Occupy Wall Street = Terrorism

How can this be viewed as anything but terrorism?  Seriously - arrest them all, I say.

From abcnews.com:

Envelopes containing suspicious powder were sent through the mail to at least seven locations in Manhattan, primarily Wells Fargo banks, in an apparent May Day protest, police officials said.

"This is a reminder that you are not in control," said a message that arrived with the envelopes. "Just in case you needed some incentive to stop working we have a little surprise for you. Think fast you have seconds."

Four of the seven samples have tested negative so far. The envelopes apparently contained corn starch.

Police believe the suspicious envelopes were mailed by militants from within the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Labor, immigration and Occupy Wall Street activists are planning protests for "May Day," May 1, which also is known as international workers' day. The intent is to show the "1 percent" what life without the working class' "99 percent" would be like.

I'm From Texas

Source: Uploaded by user via Kristen on Pinterest

Jimmy Kimmel and the Correspondents Dinner

I have to say that watching Jimmy Kimmel's stand-up last night at the annual Correspondents Dinner, I was impressed that he took shots at the President as much as at the GOP.  I was expecting the usually one-sided humor taking jabs mostly at the GOP that I've come to expect from comedians at this point, but Kimmel was quite fair.  My favorite joke was when Kimmel looked squarly at the president and said:  “Remember when the country rallied around you in hope for a better tomorrow? That was a good one.” Exactly.


Here are the top jokes of the night, including some of Obama's according to ABCNews.com:

    Kimmel: “If you told me when I was a kid I would be standing on a dais with President Barack Obama, I would have said, ‘The president’s name is Barack Obama?’

-    Obama: “Four years ago, I was locked in a brutal primary battle with Hillary Clinton. Four years later she won’t stop drunk-texting me from Cartegana.”

-    Kimmel to Obama:  “Remember when the country rallied around you in hope for a better tomorrow? That was a good one.”

-    Obama on Romney: “We both have degrees from Harvard. I have one, he has two. What a snob.”

-    Kimmel on Obama’s thinness: “This is how you know the country’s in bad shape. The president is starving. North Korea is sending him food aid.”

-    Obama: “Last year at this time, this very weekend, we finally delivered justice to one of the world’s most notorious individuals, (Photo of Donald Trump)”

-     Kimmel: “There’s a term for guys like President. Probably not two terms.”

-    Obama: “What is the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull? A pitbull is delicious.”

-    Kimmel: “”The president wanted to move it to the Kennedy Center, and the Republicans wanted to keep it at the Hilton. So, they compromised and here we are at the Hilton.”

-    Obama: “Here we are in this vast magnificent Hilton ballroom, what Mitt Romney would call a fixer upper.”

Joel Osteen Believes Latter-day Saints (Mormons) Are Christians

Joel Osteen made headlines when he went against some pastors (including Pastor Jeffress, who has surprisingly endorsed Mitt Romney) when he stated that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are Christian.

"When I hear Mitt Romney say that he believes that Jesus is the Son of God, that he's the Christ, raised from the dead, that he's his savior - that's good enough for me,"Osteen said in an interview that aired on CNN's "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer."While Osteen said Mormonism is "not traditional Christianity," he believes Mormons fall under the Christian tent.
"Mormonism is a little different, but I still see them as brothers in Christ," the pastor argued. That goes a big step further than many other Christian leaders, who have not gone so far to say that Romney is unquestionably Christian." (LINK)

The full name of the church, often not discussed in print, is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This church has Christ at the center.  

From the Church's media center:

"What Are the Core Beliefs of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

The founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Joseph Smith, wrote, “The fundamental principles of our religion are … concerning Jesus Christ that He died was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”

In addition to the above, Latter-day Saints believe unequivocally that:

1.    Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world and the Son of our loving Heavenly Father.

2.    Christ’s Atonement allows mankind to be saved from their sins and return to live with God and their families forever.

3.    Christ’s original Church as described in the New Testament has been restored in modern times.

     1. Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world and the Son of our loving Heavenly Father

Latter-day Saints believe God sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to save all mankind from their sins (see John 3:16). God is a loving Heavenly Father who knows His children individually, hears and answers their prayers, and feels compassion toward them. Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, are two separate beings but along with the Holy Ghost (Spirit) are one in will, purpose and love.

