Thursday, February 24, 2005

Who is Smearing Who? USA Next Battles AARP

The handwriting is already on the wall. The mainstream media is demonizing USA Next as though it is a branch of the GOP, does that mean that AARP is a branch of the Democratic Party? Oh, the mainstream press would never preface any discussion of AARP with "liberal lobbying organization" but think nothing at all of prefacing USA Next with "conservative lobbying organization."

I have been searching the web for unbiased news stories about USA Next, most of the news contains a headline with "Swifties" listed as though they are all one big happy family, this is not true and as usual the mainstream media is trying to discredit a perfectly legitimate organization by suggesting they are linked with the SBVT in the titles of their articles.

The leftist bloggers are having a field day smearing USA Next. It is difficult to find anything posted about them which doesn't smack of extreme bias. They are engaging in the very tactic of which they accuse USA Next of engaging, smearing them as a conservative attacker of AARP and implying that USA Next is being fed out of the very pockets of the President and his administration. Can they really not see the hypocrisy of these actions?

Just as the media tried to smear the Swift Boat Vets for Truth unjustly they will now smear USA Next unjustly because they just don't want anyone interfering with their political agenda and how dare they exercise their free speech rights by supporting something which AARP opposes! Most articles do not fail to mention the fact that USA Next intends to spend up to $10 million on its campaign of support for Social Security reform and mention that AARP has already spent $5 million but fail to note that AARP intends to spend $10 million, as well, before their campaign is finished, that tidbit of information might not mesh with the idea they would like to portray, that poor little old AARP, who has a $600 million plus annual budget is being picked on by that mean little competing organization who has a paltry, approximate $28 million annual budget. Who is smearing who here? Let's get real for once, is that still possible?

For more information about USA Next go to:

Tuesday, February 22, 2005

Social Security and the 1935 FDR Memo to Congress

Yesterday I spent the day in my internet debate group being excoriated by liberal Democrats over gay marriage. My viewpoint was simply that I would, along with the majority of Americans, support same sex unions rather than marriage, which I view not as a right but as a religious ceremony. That wasn't the issue, really, though. I was reflecting over the day, trying to understand why a particular liberal Democrat began a name calling campaign against me, insisting that I was a liar and calling me a "fascist" for some reason, of which I am unsure. I decided his attitude may have begun with the posting of my thoughts on FDR and Social Security. The post was a rebuttal I made to this member earlier in the day on the topic of FDR and his 1935 memo to Congress regarding Social Security, employment insurance, etc. Here is a link to that memo in its entirety:

American Experience The Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt PBS

Democrats are fighting mad over an FDR quote which Brit Hume made on FoxNews. I retrieved the transcripts of Brit's statement and it seemed to me that Brit quoted and analyzed that FDR quote correctly, but my liberal Democrat friend set in trying to discredit Hume's statement by using information which came out later about Social Security.

The FDR quote which struck me and which I felt made clear the intentions of FDR was this:

