Who Won the Second Debate

As much as this blogger wants to give the second debate win to Romney, it's hard to say. Romney was doing an excellent job, but kept rambling and going on and on about certain subjects when he really should have made his statement and moved on. Even so, Obama was not doing much better. He seemed like a little kid who wanted to just be like, "told you so, see," especially after liberal moderator Crowley made her statement on Libya (which was so wrong and anyone who knew anything about the whole ordeal and how long it took for President Obama to say it was a terrorist attack knew she was wrong). However, did this hurt Romney, no and here's why.

Everyone knows these town hall debates are staged and the questions are known by much of the news crew before hand. Which makes it no more real than if Obama had his teleprompter in front of him. Having said that, the first question was about jobs. Romney's answer was good, but he needed to improve on explaining more specifics about his plan on job creation (of course, it's technically not the governments job to create jobs, its their job to make sure business's are able to come in and create jobs which is what Romney was essentially saying). Obama talked about manufacturing plants, and the first thought going through my head was, we go to college to get jobs outside of manufacturing plants (unless you're an engineer, in business management or human resources). If college students wanted manufacturing jobs, they would not be in college.

Throughout the debate, Obama continued to bring up points he mentioned in 2008. Points on how he will turn the economy around, and what about that girl's question on women's rights in the work place? Women are out of work thanks to the job fall out and in ability to afford childcare during Obama's Presidency, and Romney's "binder" statement has been taken way out of context. Also, what was that statement about the gas prices about. The gas prices were low because the country was going into a recession? What a stupid statement, but the worst was definitely when Crowley butted in about Libya. Although, even her help can't hide the fact that Obama was lying and continuously trying to campaign like he had a clean record.

Overall, after rereading many reports, watching excerpts from the debate and thinking about how each candidate answered, Romney may have won. Even so, does it really matter? The big debate on foreign policy is Monday and this is the debate to watch but for the most part, doesn't everyone know where these candidates stand?

Jobless Rate Falls

The big news is, the jobless numbers dropping below 8%. The real news, jobless numbers for graduating college students, unchanged. More than 45 million are still on food stamps. Annual wage increase has dropped. It is being reported that layoffs be delayed until after the elections (especially those involving the military and Department of Defense contractors). IT has also been noted that the numbers are contradictory, and many wonder how it is that only 114,000 jobs were added when the Government is saying over 800,000 found work. Of course, it is also important to remember those who have given up the job search or who are considered by the census not to be actively seeking employment, and that contractors do not count (however, it seems seasonal jobs count alot because this seems to happen around this time of year). Another reason being reported for the fall is due to the number of people who "left the workforce," and that many jobs were part-time (showing the desperate need for jobs).

On a personal note, many of my college friends are asking, where are these jobs? There are several people I know with Master degrees and a great job history that have not even had a job for a year or more. Some have had temp or part time jobs that pay way below what they were making before their job hunt began. Others, with Masters degrees, have decided to go back to college for another Bachelors degree in a field that seems to be popular when looking for jobs. On top of that, it can be noted that there are areas of the country where it is evident that jobs are scarce, and many who are considered over qualified are overlooked or not even considered. If the market is really growing, where is it growing? Also, where are the wage increases. There are people who have been working for the same amount of money for almost 2 years now, as they watch the price of food and gas sky rocket.

The real jobless number is well over 10% and there is still a huge discrepancy in the numbers. Could this be a campaign thing? Of course. It's funny how the numbers just seem to work out the month before the election, and after a debate in which the President totally didn't show up for.

Reference:

Seidl, J. October surprise: Unemployment drops to 7.8%-but skeptics abound. The Blaze, October 5, 2012.

Schools Teach Anti-American Views

A story on The Blaze, describes why American students hate capitalism and the American form of government. Anyone who has been through the public schools or to college in the past 25-30 years knows how liberal the system is. For any student going through this line of liberal progressive learning, it is no wonder by the time they are about to graduate college, their views and knowledge of America are skewed.

The biggest disappointment in what students are learning about capitalism and history is, it is being presented to them as fact. Many teachers or professors allow students to truly research and argue an opposing view. If the student does argue an opposing view, most educators will grade them down or tell them they are wrong. To say this does not happen is wrong, and it happens more often than one may think.

Students are constantly hearing how bad America is, and what America has done wrong. Meanwhile, they learn how wonderful Marx, communism, and socialism are, but how bad America's Founding Father's and capitalism is. They also learn lies about the U.S. Constitution, such as "separation of church and state" is in there, and honestly, there are not many teachers who truly teach what's in the constitution and the documents and people that inspired it. On top of all this, students are taught that America is a white man's world (which is absolutely ridiculous seeing as how the country now has a black President and numerous leaders who are considered minorities, and there were black senators and congressmen in the 19th century that are never taught of).

American educators and the education system is doing an injustice to students and themselves. The truth is only half taught and bias. Students are not learning about the documents, people, and why America is still considered a country in which many want to live. Which is great for the education system which says they want students to develop their own views, but in reality the school system makes students and teachers focus on what they want taught by way of mandatory tests.

Over the years, it has become painfully obvious that the education system is more in line with liberal government than with teaching truth. The sad thing is, students are being done an injustice. They leave high school and college with such misconstrued views of America, that they believe the only way for America to be fixed is by creating a system that is somewhere between socialism and communism. The worse part is, many students just accept what is taught as fact, much like adults who accept the news or what is told as fact without actually looking into it.

Chicago Teacher Strike

Performance reviews and longer days, oh my! Not performance reviews and 7 or 7 1/2 hour school day, run for your lives, take to the street. Worse yet, performance reviews? We went into this job for tenure, not performance reviews, and seeing as how we are so distraught over these two things and would rather take a two week break to strike than do a job proves it is not the students who are coming first.

Teachers in Chicago happen to be up in arms over the fact that their work day is to be lengthened and they might have performance reviews which may cause job loses. Granted, being a teacher is not easy and anyone who says it is has never had to develop unit plans, teach to a test, deal with parents and students, and much more. Even so, teachers go into this profession knowing it is not easy and it takes work, compassion, and is a career that is suppose to be focused on learning and on the students. However, like all careers, it is not always what it is cracked up to be.

Teachers have to keep in mind, they are going into a thankless career at times. Parents do expect their kids to be taught everything at school, because they are to busy or in some cases lazy (it's true) to teach the kids themselves. Teachers get frustrated because learning does not stop once the child leaves the class and if communities are not supportive than students will not be committed, which creates more tension and stress for the teacher who can only do so much. However, that does not mean teacher's should give up on the students and it does not mean that Unions (who are control hounds) should encourage these strikes (mainly because if there are school closings they loose due money to give to their political parties). Also, as unfortunate as it may be for some teachers, it might better serve the community to close some schools and get rid of incompetent staff.

Unfortunately, school is more of a business than a service in many ways, and that is what Unions continuously encourage it to be. Of course, one area that is understandable in this strike is, health insurance compensation. In this economy, health insurance is crucial and that is probably one of the only areas that it is understandable to strike against.

Governor Romney Does Not Apologize For Comments

Four months ago, Romney made a comment about the 47% who were still planning to vote for Obama. He said those 47% "were dependent on Government." Of course, the liberal media (and media in general) has jumped on this opportunity to make Romney seem like he does not care about Americans. When in all honesty, Romney wants to turn the country around to make it a place where people do not need to rely on Government funds and will be more secure in themselves.

In a way, Romney is right. There are people who will vote for Obama because they do not want to give up what they are getting, and they do not want to stop getting what is being given. On top of that, many of these people believe "spreading the wealth" will benefit them greatly, but even William Bradford wrote that this leads to greater poverty (morally and monetarily). If this group of voters vote for Romney, they know these things will end or become harder to receive. Therefore, Romney is correct in the fact that there is a group like this that will not vote for him.

On the other hand, it is probably not fair to say all 47% are dependent on Government. There is sure to be a percentage that can do well without Government help, but then again, if some of those are paying into social security or other Government programs, maybe they could be considered dependent (as many could in that case).

Overall, the media is going to continue to make this a bigger deal than it is, much like trying to make a big deal that some You Tube video starting the protests in Libya and Egypt (which is beyond ridiculous and such a load of ....). This was a golden opportunity for the Obama loving media to try to paint Romney as uncaring, when in all rights he does care and at least he is true to who he is.

