Christmas Spirit

What a refreshing sight came across  the Internet this week - I guess it is called a 'flash-mob'.  Whether it was contemporaneous or not, it was  a great sight to see.  One person started to sing a Christmas song, then another joined in and on and on until there was a crowd singing Christmas carols in the mall.  There were 3 floors of shoppers looking on and joining in.  Then I went on to You Tube and saw many of these same happenings all over the country whether at malls or in the streets. 

In viewing the crowds there were people of all races and cultures.  But what I didn't see were any ACLU protesters or anyone protesting these sudden outbursts of Christmas spirit.

The large majority of people in this country who believe in religious freedom are being restrained by the loud secular groups that want to re-interpret the Constitution in an attempt to prohibit religious expression via sullen faces and black-robed judges.  Religious Police are inspecting every small town and large city public square for secular neutrality. 

BUT TECHNOLOGY TRIUMPHS---Go to 'You Tube Flash Mob Christmas' to view the smiling happy faces and joyful expressions of the people in these crowds.   

Nanny Legislation

A DREAM SEQUENCE:  I live in New York City and it is March 12, 2013.  I wake up and can't decide what country I am living in - am I in Russia?  Today is the day Mayor Bloomberg has said I can no longer buy a plus 16 oz. sweet drink in a number of establishments - another infringement of a government interfering with my personal daily life choices.

BACK TO REALITY:  First of all, how did the Mayor determine where these restrictions would take place?  He targeted movie theaters and stadium concession stands, but not vending machines, newsstands, and 7-11 type stores(where I think most of the large drinks would be sold).  How much is it going to cost the taxpayer for this selective enforcement? 

Secondly, the garbage industry will benefit because there will be more trash generated.  Instead of ordering 1 - 32 oz. drink, customers will order 2 - 16 oz. drinks therefore doubling the amount of containers thrown away. 

Thirdly, Did the mayor do the research on diet drinks vs. drinks with sugar?  Diet drinks are not part of this proposed ban.  There is evidence that regular use of artificial sweeteners may promote weight gain.  After an 8 year study in San Antonio, TX, those who drank drinks with artificial sweeteners were more likely to have gained weight than those who didn't drink "diet" drinks.

The purpose of this intrusive "law" is to cut down on obesity.  They say large drinks may be the cause.  But do we know if the people who are consuming these oversize drinks are washing down the 3 or 4 Big Macs they've just eaten?  Is the next step to ban the number of burgers you can order at a burger joint or the number of slices of pizza you can order at a pizza parlor?

The meaning of the word intrude is "to force upon others without being asked or welcomed". At what level does this regulatory intrusiveness stop? We are being subjected to superfluous and self-aggrandizing laws. In the future will the 'Kitchen Police' come to my home to check out my food supply?  
 
We cannot be our brothers' keepers.  It is time for people to take responsibility and become aware of how their food choices can negatively affect their health.  We do not need or want the government governing every aspect of everything we do.  Start educating kids about the importance of nutrition the minute they start school and continue to reinforce this theme for the next 12 years.  Will such a program work?  I don't know. But I would favor education over legislation

    

??OBAMAGATE??

In 1972 Richard Nixon was re-elected by a landslide over George McGovern.  Nixon won majorities in 49 states.  In 1973 at the start of his 2nd term, a cover-up buzz began swirling around Washington.  Two former Nixon aides, Gordon Liddy and James McCord, are convicted of conspiracy, burglary and wiretapping (January 30th). Crimes were committed but there were no injuries, no deaths, national security was not compromised, no distractive sex issue, and the election outcome was not affected, yet the cover-up buzz grew louder. 

In the ensuing months it became clear there was a cover-up, yet President Nixon continued to deny any knowledge or involvement.  The final blow came when Presidential Appointments Secretary Alexander Butterfield  reveals that the President had recorded all conversations and telephone calls in his offices.  The buzz turned into a roar and the entire episode collapsed after the discovery of the 18 minute gap in the tapes.

February 6, 1974 - The House of Representatives passed Resolution 803 by 410 - 4 to authorize the Judiciary Committee to consider impeachment proceedings against President Nixon. 

July 28, 1974 - The Judiciary Committee approves Obstruction of Justice Article to impeach President Nixon by a vote of 27 - 11 (21Democrats, 6 Repblicans vote yes).

August 9, 1974 - President Nixon becomes the first President to resign.  Whether the House and Senate would have successfully impeached the President is unknown (a 2/3 majority is required), but the President must have considered it probable that there were sufficient Republican "yes" votes.

