GROW UP!

Basically, Sheila Pugach is upset because she is going to have to pay an extra $0.694 a day for her out patient medicare coverage. Why is she going to have to pay this? Because she is in the top 25% of the income bracket for retirees. Hardly broke. She seriously needs to get over it. Right now the non-retired taxpayer carries the burden of 75% of the premiums. And right now, for every ONE person of SS and Medicare there are only 3.79 workers to cover this. And most of those workers have families with children to feed. 

Look at the number of people who have lost their homes and are now on food stamps. Our economy is in the DUMPSTER and EVERYONE who gets government benefits is just going to have to give a bit no matter what they feel they were promised or what they feel they are owed. BECAUSE WE CAN'T AFFORD IT. It's not about being mean or evil hearted. We don't have the money. Period. So grow up.

And if any medicare recipient thinks that THEY are getting the shaft, well they are more than welcome to trade their government medicare for what our veterans gets instead. EIGHTEEN MONTH WAITING PERIODS and red tape covered by red tape with a bright red tape bow on top. Only 2% of Americans serve in the military and they get the absolute WORSE coverage after being paid CRAP. They provided SAFETY and FREEDOM for the other 98%. They put their LIVES ON THE LINE while eating dirt while they did it too. But when the promises made to THEM are broken, hardly a sound. But if our medicare recipients were put on the same coverage our veterans get THEY WOULD DECLARE WAR!

Imagine how quickly our veterans would get what THEY were promised if our medicare recipients started to be their voice and demand that THEY get the medical coverage THEY earned and deserve? Otherwise, any retiree in the top 25% of income who complains about $0.694 a day increase in premiums just looks inconsiderate, ungrateful, undeserving, and straight up Selfish.Selfish.Selfish!!!!


Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

I Think I'll Get a Job (That Pays)

I can stick my school aged children in public school. They will get free transportation, free breakfast and lunch (we qualify), and free extracurricular activities.


I can then stick my 2 year old in free daycare (we qualify).


Then I can go to my job, where I will get two ten minute breaks, a lunch break, and a full day to myself on my days off when my children are at school. Oh yeah ... and a pay check.


I will no longer have to pay for ...


4 children's educational books or needs
50 total meals
extra activities
transportation for activities (they'll have them at school)

As an added benefit I won't have to ...
potty train my own child or care for him


With that savings and my paycheck I will be able to afford someone to come in once a week to clean and do laundry.  I'd be able to afford that treadmill I've been wanting as well.  I might consider an occasional massage now and then as well.


Yes, I think I'll get a job ... so I can come home and enjoy a luxurious life.

Thank you, Obama and Rosen for showing me the light!!

Okay, make believe time over. Back to reality. I have work to do...




Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

The War on Women

I really want to discuss this war on women and discuss some things that neither the liberal media nor the conservative media have really brought up. Now the conservative media has touched on some of what I have to say, but they're missing quite a bit.

The War on Women, and there is one going on, comes down to three basic components: a woman's reproductive rights and a woman's right to a career which leads to her right to be independent. There is so much to say.

Let's start with birth control. Democrats are all up in arms over a woman's right to free birth control saying that Republicans are opposed to birth control all together.

1. Republicans are not opposed to birth control. They never have been. Some may choose not to use it, but then again, look at all the Democrats who choose not to use it as well. Just take a look at the welfare rolls ...

2. Condoms are free and easily accessible at any health department. They work really well when you use them. I've never become pregnant when they were used. I know other couples who have never had accidental pregnancies using condoms. I know quite a few birth control pill babies though.

3. The fact that the democrats think that women are incapable of obtaining BC-pills on their own ($9 at Wal-Mart), goes to show that the democrat party truly believes that women are INCAPABLE of taking care of themselves. How insulting!

4. BC-pills may help with POCS and help prevent pregnancy, HOWEVER they greatly increase the chances of DVT, stroke, heart attack and breast cancer in the women who use them. There is also a higher rate in infertility and miscarriage amoung women who use them. Yet the government thinks they should be doled out for free. Hmmmmmm ...

So in regards to birth control, I'd say it's the DEMOCRATS who are waging a war against women.

Independence from needing men.  Democrats push that women can care for themselves and don't need men to help them.  Republicans believe that a woman may choose to work at home or outside the home, but men need to be responsible to care for the women in their lives and treat them with respect.

1.  The Republicans say use BC-pills if you want, but we believe that you are fully capable of coming up with $9 yourself.  As previously stated, the Democrats say free birth control because women can't afford it (again, $9 a month at W-M).  The Democrats want a country of women, who have full reproductive rights, to be RELIANT on the government, run mostly by men, for their own birth control.

2.  Both sides believe that a man should pay child support.  However, how can a group of people, Democrats, say that a woman has a right to her own reproductive organs and her body and should be able to choose to have, OR NOT HAVE, a baby ... then say she is too weak and incapable of supporting that child on her own?  I mean, if a woman chooses to have a baby when the father has said he wants no part of it, shouldn't she support that child on her own ... without a man?  I'm just saying.

So, who is really standing behind what they say?  Not the Democrats.  They are trying to make women depend on others, instead of themselves, when it comes to their reproductive rights.  Definately the Democrat's war on women here.

Let's look at abortion.  In general, Democrats are pro-abortion all the time, many even up through the second and third trimester.  They want no waiting period and feel that minors should have access without parental consent.  Republicans, in general, are pro-life, or at the least say no abortion after the end of the first trimester.  The feel that minors are MINORS and should not be able to have an abortion, an outpatient surgical procedure, without parental consent.

1. Classic clique, "Half of the babies aborted are female." Okay. Said.

2.  Abortion is a surgical procedure.  There is a risk of sterility and/or inability to carry a child after an abortion.  Cervical damage is done during an abortion.  A compromised cervix can be incapable of carrying a baby to term.  For many women, the damage to the cervix results in painful sex for the rest of her life. Infection can occur up to 40 days after an abortion.  PID is common among women who have had an abortion.  PID can cause inflammation of one or both of the fallopian tubes.  If not treated immediately, there is a high probability that sterility will occur.  Those are just a few long term and permanent side affects of abortions.

