Tuesday, November 2, 2010

politics of race

i am weary of hearing obama say things like this:

"the latino vote is crucial, and obviously when you look at stuff that's been going on during this election campaign that has tried to fan anti-immigrant sentiment, i know that a lot of latinos feel under assault." (i left out all of his "uuhhhs" and "ya knows.")

this statement actually outrages me -- forget weariness -- on so many levels. first and foremost, how dare liberals accuse conservatives of racial politics when that is their modus operandi on a regular basis. it is infuriating to be constantly labeled a racist by the liberal media and liberal politicians when they are the ones who so often exacerbate this problem. i am not saying there are no conservative racists -- of course there are. and there are as many liberal ones. why is it ok for obama to play racial politics?

secondly, i may be completely wrong, and correct me if i am, but i personally have not heard one iota of anti-immigrant sentiment. i have heard a great deal of anti-illegal sentiment, and there's a huge difference between those two concepts. for obama to say something like that is morally wrong, in my opinion -- it is another attempt to manipulate minorities into "finding refuge" with the democrat party and to paint conservatives as racists. it's heinous.

and finally, and perhaps most importantly, what i can't stand about his statement is this -- every single vote of every single american citizen is crucial. the latino vote is no more important than the black vote or the white vote or the asian vote or whatever else, and i think it's repugnant for obama to be drawing distinctions among the level of importance of the votes of different races of people in the United States. it is truly reprehensible.

p.s. not long ago, again speaking to a latino audience, BO said that they should reward their friends and punish their enemies. enemies of course referring to those of us who support crazy ideas like legal immigration and the pesky rule of law. how appropriate is that, for the president of the United States to refer to those people in his own country who disagree with his ideology as enemies? un-freaking-believable.

Thursday, April 1, 2010

the evils of the dole

a friend had the following quote as her status update on facebook last night:

"the test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. it is whether we provide enough to those who have little." -- franklin d. roosevelt (big surprise)

i've been thinking a lot about this. i can totally appreciate the sentiment behind it and the compassionate feelings it probably stirs in this friend and others who think that way. it is well-intended, i have no doubt.

the problem is that, while i believe the opinion expressed in the quote may be somewhat true, roosevelt, and those who quote him, believe that the "we" spoken of is the government. yeah, i believe that we -- meaning we, as people, should be charitable and provide for those who do not have what they need . . . but only when they cannot (because of age or infirmity) provide it for themselves. i do not believe, and never will believe, that we should be compelled to do so by the government.

our government, with all its entitlements and doles, has created over many decades -- especially since the wonderful mr. roosevelt was at the helm -- a society where countless people have learned to work the system instead of actually going to work. those who do work hard to support themselves are penalized on their behalf every single day.

this is not providing in the Lord's way. if you don't believe me, there's a little book you can read called, providing in the Lord's way. it teaches very clearly that self-reliance is key and handouts are demeaning, even evil in many ways. again, for my liberal friends, let me repeat myself lest i be attacked as uncaring and mean (which i will be anyway) -- i firmly advocate assistance for those who truly need it. we all know people who, although they work as hard as they can, are unable to provide everything for their families or those who can't work for physical reasons. this is NOT what i'm referring to. the bulk of entitlements and government spending is wasted. i do not believe in redistrubution of wealth at all, under any of its various titles.

another flaw i see in the quote is roosevelt's mention of the role "we" play in adding to one's abundance . . . again, that's not the government's job to regulate. in our beautiful capitalistic system, a person is free to work hard and earn as much money as possible, and it's no one's business -- so long as everything he does is legal -- how rich he gets. we have become such a bunch of entitled whiners. where did we ever get the idea that we have a right to what belongs to someone else? oh yeah, from the government.

i get what my friend is asserting, i think. there are good, caring people all over this country who seem to feel this same way; like i said, i think it is well-intended, if misguided. let's be the kind of compassionate people who take care of the needy without the government forcing us to -- because, let's face it, when your money goes to the poor (and the not so poor) through the government's hands, they hold onto a great deal of it, and waste a great deal more.