"It is overwhelmingly important to avoid any danger of permanently discrediting the sound
and necessary policy of Federal legislation for economic security by attempting to apply it
on too ambitious a scale before actual experience has provided guidance for the
permanently safe direction of such efforts. The place of such a fundamental in our future
civilization is too precious to be jeopardized now by extravagant action. It is a sound idea
-a sound ideal. Most of the other advanced countries of the world have already adopted it
and their experience affords the knowledge that social insurance can be made a sound and
workable project."
This quote along with the quote that Brit Hume drew from:
"In the important field of security for our old people, it seems necessary to adopt three
principles: First, noncontributory old-age pensions for those who are now too old to build
up their own insurance. It is, of course, clear that for perhaps 30 years to come funds
will have to be provided by the States and the Federal Government to meet these pensions.
Second, compulsory contributory annuities which in time will establish a self-supporting
system for those now young and for future generations. Third, voluntary contributory
annuities by which individual initiative can increase the annual amounts received in old
age. It is proposed that the Federal Government assume one-half of the cost of the old-
age pension plan, which ought ultimately to be supplanted by self-supporting annuity plans."
FDR ends with this statement:
"I strongly recommend action to attain the objectives sought in this report."
So, one may reasonably conclude that it was the intention of FDR NOT to implement Social Security "on too ambitious a scale before actual experience has provided guidance" and that he viewed doing so as "dangerous." He further stated, as a part of what he foresaw in the future, that the government would, for the time being, pay one-half of these costs until such a time that those funds should be "SUPPLANTED by self-supporting annuity plans." I take this to mean that he intended Social Security to be flexible as we learned how it would act in practice.
I believe that FDR meant what he said when he submitted that memo to Congress. Whatever, statements FDR made after he laid out these guidelines for the implementation of the Social Security plan did not negate the statements he made prior to the specifics of the plan being implemented. We were meant to keep in mind the warning of FDR, that it was "dangerous" to implement the plan on too ambitious a scale until we saw how it would act in practice.
FDR never intended the Social Security Plan to be a rigid, unmanageable policy in the first place. Now, adjustments need to be made, adjustments which FDR originally had in mind and it seems that the Democrats would prefer to ignore these guidelines of FDR. If they do not ignore them they will be guilty of not "toeing the party line," now that would be a horrid development, indeed, especially considering that obstructionism seems to be the party line of acceptance among Democrats in today's climate.

Friday, February 18, 2005

Not sure what to think of this!

The national news contains a bizarre bizarre, in fact, I can't articulate my feelings regarding it. What's that, you say? Try to articulate my feelings? Well, if you're gonna be pushy about it....alright. Here goes:

"Omigosh! Wha...HUH? No way! Well I'll be da...HUH?! OMIGOSH!!"

There you go. Perhaps next time you should believe me when I say my feelings can't be articulated. :)

Here's the story:

Women allege monkey business caring for gorilla
18 Feb 2005 21:55:26 GMT

Source: Reuters

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb 18 (Reuters) - Two women who helped care for a famous gorilla have sued the foundation nurturing Koko, saying they were fired for refusing to show the animal their breasts, lawyers said on Friday.

The lawsuit says the president of the Gorilla Foundation, Francine Patterson, sought to have the women bond with the gorilla by performing "bizarre sexual acts with Koko."

"Through sign language, as interpreted by Patterson, Koko 'demanded' plaintiffs remove their clothing and show Koko their breasts," the lawsuit said.

"Patterson pressured plaintiffs to perform such acts, regularly and consistently, and on at least one occasion, outdoors where others could see," the lawsuit added.

The Gorilla Foundation, south of San Francisco, maintains that Koko understands a sign language vocabulary of more than 1,000 words. Some experts believe that claims to understand a gorilla so well are exaggerated.

According to the Gorilla Foundation's website, Patterson is a "real-life Dr. Dolittle" who has worked more than 30 years communicating with Koko, who was born in 1971. Patterson did not return calls, but her attorney issued a strong denial.

"We unequivocally deny these allegations and are confident that this case lacks merit," Todd Roberts said in a statement. "For the attorney for plaintiffs to manipulate a purported employment issue and miscast it purely for publicity purposes is particularly hurtful to the noble efforts of such a reputable organization."

According to the suit filed on Tuesday, Patterson often discussed her employees's breasts with Koko:

Koko, who was born in 1971, has received wide global publicity, giving an Internet chat in 1998 and a visit from comedian Robin Williams last year.

Well, what do you think of them thar apples? It looks like Koko, an animal who's progress I've followed for years, is gay. Either that or her trainer is one kinky lady!

I wonder if the Democrats will drop the donkey as their mascot in favor of Koko, an animal anyone who hasn't been in a coma for the past two decades has heard about and one who's name recognition is high?

Would representation by an ape as opposed to a jackass really be different in any substantial way?

If Dean is, by some chance, searching for a new symbol to represent his "new" Democrat Party, I have some advice for him.

