Archive for the ‘Responsibility’ Category

RELIANCE, INDEPENDENCE AND FREEDOM

April 2, 2020

The current pandemic should alert even the sleepy-eyed care-for-naught millennials and gen “Z” that reliance on China for the production of virtually every hard good, clothing item, machine component, food processing and a majority of our vitamins and pharmaceuticals is not a good thing. It should be a wake up call that dependence on others, at any time, for any reason, is not a good thing. We can work together for mutual benefit and help one another for efficiency or in times of need, but relegating responsibility for our well-being to another country must be avoided whenever possible.

Likewise, dependence on government (even our own) is often unreliable and harmful in the long term. It is damaging to us as individuals and to society in general. For a nation, a society or an individual to function properly it is necessary that we express our every capability to avoid dependence on others especially foreign and adversarial nations. <link>

The current and recent past generations are largely dependent on others for essentially everything; generations so addicted to having all needs and wants met as children that they demand continued support well into adulthood. Adults twenty-five and up often continue to live parasitically in the homes of their parents despite the capability to fend for themselves.

Some people are using this crisis for personal, political and/or financial leverage. The governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, is using this opportunity to back fill a shortage of ventilators at federal expense after refusing to allocate funds state funds to purchase and warehouse the inventory five years ago. Some are taking advantage of the situation for control measures to condition us for future ease of despotic establishment. This is what dependence engenders.

Far too many individuals forfeit their dignity for ongoing government assistance. They willingly relinquish their freedoms for the stipends they receive. (referring to those who refused to seek employment during the past three years when employers could not find enough people to fill their increasing needs as businesses expanded.) Then they sought safe spaces to cower and avoid confrontation of ideas differing from their own. Now they seek safe spaces to avoid a virus from a country that was never confronted.

As a nation, we have become complacent; willingly giving up our freedoms in exchange for expediency or simplicity. It is easy to go to Walmart and buy cheap clothing or small appliances or even food that comes from countries with few regulated sanitary or safety measures. (I use Walmart as an example only because it is the most widely known. Today, it could be virtually any discount outlet.)

What freedoms might we lose? Any, and possibly all, if reliance on subversives continues. Because of this pandemic, we have lost a portion of the first amendment (the right of the people to peaceably assemble). The greater ground we give up in the name of cheap and plentiful, the more freedoms we relinquish. The more we rely on others for care and support rather than personally investing the effort for autonomy, the weaker we become as individuals and as a nation.

Until this pandemic caused the nation to sequester and brought our economy to a virtual standstill, we were growing more independent and stronger. The collapse of the foundational structures of this and other nations has to do with dependence on a Communist nation whose leaders would like nothing better than to see total devastation of all competitors and economic and political adversaries.

No matter what you choose to call this pandemic, (Chinese Coronavirus, Wuhan Virus, COVID-19) it did come from a country on which we have allowed ourselves to rely. We get everything from shoes and socks to vitamins, vaccines and other medicines from them almost exclusively, and they have threatened to cut off our access to the aforementioned much needed remedies. During this time of medical crisis, we must as a nation and as individuals, reconsider how our future lives require self reliance and cooperation.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD AND TAXPAYER FUNDING

March 15, 2017

Cecile Richards, CEO of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading abortion mill, claims that no taxpayer funding is used to fund abortions. She says private donations fund abortions and that government grants pay for other services. This is another classic and laughable misdirection by a greedy and unconcerned socialist attempting to preserve her baby-killing and bonus producing revenue.

As a responsible personal and family budgeter for the past 55+ years and the former CFO for a non-profit corporation that dealt with funding from numerous federal, state, county and city government entities, I can say with all certainty that the above statement is deceptively false. It’s as simple as moving checkers on a board.

Keeping it as simple, relatable and understandable as possible, let’s look at a personal or family budget. Whether formal or informal, written or unwritten, one must accept that there are categories of income and expense. No matter where the money comes from, it is classified as income. It might come from regular earnings or bank interest or investments. Anything that increases your wealth on a regular basis is income and it can be allocated to expenses, entertainment, savings or foolishness.

Money that must be paid out is considered expense. Expenses require income or savings to make payment valid. If you have no savings and use the last of your monthly money for a concert when the light bill is due, you should expect a dark household in a few nights.

Concept to remember: limited funds require more reasoned choices. The lack of heat or lighting is not the fault of the local power company. It is your fault and your responsibility for making a, or some, unreasonable choice(s). Foregoing that concert may have meant unspoiled food in the refrigerator.

Let’s say you have income of $2,300 per month. Along with that are your monthly expenses of $2,200 per month (rent $1400, gas and electricity $100, food and household needs $250, car payment $300, credit card(s) $150, etc.). Your income just covers your monthly hard costs with little to spare for entertainment. Make sense?

Now let us suppose that you just won the lottery and have additional $2,000 each and every month for the rest of your life. This additional revenue almost doubles your income. Now you can devote a lot more for entertainment or a nicer car, savings or whatever. It matters not whether you use the money you work hard for to spend on entertainment and use the lottery money to pay the bills because it all looks the same; it all becomes part of the income category.

This is how Planned Parenthood uses taxpayer money and claims that not a penny goes to abortion. They simply report expenditures of the $500+ million taxpayer dollars to services other than abortion, sell the body parts of the aborted fetuses and log that income as “other income”. Depending on the specific terms of the government grants or contracts, they cannot use the income from body parts as matching funds. Planned Parenthood must use other donations to justify the the grant. Just the same, they now have plenty of money to perform the abortions which a majority of taxpayers find abhorrent.

