The following is a conversation with a welfare mother who called in to a radio show. If you haven’t heard it, you must listen. The woman describes how she can smoke marijuana, sit around doing nothing all day, and the checks come every month. Words cannot adequately describe, you must hear it for yourself.
UPDATE: A reader discovered a source saying this was false. Not exactly a hoax, but apparently the woman called back again and said she had been on welfare, but was off it, and was incensed others didn’t do the same. Also that she invented the original story to raise awareness. Now I am left wondering if the retraction is true, or merely the result of worrying that some government official would come after her now that she embarrassed the system. A person who has been on welfare and successfully gotten off it could surely come up with better ways to raise awareness for the PROS and CONS of welfare than by concocting a story which only highlights the CONS of the system.
If any body else finds more to this story, let me know.
Video after the jump because it auto-plays.
A week or so ago, President Obama made headlines by declaring he’s “got a pen” and “got a telephone” and calling 2014 a year of action! My first thought was, “Gee, Batman must be jealous of your high tech gadgets Mr. President.” My second thought was that Obama was actually threatening to bypass the Constitutional role of Congress by acting unilaterally wherever possible.
In case there was any doubt about the President’s commitment to Executive action, the White House has doubled down on its promise to circumvent Congress.
One of the many interesting sub-plots of the 2014 election year is the possibility that Congress may welcome its first openly gay Republican.
Dan Innis is running for a House seat in New Hampshire. He is a businessman, entrepreneur, Dean of the Whittemore School of Business and Economics, and is married to a man. It was his husband who convinced him to run, saying “You’ve got to do this” to see if Innis could “make a difference.”
Richard Tisei is running again for a House seat in Massachusetts. He lost by just 1 point in the general election to John Tierney, and will face him again this time around. He has already served as a state senator. He is also married to a man.
Carl DeMaio is running for a House seat in California. He is a businessman who provided training and consulting specifically to financially-troubled government entities to help them become more efficient. He has also served as a city councilman for San Diego. At the time of writing this I do not know if DeMaio is married to his partner, but it is my understanding they have been together for six years.
None of these men are making their sexuality part of their campaign. It will be interesting to see what the liberals do, should these men make it through the GOP primaries. Kevin has often pointed out that liberals reveal their ultimate hypocrisy when faced with an opponent who would traditionally be a liberal. As a living example, DeMaio and his partner were booed while walking in the Gay Pride parade, because DeMaio is a Republican and was running for Mayor.
As President Obama rolls out his poorly-named “Promise Zones” (sounds like something a male adolescent would come up with to name a body part), progressives around the nation are simultaneously pushing for higher minimum wage — places like New York, Detroit, and SeaTac have recently had protests and/or legislation passed over higher minimum wage, just to name a few. And the U.S. Senate has mentioned a “$10-ish” federal minimum wage. By the way, it’s not just progressive liberals pushing for it — in Washington state, a self-described Republican is pushing for $15/hour minimum wage. The article calls him a “conservative”, but we all recognize his progressive ideology.
“Income inequality” is shaping up to be the big 2014 liberal campaign platform. The progressives want to re-frame the debate as a humanitarian rather than an economic one. Democrats hope they can ride this horse to victory, and probably even keep riding it through 2016. Never mind the fact that they are essentially admitting to buying votes.
In any free market system, the cost of labor is an input which impacts the final price of goods sold and services rendered. By artificially inflating minimum wage, Democrats promise us a better life for those at the bottom of the wage scale, but the tradeoff a higher cost to produce goods and services. This increase in cost will work its way into the economy in one of three main ways:
- Higher prices for consumers to obtain a good or service (essentially a hidden tax on consumption)
- Less innovation and production and employment growth, due to more business resources being allocated to existing labor
- Lost jobs due to companies moving production overseas, or in the case of business that can’t move overseas, more automation or just plain lower quality of service
Additionally, when minimum wage goes up, it tends to drive all wages up across the board. This exacerbates the above outcomes across the entire economy.
When fast-food workers in 100+ cities went on strike a few weeks ago, they probably never thought their jobs were replaceable. After all, how do you make food without humans? May I present to you, the robot that makes nearly 400 burgers an hour:
How many days has it been since news broke that Chris Christie’s administration had intentionally created traffic problems on the Washington bridge? It’s only been a week or so but it seems like forever. Public radio and the main stream media seem to be talking about it any time I turn on the TV, radio, or Internet. I even saw at least one Democrat calling for Christie’s impeachment. I’m not endorsing Christie by any means, but impeachment? Come on…
And now, with the Feds probing possible misuse of Hurricane Sandy relief funds, the left is whipping itself into a feeding frenzy. I even noticed CNN went so far as to call Christie “scandal plagued,” as if two scandals amount to a plague in a world where President Obama can apparently weather a dozen scandals simultaneously without CNN throwing up the quarantine tent.
It’s been a long while since I’ve posted. Many (good) things have been happening in my personal life which have required my time for the last many months. Things are settling down a bit for me now and I’m planning to start posting again. Things are happening in this country that MUST be brought into the light!
My first order of business is to update you all on Kevin. He is currently recovering from pneumonia, which he contracted while recovering from his latest surgery. He misses writing and really misses HillBuzz, but he is doing what he must do to focus on his health and well-being.