Latter-day Saints worship Jesus Christ as their Savior and Redeemer. He is central to the lives of Church members. They accept His grace and mercy; they seek to follow His example by being baptized (see Matthew 3:13-17), praying in His holy name (see Matthew 6:9-13), partaking of the sacrament (communion) (see Luke 22:19-20), doing good to others (see Acts 10:38) and bearing witness of Him through both word and deed (see James 2:26).

2. Christ’s Atonement allows mankind to be saved from their sins and return to live with God and their families forever.

Latter-day Saints believe that God has a plan for His children to return to live with Him and become “joint-heirs with Christ” (Romans 8:17). For members of the Church, Jesus Christ’s sacrifice is central to God’s plan for our happiness. Although humans make mistakes and sin, Mormons view this mortal life as an opportunity to progress and learn. By following Christ’s teachings, embracing His mercy and accepting baptism and other sacraments, Mormons believe they are cleansed from sin through Christ’s grace and can return to live with God and their families forever.

3. Christ’s original Church as described in the New Testament has been restored in modern times.

Members believe that Christ established His Church anciently on the “foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Ephesians 2:20; see also Ephesians 4:11-14) with “one faith, [and] one baptism” (Ephesians 4:5). They believe this foundation of “one faith” was gradually undermined after the death of Christ’s apostles. As a result, the original foundation of authority to lead the Church was lost and needed to be restored (see Acts 3:21). Today, members preach that the Lord has indeed restored His Church with living apostles and prophets, starting with the founding prophet of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Joseph Smith.

Church members understand that families are the most important unit of society. Accordingly, those who follow Christ and keep His commandments are promised to live with their families forever in divinely instituted eternal relationships." (LINK)

For more, visit www.lds.org or www.mormon.org.

Great Analysis Of Romney Speech

From commentarymagazine.com:

Mitt Romney’s speech after the primaries last night contained language that was simple, straightforward, and at times elegant. But there was also an impressive political intelligence behind the address.

Take as examples these three sentences:

* “Everywhere I go, Americans are tired of being tired.”

* “The last few years have been the best that Barack Obama can do, but it’s not the best America can do.”

* “Tonight is the beginning of the end of the disappointment of the Obama years and the start of a new and better chapter that we will write together.”

These sentences tapped into the mood of the public, taking pre-existing sentiments of many Americans, giving voice to them, and channeling them to Romney’s advantage. While most Americans don’t dislike President Obama personally – quite the contrary — they are deeply disappointed in his record. They are tired. They are ready to move on. And they are ready to write new and better chapters in the American story.

Now take this sentence: “I see an America with a growing middle class, with rising standards of living. I see children even more successful than their parents – some successful even beyond their wildest dreams – and others congratulating them for their achievement, not attacking them for it.”

This captured a crucial philosophical difference between Romney and Obama, with the former putting himself on the side of excellence and achievement while reminding the public that the president is a constant critic of those things. (For Obama, a progressive to his core, wealth is usually grounds for criticism, as if it’s a condition for which one ought to apologize.)

Read the rest here.

Obama's Failed Policies - America Is Not Better Off

Obama has destroyed this country. He has taken away jobs and thrown the US into even greater debt. Time to replace Obama.

GOP Platform

If you want a good read sometime, take a look at the GOP platform. It is reaffirming to review the beliefs of the party, what it stands for. When compared with the Democrat's platform, it becomes apparent that we really do come from different places.

Maintaining the Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life
"Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and
sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which
cannot be infringed.  We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendments protections apply to unborn children.
We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which
advocate it.  We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity and dignity of innocent human life."


Preserving Traditional Marriage
Because our children's future is best preserved  within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it.  In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives


Safeguarding Religious Liberties
Our Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion and forbids any religious test for public office, and it likewise prohibits the establishment of a state-sponsored creed.  The balance between those two ideals has been distorted by judicial rulings which attempt to drive faith out of the public arena. The public display of the Ten Commandments does not violate the U.S. Constitution and accurately reflects the Judeo-Christian heritage of our country.

Romney Sweeps!