Attacks and Protest "Arab Spring" In Libya and Egypt

While Americans remembered the fallen and those who survived the September 11, 2001 attacks, Islamic radicals in the Middle East were preparing an attack against the west on home soil. An American Ambassador and three other Americans were brutally killed by the so called peaceful Muslim Brotherhood in Libya. Meanwhile, attacks on the embassy in Egypt were rapid and the American flag was torn down, and put one up that read, "No God but God and his prophet Mohammad," and spray painted "U.S. of Muslim." As the attacks occurred and heightened, people in the street were chanting, "I am a terrorist."

While all this occurred and surfaced, the media responded by saying it was over a YouTube video poking fun at Muslims. Did it ever occur to them that it may be more that? Did the media think the fact that it was 9/11 had anything to do with it? To top it all, the response from the White House was about as shallow as could be when it came to what happened, and said the Embassy did not condone what happened "to hurt the religious freedoms of Muslims." First off, nothing about this attack was about hurting a Muslims religious freedom, and the glorification of the Islam YouTube video by the media, that no one really knew of to start with until this happened, along with the fact that these countries have not moved into the 21st century gracefully and have a vast amount of people that are illiterate and hold to tradition rather than fact, have been ignored along with may other facts) in an attempt by the media to promote the thought that some stupid video caused this.

While talking about stupid video's, I just want to mention how these radical Islamists almost seem to get a slap on the hand by our administration for what they have done. Meanwhile, there is another video out there of an American hostage who has been ignored by the administration and nothing has been mentioned about his religious or citizen rights. Yet, the administration's comment on the the attacks were swift and apologetic to Islam ad really did nothing to condemn what happened. In fact, one of the best statements was actually given by the Conservative Islamists who did condemn the attacks, asks for the U.S. Government to stop being so apologetic, and is asking for Muslims in the Middle East to be more educated on America and their own freedoms.

To say this attack was solely based on a YouTube video is wrong. Any American with a brain can connect the dots and realize it was not coincident that this happened on 9/11. Just to note, Obama and the Administration were warned of a possible attack but Obama was too busy to deal with public affairs and decided to keep his appointments with the media, but not make time for things that really matter.

Sometimes I think every American wonders when the next attack on American soil will be, and many wonder if it will happen on 9/11. This attack was not on home soil, but it did take place on American citizens for no other reason than the fact they were Americans, and to get the Muslim populatin to join forces against the West. While America's Government tries to make these people seem "peaceful," citizens need to realize they are anything but and that they are religious radicals who want anyone to die that does not agree with them. There hearts are hard and due to lack of wanting to understand other religious or even being taught other ways of thinking, they choose to kill or destroy what they do not understand or want to hear.

Democratic National Convention: "God and Values"

Was anyone else confused with the fact that the Democrats had to vote God and Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel back in to their platform? First of all, who votes God in or out of something? Second of all, I thought it is just a fact that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel? Of course, that wasn't the weirdest thing about the convention. One of the strangest things was how the party tried to emphasis values, American values.

Out of no where, after speeches promoting abortions, the Democrats started ranting about "God and Country," and how their faith has kept them going. When did this happen? Where did all this God talk come from for the Democrats? Perhaps they realized they might actually need God's help?

Even so, the party does have values, just not the conservative American values they tried to play out at the convention. They claim to be, the "party of inclusion," and one that wants to coexist with everyone, but when the truth comes out (such as on the Jon Stewart show), it is obvious there is still a divide as to who is welcome in the party and who is not and what kind of values they really have.

It was just strange to see that a party is so nuts and desperate, that they tried to make it seem like they have Godly values. After all the abortion speeches by the celebrities, makes since.

Atheist Billboards Attack GOP Faith

Atheist Billboards have been placed around Charlotte in time for the Democratic National Convention. The billboards are being used to criticize and mock the Christian faith, as well as encourage people not to vote for Mitt Romney, who is a Mormon. The boards are extremely critical of God, with sentences such as, "Sadistic God, Useless Savior," and "Baptizes Dead People." If this isn't a flat out public attack on Jesus and the God of the Bible and hateful speech towards Christians and one's belief, then what is?


Instead of keeping the convention about politics, it has now become a fight against religion and personal conviction. This billbard is really meant to criticize Mormons, but it has been funded and put up by groups who obviously want to abolish all religion and believes, except their own (and yes, atheism can be considered a type of religion, even by an atheists definition of religion, althouh they would argue different). What's more telling of how driven the city of Charlotte is to allow such critic on a candidates personal beliefs is, the atheist group tried to put these up in Tampa for the RNC but was denied.

Of course, anyone who does know Christ will understand, this is not an all out attack on the "nonexistance of God, but on religion."At no point do these billboards say there is no God, they just say that the God of Mormonism  is "an alien" and a few other things. So, they are not denying God's existence but showing, as they usually do, that they just want to get rid of specific religions and promote their own.

The "Dream University"

There is a new University that may be affordable, and offers students a chance to get a college education. Students could take online courses for as low as $2400 for up to 18 courses online! This is all happening at UCLA, and it is only for those that qualify under the "Dream Act" leaving those that do not truly dreaming.

Apparently, California is up to punishing those who are in the state's legally, by offering an opportunity to those who are illegal  ($65 per credit hour, which would be awesome) while charging over $6000 for these online courses for Americans and legal immigrants. It is almost as if being legal in this country is some sort of crime and that those of us who are legal should feel bad, as we dish out over $9000 (now, probably $10,000), work to no end to get a degree, and hope that their is a job in the degree field once graduated just to pay off the ridiculous loans. However, on the plus side, there are grants and scholarships to those who qualify and those things are definitely something to be taken advantage of in this age of rising college tuition and lost opportunities for those who cannot afford it.

It could be said that situations such as this continue to drive a wedge between legals and illegals in America. Legal citizens feel like their being taken advantage of while they play by the college rules, while some illegals feel like their receiving a service that is beneficial to them (because it is) because it gives them a chance to further their hopes to achieve the American Dream. Even so, remember, there are many illegal immigrants who come into the country and follow the rules and there may be some who feel like this is another spot on how Americans view illegal immigrants. However, it's hard to get wholly upset at them, when it is schools and government that are giving them this opportunity.

In the long run, citizens should be more upset at the fact that the government continues to allow this, and most understand why politicians allow it. People also get upset because the citizens are the ones paying the extra expense, and how can one blame somebody for taking advantage of this program to get ahead? If it's offered at a much lower cost, why would one not take advantage of it if it is considered okay by a University?

Overall, it's just another thing to make citizens feel like they are unappreciated and matter less. It is also unfair to those who have become legal residents, but then again, when has any government or school really been into fairness? It sounds good when spoken, but the truth is, nothing is truly fair.

Fashion: Michelle's $6800 Top Gets Cheers, Ann Romneys $990 Top Gets Jeers

The liberal media was basically drooling on themselves when describing how wonderful Mrs. Obama looked in her $6800 jacket. They said she out shined the queen and Kate Middleton, and that her "toned arms" looked fabulous as always. The praise was never ending, and neither was the hypocrisy.

In May, the liberal media willing to condemn Ann Romney for her $990 blouse. The media just couldn't help but point out how out of touch the Romney's were, so much so that she could afford a $990 blouse to wear on National television. However, how can the media describe the Obama's as being in touch with the American people? After all, they spend money (or someones money) on lavish vacations for themselves and their children, have $40,000 a plate fundraisers, buy ridiculously expensive clothes that makes one wonder how they can even afford, and much more.

Of course, one also wonders how much some of the liberal media pays for their clothes and could ask why it's okay for them to shop at stores like Neiman Marcus (where a plain white shirt can run over $100, easily) and other fashion retailers and figures, and yet, target a specific group to criticize if they do the same thing. It's all hypocrisy.

Olympic Gymnastics

Saturday was a hit for the men's U.S. gymnastic team. They had their problems, but overall, they did well. However, yesterdays performance left the team wondering, what happened? The men started out great, as the first competitor on the floor seemed to set the tone that the U.S. was going to be a strong contender. However, that changed as the second and third competitiors took the floor, then the palma horse, and so on. Even the team seemed genuinely shocked at their performance. Even so, the U.S. team may not have been as shocked as the Ukraine.

