the left/liberals who tend to want to pass laws against things they don't like, than those on the right, who generally just want to be left alone.

The idea of submission to authority is the thing that ties a great blogpost and a second-rate (though enjoyable) movie together.  The government and our educational system want people to be helpless, to be victims, to need to suckle at the teat of the all-benevolent government that will grant their every wish.  As Amit Ghate said in an article on PJM (referenced in the blogpost at Classical Values):
The flip side of this government growth is the shrinking of the domains in which private citizens can make their own decisions and pursue their own values. The individual’s thoughts are marginalized — primacy is given to whatever the president and his cronies happen to think. Science czars push science in directions they prefer, regulatory czars restrict affairs they deem objectionable, etc. Substituting the government’s judgment for that of private individuals is the essence of authoritarianism.

Or as Jareth the Goblin King would say: 
I ask so little. Just let me rule you, and you can have everything that you want.

I think it's time we stand up to the authoritarian government and echo Sarah's words that broke the spell of the Goblin King:

You have no power over me.

Monday, April 5, 2010

So how DO you fire the RNC chairman??

Listening to the news this morning on my way to work and it was mentioned that Michael Steele, RINO RNC Chairman, is being taken to task for some rather extravagant trips on the RNC dime.  He hasn't been high on my list, being a RINO and an apologist for Republican views, but then he did the one thing that's guaranteed to get my blood boiling--he pulled the race card.
Steele said [in an interview with Washingtonian Magazine], "I don't see stories about internal operations of the DNC that I see about this operation. Why? Is it because Michael Steele is the chairman, or is it because a black man is chairman?"
On Good Morning America (article about the interview here) he said that he and Barak Obama have a 'slimmer margin of error' because of their race.  It couldn't possibly be because Steele spent $17,000 on a private plane, $13,000 on limos, and that the RNC staff under his watch are so inept that they can't even put the right telephone number on a fundraising letter.  And by comparing himself to Obama, for whatever reason, he squarely puts himself in the 'really needs to lose his job' category.  If I didn't have my tin-foil hat firmly in place, I would suspect that there are forces that have been trying to destroy the RNC from the inside, and he's the point person.

He says that he won't step down.  I say that if the conservatives want their party back, we need to fire him  and the whole leadership to get the party back on track.

Saturday, April 3, 2010

The news that isn't..... sexual addiction

Was watching the morning news and the Today Show came on.  Now I'm not expecting hard-hitting reporting or anything from them, but the lead stories were just dog-and-pony-let's-distract-the-populace types of prurient and salacious tales.  Plus they are total crap.  The main focus was sex addiction--Tiger Woods, Jesse James, David Duchovny (who started this whole thing).  I think it's another way of trying to take personal responsibility out of a person's purview and  make another level of victimhood.  I was reading a blogpost by Dr. Marty Klein at Sexual Intelligence, who notes that even though he has been a sex therapist for 30 years, it was only 3 years ago that folks claiming to be sex addicts starting walking through his door.  His quote:
I don’t treat sex addiction. The concept is superficial. It isn’t clearly defined or clinically validated, and it’s completely pathology-oriented. It presents no healthy model of non-monogamy, pornography use, or stuff like S/M. Some programs eliminate masturbation, which is inhumane, naïve, and crazy.
Oh, I observe people with obsessive-compulsive disorder, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and a few other exotic states. That accounts for some of what laypeople call “sex addiction.”
I do think that part of the problem is what I've blogged about earlier in reference to Dr. Helen's article and that one part of the latest craze in psychosis is that sexuality is so stigmatized, especially here in the US (back to our puritan roots, I guess).  There is also a very narrow popular definition of sexuality and 'accepted sexual practices'.  Combine stigmatization/narrow definitions with a culture that celebrates a 'victim' and removes the idea that you have to take personal responsibility for your actions you have instant sexual addiction.

Friday, April 2, 2010

The Mount Vernon Statement

Bookworm references The Mount Vernon Statement in her post on creating a definition of a conservative racist (see my previous post).  It's worth posting separately (I've cut off the signatures and such so go to the link for a full view):

We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding.  Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law. They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government.
These principles define us as a country and inspire us as a people. They are responsible for a prosperous, just nation unlike any other in the world. They are our highest achievements, serving not only as powerful beacons to all who strive for freedom and seek self-government, but as warnings to tyrants and despots everywhere. 
Each one of these founding ideas is presently under sustained attack. In recent decades, America’s principles have been undermined and redefined in our culture, our universities and our politics. The selfevident truths of 1776 have been supplanted by the notion that no such truths exist. The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant.
Some insist that America must change, cast off the old and put on the new. But where would this lead — forward or backward, up or down? Isn’t this idea of change an empty promise or even a dangerous deception?
The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles. At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature’s God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man’s self-interest but also his capacity for virtue.
The conservatism of the Constitution limits government’s powers but ensures that government performs its proper job effectively. It refines popular will through the filter of representation. It provides checks and balances through the several branches of government and a federal republic.
A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles. It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world. 
A Constitutional conservatism based on first principles provides the framework for a consistent and meaningful policy agenda.

