Vote on Values not Labels

I was reading an article in the New York Times yesterday about the Congressional Race in New York's 23rd district. There is a three way race: Bill Owens - Democrat, Douglas Hoffman - Conservative Party, Dede Scozzafaza - Republican.

It is alarming to me that people, who are supposedly in the know, think that electing someone with the desired label next to their name is all that is needed when that person's beliefs and record show that they have little in common with their label. In this case, Dede Scozzafaza has been endorsed by Newt Gingrich who believes that the Republican party must prioritize getting its numbers up. I think Newt is wrong. We must first take a stand for our principles. Compromising our principles is not a way to win support but to become obsolete as an option.

Why should I or any other conservative vote for a person/label who doesn't and won't support my principles, beliefs, and values? I would think that Mr. Gingrich would have learned a lesson by the example of Senator Arlen Specter who happily took Republican money and endorsements but switched labels when it was beneficial for himself.

I agree with Sarah Palin when she wrote on facebook, "Unfortunately, the Republican Party today has decided to choose a candidate who more than blurs the lines, and there is no real difference between the Democrat and the Republican in this race. This is why Doug Hoffman is running on the Conservative Party's ticket."

Doug Hoffman says that he values "smaller government, less taxes, fiscal responsibility and not spending money you don’t have". I think a lot more of our senators and representatives need to learn some fiscal responsibility - especially since it is NOT their money that they are wasting.

One may wonder what some other district's election has to do with anything. My answer is that each of the elected members of Congress vote on laws concerning all Americans, not just their own district. What can you do? You can spread the word and you can support Hoffman's campaign.

Send a message to Washington: We are silent no more.

Should I Get That in Writing?

When my husband first mentioned to me that Congress wanted to pass a law taking away 90% of the bonuses paid by AIG, "I thought that won't happen, it's not legal."

Apparently, the majority of the House of Representatives doesn't care about legality. Yesterday, they trampled the constitution by passing legislation taxing 90% of this group of people's income. This is government taking aim at a group of people they don't like and confiscating their money, the income they had contractually earned.

These bonuses were no surprise. The payout of these AIG bonuses were even provided for by Chris Dodd inserting a loophole for "contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009" in the stimulus package. The outrage by Congress is a sham. Now it is evident that contracts and words spoken mean absolutely nothing to Congress and Timothy Geithner.

Who will be the next target of Congress? Who else will be targeted because the government doesn't like them, their income, their job, their political beliefs, their religion? Will you only say something if the target is you? Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean you can punish them at will.

So much for private property and the pursuit of happiness.

The Silencing of Dissent

"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist." - President Barack Obama

President Obama, let us not silence the voices of dissent.

Let's put away the Fairness Doctrine which would force radio stations to air both sides of any controversial topics but leave liberal-run television and newspapers alone. Christian radio stations voicing moral concerns would be forced to share viewpoints in opposition to the Bible. Talk radio would lose revenue and jobs because people that want a conservative viewpoint don't want to listen to the emotional ranting of liberals. It is an attempt to silence conservative voices.

Let's stop supporting hate crimes legislation which elevates one group of people above others, creating a special class. Our laws protect every citizen equally. Each crime has a consequence. What crime is not based in hate? This legislation seeks to punish extensively anyone who commits a crime "with actual or perceived bias against" a person's sexuality or religion. Perceived bias. Do we now have thought police? The Declaration of Independence says "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Our right to free speech is under attack by an inquest of "hate speech." Hate Crimes legislation is an attempt to silence anyone who believes and says that homosexuality is wrong. It is an attempt to silence Christians who believe what God says in the Bible.

Let us keep the Motion to Recommit. The Motion to Recommit has been used for a century by the minority party to amend a bill before it passes. In the last Congress, Republicans were able to block some tax increases using the Motion to Recommit. Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats passed rules severely limiting the ability of conservatives to debate policies important to a great many Americans. It is an attempt to silence many concerned voices in America.

President Obama, please don't silence our voices of dissent.