Mr. Dean, you should consider adopting a new Democrat symbol depicting the gay Koko pulling the Democrat jackass by a leash. After all, it would be an accurate represenation of your party's candidates in the last election. It should be left up to the people to decide which candidate is best represented by the leash-drawn ass, and which one is best represented by the gay ape.

Also, apes are known for getting creative with their excrement when they're excited. Thus, including Koko in your party's symbol would be quite appropriate!

If I'm not mistaken, apes are also known to scream wildly without warning. That speaks for itself, does it not?

Certianly, this new symbol should serve you well for years to come!

Just some food for thought, Mr. Dean.

The always helpful,


Thursday, February 17, 2005


I would like to welcome anyone who visits my blog to leave their comments on posts if so inclined but would like to provide a few basic guidelines:

  • Please stay on topic. For instance, if commenting on The FairTax and the Poor, please keep comments about The FairTax on the topic of how it relates to the poor, specifically.
  • Please do not use foul language on this blog.
  • Please try to keep your comments short and to the point.
  • If what you have to say is not particularly compelling, keep it to yourself, please.

Your comments are valuable and we welcome them that is why I would like to leave the comment link open to all. If, however, it becomes more than I am able to handle I will be forced to change the settings. Follow the guidelines and all should be well. Thank you. Jacke

The FairTax and the Poor

There are many reasons why I am a grassroots supporter of the FairTax. The FairTax Act, or H.R. 25, will abolish all federal income taxes, including payroll taxes, estate and gift taxes, capital gains taxes, corporate, and self-employment taxes. These taxes will be replaced with a National Retail Sales tax which is projected to be approximately 23%. H.R. 25 was introduced by Congressman John Linder and has been referred to the House Ways and Means Committee. In short, it is one of the tax bills being considered when the Committee is discussing the Bush promised Tax Reform. The FairTax is not simply a tax reform, however, it REPLACES our current income tax system, that's right, it will no longer exist and the beauty of it all is that it repeals the 16th Amendment and it ABOLISHES the IRS. In Red State language this is "Yeeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaw" territory! I am going to make an effort to do a little in depth series of posts on different ways the FairTax will affect different aspects of our economy as well as social issues.

In this in depth post I am going to address the effects which can be reasonably predicted regarding the FairTax and the poor in our Nation. I will be discussing this in common layman's language, quite frankly, because that is all I am capable of doing, but I will provide links to information upon which I base these predictions. The reason I have chosen this particular topic to address first is because, in all honestly, it is the aspect of the FairTax which warms my heart the most. In light of the fact that I have spent my entire life short of money and living pay check to pay check I can see the promise for people like myself contained in the FairTax Plan.

The majority of my life I have spent working for "the other guy," beginning with working in a theater's concession stand, fast food restaurants and later in life as an Executive Administrative Assistant. In the whole of my career I was able to count on the fact that an approximate 30% of my paycheck would be withheld in order to pay for federal and state income taxes, Social Security, Medicaid and later on in matching payments for health insurance coverage. Under the FairTax I would receive 100% of my paycheck. There would be no deductions for any of the items listed, except of course, insurance deductions if I so chose. This would translate into an approximate 30% pay raise for myself and my family.

Add to the 30% increase in my weekly paycheck a monthly Pre-bate which will be figured based on my household's income and figured and paid by the Social Security Administration (and if you think about that statement a little while you should have an epiphany moment which I will expound on at a later date). This pre-bate check should cover the costs of essential goods and services purchased by myself and my family for the month. Now, if, as I have always found the case to be, a person is living paycheck to paycheck they will likely spend the amount allotted to them in the form of the pre-bate check on those essential goods and services and have an additional increase of at least 30% on their weekly paycheck with which to, initially, purchase a few things for the house which they have been forced to go without due to their financial situation, pay off existing bills, or invest in a retirement account. Sweet, huh?

