Category: Obamacare - Conservative Voice
PicturePhoto Credit: InfluenceTumblr
Perhaps you did not know this about me, but I am a troll!  LOL!  Seriously, apparently I am a troll… depending on who you ask of course.  It was a recent wave of anti-PJ sentiment that unfolded on Twitter that brought this to the surface.  Granted, I did not know about this until now because of my deliberate under utilization of social networking, but it is interesting nonetheless. 

So how was it that I became a troll?  Well, it was quite simple actually.  Crystal wrote an article in support of a Black Republican the GOP refused to support.  She tweeted the article and I uncharacteristically responded to her tweet in a very characteristic manner – and therein lies the problem… political honesty.

The Establishment Republican has done to Conservatism, what the Modern Liberal / Progressive has done to the Democrat Party – bastardized it.  When you think of one, it is the lesser desirable aspect that comes forth in the mind’s eye.  Clearly, not all Democrats are the baby killing, war mongering, wealth stealing, race baiting, profoundly ignorant, God hating, gay loving, right restricting, liberty stealing peddlers of political deceit, personal irresponsibility and overt dishonesty that Progressive influences  have now made representative of the Left.  In spite of such reality, the socially enforced current state of partisanism demands that we see only the worst in that which politically defies us.  The mantra of resistance becomes a pseudo-intellectual and sophomoric statement of ideological defiance:

You don’t agree with me because you are wrong, your political orientation is wrong and you will never agree because you are merely a blind follower of a highly faulted political regime.” 

This temperament is of course deployed because forcefully attacking disagreement allows the freedom to not self-evaluate an individual’s own political orientation, personal beliefs and motives.  Such self-evaluation would result in the acknowledgement that the aforementioned perspectives are questionable… in the least.   

With this in mind, the true Conservative is likened to the more the stereotypical bible thumping, God fearing, overtly judgmental, prudish, gay hating, power grubbing, racist, fat White Establishment Republican in the eyes of the Progressively influenced Leftist. 

In reality, these stereotypical, political impotents do in fact exist and it is their perverse distortions of self and ego driven narcissisms that are destroying the healthier sense of Americanism… by first destroying their own from within.    

Not making sense?

Please indulge me while I elaborate and explain the whole “troll” thing.

Daily Troll Alert?”  Apparently, this “alert” is used to inform Twitter users when someone is saying something that other Twitter users belonging to a some political clique may not find favor in.  It is sort of like high school gone digital – the quintessential definition of sophomoric.  It is not being referred to as a troll that is worthy of garnering attention, it is who is so callow to perpetuate such nonsense.  If you are thinking a Progressive, you could not be further from correct.  Clearly an Establishment Republican (who has the political lack of awareness to consider herself a Conservative / Libertarian)  attacking Conservative temperaments that are seeking to only improve the direction of the Right – albeit that Republicanism has reduced itself to the role of lesser evil considering Leftist alternatives).

The fact is Establishment Republicans are just as threatened by Conservatives as the Progressive Left.  Both want more control over the people, less liberty and freedom for the people and attack on personal levels when they know they cannot defend themselves with facts of truth. 

Let’s take the troll perpetuator, Gloria Mitchell for example.  She is quick to launch personal attacks when the current state of the GOP is questioned in a manner no different than a Progressive attacking when Obama is criticized.  Calling a person “stupid” is her favorite by far, but she is also quick to state that if you are Black, or of color and even remotely question the Republican establishment that you must be on “CRACK.”  (Take the insinuations from that as you may… but the stereotypical Establishment Republican comes to mind.  And to think, these same Republicans insist they are not a part of the problem that currently plagues the GOP.  Equal parts amusing, sad and pathetic rolled up into a political ball of hate and contempt – mostly self-contempt that is). 

Interestingly, our little Establishment Republican, Conservative hater is quick to denounce ObamaCare, yet is proud of her support for Mitt Romney who has also implemented health insurance mandates - and in the same breath, is quick to call others hypocrites, among other things.

Clearly a class act.

Here is my problem with today’s Establishment Republican; they make too many Progressives correct when they launch attacks depicting the Right as a bunch of racists based on generalizations and stereotypes. 

Too often, we hear the elected Republican elite state how they represent American liberties and freedoms, yet, not a single one of them consistently voted against the Patriot Act.  These same individuals supported the freedom crippling NDAA, unprecedented First Amendment limitations have been applied both by Republicans and with Republican support.  These Establishment Republicans are blindly supported no differently than Obama is supported by disillusioned Progressives – yet, we on the Right are not secure enough in our political identity to acknowledge the problem.  If we are too insecure to acknowledge the problem exists, we will never have the courage to correct the course of the Right.  Sadly, the failings of the Right are willfully and woefully protected by “troll perpetuators.”

