So being a stay at home mom isn't work, huh...

I respond with a quote from G.K. Chesterton:

"To be Queen Elizabeth within a definite area, deciding sales, banquets, labours, and holidays; to be Whitely within a certain area, providing toys, boots, cakes and books; to be Aristotle within a certain area, teaching morals, manners, theology, and hygiene; I can imagine how this can exhaust the mind, but I cannot imagine how it could narrow it. How can it be a large career to tell other people about the Rule of Three, and a small career to tell one's own children about the universe? How can one be broad to be the same thing to everyone and narrow to be everything to someone? No, a woman's function is laborious, but because it is gigantic, not because it is minute."

Hear, hear!

Wisdom for Wednesday...

In honor of the rapidly approaching deadline for filing your income tax, these words:

THE POINT TO REMEMBER IS
THAT WHAT THE GOVERNMENT GIVES
IT MUST FIRST TAKE AWAY.
--John S. Coleman

Thanks to all for your forced contribution.

I'm sure I don't understand...

...because what I thought I heard has such broad application.

What I heard yesterday as one of the arguments to uphold the healthcare law was that those who don't participate in purchasing healthcare make the costs greater for those who do...and that is an undue burden on those participants.

Couldn't I say that is also true for those who don't choose to purchase raspberries? Really -- it causes us a burden when the price goes way down because the market is soft. So, we plant fewer raspberries, and then people want them more, and they become costly because there aren't enough of them to go around...and that causes a burden on everyone.

If everyone was required to buy some raspberries every year, wouldn't that be more fair?

I'm not sure how they're going to handle shipping raspberries to places that don't have them. Neither do I know what they're going to do about the people who don't like raspberries...or think they don't need them...

They'll come up with some regulations to handle that, and after they pass that bill we'll find out what's in it.

And we'll all live happily ever after, because life will finally be fair...well, except for people who don't like raspberries.

But obviously, they don't know what's good for them anyway.

If ever there was evidence...

...of our President and his wife considering themselves as entitled elitists, I think the report that their 13 year old daughter was sent to vacation in Mexico with her friends and Secret Service Agents is it.

First of all , what 13 year old deserves her own spring break vacation. I'm not sure most college kids deserve spring break vacations... AND what 13 year old needs to vacation without her parents?

Secondly, MEXICO??? This is craziness! Our own State Department is warning great caution in traveling to Mexico because of the drug cartel dangers. I have great admiration for, and faith in, our Secret Service, and frankly, I wouldn't go to Mexico unless I could get Secret Service protection... But think what a prize the daughter of the US President could be to the drug cartel thugs...They could have carte blanche if she was kidnapped...Why would you risk that kind of danger for your child, and the others accompanying her?

Perhaps the justification for her trip was that "normal" kids her age would get to go on such a trip...Maybe it is a school trip...details are lacking (which is safer for all the participants)...

My third point is that a member of the President's family must sometimes make sacrifices of what "normal kids" do because they fall into the category of "not normal kids". Most normal kids don't cost the tax-payers tens of thousands of dollars when they take a trip to Mexico. Most normal kids escapades in a foreign country don't have the potential to cause an international incident.

And, actually, if you want to be a "normal kid", there are likely many more of those whose parents would say: "You're not going." I can't think of another President who would have asked the taxpayers to foot the bill for a 13 year old's vacation. 

This, to me is unarguable evidence that the Obama's think of themselves as royalty more so than public servants.

Disgusting...

Trial by media...

Large organization takes action according to previously established guidelines.

Said action creates negative impact on a media/ liberal favorite.

Politically motivated media accuses organization of being A) politically motivated, B)racist, C)homophobic, D)chauvinistic, E)the 1%, F)a warmonger, G) anti-environmental, H)just plain mean, or I)any or all of the above.

There is an outcry from the people…according to the media.

Money is taken away from large organization, according to the media.

Large organization reverses now-controversial action and says they didn’t mean to be mean.

Large organization fires someone.

Everything is All Better. 

I fear we are becoming “America, the land of Perpetual Junior High”…

Rest in peace, Joe Paterno...

I’ve not been a follower of Penn State football. I knew of Joe Paterno, and frankly, my thought was that the old guy should quit while he was ahead. Really – coaching football at 85?

Obviously, it was what kept him going.

From the beginning of the Sandusky scandal, I thought it was wrong that they fired Coach Paterno. I think the board of trustees did it to placate the media frenzy, and try to keep them (the media, that is) from creating a portrayal of their university as a “good ol’ boys” administration that looked the other way.  And Joe Pa was collateral damage.

I maintain he didn’t deserve it.

Consider what this man is characterized by: He loved football, but saw it as a tool to further education. He insisted that his players meet high academic standards. As more and more football programs enjoyed the money that success brought, he continued to stick with the plain uniforms, navy jerseys with no names on them…the Nittany Lions were a team, and not flashy.

When the scandal broke, and he was fired, he waved off the supporters (and reporters) hanging around his front door, thanking them for their support through the years, and asking them to pray for the kids who were victims. He didn’t protest his firing. He expressed that he thought he had done enough, but looking back now, he wished he had done more. He expressed his gratefulness for the many years he had at Penn State, and all the blessings that had come from it. His attitude was, “I’m fine…pray for the kids who were hurt.”

That just doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who would be culpable for concealing the kind of activity that was perpetrated by Sandusky. Consider the generation: Can you imagine how your own grandpa might have handled a similar situation? Honorable people of that generation could not acknowledge or articulate such heinous acts. I wish for the sake of the kids who were hurt that he had done more – but so did he. This was borne out in the interview he gave recently, in what turned out to be his last days.

I admire Joe Paterno. I think that even in the scandal that ended his career, he continued to display good character. A terrible thing happened on his watch, and though I think he could have been defended, he chose to take the consequences, focusing on what he had to be thankful for, and showing compassion for those who had been hurt.

I think he will rest in peace.

Oh boy, a State Bank!

There is talk in Olympia of the need for a state bank, or State Bank perhaps is more accurate.

The state would bank and invest its own money, and then they could offer low-interest loans to citizens who have difficulty getting conventional loans.

HELLO? Ever heard of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? I don't think they had much luck with the same principle...and trust them, they tried it on a very large scale.

Leave it to our liberal legislators to come up with an idea that has tried and failed and call it a new solution...

Sign me,
A Lonely Conservative Living in a Blue State