This is NOT Democracy

A major story today. Our President is literally out there altering the landscape of this country, bypassing the legislative process, and making executive orders that affect you and me and this great nation. 

Today, our President and Secretary Janet Napolitano announced a "temporary stop-gap measure...and degree of relief" to over 800,000 illegals. The Department of Homeland Security is no longer allowed to deport young illegals. Instead, these people will be granted work authorizations, which can be renewed indefinitely. Call it what you will, but this is our President giving a free pass to illegals in exchange for their vote.

The President says it's the "right thing to do." Says who? That's not what I learned in school about how the legislative process works. If it's the right thing to do, the legislature will debate the issue, vote and THEN the President can sign his name in approval. 

No one likes political gridlock. It's frustrating when agreement cannot be achieved. But at the same time, political gridlock is a product of a divided country. And our President, rather than help our legislature unite under compromise, refuses to accept the gridlock and believes it gives him some sort of "right" to act alone. It is his excuse to step in and help a group of illegals. I wish he would step in and help our struggling economy and sky-rocketing debt. I wish he would step in to help ME and the regular, every day citizens of this country who sit in fear at the current state of this great nation. 

See the video of President's Speech here and make your own call: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/15/obama-administration-to-offer-immunity-to-younger-immigrants/  - SIDENOTE: I am disgusted at the way Obama belittles and talks to the reporter that is trying to ask him a question (see video). Yes, the reporter interrupts him, but there is a better way to handle it. I wish he would show some class, but every time I see this rudeness it's more evidence to me that behind his charm and smile, Obama's probably not a very nice guy. This is NOT how a leader operates.

Reese's Thoughts on Contraception

"I'm sorry the civility police now have an opening to demonize the entire right based on one radio comment - because it's the progressive left in this country that has viciously and systematically slimed female conservatives for their beliefs."

 - Michelle Malkin

With all that is going wrong in the country today (which I could come up with a pretty long and solid list), it seems access to contraceptives is the current hot topic. This topic has now morphed into women's health rights and "conservatives hate women". I am so fed up that I have resurrected this conservative blog to rant share my thoughts.

Here is what I WANT to say to the world:

• How much and how often you have sex is a social issue. Do not involve the government. Keep it behind closed doors where it belongs. 
• The natural consequences of sex is pregnancy and STDs (unless you and your partner have practiced abstinence prior to your relationship). If you don't want to get pregnant or have STDs you should use birth control.
• Life is filled with choices about what/how to spend your money. If you have LOTS of sex it would seem appropriate you would spend some of your income on birth control. But this is an individual choice. I will not tell you how to spend your money. 
• But just like I won't tell you how to spend your money, don't cry out that the government must somehow use taxpayer dollars to protect you from the natural consequences of your actions. 
• Churches should be able to live and lead their congregations as they choose. The government has absolutely NO right forcing churches to provide a service that goes against their religious beliefs. If you are upset the Catholic church is not providing birth control, I would suggest you are probably not a devout Catholic and your religious desires could be fulfilled elsewhere by another church. You should also not attend a Catholic university like Georgetown. 
• Mandating insurance companies to provide birth control at no cost is not feasible. Most insurance benefits require some out-of-pocket expense (co-pays, coinsurance, deductibles, premiums, etc.). It is not unreasonable for insurance companies to charge fees for birth control. This does not violate women's rights, it's merely economics and how a business operates. 
• Those who are speaking out against this ridiculous government mandate are not attacking women. They are defending personal and religious rights and demanding the government step back from this overreach. 
• Any woman who is speaking out for the misogynistic behavior of the "right" and certain talk-radio hosts, are hypocritical because where are they when conservative women are attacked?  Michelle Malkin has documented some of her hate mail here. Why haven't you come out against her attackers? 
• Yes, I'm sorry Rush (who I love dearly) used a bad term to describe a person who testified in congress about her personal life. But if you choose to testify before Congress you open yourself up to public scrutiny and yes, sometimes it's hurtful. People in the public sector are susceptible to criticism and I believe it's part of the business. Certainly the likes of Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin would have thrown in the towel long ago if they couldn't stand up tall despite the hate. 

I'm not telling you what to DO, but I will not protect you from the natural consequences of your choice. Don't expect the government to protect you and demand companies provide a service to you for free. Be smart about your social choices and if YOU deem something important, go out and make the sacrifice to get it. 

OBAMA: "I AM THE LAW"

"These are not the acts of a teacher on Constitutional law. These are the acts of a big city boss or a third world dictator. If you want to know why business has pulled in its horns and hunkered down, and why people at tea parties and elsewhere are scared, look no further than Barack 'I Am The Law' Obama."

 - Ben Stein, The American Spectator, 6.16.10

When I was a teenager I babysat often for my family's closest friends. One summer while home from college I watched the four kids for a weekend.  The youngest (about 5 at the time) and I had a real go for those few days. One night I had made dinner and served it to the kiddos. The youngest, "T",  said, "I don't want that." And I said, "Okay. I'm sorry this isn't your favorite, but this is what's for dinner." Dramatically, T said he wanted a popsicle instead and his mom let him have popsicles for dinner. I replied, "Popsicles are dessert. They are not for dinner." Young T was quite upset...tantrum ensued and he screamed at me, "YOU ARE NOT THE LAW....MY MOM'S THE LAW!!!"  