America has fallen into a state of political despair driven by partisans who refuse to see their own wrongdoings and contemptuousness.  Today’s partisans, with all their might, hate any all things that do not represent specifically what they are – even when the end goal of discourse is for their betterment and the benefit of the nation as a whole.  It is this ill-contrived hate, which is now equally garnered on both the Right and Left that undermines the natural order of political progress.  Rather than correct the wrongdoings, which are indefensible, it is chosen to attack.  This only ensures what is wrong and can be improved, stays wrong and will not be improved.  Little in the political realm is more disappointing.

Are we to believe that Liberals are the only women having abortions?  Are Republicans the only ones in America who believe they have the constitutionally given right to bear arms?  Conservatives must then be the only Americans that believe in less government.  Such generalizations are completely absurd, but we have become so divided we cannot see how farfetched these assertions actually are.  We have not only learned to tolerate these gross and inaccurate generalizations; we have grown so apathetic and submissive to political order, that we actually buy into it them.

OK, the government shutdown. So what!  If Congress were to shut down; at least then we could rest assured the federal government was finally acting with some semblance of competence.  But of course, in true Obama fashion, the shutdown is the Republican’s fault – and he and his fellow Democrats are completely innocent and not in the least bit culpable.  The shutdown, driven by Republican anti-ObamaCare sentiment has left federal employees temporarily out of work and has been made out to be the ultimate American partisan Armageddon. Ignorance abounds.

The “defund ObamaCare” line in the sand is not what it is being made out to be.  The Republicans want “changes” to ObamaCare – not to cast it into the depths of the sea as Obama has been saying… yes, your beloved presidential messiah, is a liar.  The bigger question people should be asking is what “changes” are being sought.  Before that, the Right needs to grasp the concept that the Republican political elite SUPPORT health care mandates and “taxed” socialized medicine models.  Hell, Gingrich, who many Republicans supported on his presidential run supported health care mandates as Speaker of the House. Never mind the Republican Nixon era push, or how “Conservative” organizations like The Heritage Foundation spearheaded Republican based support.  At least this supported existed when health care mandates were a Republican ideology.  As Democrat ideology, the Republican Party has developed a public oriented façade that the Party despises the concept.  If this were the case, why then would the Republicans have started the resistance with “repeal and REPLACE?”  If the Republican Party cherished constitutional authority over political agendas of tax revenue, there would have been no need to replace ObamaCare for another insurance mandate model.  Because Republican support is what is, socialized health care in its current ObamaCare form is never going away.  Get over yourselves already.  ObamaCare was largely based on RomneyCare and despite years of fussing about ObamaCare, the Right lined up in mass and voted for Romney.  If the Right truly stood against ObamaCare and its founding unconstitutional conceptualisms, Romney’s name would have never found its way to a single ballot.  It is continually that the Republican political elite say one thing while doing the opposite, yet the Right’s constituent response is only reflective to what their leading Republicans are saying – not to what they are actually doing.  This leaves the Right arguing against their own Party’s agenda because they insist upon themselves with a perverse sense of denial about the larger Party’s actions. 

Since we can reasonably establish underlying Republican support for ObamaCare, we can then focus on what the Republicans actually find wrong with ObamaCare and in the least would like its start-up delayed.  Here is what you don’t know.

Perhaps the single largest problem with ObamaCare, beyond its blatant betrayal of constitutional authority, is the enrollment process.  Forced upon the states and grossly underfunded by the federal government is the enrollment process itself which is managed by “Navigators” and “Assisters.”  These individuals are hired to assist citizens in enrolling in ObamaCare in order to stay out of jail and or avoid being additionally taxed by the federal government for not enrolling.  Due to ObamaCare’s excessive complexity, it was determined that Navigators and Assisters will need a minimum of 20 to 30 hours of training to effectively enroll potential candidates.  Despite the training concern that was generated by the Obama Administration, they have allowed Navigators and Assisters to enroll citizens into ObamaCare with as little as five hours of training despite having no prior health insurance training or experience. 

To complicate matters with enrollment, Navigators and Assisters will not be held accountable for providing misinformation about ObamaCare plans that cause the enrollee to undergo financial hardship as are other professionals such as accountants and financial planners that disenfranchise their clients through either malicious intent or professional incompetence.  Long story short; the Obama Administration recognized the high probability of enrollment errors and rather than seek to correct the issues before these problems occurred, the Obama Administration has granted Navigators and Assisters “immunity” AFTER SETTING THEM UP TO FAIL the public.  This will assuredly result in enrollment errors, cause enrollees to pay for services in which they have no need and have enrollees be refused access to care because they will not be enrolled in the correct plans.  Sadly, those doing the enrolling will be provided federal protections for the harm they will undoubtedly cause.