Today America is faced with a crisis with similar overtones.  The American Embassy in Benghazi was attacked on 9/11.  Unlike Watergate there were deaths, injuries, a sex scandal, classified document exposure, property damage, possible affected election results and cover-up.  Do we dare postulate "OBAMAGATE"?  Will the Democrats like the Watergate Republicans willingly empower a select committee to get honest answers and all the facts? which currently seem to me very murky.

If President Nixon would have admitted to knowing about Watergate he might have been forgiven and completed his 2nd term.  President Obama's explanation of the Benghazi attack on 9/11 is going to be more difficult and a trip to a Las Vegas fundraiser on 9/12 certainly doesn't help.

                                                 God Bless America

AARP

I see AARP advertising health care plans to senior citizens.  I would hope that the Medicare eligible would select any other health  insurance plan - not AARP's plan.

In order to represent the total membership of AARP, they should not have any political affiliations.  But they chose to back Obamacare.  Many people dropped their  membership because AARP embraced this unpopular and unproven plan.  Seniors - you got duped.  AARP should stay neutral if they want to represent all their members.

Now that we are entering the implementation phase of Obamacare, all of the items that were buried in the 2000 page document are coming to light.  The bottom line is that in the years to come you will be paying more money for your health care and your expectation of the same care as in the past will be seriously threatened. 

Shame on you AARP for promoting a plan with so many undisclosed details and touting it as an improvement over our current health care system.     

We Need A Leader

Where oh  where is Ronald Reagan --- remember when he had the support of an entire nation - winning every state except Massachusetts?  He was a President who put this country first - he did  not kowtow to all our enemies.

Election is over - stock market is down over 300 hundred points.  There is doubt about the future  ---Will taxes go up in all sectors ( dividends and capital gains tax rate of 15% thanks to George Bush will expire in January-may go up to 20-30%)?    Uncertainty about the taxes and the cost of Obamacare are causing employers to shift the work force from full time employees to part time employees.  Companies are not going to create new career type jobs.

These are just a few of the issues that were kept low key by the mass media before the election.  The campaign is now over; the media has their man in for four more years.  Issues that could have hurt Obama will NOW miraculously and finally become front page and prime time news.   

Entitlements

Did you know that when you pay your home phone bill and your cell phone bill you are also paying an extra charge so that the government can give cell phones and cell phone service and computers   to people who supposedly can't afford either?  Check on your wireless telephone bill "Federal Universal Service Charge".  This is a monthly fee(tax?) that you pay so low income people can have access to cell phones and computers.  This fee is  set at a percentage based on the consumer's phone bill.

Where is the incentive to go to work if the government is giving away all these additional life style conveniences that working people have to buy with their own hard earned money?  Politicians make it too easy for people to stay home and not seek employment - and once again the working citizenry is footing the bill.

Washington can help out with food, housing, clothing and a traditional phone line(basic needs)-but should not subsidize a free cell phone program that is riddled with abuse (10-20 free cell phones per person) which are then being resold for money.

Economics 101--Part 2 - Another stimulus?

I have been trying to understand how this new stimulus - Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke's plan to put   $40 billion a month into circulation - is going to work.  My husband and I have been reading articles regarding this plan - and if you read 5 articles, you get 5 different interpretations on what it is all about.

This is how I understand what will happen with this new stimulus:
           The Federal government is going to purchase from the banks MBS's (mortgage backed securities), formerly called toxic assets, that are corroding the bottom line of the major banks.   This stimulus action is expected to enable the banks to provide  loans to businesses and individuals.  Somehow the money is created out "of thin air" and given to the banks for these worthless assets. 

This plan works only if you believe that erasing the 5 on a $5 bill and replacing it with a 6 really puts more money in your pocket.  This $40 billion a month that will go into circulation will not come without costs to its citizens.  If you are now paying $3 for an item, I believe it will cost you $4 next year.  This plan will have a negative effect on your purchasing power.

My thoughts on Obama/Soros

Where did President Obama come from - I mean his rise to the Presidency?  I believe he was earmarked by the "gods" of the ultra liberal wing of the Democratic party.  I think they said let's find somebody who has charisma and we will get him elected.  Obama had no real credentials to become President - he was a community organizer.  But he had the backing of money people like George Soros.  Soros, who is Hungarian born and cannot be President, basically hand picked Obama to become President and Soros is still in the picture pulling the strings on his puppet Obama.

Do we really want the ideas of a person like George Soros to shape the future of our country?  Soros, who has made billions as a hedge-fund manager in a free market society, does not believe in and is a critic of capitalism; but while making his billions off capitalism he supports and espouses the "merits" of socialism.  His works of "philanthropy" aren't - he funds atheism, guncontrol, globalization, and liberal, and in some cases, extreme causes in our colleges and universities.