The Ukraine had beaten Japan, thought they were going to be standing on the podium with a bronze medal. However, that medal was not meant to be. Apparently, a judging error was brought to light, and it was revealed that Japan would win bronze, by .7.

So, the men have had their share of drama, what about the women on Sunday evening? The favored world champion, Jodyn Wieber did not score enough to go into the all-around. Even though, overall, she was in fifth place! Wieber was shocked, in tears, and at the same time happy for her teammates, but her dream of competing in the all around was broken.

Of course, it was mainly broken due to the new rules the Olympic committee has decided to put forth. I like to call it, the "fairness rule" or let's give everyone a trophy, so no one feels left out rule. In the past, the top scoring 24 gymnast have competed in the all around, but this year, the top two from each country are competing in the all around.

To many, this just does not seem right. It is also a look in to how trying to be fair to everyone, ends up being unfair to others who deserve to receive recognition. It's understandable that the Olympics wants to showcase all countries, but is it really fair that a gymnast who is in the top 24 (5th overall) is out of the all around because of the committee's desire to be fair to all countries? As awful as it is that she will not be competing in the all around, she is still a team member and everyone is hoping for a medal in women's gymnastics. As one story put it, she will "come out fighting," and she will not let her team or chances of winning a medal go.

United SteelWorkers Union Seek Out "Secret" Romney Campaign Dinner

The United Steel Workers Union is apparently upset over the fact that Mitt Romney is having a high dollar dinner in London, as a way to raise campaign funds. The dinner is $25,000 to $75,000 a head. The Union has decided to offer a reward to anyone who can find the location of this secretive dinner.

Apparently, it's okay for Obama to have lavish campaign dinners throughout the country, especially in Hollywood. His dinners are always $35,000 or $40,000 and up a head. However, when a Republican has a similar dinner, it is an outrage! Of course, when the unions (of all sorts) are using their member's money to pay for Obama's and many other Democrats campaigns, they want their member's money to go to good use and to see those people win. Otherwise, that was money wasted for them (hear the sarcasm).

Overall, this is a double standard. It is okay to so many liberals and unions that Obama out spends and goes over budget and has his campaign dinners. However, it is just wrong for Romney to do this, and it is wrong if Romney gets more money than Obama. The only reason the Unions want Obama, is because they know Obama will play into their hands, whereas Romney will not.

Obama's Business Statement and His True Campaign

The attack ads just keep getting worse from the President who, in 2008, said he wanted to run a clean campaign. Even though, his campaign then was not so clean (seeing as how many who should not have voted did so and then the famous ACORN organization mysteriously vanished after helping get votes for him). However, 2012 has proven to be a different story. Since Obama cannot run on his terrible record as President, he has decided to go with the punches and be the true politician he is, while giving elegant speeches full of hope and promise that will never happen.

In Obama's world, everything is a handout when it comes to benefits and it seems like those with money never run out of it and can keep giving to those who want it. He also thinks people of America are happy with government welfare programs being extended and doing little to encourage working, finding a career, or a job that will help build their skills (not minimum wage employment, good employment for people who are truly qualified) and get moving on making or continuing a career. Whereas Romney at least believes these people who are on Food Stamps (SNAP) or unemployment and other programs want to find good, decent paying jobs. He believes that people genuinely want to work to earn their own living and have their own opportunities instead of just collecting a check and then complaining if it's not extended because they really aren't looking for employment but they still deserve the handout.

The difference is definitely the mindset that each of these men have, Obama believes in spreading the wealth and that handouts and government control works just fine, and Romeny understands people want to be given opportunities and handouts are not opportunity and government control is not the answer. A major difference may be that Romney actually believes the in the American people and Obama has done little in his first term as President to prove he really does.

It was made obvious what Obama's view really is in his statement talking of Bain capital, "If you've got a business-you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." Something that wasn't emphasized as he kept talking about not getting to where one is on one's own (which is true to an extent) was his main point of the topic, "Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. " So, with that statement of all the things listed that governments helped create but Americans (many during the Depression who were in desparate need of jobs) helped build those and without them, they wouldn't be.

Before completely buying into what Obama says, think about his intent and his bad record (even as a Senator). Also, why is Obama asking for more documents from Romney, why was it like pulling teeth to get his birth certificate and why doesn't he release lists of his donors and documents from colleges, schools, and other things. Not only is this election proof that Obama is not a "clean" politician, it's also proof that he has got nothing to run on except to make someone else look worse than him.

The United Nation and Gun Control

So, while Syria and Saudi Arabia and other UN countries are violating multiple human rights and constantly encouraging violence, the United Nations has decided that it should pair with Iran and create gun control against America. Mainly, against American gun owners. Apparently, the UN and Iran want records of gun owners to be given to foreign countries. Is this not a violation of human rights and especially America's 2nd Amendment right? Of course, considering all the laws that have been passed which go against the Constitution, why not let this happen? It's only the lives of Americans that may be endangered and controlled by foreign countries, but especially the UN.

It should not be a surprise that something like this would come from the UN because the UN really has not done a good job in encouraging human rights in middle eastern countries what so ever. Of course, it shouldn't be surprising that Iran would encourage such a thing, but for the UN to go along with it is a bit strange. As the head of the NRA put it, Americans do not want to be in a "nanny state." Especially in such a state involving the UN or other countries, and it does restrict our rights that are written and spelled out in the U.S. Constitution.

There is a lot of concern about what this could do and the dangers it could cause for the U.S. Hopefully, it will not happen and the current administration will fight it.

Unions Spend Billions and More on Campaigns

Surprise, surprise (not really). A new report (from the Wall Street Journal) shows that unions are spending more on elections and lobbying than once thought, on Democratic candidates. Why this is a news story is more shocking than the fact its self. It has been apparent for years that unions are always throwing money at a candidate or a political position, and trying to control the vote of their members by doing so. Mainly because of promises that they may benefit from, or just the fact they are for one party over the other because of the benefits.

The money spent is not just at the national level, but also state and local. The biggest story out of this is probably the pull unions have with swaying the vote, and the fact that it is so hypocritical for the left to yell about Republicans campaign funds when the Democrats have been receiving much more from other businesses, unions, private donors, and so on for years.

Unions have a huge hold on their members. Of course, a member could pretend that they would vote for one candidate just to make the union happy but vote for the other. The unions may not really control their members so much as influence them.

As for the hypocrisy of the money, it is not a shocker. Everyone, or at least everyone with common sense, knows that the money flows in from all sorts of places for candidates. For a while Democrats have said that private donors should be made public, but when Obama's campaign did that a few weeks ago, it ended up hurting some of Romney's donors and causing them to be placed so much in the public eye that they received a lot of backlash for the candidate of their choice. If the Romney campaign had done that to Obama's donors, it would have been a National crisis. Of course, everyone knows who gives to Obama, Hollywood and unions (to mention two), two very influential sources. The hypocrisy comes in the fact that Democrats constantly get up in arms over big spending on campaign, when they are the biggest spenders and control addicts.

So, as it's always been known, Dems can get billions and get away with it but if the Republicans get millions, then it's just too much being spent on the election. As for those unions supporting candidates that their members may not necessarily support, go ahead and thank them for continuing to chip in to your agenda.

Abortion is Not So Bad

A news story popped up on The Blaze about a new internet site showing that abortion is not as bad as it is made out to be. It was created by a woman who had an abortion at six weeks and wants to show the world that it is not bad, and try to show a more realistic view of abortion besides the ones depicted by religious groups and conservatives. Of course, it seems kind of hard to do that when one of the pictures on the site is that of a thing of blood from an unborn child that was selfishly aborted and now being exploited.

The woman, using the name "Jane," claims that, this is not about her (obviously not about her aborted child either). Jane says, "the power is in the collective." In other words, it is those who will cooperate and come together to share this new discovered view of what abortion really is, and rally together to support it and fight against the Pro-lifers (cause they are so bad for wanting to save the life of a baby).

Of course, one of the reasons she created this came out during an interview. She admits to making the site because it is an elcetion year and women's rights should be a focus. "Women's rights are human rights." Really Jane? What about the human being you aborted, does he or she not have any human rights just because you think your rights are more important then theirs? What would this Jane consider her aborted baby to be when she talks about her human rights but not that of the childs?

Of course, the blaze makes an excellent point as to "how much faith" it takes to believe this woman and her site. However, the fact that it encourages killing human beings while advocating for a woman's human rights, is very contradictive and wrong.