Not that anyone is surprised now that Santorum has dropped out of the race, but Romney swept all 5 states holding primaries tonight.  He is that much closer to attaining the full delegates required to clinch the nomination.  However, he is at this point the presumptive nominee.

If only Gingrich would get the message and end his fledgling campaign.  It is really getting embarrassing at this point!

Proposed Law In Kansas Would Force Churches To Host Gay Weddings, Violate Personal Beliefs

A proposed law in Kansas threatens to attack the sanctity of religion for the citizens of Hutchinson and set a bad precedent for the rest of the country.

"Religious liberty groups are blasting a proposed ordinance that would force churches in Hutchinson, Kan. to rent their facilities for gay weddings and gay parties.
The Hutchinson City Council will consider adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the protected classes in the city’s human relations code. They are expected to vote on the changes next month.
According to the Hutchinson Human Relations Commission, churches that rent out their buildings to the general public would not be allowed to discriminate “against a gay couple who want to rent the building for a party.”
Meryl Dye, a spokesperson for the Human Relations Commission confirmed to Fox News that churches would be subjected to portions of the proposed law.
“They would not be able to discriminate against gay and lesbian or transgender individuals,” Dye said. “That type of protection parallels to what you find in race discrimination. If a church provides lodging or rents a facility they could not discriminate based on race. It’s along that kind of thinking.”
Matthew Staver, chairman of the Liberty Counsel Action, told Fox News the proposed law is “un-American.”
“It is a collision course between religious freedom and the LGBT agenda,” Staver said. “This proposed legislation will ultimately override the religious freedom that is protected under the First Amendment.”
He argued that churches cannot be forced by the government to set aside their religious convictions and their mission. And, he warned, some churches could even be forced to rent their buildings for drag parties." (LINK)

Part of religious freedom is that the government should not infringe upon the rights of those churches or participants practicing the religion. This would be an absolute violation of these church-goers rights.

Senatorial District Convention - First Time Experience

This weekend I had the pleasure of attending a Senatorial District Convention here in the great state of Texas. Here in Texas, we have several conventions that lead to the GOP National Convention - precinct, senatorial, state, then national.

What a neat experience! I feel so grateful for the opportunity to be involved in the process. I was able to meet with other voters, discuss concerns and hopes for this country, meet candidates for election, and vote on resolutions. There were a couple of themes that seemed to emerge at the convention including pride in America and our freedoms, grave concern over Obama and the direction he is taking our country, and confidence in our ability to turn things around IF we elect a conservative senate and REPLACE Obama. We started with a prayer and Pledge of Allegiance and ended with "God Bless America."

I am so excited for the state convention and looking forward to the rest of this voting process. This is the election of our lives...let's make it count!

Political Cartoon

Had to pass this on:

Conversations with a Liberal

So the other day I responded to a friend's Facebook post, and then to one of her friend's posting.  Normally I don't respond to be people I don't know, but come on... I couldn't help myself with logic like this!!  And quite frankly, sometimes talking to the someone of the left is entertaining.  This "liberal" states his political views on his Facebook page as being "Far Left".

I have taken out names, swears, and the Lord's name when used in vain.  It's a long read, kind of slow in the beginning, but you'll love his logic!

Friend’s Status Update

Job interview Monday. I have to skip school for it but hopefully it'll be worth it! Teller job at MAJOR BANK.

Liberal Good <gosh>, banks.

Friend Banks are good jobs. Good money.

Liberal I'd rather work for Wal*Mart or mcDonalds, at least they make sense         

Friend They don't pay as well, and thats a lot more physical for a pregnant chick to do. Too much standing and walking and lifting (in Walmarts case for sure).           

Friend But if you've got anything better, I'm open to lots of things. I just need a job.         

Liberal Well COMPANY A is almost always hiring, though tbh I don't really know any places or have any connections down there with jobs. I just don't like banks. At all. And would rather work for a company that has been more vehemently victimized on strict principle

Me Good luck! I hope it goes well!

