And Now Sherry Rants about Politics...

We have seen that our Representative Republic cannot manage itself. Our government spends money hand over fist we do not have, at roughly 3.97 billion per day or 45,949 dollars per second.  Basically enough to fund a college student for a year at a private school with board, give or take 5k. 

Just 4 seconds of your Government's time, 2 if it's a state school.

We should be screaming at them.

Neither the President nor the Senate nor the House have any actual intentions of dealing with this, as all of the piggies have their noses in the trough. The few that have attempted to restrain spending lack the political capital to get anything to happen. The Senate hasn't passed a budget in three years.  The President's budget is so not serious, not even any Democrats voted for it out of party loyalty. 

Anyone can google the existing programs of the Federal Government and find Waste. Waste. Waste and more waste.  Nothing happens to stem it.

I'm sorry.  It's just way way way too much to spend giving small coctail appetizers exercise. I like my shrimp Jumbo sized.

And all they know is sick shrimpies don't do as well?  I'm sure they know more but that's the selling point?

(In fairness, I watched three different videos of the scientists explaining their work and picked this one because it was 1) shortest and 2) the other two had more about the shrimp being an internet sensation.  I did look at their website and their perspective, but have a mill for a treadmill....and to study shrimp. And this is just the project that we know about. What we don't know about, is all the par-tays the GSA, Secret Service, Solyndra and others have been having on our dime. 

So things are not working. And Romney or Obama, Congress shall remain its spending don't look a problem in the eye kick it down the road CHARGE it in practice.   Except we can't go on indefinitely.  If we took away all the money of all the millionaires and billionaires in this country and even took the entire fortunes of the fortune 500, we'd still not be able to  finance all that we spend and certainly not what people want spent today and tomorrow and the tomorrow after that.  

MEMO to both parties: If it's bad when THEY do it, it's BAD when YOU DO IT.  See: Gitmo, Guantanamo, suspending habeas corpus, drone strikes, torture, restricting religious liberties, taxing on top of taxing, wasteful allocation of funds, crony capitalism and crony federalism, no bid contracts, factually devoid hit pieces on opposition, lewd, crude and socially unacceptable behavior of every flavor, spin, lies, revolving door lobbying, and for sale access. Corrupt is Corrupt. Stink is stink.  Evil is as evil does and a letter R or D is irrelevant.  

I know in part why we're not out there screaming. We've yelled. We've voted. We've done Occupy or Tea Party and had 15 seconds of coverage and now there is nothing.  No difference. The glaring absolute shrug of shoulders by those in power to any of the grievances about all of this tells us, we are no longer a free people.  We are the funders of those in power, who get to keep what those in power deem appropriate.  And we get to fund whatever they want, for as long as they want, regardless of our own objections, be they religious, fiscal or political.  Pay your taxes, shut up and go home. 

We have a hydra on our hands with as many heads as it has dollars.   First rule in fighting a hydra. 
We need to at least stop creating new heads. 

If we just were to keep spending at a fixed level until we begin to clear away some of this...2008 levels in all things, it would be a start.

If we also froze Congress pay so they can't give themselves pay raises anymore, that would be a symbolic recognition that the government ought to show the same restraint that the private sector must when times are tight.

And, if the government opted for shaving simply 2% of its entire budget --leave the actual cuts to the actual departments but they must submit a budget that is 2% less than last year's. No auxiliary. No extra. No getting around. Everything must be included. No accounting tricks. No funding tricks. Everything.  Then we might start to recognize that budgets are like diets. They require discipline and consistency and most importantly, time. As a country, we're not giving ourselves even a starting chance at this; it's like we start every morning with a bucket of fried chicken and a whole chocolate cake, wash it down with a six pack of beer and say, "Today, I'm going to lose 10 pounds!" It's not happening. 

But that's a lot of "Ifs."  Frankly, I think my odds are better if I wish for a pony. 

