Good Intentions = Higher Taxes

Full story here

Going to a topless bar or paying for a personal escort service could help nursing home residents afford haircuts or movie tickets if lawmakers agree to an unusual new sales tax.

A proposed law, House Bill 751, would create a sales tax on "adult entertainment services'' to provide nursing home residents and others more spending cash.

Rep. Rick Kriseman, D-St. Petersburg, said he was bothered by the low level of the $35 monthly "personal allowance'' that low-income nursing home residents receive from Medicaid.

That money must pay for everything not supplied by a facility, including entertainment, haircuts and other costs.

Kriseman said the allowance has been stuck at $35 since the late 1980s. But the current budget crunch for state government, facing a multi-billion dollar drop in revenue, makes increasing the payments difficult.

So Kriseman and his staff decided that extending the sales tax to adult entertainment would generate enough money to pay for doubling the allowance to $70. The monthly payments also go to developmentally disabled and other low-income residents in state-run facilities, including the state mental hospital.

"People need to at least have a quality of life for the time they have left,'' Kriseman said.

Despite a general reluctance among lawmakers to raise any tax, Kriseman said opposing his plan will be difficult given the source and the beneficiaries.

Once again, the morality police strike with a "feel good" tax hike. I'm sure it sounds good and is easy to justify to one's self; to tax those who go to strip clubs. To me, it looks like yet another case of taxing people because one doesn't approve of the way they choose to spend their hard-earned money. My other question is why should anyone be paying for someone else's haircut or movie unless they choose to do so? Stop this "tax by guilt" way of forcing people to look bad who oppose you politicians!

The bill defines those services to "include lingerie, bikini or nude modeling; body shampoos or scrubs; private shower shows; peep shows; nude, seminude or topless dancing; nude, seminude or topless waitressing; lap, friction, couch or table dancing; erotic massages or performances; nude photo sessions; and personal escort services.''

I will never understand how the allegedly "socially liberal" democratic party can constantly barrage the law-abiding taxpayer with tax after tax after tax like these "sin taxes"; all in order to supplement their ever-growing government machine. Stop picking on people who spend their money in ways you don't agree with!!

How is raising taxes EVER a good thing? How about trying to cut spending in the plethora of unnecessary programs the government sticks it's grubby little paws into instead? If the government would run itself like a business and honestly attempt to create surpluses (profits) by streamlining itself, then they would have that money on hand for emergencies. Trying to spend every single tax dollar (and MORE!) brought in only forces government to expand from year to year... because of inflation/raises/etc. That in turn forces them to take the easy way out and find new and creative ways to raise our taxes.

Why do people accept this kind of behavior? I just do not get it.

Full Disclosure:
I worked for nearly two years in the topless bar industry as a bouncer and manager, and I am not ashamed of it in the least.

So You Claim It's A Consensus?

I'll let this report speak for itself, with me posting some of the introduction below.

Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.

Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking." Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears “bite the dust.” In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement.

This blockbuster Senate report lists the scientists by name, country of residence, and academic/institutional affiliation. It also features their own words, biographies, and weblinks to their peer reviewed studies and original source materials as gathered from public statements, various news outlets, and websites in 2007. This new “consensus busters” report is poised to redefine the debate.

Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution. Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.

That should be enough to make you want to read it all!

Kids... and Guns...

Can and SHOULD go together. Nice idea, West Virginia! The only way to truly appreciate what they are capable of is to actually learn about, and use them.

Hunting is one of the best things my father ever introduced me to. Through it, I learned an even greater appreciation of nature. Being "out in the woods" showed me that the stuff I saw on Wild Kingdom actually happened... and sometimes even relatively close to home! Anyone who thinks hunting is only about the kill really needs to spend time actually talking with most hunters. I know that most hunters I know here in Wisconsin relish in the sharing of tales of things they observe while out hunting as much, if not more than, the actual tales of killing their prey.

If I ever have kids, they will ALL learn about and fire guns. I want them to understand how a gun is not evil, only the person wielding it has that potential. They will learn that a gun is not to be feared, but respected... and that a gun in the hands of a good person is never a bad thing.

Pay For Me... Or Else!!

Full story here

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.

The New York senator has criticized presidential rival Barack Obama for pushing a health plan that would not require universal coverage. Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would embrace, but when pressed on ABC's "This Week," she said: "I think there are a number of mechanisms" that are possible, including "going after people's wages, automatic enrollment."