Job Numbers Down, Disability Numbers Up

While sitting in economic class last Thursday, the professor made an astonishing announcement about the job numbers. He said, the job numbers were looking really good. Of course, the first thought was, what job report is this guy looking at? Then, as always, a look at the actual job numbers were not so optimistic.

As of June, only 80,000 jobs were added, that is not much of an improvement in jobs. Nor is it really an improvement when there are people who have been unemployed for so long that they are not even counted or they just don't claim unemployment. Of course, jobs may be down, but disability went up. Which is just another way of realizing how bad the job market has really gotten.

Of course, the reasons for no real major job growth is many, and now that Obamacare has passed, employers are waiting to see what happens and on top of that regulations have always been a problem. Once again, on top of that, the number of people looking for jobs is HUGE! It isn't just teenagers, new grads, and 30 somethings, it is everyone from 16 and up. The job market is so competitive because of the need for people to work, and for those in a somewhat decent or a great job, they will not be leaving any time soon.

Overall, one knows the numbers are bad when even Robert Gibbs says so. Hopefully, there will be some hope in the numbers and the gas prices will not go up too bad to boot.

"NOBAMA" For Brad Pitt's Mom

Apparently, Brad Pitt's mom is none too happy with the current President. She responded to a note in a local paper that criticized Romney. More particularly, it criticized his religious views, and the writer seems to believe that any vote for Romney is anti-Christian. Mrs. Pitt, does not share the same thought.

In her letter to the writer, she claims, "any Christian who does not vote or writes in a name is casting a vote for Romney’s opponent, Barack Hussein Obama — a man who sat in Jeremiah Wright’s church for years, did not hold a public ceremony to mark the National Day of Prayer, and is a liberal who supports the killing of unborn babies and same-sex marriage."

This is a surprise to many who follow Actor Brad Pitt and who know him and especially his wife, Angelina, to be rather liberal. However, his mom is absolutely right. It is so upsetting to listen to people make Romney out to be worse or just as bad as Obama. He is not. It is also important for all the Reagan fans who were not originally Romney supporters, to remember how much Reagan changed and how well he did. Romney is no Obama.

As it was pointed out by Mrs. Pitt, Romney has not sat through a preacher who is speaking against America and promoting hate. Romney is honest about his religion, where as Obama says one thing but does not seem to practice it. In fact, no one knows what he believes but to say he is Christian but okay with abortion and is willing to fund so many, is a little odd to some and not very Christian when it comes to the lives of innocent infants. As she stated, Obama did not even "hold a public ceremony to mark the National Day of Prayer." What so called Christian President does that? His morals and values seem to be few, and all one can do is pray that he changes.

Also, something that is not mentioned, Obama is obviously not a President who wants to uphold the Constitution, but change it. Not only change it, but change it to match what him and people like Pelosi and other liberal Dems want. At times it seems like they have little respect for the document, whereas other President's and his  opponent actually have values and morals that are more in line with upholding the law and not imposing their own upon the American people.

Overall, thank you Mrs. Pitt, it takes lots of courage and thank you for standing up for what you believe.

This is the Pro-Christian, Anti-Obama & Anti-Gay Marriage Letter That Actor Brad Pitt's Mom Wrote To A Local Paper, July 6, 2012. Viewed, July 6, 2012
Also,

Talk Show Host "Hates" America

It is no surprise when a liberal makes a statement against America, but this one seemed to stick out. It is really not shocking that far left liberals cannot stand America or the Constitution or anything to do with freedom as the Founders intended it. So, to hear these words come out of a liberals mouth (who is FREE to MOVE out of America if she hates it so much) is not surprising.

Apparently a liberal radio host was recounting her experience of having to pay a $2000 doctor bill, and said, she "hates this G..D.... country," and cannot stand living in a place that allows people to go bankrupt because of getting sick. The funny thing is, she only spent two hundred dollars because she has insurance.

First of all, if she hates it, move. Second of all, health care is expensive for many of us who have had to pay for the actual visits (especially dental health and that is an area that should be looked into). Third of all, why is she complaining about having insurance? Fourthly, she has insurance but is for Obamacare, the why to that is a mystery, maybe she thinks she'll get it for free, but she will really be fitting the bill for everyone else (including illegal aliens who are exempt from the tax in the bill) to have care, because she makes enough money to afford it. Finally, she is promoting Obamacare but has insurance that possibly helped her more than she even knows (do not get this wrong, insurance is a pain but Obamacare is going to be a much bigger pain). She even says it is "not a human right."

So, if she really hates the system here, please.....please....move. Also, if she doesn't think health care is a human right, then how does she agree with Obamacare, and she should realize her taxes through that bill will help her do what she and so many other well off liberals want to do, share the wealth. So, when she goes broke and really can't afford a doctor's visit, she can feel good about sharing the wealth.

Source:
Liberal Talk Show Host: I Hate This Goodd-n Country, July 4, 2012. Viewed July 5, 2012.

Healthcare Law Passes: Is Considered "Constitutional"
Orignially published on hubpages on June 28, 2012-decided to move it back here-also, please listen to the radio clip at the end, to hear more about what is really in the law and who it does and does not affect (it definitely effects the middle class and even lower middle class, and illegals are exempt-which isn't surprising).
Today is a victory for Obama and the democrats who have been pushing Obamacare. Today, the Supreme court ruled the Healthcare law as constitutional. However, the court says it violates the "Commerce Clause," but it was considered Constitutional by 1 vote.

The mandate law is also upheld. So, for those who can afford to buy healthcare (whatever the number made is considered able to afford) they must buy. For those who do not have it, they will be covered. For those who can afford it and more, they may be paying for those who cannot afford to pay for it. After all, healthcare is not cheap and it is naive to think that this bill is not some sort of tax increase or that it will lower cost of payments by any means.

It is also crazy to believe that the healthcare law will help Americans. There should be questions about what will happen under the law for certain conditions, and is it true people will not be turned away from certain types of care. Will individual rights, the way one live, be taken away because of this law? Most of all, why did it pass when it is obvious that it will increase taxes, and how will it truthfully affect the doctor one visits? This law is too questionable to pass, but it did, without one mention of taxes. Even though, the subject was discussed in Congress.
What is amazing is, under the Commerce Clause (Article 1, Section 8), this is unconstitutional. The legislative branch, the Federal Government, does not have the right-at least in this case-to "regulate commerce" when it comes to the individual mandate or telling people they have to have it.
Of course, this is also coming from the court that recently decided it is not illegal to lie to employers about military service and honors. However, the vote was 5-4, with Robert's as the final say. Just to note-the tax will be 1% of an individual's income for the first year and goes up after that. It may not sound like much, but when living on a budget and being told by the government that this is mandatory, which means more taxes for the federal government, as well as other taxes paid to whatever state one lives and county, it's getting to be too much.

http://www.rogerhedgecock.com/story/18919206/list-of-obamacares-new-taxes 
Please read and listen to this clip

Eric Allen Bell: A Change in View

Eric Allen Bell had been a liberal filmmaker working alongside Michael Moore for years. It wasn't until he was living in Murfreesboro, TN (a couple of hours from Asheville and located where most would call the boonies or middle of nowhere) that his views on Islam and the war in Afghanistan and Iraq began to change. In fact, it seems as if his whole view changed.

Apparently, Bell moved from California to Tennessee in order to take a rest from the documentary film business. While attending a meeting in 2010, about the newly proposed plans for a 53,000 square foot mosque, he heard Christians speaking out against the plans and heard phrases he had never heard growing up in southern CA. Being curious, he decided to follow the story and eventually, decided everything he thought he knew was wrong or at least not documented correctly.

At first, as he put it in his story, I "fanatical Evangelicals bullying a peaceful Muslim population, which had been in the community for over 30 years without there ever being any trouble." So, he decided to film the story and make a documentary about the event, in order to show the world how Muslims were being bullied by Evangelicals. He attended a parade that was protesting the mosque, filmed Christians praying and holding signs that read, "Stop Homegrown Terrorism," did interviews, placed liberals throughout the crowd to protest against the Christians, "court proceedings," and documented over "300 hours" of footage.