We need a constitutional amendment to demand that Congress live within the means provided by the tax payers and not institute taxes that are retroactive or proactive to fund today. We need it because the politicos of today lack the moral courage to do this with the power they've been given absent the force of law.  

It's been a long time since I did a political post, mostly because this year, I'm just discouraged. I do not see anyone the least bit interested in spending less. I do not see anyone the least bit interested in reducing my family's tax rate. I do see people spending money like mad and with nary a concern about results, effects or reality. I have no faith in the GOP --Romney? Really? The guy who can do great in the blue states...but won't win a one of them?   Thanks. If the Republicans lose the White House, I hope they learn to get rid of the tired argument, "It's His Time." Dole and McCain ring any bells people?

And Obama? Please. The man has in three years, spent more than any President in the history of our nation.... Combined.  He doesn't think there's a problem his government can't solve.  He doesn't see the problem. He's shown zero leadership in this area and all the pretty speeches in the world aren't going to make me believe that he's suddenly become a fiscal hawk.

Remember when the DNC used to howl about deficit spending under Reagan and how bad that was? Remember when the DNC wrung its hands about how crazy Bush was for spending so much? I do. I agreed with them. It's not often that happens.  Does anyone in Washington actually know how to get things done that don't involve creating more entitlements or spending more money?  We used to know. Not that long ago either I might add. 

Our government need not continue as it has, but it will take people of courage to do otherwise.  Here's hoping there are enough people left in the House and Senate who could make this the priority, this the purpose, so that government of the people, by the people, for the people, might not vanish from the Earth due to lack of funds.  Because the alternative...no matter what political stripe you root for, won't be pretty.

Mothering the Sous Chef Way

You know those cooking shows where the smiling perfectly coifed chef whips up four fabulous healthy dishes in 30 minutes? They have a secret. A sous chef.
For those out there who don’t follow cooking shows –I’m a closet addict. Even when we didn’t have cable, when I’d be at a hotel, I watch them in a binge style fashion, trying to digest every tip and dish by channel surfing the Food Network, Every Day with Rachel Ray and whatever chef being showcased on Lifestyle. Between that and repeated watchings of Ratatouille, I learned a sous chef pre-prepares everything for the headlined chef. Measuring salt, cutting chives, defrosting the food, scoring the meat, peeling the garlic, that sort of thing that adds time and usually mess to cooking.

We don’t see a chef pondering…I have frozen sausage, peas, whole wheat pasta which the kids hate, no butter, no milk and we’re out of diet coke. What am I making for dinner?

We don’t see the chef on TV then feebly put the sausage, peas and wheat pasta together with a can of stewed tomatoes to earn universal displeasure. We don’t actually ever see the chefs sit down to eat more than a bite of their creations. Okay, so maybe we do have one thing in common.

I started studying the other Home tip shows and they have the equivalent of sous chefs for everything. When they are showing how to fold laundry better, their dryer is not overstuffed with towels. The load is small, manageable and no happy meal toys are pulled out of a sock melted and molded to the interior. Nothing is accidentally pink. The sous chef of washing and drying must have presorted and ensured that the wash was done before it became the size of a baby mastodon.

When the hosts of “Better TV for Women” kind of shows goes to the grocery store, her cart is organized, neat and does not have six boxes of mac&cheese, frozen waffles and canned pineapple. No. Her cart has shredded cheese, the makings for Swedish filled pancakes and fresh pineapple from Hawaii.

My cart overflows to a second cart. Lodged between the Ragu and the Laundry detergent, 12 pack of paper towels and size six and four and two diapers, there have been reported sightings of actual vegetables and fruits (Carrots, potatoes and bananas) and there is a large vat of ketchup. Her cart has brussel sprouts which will be braised in freshly bought balsamic vinegar with endive. She also has a perky little pint of kumquats for flavor and color and a large gallon size jug of vinegar –for cleaning, but I don’t see any serious supplies like SOS pads or toilet scrubbers.

Mine cost $231.47 and has fish sticks and will feed ten I hope for one week.