Clinton said such measures would apply only to workers who can afford health coverage but refuse to buy it, which puts undue pressure on hospitals and emergency rooms. With her proposals for subsidies, she said, "it will be affordable for everyone."

First off, I have a serious problem with anyone being told that they MUST pay for health insurance. A person like myself, who hasn't been admitted to a hospital, had no serious injuries, and doesn't get sick, finds health insurance a waste of money. Granted, now that I'm approaching 40, I will probably start paying for it. I know that my luck will eventually run out.

Secondly, I have a real big problem with the government sticking their grubby little paws deeper into my paycheck. How is this NOT considered a new tax? The money may not go directly to the government, but it IS literally stolen right out of our wallet, regardless of whether we want to pay or not. It's definitely the "Hillary Health Care Tax", no doubt about it.

And lastly, I don't see everyone having insurance as the solution to the problem. Here's an example: My father has health insurance... very GOOD insurance. Yesterday the Doc told him that he would need to get a new shot once a week, and that my mother could administer it at home because it was almost identical to her insulin injections. Today the health insurer calls to say that they refuse to cover the cost of it if she gives him the shot. They also said that the home care nurse (who visits once a week) could not administer it either. We have to take Dad to the hospital, which is a HUGE inconvenience for him because of his weakened state, just to get an injection... even though the DOCTOR said that Mom could do it at home. How is having insurance making things any better here? The insurance company is actually making things WORSE.

You know what Hillary? You can take your MANDATORY Universal Health Care and shove it. The land of the free doesn't mean "The Land of the Dictatorship of Clinton."

Banning smoking. Banning fat people from eating out. Mandatory health care. Unfortunately, the list just keeps on growing.

What ever happened to the freedom of choice? Is it really our government's place to be forcing us to live how they deem "good for us?" I'd rather die free than live under someone else's thumb... especially a Clinton's thumb!

I Will Never Visit Mississippi If This Becomes Law

What am I talking about?

This piece of nanny statism.

Bascially, they are saying that anyone they deem to be obese can not eat in a public restaurant... and if they do, the establishment is to be held accountable. Doesn't this reek of the government trying to overstep it's bounds? How do they decide who is "obese?" Do you call the "fat cops" when you see someone who might be overweight eating at Mickey D's? Why aren't the "fatties" penalized, too?

What in the hell is wrong with these people? I'd love to see them try to stop my 6'4", 290lb self from eating some crawdads if I were there on vacation. Give me a freaking break!

I guess I'm not alone in seeing this as a waste of legislative time and money. Here are a few excerpts from a report I found online:

"What kind of crap is that?" asks James Kelley of Clarksdale, Mississippi. "What do I think about it? Leave people alone. Let them eat what they want. Let them be."

Dedra Holley from Robinsonville, agrees. "How can you be serious?" she says. "So if they discriminate against obese people who are they going to discriminate against after that? People with long hair? Short hair? White people? Black people? I mean, that's absurd."

As I said, at least I'm not alone in feeling like this is an utterly ridiculous bill. I wonder what the authors of it are saying. I know what one of them said...

You'd be hardpressed to find any Mississippian who supports the idea. Even the man who sponsored the bill, Representative Ted Mayhall, says it should never pass.

"I do not have any intention of this becoming law," says the Desoto County Republican. "I don't think it has a Chinaman's chance. I'm against intrusive government. I don't think that's what we're here for and what we should be doing."

So why draft such controversial legislation?

"The reason I put the bill in," says Mayhall, "was to call attention to the seriousness of the obesity epidemic in Mississippi."

Why is this considered an acceptable forum for "call(ing) attention to the seriousness of the obesity epidemic?" A true republican would not waste taxpayer money and time on this by creating a piece of legislation to be researched, discussed, and voted upon. I would think that a real republican would call a news conference and/or issue a statement... and work with non-governmentally funded organizations to raise awareness of the issue on THEIR OWN TIME. Where have all of the real conservatives gone? They certainly aren't in Mississippi, because two of the three authors of the bill are republicans!

It's the first small steps, just like this one, that begin the trampling of the freedoms every single one of us are guaranteed by our Constitution. Granted, the "right to become fat" is not written as such, but the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is most certainly in the Declaration of Independence. Becoming fat is part of "pursuing happiness" for some of us. I know I love cooking... and eating what I cook. Those two things are contributing factors to me being "bigger than the average bear."