Of course, Bell was not the only one filming or reporting the event. News stations rushed to the scene in order to make the town look like back woods hillbillies who do not know anything about religion except that they are told. Which, when people are spelling "Muslim" wrong, that may be true, but they know enough to understand that many of these Islamic groups are wrong. Islamic blogs raced with reports, and Bell seemed to eat it up, even though he was suppose to be taking a break.

Then, the change over started. While filming and after collecting hundreds of hours of footage, Bell was approached by CNN producers of Soledad O'Brien, who wanted to use some footage of what he was titling "Not Welcome!" Bell got a tip that the news company wanted more than a few hours just for a news story, and when the documentary "Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door" aired, he realized he had been tricked and decided after all that had happened (all the threats, siding with the Islamic group, and then the news documentary) he was leaving a film crew behind and going to finish editing in California.

After going back to L.A., work on the project continued, he got picked up for a film deal, and begin blogging for Moore and the Daily Kos. It wasn't until he was back in Tennessee, in a cab in Nashville, talking to his driver from Egypt, that he realized, Islam is not the peaceful religion he thought it was.

Now, taking a break from this, as someone who has talked to many former Islams and some who still practice the religion, it has been apparent for years that this is not the religion the Islamic world or media paints it to be. In many cases, due to corrupt leaders and terrorists groups who run the countries and political actions more so than the leaders at times, former Muslims have admitted to leaving the practice because of the corruption in their country, how their lives and their families lives were in danger if they did not agree with certain groups, ways, or people, and realizing that it was not the religion they thought they knew (granted, this is not in all areas, and some did not feel as threatened depending on areas or depending on whether or not they were a convert outside of the middle east, as was the case with a woman from Denmark and a man from Michigan). Also, after studying the Koran in depth and the prophet Mohammad, it has always been apparent that this is not the religion that the media makes it to be.

As Bell began his journey to truth about what was really happening, he started paying much more attention to the news. He learned the stories of the Muslim Brotherhood, the fear of his cab driver being played out in front of him, the horrible treatment of women who had really done nothing wrong, and the capture of a man in an Islamic country for updating his facebook status as, "there is no god." It was at this time he took the words and the suggestion of a pastor from Murfreesboro seriously and even read the book, "Mohammad in America," and the Koran. He quickly altered his filming, finding that his crew and liberal friends were less than thrilled, changed his views, and when he placed his factual findings in front of everyone after deciding to tell the truth, he was told to take a break.

After writing a series of blogs about radical Islam, loonwatch, and the Islam religion on the Daily Kos, responses calling him names and telling him he was "right winged" pour in (it happens to most who tell the truth, way to go Bell!). He found himself one of the feature stories in Loowatch the next day, and it seems as if it was a threatening story as well. He also realized the truth that most people on his or his former side of the isle did not want to know or hear the truth. He tried writing article after article, receiving hateful comments and condemnation, until he was thrown off the Daily Kos. His article on "Human Rights" was the last straw and even facebook friends dropped him (typical).

Although, he is not really conservative, his views have definitely changed. His life has changed drastically because of his change of mind. Friends and co-workers dropped him just because of his view, even though they are constantly encouraging freedom of speech and the right to have whatever view one wants. He is simply trying to point out that Islam is not the "religion of peace" it is painted to be, and he is trying to raise awareness to how it hurts human rights and how news stations should focus more on some of these stories and on the rise of Islamic extremists in America. Even so, as he says, he still supports the building of the mosque but this view has changed as of late.

He now, firmly believes, the mosque is a continuation of Islam's "threat to human rights." All the same, it is great that he has realized the dangers of extreme Islam and is promoting awareness for it.


Read his story, it is a great insight to his journey "The High Price of Telling the Truth About Islam," Feb. 10th, 2012, viewed July 3, 2012.

The "Unfair Campaign"
Sorry I'm White...

The University of Minnesota in Duluth, decided to start an ad campaign to let people know about racism. In the process, they have decided to make it seem like one race in particular is bad and is the cause of all problems. The ad campaign features white people with writing all over their faces. Some which read, "Is white skin really fair skin?"

According to the campaign ads, white people are priveleged. Anyonw who goes through a teaching, sociology, political science, or liberal history course (to name a few) will learn that white people are apparently, as a whole, more priveleged than any other race. Which, is absolutely untrue. Perhaps, these white people featured in the video are previleged enough to feel guilty about their race, but as for many others, they work and struggle and may have many of the same problems and more as any other race. To say that this university is trying to speak out against racism by promoting a theory that all whites are "priveleged" or better than other races, is racist.

As for better pay, better jobs, and better everything, perhaps these people do live in a priveleged area because most of us, even with college degrees, do not get those better pay and better jobs right off the bat. In fact, most have to work their rears off from the bottom of the pack in order to even get the pay one feels comfortable with. As for being a white female, priveleged is hardly the term one would use in the work place. In fact, most work places (especially office settings) are unforgiving to females in general, especially those who have families, and make it obvious that everything is about business and family emergencies or kids do not matter. In fact, females of all races are treated unfairly in the workforce in many cases because of gender. Perhaps, if these people really wanted to start an "unfair campaign," they could focus on the gender gap and not being racist in order to campaign against racism.

The website even includes focus videos, blogs, and information on how different races are treated. One information piece is called, "The Game of Life." The first stop is the doctor, where the group tries to emphasize that whites are generally in good health when they go to the doctor. There is nothing about unfair treatment, just about health, which seems to indicate that other races are not as healthy due their race or that perhaps, and somehow the university has turned it into a racial issue (and apparently not many of them have lost health insurance or ever had to worry about paying 100s or 1000s of dollars because of lack of insurance-both medical and dental- and coverage, which many white people end up doing).

The game goes on to focus on jobs, school, the store (which is nuts, because even though Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders might make a few thousand more than other groups, their cost of living is much more than those living in many states), on the highways, streets, and so on. Another feature is that of, what "standard of beauty" is placed on African American girls. REALLY? Is this really just a one race problem? So, no other race has standards of beauty that are emphasized via the media, marketing, local influence, and other factors?

Granted, there is a history of racism, not just in America but throughout the world. In fact, it was Portugal who actually started the slave trade, and if one really wants to go back in time, it was the Egyptians who enslaved the jews (people from the same geographic area as themselves) during Biblical times. Racism has been a problem from the beginning of time, but what this group is doing is another form of racism and stereotyping that they seem to be unaware of.

If this group truly believes they are overly priveleged, here's a suggestion, go somewhere in the world where you will not be the dominate skin color. Move to another country and put your actions where your mouth is. Become part of a society where it is believed that whites are not a dominate race nor will they be given special priveleges.

Of course, race is an area that is important and it is important to realize that there are people out there who are racist, but it is not confined to one race. Also, racism does not mean being judgemental due to skin color-it also means being prejudice against a person because of their area of origin, not just skin color.

Maybe UM Duluth is having trouble understanding race because of their lack of diversity, which is why they are running this campaign. Just because they are not considered diverse enough does not make them a racist school, it could possibly mean others are just not interested in going to the school. The school should also realize that this campaign is racial and that they should not be making anyone feel guilty about their race.

Article on healthcare ruling
http://kayecandles.hubpages.com/hub/Obamacare-Passes-SCOTUS

Mom made to pay for cleaning bill of son hit by Illegal Drunk Driver in Greenville, S.C.

A mother in Greenville, who suffered a tragic lose due to an illegal immigrant who was driving drunk, has been billed for several things involving the accident, including, the clean up. According to news stories (Loretta Robinson, Grieving Mother, Billed For Clean Up After Son Killed By Undocumented Driver, The Huffington Post, June 15, 2012. Updated June 26, 2012. ). She spent a total of $15,000, including the cost of the funeral, and the cost of storing the wrecked car, towing the cars, and cleaning up the wreck (to name some).

Meanwhile, the illegal immigrant, Anna Gonzalez, did plead guilty, but has not had to pay for any of this. Not that she is not paying by being in prison, but this is absolutely adding insult to misery. Robinson's son was not found at fault for any reason, and yet, she has been paying everything for Greenville to clean up this wreck. Here's a thought, Greenville, why not make the person who was at fault pay for it and work it off if she does not have the money up front? Why does a mom, who suffered a loss such as this have to pay for a wreck that was no fault of her sons?

Even if Ms. Gonzalez is deported, she should work until she can pay every penny back to Loretta Robinson. There is no reason for the city to make a family member of the not at fault deceased to clean up a wreck that Gonzalez caused.