Friend COMPANY A called me for a job like 10 times. I would work there, but they aren't flexible around my school schedule. I would have to drop out, or switch to night classes which would put me getting home at just about midnight. That is just a little too late for me, especially considering I would be working all day then at school all night- I wouldn't have time to clean the house, see my 2 year old, make meals, etc etc. I also am pregnant so I pass out around 10pm- normally I am more of a night owl but you get SO tired when youre pregnant! I'm going to go there if nothing comes up when I graduate, but until then it just isn't that great of an option I'm afraid =/ Anything else? I've been looking for a bank job because I have 6 years of cash handling experience, and there is a lot of room for promotions and such in a bank. My friend started getting $14 an hour after only a few months at a bank.

Liberal Try getting a job at a Credit Union, or a bank that isn't Wells Fargo or Bank of America             

Me Normally I don't respond to people I don't know on someone's page, but seriously? For someone so against big business, it looks like you sure like a lot of things made in China (according to what I can see on your profile). How about supporting American workers where the money is made here and spent here.  

Liberal It's not that I hate big business, it's that I hate big banks, because all they are is legalized thievery.

Other Sane Person My aunt works for Chase. She's not a thief. :/  

Liberal ‎"Guilt by association"       

Liberal The idea that banks can charge you to use your own money makes absolutely no sense, not to mention the fact that they're at this point necessary to make a living in this country as you either deal with a bank of your choice or you have to deal with ADP style pay. What happened to the days of getting a check? What happened to the days when your money was your money and you could spend it without being charged for it?          

Other Sane Person So go open a bank and run it the way you think banks should be run.

Me I'm not a huge fan of astronomical profits for big business, especially if they don't take care of their employees in terms of paying fair and benefits.  What you're saying doesn't even make sense. First, most people can get an account without any kind of fee- I have a no fee account. Secondly, you pay a fee for a service they are providing, which is safeguarding your money and providing you with an easy way to access it via ATMs and debit cards.

Me Nothing is free. 

Liberal It's more so that you're basically required to have a bank now that bothers me more than anything, why should anyone be able to tell me what I need to do with my money?

Other Sane Person And what if Friend DOES get a job with a big bank? Is she supposed to be "guilty by association" too?    

Liberal On top of that I have been charged for something the bank did, without my permission, to my account. I have had a bank steal money from me on a month to month basis- and almost charge me for overdrawing my account too!        

Me You don't have to have a bank, there are credit unions, paypal, prepaid cards. That's not a banking problem- that's a technology issue. We're moving in the direction of technology and convenience- banks are simply adapting to stay relevant.

Other Sane Person I'm sorry, I know this is a serious debate, but you're going to have to explain to me how a bank "almost charges" something. Either it charges or it doesn't. There's no almost.

Liberal I use Credit Unions exclusively after that fiasco I had with Bank of America, but not all credit unions are good- for a fact I know my mom banks with Credit Union who charges her something like a dollar every time she runs her card as Debit, which makes absolutely no sense. On top of that it bothers me that you need to have something similar to a bank (ala Credit Union or ADP pay system) to be able to receive payment from most jobs, a paper check should be just fine.

Liberal How a bank "almost" charged was I only had somewhere along the lines of like 8.50 in my account at the time, that I was going to use for food until I got paid in like two days. They charged me 8 dollars randomly, which had I used my card to purchase something before that they would've charged me the overdraft fee. Not to mention they had never mentioned anything about a monthly fee as long as I had direct deposit 

Me When she uses her card, is she not using a service someone is providing? Do the lines not have to be paid for and the card readers, and the employees who keep the service up and running? Having worked for a credit merchant company in the past, I can tell you, it costs money to maintain things.

Secondly- how is a job requiring a direct deposit (which I will agree is common nowadays) the bank's fault? That's an issue for the job and your HR group. If you don't like it, talk to your job.  

Liberal It is partly the jobs fault for requiring that, but it's also a bank issue because if banks never initiated the idea of direct deposit then jobs would never see it and think it's the way of the future.      

Me That is the worst argument I've ever heard. So it's the fault of the bank for initiating something that millions of people like and makes their life easier and more convenient and then offering that service to their customers? What an awful company for trying to make their customer's lives easier! Just tragic!  I have a feeling we'll never agree on this. I'm probably the epitome of a person you don't like- I'm pro life, Republican, in favor of the Tea Party concept, and religious. But it seems like your argument is terribly flawed.          