Hers has fresh fish, feeds four and will last one night. People who have sous chefs don't do frozen.
Our carts contents cost the same.

She pays in cash if they bother to show her checking out, where as I am the debit master, who then has to opt for a credit card because my debit card has decided it’s not feeling well today and won’t go through.

I want a sous chef life experience where I am the master chef. I want to live unharried, unhurried, unhasselled by undefrosted meats and undeterred by mere minor inconvient truths like picky eaters and budgets.

So starting today, I decided I need an army of sous chefs. I am going to train all my little darlings to be sous chefs in different areas of life and thus I will be the host of my own reality show. “Mothering the Sherry Way” or “Ten Children and How They Sous.”

In my fantasy reality tv show, the Oldest, every day will Sous the garbage in the house by patrolling the cans of the house. He also has the honor of helping with the lawn and providing free babysitting. "It's a sous thing." I'll explain. Next in line shall have the sousing of the bathrooms, wiping the counters and windexing the mirrors, securing toilet paper if necessary. The third shall sous the dishwasher, emptying it before next round of dishes are needed. The fourth shall sous the beds, making them. The fifth shall sous the kitchen floor with a vacuum. The youngest two ambulatory shall wipe the table and pick up all the toys on the floor to put in a basket. Like the little dishes for condiments in cooking shows, I’ll have baskets for everything.

With the Sous method in place, I will be able to brush my hair and smile in my freshly laundered apron as I explain how to make dinner when all you have is frozen sausage, wheat pasta and peas. “You pick up the phone and dial 1-800-PIZZA ME!”

2010 Resolutions

I've never really gotten into resolutions, but then I don't like budgets and diets either, and usually January 1st is about restraint, moderation, about self discipline. Already, the animal part of me can feel the presence of a proposed bit and bridle, (to use the Aristotle image) at the mere suggestion of eat less sugar and fat, exercise and cut up the credit cards. Even though I know intellectually, these would be helpful to my well being and long term goods, the horse chafes at the prospect, stamping, snorting and glowering at the would be charioteer in me proposing such a crazy idea.

I've never had much luck with all things in moderation and my chariot is the proof. I haven't asked in prayer for that assistance, and more so, I haven't asked because it isn't my heart's desire. I guess having nine children makes it obvious, mine by nature, is not a moderate soul.

But I know it is not what we do but how we do it that makes a day full, makes a life sparkle. In writing, what determines a writer from a person who writes as a hobby is BIC time. (body in chair). A hobbyist writes when they get to it, when they're inspired, when the ideas are crackling and popping like bacon. When the muse is with us, the very smells of the ideas jazz us to want to do more. But when there are no lines in our head so good we keep repeating them until we can find a crayon and torn envelope to write them down, the blank page of a word perfect program feels like a K2daring the unprepared hiker to take the first step. A hobbyist will wait for inspiration, a Sherpa to guide. A writer starts up the hill daily with or without one.

Now my sister is the introspective one in the family; she is also a natural rider and an expert on horses. She understands what goes on in her own head and heart immediately, intuitively; and she rides magnificently. My charioteer's a bit slow on the uptake and my capacity to ride a horse; it's shamefully amature and worse, seasoned with my own Texas bravado. I can do it, but anyone who knows anything, knows I know nothing but that I think I know what I'm doing.

The one thing I can do, is get on a horse and go VROOM. I love that flying feeling until I remember, I'm not entirely in control and we're going way too fast and man am I an idiot who is going to break her neck if she doesn't pull up, whoa, Whoa, WHOA! It's probably why when I was at camp, they put me in horse musical chairs with the oldest horse in the stable. But I digress.

When I write things, I usually go VROOM and then pull up and have that "Whoa." moment about whatever it is I've been hashing over on the page about my own life after I've written at least 1000-2000 words. She half jokingly told me, "You should write more."