Does anyone out there want to invest in a restaurant in Mississippi that only caters to "fat people?" I've got the restaurant management and cooking experience to run it, all I need is a financial backer!

It's Been Rough...

.. over the last few weeks. Dad's health has been pretty bad. He's had almost 15 liters of fluid removed from his abdomen. The fluid is a byproduct of the cancer. He also almost died when he developed a blood clot in his lung. That's not over exaggeration or hyperbole... that's fact. My brother and I had to help him upstairs from the shower room in the basement (which he can no longer use now) because he was so out of breath from drying himself off. Once we got him upstairs, he still hadn't caught his breath an hour later... so Mom took him to the hospital. We were lucky to have been there for him. I really hope that he makes it to his 60th birthday in April.

I'm not telling any of you this for sympathy.. I simply want you to know that I have a lot of more pressing matters to attend to, and that's why I'm not a "good blogger."

Thanks for hanging in there with me!

My Brother Rocks!

Close to a year ago, I made a post about Van Halen reuniting. Their tour was so successful last year that they announced another one this year, ending here in Wisconsin on April 7th.

My little brother decided that getting me tickets for that show would make for a great Christmas present... and he was wrong...

It made for a FRIGGIN' AWESOME PRESENT!!

In honor of the reunion tour, here's a hilarious video about the reunion from Red State Update:

The Red Truck Keeps Rolling

According to numerous pundits, "journalists", and others allegedly "in the know", Fred Thompson's campaign is about to fold up.

Don't you believe it. Here's the latest update on his campaign's funding, from Fred's blog:

We crossed the $1 million mark. We started filling the red truck Friday, January 4. So give or take a few hours we’ve averaged $100,000/day. We set three goals, and you met every one. With your gifts you have given Fred the resources he needs to convey is conservative message. Be proud of your accomplishment.

Thanks for all your help.

A million bucks in ten days... and we are supposed to believe that his support is waning?

Fred also jumped up four points in the latest Rasmussen poll of South Carolina voters. Considering that Mike Huckabee lost five points, I'd say that Fred challenging the Huckster to defend his record has started something big.

Here's the debate where he calls out the fake conservative, Mike Huckabee:



And here's what the Fox focus group had to say about it:



The race is on, and it's going to be really interesting over the next month. If you haven't made up your mind, here's where Fred stands on ALL of the issues.

If you like what you read there, then click on the little Fred image below. I don't get anything for you donating, but the country gets a president that will make us all proud to be Americans...

Which benefits everyone!

Not Quite Presidential

Since well before Fred even began to pursue the presidency, I have supported him. I have not hidden that, and I definitely have not been quiet about it (when I actually blog that is!!)

Here is one more reason why I support him. He will not be appearing on the Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians List. If you're wondering which candidates are on the list, here you go:

1. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY): In addition to her long and sordid ethics record, Senator Hillary Clinton took a lot of heat in 2007 – and rightly so – for blocking the release her official White House records. Many suspect these records contain a treasure trove of information related to her role in a number of serious Clinton-era scandals. Moreover, in March 2007, Judicial Watch filed an ethics complaint against Senator Clinton for filing false financial disclosure forms with the U.S. Senate (again). And Hillary’s top campaign contributor, Norman Hsu, was exposed as a felon and a fugitive from justice in 2007. Hsu pleaded guilt to one count of grand theft for defrauding investors as part of a multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme.

5. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R-NY): Giuliani came under fire in late 2007 after it was discovered the former New York mayor’s office “billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons…” ABC News also reported that Giuliani provided Nathan with a police vehicle and a city driver at taxpayer expense. All of this news came on the heels of the federal indictment on corruption charges of Giuliani’s former Police Chief and business partner Bernard Kerik, who pleaded guilty in 2006 to accepting a $165,000 bribe in the form of renovations to his Bronx apartment from a construction company attempting to land city contracts.

6. Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR): Governor Huckabee enjoyed a meteoric rise in the polls in December 2007, which prompted a more thorough review of his ethics record. According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also been colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about his integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use of a nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction of state computer files on his way out of the governor’s office.” And what was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics allegations? Rather than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee sued the state ethics commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down.

8. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL): A “Dishonorable Mention” last year, Senator Obama moves onto the “ten most wanted” list in 2007. In 2006, it was discovered that Obama was involved in a suspicious real estate deal with an indicted political fundraiser, Antoin “Tony” Rezko. In 2007, more reports surfaced of deeper and suspicious business and political connections It was reported that just two months after he joined the Senate, Obama purchased $50,000 worth of stock in speculative companies whose major investors were his biggest campaign contributors. One of the companies was a biotech concern that benefited from legislation Obama pushed just two weeks after the senator purchased $5,000 of the company’s shares. Obama was also nabbed conducting campaign business in his Senate office, a violation of federal law.

9. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who promised a new era of ethics enforcement in the House of Representatives, snuck a $25 million gift to her husband, Paul Pelosi, in a $15 billion Water Resources Development Act recently passed by Congress. The pet project involved renovating ports in Speaker Pelosi's home base of San Francisco. Pelosi just happens to own apartment buildings near the areas targeted for improvement, and will almost certainly experience a significant boost in property value as a result of Pelosi's earmark. Earlier in the year, Pelosi found herself in hot water for demanding access to a luxury Air Force jet to ferry the Speaker and her entourage back and forth from San Francisco non-stop, in unprecedented request which was wisely rejected by the Pentagon. And under Pelosi’s leadership, the House ethics process remains essentially shut down – which protects members in both parties from accountability.

I'm sure that you're wondering why I included Nancy Pelosi on this list. Well, she is the third in line for the presidency, behind only the president and the vice-president. She could become president without ever being elected by the entire country. For that reason, she's on the part of the list I posted here. The only person on this list of presidential hopefuls I found somewhat surprising to be included on it was Obama. Granted, I don't know much about the guy, but I hadn't heard the same arguments being made about him, and his past dealings.

Regardless of whom you're throwing your support behind, this list is probably of interest to you. If I used this list AND I voted democrat, I'd seriously need to think about supporting John Edwards. But...

Since I tend to vote republican and/or libertarian, and my candidate of choice is not on the list, I feel even better about my decision to support Fred Thompson. Honestly, I didn't know I could feel better about my choice, but I do.

In the end, I'm sure that this list will make a small impact on how people vote. When I say small, I mean VERY SMALL. Too many people blindly follow the person they think is the right one, without actually looking into much about them. It's not a popularity contest, it's an election to decide who the best person is to lead our country.

I think that too many people forget about that when they step into the voting booth... which is very, very unfortunate.

Do Onto Others...

As they did onto your 8-year-old daughter... and then some.

FORT WORTH, Texas — A father sodomized his 18-year-old stepson to avenge the teenager's alleged rape of the man's 8-year-old daughter, police said.

The father, 32, turned himself into to authorities on Friday and was released from jail Saturday after posting a $17,500 bond. He faces a charge of aggravated sexual assault.

The stepson was arrested Jan. 2 and charged with suspicion of aggravated sexual assault. Police say the father caught him assaulting his daughter, and a subsequent examination at a hospital revealed the girl had been sodomized.

Sgt. Cheryl Johnson, supervisor of the Fort Worth sex crimes unit, said in a story posted Saturday on the Fort Worth Star-Telegram's Web site that people need to "allow the criminal justice system to work for them."

"This is a very unique case, but we have a criminal justice system in place, and no one can take the law into their own hands," Johnson said.

The Star-Telegram didn't identify the father or the stepson to protect the identity of the girl. Fort Worth police didn't immediately return phone and e-mail messages from The Associated Press.

When the stepson was arrested, the man warned his wife not to get the teenager out of jail. She posted bond for the teen's release. When he called home Jan. 3 after getting released, the father took the call and picked him up, police said.

Instead of taking the teenager home, the Arlington man drove to an abandoned house in Fort Worth, beat his stepson with a baseball bat and sodomized him with a metal tool, police said.

After the man left, the stepson found a pay phone and called police, who searched the abandoned home.

"We did find evidence at the scene to corroborate our victim's story," Johnson said.

I know that we all follow the rule of law in America, but even a person like me, who has no children, can understand the urge to retaliate here. While I will not defend or approve of his course of action, I also have a part of me that empathizes with this father and daughter. I can't even begin to imagine the rage that would be created by a stepson sodomizing my eight year old daughter. My heart goes out to both him and his daughter, and it's a shame that she's going to have to grow up without her father around for some time. That's what happens when you break the law, though. He deserves to get whatever he gets from the judicial system.

I'd like to think that I would rise above taking matters into my own hands like this, but unless I was actually put in that position (which I never wish upon any parent!) I can not say for sure.

Can you?

Slightly Overexaggerated?

via Drudge:

Full Article Here.