you may have noticed it's been quite a while since my last post to this blog. that's because i had to take a break from the political scene. it was really stressing me out and even hurting my heart to watch what is going on. as i've said before, i am no longer making this a democrat versus republican thing. george w. bush made many mistakes, as did clinton and bush before him. and don't get me started on jimmy carter. the problem is we have allowed washington to become a place of corrupt people who are so far off course from the vision of the Framers that it would be unrecognizable to them. it happened little by little, and we have just let it happen. that being said, barack obama has upped the game exponentially, and i think people are finally starting to get fed up. i'm so tired of hearing libs say, "we sat quietly while george w. bush ruined the country. now it's our president's turn, and you have to be quiet." that kind of reasoning baffles me. so it's ok if obama ruins everything because, on principle, he's "your" president and you love him? i don't even know how to respond to that when i hear it. it's so beyond ridiculous.

i'm firmly behind the movement to unelect every politician in washington and start all over. i'm in favor of setting term limits for congress and in doing away with all the perks they have set up for themselves. if they are not accountable for their actions, which they are not, why wouldn't they become corrupted?

what do you think about this quote from roosevelt? what are your feelings on how we should deal with this age-old question?

Saturday, September 19, 2009

simma down nah

there's so much lunacy going on in politics right now...so many things i could go off on. i just don't have the energy to do it. if i did, i would comment on how nice it would be if obama were so busy WORKING that he didn't have so much time to make appearances -- after this weekend he'll have made 124 since taking office. (and slow it down, folks -- bush had only made 40 at this same point.) i'd also share my disgust on how the patriotic and very civilized protesters gathering in washington last saturday have been all but ignored by the media elite. amazing that the president and other elected officials all left town (obama to, what else, make a personal appearance). believe me, i'm at my wits' end with everything that's going on. from all the corruption in acorn, that wonderful group from which obama sprouted and which helped him get elected, to the absolute whacko czars our president has surrounded himself with. (you know, people who believe in sterilization, forced abortion, and legal representation for animals.)

there's so much out there i just can't even wrap my head around it. i mean, it literally hurts my brain to think about it. moreover, it hurts my heart to see our country in such turmoil. i don't like to argue -- contrary to what many of you may believe. i would never want to hurt anyone's feelings. but i have gotten into some heated exchanges with people i care about. i've had to take a step back and relax a little bit. i am not saying i intend to quietly watch this great country head down the wrong road -- which i firmly believe it is -- but i do need to keep my perspective where it should be.

a wonderful friend emailed me a quote not long ago, and it has really hit the spot for me. it comes from President Harold B. Lee, 11th President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (I don't have a date on the quote, but he was the Prophet in 1972 and 1973.)

"Men may fail in this country, earthquakes may come, seas may heave beyond their bounds, there may be great drought, disaster, and hardship, but this nation, founded on principles laid down by men whom God raised up, will never fail. This is the cradle of humanity, where life on this earth began in the Garden of Eden. This is the place of the new Jerusalem. This is the place that the Lord said is favored above all other nations in all the world. This is the place where the Savior will come to His temple. This is the favored land in all the world. Yes, I repeat, men may fail, but this nation won't fail. I have faith in America; you and I must have faith in America, if we understand the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ. We are living in a day when we must pay heed to these challenges.