If you pray, I ask that you please pray for Kevin, his health, his recovery, and his happiness!
Mommy Wars are a huge part of parenting and usually waged between working vs. non-working moms. But if you want to know who is really ruining kids, look to the philosophies of permissive parenting and moms who are more interested in being a friend than a parent. This trend is not only popular in Hollywood, but is trickling into suburbia where mothers of teen girls are shopping at the same stores as their teens and hosting parties with alcohol for their underage progeny. If you can answer yes to any of the following questions, congratulations, you are a crappy parent.
3. Are you a stage-parent?
Dina Lohan’s first mistake was getting her little girl, Lindsay, into the entertainment industry. While commercials and off-broadway plays may seem harmless, it can lead to full-on hollywood horror. Strangely, while Disney maintains the best place on earth for little ones, any child sucked into working for Disney doesn’t end up happy or healthy. Very few child stars escape unscathed. Aside from that, hawking your child like a money-making opportunity is just distasteful and I’m sure makes for uncomfortable conversation over holiday dinners while your child is trying to figure out how they ended up with a cocaine addiction to rival Richard Pryor’s. Stage-parenting is not the same thing as parenting.
A classic example is Lynn Spears who allowed a Rolling Stone photographer to photograph her under-aged daughter alone in her room wearing only a bra and panties surrounded by her childhood dolls. Spears then wrote a book trying to explain that she was just naive and had no idea the entertainment industry would exploit her daughter in that way (even though it had previously exploited every other female it got its hands on.) I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure if some creepy photographer tried to get my daughter alone in a bedroom he’d find himself out on the front lawn with a bloody nose. What kind of parent doesn’t protect their child from predators? A crappy one. (ahem…Billy Ray Cyrus.)
We started school in my house on Thursday, and, as usual, the freedom homeschooling offers still takes me by surprise. I’ve been at it for 3 years now (well, 7 if you count all the pre-pre-school that happens before school age.) We have a new grammar curriculum, Shurley English, which I think I’m going to love but when I started teaching the first lesson I realized my daughter already knows this information and I don’t want to waste her time re-teaching it. So I set her up with writing exercises while I perused the book and found the first 5 chapters are a waste for her. So guess what? We’re skipping them! If she were in class with 25 other kids, some of whom don’t know the same information she does, she would have to sit through 5 whole chapters which would take up several weeks of re-learning redundant information. What a waste of her time and talents! Instead, we can just skip ahead and get to the new stuff right now.
Many kids hate school and just get through it as quickly and as mediocrely as they can. Perhaps it’s because their specific likes and dislikes or personal learning styles aren’t taken into account. How can they in a system that has to cater to such a large group of children? Recently, a controversial article was written entitled, “If You Send Your Kids to Private School, You are a Bad Person” by Allison Benedikt that laments parents who want, and can pay for the best education their kids can get. Benedikt supposes all children should be in the public system even at their own detriment:…CONTINUE READING AT PJMEDIA!
From Rapey to Righteous: Can Robin Thicke’s Controversial Hit Song ‘Blurred Lines’ Elevate the Culture?
Fauxminists everywhere are declaring Robin Thicke’s summer hit, “Blurred Lines,” rapey and weird:
Basically, the majority of the song…has the R&B singer murmuring ‘I know you want it’ over and over into a girl’s ear. Call me a cynic, but that phrase does not exactly encompass the notion of consent in sexual activity.
As originally written with the rap, yes, it’s gross. So was the video with the naked supermodels, as is most pop music. That is all true. (Someone needs to record the date and time I agreed with a modern feminist. It won’t happen again.)
However, “Blurred Lines” is a serious jam and I can’t help but turn it up and sing along (albeit without the kids in the car.) Last week, I wrote about the Miley Cyrus twerking incident which involved Thicke, who really should have known better than to agree to perform a pedophilia fantasy with a barely-legal girl in a teddy bear suit. I think we can all agree these are not shining pillars of moral superiority we’re dealing with. The Hollywood crowd seems to be arrested in development somewhere near 15-years-of-age with a fixation on dick jokes and orgasms.
But something happened with “Blurred Lines” that made it palatable even to this Christian conservative prude
If you don’t know what twerking is yet, I’ll explain it one more time. To “twerk”, as the kids say, is not your average Jennifer Gray/Patrick Swayze dirty dancing. In fact, it makes their bump and grind look like the foxtrot. I was in Oklahoma last year hanging out with my cousins at a rodeo bar (yeah, I know it’s cliché but when in OK City, it’s A-Ok to go full-on cowgirl.) I was beyond perplexed when I realized I brought my red leather cowboy boots down hard on some poor girl’s fingers on the dance floor. What were her fingers doing on said dance floor, you might ask? Twerking. Imagine, if you can, what kind of position a girl must be in to have her hands on the floor, ass in the air, gyrating around like an acrobat on LSD. It’s not pretty. In fact, it’s pretty ugly. I can tell you that me and the 5 other people I was with had a great time discussing and laughing (as was the guy she was twerking on, btw.) No one thinks this is sexy. It’s a big joke. It’s as if the guys in the room (not men) are all waiting to see who they can fool into trying this “move” which is nothing more than a scene from a XXX movie.