Also, there is need for post-op care.  Hemorrhaging is not uncommon.  There have been many cases of teenaged girls bleeding out and dieing after an abortion because their parents did not know the abortion was done and did not know to keep an eye on their daughter.  I don't get it.  They can't give my child a Tylenol without my permission.

3. Democrats claim to be pro-choice when they are really pro-abortion and anti-choice. How do I come to this? Well, a true choice can't be made if all the fact aren't made available. Democrats routinely stand in the way of legislation that would require any female wanting an abortion to see and ultrasound of their child and then wait three days. They are okay with the ultrasound but say that a women should not have to see it.  Why? They say it's cruel. In reality? In poor neighborhoods 50% of women change their minds when shown an ultrasound and in middle to upper class it's 90% of women change their minds.  They know this.  Yet they block legislation to require FULL DISCLOSURE and a 72-hour waiting time for a woman to make an educated choice between life and death.


More women seek help at crisis pregnancy centers for post-abortion counseling than for help in a crisis pregnancy.  Women who have had abortions come to the reality of what they've done, sometimes years after the fact.  They deal with depression and suicidal thoughts every year around the anniversary of their abortion.  So when it comes to abortion, who is waging the war against women?  Democrats.

Career choice for women.  Democrats say that a woman should be able to choose what she wants to do with her life.  So do Republicans.  But how do they REALLY feel?  Let's see ...

1.  “Ann Romney has never worked a day in her life.” - Hilary Stupid Bitch Rosen

Ann Romney raised five boys.  She was involved in their education.  And who cares if she lived a life of luxury, as the Democrats apparently think SAHM's do, or if they were rolling in the dough and lighting bonfires with hundred dollar bills.  It was her chosen career.  It was her CHOICE (I thought the democrats were all about choice).  And currently raising five boys and one girl myself, I GUARANTEE you that I work harder than most women do at their jobs every day.  Do you have any idea how many women I've met who have said they work because they CAN'T HANDLE THE STRESS OF STAYING AT HOME WITH THEIR CHILDREN ALL DAY?!?!?!?!  I'd love to have Rosen come to my house and do MY job for a week.

2.  " ... once Michelle and I had our girls, she gave it her all to balance raising a family and pursuing a career ... we didn’t have the luxury for her not to work ... she’d feel guilty that she wasn’t giving enough time to her work, and when she was at work, she was feeling guilty she wasn’t giving enough time for the girls ..."  - The Grand Master Idiot, Obama. 

Here is my list of luxuries the first few years I stayed home:

1. A/C set at 85 during the S. Florida summers to keep the electric bill down.
2. One pound of ground beef and one cut up chicken for the ENTIRE week. The rest was pasta and beans.
3. Cloth diapers.
4. Clothing with literal holes in them because there wasn't any cash to buy myself more.
5. Using cloth for my "monthly" because it was either kotex or food.
6. 1,000 sq feet of living space for SEVEN people (I LOVED that house!!!).
7. Our big date? A rented movie and one single lottery ticket.
8. No health insurance (still don't have that one).
9. Used furniture that was given to us (was always very grateful for it though).

Need.I.Go.On?
However, just to be fair, let's take a look at how much money they were making when she was feeling so guilty about leaving those girls because they didn't have the "luxury" for her to stay home.  I mean, OBVIOUSLY, they must have absolutely NEEDED her income to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table, right?  I'm sure she had to make the choice between kotex and food, right?  That was what forced her to pursue a career outside the home ... tampons ... I'm sure of it.  Well, let's see ... When Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2005 they had a combined salary of $479,062.  Barack was making $162,100.  Michele was making $316,962.  I seriously doubt that she had to work for tampons ...

So tell me again, Asshole, how you and Michele lacked the "luxury" for her to stay home?  I mean, WOW!!!  We are a family of eight.  I stay home.  My husband makes less than half of what YOU made in '05 when Michele just had to abandon her 4 and 7 year old daughters so she could have a big house, expensive clothing, and lots of jewelry force herself to go to work to keep the family out of poverty.

As far as waging a war on women in their choices of career?  It's the democrats.  They'll support you if you stick your kids in daycare, but not if you stay home.  And spare me the BS of how to handle economics.  If there is anything a SAHM understands, it's how to sacrifice and make choices between needs and wants.  In fact, we have a better taste of reality than most married women who work.

So, is there a War of Women?  Damn straight there is!  But it's the Democrats who are waging it!


Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Romney's Nomination will Cost us the War

Let's just be straight up and honest about Romney. He's a RINO. Now this doesn't really bother much of the GOP leadership because the GOP of today is just the democrap party of 20 years ago. They like Romney. He's an east coast progressive conservative (which makes as much sense as the term jumbo shrimp). They like the fantasy idea that he is the most electable.


He's not the most electable.

He will not unseat obama.

His nomination will guarantee us another 4 years of obama.

Let's look at what really happened in Iowa:

Mitt Romney 30,015 votes = 24.6%

Rick Santorum 30,007 votes = 24.5%

Ron Paul 26,219 votes =21.4%

Newt Gingrich 16,251 votes =13.3%

Rick Perry 12,604 votes =10.3%

Michele Bachmann 6,073 votes =5%
Jon Huntsman 745 votes =0.6%
Herman Cain 58 votes =0%
Buddy Roemer 31 votes =0%
No Preference 135 votes =0.1%
Other 117 votes =0.1%

Romney is a RINO and we'll stick Perry in there as well because he has some RINO tendencies (although I believe that the Perry vote would be split nearly 50/50 between if he stepped out of the race). Santorum, Paul, Gingrich, Bachmann, Huntsman are all conservatives so we'll put them together.