When are the citizens of America going to realize that Obama is not his own man - that what he is doing in the White House are the wishes of left wing money men like George Soros?  Do we really want another 4 years of George Soros' anti-American and anti-Constitutional thinking?

Economics 101

The government needs to start doing what it is asking its citizens to do - when times are rough (no jobs, no raises) - and bills are hard to pay, you need to cut back on your spending.

I've worked my whole life - since I was 10.  I don't mind paying taxes and expenses that are associated with my everyday living.  But I've earned the money and I want to spend it the way I see fit.  I'm tired of the government giving my money away to people and causes I do not support.

The government continues to spend money, even though they don't have it.  Cutting back is not in their vocabulary.  If I don't cut back or I spend more money than I earn, there are consequences that I will have to deal with - credit card bills that I can't pay, mortgage payments that won't be met and the threat of bankruptcy. 

In order for the government to have a financial plan like every working U.S. citizen should have, it needs to enact long term reforms for entitlement spending, especially Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and enforce long term spending rules to get us out of debt.  Long term is the key phrase here. 

We didn't get in this dire situation over night.  It will take time and determination to resolve this crisis, but if Congress never has the courage to start the process, then they are just going to continue wearing their shoes out kicking the can down the road .  Of course, they can always buy more shoes with taxpayer money. 

Re: Obamacare

Nancy Pelosi's statement regarding Obamacare - "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it"---Have you ever really looked at this statement and thought about what it means?  If you think that is how laws should be passed, then Obama care is for you.

Can you imagine saying to one of your children "Sure, go out and do something and we'll worry about the consequences later"?  I don't think so.

I feel quite sure Nancy Pelosi strong armed many Congressmen with threats of losing perks and loss of money and support from the DNC if they didn't vote for Obamacare.  She reminds me of a spoiled brat who threatens if she doesn't get her way.  I am happy to say that my Congressman who cast his vote in favor of Obamacare was defeated in his next bid for reelection.

Now that we are burdened with this new health plan, here are some thoughts on the realities of what may occur and also what is already occuring:
                  --The fear mongers are telling us that Medicare as we have it now is going to disappear under Ryan's plan.  How can senior citizens(of which I am one) really believe this would happen?  The ads you see on TV actually lie.  Current recipients and those eligible up until 2023 will see no change in Medicare.
                  --The implementation of computers into Doctor's offices was supposed to make a provider's life easier - but what I hear from former colleagues is that the computer programs are not user friendly, they are cumbersome to use and more time consuming.  What should be the priority  for the provider - time spent entering data into the computer  and dealing with computer issues or time spent with a patient?
                 --Seniors Beware!  If selective treatment becomes a reality, then depending on your age and seriousness of your illness, your access to treatment may not be your decision, but a decision made by a panel of strangers.  This is my greatest fear - that I will lose control over decisions regarding my health care.  And as I age, age will become a liability!   This may seem farfetched, but you never know what will come out of Washington.

Of course I also haven't read all 1000 pages of Obamacare, but neither did our representatives who are supposed to represent us.  How can you justify voting on a bill when you don't know what's in it?  We need to get more involved, to keep tabs on the people we send to Washington---not happy with the performance, out you go.

Introduction to A Farmer's Daughter's Reflections

I will start my first blog post with what is closest to my heart - farming.  My grandfather came from Sicily and started the farm in 1921.  My father - the oldest of 13 children - and his 5 brothers started working on the farm at a very young age.  I was 10 when I started packing fruit.  I remember when the fruit was in season we worked from 7 in the morning till 10 at night.  My father worked 16-17 hour days every day from June thru October - supervising picking the fruit, packing the fruit and going to market an hour away twice a day.

How can the politicians in Washington know anything about the daily running of a family owned farm?  The workers - all the workers, including family - have to work when the fruit needs to come off the trees, get packed and sent to markets.  In the winter when it is quieter, then we can take life a little easier.

The politicians think it would be a good idea to pay overtime for over every 8 hours worked every day.  If this were to happen for the 5-6 busy months, most farmers could not afford to stay in business.  Each year is an economic unknown, as farmers are at the mercy of weather conditions - if it gets too cold the fruit freezes, if hail and winds hit the fruit gets damaged.  Do we really want to jeopardize America with costly political burdens that might put farmers out of business?  Do we really want to import our produce from China?

Washington--Leave the farmers alone with intrusive and unnecessary regulations!!