This immunity however, stretches a bit further than one might imagine.  Navigators and Assisters will have direct access to the enrollee’s Personal Identifying Information such as SSN, date of birth, household income and even this same information of other adult individuals living within the same residence.  During the rulemaking session HSS conducted for ObamaCare, this concern led to a discussion to determine the feasibility of conducting background checks before hiring Navigators and Assisters to mitigate the high risk of identity theft.  One government official serving as a board member who was said to be “well versed” in Human Resources questioned whether the federal government held the authority to conduct background investigations as a condition of employment.  The discussion was then curbed citing background checks would hinder enrollment in that many areas where ObamaCare is in need. Potential Navigators or Assisters in these areas were described as being unwilling to submit to a background check and thus would not qualify for employment by default. This, according the HHS rulemaking board, would then leave gaps in where ObamaCare could be accessed and background checks were not included as a condition of employment.  Again, the Obama Administration identified a risk with the enrollment process and ignored it because it was deemed more important to launch the program by a specified date than it was to protect the American consumer enrolled in the program.  Sadly, this not where the enrollment issues end, it is where they begin.

The HSS was also advised against paying Navigators and Assisters on a per enrollment basis. They ignored the warning and have now set in place Navigators and Assisters who are grossly under trained, many of which have criminal backgrounds to include crimes of identity theft and have incentivized them to enroll the highest number people possible for the most expensive plan available while further granting them federal protections for misrepresentations of the program that cause financial harm to those seeking ObamaCare.  This system of dysfunction immediately led to ObamaCare scams where individuals and organizations sought to exploit the easily compromised program.  The HSS, once informed of the fraudulent activities refused to certify legitimately sponsored programs in order to protect the consumers.  This simply means there is little to differentiate the real program from a fraudulent program until such a time as the IRS seeks action against an individual who is actually not enrolled in ObamaCare.  In such a situation, it is the consumer who lacks protections and it is stretch to think the IRS will suddenly be forgiving when owed money when it has already abused its power enforcing its own interpretation of the new health care law.  Least we not forget, despite the misinformation and misrepresentations, ObamaCare IS NOT FREE.  The majority of enrollees will have to pay for their mandated insurance plans.  Because of this, the IRS now has unprecedented access to an individual’s financials that they will forcefully police.  Failure to comply will bear results that are hardly unpredictable considering the IRS’ enforcement tactics.

The problem here is that issues such as immunity for those enrolling individuals into ObamaCare, the gross lack of training, failure of the government vetting these employees for consumer safety reasons and the IRS’ power grab have not seen the light of day in the media and WILL bring direct harm to those who have been forced into ObamaCare.  The ideology behind the program was that it was for the good of the people, yet those implementing the program have not done a single thing to protect the people from the problems that ObamaCare is guaranteed to cause.  The “Republicans who have shut down government” as Obama likes to refer to them, want things like this fixed BEFORE implementation of the program.  While there are a few who would completely defund and do away with ObamaCare in the name of constitutionalism, they are not the driving force behind the current budgetary debates.

To delay ObamaCare gives government the opportunity to correct the highly faulted program and protect the interests of the consumer who under ObamaCare are forced by law to figure out how to pay for their share of the law’s mandates.  The majority of those who do not have health insurance do not have it because they cannot afford health insurance and pay for things like groceries and rent (see RomneyCare complications for an example of how this will affect most Americans enrolled in ObamaCare).  The law forces that decision on their behalf at rates that have now been determined to be more expensive than pre-ObamaCare health insurance rates.  More specifically, Obama promised to decrease the average family’s health insurance by $2,500 per year, while it will actually surge some $7,450.

The truth, as painful as it may be, is not what the highly partisan banter has been about.  What Obama supporters need to understand is that the program’s implementation is far more important to Obama than the protection of consumer interests that are clearly compromised by the program.  The Right needs to accept the fact that the Republican political elite are now completely out of step with their constituent base.  On both sides, Americans simply want to believe it is the other side that is wrong.  Unfortunately, neither understands what is actually happening.  Democrats have been duped, by their own over-abundance of ignorance, into believing Republicans are harming them by blocking ObamaCare while they (the Republican political elite) are in fact the only entity within the federal government attempting to protect them from the certain ill effects of ObamaCare.  Republicans, in an attempt to protect the secrecy of their support of ObamaCare have used the denial of the Right to poise a defense of defunding the program.  In doing so, they have lost the only position of integrity to be found within the entire debate.   Republicans birthed the ideology of mandated health care models in America.  They have wanted “ObamaCare” (or the like) for no less than 40 years and have pushed for it on several fronts since 1974.  Supporters of the Republican Party must come to terms with this in order to understand what is really happening in America today and within their own Party.   