Here is the REAL outcome of the Iowa caucus that the GOP needs to stand up and pay attention to:

RINO 42,619 votes = 36.04%
Conservative 75,295 votes = 63.67%
Rest of them 341 votes = 0.29%

It is quite clear that 2/3 of the voters wanted a conservative. However, if it continues this way, we won’t we get one. Here is why. If you take the time to look over various primaries over the last two decades which ended with a RINO as the candidate you will notice that in general there is one RINO but several conservatives running. Thus the conservative vote gets split. In order for a conservative to win, there needs to be ONE conservative candidate. If Paul, Gingrich, Bachmann and Huntsman want to unseat obama and save this country, they need to step out of the race and throw their support behind Santorum and go stumping for him … NOW!!! That is how we guarantee a conservative nominee and a Republican candidate.

Now you won’t hear this coming from the GOP leadership. We have a problem there. You see, the GOP leadership, which isn't really conservative anymore, has forgotten about their base, which are truly conservatives. They are so concerned with appeasing the "swing vote" that they have forgotten that the base is much larger and more important and that without them there is NO WAY for a Republican to get elected.

Now the base has been faithfully voting for the RINO's (while holding their noses and trying not to vomit) because RINO's are the less liberal candidates, the lesser of the two evils. They aren't voting FOR someone, they are voting AGAINST someone.

Now those of us who have faithfully voted for the lesser of the two evils for the last 15 years have some blame for what is going on today because by voting for non-true conservative candidates we compromised our values and beliefs and sent the signal that we were okay with where the Republican Party was heading. We signaled to them that we’re faithful dogs who will wag our tails for them just because …

The base is getting tired of being treated like the stupid dog you can kick but always comes bag with their tongue hanging out hoping for some love. That is why McCain lost and we got obama to begin with. Many in the base were so sick of not having someone to vote FOR that they simply didn’t show (we need all of the base to vote in order to compensate for the dead people who like to vote democrat multiple times in different districts across the country).

It’s going to be worse this time if Romney wins the nomination. Why? Well I know that I’m DONE. FINISHED. BRINGING AN END TO putting my stamp of approval on a person for simply having the letter 'R' behind their name.

I straight up, flat out REFUSE to vote for another RINO. I will NOT vote for Romney. And I know I am not alone.

Spare me the “if you don’t vote for Romney it’s like voting for obama” line of BS that that the GOP has been feeding us for years. It is precisely that we buy that line of crap that they continue to run RINO’s to begin with.

For the first time in my voting life I will not cast a vote for President of the United States unless I have a candidate I can vote FOR instead of candidate I’m voting AGAINST.


Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Obama May Have a Criminal Past

Hat tip to Rick Perry, a former IRS investigator....very interesting.


Too much to copy and paste, however, it may well be that Obama was a drug addicted/mule under the name Barry Soetoro. There also appears to be evidence that he committed several felonies under the name Barry Soetoro before illegally taking on the alias "Barrack Hussein Obama". Even taking on the name BHO, may be illegal as there are no records of him ever legally changing is name from Barry Soetoro.



Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Only 15% Cheat on Their Taxes?

Okay, I think that number is actually higher and that people were too paranoid to answer honestly.

But that's just me.

Tax Cheaters Tend to Be Young, Single Men


Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

No Cost of Living Increase for SS Recipients ... Cry Me a River ...

As those of you know, I am in an ongoing battle against Social Security. It's a social program handout that should be either (a) adjusted with the actuary rates or (b) abolished altogether. (Feel free to read Speedy Gonzales, Social Security, Medicare and Welfare

With the part B medicare cost being equal to the marginal increase in benefits, there will be no cost of living adjustment (COLA) increase for those on the dole ... I mean on Social Security. However, I am here to arm you with facts to counteract the impending onslaught of whining from those with their hands out.

It's a simple math equation. Present it to the whiners and let them find the answer.

About 45 million people -- one in seven in the country -- receive both Medicare and Social Security. (Medicare Rise Could Mean No Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment)

For every ONE person on Medicare and SS there are only SIX people to pay for it.  In January 2011, the average Social Security payout for a retiree was $1,177/month (Average Monthly Social Security Benefit for a Retired Worker).  That would work out to a cost of $196.17 per month for each person NOT on Social Security.

Unfortunately not all six of those people work.  Some of them are children (27.3% of the U.S. population is under 20 Wikipedia).  Some of them will have jobs, so we'll say that 20% of the six not on the Medicare/SS dole are children.  That leaves us with just 4.8 people to pay for each person on the dole.  But wait!  There's more.

The BLS says unemployment is 8.9%.  However, that number does not include the U6 unemployed (those working a p/t job when they really need f/t or those who have stopped looking because there simply is no work).  The U6 unemployment is 16.7%.   When these numbers are adjusted, the TRUE unemployment rate is 21.1%.  (The Real Unemployment Rate)  Adjusting that 4.8 with the REAL unemployment rate brings it down to 3.79 people persons to pay for each person on Social Security.  That's without considering families like mine where the mother stays home.

Now, the average SS payout of $1,177 per month divided by 3.79 people who pay for it equals a monthly cost of $310.55 per working person.  Now we are a one income family with six children.  We could really use that $310 each month for things like FOOD and CLOTHING for our children.  My weekly food budget varies between $150-$200 a week.  The hand out it literally taking food out my children's mouths.

But it gets better.  That is just Social Security.  What is our family paying for Medicare (while my husband and I go uninsured because we can't afford it and my eldest will become uninsured on his 19th birthday)?  The cost each year for each Medicare recipient is about $11,000 per year.  Of that, the recipient pays about 10% in premiums.  Using the total cost of Medicare in 2009 divided the number of workers in 2009, the cost came to $3,690 per working person (What is the Cost per Citizen for Medicare?).

Of course now there are fewer working persons to spread that cost to, but we'll use the optimistic 2009 figures anyway.  The cost of Medicare for each working person comes to $307.29 a month.

So, how much does ONE person on the Medicare/SS dole cost each of 3.79 working people in this country each month? 

$617.84

And that, folks, is why I, and many others like me, have no health coverage and little compassion for the whiners on the dole who do.  We have to pay for those on the dole AT OUR OWN DETRIMENT so they can have what we can no longer afford.  I'm sure my children are happy to know that if I get bad sick they will finish growing up with no mother so someone who's 83 can get a check every month their medical needs taken care of ... and then complain that it isn't enough and what it costs THEM!

Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

It's Time to Play the Name and Religion game again!!!!

Yes, I've been MIA, but I saw this article and HAD to post!

US Arrests Saudi Student in Bomb Plot

WASHINGTON — A 20-year-old Saudi Arabian student living in Texas has been arrested by federal agents, who charged him with planning to build bombs for terror attacks in the United States, the Justice Department announced Thursday.

So ... you know the drill ...

Guess What My Name ISN'T

and

What Religion I Am NOT!!

His name isn't Ira Goldstein and he isn't Jewish ...




Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

LET'S PLAY A GAME!!!

In light of the following events of the last three weeks:

Teen Arrested After Plotting to Bomb Portland Christmas-Tree-Lighting Ceremony

Arrest Made in Failed Recruitment Center Bomb Plot

and in an attempt to be poo-litically correct, let's play the new game ...

Guess What My Name ISN'T

and

What Religion I Am NOT!!

I'll go first.

Neither of them were named Billy Joe and neither of them were Southern Baptists.


Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

The Underwear Bomber, Mearly a Diversion

While the government is spending untold amounts of money installing body scanners and enforcing invasive pat downs at the airports, they are failing to focus their attention where we are REALLY vulnerable.

The makers of the body scanners have said that the Underwear Bomber would NOT have been caught using one of the scanners and he also would NOT have been caught with the new pat downs either. That bit of information aside, I'm not even a terrorist, but after researching the scanners for just 45 minutes, it's obvious that that these new techniques aren't going to stop anyone who really wants to take down a plane. I mean, come on, more than 50% of the cargo isn't inspected, and of the cargo that IS inspected, most of it is minimal.

I think that the Underwear Bomber was never truly meant to work. It didn't take down an airplane, but it sure did stir up heated debate and have everyone, including the U.S. Government, spending their time spinning their wheels over airline safety. People have reacted exactly as the terrorists wanted us to.

Look, it's simple psychology. CHILD psychology. Any parent who stops to think about it for 3 seconds understands exactly what I mean. It's like starting a fire in a couple trash cans so while everyone is outside looking at the fire trucks and commotion, the thieves can slip into a few houses unnoticed and slip out with a few pocket sized items.

I'm telling you that if the terrorists wanted to take down another plane they would have done it already. I'm not saying they WON'T do it again, but they're not going to until we've calmed down. They want to totally disrupt our way of life and strip us of our freedoms.

And they have.

They win.

Now follow me on this one, while they have everyone focusing on the body scanners, just what do you think THEY'RE doing? Laughing at us and planning. There's going to be another attack and it won't be the airlines. We are SO vulnerable in so many places that we can't secure even if we spent 100% of our tax dollars on it. Don't believe me? Let me name just a few for you: the grocery store, the mall, the public parks, churches. What? You think these guys couldn't EASILY strap bombs to themselves and walk into these places? How about public buses? the subways in New York? No body scanners or pat downs there and there never could be.

In San Diego, they just discover THE LARGEST bomb supply cache ever in the history of the United States. Anyone truly think that is the only one?! That's right, while we're all worried about the government forcing us to either pose for Government Playboy or be sexually assaulted, THEY'RE planning the real attacks.

And those are the ones that will cripple us.

I also like to take a moment to, to put the loss of life on 9/11 in perspective. I want to share a few stats with you to prove just how much we are over reacting. Mind you, I'm not belittling the 9/11 attacks or the diminishing the loss of life in them. I just want us to think.

Since and including 9/11, just under 3,100 Americans have been killed by terrorist attacks. NOT including 9/11, less than 100 Americans have been the victims of terrorists.

From 2001-2008, the number of alcohol related fatalities in car accidents is 130,803. So with 2 FEWER years, for every 1 American killed by terrorists, 42.2 have been killed due to alcohol related car accidents. It's an average of 16,350 deaths per year. It's the equivalent of 43.6 Sept 11th attacks. It's one person every 45 minutes.

Got that?

Absorb it yet?

While 9/11 WAS atrocious, we need to keep in mind that in the same year, 17,400 people were killed in alcohol related accidents. That's 580%.

It's all been a diversion to get us looking in the wrong direction and KEEP us looking in the wrong direction. The REAL attack is quietly being planned and carried out right under our noses. Best if we stopped thinking and acting like panicked animals and start using that grey mass between our ears.

Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

I Wonder What His Religion Is...

Man Arrested in Alleged Washington Metro Terror Plot

(Oct. 27) -- A Pakistani-born U.S. citizen was arrested today for allegedly plotting a series of bomb attacks on Metrorail stations in the Washington, D.C., area, federal officials said.

Farooque Ahmed, 34, of Ashburn, Va., is accused of providing material assistance to people he believed to be affiliated with al-Qaida, the Department of Justice said.

He believed they were planning a series of attacks on Metro stations in 2011, the Justice Department said.


Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

For Richard - A follow up to Luby's Massacre

On March 3rd of this year I wrote a piece entitled "REMEMBER LUBY'S MASSACRE! - The Cost of Gun Control Laws". A week ago I received a new comment and request from someone personally touched by the shootings.  He requested I post the following video of Suzanna Gratia Hupp, a survivor who lost both parents in the shooting, testifying before Congress on the behalf of gun rights.  As this month marks the 19th anniversary of the shooting, I am happy to oblige.  Richard's comment is posted below.



Hi, Krystal,

There're two reasons I'm hoping you'll allow my comment and the link to the video of Suzanna Hupp's video of when she testified before Congress to be on your website. 1) No one can say it more clearly and flawlessly than Suzanna did that day; I believe God's blessing was on her, and no doubt it was straight from her heart; .. and 2) She addresses the matter you mentioned of anyone being able to jump the gunman while he was reloading. Anyone who believes that was possible doesn't have any experience with how fast and easy it is reload a clip.

My family and I used to love eating at Luby's cafeteria ( not the same one; we lived in the Dallas area ). It was a Sunday favorite and one of my favorite childhood memories .. other than now it's impossible to separate Luby's from this horrible incident.

Anyway, I think anyone interested in this story would be interested in hearing the story straight from this dear person's ( Suzanna's ) mouth.

