Life is like a box of...stupid.

This was this guy's first boat, but he wasn't quite sure of the correct procedure for launching a boat at the ramp. However, he figured it couldn't be that difficult to do, so he stopped by his Union office for advice, and they just told him, "Don't let the trailer get too deep in the water when you're launching your boat".

Well later on, he couldn't understand what they meant by that, as he just could barely get his trailer in the water!

Here's a picture worth a "thousand' words! You're gonna love this guy!!! They walk among us, get married, have children and vote!

Oh, check out the sticker on back windshield. Some will say it explains everything. Others say, well...that's pretty much what everyone I've shown the picture to has said.

"The FairTax will not be revenue neutral (i.e. bring in the same revenue as the current system) at 23%"

The truth: The FairTax rate of 23% (when calculated inclusively like income tax rates) has been thoroughly researched to provide all the revenues now collected under both the income tax system and through FICA payroll taxes. Reports otherwise are largely based on the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform which declared the rate would have to be much higher. What the Panel failed to make clear in an amazingly shameless sleight-of-hand is that they never studied the FairTax legislation as it exists in pending legislation. They ignored $22 million of FairTax research and, instead, quietly devised their own national consumption tax which they loaded with the exemptions and deductions they felt were "politically realistic". They also failed to calculate the effects of elimination of the FICA tax on annual taxpayer burdens or on the distributional effects of the FairTax across the income spectrum. Upon completion--and after declaring a national consumption tax flawed--they then refused to publish their underlying assumptions.

For more information on this topic, see these research papers.

Taxing Sales Under the FairTax - What Rate Works?

A Comparison of the FairTax Base and Rate

Comparing Average and Marginal Tax Rates under the FairTax and the Current System of Federal Taxation

Right to Choose

I've been hearing something lately about Tim Tebow and some controversy surrounding him and a CBS Super Bowl ad, but, not being a Gator fan in particular, or football fan in general, and not caring much at all about the Super Bowl, I didn't know what the controversy was. And, frankly, didn't care.

I came on the facts today. Apparently, the American Family Association (AFA) produced a a pro-life commercial to air during the Super Bowl featuring Tebow, regarding his mother's decision not to abort the pregnancy that resulted in Tebow's birth.

Oh, my goodness!! A commercial that actually promotes continuing a pregnancy instead of abortion! The world is coming to an end! We're all going to hell in a handbasket! Okay, so I'm being a little ridiculous here. In my opinion, not much more than the left.

So typical of the left, they are up in arms that CBS is broadcasting a decision that is contrary to what they believe. They are all for choice, unless it's contrary to what they believe. Joy Behar, of "The View", said that abortion would have been appropriate since Tebow's mother didn't know that her child wouldn't grow up to be a "rapist pedophile".

What a stupid statement. Why assume that an unaborted pregnancy would result in a "rapist pedophile" rather than a doctor who discovers a cure for cancer? Or a fireman who saves a life while fighting a fire? or a police officer who stops a "rapist pedophile"? Not every unaborted pregnancy will result in a child who goes wrong just as not every continued pregnancy will result in fine, upstanding citizens.

I applaud the Tebow's for putting it out there. I'll also say that if abortion had been a viable option when I was gestating, I might not be here writing this. Yes, my birth mother was unmarried when she got pregnant with me. She didn't have a lot of choice in those days. She could have had a back room abortion that might have killed both of us. She could have been left unable to give birth again (I know she had another daughter a few years later). Let's assume that I have possibly survived but left severely physically and/or mentally impaired, requiring constant, expensive care. Yep, that would have given her a good life. She choose to give birth and I was adopted by a wonderful couple who loved me as their own, loving and caring for me as their child, until the day they died. I know who my birth mother was (she too, has passed on) and I thank her for making the decision she did.

Abortion is only one of three choices I know of. The others are giving birth and either raising the child or adoption. I note in what I've read about the Tebow controversy that adoption has never been mentioned as an option by the left. Why does the left seem to believe that abortion is the only acceptable choice? What about adoption? It's as viable a choice as abortion.

