The Love Affair with Barack

Thursday, November 6, 2008

The Love Affair with Barack

The infatuation with Barack Obama can be compared to a sexual based relationship. The problem with these relationships is that they are based on physical connection and not on a spiritual connection. The relationship will not fully mature until both people begin to connect on a spiritual level. Often times what happens, is one person is giving more of themself to the relationship than the other. There is no reciprication. In the end this person feels taken advantage of, and/or manipulated. They feel used and lied to.

We have a man who has promised his partner (America) the world. He convincers her that he really likes her. He tells her that he's going to be an honest guy and that he likes kitties. But she's heard things about him from mutual friends that she has questions about. He cheated on his last girlfriend and she thinks she's going to have a hard time trusting him. But, surely he's changed. He will promise to think about her feelings first, unlike his behavior with his former girlfriend. He's going to make sure that he meets all of her needs...especially her emotional needs. Friends say that he hangs out with the wrong crowd. He will give up that group of friends for her. He used to be into drinking and all night partying. He will quit that life style.

She is going to give him a chance, and at least get to know him on a friendly level. He has decided to take her to a couple of nice dinners. He opens her doors for her. He randomly shows up at her work with a spring bouquets. He buys "just thinking about you" cards and discreetly puts them in her mailbox. This is not the cheating type. He's nice. He's "changed". She feels that there is "hope" in taking a chance with him. They become closer and closer. Next...

Now they've developed this physical relationship after only knowing each other a short while. He feels as if for the past month he hasn't seen his old friends. He decides to go out with them. He stays up all night partying and running around. He remembers how much fun his extreme lifestyle was. He begins to embrace the "old him", all the while pushing his girlfriend away. She sees the change starting to take place, but she'll never admit it. She can't, she'll look like a fool to all of her friends that said "I told you so". One day, he tells her with no shame in his face that he can not be the person that he said he would try and become. It's not in his nature. He even goes as far as trying to blame it on her. She put too much pressure on him to be someone that he's not. He followed suit because he thought that was what she wanted to hear. She feels dejected. She feels shame, anger, guilt and knows that she should've never trusted him.

What's going to happen is that Barack made a deal with the devil. He has embraced and lived to the extreme far left his whole life. The far left is what got him into office. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank; they're all going to come a knockin for there due credit. They put him into the lime light. They made him who he is, and now they want theirs. But, this can't happen...Barack promised America Bi-Partisanship. He promised to govern from the center and reach across the isles. What will happen, is that the far left will eat him alive. They will make him look stupid, because they don't care about anyone. He will not look stupid. So for all those "girlfriends" that threw a line out for "hope" and "change", they will be left feeling used. He's too proud to admit fault, and he will then divide this nation all over again. I'm just glad that I'm one of the "I told you so's".

0 comments:

BUTT OUT!

The Government needs to get out of the private sector. They can't run a car company; example the "Cash for Clunkers" broke in just one week and then the Government gave that program an additional $2 BILLION on Friday - which is another tax that is levied upon us (which our fear-less leader said he wouldn't do).

They can't run Health Care; Medicare and Medicaid are both broken, and they've levied such enormous regulations and taxes on the Health Care professionals that their costs have to include the additional costs that the government has forced upon them and then they pass them onto the consumer - no free market is allowed in health care if you get down to all of the regulations, and free market historically increases quality and decreases cost.

When I managed restaurants, I had to make sure that all of my costs were covered too. For example; when you ordered a sandwich from me, you were paying for the "butt end" of the lettuce that I would chop off. You were paying for the un-usable pieces of bread. You knew that you were paying for my labor, and the general cost of goods that you consumed. You didn't know that you were paying for the guy to clean the grease traps behind my restaurant. You didn't know that you were paying for the guy that came by bi-weekly to clean the windows. There are so many necessary operational costs that have to be paid for...it's called business. What is so wrong with insurance companies being profitable? Don't they supply many jobs? What is so wrong with Doctors making a profit? Don't they deserve it? They've spent three people's life's savings to become a doctor. What is awful is that Government gets involved in both of their businesses! The Doctors have to cover all of the ridiculous, fraudulent, and unnecessary regulations that have been forced upon them by the government. Also, the Government is requiring us to pay for coverage that we don't need. I only need a few things to be covered. I don't need to pay for STD prevention. If you don't know that sharing needles or sleeping with multiple partners with out protection will KILL you, then you need to be put to sleep. Please, it will only save me money in the long run. I don't need to pay for anything that has to do with tobacco caused cancers. I'm sorry if this is close to home with some one, but again, I could've told you that those things are bad for your body. Even our newly appointed (obiese) Surgeon General knows that. She just doesn't know how to put the doughnut down. Why should I have to pay into a program that covers the morbidly obiese? I know that there are extenuating circumstances, but I shouldn't have to fund a program that teaches parents how to pull the crap out of their freezers! I'm sick of being baby sat and being the baby sitter! What we do need is Health Insurance Savings Plans.