Here's the link: [ http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4069761537893819675# ]

Thanks for your great writeup about this. You said so much in such a short space.

Richard



Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

The REAL Reasons for High Insurance and Medical Costs

Everyone wants to blame the evil greedy insurance companies for the cost of insurance.

And everyone wants to blame the evil greedy doctors and hospitals for the cost of their services.

And everyone wants to blame the evil greedy pharmaceutical companies for charging too much for the medication they make.

Hey, people! How about a bit of honesty here? M'kay? 

The TRUTH is that a great deal of these costs rest directly on the shoulders of the spoiled American people who want to live any lifestyle they want and then live disease free, pain free, and forever.

HUH?!

We all want politicians to be honest people and we want an answer to the cost of health care, but when will the American people start taking on THEIR part of the problem? People in other countries dig through the trash to find food.  We eat and smoke ourselves to death!  In fact, obesity is about to overtake smoking as the number one cause of death in America.  Some say it already has.  Some say it's a tie.

I ask, DOES IT MATTER?!

While running neck and neck, it can be agreed that they take first and second place.  Since there aren't any medals being awarded, the exact answer doesn't matter.  What DOES matter is that our own lifestyle choices is what's running up the cost of healthcare.

Lung cancer tumor.

The list of illnesses caused by smoking it long and broad.  According to the CDC, the top three are lung cancer, COPD, and ischemic heart disease.  There are many others though.  Let's just crunch the numbers from lung cancer.  From 1997-2001, the average number of people who died from lung cancer each year was 137,979.  It costs OVER $100,000 to treat just one person with lung cancer.  That means that it's reasonable to figure that the choice to smoke cost AT LEAST $13,797,900,000 in lung cancer alone each year.  That doesn't even take into consideration the cost of COPD and heart disease.  At $1,000 a month, it would take nearly 9 years to pay that much in premiums and they'd bitch and whine each month to pay it.

And let's be real, a person who smokes or resides in a house with a smoker isn't going to go without some other smoking related illness for nine years straight.

Even though higher premiums may be paid by smokers, it still isn't enough to cover the health costs they incur and cause because they CHOOSE to smoke. And of course there are the administrative costs.  Insurance companies have employees, not volunteers.  Those who don't smoke pay higher premiums to cover the difference.


But wait, there's more.

According to an article in the LA Times from 1998, the yearly cost to Medicaid from smoking relating illnesses was $12.9 billion!  Those people don't even pay premiums.  Of course those numbers would be higher now due to the higher cost of medical care since 1998.

And if you aren't angry enough, I'm sure that the overwhelming number of those on Medicaid are also on welfare, ie, government housing, subsidized utilities, free breakfast and lunch programs, WIC, food stamps, etc.  They don't have money for food each week, but they have money for cigarettes ... lots of them.

Now if THAT doesn't straight up burn your backside, you must be one of the assholes on the dole.

Every minute seven people die because of cigarette smoking. How much in medical bills do you think they ran up before they died? Do you really think they paid for all of it themselves? Could you imagine the drop of medical costs if smokers just quit?

Now let's take a look at obesity.  The top ten obesity related health issues are: diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, stroke, endometrium cancer (females), gallstones, infertility, arthritis, and back pain.  Of course many of those lead to other health problems as well.  Diabetes has a myriad of additional health risks.  The American Diabetes Association states that the 2007 cost of diabetes for 23.6 million people was $116 billion in direct medical costs.  That doesn't include pre-diabetes, gestational diabetes and undiagnosed diabetes.  It works out to about $4,915 per person per year or $410/mo.

The World Health Organization research shows that approximately 85% of people with diabetes are type 2, and of these, 90% are obese or overweight.  Many studies have also proven that loosing weight can control type 2 diabetes, or in the case of a few people personally known to me, make it so they no longer even test diabetic.

Let's play with some numbers.  Using the above stats it works out that in 2007 there were about 20 million type 2 diabetics in the United States.  Of those, 18 million were overweight or obese.  Just to be sure to UNDERESTIMATE the cost of just ONE weight related illness, we'll say that only half of the 18 million have diabetes because they over eat.  That takes us down to 9,000,000 people.  The annual cost of those people who are diabetic because of personal choices by 2007 medical costs would be about $44,235,000,000/yr or $3,686,250,000/mo.

Now I don't know how much of those costs are paid for by private insurance and how much is Medicaid.  I do know that according to the Kaiser Commission, diabetes accounts for about 16% of overall Medicaid costs.  According to our numbers above, we can estimate that those costs could be cut in at least half if people just ate better and exercised.

America has the highest obesity rate in the world.  Nearly 70% of Americans are overweight or obese.  In 2008, the cost of this was $150 billion.  This is expected to increase by 70% in the next five years.  Why?  We're getting fatter!  According to Wikipedia, somewhere between 15-25% of American children are already obese.  Of course the costs would be higher if it weren't for the fact that obese people die 8-10 years sooner than people of a healthy weight.  Somehow, I don't think these people are perfectly healthy up until the time they die.

Now I'm not here to point fingers.  I use to smoke and I use to be obese.  I am currently overweight.  I could blame it on the car wreck or the pregnancy.  Truth is, I'm overweight because of too many trips through the drive through.  My weight is my fault and I accept responsibility for it.  That is why I'm working to loose the weight.  Not easy with a newborn, but I'm trying.

And I'm not saying that we need to hang people out to dry who have medical issues that they aren't responsible for either.  What I am saying is that all insurance is a medical "pool" where everyone shares the costs.  When people fail to care for their own health, those costs go up for EVERYONE.   It's high time Americans stop blaming everyone else for the cost of medical care and start taking personal responsibility for our own CHOICES. 

So many people are opposed to the fat tax and cigarette tax but think nothing of the backdoor taxes we already pay in medical costs for those who fail to take care of themselves AND the higher medical costs we all bare in the cost of higher insurance.  Maybe the fat tax and addition cigarette tax is a good thing.  In fact, I'm certain that if I had to pay 20% tax on fast food, I'd stop eating it.  If the cigarette tax were increased enough to actually cover the costs of smoking, I'm sure people would quit.  Normally I say that the government needs to not be a nanny state, but if we're not willing to be responsible for ourselves, then maybe that's what we deserve.  Maybe that's the only way to prevent those among who eat right, exercise, and don't smoke from paying for everyone else who does.