I don't believe in abortion as a method of birth control. I also don't believe in a woman continuing to turn out child after child, continuing the welfare cycle. I won't ever say that the number of children produced by one woman or couple should be limited, but as long as she, or they, can take care of the children, it's not my business. Only when the family is continuing the welfare cycle does it become any of my affair and that's only because I'm helping to support that family through my tax dollars. I'm still working on that issue trying to find a solution that isn't contrary to my values, but also will help women and their children from falling into an abyss they can't get out of.

Personally, I'm Pro-Life and Pro-Choice. That means whatever decision a woman makes, to abort or to continue to give life, we should all shut our pieholes and respect her decision. I might not agree with her decision, but, guess what? It's HER decision, not mine, and no one else's. I don't believe anyone has the right to criticize a woman who makes the decision to abort or to continue a pregnancy.

And when the left makes statements like Behar's they just look and sound stupid. Why should I or anyone else listen to anyone making statements that are stupid?

~~~~~

Note: I just learned more of the Tebow story. I didn't know that Pam Tebow was a missionary in the Philippines when she became pregnant with her fifth child, who would become Tim. I didn't know that she was ill during the pregnancy and the doctors were insisting that she abort the pregnancy.

While I didn't know these facts, it still doesn't alter my opinion that the decision made was a decision that could only, and should only be made by the people involved - the parents. While if I were asked, I would offer the opinion that had Ms. Tebow chosen to abort the pregnancy, under the circumstances it would be understandable and (to me) an acceptable reason.

But, it's not my opinion that matters. It only becomes anyone's business because AFA chose to use the story as a plank in their Pro-Choice platform. The Tebow's obviously believe in Pro-Life (and are maybe even pro-choice, I don't know) and chose to allow the story to be used. In that, they had to expect that they would become the center of controversy.

That's not the way it should be, but it is. I'm not criticizing anyone on the side of Pro-Choice or Pro-Life. I'm not criticizing the Tebow's for "going public" with this story. I might have some criticism for AFA, but they were allowed to use the story, so, I guess not too much.

I do have criticism for those who think that Ms. Tebow made the wrong choice. She made the choice that was right for her; the choice that was core to her values and morals. Had she gone against those values and morals, who knows how it might have affected her life, the lives of her other children, and the people whose lives she touched since then?

I don't believe it's right to impose one's own morals and values on anyone else. I personally will not judge the women I know who have had abortions. It's a decision they made, based on their own values and beliefs, and their very particular situation at the time. Some have regretted it, but understood it was the right choice for them at the time.

And how dare anyone second guess anyone else's choices in life? Just because you might be pro-abortion, don't assume you have all the answers. You haven't walked in anyone else's life and can't assume you know what is best for them.

And I still say that Joy Behar's statement was just plain stupid.

Headlines In the News

Cold Wave Linked to Temperatures

bet some smart scientist figured this one out

Headlines In the News

If Strike Isn't Settled Quickly, It May Last Awhile

hmmm....sounds like that jet crash expert opined on this one

Headlines In the News

War Dims Hope for Peace

Yeah, I can see how that could happen

Muth's News and Views

JANUARY 20, 2010

AND THE JACKASS OF THE YEAR AWARD ALREADY GOES TO.

"I wanted to apologize for calling Senator-elect Scott Brown an 'irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, tea bagging, supporter of violence against women and against politicians with whom he disagrees.' I'm sorry, I left out the word 'sexist.'"

- Keith Olbermann, MSNBC/NBC anchor

AND THE RUNNER-UP IS.

"If [Massachussets voters] go for Republican Scott Brown it's deliberate, premeditated murder for health care!"

Chris Matthews, MSNBC/NBC show host

JUST NOT BUYING

"There's going to be a tendency on the part of (Democrats) to be in denial about all this, (but) "if you lose Massachusetts and that's not a wake-up call, there's no hope of waking up. . . . (M)oderates and independents even in a state as Democratic as Massachusetts just aren't buying our message. They just don't believe the answers we are currently proposing are solving their problems."

- Democrat Sen. Evan Bayh on Tuesday night's election results

SHOCKING!

"President Barack Obama's plan to fix the foreclosure crisis has been a dud, putting the housing market recovery at risk."