Amazing is the deafening impact of denial when coupled with ignorance.  Of course, the Left will never acknowledge that their great one is perhaps the single most deceptive president in US history and Right will never realize their political elite have long since abandoned them and their conservative values.  In the end, we are left with exactly what we have here today.  We now live in a land where rhetoric has replaced reality.

It is not that I am “anti-Right” or anything like that, though I have matured enough politically to see the gross republican failings.  Hell, that would make me a Liberal… or even worse – an Independent!  “A far Right Conservative,” a very good friend more recently called me.  It was to say that I tend to be a bit unbending in my political perspectives; rigid and unforgiving – extreme even (which is what “far Right” means anymore).  Consider it a “slight of compliment” that was both fitting and at times appropriate. 

It was a comment that made me think

Place the emphasis of “far Right Conservative” on Conservative; i.e. not Republican is what was being stated.  (I like the sound of that – “Not Republican!” It would make a good blog or website theme these days).  I like Republicanism and the associated political ideologies, but before that, the political values of fiscal responsibility, individual freedom, constitutional rights, personal accountability, personal responsibility and limited government must be upheld.  Looking at my little checklist: Where do Republicans really fit in to my political value system?  In my opinion, Republican officials represent these values in terms of rhetoric only, not in practice.  They DO exist in Republican philosophy and mantra, but both current and more recent Republican leadership refuse to practice them.  Moreover, I see the Party for how it practices the art of American politicking, not how they wish to be perceived as practicing them.  And this is where I simply veer course from the “establishment Republican” – they either do not find such values as important as myself, or they simply refuse to see and accept the truth about what their Republican political leadership is actually doing.  It is not that they are bad people; it is just that I see things differently and am accordingly not blinded by party affiliations over personal values and common sense.  (Ahem, Not that all Republicans are).

I just don’t get it

Practically, everyone on the Right is fuming over Obama’s Executive Order essentially granting amnesty to illegal immigrants – and rightfully so.  What I don’t get is why the actively elected Right has called upon an out of office, professional President wannabe (with no active political decision making authority what-so-ever) to take the lead on the immigration issue.  Rather than effect active legislation, those HIRED TO SERVE IN OFFICE BY THE RIGHT have taken a roll of passivity while further relying on a moot political figure, solely because he is running for office.  Simply put, Romney is not in a position to right the unilateral wrong committed by Obama, nor is Romney in a position to dictate immigration policy.  Elected politicians, inept in their own individual political ability, have hid from the issue behind a Romney shield instead of taking action as they were hired by the people to do.  Yet, no one really seems to notice. 

For purposes of personal amusement, let’s take a quick glimpse on Romney and the Latino vote.

Romney’s presidential bid needs no less than 31% of the Latino vote AFTER Obama just rolled over, smiled and swallowed  and secured the Latino vote in a monumental way.  When pressed on whether he [Romney] would strike down the EO if elected President, he ducked, dodged and avoided answering.  [Should probably insert a note here that Romney’s avoidance means he will do nothing if elected].  Romney however, is not dumb, but he may be making a very stupid move to resolve the “immigration” conundrum he faces.

More of the same old thing

Have you noticed how the media consistently covered how “Obama deported more illegal Mexicans than Bush;” all while AZ was attacked for enforcing the same standard Obama was being given credit for?  Perhaps you may have noticed when Obama deportation numbers were being dropped in public view; ICE was granting amnesty.   This Democrat hypocrisy exists because MOST DEMOCRATS SUPPORT IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT, NOT AMNESTY.  Obama pandered to both sides of Liberal immigration temperament and then sealed the deal favoring the Latino vote over national sovereignty.  Suckers.

Here’s another little immigration conflict for ya!  Asians now stand to overtake Mexicans in immigration to the US.  If they (both Republicans and Democrats) have sold national sovereignty for the Latino vote to this extent; can you possibly imagine what they will be willing to do for the Asian vote once politicians decide to make Asians the next American race issue?  That is how they get the votes you know.  They make it look like anyone not of a specified race is wrong and racist for not being of that race and then promise they will make things different and better.  The whole time making it worse to have something to actually fix, then walking away - after the given ethic group has given them their blind loyalty that is.  If you are Black like me, that should sound all too familiar.  If you are Mexican, I hope you have been watching closely; you’re next.

Republican vetting against constitutionalism

Rubio is currently being vetted for the coveted VP slot.  Not a bad choice in terms of political perspectives, but one cannot help but wonder if this is merely a “Hey! I like Latino’s too!” move to counter traditionally low Latino support for Republican politicians in a time where the Latino vote could well be the deciding factor in the 2012 Presidential race.  Though obvious, this is not what makes it a potentially disastrous and stupid move. 

Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has something in common with the good old Prez.  Rubio’s parents “held off” on become US citizens until such a time Marco had already earned dual citizenship.  (In case you have not noticed, the commonality is not the Cuban parent part….)  Please allow me to digress even further.

The Right hosed the “Birther” issue by attacking it the laziest way possible.  Challenged was “where Obama was born” because the Right felt that if it proved Obama was born in Kenya, it would be an open and shut case; WRONG!  They almost completely ignored the true issue in that Obama’s father gave him dual citizenship because he [Obama] was born of a father that claimed citizenship to a nation that extended its citizenship to those children of their citizens born abroad.  You see, it never matter “where” Obama was born per se, because the dual citizenship is where the constitutional argument lies; an argument more difficult in constitutional terms than that of Obama being born in a foreign nation.  Had Republicans taken the higher ground, the “birther” conspiracy would have held the merit it truly deserved.  The average American of course, does not know this and the majority of those whom do possess the apathy of those worthy of following only.  Be that as it may, constitutional eligibility has been brought back to the forefront by Republicans; incorrectly, but nonetheless by Republicans – and constitutionally minded Republicans at that. 

So, that leaves me pondering why a Republican presidential wannabe would venture so recklessly in the deep and murky waters of constitutional eligibility – after making such a big deal about it and all.

What matters is winning the Latino vote, not the constitution.  Sound familiar?  The system was wrong for allowing Obama to be vetted and consequently seated in terms of constitutional eligibility.  Now stay with me here.  Yet, because American politicians have failed in the three years since Obama’s election to correct (or even attempted to correct) the failed system that allowed Obama to win the Presidential seat in the name of the Democrats – it is now only appropriate that the constitutional eligibility blind eye now be turned in REPUBLICAN favor.  A little quid quo pro if you will.  Since when was the constitution relevant anyway?  When will we, as Americans, become smart enough to realize that Left versus Right yields no true winner when both are wrong?

When both are wrong; all lose

And that is the underlying theme of all of this anyway isn’t it?  Both sides are wrong and they are wrong on all of the issues.  When it comes to the political elite; they are of the same agenda, just with different means to their ends.  Obamacare was so wrong, yet we nominate its architect for President? Never mind Nixonian Republicans and their attempt, ignore Clinton’s attempts and Gingrich who pushed it while Speaker of the House. Illegal immigration is wrong, but Reagan passed Amnesty; now Obama pens an EO for the exact same reasons Reagan pushed it through.  I mean really, with such hypocrisy; who should take the establishment Republican or modern Liberal seriously?  When is the last time an administration, albeit Republican or Democrat, effectively reduced government, regulation and spending?  Chirp, chirp.  (Hint: WWII for those not taking the question with its posed rhetorical intent.  BTW, it was the sharpest recession recovery in US economic history – yet today both Republicans and Democrats see it only fit to increase spending in order to provide entitlements in barter for votes).  The big difference is that Democrats have arguably done a better job of exposing Republican failures than Republicans have exposed the egregious failings of Democrats.  What’s funny is that Americans are ever so bitterly divided – all while their given elected officials pursue a common agenda against the good and freedoms of the people.  Well, that’s not really funny is it?  Please interject sad, pathetic, pitiful or any other adjective you deem most appropriate lieu of funny.

Conservative deviance

The problem is that, to an establishment Republican, I maintain an “extremely conservative” political perspective.  (The word they are looking for is DIVIANT, not so much extreme – while fully admitting extreme can fit in several places).  ;)

It is this deviance that separates Conservatives from establishment Republicans.  It is almost as if establishment Republicans have not yet awakened to the fact their political elite do not share their agendas, or at least I hope they don’t (given all the unconstitutional laws passed and what not).

It goes to reason why so many people refuse to follow politics.  It is truly a culture of deceit, corruption, hypocrisy and destruction.  In not following, you are spared the frustration and don’t have to look like a hypocrite for supporting one side over the other; you win by not playing.  What’s better than that? 

I hope at this point you realize our problem is not so much what the Left is doing versus what the Right is doing.  They are doing the same things and we only find political wrongs “un-American” and unconstitutional when it is the other side penning the legislation.  It is as shameful as it is true.  Perhaps what is most shameful is supporting this Two Party system solely designed for internal destruction and expecting someone to take you seriously.

For some strange reason I have been getting a great deal of e-mail inquiring about my position on abortion.  More specifically, requests to write an article on the new bills proposed in Congress and government’s role in abortion.  Fair enough.  The article is started, but while I collect my thoughts on the article, I will address some positions a bit more openly.