Insurance companies are not evil.  The people who think they should be able to live irresponsibly and not pay for it are just selfish.


Doctors, hospitals, and drug companies are not evil.  The people who live in such a way that requires so much medical care and medication and then feel they should get it for next to nothing, are childish and immature.

I have no gripe with people who have illnesses beyond their control.  I have no gripe with being in an insurance "pool" with them or helping them through my taxes.  I have a HUGE gripe with those who make themselves sick and then expect others to pay for it while giving them pity.



Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Speedy Gonzales, Social Security, Medicare and Welfare

Remember the Speedy Gonzales cartoons?  We all laughed because the stupid humans kept baiting the mouse traps, but Speedy ALWAYS grabbed the bait and escaped unharmed.  Apparently, *I'M* the stupid human because the mouse in my kitchen can lick clean peanut butter or remove a piece of lunch meat from any trap without setting it off.  But if I barely touch the trap, it triggers.  All hail Speedy of my Kitchen.  He's a better mouse than I am.

That being said ...

I'd really like to smack a few senior citizens who claim to be conservatives.  Let me tell you why.  They all think that government health care is wrong and socialistic.  They all think that people who LIVE ON government handouts via welfare and medicaid are irresponsible.  But they have no problem collecting social security ("Oh! I didn't get a cost of living increase for two years!") or using medicare ("Oh! I have to drive 45 minutes to find a doctor!") You know, cry me a freaking river!

Social security IS welfare that THEY live on.  When it was set up in 1935, in order to collect you had to be 65. Here's the rub, the average life expectancy was 61 years and 7 months (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html).  In other words, you had to outlive the average life expectancy by 3 years and 5 months in order to collect.  Let's be blunt about it, the government expected AT LEAST HALF of the people who paid into it to die before collecting a single dime.  That was the intention of social security when it was put into play. 

The problem is that the government has failed to keep up with the actuary table for social security.  If they had, we wouldn't be having a problem with it right now.  Why? because people would have to work longer, pay in more, and still at least 50% of the people would die before collecting.  The money would be there. 

The problem with social security is that the average life expectancy in 2005 was 77 years and 8 months.  This means that in order to keep up with how it was set up to begin with NO ONE SHOULD COLLECT UNTIL THE AGE OF 81 years and 1 month.  Why?  Because THAT was the TRUE intent of the program to begin, everyone pays in, but less than 50% collect.  And guess what, those who did live long enough to collect didn't live to collect it very long.  It simply was not intended to pay people for 2 decades.  Currently, starting social security at 65 has a person collecting a full 16 years before they should truly be eligible.  And to prove further the idiocy of this program, people can now start collecting early at 62, 19 years before they're suppose to.

They decry big government and big government spending, but have no problem with being a part of the largest government program in the country.  From Wikipedia, the facts are:

By dollars paid, the U.S. Social Security program is the largest government program in the world and the single greatest expenditure in the federal budget, with 20.8% for social security, compared to 20.5% for discretionary defense and 20.1% for Medicare/Medicaid.  Social Security is currently the largest social insurance program in the U.S., constituting 37% of government expenditure and 7% of the gross domestic product and is currently estimated to keep roughly 40% of all Americans age 65 or older out of poverty.

They scream to cut government spending, but THE LARGEST single spending in this country is social security ... 37%!!! ... and merely mentioning the need to fix it sets them off in a defensive tirade telling us we have to keep the promise made.  Okay, let's keep that promise, but I expect them to go by the rules as they were set up.  When they outlive the average life expectancy by nearly 3 1/2 years, I'll happily pay their social security.  Truth is that they did not earn what they are getting.  For the 16 years they collect before outliving the average life expectancy, they are on a government dole plain and simple.  They are receiving way more than they ever put into it.  

So now that we have ascertained that seniors are collecting for 16 years longer than they are suppose to, what right do they have to complain about the lack of cost of living increase?  How many families WITH CHILDREN not only didn't get an increase, but worse, are making LESS than they did two years ago?!

I have an idea, how about cutting expenses?  That's what everyone else is doing.  And no, I won't see it differently when it's my turn to collect ... because it won't be there.  Ca piece?

One last thing regarding "conservative" seniors and their sacred cow, who ever said there was a RIGHT to retire and have the government pay their expenses?  Especially those who espouse the Bible all the time?

Even while we were with you, we gave you this rule: "Whoever does not work should not eat."  -- 2 Thes 3:10

As for Medicare?  If you're 82 and get cancer, you'll get chemo and radiation courtesy of the government (that would be me).  But if a 26-year-old mother of three gets the same thing, they'll make her loose everything she's worked for, beg money, and eventually, let her drop dead.  Again, cry me a damn river about the troubles with medicare!  They whine and whine and go on forever about the medical care they get for next to nothing, but what about their own children and grandchildren who can't get medical care at all for varying reasons? 

I hate to sound heartless, please remember my Daddy died of cancer, but the truth of it is if one life should be chosen to save, whose should it really be?  I'm not saying that the life of a senior is less valuable than the life of those younger.  I'm simply saying that children needs their parents and a person in their 20's, 30's or 40's are much more likely to recover than a person in their 80's.  Consider this, a few months ago a 93 year old woman who was in a coma and received a pacemaker (friend works at a hospital).  Seriously!  Wasn't that a waste of money?  According to the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee website, a pacemaker surgery costs between $35,000 and $45,000.  The woman was 93 years old and in a coma for heaven's sake!

On to welfare.  Look, some people work very hard and still can't make it.  I have no problem helping them.  Unless of course ... they continue to spit out baby after baby just to collect more.  OH!  And continue to purchase alcohol and cigarettes.  And we shouldn't forget the pet food and vet bills so many welfare recipients find money for.  No new tattoos.  They aren't free.  I know welfare people who think nothing of dropping $75+ for a new tattoo and then using food stamps to purchase food on their way home from the tattoo parlor.