I plead with you not to preach pessimism. Preach that this is the greatest country in all the world. This is the favored land. This is the land of our forefathers. It is the nation that will stand despite whatever trials or crises it may yet have to pass through."

it reassures me to know that our leaders have told us again and again that this great country will not fail. i take this to mean as well that even though our current leaders are doing their best to undermine those principles our country was founded on, they won't succeed. my new focus is to avoid the pessimism i have often allowed to plague me. i too have faith in this country. everything will be alright.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

government destruction of healthcare

i am out of my mind with this healthcare crap that's going on. of course healthcare costs are exorbitant, and of course something needs to be done, but what on earth makes people think the government should step in and socialize medicine? honestly, what does the government do that is efficiently run, that saves money, and that really improves life? need we look any further than the dmv or the irs to see their handiwork?

the idea that obama's plan is likely to pass has me crazy. we are going to be living in a country where healthcare is sub-par at best, where taxes are crazy high, and where chaos is going to prevail. i firmly believe americans are going to suffer and die if this plan becomes law.

i keep hearing all these people who i know have good hearts and want everything to be fair and everyone to have what they need talk about how important this is. sure, i want all people who work for it to have access to quality care. did you catch that -- people who work for it. unless a person is handicapped, he or she should be paying taxes, working, and contributing to their own care. children should have the care they need, obviously.

go ahead and call me heartless, but i am absolutely against the president's plan because it amounts to this -- hardworking americans who obey the rules, who support themselves, and who pay taxes are going to end up footing the bill for this enormous government hemorrhage of money that is going to create a failed system in the near future. and we will be paying for illegal immigrants, who refuse to obey the rules and who don't pay taxes, to get medical care. no, sorry, it's not a right. argue away, liberals, but healthcare is not a right.

i am totally in favor of people immigrating to this country, as long as they do it according to the law and then work and pay taxes like everyone else. period.

and what really, really sticks in my craw is that obama and the democrats are foaming at the mouth to pass this plan because it means tax-payer funded abortions. is anyone even thinking about that? i haven't heard it mentioned much on the news, but that is what is at the root of this whole thing -- forcing all of us to pay for abortions (or 'reproductive rights' as the libs want to call it.) bull crap.

one step closer to socialism. i want to hear from anyone reading this who disagrees with me -- and i know you're out there. i want to hear from anyone who voted for obama and still backs his drive to march our country away from liberty and capitalism. i honestly want to understand what goes on in your minds as you are watching this unfold.

Thursday, July 9, 2009


supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg said the following about abortion in an interview with the new york times:

"frankly i had thought that at the time roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."

it's really nice when the liberals say something so ridiculous that it doesn't even require comment. just wow.

Monday, June 29, 2009

a little bit of this, and a little bit of that

yes, my mind is a whir with all the crap going on -- i have to make myself avoid the news like the plague if i want to have a good day. but then there's this nagging sense of feeling the need to stay informed that always brings me back.

i started off this morning hearing about madoff's sentencing (one crook in jail, but what about all the rest?), billy mays' unfortunate accident, and the stupid cap and trade garbage. (at least those new haven firefighters won their case -- one bright spot indeed.)

how about a few political cartoons to lighten our mood, shall we?

(unfortunately this is too sad to be funny)

"i pledge that under my plan, no one making less than $250,000 a year will see any type of tax increase. not income tax, not capital gains tax, not any kind of tax." that was obama last year, during his campaign. now the administration is saying they won't rule out any possibilities, including taxing the middle class, as a way to pay for their new socialist health care plan.

(and please, before anyone comes back at me (here or in the future) with the old standby, liberal rebuttal of, "but george bush did this or this or this," save it. i'm not talking about george bush. i'm talking about our current president. let's stay focused, guys.)

and this cap and trade thing? help us, please. "the whole point of cap and trade is to hike up the price of electricity and gas so that americans will use less. these higher prices will show up not just in electricity bills and at the gas station but in every manufactured good, from food to cars. consumers will cut back on spending, which in turn will cut back on production, which results in fewer jobs created or higher unemployment . . . likely to be the biggest tax in american history." (from the wall street journal; thanks, jen, for turning me on to it.)

maybe it's just me, but i would rather not have the government trying to regulate what i can and can't buy or how many miles i can drive my car or whether i can run my air conditioning.