Other Sane Person ‎... So it's the big evil banks fault for suggesting something that will make our life easier? Yeah, I'm out. I just can't read anymore of this.

Liberal How does direct deposit make life easier?

Liberal If I didn't have to have a bank for direct deposit, they wouldn't be able to charge me fees for letting me use my money and therefore I'd be able to, well, use my money for things I want to use it for. 

Me Seriously?? Okay, fine, I'll play along. When I got a paper check, I had to take a long lunch in order to get to the bank in time to deposit it. Actually, at that time I was with a credit union who had even shorter hours than a bank. Often I was late from lunch. Then I had to wait three days for the thing to clear, meaning I didn't have money on time to pay my bills. With direct deposit, the money is in the bank and ready to use first thing in the morning. I could take a leisurely lunch, and not worry about paying my bills in time.  Again, find an account that doesn't charge you fees. I'm sure that $8 fee is over the top- so find one that doesn't have a fee. Every bank I've ever banked with offered a no fee account. Every single one.       

Liberal I agree, I've refused to bank with any bank that charges me to use my money since that incident, and I've promptly advised all friends or family members to stop banking with them as well. On top of that, what type of bank do you use that doesn't instantly clear payroll checks? Oh, and who ever said you would deposit the check into the bank?   

Me So instead I have to go directly to the bank the check is drawn on and cash my check? And without a bank, I have to get money orders for things like my mortgage and pay convenience fees for paying my utilities in person. Yes, that's MUCH more convenient.            

Me I can't chat anymore, I have to get my kid ready for bed... but this has been an interesting discussion. Sorry to take your page up Friend! Good luck- I'll send job vibes your way.

Friend I had at interview at a credit union, but it was in TOWN 40 min 1 way, plus a toll every day. Couldn't do it. They weren't hiring for the ANOTHER TOWN branch.

Liberal Wait they charge you fees...to pay your bills....in cash?        

Liberal What a <messed> up world we live in, good <gosh>.

Friend Also I love my direct deposit. I don't always have time to go to the bank. Sometimes I need to use $ from my account before I can deposit the check, especially for gas. Can't drive all the way from work to the bank with no gas. And I have to have a card for bills and gas, I don't use cash for those things. I get gas at Sams which only takes cards, so I can't just pay cash for it. Also, I can't pay my electric or my car insurance in cash, or they do charge me more. My electric automatically withdraws every month- my other option is cash, with a $600 deposit.

Liberal Good <gosh>         

Liberal What a world what a world

Liberal And imagine, if people actually cared, if people actually wanted to help other people how much better this place would be? But no you have people wanting to eliminate freedom of choice, who want to hoard money in the name of the American Dream.     

Friend Most of my bills I have to have checks for as well, which require a bank account. You can't just stick cash in an envelope and mail it. You would have to go get a money order or a check, which would require a bank or amscot or something. Its 500xs easier to direct deposit and pay online the morning my check deposits without having to go anywhere to get or use my money.    

Liberal I guess I just don't understand this world. I'm moving to Europe

Friend I would love to move to Europe. A lot of their countries have diminishing populations, which mean they don't have enough workers and the jobs are good. But it's just too far away from family. I couldn't do it.

Liberal It's not far enough away from some of my family

Obama's Attack on Women

Women And The Obama Economy [Infographic]

Senate GOP Sues Obama For Recess Appointments

Wow, the Senate Republicans decided to go for it.  They are suing President Obama for appointing political allies to the National Labor Relations Board.  The President is only allowed to not attain Senate approval when they are not in session.  This was not the case and, therefore, he should not have taken this extraordinary executive power-grab to get his way.  But, this is our President.  Of course, if the GOP ever did this, Democrats would cry foul.  But, Obama lives in a world where he can do whatever he wants.

Here's more from Breitbart.com:

The lawsuit itself is based on President Obama’s non-recess “recess appointment” of political allies to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which oversees management-union relations; it was originally filed by Noel Canning, a soft-drink business owner who sued the NLRB over its ruling that the company had to work with a labor union.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell came out firing today:

“The president’s decision to circumvent the American people by installing his appointees at a powerful federal agency, when the Senate was not in recess, and without obtaining the advice and consent of the Senate, is an unprecedented power grab. We will demonstrate to the court how the president’s unconstitutional actions fundamentally endanger the Congress’s role in providing a check on the excesses of the executive branch.”

