Is Obama treated differently?

Rep. Sheila Jackson has suggested that Obama is treated differently because he is black.

Does she forget that this happened in 1995 for the same reason?

And that in 2006, every Democratic senator, including Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling?

What’s different now? 
A staggering debt and no plan to stop it from increasing.

Tucson

In the wake of the Tucson shootings, I hear a lot of blame thrown around.

Some blame the left, some blame the right.
Some blame political rhetoric, gun laws, the healthcare system and our attitudes toward mental illness.

What I don’t hear enough is people blaming the one thing that is truly and solely responsible – the man who did it.

We need to take a step back and ask how and why we’ve become so comfortable
laying blame wherever it is most convenient, rather than where it genuinely belongs.

If we change what we say because some nutjob might react a certain way, then the lunatics are literally running the asylum.

H.R.5741 — Universal National Service Act

Read the bill http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111%3AH.R.5741:

The problem here is that it’s a subjective, moral imperative.
If you wouldn’t accept the forced imposition of a moral mandate from a church or religious organization, why would you accept it from the federal government?

You trade one moral framework for another.  This is how new religions are born.

Not to mention that it blanantly violates the 13^th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. 

As far as helping others go, we first help ourselves. 
Then, we help our familes.
Finally, we help our friends and associates. 

Voluntarily helping others is nice.
Being forced to help others is servitude.

Worse yet, it’s at the discretion of one person – the President of the U.S.

The current administration may have good intentions for the use of these resources.
But what use may future administrations have?

This is a bad precedent to set.
Power granted to government is not easily taken away.

You can call someone a bad citizen, insensitive or uncaring for not wanting to help others.
But you must not force them to do so.
If a person doesn’t want to do community service and help others, that’s their choice.

We are free to make good choices as well as bad choices in the country.  Otherwise, we are not free at all.

H.R.4173 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act

Absurdity in motion.

Here are the the stated aims of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act:

1. Promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system.
   Finaincial stability?  There is no such thing.  Accept the risk and instability. 
   That’s what makes for a strong and dynamic economy.
2. End “too big to fail” .
   End it by not bailing them out.  Let them fail.
   We’ll suffer through and learn from it.
   Companies will be more adverse to risky investments if there’s a real possibility that they will go out of business.
3. Protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts.
   Then don’t bail them out.  Our economy will recover and so will we.
4. Protect consumers from abusive financial services practices.
   What practices are these?  Requiring customer consent for enrolling in overdraft protection programs?
   Solution:  Don’t overdraft. 
5. And for ‘other purposes.’
   What might these might be? 
   Anything a future administration might decide is the fashionable threat du jour? 

We don’t need legislation to solve these problems.  Let nature take its course.