Climate Reparations

I realize the Copenhagen climate summit is over but I just thought of a couple of good ideas. And I'd be willing to let Hillary and Obama could use these as talking points at the next big U.N. pot luck.

A little background, please. The G77, which is comprised of over 100 developing countries (that's what used to be called "third world" before that term became politically incorrect, don't ya know), is unhappy with a $10 billion annual commitment from rich countries in climate reparations. The logic goes something like this: poor countries will suffer from the effects of climate change (that's what used to be called "global warming" before that term became politically incorrect when scientists reported the earth might actually be cooling) more than the rich countries who caused all the problems to begin with when they went and built all those factories to produce goods which improved people's lives.  See, the United States ruined Mother Earth and now we should just give billions of dollars to poor countries to say we're sorry for being so bad. Get it?

OK, here's my idea. We take the United States' share of that $10 billion annually, which would probably be in the ballpark of of $9.99 billion and subtract all the money that the U.S. has spent helping and/or saving the rest of the world since 1776. We can also subtract all the money given to international charities by U.S. corporations, churches, and other non-profits. We can subtract all the money spent in Europe and Japan to rebuild those countries after both world wars; we can even bill most of those still-existing countries for saving them from Hitler. We can subtract all the economic benefits those countries got from implementing U.S. inventions and products. We can place a dollar value on the number of their citizens' lives which were saved by U.S. pharmaceuticals, doctors, and nurses. We can subtract millions of dollars we spend on AIDS research, prevention, and treatment. What is our total foreign aid budget in one year, anyway? Multiply that times 233 years.See where I'm going here?

Climate reparations? I don't think so. They owe us money. And a big thank-you, but don't hold your breath.

I Hate Harry Reid so Let's Boycott Nevada

Harry Reid. How long has he been in the Senate? 23 years. But honestly, I didn't know the man existed until a year ago. Now I hate him. I know, I know; I'm supposed to be the "Sensible Woman". I can't go around  blogging from an emotion-based frame of mind writing that I hate Harry Reid. Someone might accuse me of being an extremist. That term is getting thrown around a lot lately. But that's another blog for another day.

But let's get back to old Harry. What to do when the esteemed Senator from Nevada bribes hesitant Democratic Senators from Louisiana and Nebraska with $142 MILLION in appropriations and extra medicaid funds, respectively, to kowtow to the party line on the health care bill? What to do when he values prevailing over Republicans ahead of doing what's right for America? What to do when he refuses to admit this health care bill is unconstitutional? Even the Governor of Nevada said today that Harry has "put his national political ambitions ahead of Nevada." That's harsh.

Well, being sensible and all, (instead of just being a hater) I call for a boycott of Nevada. That's right. Hit those Nevada voters, who keep voting him in year after year, after year, after year....whoa, almost dozed off there...where it hurts - their pocketbook.  A little peer pressure from the citizens of other states just might do the trick. Surely we can skip Vegas and silver jewelry until 2010. We could even have a slogan: No Craps until there's no more crap. Something like that. I'll work on it. Who's with me?

Hey, this idea could snowball and take off to other states whose Senators and Representatives have lost their common sense from being in Washington D.C. for decades. States like, oh say,  California? We could even get a two-fer and de-throne Pelosi and Boxer at the same time. Be still my beating heart.

Liberty's Due - It Must be Paid

"Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."  - George Bernard Shaw

A long, long time ago I was in 5th grade (I can already see my children rolling their eyes) and our teacher, Mrs. Jenkins, taught us about the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  She was careful to emphasis though, that that along with those rights came responsibilities. I think that responsibility part is getting lost these days.

We have the responsibility to educate ourselves on the issues facing our states and nations.   We have the responsibility to vote and to demand ethical candidates. We have the responsibility to hold elected officials  accountable and let them hear from us. We have the responsibility to keep government under our control, not the other way around. 

But we can't do it by just sending emails around to each other. That's what we call "Preaching to the choir". We have to spend the time and sign those petitions, contact the Senators, call our representatives, write that letter, and encourage our friends and family to do the same.

I understand. We live in a busy world - jobs, children, financial pressures.  But we've been so busy with our heads down, working hard digging that ditch, that we haven't seen not everyone around us is doing the same. There's a whole lot of people out there resting on their shovels while you and I are digging the ditch.  Then there's a whole other group (not digging either) telling us how deep to dig, how fast to dig, and requiring us to dig with one hand tied behind our back. I understand. We're tired.

But our liberty and Constitution is at stake and like it or not, we have to add one more thing to our "to do" list today. Otherwise, we deserve what we get.

SnagFilms Film Widget

University of California tuition increase

Tuition at UC schools will increase by 32% next year.  Students organized a protest and the Orange County Register quotes some students who say the increase will force them to drop out. But wait, according to the same article, UC President Mark Yudof doesn't expect to lose any students because one-third of the fee increase will go to what? Expanding FINANCIAL AID!
Yes, that's right. Taking a cue from our Socialist-in-training state and federal government, UC plans to spread the wealth around and increase the burden of those families that actually PAY tuition in order to increase financial aid to those who don't.
I understand haves vs have-nots. But what happens when the "haves" don't have anymore?