So it is, that I had the "Whoa" moment that writing, like jogging, like riding, budgeting, is a process of being first and foremost, willing to take on whatever it is, to start, and then to edit and refine as you go and keep doing it every day. That whispering to the horse how the chariot could go VROOM if only she submitted a little, might be the charioteer's best bet. The horse might not be receptive to being attached to a chariot via a bit, bridle and all of that, the chariot could use some care and a bit of paint and trim, and the charioteer should get more willing to practice and become more educated about the whole direction they need to be going, but being allowed to run full throttle once they get started, that they all three understand.

So this year, I resolve to stop treating any of my life like a hobby. Every day is a new document demanding my attention and dedication, and every day is also, an old piece requiring editing and refinement. This year, I resolve to go Vroom and learn to say Whoa before I come close to breaking my neck, and also to talk to my sister more often.

Harry Reid's Grand Strategy

I understand the very real need for access not simply to emergency care but everyday long term pain in the neck maintenance care that insurance provides and that should be in this country, available regardless of income. I get it.

What I'd like, is a plan that had a ceiling as to how one qualified, meaning if you could not get work via an employer (as they are now by law required to offer this benefit), and you could not purchase it (unemployed), you would be able to access the system.

But I start to turn cold to the whole process when this level of stupidity constitutes the beginning of a theoretical serious discussion about the matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65wi22hB8q4

So I can't think it's too expensive as currently envisioned? It is.

I can't worry that it will fund abortions or anything else I find objectionable without being considered the equivalent of a slave holder?

I can't think we shouldn't add spending to an existing and ever growing deficit by creating a new entitlement that seems overly broad and with no exit strategy to cease ever expanding? Why not?

I can't think that this might eventually eliminate existing insurance programs because why would business buy something they could get for free if they got taxed if they did and taxed if they didn't? Why not?

I can't think that the government couldn't manage the very small cash for clunkers well and has found it could pay for things by recapturing fraud it ignored might be playing loose with the fiscal facts? Why not?

I can't think this is a bad plan on top of lots of other bad plans? Why not?

I can't think that this will cost much more than anticipated or reported? Why not?

I can't think that I will lose a lot of privacy by the government overseeing health care? Why shouldn't I?


I can't think that any of the health care plan that is over 2000 pages is full of stuff I don't want and don't want to pay for on a permanent basis and that probably is pork. It is. I don't have to actually think about that question, it's just true.

I can't worry that if Medicare and Medicaid are undercut and are currently going bankrupt (prior to this) that maybe the government taking over this much of our economy might not be a good thing? Because why? Because more spending of what we don't have will solve our problems! Right.

Based on all the screaming by the Democrats and Health Care Reform Advocates claims, If I pause, if I criticize, if I find fault, I'm like a southern Democrat in the days of slavery. The leader of the Senate said so. My concerns are just so much flotsam of a morally inferior soul, like the racists and slave holders of old.

So I'm guessing what's next is if I chose to disagree with Democrats on anything, new federal regulations require (under the not yet passed Fairness doctrine) I admit I'm a big neanderthal meanie who is sadly misinformed and doesn't understand the big picture. Restitution will involve writing that sentence on my blog 1000 times.

Remember, We're from the Government and we're here to help.

My Letter Back to the White House

From: "David Axelrod, The White House"
To: sherryantonettiwrites@yahoo.com
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 12:38:19 PM
Subject: It's time for a reality check

Dear Friend,

Anyone that's watched the news in the past few days knows that health insurance reform is a hot topic — and that rumors and scare tactics have only increased as more people engage with the issue. Given a lot of the outrageous claims floating around, it’s time to make sure everyone knows the facts about the security and stability you get with health insurance reform.