maybe you've seen this letter before, from a woman in arizona to our nation's leadership. if not, read it -- it's awesome! she is right on, and she says it better than i could.

ok, i feel better now. sometimes you just have to get it out, you know? sheesh.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

butt out, lady

i should probably wait until i have calmed down about this instead of shooting off right now, but i can't help it. i'm loving this blog as a place to vent, even if i end up sometimes saying things i might not say after some careful thought.

we just got home from the park -- took the kids so they could play, and i met a couple of friends for some much-needed chatting time. well, not once, not twice, but three times i witnessed some other uptight mothers actually having the nerve to correct or scold my children. it's happened before, so i didn't have to waste time doubting what my eyes were seeing. this is something that really, really bugs me.

my children are not perfect. they do all the things normal kids do at the park . . . i've seen it happen again and again. you know, those huge offenses like sitting for too long in one spot and thus preventing another kid from passing. or even being slightly bratty and telling some kid to wait his turn or whatever. yeah, they do things they probably shouldn't do, but this is life on the playground, right?

well, three times different women went up to lindsey to scold her about something stupid like that. maybe some of you other mothers can help me understand why it is that these women are, 1) having a stroke about nothing, and 2) feeling like they have the right to correct my kid. i would never dream of doing that. if i noticed a child doing something that really needed to be reported, i would say, "hey kid. where's your mom?" and i would ask the parent to handle the problem, showing respect for that person and the child. i don't feel like i have the right to discipline anyone else's kids, and i really don't like anyone else doing that to mine. it sort of makes me crazy mad.

here i sit, not 20 feet from where my kids are playing, and i have to quietly watch these uptight women scolding my kids. MY kids. i think i'm pretty good about staying on my kids to make sure they don't break rules or hurt or even inconvenience other children, so it's not like they are running wild, acting like fools while i turn a blind eye. if i happen to miss something that is going on, it makes me feel pretty terrible, so i try to pay close attention. but now that i have four kids, and joseph thinks he's grown and able to come and go as he pleases, it's a lot more difficult to keep constant watch on all of them. so i occasionally miss something. but i think it's incredibly disrespectful for an adult to discipline someone else's child without trying to talk to the parent and let her handle it.

my friends kept telling me i should go over and just tell the lady, "i got it, thanks." but i know myself well enough to know i couldn't do that without coming across as angry, and the last thing i would want is some kind of confrontation. so i just had to ignore it and then call lindsey over to talk to her about it. i told the kids on the way home that they need to be more considerate of others at the playground, but that if there is ever a time when a grownup starts lecturing them about something, they are to immediately come right over to me. then i'll handle it.

this is an ongoing sore spot for me, which is why i'm so sensitive about it. i've had some trouble with the father of a boy my son plays with. i've overheard him absolutely reaming my son about touching his kid's toy without asking, instead of coming to find me and asking me to talk to the boy about it. (of course, this playmate was constantly -- and i mean constantly -- playing with toys that belong to us without asking, but parents rarely seem to consider the possibility that their own little angels might be at fault.) it got to the point, after a couple of incidents like that, where i was fighting mad and ready to go several rounds with this dad. but i didn't; somehow i restrained myself. i'm passionate about my children, and i know any encounter would get heated fast. i am pretty uncomfortable now about letting my son play with this kid if i know his dad will be around.

i'm not sure if this is a utah phenomenon or if it's pretty standard, but it really bugs me. in fact, i don't think i'll take my kids to the park again anytime soon. i guess it's better to avoid the situation altogether than to risk saying something i know i shouldn't say.

the overarching problem i have with this is the disrespect, but i also think it's ridiculous that parents expect that the playground is like their own personal backyard where their kid is king and gets to set the rules. and how about we let our kids interact with each other and learn to handle the situations that naturally arise. no, don't let anyone get hurt, but isn't it something they need to learn? heaven knows some of these adults could use some playground-style justice in their lives.

but that's just me.