I would never have believed I would hear an official of the United States Government praising Fidel Castro... and being applauded! Seriously? SERIOUSLY?! Are you f'ing kidding me??? I'll give you a quote followed by a link to Michelle Malkins blog with a video. California! WTF?? You seriously elected this wench?!

It was just mentioned to me by our esteemed speaker, “Did anyone say anything about the Cuban health system?”
And lemme tell ya, before you say “Oh, it’s a commu–”, you need to go down there and see what Fidel Castro put in place. And I want you to know, now, you can think whatever you want to about Fidel Castro, but he was one of the brightest leaders I have ever met. [APPLAUSE]
And you know, the Cuban revolution that kicked out the wealthy, Che Guevara did that, and then, after they took over, they went out among the population to find someone who could lead this new nation, and they found…well, just leave it there (laughs), an attorney by the name of Fidel Castro…

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/08/28/race-baiter-democrat-rep-diane-watson-praises-cuban-health-system-castro-guevara-who-kicked-out-the-wealthy/

Sorry for the lack of link. Blogger still isn't letting my links go through. And yes, if you look back through my posts, I most certainly know how to post a link but it just isn't working lately. And yes, for the record, it is starting to piss me off!

I just read an excellent article on personal responsibility (foreign concept, I know) by Thomas Sowell. You can read it here. Okay, for some Blogger reason the link won't show up so just copy and paste this: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell082509.php3

Here are a couple of quotes to whet your appetite:

"Americans can have the best medical care in the world without having the best health or longevity because so many people choose to live in ways that shorten their lives."

"...most discussions of what is wrong [with public education] leave out the fact that many such students may have chosen to use school as a place to fool around, act up, organize gangs or even peddle drugs."

Finally, an honest politition;o)

I've known for years that politicians don't really give a $h!+ what their constituents think. They pander to you to get your vote and then do what the hell they want to. At least this outstanding paragon of politics is being honest.... Ummm, hello NY? What the hell were you thinking? This guy looks and talks like a used car salesman! I expected him to say, "I've got the goodes" at any moment. But no, all he says is that he will vote however he likes no matter what his constituents want. Oh, and that he won't have a townhall meeting because "every time we have one of those... we lose 3 million supporters to our cause." Well, he got that part right!

Demagogue: a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power

Or here is the definition from another dictionary: a person who tries to stir up the people by appeals to emotion, prejudice, etc. in order to win them over quickly and so gain power

Sooo, in a joint press conference with the Mexican President and the Canadian Prime Minister, Potus was asked if he thought he would be able to keep the promises he's made to Pres Calderon on amnesty for illegal aliens considering how much trouble he is having with the healthcare bill and his slipping numbers.

He gave, of course, a long, rambling response but I thought this part was pretty telling:

“This is going to be difficult; it's going to require bipartisan cooperation. There are going to be demagogues out there who try to suggest that any form of pathway for legalization for those who are already in the United States is unacceptable."

This set off quite a complicated set of thought processes for me. First off, I thought, "Hmmm, demagogues eh?" Now, if we look at the definitions I've listed... who does that sound like? Is it just me or has the president just called his opponents a bunch of democrats? Puts a whole new twist on the pot calling the kettle black doesn't it? And NO that wasn't a racial remark, Nancy! It's just a saying. And doesn't democrat come from the same root word? Nancy Pelosi painting the citizens practicing their basic freedom of speech at townhall meetings as "astroturf" and "carrying swastikas" doesn't smack of demagoguery at all!

Okay, sorry, the English major in me kicked in for a minute there.

Now, I am slightly cheered by this particular story overall. Confused? Well, so am I most times. But see, unlike my husband and most of my friends, I am not opposed to "any form of pathway for legalization for" illegals. I don't have any problem all with decent, hard-working people from other countries coming here. I think they enrich us as a country. I don't think it should be automatic for those who happen to have lucked into their illegal perch during the Obama regime. I don't think it should even be easy. But I do think it should be possible for an illegal who really wants to be here for the right reasons and is willing to work hard, learn the language and follow the rules to attain citizenship, pay their taxes and take on the rights and responsiblities the rest of us carry.

I don't, don't, don't believe that we should have to cater to their language, culture etc but rather they should have to adapt to the one they have chosen. We should not feel guilty or apologetic for not having signs, documents etc in their language. And I personally think that the drive to make more things available in Spanish is playing favorites and eventually we would be charged with not making those documents available in ________ (fill in the blank - every language in the frickin' world!)

So I am a tiny little bit cheered by the fact that a plausible compromise on something the Potus has proposed doesn't terrify the crap out of me. And the fact that he realizes that he is slipping and that everything he wants isn't going to fall into his lap simply due to his fabulousness, well, that cheers me more than a tiny little bit8O)

THOSE ANGRY MOBS ARE NOT REAL. IGNORE THAT ELEPHANT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROOM. PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN.

You know, you really have to feel for those poor Dems on recess having to deal with angry mobs. Now, the poor ol' AARP reps are having to deal with them too.

Breitbart.tv » AARP Organizers Cancel ‘Listening Session’ After Participants Refuse to ‘Keep Their Comments Quiet’

Shared via AddThis

Dang those retirees. Should we really be letting them wield canes?