That’s why we’ve launched a new online resource — WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck — to help you separate fact from fiction and share the truth about health insurance reform. Here's a few of the reality check videos you can find on the site:

CEA Chair Christina Romer details how health insurance reform will impact small businesses.
Domestic Policy Council Director Melody Barnes tackles a nasty rumor about euthanasia and clearly describes how reform helps families.
Matt Flavin, the White House's Director of Veterans and Wounded Warrior Policy, clears the air about Veteran's benefits.
Kavita Patel, M.D., a doctor serving in the White House's Office of Public Engagement, explains that health care rationing is happening right now and how reform gives control back to patients and doctors.
Bob Kocher, M.D., a doctor serving on the National Economic Council, debunks the myth that health insurance reform will be financed by cutting Medicare benefits.
There's more information and a number of online tools you can use to spread the truth among your family, friends and other social networks. Take a look:



We knew going into this effort that accomplishing comprehensive health insurance reform wasn't going to be easy. Achieving real change never is. The entrenched interests that benefit from the status quo always use their influence in Washington to try and keep things just as they are.

But don't be misled. We know the status quo is unsustainable. If we do nothing, millions more Americans will be denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions, or see their coverage suddenly dropped if they become seriously ill. Out-of-pocket expenses will continue to soar, and more and more families and businesses will be forced to deal with health insurance costs they can’t afford.

That's the reality.

Americans deserve better. You deserve a health care system that works as well for you as it does for the status quo; one you can depend on — that won't deny you coverage when you need it most or charge you crippling out-of-pocket co-pays. Health insurance reform means guaranteeing the health care security and stability you deserve.

President Barack Obama promised he'd bring change to Washington and fix our broken, unsustainable health insurance system. You can help deliver that change. Visit WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck, get the facts and spread the truth. The stakes are just too high to do nothing.

Thank you,
David

David Axelrod
Senior Advisor to the President


This email was sent to sherryantonettiwrites@yahoo.com
Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy
Please do not reply to this email. Contact the White House

The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW • Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Mr. Axelrod,

I read with interest, your many articles and videos to address the unfounded concerns about pending health care legislation, but it did not address the founded concerns about the pending health care bill.

Here are the following things I find have not been adequately addressed by any of the speeches or statements offered by the President, the White House or the legislators in their town hall meetings, press releases and op-ed pieces:

1) the claim that all costs will be budget neutral over the next ten years. Only in government does this sort of financial wizardry actually make sense or seem possible. The cost of health care for the private sector keeps going up because of spiraling demand for health services. As the surplus of baby boomers tap into Medicare, Medicaid, social security and this new government largess, a much bigger strain on the system will take place than currently projected.

If we can't afford to fund Medicaid and Medicare and SCHIP fully, then why do we think we can afford to take on 14, 43 or 50 million uninsured?

2) Hypocrisy: If it was bad for Bush to increase the deficit, and bad for Reagan, and bad for the Republicans under Clinton, then it is bad now. The R or the D makes no difference. We can't demand more from the government on a monumental scale and not expect a corresponding increase in spending, deficit or otherwise. Even the Congressional Budget Office says your numbers don't add up.


2) The funding of possibly assisted suicide. Now I heard the lady talk about how the end of life counseling is only about living wills and end of life care and that doctors will be reimbursed by the government for having these helpful talks.

But the content of those talks is of significance, and it matters that our government will pay doctors to talk about living wills and end of life care because it is the government subsidizing end of life planning through a third party.

It makes people nervous, not because they fear change --a broad based and frankly unworthy charge, but because the content of those discussions which we as tax payers will be financing is not discussed or expressly spelled out.

I understand that this is not mandatory and that you worry the Republicans are demonizing one aspect of health care to doom all of it. But you should understand that those of us who have taken the time to read at least some of the bill and who try to stay informed understand that if you reimburse someone for recommending something, they do it more often.

The drug companies do this with doctors, and thus we have a nation that takes antacids, Viagra, and pills for every ailment from restless leg syndrome to insomnia and all the sufferings in between. If the government pays for the talks, the talks will happen. It stands to reason, and thus people are concerned where these talks will lead eventually.

Talking about how to manage one's affairs at the end of life is a matter that is personal and usually involves family and lawyers, rather than the government and doctors. So having a third party, Uncle Sam, in on the conversation makes us wary.