A STUDY that claimed 650,000 people were killed as a result of the invasion of Iraq was partly funded by the antiwar billionaire George Soros.

Soros, 77, provided almost half the £50,000 cost of the research, which appeared in The Lancet, the medical journal. Its claim was 10 times higher than consensus estimates of the number of war dead.

The study, published in 2006, was hailed by antiwar campaigners as evidence of the scale of the disaster caused by the invasion, but Downing Street and President George Bush challenged its methodology.

New research published by The New England Journal of Medicine estimates that 151,000 people - less than a quarter of The Lancet estimate - have died since the invasion in 2003.

“The authors should have disclosed the [Soros] donation and for many people that would have been a disqualifying factor in terms of publishing the research,” said Michael Spagat, economics professor at Royal Holloway, University of London.

Even with this coming to light, I highly doubt that it will alter the way the anti-war left uses this as if it were a "proven fact."

I tell ya... people wonder why there's so little trust in the media nowadays. When reports like this are simply copied and pasted, (without any research into where it came from, who funded it, etc.) we have the current state of journalistic integrity (or lack thereof) which instills zero trust from people on every side of the discussion.

Even when there is an attempt to investigate a story by an author or publication, more times than not the research, AND the conclusions drawn from it, are so slanted to fit someones personal beliefs/agenda that it makes many of us wonder if it's possible to get an unbiased point of view any more.

Everyone talks a great game about wanting transparency in almost everything, but who is actually going to step up and "walk the walk"?

Why (Some) Liberals Irritate Me

Do as I say, not as I do.

Here's a glaring example, from *lowers head* a Wisconsinite who decided to go after Michelle Malkin.

Please click on that link, ESPECIALLY if you consider yourself left-leaning or liberal. These are the two-faced morons who ruin any chance at conversation and debate. I don't know whether to laugh at him, or simply feel sorry for him. Regardless, he makes people from Wisconsin look bad.

My apologies to all morons out there who aren't antagonistic jerks.

Paging Mr. Ringo... Mr. Ringo You Have A Call At The Front Desk

Whoa!

It's been forever and a day, hasn't it?

I'm not going to beg for forgiveness... and there might be one or two of you who still pop by to see if I'm alive who actually care.

I am alive... but Dad isn't doing so well. I know that I mentioned, albeit briefly, that he was diagnosed with terminal cancer during the '06 holiday season. Suffice it to say that his cholangiocarcinoma has not been good to him. He's lost over 80 pounds, and has taken an early retirement because he has no energy to work. I've barely worked because I spend every day with him, and I don't know when he's going to be gone.

I've also had a long battle within myself, because of watching the one man I've always seen as "indestructible" slowly becoming frail and old beyond his years. I had an extended period of seeing nothing but negatives in everything in the world. Because of that, I made the choice to stay away from anything resembling "public speaking" on my blog. I didn't think that anyone would appreciate hearing me piss and moan about everything that was aggravating me... which was pretty much everything.

This isn't to get any of you to feel sorry for me, or for him. I just thought you should know that my long absence was not planned, but it was for the best.

I'm back now... and if you see me falling into the "bitch about everything" mode... by all means call me on it. I'll do my best to NOT do that very thing. (after my next post! LOL)

Fred Is OFFICIALLY In The Race!

Here's the video:



Click here for the Official Fred Thompson For President website.

And here's the link to the Official Fred Thompson blog.

Now that it's after Labor Day (when the presidential races usually begin!), the race is definitely going to heat up.

It was humorous watching the other Republicans at the debate tonight taking their shots at Fred for going on Leno... instead of joining the debate in New Hampshire. There will be plenty of debates after tonight for these candidates. Fred only gets to announce once. Seeing as he was running second in most polls without formally being a candidate, I understand them wanting to knock him down a peg or two. Remember this...

It was one of many debates. By the time the primaries roll around, who's going to care about him not being there tonight?

As for him announcing so "late?"

Well, when Leno asked him that question, Fred's reply was right on. (I'm paraphrasing it)

"I really don't think someone's going to say, 'I really think this guy would make a great president... but he declared his candidacy too late.'. Do you, Jay?"

That's the "plain-speaking" that so many of us Fred Heads love.

For all of you Law and Order fans, here's a little musical send off for D.A. Arthur Branch:



The United States needs Fred right now. After the election you'll still have syndication.. Besides, Sam Waterston can now stop being the oldest A.D.A. in history!