As far as I'm concerned, everyone should have to show ID for at least alcohol and tobacco.  When a family receives food stamps, their license should have a sticker on it that restricts them from purchasing such items.  One family, personally known to me, goes through 2 cartons a week.  That's over $40/week and $2,000/yr.  If they have it to smoke, they have it for food. 

I'm not cruel.  I like to help people.  However, there does come a point to which a person is being enabled instead of helped, and to tell the truth, I'm tired of it.




~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Obama on the view.

DC posted a great picture of Obama's appearance on The View. You MUST go see it. I had already formed by oppinion of his "Girl Time" and shared it at Goomba's blog. I repost it here.

I was sickened by his buddies saying what a great move this was for him to reach the women who stay home or are out of work. I find it insulting that they believe the best way to reach the majority of women is for him to go on some talk show with a out of date comedian, an ugly liberal idiot in guady heals, a man crazed fat chick, an overly senstivite (although conservative) blonde, all of whom follow the lead of another female who is so old and out of touch with reality that she remembers when the "Earth was without form and void".

As a stay at home mom, I'm insulted. As a woman who can actually THINK, it was obvious to me that he went on The View because he knew the only one who wouldn't toss him a soft pitch would be the blonde. And he knew that when she did, the others would all rally around his stupid ass and change the direction of conversation to something he could answer without a teleprompter. For example, his favorite ice cream and the color of his socks.

I'm educated and well read. I have a higher IQ than both Bush and Gore and I'll bet a dollar to a dime that it's higher than Obama's as well. I do NOT spend my day at home watching The View or any other mind numbing idiocy. I resent the fact that he, and his ilk, believe I'm dimwitted and can be won over by his lame attempts to appear to be like the general public, whom he appears to have forgotten HE SERVES.

While he's been yucking it up, secret military files, complete with names and ss numbers, were being stolen and leaked and published risking our national security. The names of informants on the Taliban were also published and the Taliban promised their excecution.

This type of leak can legally be considered treason! Yet he does NOTHING!! The man responsible is so brazen that he's shown his face, done interviews, and says he has more illegally obtained secret military files that he plans to release. He knows this administration won't even do so much as slap him on the wrist.

Obama is too busy being the narcisist he is to notice, care, or take any action.

Yeah, it was a FANTASTIC move on his part. I have an amazing oppinion of Obama now.


Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

I've had FIVE visits from census workers.

Hat tip to Joe for posting the following video on his blog. I had to post it here because I've had FIVE visits from census workers.




Gotta love government waste...





Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Accosted by Census Worker

Wednesday night, while pulling out of my driveway, a man I had never seen before in my life pulled into my driveway. He gets out of the car, pets my dogs. I see an orange vest but can't read the yellow lettering on it. I put my window down, this is where it gets good. While not verbatim, it gives you the idea...

"Can I help you?"

"I'm from the census."

"I filled out the form. We were leaving. There are seven people in the house." I start pulling out again.

With some authority, as if being a census worker gives him some kind of power or control, "I have more questions than that!" He turns, I make out the word "census" on each lapel in sticky yellow letters. As if a six-year-old couldn't do that with supplies from Wal-Mart. He never gave his name or showed his ID. His ID tag was turned so that all I could see was the blank back.
Me, a bit shocked, annoyed, and running late, "Uh, we were leaving! Seven people in the house! I filled in my census!"

***Him, "Blah, blah, blah! Me man! You woman! You do what I say!"

Wait, he didn't really saw that. But his attitude sure did ... ***

Him, "Well they didn't get it and now you have to answer all of these questions! Didn't you get the note I left on your door?!"

***"Screw off you stupid bastard and leave me alone!"

No, I didn't really say that. But it would have been cool if I had. Truth is, for some reason this guy gave actually shook me a bit, probably because I'm VERY pregnant and hormonal and he gave me a really bad vibe from the time I saw him petting my dogs. I don't get that often. ***

"Yeah, I got it. I'm very pregnant and have been preoccupied." I point my belly out to him as he had walked toward my van. The paper he had left simply had his name and number. It did not have the address of the office he was working out of. It did not have a number for me to call to verify he was who he claimed to be. Both are required.

AS AN ADDED BONUS his number is a "954" area code. That is a Broward County, Florida number. This did not make me feel any more comfortable since he gave me no way to verify who he was. Yeah, I'm going to call him real quick and give information about my family to a man I've never met who has shown me no credentials. PLUS I was dealing with a few issues that take precedence over giving said stranger info about my family anyway.

He steps closer to my car. "Well you have to answer these questions!"

***"All I have to do is stay white and die! And if Christ returns soon I may get out of the latter!"

I really wish I had thought of this one during the moment. I would have used it.***
"I'm LEEEAVING! There are seven people in the house!"

He writes his number on a piece of census paper, walks to my car. Yeah, I was pretty nervous at this point. He reaches INTO MY VEHICLE on the passenger side and thrusts this paper at me. I take it. He says, "You WILL call me!"

***"Okay, I have a few things I can call you ... where shall I start?!"

In reality, too shaken at this point to respond for a few seconds. I mean, the man reached into my VAN with my CHILDREN in it!***

I start backing out really quick. I wish I hadn't given him time to get his arm out of my window. I yelled at him, "Seven people in my house is ALL I'm going to tell you!"

I found out this morning that the children were upset. The night this happened they told their eldest brother, who was not in the car, what happened. The 13-year-old said he was a "real big jerk". The 10-year-old described him as "snooty". The 8-year-old said he was "really rude". I felt he was very aggressive.

So I called the customer service number for the census. I got a man whose wife has about the same due date. How fortunate! I tell him what happened. The man messed up from the beginning by not saying his name or showing me his tag. He messed up when he failed to leave the info of where he was out of on the first note. The man at the census said the man was out of line. He also informed me that the magic words for me are, "I refuse to comply." Then the man MUST MUST MUST leave. He has to leave if asked to. He is not allowed to say another word to me. He is not allowed to "strong arm" me.