  • It applies the principle of limited government based on the
    rule of law to every proposal.
  • It honors the central place of individual liberty in American
    politics and life.
  • It encourages free enterprise, the individual entrepreneur, and
    economic reforms grounded in market solutions.
  • It supports America’s national interest in advancing freedom
    and opposing tyranny in the world and prudently considers what we can and should do to that
  • It informs conservatism’s firm defense of family, neighborhood,
    community, and faith.
If we are to succeed in the critical political and policy battles ahead, we must be certain of our purpose.
We must begin by retaking and resolutely defending the high ground of America’s founding principles.

The definition of being a conservative racist

Bookworm has a fantastic post about the redefining the word racist and her definition of a conservative racist.  Some excepts:
I’m a racist because I believe that blacks are fully capable human beings who are perpetually demeaned by the liberal theory holding that blacks cannot function without handouts from condescending, rich white people.
I’m a racist because believe that blacks are just as academically capable as any other people in America, but that they are having their abilities systematically squished when condescending, rich white people assure them that they can’t make it without assistance — a heinous approach predicated on the liberal’s implicit assumption that blacks are inherently stupid, ill-informed and ill-suited for intellectual effort.
I’m a racist because I believe that vigorous (but still constitutional) law enforcement benefits blacks, who are disproportionately the victims of crimes by other blacks.
I’m a racist because I believe that excusing harmful behaviors in the black community (whether academic failures, teen pregnancies, drug use or crime), on the ground that blacks cannot help themselves because whites have essentially ruined them, is the ultimate insult to blacks, reducing them to the level of animals without intelligence, self-discipline, moral fiber, ambition or ordinary human decency.
She ends her post with this:
I just want to throw in here that words can change meaning.  Racist used to mean that one thought other races were inferior.  Now it means one thinks Obama is a bad president.  One day, I hope it means that we believe all races can achieve their full human potential. 
I always remind myself that the word “beldam” (old hag) started life out as “belle dam” (beautiful or grand woman, which then became grandmother, which then became old hag).  Language is not static.
Please read the whole thing!

Join the crowd--more elected officials who don't care about the Constitution

 Via Instapundit, a link to Big Government with a video that shows Rep. Phil Dare (D-IL) talking about the fact that he doesn't worry about the Constitution.  Link here.  It seems to me that politicians are so used to lying that the oaths that they took upon being sworn into office are meaningless.  It used to be that oathbreaking was considered to be a serious crime--sometimes more serious than murder since it was a sign that the society as a whole had no meaning to the person breaking their word.  Now it's status quo in politics.  How can a government survive when there is no moral compass??

Porn and Relationships---some thoughts prompted by an article from Dr. Helen

Dr. Helen (the InstaWife) has an article today about a woman in Virginia who basically blames porn for her husband leaving her.   My thoughts are this, and I have to admit that they are much different than they might have been even six months ago--some of them are thoughts I've always had.  I think that the anonymous psychologist quoted by Dr. Helen has the liberal mindset that if something is bad to you, then you must make laws against them.  I agree with Dr. Helen in that I'm sorry that the woman's marriage didn't work out, but I'm of the mind that she's trying to find something outside to blame.

I think that the reason that some women find porn to be disturbing (I'm not one of them) is that they feel that it's a type of competition.  Combine that with feminist 'reasoning' that men should love their spouses/significant others regardless of whether or not they change or rest on their laurels and do not try to keep themselves attractive for their men.  Amy Alkon has blogged about this more than once.  Women can't have it both ways.  I've lost 20 pounds so far and am taking yoga--I'm enjoying the results, I'm feeling better, and it gives me something to do outside of the house, but the impetus for it was my partner.  I want to be attractive to him.  It took some time, some soul-searching, and some hard discussions but I've decided that he's most important thing in my life and I want to make him happy--my being physically fit is a part of it.  If they come and take my feminist card away for that, then so be it.  I'm not losing myself or subsuming myself, I'm keeping the promises I made, even the silent ones.

Thursday, April 1, 2010

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

No wonder the healthcare bill passed if this is an example of our Representatives at work.  Via Mr. B. at In the Middle of the Right, a youtube video of Hank Johnson, the man who defeated Cynthia "Do you know who I am" McKinney in the 4th district race in 2006 in Georgia. 

A friend commented that we should distribute life vests to the residents of Guam and make sure that the population is uniformly distributed across the island to prevent any potential problems with tipping.

For myself, I applaud the Naval officer for maintaining decorum and politeness in the face of utter and complete stupidity.  But seriously--this is the quality of folks that the citizens of the United States (or at least of the state of Georgia) are entrusting with our livelihoods and to look out for our interests.  Mr. Johnson is a prime example of why the federal government has gone to hell in a handbasket.