My mom and I still giggle at this incident. "T" had it right. As a mother now myself I know that I'm the law and what I say goes. That's what I get for my sleepless nights, constant management of whining, organizing play dates/activities, and cooking, serving, cleaning three meals each day plus snacks.  I at least get to lay down the law in my own house.

Now...it appears our President has the same kind of "mom" mentality.  But he has it wrong in a number of areas...one being that he works for us and reports to us.  He doesn't get to say it's the law just because he's the President. But Obama doesn't care.

A GREAT piece by Ben Stein yesterday in The American Spectator.  Read the WHOLE article here.  

Yes, BP should probably pony up and pay out for this horrible disaster, but not because the President mandates they do so. Stein says, "But the action of the President in demanding this immense transfer of stockholders' wealth without any legislation or court decision is extremely worrisome."   

Stein continues: "We live in a Constitutional Republic.  The President's job under the Constitution is to enforce the laws made by the elected Congress. His job is not to create new laws and enforce them all by himself.  His job is as magistrate under the Constitution, not as Caudillo.  He is not the law.  He is supposed to enforce what Congress decides."  

And I'm still trying to figure out why we don't focus on stopping the gushing.  That seems like Priority #1 to me.  

Gotta run...I need to make sure my kids remember I Am the Law... that is, until the President steps in and tells me how to run my household...you know it's coming...

Source:

Ben Stein - The American Spectator 06.16.2010

Mexico Does Not Co-sign Laws

"The Second Amendment is not a subject open for diplomatic negotiation, with Mexico or any other nation."

 - Sen John Cornyn, (R - Texas)

Did you know the President of Mexico, Felipe Calderon, spoke to Congress today? He had a lot to say about OUR laws, specifically the new immigration law in Arizona and also the Assault Weapons Ban which was lifted in 2006.

I find it interesting he comes here to exert pressure and judgement so inappropriately. It doesn't seem diplomatic to step on foreign soil and be so critical of how we do things here.

I like what Michael McCaul (R-Texas) had to say: 

"I think it's inappropriate for him to come in and criticize our law. When we go down to Mexico, we don't do that to the Mexicans. The Arizona law is not the problem. The problem is the growing violence down the border and securing the border and the Obama administration enforcing federal law."

Do you think President Calderon cares that his citizens flee Mexico and come here illegally? Many become criminals and are housed in our jails and managed through our judicial systems. It's one less felon for him to worry about in his own country.

This is what he had to say about the new Arizona immigration law:

"I strongly disagree with the recently adopted law in Arizona. It's a law that not only ignores reality, but also introduces racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement."

Pfffff! I can't handle it. He obviously hasn't read the bill along with the rest of our leaders...

And you know what is sickening? Our United States Congress gave him a standing ovation. 

***

Have you been pulled over by a police officer before? 

I have.

It was a stupid ticket that I'm still mad about...but that's beside the point.

But...here's the kicker...when I was pulled over I had to show my ID.

Do you think it's wrong to ask someone, who also happens to be illegal, to show their ID when pulled over for a regular traffic offense?

Why does an illegal get more privilege than me? 

Source:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/20/mexicos-calderon-takes-case-congress

Citizens Not Subjects

"I didn't stand with the banks and the financial industries in this fight.  Neither did any of the members of Congress who are here today. We stood with you."

 - President Obama (speaking about student loan takeover)

Obama signed the health care amendment yesterday...which is where today's quote is from. It's ironic to me how this administration continues to demonize businesses. A recovering economy needs healthy, profitable businesses, no? And how can he stand "with us" if his disapproval rating is at 50%. Again with the fuzzy math.

But back to my original thought...

Included in the health care amendment was a complete takeover of the federal student loan program, eliminating banks and other federal institutions from the equation.

This is just one more takeover to chalk up to Obama's "transformation" plan. Slowly but surely this president is creating a welfare state with middle class families becoming dependent on the government. In the words of Marcee Tidwell (Jerry Maguire), "I'm freaking out here, Jerry!"

First - Government bailout and takeover of the car industry. President Obama and his car czar now have a say in how GM/Chrysler run their business. You think they will continue to allow GM to produce gas-guzzlers??   Think again.  

Interesting fact...our Tahoe (made by GM) which we purchased 18 months ago is now worth MORE than we paid due to simple supply and demand economics. I wonder why GM is not producing more of these vehicles?  I love my Tahoe and the sound of my meaty engine. It makes me happy. Obama, however, believes I'm melting an iceberg each time I put the pedal to the metal. 

Second - Federalizing health care, which will eventually become nationalized health care if Obama has his way. This essentially determines how the citizens of this nation will live their lives.

And, Third, this government takeover of student loans. Any institution utilizing these loans will become subject to the government. President Obama will have ideological enforcement at colleges and universities across the nation. Thinking your college children will be receiving a liberal education is an understatement...think more extreme...