This accident has also brought up another question, license for illegals and deportation. It is no surprise that illegal immigrants seem to get driver licenses rather easily, even without a green card. It may be surprising to some that some dealerships (do not know which ones, and this was brought to attention in western N.C. on a local news station) have deals with some who employee illegals and basically allows them to buy or trade cars with little to no background check or documentation.

It is not that laws are not on the books for many of these problems to do with illegal immigrants (who do not need a license unless they can successfully pass a English driving test-at least knowing the signs of the road and rules and being able to drive and prove that they hold at least a green card to be in the states legally). The problem is, the rules are not enforced. To say they are not getting special treatment is wrong, because in so many ways they are. Many (not all illegal immigrants, and some who are not legal yet are going through the process to become citizens and good luck to them) are being given a lot of previleges and able to get around laws, not on purpose, but because the law makers allow it.

To make things worse the recent debate on immigration has proved how much Obama and those around him do not follow or want to follow immigration policies (which is unfair to those immigrants who came here legally). The recent Supreme Court Ruling upheld many of Arizona's immigration laws, but Obama and his administration did not care for the ruling and decided to make it clear that the "feds will not act" on the law.

In 2011, almost 30,000 incidents involved illegal immigrants who were driving drunk, "compared to 10,000" during Bush's last year in office, and only slightly over 4,000 were deporting in 2006 or 2007 for traffic violations. These numbers may not mean much, but it is clear that the Obama administration is not concerned with illegal immigration or the problems that not enforcing the laws have caused, and it really is a slap in the face to those who came to the country legally and continued to become citizens, and to those who do not receive special previlege's for being an immigrant as so many others may.

In all, hopefully, Loretta Robinson will receive the money she spent back from Gonzalez. Hopefully laws will be enforced and these types of incidents involving illegal aliens will become less and less.

Obama Knew-What is the Administration Hiding From Congress?

The administration has said they have nothing to hide in the fast and furious case, yet, will not release any information to Congress. It makes no since. It is not as if they are giving out information to another country or terrorists, it is to Congress. This video was mentioned and featured on the Roger Hedgecock show last night. It basically proves that the administration knew what was happening.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEEL7CWsL00&feature=youtu.be

Medicare Gives Out Penis Pumps

Men, feeling down? Need a lift? Or maybe something to boost moral? Medicare can help! By using hundreds of millions of taxpayer money, you can enjoy your own penis pump funded by Uncle Sam. That's not all! Tax payers will happily pay for a penis enhancement or some pills to help when you need it most. After all, taxpayers do not mind wasting money on such things, as long as it makes you happy and fulfilled. Don't miss this once a week opportunity. It may be gone soon.

McConnell on Free Speech

As any conservative knows, if a democrat donates or speaks against a conservative or their values, then it is free speech. If a conservative speaks or donates against a democrat, it is considered unconstitutional and wrong. For years the democrats have fought against free speech for conservatives, whether it be conservative women values, men, thoughts, talk radio, books, and more. Friday was no different when Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell admitted to the fact that the Obama administration is trying to silence those who oppose their view or agenda.

It has come to his attention that the current administration seems willing to do anything to keep themselves and their policies from getting scraped. This comes after the administration has bashed Romney donors and set out to ruin those who donate against Obama while Obama has big plate dinners and gatherings and multiple multi-million and billion dollar donors (especially in 2008) contribute to his cause (or desires) without little notice or talk in the media. Upon the fact that Romney is receiving money, the Obama administration decided that private donors should not be private, and that corporations and unions should tell who they are supporting, by order.

After what has happened to several donors of Romney, of which a list was made, and government officials from the current administration under Obama's support, have decided to hurt their reputations as much as possible (while making Hollywood seem like the best people in the world, except for those who do not support his campaign). Fortunately, the plan to scare people into donating to Obama or not donating at all has not worked, and has truly outraged many.

What is scary (at least the thought) is how far will this administration go? Will they start intimidating voters more so and encouraging their supporters (or just letting them without any restrictions or discipline) bully none supporters, as was the case in some cities in 2008. It is amazing how against bullying the Obama administration claims to be, and yet, when it is not in their favor, they turn to bullying in order to win and silence anyone against them.

Food Network 'Restaurant Impossible' Used By First Lady Obama to Push Healthy Food Agenda

For those who are fans of the show, 'Restaurant Impossible,' featuring a failing restaurant which receives a face lift within 48 hours by the famous Robert Irvine and his team, Mrs. Obama gave the famous chef a challenge. The challenge did not involve a restaurant, it involved the schools and the American children. Her challenge was for Irvine to help American kids eat right and be active.

This story from the first lady is constantly getting beaten in the ground. She changed several school's lunch menus and those schools ended up wasting food because it was so bad. Students actually appreciated their parent's sandwich bags. Even so, it is great that Irvine and the team helped the Washington D.C. Community Center, and he admitted to doing the mission in order to help the center and the kids. Which is great. Also, if there is a chef that could make healthy food taste good, he's definitely one.

After going over Food Network's Facebook account on Wednesday, it was apparent that many who enjoy the show would not be watching the show. Maybe it is because Americans get tired of listening to politicians tell them what they have to do, how they need to change to meet the politician's personal agenda, and having a government that seems to not only push agenda on adults but also on their children. Not to mention the fact that with all the health and activity talk, the President and his wife have been seen enjoying a good amount of unhealthy food. Americans do not take well to people, such as Bloomberg, who claim that it is government's responsibility to make and keep Americans healthy, because the truth is, it is personal responsibility. It is the government's responsibility to run the country correctly and in a good direction, not control every aspect of their citizen's lives.

Even though, this was one episode that many did not watch, it is good to be healthy and to push for healthier environments and lifestyle. However, it is just getting ridiculous to keep pushing the issue to the point of trying to have so much control over Americans lives that they have little to no right to decide for themselves. Of course, if all of these people truly wanted to help end the unhealthy epidemic, maybe they should start with shutting down some of the most unhealthy food chains and cause more unemployment.

Abortion Is A Benefit Under Obamacare

In Connecticut, abortion will be considered a benefit under Obamacare. In fact they are considered an "essential health benefit." When did taking the life of an innocent child become an "essential health benefit?" Why is it essential and who is it really benefiting?

Overall, the state is saying no matter what, if someone wants an abortion, it's covered. Taxpayers will unwillingly be covering more abortions. As shocking as this may seem, seeing as how the current administration is not too concerned about the well being of a human life while inside the womb or the babies right to live, it is said that most private health plans in Connecticut already cover 'elective abortions.' However, state plans do not, and in order to have it included the health panel voted in favor of the plan.

So, the state believes they are doing a great service to women. When in reality, if Obamacare and many plans out there were truly concerned for women's health, than breast exams, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer would be offered free of charge. Not birth control and abortions!

This is not political, but it is an article I wrote 2 years ago and want to share. Featuring one of my favorite Founding Fathers, Benjamin Franklin.

Benjamin Franklin would probably be considered an "over achiever" by today's standards. He was an extremely talented, dedicated man; who believed in "brotherly love." Even so, he was a stout politician, who also believed in voicing his opinions and beliefs openly.

Benjamin Franklin: The Early Years

Benjamin Franklin started his writing career as a teenager working as a printer's apprentice to his older brother, James. He could not wait to get his hands on the press. He was a self-taught writer, reader, and was extremely blessed with knowing how to use his hands for building and inventing (despite his poor math skills).

James Franklin had been apprenticed in England, and upon returning to America, opened a printing press. He published, The New England Courant. James was not nice to his younger brother. In fact, he treated him like a servant, rather than a brother. The thought of Ben, an apprentice, printing any writings was appalling to James.

Even so, Ben had a plan. Benjamin Franklin was not the type of boy or man to step aside and keep silent. He followed through on his plans, and in 1722, began publishing "The Silence Dogood" letters.

The letters were supposively written by a "middle-aged" widow. They were comical in some ways, and often made fun of "drunkenness, religious hypocrisy, and the persecution of women." They also included pieces about women's fashion, the ridiculing of Harvard, and "civic improvement."

Franklin wrote a total of 14 letters, and once his brother discovered the author's true identity; he was infuriated. James did not think the young apprentice needed encouragement. Ben decided to run away to Philadelphia in 1723, and he began to look for opportunities to open a printing press.

