Skip

EBT cards – used to be called “food stamps” and I remember people using coupon books to pay for their items at the grocery store (and often, even now, a second round of purchases with cash or credit after using our money).  Yes, our money, for remember that the State cannot give to someone until first taking from someone.  That is the plain honesty of how it work  – taking before giving and no amount of caterwauling from the Left can change that equation (yes, for them it seems that math and economics is hard).  And Kansas has just voted that the Peoples’ money should be used for its proper usage – life sustaining items and not the “extras” like these:

• Tattoo parlors
• Spas
• Nail parlors
• Porn stores

Read more

In the Union Leader a few days ago, they printed an Op-Ed by David Scannell that bit me the wrong way (The complete Op-Ed (for context) is after the jump; emphasis mine in the parts that highlight my points).  In toto, it is obvious that he expresses what I have seen over the last few years – a growing disdain for parents and a disregard of the relationship of government and the citizens that give it its legitimacy by their consent.  Certainly in this piece it is clear that citizens have been withdrawing their consent by withdrawing their kids in participating in “mandatory” testing and surveys.  Oh, how DARE these parents get in the way of us (in the government school system)  doing what WE believe needs be done for “our” children (yeah, that’s the increasingly evident groupthink and outlook being displayed – not YOUR children but OUR children).

So here’s a couple of those snippets:

THIS JUST IN from the don’t-we-have-enough-to-worry-about-already department: the perennially put upon, overextended and tapped out Manchester School District — currently dealing with looming cuts in state funding, manufactured outrage about standardized tests, and a federal civil rights inquiry — is confronting two additional heaping helpings of trouble recently placed on its plate: sex and drugs.

Read more

NH State Rep Barbara French (D-Henniker) had an Op-Ed in the Concord Monitor stating why she was not going to vote for the NH Budget.  Certainly and true to the Democrat form whereupon ANY lessening of a proposed budget calls for shrieks of death, damnation, and falsehoods (“Our state agencies have been severely cut over the years” – really, real cuts ma’dam? Only if 1% is considered, f’instance, as severe).  Typical “we didn’t everything we wanted so Republicans aren’t just of a different mind, or wrong, but EVIL!  The whole thing is after the jump but two things jumped out at me:

• Once again, the phrase “General Welfare” is used in a completely wrongful manner
• Once again, the wealth of Individuals is held to be at the full disposal of the State (and of course, her as a legislator).

To the first:

The U.S. Constitution and the New Hampshire Constitution both direct us to promote the general good/welfare.

Constitution of New Hampshire (Part First, Bill of Rights, 1, Equality of Men, Origin, Object of Government): “All men are born equally free and independent. Therefore all government of right originates from the people, is founded in consent and instituted for the general good.”

Constitution of the United States: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Really?  Actually, no, not from legal perspective are either uses of “general welfare” which shows a lack of knowledge by this long lived solon.

Read more

Gov Pataki on WMUR’s Closeup (4/5):

I agree completely with the idea that we have to protect peoples’ religious freedom.  There’s no question about that.  I quietly am, in my own way, deeply religious and I don’t want someone to tell me that I can’t practice my religion as I see fit.  But on the other hand, this is America and when it comes to human rights, when it comes to treating people equally, I thought we got over that fight when Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican President, but apparently we have to continue to fight that fight and I’m happy to do that.

This is what happens when politicians want to straddle the fence on an issue: “on the other hand….”.  The construct is always the same – “SURE, I’m in favor or <insert issue here> BUT!”.  Some forget that they shouldn’t use “BUT!” – very obvious and when we hear it, we should know that whatever they JUST said is about to be thrown under the bus.  Whatever they say AFTER is the ONLY thing they believe in to the point that they’ll vote for or support.

Read more

On This Week with George Stephanopolus (4/5) was another great example of an Establishment Republican, Matthew Dowd (Republican strategiest, according to This Week), of the absolute distaste of the Beltway R Elite not wanting even engage in anything that gets in the way of “we can’t make it smaller but we can manage Govt better” mantra, specifically “who CARES what’s in the First Amendment we say we support”:

Dowd:  I think it makes it difficult when you get involved in a culture war.  It makes it easier in a primary but more difficult in a general election where the country stands today.  To me, the reason why this is both fascinating and sad, and disappointing, is it that these issues drop into the body politic and because there is this underlying boiling going on that we don’t see that drop in then everyone gets polarized.  To me, the thing that disturbed me the most about this was that people couldn’t say: you could be a person of faith, who goes to church, prays to God, and tolerant and compassion at the same time.

In other words, it’s all about the W, period.  Also, in other other words, Dowd hates the idea that the Republicans have to get involved in the Culture War at all. Worse,

Read more

…James Madison (who was the main author of the US Constitition) put the point this way:

It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to Him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society.

It is important to note that Madison was making this case not in the context of arguing for permitting the free exercise of religion but rather in the context of arguing against the establishment of any religion by law. His point was that no one ought to be compelled to affirm as true a religious tenet he took to be false and that no one should be compelled to participate in a religious rite that violated his own understanding of his religious obligations.

Read more

As Steve points out, the hypocrisy is strong with the Left.  Along with Apple, Angie’s List (who has been advertising heavily on TV as of late (at least in my local area) also decided to weigh in on the Indiana RFRA, saying that it would not continue with a planned $40 million expansion of their HQ.  Curious, though, not even a whisper of pulling out of the other States that have similar laws on the books.  After all, if you ACTUALLY read the RFRA law (which I did), it doesn’t do what Angie’s List claimed (or, pretty much most of the Left) but it decided

Sidenote: Again, hypocrisy of the Left – they were VERY happy to see Apple and A.L. to weigh in as “Corporate Citizens – but HATE the idea of Hobby Lobby having the same “personhood”?

to go along with the rhetoric anyways.  So, if a company decides that it actively fights against my beliefs, I shall not do business with them:

Read more