- Associated Press, 1/16/10

STIMULATING MORE BUREAUCRATS

"The Social Security Administration spent $30 million in stimulus money in 2009 to hire 585 new bureaucrats who will be responsible for certifying whether people are eligible for disability so they can be paid by the taxpayers not to work."

- CNS News, 1/20/10

WELL-MEANING INCOMPETENT

"The President's now-infamous 72-hour delay in speaking publicly about the Christmas Day attack may have added to a growing concern that President Obama may mean well, but he and his administration are lacking the level of competence we need."

- Rich Galen, Mullings.com, 1/19/10

BYE-BYE BOXER?

"California's Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer's days in the Senate may be numbered. After representing the Golden State for 18 years, Ms. Boxer is finally facing a formidable field of GOP opponents. . . . As voters become more familiar with the Republican candidates, Ms. Boxer's numbers seem likely to fall even farther."

- Allysia Finley, Political Diary, 1/20/10

JESSE "THE INVESTIGATOR" VENTURA

"Former Navy SEAL, professional wrestler, and Minnesota governor, Jesse Ventura, recently launched a new television show on the truTV cable channel. . . . Predictably, mainstream critics have universally condemned the series. . . . Contrary to the rants of modern critics, however, Ventura's Conspiracy Theory is not 'reality' television or 'mindless, good fun.' It is better investigative reporting than anything I've seen on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN or FOX NEWS in a long, long time."

- Columnist Chuck Baldwin

SAYONARA SOUTHERS

"The man President Obama appointed to lead the Transportation Security Administration withdrew his name on Wednesday, a day after a 2008 video surfaced of him comparing the war on terror to global warming.

"Errol Southers' nomination was stalled by Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, who put a hold on it citing concerns Mr. Southers would give TSA collective bargaining rights. While the nomination was being held, it was also discovered that Mr. Southers gave misleading statements to Congress about a federal security database he twice accessed for personal reasons.

"Another blow, however, was delivered to Mr. Southers when the conservative-leaning CNSNews.com posted a 2008 video interview that he had granted to Videojug.com, an information-sharing video Web site. Mr. Southers was asked in the interview, 'How high should the war on terror be on our list of national priorities?'

"He replied, 'It should be high on our list of priorities because of, speaking globally, the threat that exists.' But Mr. Southers added later, 'I do think, however, it deserves to perhaps have some parity with global warming, with education, with the economy.' That statement, and others in the video, surely would have become part of the debate over his nomination, but Mr. Southers withdrew it on Wednesday morning."

- Amanda Carpenter, Hot Button, 1/20/10

MUTH'S TRUTHS

I haven't been this ticked off in a long time. According to a January 4th report on WRGB-TV 6 in Albany, NY, Richard and Margie Cressy were "arrested on child endangerment charges" after authorities received an anonymous tip. And just what heinous abuse were the Cressys inflicting on their four children, ages 8 to 14? You're not going to believe it.

These dastardly, diabolical monsters had dared to..

Read the rest HERE

FED-EXCESS

It's a new year, but the same old FedEx disinformation campaign. Here's what the anonymous writers for the "Brown Bailout" project wrote on Tuesday:

"When Congress returns to Washington this week, UPS lobbyists will be back to their old games, lobbying Congress for an unfair, anti-competitive bailout that could threaten the nation's overnight delivery network and cripple entire sectors of our economy. If UPS succeeds in getting the 'Brown Bailout' passed, consumer shipping costs could rise and service and reliability could suffer. Put simply, this could hurt businesses and individuals across the country."

Now here's how the release SHOULD have been written:

When Congress returns to Washington this week, FedEx lobbyists will be back to their old games, lobbying Congress to keep an unfair, anti-competitive corporate welfare subsidy that creates an uneven playing field in the overnight delivery market and uses federal labor law to give FedEx an undeserved and unfair marketing advantage. If FedEx succeeds in retaining this corporate welfare subsidy, the uniquely and quintessentially American concept of equal justice under the law will continue to suffer. Put simply, this would hurt the free market for all businesses and individuals across the country.

There, that's better. And accurate and truthful, to boot.

FAMOUS LAST WORDS

"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it, and then misapplying the wrong remedies."

- Groucho Marx

Headlines In the News

Miners Refuse to Work After Death

Is that Union rules?