The Governor of Pennsylvannia offered to help young Franklin realize his dream. Franklin set off to London to gather supplies, only to discover the Governor had lied. After finding work in a printing press and two years in London, Franklin returned to Philadelphia better rounded, careful, and a more moral individual than when he left.

Thirteen Moral Virtues

Upon returning to the colonies, Franklin worked as an accountant, a merchant, and eventually a printer. Once back in the colonies he was determine to commit his life to "civil service," and honoring his thirteen moral values (which appeared in Poor Richard's Almanack):

• Temperance: Eat not to dullness. Drink not to elevation.
• Silence: Speak not but what may benefit others or yourself. Avoid trifling conversations.
• Order: Let all your things have their places. Let each part of your business have its time.
• Resolution: Resolve to perform what you ought. Perform without fail what you resolve.
• Frugality: Make no expense but to do good to others or yourself; i.e. waste nothing.
• Industry: Lose no time. Be always employed in something useful. Cut off all unnecessary actions.
• Sincerity: Use no hurtful deceit. Think innocently and justly; if you speak, speak accordingly.
• Justice: Wrong none by doing injuries or omitting the benefits that are your duty.
• Moderation: Avoid extremes. Forbear resenting injuries so much as you think they deserve.
• Cleanliness: Tolerate no uncleanliness in body, clothes, or habitation.
• Tranquility: Be not disturbed at trifles or at accidents common or unavoidable.
• Chastity: Rarely use venery for but for health or offspring-never to dullness, weakness, or the injury of your own or another's peace and reputation.
• Humility: Imitate Jesus and Socrates.

Perhaps the only one Franklin succeeded in was, "silence" and "tranquility."

His new view of the world, of himself, and life, set the stage for him to become one of the most controversial writers of his time.

Ben Franklin and "Free Speech"

"Freedom of speech" and, according to Carl Japikse's book Fart Proudly: Writings of Benjamin Franklin You Never Read in School, "freedom of the press" is "a nostalgic idea."

The truth is, due to political correctness, and the fear of hurting feelings or causing controversy; the press really has limited freedoms.

However, anyone who has studied Benjamin Franklin, knows he was a very "free speaker," who often crossed the line. Not really to cause controversey, but in order to make those around him consider their actions, and the fact that they were (in many cases) not as civilized as they made themselves out to be.

Ben Franklin: A Sample of Not so Well-Known Writings

Ben Franklin did not write without intent. All of his writings and sayings had a purpose. He often wanted to drive a point home, whether by telling a story or writing a simple sentence.

Here are a few examples of his writings, when they were written, and their purpose (according to Ben).

The Transporting of Rattle Snakes, written 1751, due to the fact that "Great Britain" would not "prevent nor discourage the Importation of Convicts." In this letter, he describes the convicts in the colonies as snakes, who should be transported back to Britain if not put to Death by law.

He also goes on to write how Britain seems to use the colonies as a conveniant escape for their criminals. So, in the end he suggests trading criminals for rattlesnakes. "For the Rattle-Snake gives Warning before he attempts his Mischief; which the Convict does not."

The Striking Sundial, written 1758, describes how to create a gigantic sundial for all to see by using guns, gunpowder, and glasses. Each hour, the number of shots fired will indicate the time. At the end, for those who read the entire article, he makes it clear that this is not serious. Then writes, "Let all such learn that many a private and many a public Project, are like this Striking Dial, great Cost for little Profit."

A Letter To A Royal Academy, written in 1781. This letter focused on "inflammable air" for balloons. Franklin, the silly man that he could be, decided to write the academy in order to suggest creating a perfume for "the Bowels of human Creatures."

In this letter, he purposes finding some sort of drug that will not harm humans, and will cause a more pleasant odor to enter the air when the "natural wind" expels from the body.

These are a few of Franklin's writings, a very few to say the least. He was an exceptional writer for someone so uneducated, and thru his writings he became a voice for many.

Sources:

L. Jesse Lemisch “Introduction” of The Autobiography and Other Writings by Benjamin Franklin, ix (New York: Signet Classics, 1961).

Franklin, Benjamin. Poor Richards Almanack (Mount Vernon, New York: Peter Pauper Press Book).

Carl Japikse, Fart Proudly: Writings of Benjamin Franklin You Never Read in School (Columbus, Ohio: Enthea Press, 2003).

House Says "NO" To Funding Abortion

A few weeks ago (before going out of town), several blogs had been written about the subject of abortion. A subject that is touchy and hits close to home for many. One was about funding abortion for illegal immigrants, and thankfully, the House put their foot down, denying the administration's push to do so.

It was not just the fact that the illegal immigrants were getting these funded abortions, but also because they were being offered "extensive" healthcare. More so than most American citizens. It would seem that the ICE agency was paying for these by way of tax payer dollars. Therefore, the House deviced a bill which passed, making it illegal for the agency to go through with such an act. Some democrats, needless to say, are not pleased.

Even so, for now, this is wonderful news for Pro-Life supporters. It is good news.

Obama and House Members Do Not Support Sex Selection Ban

After an employee of Planned Parenthood (who claims this was a one time thing), told an undercover reporter that it was okay to have an abortion if the baby was not the sex of her liking, the subject of gender genocide erupted. Planned Parenthood claimed it was a one time thing, but this employee told the girl how to go through with the abortion, get on medicaid, and not to tell the doctor why she really wants the abortion. The only response from Planned Parenthood was, it was a one time thing (which is hard to believe), and they are their to support anyone asking for help without judgement.

That's great that they do not want to judge, but what about helping women through a pregnancy (which is what the program was originally intended for, so one would have thought) instead of telling her to just end it and don't worry about it. Like the baby is a piece of clothing that can easily be gotten rid of and forgotten about. Also, even though they are not judging someone who wants to do this based on gender, aren't they passing some sort of judgement on the baby by supporting it?

This raised many questions and concerns. The House decided to vote on a bill requiring women who want an abortion to tell whether or not it was because of the babies gender. The bill would make it a crime. It was 30 votes shy of passing. Some pointed out that in some countries where this had been legal, it is now banned because of unequal boy-girl ratios. Some also believe it will cause problems and discrimination in certain ethnic groups who are more likely to have gender selective abortions. However, it has also started another thought on the so called war on women and continues to point out that this would be, and could be considered, a contribution to that so called political war.

Of course, it has also been pointed out that President Obama, the noble peace recipient, opposed the bill. Many have questioned, how can someone who was awarded the noble peace prize oppose saving the lives of what could potentially be hundreds or thousands of babies (of course, one would question that anyways with his support for abortion overall).

In all, this act is sex discrimination, and these babies who seemed to be thought of as a disease or an inconvenience, rather than a human being. In reality, the majority of abortions are thought of as such and it is disgusting. Perhaps women should start telling physicians the real reason they want abortions, and seeing how the cost hits the tax payers as well (in many cases), knowing that a woman isn't doing it for selfish reasons would not only help in some ways (not much) but may also lessen the death of thousands each year. In all, it has really driven the point home that Planned Parenthood is not really helping women but promotes sex and abortion, and has continued to prove that the real war on women is not coming from those the media claims it comes from.

Obama Still Campaigning on Hope and Change

Perhaps, President Obama is campaigning on hope and change because he's hoping people will change their mind about him. Better still, he may be running on these (what we know to be false) promises, because the vast majority of Americans are still hoping for change.

It is crazy to think that his campaign camp believes this to be a good idea. To have a president who has run up the deficit more so than any other in history, has put more people on food stamps (along with Pelosi's encouragement when she said that would help the economy), driven gas prices up (the average was under $3 at the end of Bush's Presidency-$2.50), bailed out failed businesses and used funds to create green jobs that went under, allowed his family to take elaborate trips on the tax payers dime, has had no real job creation (counts temporary jobs as creating jobs, does not count the actual number of people out of jobs who do not except Government help or whose help has run out-so the actual number has been between 13%-20%+), seen the standrad of living rise but the pay continue to stay the same or be below what is needed, more college students graduate with no job prospect, is always supporting cuts to defense and sometimes military members and families, has a healthcare plan that will further cause rising costs and problems, claims to have made government operations more public (yea, right), and the home market is still on the decline.