First off, I am no big fan abortion; everyone should know that by now.  While many seem to feel that this is due do my being conservative, this is actually an incorrect assumption.  It is because my personal values and personal experiences that have delivered me to a place in life where life itself appreciated a bit differently.  When “no big fan” is stated, it is to say that there is far less support for abortion than there is open opposition of it.  It does have its place given the cruel world we live in where the innocent are preyed upon by the vile.  Clearly, there are and can be no absolutes.

Where it started
The hang up exists in the history.  Our generation is a bit too young to understand “back alley abortions.”  A young woman in the 1950’s would get herself “in trouble” and turn to some quack to have an abortion.  Everything from hangers to rigged vacuum cleaners where used to conduct abortions.  This led to deaths from hemorrhage and infections.  Because of this, the government had little alternative but to regulate abortions.  In doing so government gave birth to a controversy that would become a political issue for the forth-coming generation.

What the argument lacks is balance.  Take for example a young 17 year old that has been the victim of her own father since she was three.  She simply does not have to be protested against and belittled when an abortion is sought.  This is of course a shortcoming of many on the pro-Life side.  They protest any and all before they take the time to stop and consider the factors.  Of course patient privacy prevents a selective protest, but not all seeking abortions are doing so as a means of absolving ones acts of irresponsibility. 

Facts are facts
I know, I know!  Condoms break, birth control fails.  Well, it is all in the numbers.  The failure rate is not what people think.  We all hear the astonishingly low failure rates, but they are manufacturer boasts of ideal applications and usages.  Women forget to take the pill.  Reality is that if she becomes pregnant, it is her fault, but this is a flaw AND failure of the birth control method given the administration protocol of the medication.  With this in mind, the birth control failure rate for the pill is actually 8%.The condom has a failure rate of 15%.  Do our youth actually know these percentages?  Probably not because so much “education” is sponsored by manufacturers and pro-abortion groups that real numbers are skewed.  This inaccurate representation of the failure rates and deliberate passing of misinformation only serves to increase the pregnancy and abortion rates. 

A personal account
I remember being taught very incorrect information.  The educator would take a condom, slide it over her hand and forearm to demonstrate that condoms “do not break.” 

“Well, Mrs. Johnson, what about  known wearing impact on latex of friction, ph balances, constant force and pressure?”  I could not help but ask.  She of course was not prepared for such a challenge, could not answer the question and chose to redirect.  Not one to by blown off, I took the high road and opted to disrupt the class.

“Stop listening, she is lying.  She can’t answer the question because she was not told what the failure rates actually are.  She is here trying to do our parent’s job and she is going to get someone in trouble doing it.  Look at her, when was the last time she needed a condom used?  How would she know from experience?  Old bitty, witch has no idea what she is talking about.”

My actions almost got me expelled from school for such direct opposition to a key liberal agenda piece.  (Un)fortunately, my aunt was the senior vice principle (who was more than tired of seeing me in her office) and my father was on the school board.  Nice right?  My problem was a simple one.  Because I was a poor Black kid did not mean I was stupid.  I never missed a single science question in all my years of school and though I did not know everything about sex and condoms, I knew BS when someone was trying to blindly shovel it down my throat.  That was my objection.  If you were going to lie to me, you at least had to attempt to do it smartly.  My punishment was an oral report on sex education and pregnancy prevention.  I had my say in the end.  A say that directly challenged the statistical efficacy of the planned parenting we were being taught.  My challenge was never met.  My aunt smiled, shook her head and walked out of the class.

No replacement for personal responsibility
Looking back it becomes obvious where the problem starts.  Youth have no idea what they are getting into.  They only know that they are supposed to be doing certain things by a certain age; with less and less parental involvement and more and more kids having kids – sex is what they are supposed to be doing.  It boils down to the irresponsible literally being taught both formally and by example of their parents that sex is very high on the adolescent to do list.  It ends in pregnancy that is supported by a system that condones and passively encourages premature sexual activity and abortions as an essential tool of birth control.  So, I get it.  Planned Parenthood and pro-choice groups are protecting the youth from being forced into the responsibility of being parents too early in life.

So where is the responsibility?  It is good to know that abstinence is on a comeback and teen pregnancy is dropping.  But at the same time a huge problem exists as our morals erode as a society.  What was once taboo is now commonplace.  We do not bat an eye seeing a pregnant 16 or 17 year old waddling through the mall while those of the traditional generation would have wanted to have words with both his and her parents.

One side believes abortion is the answer through enabling the lesser evil; death over responsibility.  The other side believes life itself should be cherished enough to at least be given a chance.  The two sides in this case shall never meet and that is fine.  All I am saying is that responsibility starts long before a given side is trying absolve another of it; yet they really do not support that concept - the concept responsibility starts before conception that is.  Because sexual activity in the young is so mainstream, it is not discouraged.  To make matters worse, the education process is laden with poor and inaccurate information which predisposes youth to risks they are hardly prepared for.  To right this wrong, abortion is again the answer delivered as a solution to a problem that was never correctly addressed to begin with.