Where are the checks and balances to ensure that one's personal convictions and not the doctor's or the government in power which will change from time to time, remain superior? We need a written guarantee that "communitarianism" medical care as advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the President's top health advisors, will not be eventually deny care of a pre-existing condition, chronic condition or advanced age to mitigate expenses. There have been plenty of written pieces by key advisors that indicate when someone has a serious permanent pervasive or debilitating condition, the Doctors that currently enjoy key positions of power and influence with the President, counsel against additional medical care as a rule.

The premise that health care reform at present will not include the government making those decisions apriori for patients does not preclude the government from eventually opting to adopt a cost effective measure of doling out medical treatment. There needs to be an explicit guarantee within the confines of the legislation that all end of life care shall be determined by the parties in question and not by the government or proxy by the government refusing to pay. (Especially, when some of the people advising on this health care bill have written as friends of the court in cases involving assisted suicide, and have connections to the formerly called Hemlock society). (See Jill Stanek's website for details if you wish).

3) Moral issues like abortion.

For some people, this moral issue is the crux of their problems with the universal health care. These are people who care about the poor, who donate to charity, who pray and make meals for families in need, but who also hold themselves to a standard they believe is from God. To require people to violate their religious beliefs to satisfy a health care program that wishes to offer all things to all people is to (as a government), demand that people deny their beliefs in order to comply with the will of the state. This is a troubling precedent as I'm sure you can understand.

People do not like being told they must fund something they find morally wrong. People do not like feeling like they have no choice. Cut out the stuff that is not medically necessary --like abortion. Make sure these issues which are not medically required for continued existence, are expressly NOT funded to eliminate debate on the issue. There will then be more public support.

The idea was to provide medical care for people in need, to ensure everyone had access to critical medical care and systemic medical treatment for health issues. If you would insist abortion is only a choice, then it is optional and as such it is not a medical necessity but a preference. We do not need to pay for someone's preference, especially when some of us consider the choice itself an evil act.

3) Private vs. Public care. Overwriting and underwriting are the two great sins that the government excels in committing. If there is an increase in cost for providing private care as versus public, most businesses won't offer private except to lure high power people into their business. If there is not a guarantee that the government plan shall not undercut the private by such an extent as to penalize businesses that offer private, (as is currently in the bill, with 8% increase penalty tax that businesses must pay if they do not offer public options), private insurance shall only be the privilege of the very rich or the members of Congress.

Underwriting: Currently, the underfunded insurance assistance programs offered by the government --the aforementioned Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP and also COBRA, fail in their stated objectives for lack of funding. Doctors won't take Medicare and Medicaid because it traditionally underpays by as much as 70% in some cases. If public becomes the only option and underpays what doctors need to meet the bottom line of having an office and a staff and the materials to treat patients, they will leave the profession, leaving a glut of patients in a lurch and in need. The lines for available doctors will get longer, and the care of less quality owing to a lack of capacity to address the sheer volume of demand.

Put in an agreement that public will not undercut the private offerings thus making private a thing only for the rich, or consequently rendering private insurance, a thing of the past.

4) Security: You've said we can keep the health care we have if we like it, but there is no guarantee that with the presence of a public option, the cost of the private care won't skyrocket. If it does, all who can't afford private, must accept the public and that will mean 1) losing one's coverage, 2) losing one's doctor 3) a change in care. Government guarantees are not exactly gold standard in this day and age. So it comes down to trust, which must be earned by careful stewardship and thoughtful responses and crafted legislation.

5) Conviction: It's hard to believe you care this much about health care when you did not help draft the bill, have not offered your own version, and don't seem worried that this might break what is not broken in the system and not fix what you declare must be resolved. Simply put, we do not trust your guidance when you've exercised so little of it in the creation of this bill, and seem only willing to exert your influence to bully the American people into accepting whatever Congress deems to send you. Again, trust is the vital component that is missing. For those that believe in you, they see no wrong. For those that did not, your administration has done little to alleviate their concerns or gain their confidence.