The Senate was technically in session when President Obama made his recess appointments; he unilaterally determined that there was indeed a recess. “The Senate should decide when the Senate is in session,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) stated.

Parents, Choose Names Wisely

Why it's important to choose a good name for your child:

"A defendant named Fellony was arrested yesterday for felony battery after she allegedly struck a woman in the head with a glass at an Indiana bar.

Fellony Silas, 30, was collared early Sunday following the fracas at Kilroy’s Sports Bar in Bloomington. The bloodied 24-year-old victim suffered several lacerations and was treated for her injuries at a local hospital.

The attack was reportedly triggered when the victim accidentally bumped into Silas while she was dancing." (LINK)

Which is it Obama? Boredom or Can't Afford it?

When Michelle Obama was interviewed by Vogue she stated:

 "The days I stay home with my kids without going out, I start to get ill," she says. "My head starts to ache." When she mentioned it to her mother, Marian Robinson told her daughter she didn't think Michelle could handle the boredom of staying home with kids. "

So which is it?  Could you not "afford" it (although your finances indicate something otherwise) or did Michelle get "bored" with spending time with the kids?

Look, I don't mind that Michelle Obama has chosen to be a working mom.  Staying home with your kids is not for everyone.  And I respect that she chose what was best for her and her family- what I don't like is when the Obamas can't seem to get their story straight.  Either you wanted more money or you got "ill" from being home with the kids.  You can't politically play your cards when they are convenient.

Obama has used the opportunity of the attack on Romney to portray himself as a working class president, who couldn't afford luxuries, and not only is the financial aspect of that blatantly false, but the real reason why Michelle Obama, as many suspected, is not because they couldn't afford it, but because she didn't want to.

Women Should be Celebrated, Shame on Rosen

There's been a lot of talk the past two days about the battle between SAHMs and moms who work outside the home (created by Hilary Rosen's attack on moms).

Does anyone else find it "coincidental" that this attack from Hilary Rosen came just a few days after Obama made the comment that he and Michelle didn't have the luxury for Michelle to stay home?  I don't find it coincidental at all, I find it purposeful and manipulative- but that's a topic for another day.

The topic I want to cover today is about sacrifices.  Women make sacrifices.  It's in our nature to want to nurture others.  We make sacrifices for our jobs, for our children, for our husbands.  We make sacrifices to take care of our elderly parents and for community events, and to care for our neighbors.

When Obama's children were 4 and 7, and he was elected into the Senate, he was being paid $162,100.  Now I'm a stay at home mom, and I look at that figure, and it's a heck of a lot more than we live off of... I mean, a dang lot more.  So let's talk about luxuries, shall we Mr. Obama?  You wife has the luxury of fine dining, the luxury of designer clothes, and the luxury of fancy vacations.  Were she to make those sacrifices, she would most certainly have the luxury to stay home with your children and live a very nice life.  But she didn't choose that, and unlike Hilary Rosen- an adviser to the DNC- I celebrate Michelle's right to choose what's right for her.

What was likely intended for the Obama Administration to divide women, should only unite us to celebrate our lives, our choices, and our victories.  We live in a country where we have the choice, to not only have a child, but to have multiple children.  We live in a country where we are free to send them to daycare, keep them at home, or negotiate child watching schedules with neighbors.  We live in a country where we can get a job, go to school, or stay home.  We have the choice to prioritize our own agendas, to determine for ourselves what is most important to us, and to live that life without persecution.  At least so I thought.

Ann Romney Responds To Hilary Rosen's Attacks

Hilary Rosen has Ann Romney in her cross hairs. Rosen, Obama adviser and democratic strategist, went after Mrs. Romney by stating she "has never worked a day in her life." This attack was made in response to Republicans appropriately stating that the left, Obama included, are waging a war on women. Ann Romney appropriately responded on Foxnews today, stating that she made a choice to have her career be a stay at home  mom. Each woman has a right to her career and that is the career she chose.