Banking - Tim Geithner (US Secretary of the Treasury) was testifying before a congressional panel, and claimed that he really didn't know where a Half A TRILLION DOLLARS of the most recent stimulus package went. When the Chairman of the panel informed him that it went to FOREIGN Banks, he claimed that it "probably" did happen. What?? In 2008 the top 1% of earners paid just over 40% of all taxes. That number will inevitably increase this year, and it is no secret. This new government has said that they're going after the top 1%. Also, the top 1% give more charitable dollars than the other 99% combined. This too is on the decline. It is the private sector that truly helps people, and they do that with their time and money. The government needs to stay out of the people's business. There has to be some regulation, because with out laws their is only chaos. I want small limited government, and a strong military to keep me safe. People should be able to make as much money as they can handle, people should also jump in and help out a brother or sister in a time of need. Having money isn't a bad thing, because money is what funds charities, not-for-profits, churches, and missions.

Immigration - We need to get 'em out. Then they'll stop being a drain on our society-across the board. Crime, Health Care, Education, Any Public Services, etc... I'm not against people seeking the American Dream, but there's a reason why they coined the phrase "Illegal Aliens". I don't mean to sound insensitive, and in fact, I know that some of my contractors employ illegals. The simple fact is that much of the financial hardships that America, but in particular, California and Arizona (which economy's directly affect each other) face is due to the criminal aliens that we are harboring. We have removed huge amounts of people before...we did it during Vietnam. We pulled people from their lives that may, or may have not been sensitive to the Communist movement. It was ugly, but it worked - it's our Country. A lot of people who would have done us harm were captured, and the rest were still let free to go back to being a criminal alien. I think we would see a financial dent because of it, but that would quickly rebound because our un-employment (which the current administration is ruining) is so dire right now. Americans would be scooping up the jobs that "nobody else wants" because they have to work. Amnesty will solve nothing. It will only enable more criminal aliens to continue to rape our borders. We need to secure our borders, but first we have to remove those which are a burden on our Country. Once this happens, I think you would see that the amount of money that is instantly freed up would be staggering. We would then be able to hire, promote, and equip our Homeland Security forces to do their jobs successfully.

Matthew

Jamie, when we had Matthew we went through almost 30 hours of non-productive labor. During that span Patti never dilated more than 4 Cm's and that was including 17+ hours on petocin (the drug used to induce labor). Finally the Docs decided to operate, and when they did, the epidural didn't work. She felt the incision. They quickly had to put her under. They then realized that b/c of the petocin(?), her uterus wouldn't contract back shut. They had to perform multiple major surgeries. They kicked me out with out even seeing Matthew and they had a state of panic about them. When you see surgeons and nurses panic, it's never easy to take. I broke down in the hallway b/c I didn't want Patti's mom to know that anything was going wrong. Matthew was healthy, and for the next few hours I put more into God than I ever had. I need to continue to put that much into Him. In the end He has shown me that He is completely sovereign. He will not forsake us. I love Him more for taking me to that point.

Veronica "Ronni" Faye Durham

She was born on July 22nd at 4:16pm. She was born 19.5" and weighed 6lbs10oz. Patti and Ronni are doing wonderful. I can't tell you how much smoother this was compared to when Matthew was born. If you don't know about that experience please feel free to ask some time, because that was truly a testament to putting everything you have into trusting God and His plan. Ronni's birth was so perfect! Which also reminds me just how great God is to us. She will truly be a blessing to all that she meets, just like Matthew already is. We can't wait to share more pictures and memories with our friends and families! Love to you all more than you'll ever know.

Also from 10/29/2008

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Trickle Up Effect Vs. Trickle Down Economics

The Trickle Up Effect is defined as the economic theory used to describe the flow of wealth from the poor to the affluent.

A common criticism of republicans and capitalism is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Capitalism by definition alone makes this argument just whining. I will make an argument for Trickle Down Economics by exposing and dismantling the Trickle Up Effect (Obamanomics/Clintonomics/FDR’s “Bad Deal”). Look, I like Robin Hood as much as the next guy. I mean that cute, cunning little fox helped all the forest folk by stealing from the evil Sheriff of Nottingham. It was a great story. Well, life’s not a cartoon. Here’s where the lunacy starts.

The trickle up effect states that benefits to the wealthy will be realized due to an increase in sales relative to the amount of benefits that are given to the poor. OK, you got me; I’m intrigued; do go on. The trickle up effect argues itself as more effective than the trickle down effect because people who have less tend to buy more. In other words, the poor are more inclined than the wealthy to spend their money. Why on earth are they poor then? This being so, proponents of the trickle up effect believe that if the lower and lower-middle classes are given benefits(paid for by increased tax rates on businesses and the “wealthy”), such as tax breaks or subsidies, the increased funds would be spent at a much higher rate than would the upper class, given similar fund increases. Furthermore, the trickle up effect argues, many upper-class individuals do not spend their entire yearly salary to begin with, which is an indication that they will not spend any additional funds. You mean being responsible? Instead, they will save additional funds, thereby withholding those funds from the economy and increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. The word withholding is actually slang for re-investing…I know it’s tricky. The trickle up effect avoids this pitfall by giving more money to those who would be more inclined to spend it. So, stop me if you’ve heard enough.