Then he connected me to the office the jerk was out of. I repeat the story to a woman who was totally appalled. I including the reaction of my children. She said the man's actions were "agressive" and his supervisor will be getting with him. She also said he was out of line, didn't follow protocol, etc. I inform her that if this man steps foot on my property again that I will call the police and have him arrested.

I stopped by the sheriff's office. I spoke with the sheriff himself. He confirmed that what this man did was verbal assault (I was shook, and yes, with him approaching my van and then entering the van by putting his arm inside, a little scared). He also confirmed that because I informed him I was pregnant, it's an automatic felony. I told him I would call if the man showed up again. The sheriff's response? "Please do." I don't think he liked what he heard either.

I have four witnesses. I will press charges. He's best not to come back.

Peace Out,
~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Father Fights for Custody of Daughter

John Wyatt is currently fighting to get his daughter. His ex-girlfriend put their daughter up for adoption without his consent KNOWING he wanted to keep her. The baby was born in Virginia, but the adoption took place in Utah. Virginia has said that John has custody of the little girl, but Utah is ignoring the court order. Utah says that he should have filed in Utah. Uuuuuhhhh, (1) he wasn't made aware of what was going on and (2) since the baby was taken across state lines without his consent, the child was legally kidnapped, according to Federal law. Therefore the adoption is null and void.

Of course I feel for the adoptive parents who want to keep her, but should this man give up his kidnapped daughter?! One of the blogs I read mentioned asked when there SHOULD be Federal laws. Here's a perfect example of when. While I feel bad for the adoptive parents, I have to ask how they would feel if their child was kidnapped, taken across state lines illegally, given to another couple to raise, and then be told "

Watch the video.
Peace Out,

~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Postal Blues -- a Model for Health Care

Pressure Mounts for Radical Changes to Postal Service

Congress, which oversees the USPS, is considering cutting Saturday mail delivery, eliminating some jobs and closing some post offices. A new report from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, obtained by The Washington Post, says the Postal Service business model is "not viable" and recommends to Congress that the proposed changes be made immediately.

The GAO endorsed the five-day delivery week but encouraged even more extensive cuts, including hiring more part-time workers, raising prices, closing some post offices and even outsourcing delivery routes to private contractors.

Even as the government prepares to take over our healthcare, the post office is unable to survive without continued government subsidies (read ... TAX PAYER MONEY) and higher costs for use. If this were a private company, it would have gone out of business a long time ago.

This short piece fails to mention one of the outrageous costs the post office has to face.

THE UNION.

Having friends who work or have worked at the post office for many, many years, the benefits they get as government employees is absolutely outrageous. My mail carrier in Florida had saved up all of his vacation days for several years. He had over six months paid vacation and unused sick time on his account. The best part, he said, was that when he does decide to take his six month+ vacation, he will be paid at his CURRENT rate of salary instead of at the rate each paid day was earned at. He bragged that he was making money off the deal.

As he went on to tell me all of his retirement benefits (WOW!), I couldn't help but ask myself how he, and others like him, think that the post office could possibly survive for long with those kinds of payouts?

The answer is, it can't.

In much the same way as the unions have run out other business, or in the case of certain auto makers, force them to take tax payer bail out money to continue the benefits of union workers, the cost of union workers in the post office is having an effect on it's ability to keep itself afloat, although it goes unmentioned.

Don't get me wrong, email has played it's fair share as well. However, with all the junk mail I receive daily, the post office still has plenty of customers.

So the government has decided on a plan of action to cut costs. Stop Saturday delivery. Make full-time jobs part time jobs. Eliminate other jobs. Close offices. Raise prices. It's amazing how the government stood with the unions against the auto manufacturers when they tried to take similar measures, yet have no problems doing it themselves.

The funniest and best part is that they plan to OUTSOURCE TO PRIVATE COMPANIES. Why? Deep down, the U.S. Government knows that privately run companies are more efficient and can do the same job for far less than the Government.

Pay close attention to how the government handles the situation with the post office. It's how they'll handle our healthcare! When it gets too expensive, they'll ... Limit availability. Make full-time jobs part time jobs. Eliminate staff. Close offices (another limit on availability). Raise taxes.

So as we might as well bid adieu to private insurance and get use to government run healthcare, take a good look at what the government already knows.

They can't run crap!

But don't worry about the postal employees loosing their jobs. They can simply be retrained to work for the IRS enforcing the new health care reform ...

Peace Out,

~*~*~Krystal~*~*~

Perry Says Texas Can Leave the Union if it Wants To
"Texas is a unique place. When we came into the union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that," Perry said. "My hope is that America and Washington in particular pays attention. We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, who knows what may come of that." -- Governor Rick Perry

Vermont Secession Movement: Nine Statewide Candidates Push to Leave Union
"The only hope is to just say, 'Look, this isn't working for us. We want to start fresh again, with a real democracy,'" Garritano said. "I think that's the answer. Hopefully, it won't take another horrible economic breakdown to realize that the people running things don't look out for the little guy, or us, or the soldiers. It's all about profit and getting the last drops of oil on Earth and trampling people's rights." -- Peter Garritano, gubernatorial candidate in Vermont

Alaska Independence Party
There is a commonly held belief across Alaska, that the US Constitution has been set aside, and other then ourselves, there are no protections to the liberty and freedoms we are to have as our continued inheritance since the formation of the Union of the "several States". Our main "goal" is a legal vote and ballot; one that was not given in 1958 and was in violation of International Law and Treaty. Alaskan were robbed of the choices we were to have as a non-self-governing territory, and steam-rolled into the current classification of a State. The Native population of Alaska, in a large percentage, did not even receive a ballot because of the Federal Voting Rights Act in place, at the time requiring the ability to read and write English, and for the first time in any Statehood vote of a Territory entering this "Union", the military and their of age dependents, through a special act of the US Congress, were allowed access to the Statehood ballot. Then, as today, corruption abounds. The US government is far and away outside the bounds placed on it by the 9th and 10th amendments and is operating illegally for all.


Peace Out,

~*~*~Krystal~*~*~