The Obama factor
On the pro-life side exists a very interesting dilemma.  Most are not fully opposed to abortion, but embrace a concept of life that starts before even those of the Obama administration will acknowledge while the “acknowledgement” on the pro-life side is largely that responsibility begins with handling the events leading to pregnancy correctly.  However, what runs a bit deeper is accountability.  It is felt that if a person is willing to act in a more adult manner, they should be held accountable when their actions take a form on to its own.  With this group, it becomes a bit easy to ruffle feathers and stir spirited debate.  And that is exactly what Obama has done with not only with his personal support of abortions serving to absolve responsibility, but with ObamaCare that sought to very overtly deliver abortion services on taxpayer dollars.  It was contested that taxpayers were not funding abortions through ObamaCare, but that was very easily dispelled by simply reading the bill and its amendments. 

The fight over ObamaCare and its repeal did little to address these concerns.  (Please understand that ObamaCare hinges on far more than a simple repeal bill).  Adding to the challenges ObamaCare faces is a bill that seeks to ensure taxpayer dollars are not used to provide abortions in cases of consensual sex – regardless of government provided insurance or otherwise.  To the accountability respecting pro-lifer, this creates an ideal circumstance where responsibility is applied and those who truly need abortions are provided the option under circumstances that do not further economically imperil them.  Those on the pro-choice side disdain this bill and have delivered arguments and protests against it solely based upon the semantics of the definition of “rape.”  What they are actually angry about is a group has directly challenged their position to use abortions to absolve the accountability of the actions of individuals not fully understanding the consequences of sexual activity.  This disdain is felt so forcefully in this group because this group has always misrepresented the facets of sex on multiple levels and are thus largely responsible for the insanely high abortion rates of many ethnic demographics and deliberately refuses to fully address the level of responsibility that accompanies sexual activity.  This comes as a direct slap in the face to them and they have not taken it lightly.

The fact of the matter is that neither side is 100% right or wrong.  But there is not an equitable balance to found between the two either!  Hell, pro-lifers have taken lives in their protests against the taking of lives!  Pro-choicers have taken a position that virtually no one is responsible for their own actions and have gone to great lengths to ambassador a culture of immoral behavior. 

Finding balance
It is not whether a person is “pro-life,” or “pro-choice.”  It is a matter of balancing the perspectives that have polarized conventional and reasonable thinking.  Most support personal responsibility and feel taken back by government forcing them to fund the absolution of responsibility of the other while most also support the belief that what a woman opts to do with her body is up to her.  The balance lies in the imbalance between the sides that have been driven apart by the politicizing of an issue that actually has far more commonality than people will admit.  As with most, both sides have merit and both sides have fault, but what is most important to remember is when you respect yourself first, the polarizing aspects of the other become less so.  We embroil in debate and stand separated on an issue that has sufficient enough common ground to foster open and unifying discussion, yet we insist solely that the other side is wrong in our arrogance of self.  Interestingly enough, lost in the debate is life after life as we selfishly insist upon ourselves!

OK look.  Little is more upsetting than an atrocity of integrity for president.  And that is what Obama is and why he has lost so much support, so fast.  He doesn’t even attempt to be sly.  He just blatantly lies to the people and moves on with his own agenda against the people. 

Administration of deceit

We have seen this repeatedly starting with a stimulus that failed to deliver on promises he knew it couldn’t keep; it was what was needed at the time to further weaken an already threatened economy which served as the catalyst for a wave of recession extending government sponsored programs.  We listened to him directly criticize conditions in the AZ immigration enforcement law and turn to have the exact same provisions installed into a failed DREAM Act.  That of course got under my skin.

For months I listened to people complaining about HOW DARE WE REQUIRE IMMIGRANTS TO CARRY IDENTIFICATION ON THEM AT ALL TIMES.  This little fire was started by the Obama administration and fueled by people who failed to understand that such a requirement is a FEDERAL LAW.  When this found its way into the DREAM Act… silence.  This silence clearly stated the people would object carrying identification if it could be used to determine their unlawful status, but were perfectly fine with it if it meant the law breaking were suddenly “legal.” Such hypocrisy is maddening because it just goes to show how shallow and weak minded supporters against a cause and against the law can be.  They become supports of no cause, led by a supposed supporter of Human and Civil Rights; that only wished to tax illegal immigrants while selling a lie that he gave a crap about them and their well being.

