Tim Hawkins

If you don't laugh it hurts too much...so laugh.

Get Rid of Welfare? Pt. 2

I have much more to say concerning this topic, but here is just one more idea.

The world did exist before government sponsored welfare. The poor were taken care of before welfare. And the lower class was much smaller than it is today before welfare. Before welfare private charities and churches took care of the needy. These organizations offered to the poor(and still do to a much smaller extent) not only the necessities of life, but opportunity.

If welfare was to be eradicated tomorrow, do you not think that the good people of America would step forward and feed the poor, clothe the naked, and give shelter to the homeless? Charity would be given with honor, and the charity would be received by a grateful and humble people. This charity would inspire and motivate the needy, when possible, to reform themselves and to become better people. This process would inspire us all to become better people, but especially those that received help.

Government welfare breeds ingratitude and feelings of entitlement. The lower class, and all of us, are better off without government sponsored welfare. It robs all of us of the opportunity to CHOOSE to give, and robs the poor of opportunity.

Why do I waste time talking about something that will never happen? Because it's easy to forget how far our country has gone in the wrong direction. It is easy to accept how BIG our government is because it is all we know. Our federal government was never intended to be so large, and our state governments were never intended to be so small and insignificant. Welfare will never be eradicated, but it is worth talking about to remind us all that BIG government is not the answer.

ObamaCare

Obama's health care plan will:

* Be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it.
* Be passed by a Congress that hasn't read it (but exempts themselves from it).
* Be signed by a president who smokes (and also hasn't read it).
* Have funding administered by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes.
* Be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese.
* Be financed by a country that is nearly broke.

What could possibly go wrong?

I am not the author of this, but it made me smile and almost chuckle.

Get Rid of Welfare?

"Repeal that [welfare] law, and you will soon see a change in their manners. St. Monday and St. Tuesday, will soon cease to be holidays. Six days shalt thou labor, though one of the old commandments long treated as out of date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing all your estates among them."

--Benjamin Franklin, letter to Collinson, 1753

Welfare enslaves the lower class. Welfare offers no escape, no light at the end of the tunnel...only more of the same. So much for CHANGE.

My Response to a Stranger

I have no idea who this is that wrote this and he doesn't know me, but I had to respond to him...but don't know him well enough to do it to him directly. So here it is.

His quote (speaking about the economic crisis and Obama's stimulus package):

"Inaction would be much worse than Action. Do you not see that? Many economists have blatantly stated that we needed "more" stimulus money; they blamed Obama for not putting enough into the system. These are economists speaking..the ones that deal with numbers, not politicians."

Okay, first...there are such things as liberal economists. The majority of economists saw right through the stimulus package and predicted it would do nothing to 'stimulate' the economy, and that it would actually do more harm than good.

The way you phrase 'they blamed Obama for not putting enough into the system' makes me shiver with disgust. First of all, let's be clear. The government has NOTHING to 'put' into the system. The government can TAKE and then give back what was ours to begin with. The government creates no income, the government has no money except what they take out of the economy in the form of taxes. What the government has is OURS. They cannot create wealth and then 'put' it into the economy. They can take wealth out, dilute it, then put it back into our country as they see fit. Got it?

So no, inaction would not be worse than action. You are wrong. So there. (I am now sticking my tongue out at the computer screen) I really do feel better, this was very therapeutic.

Iraq Who?

Just because more people will read if I have a picture:




Just an interesting thought.

Do you remember how much the Iraq War was talked about from 2002 to 2008. Isn't it interesting that we haven't hardly heard one thing about it since Obama became president? It was even a hot topic in the election. In Obama's run for president he made huge promises about bringing the troops home by specific dates even. Obama hasn't brought anymore home than Bush would have.

Sure the economy is the main topic of discussion, but surely some mention of the war would be consistent with the coverage it's gotten in the past. Somehow, health care reform has been pushed forward as the new hot topic behind the economic crisis. Which is interesting given that our current 'depression' (as it was termed so quickly during the election, but not so much anymore) makes it so we have NO money for any of the health care reform that Obama is pushing (literally pushing). Bringing the troops home and ending the war would do more to help our economy than reforming health care. It just doesn't make sense.

There has been no push to bring the troops home during 2009 and no talk of the war in the media. Interesting how it's easy to talk the talk.

A Conservative in Politics.....Noooo

Rep. Tom Price of Georgia on Obamacare.



Open and say Obamaaaaaaaah.