What's next on the takeover list?  I hate to even entertain ideas...

Chris Baker, in for Glenn Beck this morning, mentioned two things I love:

(1) Americans were not meant to live their lives on a leash.
(2) I want to be a citizen rather than a subject.

Obama's takeover ignores both ideals.

Source:

Obama Signing Amendment - Washingon Post
Glenn Beck Radio

Get Your Game Face On

"Fortunately, there are no permanent victories or defeats in Washington."

 - Edwin Feulner, President, The Heritage Foundation

I spent most of today amid my own personal chaos...that's just the life as a stay-at-home mom sometimes.  But periodically as I tried to "check-in" and assess the mood across the country, I surprisingly did not feel defeated. It appears within the corners of this great nation people are ready for a fight. Something never before seen since the colonies declared their independence and our founding fathers set a course for freedom and liberty.  

I love The Heritage Foundation. The President, Ed Feulner, had an inspiring message today.  It brought the fight to the surface. If you are even the slightest bit hesitant about Obamacare, you should get involved. Numerous states are starting on the path to block portions of the new legislation. And while repeal will be difficult, we can assure change by electing officials willing to represent the true voice of their constituents.

And because I can say it no better than Mr. Feulner, I've included some of his direct quotes below.  If this makes you want to stand up and cheer then you are in the majority. Our collective voice is tuned out in favor of power, greed and control in Washington. But we the people have the ultimate say. We can be part of this fight...one that will be worth the effort to save the American dream.

"Large majorities of Americans oppose this legislation because it offends the historic American dedication to the principle of self-government. They understand that this new law will accelerate Washington’s intrusion into our most personal and private decisions."

"Those who supported this bill are our fellow Americans, and we do not question their good will or patriotism. In public policy, however, good intentions alone do not suffice. And let there be no mistake, our philosophical differences with supporters of this bill are profound."

"If there is one good thing about the past year—one in which we have witnessed unprecedented horse-trading, press stunts, midnight votes and political manipulation in both houses of the U.S. Congress—it is that the American people have come away educated as never before about the differences between these two visions for America."

"They understand this health care bill forces individuals and employers to buy insurance policies designed by government bureaucrats. This intrusion is intended to follow us from cradle to grave."

"Instead of empowering families and individuals to make their own choices, Obamacare empowers the bureaucracy to make those decisions for them. It is this unelected bureaucracy, unanswerable to the electorate, that will determine the content of health benefits packages, including medical treatment and procedures, and how much will be paid for those services."

"Americans will not stand for it. The American love for liberty prevailed in our founding, and will prevail once again."

"Fortunately, there are no permanent victories or defeats in Washington. For millions of Americans and for Heritage, Round One of this fight is over. Today, The Heritage Foundation is answering the bell for Round Two...Help us educate our lawmakers, as well as those who aspire to become tomorrow’s lawmakers. Together we can make the persuasive case for repeal of this Intolerable Act and thereby return us to our American destiny."

Mr. Feulner ends his letter with this salutation:

Onward!

My friends.  Do not give in.  Do not be complacent.  We must press onward!!  The fight begins again.

Source:
The Heritage Foundation - Edward Feulner Letter 03.22.2010

Free Speech to ALL

Those who criticize this decision have lost sight of a basic truth: the answer to speech they disagree with is not to restrict that speech, but to answer it with more speech.

 - Hans Von Spakovsky, The Heritage Foundation

This past Thursday the Supreme Court reversed two prior court decisions related to corporations' ability to contribute on a political campaign.  The Heritage Foundation has a great article conveying how the reversal is a restoration of our basic right to free speech granted in the Constitution.

Heritage says, prior to the ruling on Thursday, "Corporate associations were prohibited under penalty of criminal and civil sanctions from expressing the views of their members in the political arena over which particular candidates should be elected to uphold the positions on important issues of public policy that their members believe in unless they complied with certain very restrictive, complex provisions."

Summary: in most instances corporations couldn't contribute on a political candidate's campaign.

Here are some great quotes supporting and defending the Supreme Court's decision:

The Court also found that free speech rights under the First Amendment do not depend on a speaker’s financial ability to engage in public discussion – the fact that some speakers may have more wealth than others does not diminish their First Amendment rights.

Speech is an essential mechanism of democracy and the means to hold officials accountable to the people. As such, political speech must prevail against laws that would suppress it.

The following quote is directly from Justice Scalia:  "The Amendment is written in terms of “speech,” not speakers. Its text offers no foothold for excluding any category of speakers…Indeed, to exclude or impede corporate speech is to muzzle the principal agents of the modern free economy. We should celebrate rather than condemn the addition of this speech to the public debate.

Now, yes, some "shady" companies will take advantage of the court's ruling to finance misleading advertising, but the argument is still irrelevant.  What matters is whether the voting body chooses to be educated on the issues enough to make an informed vote.  Give the responsibility to the voter...which is where it should be in the first place.

Chalk up a win for our Constitution.  I wish I could high-five our founding fathers.

Source: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/01/21/citizens-united-v-fec-a-landmark-decision-in-favor-of-free-speech/