Some claim many things that this president has done, such as, putting the environment first (what about putting the American people first, and not telling them to change vehicles or light bulbs to more expensive ones to accomodate his green agenda?), suporting the capturing and of killing Bin Laden and the Somali(which was a good thing), supporting more stem cell research, education reform (What? Where? Where's the reform, how about jobs for college students who actually graduate?), and ending the war in Iraq. For many, he seems to have done much, but for the majority of Americans, he has changed this country and they are hoping to change Presidents.

Planned Parenthood Pushes For Abortions Based on Gender

According to LifeNews.com/, planned parenthood is supporting abortions based on gender. There is a video showing a worker telling a mother to be, it is ok to abort the baby if it is not the intended gender. The worker tells the woman to get on Medicaid to cover ultrasounds and appointments until the pregnancy is to be terminated.

This is very sad, and has shown that sex selection abortion is in America. It is even more disturbing to listen to someone actually make it seem okay. Even if the worker in the video does not agree with it, how can she just say with no problem, it's okay? However, the worker was fired from her position. Therefore, it could have just been the worker, but in any case, it is still sad.

Michelle Obama Still Trying To Parent American's Diet

Lets be frank, Americans (and many around the world) do not have the healthiest diet. Obesity is a problem, and there are people who need to suck it up and start working out instead of eating out. Although, it is a personal responsibility and is left up to the individual as to how to handle it. However, according to Michelle Obama in a recent interview promoting her new book about obesity, she says this is not about government "telling people what to do."

Perhaps, it is not about government control. However, when the first lady is making comments about manufacturers making food healthier, school lunches meeting certain health criteria (which is totally bogus), and changing restaurant menus and services in order to push for what she believes is healthier service. She has also criticized the military food (which is also understandable), mainly for the food not encouraging soldiers to eat their vegetables, so to speak.

In many ways, Michelle Obama is right in wanting to push for a healthier America. Sometimes it has been hard to do so when her husband and her (at times) go out to eat fries and burgers or other high calorie meals. Even so, America does have an obesity probably, and in many ways it is due to unhealthy convenience food over healthy options. In many cases, it is not the lack of stores with healthy options, it is people who just choose not to eat the healthier item.

Despite what Mrs. Obama claims, in some ways, the government is already trying to control the food industry by way of restaurants and schools. However, as much outrage as that causes for some, imagine if the government tries to control food inside American homes as they are trying to do with kids working on a farm? As much as health is important, and Mrs. Obama is in the right, people need to workout and be healthy, as well as be good healthy role models for children and to reduce many health risk factores, it is wrong to force people to eat a certain way. That is what some seem to be concerned about.

Memorial Day 2012

Just wants to say thank you to all who serve, who have served, to their families and loved ones, and to those who have lost loved ones serving, so that we can continue to be free. Thank you, God be with you, protect you and keep you. Have a safe Memorial Day 2012.

Senate Defense Bill: yes to women in battle, no to biofuels, yes to funding abortions

Last night, the Senate Defense Bill moved forward. The bill has not passed, it has to move on to the Senate floor. Even so, it seems as if women may get a chance to fight in the front lines while expensive biofuels may not be available to the Air Force.

Some other items discussed were; proposals to reduce the civilian workforce, cut aid to Pakistan (over recent 33 year prison sentence of Dr. Afridi), stop military detention on American soil, funding for M1 Abram Tanks, cutting over $500 billion in military budget, women in battle, and not increasing Tricare fees However, one issue discussed and proposed may leave some upset, funding military abortion.

The Ladies of 'The View' Speak Out For S.E. Cupp

Thank you, to the women of the popular morning talk show, 'The View' for supporting S.E. Cupp. So far, 'The View,' seems to be the only ones actually admiting to how degrading and disgusting this is (especially Whoopi Goldberg-thank you), not just for Ms. Cupp, but for all women. No man should disgrace a woman in such a way.

However, Rosanne Barr seems to think differently. In a series of tweets, she made it clear that she believes Ms. Cupp had it coming to her and got what she deserves. As for N.O.W., no word from them, and as for Larry Flynt (who altered and published the article), he is unapologetic. In fact, to read his words, one would think he is doing a happy dance somewhere and giving himself a big pat on the back for what he did. Which shows what a jerk and male chauvinist pig he is.

Others who are supporting Cupp, include Ms. Sandra Fluke. Also, change.org, has a petition to sign. They are also siding with Ms. Cupp. No matter what political views are, this is one action where both sides should be appalled and speaking out against.

Glenn Beck Employee (S.E. Cupp) Is An Unwilling Feature in 'Hustler' Magazine

Anyone who listens to Glenn Beck has heard Samantha Cupp speak or at least heard of her. She is a conservative commentator and writer. Apparently, her conservative values yearned her a fake spot in the recent 'Hustler' magazine.

Due to the graphics of the magazine photo, it will not be on here. Nor will exactly what it says. Lets just say, the liberal left jerk that wrote the piece, stuck something in her mouth to shut her up, thinking it was funny. The reason for the picture is clear, she is conservative and her views are bad, but at the same time she's still 'hot,' so as long as she does not talk about her values, defunding planned parenthood, or anything the writer deemed "dumb."

Glenn Beck had Ms. Cupp on the show, and she apologized for the photo. When in fact, it should be the idiot who is obviously bullying her publicly in a way that is grotesque and demeaning to all women. Where is the President and the far left feminist crowd to talk against this? If this was Pelosi or another top democractic female figure, it would be everywhere and the outrage would be endless. Even though there is a disclaimer, couldn't this still be a form of bullying and disrespect? Could this even be a form of imagined rape or sexual desires played out (not acted on) in an article? It's disgusting, and all women should be angry that anyone would do this to a woman.

In all, since no one on the left has really said anything, and N.O.W. hasn't even responded to the photo in any way (even though it has been sent to them), seems like a slap in the face. It also seems like they don't care, as long as it is not a liberal woman. There is no way to express how hurt she must feel, and how hurt so many women in her position who have to deal with junk like this must feel. So, where is the President on this? Where is the left to yell how there is a "war on women?" Where is Pelosi? Of course, where were they when Olbermann said, Ms. Cupp should have been aborted. No where!

United Nations Wants U.S. to Sign Sea Treaty

Instead of focusing on countries that do not follow the United Nations Laws or guidelines for human rights, the U.N. has decided that the U.S. needs to sign a "Law of the Sea Treaty." This is not just some in the U.N. that want this, but also Obama and Harry Reid.

LOST (as it is known), asks for fair trade, redistribution of wealth from rich to poor Nations, and more environmental, trade, and business regulations and laws. Not only would the treaty make trading and business that much harder, it would do nothing to create fair trade. It places more jurisdiction limits on all who trade on the seas, makes for more taxes, could cause more job loss, and cost trillions for the U.S.

Here's the thing. Every business venture, especially when it has come to the environment and redistribution of wealth, that Obama has put forth, has failed. What makes anyone think this treaty would be fair? Why is the U.N. not focusing on countries who still have problems with clean water or even human trafficking? It's amazing that the U.N. and Obama seem to always want to spread the wealth, but everytime a law passes to spread it, nothing is ever accomplished. This could definitely dig America into a bigger financial crisis.

A petition for the treaty is available at Freedom Works.

Allen West Questions Why Obama Administration Will Not Release U.S. Soldier, but Would a Terrorist by way of Letter

While searching Michael Savage's website, this link to a letter from Allen West appeared in an article. The letter is in reference to the Obama Administration's handling of soldiers and terrorists.

The letter is speaking of the recent release of a Lebanese man, who the U.S. gave over to Iraq, prior to leaving the country. West mentions that Obama claims that "Status of Force Agreement" (SOTA), has "required" him to hand over Iraqi citizens to Iraq before 2011. The problem is, this man was not an Iraqi citizen, has been involved in brutal terrorism, and has been released!

Meanwhile, he mentions how Obama is treating American soldiers worse than he is the terrorist. He talks of three soldiers who are still being held for "questionable incidents." He also makes it clear, as a vet of both Iraqi Freedom and Desert Storm, he is obviously upset by the decisions this Administration has made.

As Mr. Allen West made clear, this administration is constantly undermining the American military, and making decisions based on popularity of those he is surrounded by. This letter is a great statement to how many families and perhaps former and cuurent service memebers may feel. While service members risk their lives to protect a country and loved ones, the Obama Administration seems to act like they care, but their actions would suggest otherwise.

This is a great letter to read, and thank you Allen West, for your words of truth and for your service.