Take away the taxpayer money and all of a sudden Cecile Richards has to begin making reasoned choices. Continue abortions and forego the bonus? That might be one choice. Discontinue abortions or a majority of them and keep the bonus might be a second choice.

It should not matter whether you are pro-choice (pro-abortion) or pro-life. A individual’s sexual misdeeds are not the responsibility of the general public. They are as personal as can be had. It’s an individual responsibility.

Should the citizens of a community be held responsible for the automotive repairs, property damage and medical expenses resulting from an accident caused by a driver who is more interested in texting than paying attention to the road and traffic conditions? Most thinking people will answer that question with a resounding NO. It should it be his or her responsibility to buy sufficient insurance or otherwise personally bear the burden of all costs incurred due to his or her negligence.

Some people are laughing at this comparison right now. They are the very people who want everyone else to pay for their mistakes and their well being in general. They’re called LIBERALS.

IT WAS NOT A FLUKE

March 7, 2012

On Feb. 23, Sandra Fluke was the sole witness to appear before an all-Democratic panel chaired by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.  As has been well reported, Ms. Fluke testified that it can cost a law student in excess of $3,000 for birth control during their term of education.  She feels that insurance should pay for the party favors whether or not the religious foundation approves or disapproves on moral grounds.

Initially, Barry Lynn, a  nationally known liberal, progressive, ordained minister and graduate of Georgetown University Law Center was invited and scheduled to give testimony before a full U.S. House of Representatives committee.  Lynn was bounced at the last minute and Fluke, a 30 year-old law student with an extensive history of activism in leftist causes, became the Democrats’ replacement speaker.

Ms. Fluke is attending Georgetown under a Public Interest Law Scholars (PILS) program.  PILS is a scholarship program available to students who intend to dedicate their careers substantially to public interest matters (leftist agendas).  In short, Ms. Fluke is attending law school at the expense of donors and still she is still not willing to pay for her own amoral behavior.

Though not part of her testimony, it has been reported that Sandra Fluke also advocates health insurance policies also cover gender modification for those people living alternate lifestyles.  Reschedule the heart attack victim, there’s a gender swap needed!  If he/she decides the new identity is no longer in vogue, the insurance or the government must pay for another surgery.  It’s a right.

Reverend Lynn would have also presented a very strong argument in favor of health plans including birth control.  His testimony and life experience may have had a different, and perhaps more truthful, impact.

Regarding the cost of birth control, a Target store only 3 miles from the law school currently sells a month’s supply of birth control pills for only $9 to people who do not have insurance plans covering contraceptives.  A CVS store a few blocks from the school sells a month’s supply of the product for $33.  Even at that price, a three year supply would only cost $1,188.  Three grand…not the truth.  Destitute female students wishing to have regular and frequent sex out of wedlock might want to car pool to the Target store to save money.  They could also ask that the object of their affection for the night provide condoms and protect both of them against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

Ms. Fluke is attending Georgetown University Law Center to become a lawyer who will sue any body, company, corporation, or group that would like to keep their earnings for distribution as they see fit.  I would guess that she has already filed application with the ACLU (America’s Cancerous Liberal Union).

Liberals are taking control of our lives and our well being.  Bit by bit they are taking from those who have earned and giving to themselves and others who are unwilling to work hard and make something of their selves.  They are giving away our freedoms and demanding that we relegate our responsibilities to the government.

Please vote wisely in November.

CONDOMS FOR ALL

March 3, 2012

There is a big and continuous conversational debate about the new Obama Care mandate for religious organizations to provide birth control and cover abortions.  HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius believes (or at least professes to believe in order to justify the mandate) that providing contraception will save the taxpayers money.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” Sebelius said.  She went on to say the estimated cost is “down not up”.

This is a typical misdirection that not only has the general population flummoxed, it has even the best minds (both of them) in the media twirling to the point that they cannot even see the obvious.

Why can’t the parties responsible for the wild abandon and any pregnancies resulting thereof pay for their own contraception, abortion or raise the resultant child?  Where, other than in an Obama mandate, is it written that you and I are liable for the Saturday night entertainment for a couple of unthinking, uncaring irresponsible horn dogs?

Health care, by original definition, is the care of one’s health – period.  It is not wage earners payment to the ticket booth with attendees’ limited to co-pay for a night at the movies.

Sandra Fluke recently told a congressional committee that birth control was costing students at Georgetown University upwards of $3,000 during law school.  She added that some 40% of the female student population is struggling financially because insurers won’t pay for contraception.  Is this because mommy and daddy will pay for education but not for their daughters to have casual sex?  She intimates that it is a “right” for students to have regular and frequent sex with multiple partners at the expense of others.  When all goes awry, someone else must pick up the tab for an abortion.

At what point will enough level-headed individuals say enough is enough, quit the gimme-gimme whining?  What will it take to force the loony leaches of the left to assume some personal responsibility?

FOLLOW THE LEADER

February 9, 2012

Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010.  She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare.  But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the “week-after” pill “ella” that can induce early abortions.

She went on to say, “I would have never voted for the final version of the bill if I expected the Obama Administration to force Catholic hospitals and Catholic Colleges and Universities to pay for contraception.”

Like the mindless sheep they are, Democrat congressmen and congresswomen blindly followed their leader.  It was what the party wanted.  It was what the President needed.  It was so important there was no reason to read it.  “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it…”  Nancy Pelosi –May 10 2010

Well Kathy, you should have done the job for which you were elected and paid.  You should have read the bill to know just what you were endorsing.  Perhaps you’d still have a job and the country would be much better off.