Another advantage of the FairTax, in regards to the poor, is that it is the poor among us who are purchasing used goods. Used goods are not taxed. If the poor are wise and they continue to purchase re-sale clothing and used cars and goods they can self-control the amount of consumption taxes they will pay. Only NEW goods and services are taxed. If you buy a used car there will be no tax to pay. If you purchase a used item of perfectly good clothing at a re-sale clothing outlet, there will be no tax. Can you see where this is going?

On the other hand, it is the wealthier among us who have expendable income. For instance when you go to the grocery store and buy a can of coffee which is a regular consumer brand you pay that price. It is the wealthier among us who are more likely to buy the specialty whole bean coffee, custom ground and twice the price. It is the wealthier among us who are going to go to the butcher counter at the supermarket and ask for that special cut of 100% Angus beef and it is the poorer among us who are going to purchase the ground beef and stew meat. In the same fashion, the wealthier among us are going to continue to purchase new designer clothing at exclusive clothing stores. In short, the wealthy will continue to live in the lifestyle to which they are accustomed but rather than finding loopholes to avoid paying taxes when they buy a new good or service they WILL NOT be able to avoid paying the National Retail Sales tax.

I want to see the FairTax pass, I want my 30% increase in wages, my pre-bate check and I want to pay off bills, invest in my future and look forward to a comfortable retirement. How 'bout you?

For information regarding details of how the FairTax will affect the poor, go to, click on the link there for information and under the Frequently Asked Questions link read numbers 12 through 14.

Thoughts on Gannongate

I've been reading some leftwing commentary regarding Gannon, a.k.a Guckert. I know Jacke has too and she will be along to post her thoughts on the matter soon. She's good at putting her thoughts on paper, er....screen. I'm more inclined to rant, so here it goes.

The left excoriates conservatives for allegedly 'hating' gays, for believing that homosexuals are 'bad.' Of course, neither I nor anyone I know does that, but the lefties feel comfortable under the assumption that we all do. Now, when it looks like Gannon, an avowed conservative and one of our own, might actually be gay, they're hellbent on dragging up every piece of evidence, or non-evidence as has sometimes been the case, to splash across the net and other places. Are they doing this because they believe the information can be used like a club with which to bash Bush? Does that strike anyone else of being ...ahem.... slightly hypocritical?

I mean, if being gay is normal and not something we should care about, why are they doing their utmost best to 'out' Gannon? Shouldn't it be something they handle in the same manner they demand from us? Apparently not.

I know they're drawn to the idea that Gannon and conservatives in general are hypocrites because Gannon spoke frequently against gay marriage rights. They're so drawn to the idea that ruining a man's life is something they do with glee. The notion that gay people too can possess common sense is totally foreign to them. It's the same reason they ignore or view with contempt African Americans who disagree with affirmative action or hate laws. They view these folks as having escaped the lefties' plantation which they built for them. Of course, they'd never say it in such politically incorrect terms.

"All gays - Please pack your mental baggage and move to the In Your Face Resort. IYF is wholly run by Democrats and is the only resort where your status as a perpetual victim will be celebrated! Come Protest With Us!!
This message has been brought to you by the Loony Left. No purchase necessary for you to become a member. However, hatred and shunning of those who are not members is strongly advised. People of color whom are gay will enjoy dual citizenship in both the IYF Resort and the Minorities' Perpetual Victim Status (MPVS) Resort."

Gannon, gay though he may be...and I, personally, believe he is.....didn't move to that plantation and they're trying to make him pay for it. It should come as no surprise that they're doing this. They've built plantations for all those they 'care' about: the poor, persecuted intellectuals, people of color, homosexuals, atheists, etc. Anyone not lining up to move where the lefties direct them is to be shamed and attacked as much as possible...a conditional love, if you will. Kind of sad if you ask me.

I hope Gannon keeps his spirit and his strength. If he's gay, SO WHAT? It doesn't nullify his beliefs one bit in my opinion. There are no rules governing how all homosexuals should view the world around them, are there? I don't think so, but you sure couldn't tell it by the way the lefties are foaming at the mouth over Gannongate.