And then there is the health care reform LIE.  It was Obama who bested Clinton in saying he would NEVER MANDATE health insurance in the US because he WOULD NEVER BURDEN the American people with the mandated expense.  This of course was determined to be unconstitutional as states lined up to protect themselves from the financial burden of the program.  One of the least discussed aspects of Obamacare is just that; the burden it places on the individual states.  The program expands a grossly failing Medicaid program that is suffering funding cuts while at the same time the Obama administration wishes to expand the demographics of those eligible for the program.  Though in ideology this is enticing to many, the math does just not add up.  You cannot cut funding to a program you are expanding and expect positive results.  The Obama administration was called out on this by the states who had determined the obvious.  What the Obama administration did was implement a program, cut funding and stuck the individual states with the shortfall (with the exception of Nevada whose elected official (Bart Stupak) who later decide to not run for re-election) sold his vote against the program to Obama’s offer (bribe) to cover health care reform costs for the state).  When the states called the federal government to the table to discuss these issues; the Obama administration literally walk away leaving the already economically crushed states to fend for their selves.  When you look at the happenings of health care reform, repeal should be based on principle, constitutionalism and economics.

Virtual and value of repeal

The Republican House of the 112th Congress has decided to go forward with, "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act."  OK, stop; just stop!

The Republican takeover of the House was too easy because it is this is the type of crap Obama led the 111th to do!  All rhetoric and no principle!  There is just reason to repeal the health care reform law and the just cause in doing so is the only reasonable approach to repeal. 

In all honesty, job killing could be a possible effect of Obamacare, but let’s face it; job killing was included in the title solely to elicit emotive response against the program long before it is proven to an actual detrimental aspect of the program (rhetoric).  This Obama like strategy is the exact opposite of why the 112th has been put in place by a population voting against Obama, his rhetoric and his lies.

Repeal it because the individual states were stuck with funding a federal program which they simply cannot afford to do.  Repeal it because the general population supports the repeal of the program.  Repeal it because the general population was against it while their elected officials supported it in defiance of their electorates.  Here’s a novel idea for the 112th Congress; REPEAL IT BECAUSE IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! 

Understand this; the 112th Congress is in place for the right reasons.  This of course does not mean they will follow the will of the people.  It is the people whom they work for, that is the way America was founded to be.  In their desire to repeal health care reform, they MUST go about it in the correct manner; nothing less should be tolerated by the people.  Here we already have them trying to do the right thing, but going about it the wrong way.

This shows you the impact Obama has had on American politics.  It is in direct spite of this that the 112th Congress was elected.  In doing the right thing, we must insist that they do it the right way.  They must explain to the people that the states have been collectively stuck with the tab on the federal takeover.  Explain that the mandate and the lie it represents is unconstitutional and goes against the very fabric of America in that it unravels Americanism.  This is not rocket science, but it is a matter of principle and integrity. 

American principles first

The day of expecting more from congress has passed.  It has yielded to a day of demanding more from and of congress.  Today, less than a third of Americans feel America is on the right path.  As alarming as this is, if the nation remains on a course of special interests that go against the will of the people it will become the norm and America will be lost to an era of political rhetoric and agendas against the people.

The election of the 112th Congress will only be of positive consequence if the remaining two thirds of Americans voice the virtues and values on which this great nation was based.  America is only lost when the people of her fail in seeking her out from the toils of internal self destruction.

Associated Press. "Tea party target Stupak won’t seek re-election ." 09 04 2010. MSNBC; Decision 2010. 05 01 2011 <>.

Barak Obama, Hillary Clinton. Ohio debate/Obama, Hillary on health care MSNBC. 2008 26 02.

Devitt, Caitlin. "Health Care Reform Likely To Cost States, Moody’s Says." 29 04 2010. Financial Planning. 05 01 2011 <>.

Freddoso, David. "Cantor's Obamacare repeal bill goes online." 03 01 2011. Huffington Post. 05 01 2011 <>.

Gov, Arizona State. "Text of Arizona's Anti-Illegal Immigration Law - Part 1." 25 04 2010. KEYTLaw, a legal information resource. 05 01 2011 <>.

Johnson, Paul. "Bart Stupak. Political Suicide or the Lesser Evil?" 9 4 2010. Examiner. 05 01 2011 <>.

—. "Why the DREAM Act Failed." 21 12 2010. Examiner. 05 01 2011 <>.

LEAHY), Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. "DREAM Act of 2010 (text)." 30 11 2010. Opencongress. 05 01 2011 <>.

Picket, Kerry. "Ariz. immigration law mirrors federal version but with state enforcement." 26 04 2010. Washington Times. 05 01 2011 <>.

Weiner, Rachel. "Poll: Voters Reject Health Care Mandate Without Public Option, Medicare Buy-In." 03 06 2010. Huffington Post. 05 01 2011 <>.