It's interesting that the feminists say that they have been fighting for women's rights, but they attack when women choose something the feminists disagree with. Millions of women have chosen to be stay-at-home moms and in 2010, 5 million women were stay-at-home moms. That doesn't sit well with feminists like Rosen. Rosen makes the argument that in order to understand women, you must suffer in the same way as every woman. I disagree. Ann Romney has been on the campaign trail and women have been speaking to her. Her sharing their concerns is appropriate. She is giving conservative women a voice and this is the real issue. Rosen wants conservative women to be squashed. She knows the power of conservative women and she is seeking to silence them.

Ann Romney also made a point to include that many men have chosen to be stay-at-home dads and that is their choice as well. She was genuine, articulate, and sincere. Ann Romney does women proud by articulating that her choice to be at home was right for her and her family. Each woman must choose to do what is right to them and their family. It is not our place to judge their decision.

Racial Divisions Increase Over Black Panther Comments

New Black Panther Party chief of staff, Michelle Williams, is doing her part in creating racial divide and fear.  During an online interview, Ms. Williams stated:

"Let me tell you, the things that's about to happen, to these honkeys, these crackers, these pigs, these pink people, these ---- people. It has been long overdue. My prize right now this evening ... is gonna be the bounty, the arrest, dead or alive, for George Zimmerman. You feel me?" 

Perhaps she needs a lesson in widely available statistics.  The "honkeys" aren't the ones doing the aiming.  80% of non fatal violence where the victim is black is committed by a black offender.  80%.  Let that number simmer for a little bit.  70% of white victims have a white offender.  

Let's talk homicides for a minute:

About 93% of black homicide victims and 85% of white victims in single victim and single offender homicides were murdered by someone of their race.

That number is even more shocking!  93 percent of black homicide victims are murdered by someone of their own race.

You want to be outraged at George Zimmerman, then be outraged.  But let's get outraged at the REAL victims and the REAL perpetrators.  It's time to stop ALL crime.  It's time to take back our sons, bring them out of the gangs and the bad neighborhoods and prevent them from living a life of crime or getting murdered by someone of their own race.

Why Is Obama So Committed To The Buffett Rule?

Seriously!  It is strange.  His continued commitment to an idea that does nothing to substantially reduce the deficit is quite bizarre at this point.  Why place your entire political reputation on this non-issue?  The only thing that the so-called Buffet-rule seems to accomplish is to "stick it to the wealthy."

As has been reported (even by the MSM, so you know it must be true as it they tend to support Obama at all costs), raising taxes on the wealthy does not impact our deficit in any real way.

Here is a great write-up from bankruptingamerica.org:

For years the U.S. has had an unfortunate habit of spending far more than we can afford, sending us trillions into debt. Some have suggested we should tax our way out of it. Before Tax Day 2012, we go beyond the question of whether we should, and ask a more important question: can we?

Are Taxes Enough?

In 2008, the independent Congressional Budget Office was asked to determine what the tax rates would have to be if they used “higher income tax rates alone to finance the increases in spending projected.”¹This was the last time the CBO did such an analysis.

Here is what the CBO determined at the time:

In order to keep up with projected spending, taxes would have to increase:²

• Corporate: current top rate 35%; rate increase to 88%
• Highest income tax rate: current rate 35%; rate increase to 88%
• Near-the-middle income tax rate: current rate 25%; rate increase to 63%
• Lowest income tax rate: current rate 10%; rate increase to 25%

What is the “Buffett Rule” Tax?

Recently, President Obama has called for fairness in the tax code. The president says one way to do this is to enact the so-called “Buffett Rule.” Under this proposal, wealthy Americans would pay a minimum tax rate of 30 percent. One reason some wealthy Americans can pay a lower tax rate is because investment income is taxed at a lower tax rate than ordinary income.³

• According to the analysis, however, the proposed tax would do almost nothing in terms of deficit reduction.  Congress' independent tax analysis arm, the Joint Committee on Taxation, determined this proposed tax would raise just $47 billion over the next 10 years.  When looking at the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office's projected debt over the next decade of $21.665 trillion, $47 billion represents 0.2 percent in defecit reduction.

The facts show that this proposed tax would do almost nothing in terms of deficit reduction. (bold added)