The hypocrisy shown by the left in demanding that homosexuals be treated one way by us while they do the opposite is astounding. I hope it doesn't escape everyone else's notice.

This rant is officially over, but I reserve the right to re-rant as circumstances warrant. :)


Wednesday, February 16, 2005

Hammer Time!!

Well, Jacke's done it now. She's been threatening to start a blog for months now. No longer a mere aspiration, it is reality. Jacke is BLOGGING!! Yesssssssssssss!!!

Personally, I think she's a born blogger. Why, she's quite the wordsmith and manages to put forth her ideas in this heated political environment in a way that makes me jealous....never resorting to rhetoric, vulgarities or ad hominems. I'm not nearly as nice as Jacke! She always reminds me of the saying, "You can attract more with honey than with vinegar," or something to that effect. If it wasn't going on 1 a.m., I might be able to remember it, but not tonight. Jacke uses honey. I don't, at least not always.

Even with all my shortcomings, Jacke insisted that I be a part of her blogging adventure. "Fine," said I. Why not? I can write a book about the most boring things in life, as I'm sure you're learning just now, and she loves them. I'm not sure why. Perhaps one day I'll understand. I guess it could be for the same reasons that I love to read just about anything her fingers bang out on the keyboard. The topic doesn't matter. Her debate skills, articulation and reasoning are to die for! Her sense of humor is quite grand, too. I guess I'm hoping her abilities will rub off on me. Hey, it's possible!

I just found out 20 minutes ago that we had a 'blog site.' This is my first blog and since I don't know jack about blogging, setting up profiles, etc., I'll tell you a little about myself here. Hope you don't mind.

I'm a Red Stater and I'm not nearly as stupid as the Blue Staters like to think. Let's get that straight right off the bat. I am NOT stupid. I was NOT brainwashed into voting for Bush. I have NOT succumbed to some sort of mass hysteria or manipulations at the hands of Karl Rove, Dick Cheney or anyone else. Whew. I feel better already just having that off my chest. There might be something to this blog stuff after all.

Folks call me Twoop. I'm 40 years old and a proud mother of seven beautiful children ranging in age from 17 years to 11 month old twins. Now you understand why I'm sitting at the computer late at night. It's my "me" time. I have a wonderful husband who is a non-liberal attorney. Talk about a rare gem!! For those of you wondering, YES, they do exist. I can vouch for that. My life is busy, hectic and messy (hey, with all those kids, it can't be anything other than messy....but that's another story) and I love it.

My interests are politics, child-rearing, gardening, writing, crafts...primarily tole painting....and clever quips for annoying sales calls that interrupt our evenings. "Sorry. I don't have time right now. I'm, uh...waxing the cat. Can you call back later?" I guess we should now add blogging to my area of interests as well. I'm honored Jacke would ask me here. She's a special, special person with a mind like a steel trap as you'll find out soon.

I'm buckling my seat belt for this new ride and if the creek don't rise, I'll see you soon. Get ready for a splash of a lil honey mixed with a lil vinegar. Jacke, am I supposed to wink and pull on my earlobe now? I feel like I've just done a monologue. :)


Jeff Gannon

I think I failed to mention that I have a very healthy addiction to internet political groups. I find myself engaged in debates with liberals, who in fairness I hope do not represent the majority of the Democratic Party but rather an extremist left faction of it.

There is much debate currently going on about the Jeff Gannon issue in one of the groups in which I am involved. I confess to not studying as in depth as I should about this issue and will try to look into it more deeply tomorrow and post more about it. Right now what I am receiving from rabid leftists is that Jeff Gannon is a male prostitute, that has engaged in prostitution in the very White House. I know that this in untrue and I will get to the facts. I know that it's a trumped up version coming from leftist blog sites and based on nothing more than speculation. Look for more on this topic later.