The mainstream media has assured us, however, that those mobs are really just a bunch of elitists gathered up and bused in by the GOPs rich friends to act angry. So, no fears, the Dems are free to dismiss them entirely.

I am not rich; I'm not an elitist and I have serious concerns about the GOP but the Dems are right about one thing. I AM ANGRY!!! I never thought I would see the day when elected officials in this country would openly, blatantly ignore a huge public outcry like this from their constituents. It makes me feel scared and hopeless and afraid that it is going to get much much uglier before it gets better. But more than any of this, it makes me ANGRY! I am terribly afraid that push is going to come to shove in this country and that we are going to see internal conflict the likes of which noone now alive has ever seen here in America. LA after Rodney King? Nothing compared to what is coming all over the country. I am not advocating it but I see it coming. See that light approaching? It is a freight train headed this way people. What can we do to try to avert it? Any ideas please PLEASE let me know. Here are the only things I know to do right now:

1) Cancel your AARP membership NOW. This is the only language AARP will understand. AARP condoning this bill is a HUGE feather in their cap.

2) Figure out who is running for election in 2010 in your area who might actually have the cojones to vote against ZerOs socialist and marxist policies and VOTE FOR THEM. Campaign for them. If we vote back in the same Obidiots then we deserve what we get folks.

3) Phone, write, email, fax... whatever floats your boat but at least get it on record to every member of Congress that we DON'T for one second buy it that the people who vote for a bill as far-reaching and financially humongous as this one have to make decisions so quickly that they don't have time to read the bill. TELL THEM THAT IF THEY HAVEN'T READ IT AND DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FULL IMPLICATION OF EVERY SECTION THAT THEY BETTER THE HELL NOT VOTE FOR IT OR THEY WILL BE REPLACED!!!

Yet more invasion of privacy in "Healthcare Reform" bill

Right now government officials cannot come into your home and interfere with the parenting of your children unless there is reason to believe that you are neglecting or abusing them. That is all getting ready to change. How many times have you had a discussion with someone about child-rearing practices and just had to agree to disagree? Not everyone approaches child-rearing the same way. Does it seem that it is becoming PC to consider raising children in the Christian faith as "brainwashing" and requiring your children to attend church as unreasonable? Ever heard stories of people's children being taken away from them by overzealous social workers when there was no abuse going on? (If you haven't, you need to get out more.) If any of those things have bothered you, then this should curl your toes. I got this from NHELD.

Did you know? One of the proposals for health care revision may lead to increased accusations of parental abuse and neglect regarding the upbringing and education of your child.

The House version of the health care legislation, H.R. 3200, entitled, “America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009”, sponsored by Congressmen John Dingell, Henry Waxman, and Charlie Rangel, among others, contains many provisions that are worthy of questioning, not the least of which is Section 440. That section is entitled, “Home Visitation Programs for Families with Young Children and Families Expecting Children.”

The title, itself, gives one pause for concern.

This section of the bill authorizes the provision of federal money to be given to the states on the condition that the states will develop certain programs that include “voluntary home visits” by government officials.

The visits by government officials will be through the implementation of programs that, among other things:

“ adhere to clear evidence-based models of home visitation that have demonstrated positive effects on important program-determined child and parenting outcomes, such as reducing abuse and neglect and improving child health and development”;

“establish appropriate linkages and referrals to other community resources and supports”;

“monitor fidelity of program implementation to ensure that services are delivered according to the specified model”;

“provide parents with-- knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains…
· knowledge of realistic expectations of age-appropriate child behaviors;
· knowledge of health and wellness issues for children and parents;
· modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices; and
· skills to recognize and seek help for issues related to health, developmental delays, and social, emotional, and behavioral skills…”

Those are all laudable sounding goals. But is that the job of the government, or the parents?

What happens if the government worker comes into your home, sees what you are doing as a parent, doesn’t like it, tells you to change it, and you disagree with the opinion of the government worker?

There is a provision in the bill for the information gathered during the home visits to be shared with other government agencies.

There is another provision in the bill for the state to report back to the federal government on what was learned during the home visits, including information about the people who were visited.

Who believes that information learned during the home visits will not be shared with child protective services agencies, especially when one of the goals of the program is to reduce child abuse and neglect?

Who believes that a parent’s right to educate their child at home will not be questioned by government workers who may have a vested interest in seeing the public, i.e., government, school system continue to thrive?

In case you think that this is some insignificant section of a very large bill, and won’t really matter, consider this - the government will be expending on only this one small section of the bill the following amounts:

..(1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
..(2) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
..(3) $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
..(4) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2013; and
..(5) $250,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.

Apparently, the program is designed to expand in the future. How many homes will be visited ultimately?

Don’t take our word for it. Go read the bill for yourself. Your legislators certainly won’t be reading it before they vote on it. Somebody should read it, after all. Parents need to know what their government is proposing, how the government very soon, could be inside your home. If states accept this money, they will be obliged to conduct the “voluntary” home visits. Do you want government officials coming to your home, telling you how to parent, and reporting what you do to other state and federal agencies? If not, you better act now before this bill becomes law, and before your state officials decide it’s a great way to get more money from the feds. For the sake of your children and your grandchildren, NHELD strongly suggests you read this bill, and any others being proposed, then act to safeguard your rights. The text of the bill can be found at http://www.opencongress.org/..bill/111-h3200/text