6) Redress of problems. If care is not rationed but not unlimited, there must be a point when the government, like the insurance company, says "No." Rationing as you have argued already occurs in private care when people are denied coverage, dropped from coverage or refused payments for doctor services rendered.

There are checks and balances in the private sector for when the answer is "no." One can sue; one can complain to the government about the tactics of a specific company, one can go to the press and to charities to get additional information, aid and possibly a solution.

Redress of when someone is told "No" by the government needs to be carefully explained to the public or they will fear an Orwellian type system unsympathetic to the plight of the helpless, commercially unviable and elderly. The health bill already states that we cannot sue.

With all due respect to the President, as hard as it is to fight insurance companies, it's harder to fight city hall.

7) Prior experience, prior writings, prior words: The types of literature put out by many of your key officials that are providing counsel and advice do not help alleviate fears about a government program that will eventually become Logan's Run, Soylent Green, or some type of Houyhnhnms society.

When Peter Singer in the New York Times talks of how a teenager has more added value and thus is worth more to the state than the elderly, I find such thinking morally and ethically disturbing, as well as implicitly scary. Dr. David Blumenthal, another advisor recommends "slowing medical innovation to control health spending." Blumentahl thought it was debatable whether timely care that Americans get is worth the cost.

Delays in treatment that clog up the ER are part of what prompted this health care crisis in the first place, when people must wait hours for basic care at a place designated for emergencies.

I do not feel comforted by the counsel of the President's top health advisors. These are not the scare tactics of the right or the Republicans, these are the words of your own advisors, who presumably believe what they say and intend to enact policy that reflects those beliefs.

And then there are the President's past words, when he offered a morphine drip instead of a pacemaker for a vibrant elderly grandmother as a cost cutting alternative. These past words have memory in the public sector and as such are not going to be ignored just because they contradict the image you wish to present now.

7) Finally, people resent being demonized for having dared to discuss their concerns in town halls and with legislators. Granted not all of the discourse has been cordial, but frankly, those in power have seemed woefully indifferent to the concerns of those who did not vote for them.

In a representative government which I submit, this still is, these voices still matter as much as the Democrats did when they did not hold the House, Senate or White House. They should not be trivialized as stupid, vulgar or uninformed. They should not be considered traitorous for sending out emails or discussing articles and talk shows. To brand people as such because they disagree is to stoke the fire and make people much more distrustful of anything that is subsequently said.

I hope you can address some of these issues instead of answering only straw man arguments that further indicate an unwillingness to bend even the slightest to the public concerns that hold merit. I do agree, the stakes are too high to sit and do nothing. I look forward to your response.

Sherry Antonetti

How Much Can We Pay Them to NOT work?

Remember the government shut down back in the early 90's, over spending?

What a quaint idea.

To be upset at waste and fraud and excess. The problem now is, the government has factored waste and fraud into its budgetary process and yet wants to claim that by eliminating it, we can pay for new programs. Maybe I'm just not educated enough to understand how if we can identify waste and fraud such that we can then eliminate it and fold the money back into the budget, why we have waste and fraud in the first place.

And won't that money that is recooped from the unnamed wasteful and fraudulent programs that are so easily discerned when we still want to spend the money, then not go to programs that as I understand it, still offer some good even if they are wasteful and fraudulent? Wasn't that part of the justification for the excessive amounts in the Enviornmental bill, the stimulus package 1, the stimulus package II, the budget, and the pending health care program? We had to have numbers in the billions and trillions to offset the costs that would include waste and fraud?

But don't worry, none of this will affect you. Between all the hidden money preallocated via waste and fraud programs and the spare change all those idle rich have that they got through licit business, we'll be able to afford everything. We'll have a pure earth, perfect health and schools that graduate everyone in one year of preschool with degrees that even NASA would envy. Why? Because we've got good intentions, we're with the government, and we're just here to help.

Just a Second, Please.

The New York Post did a piece that explained how the current congress and our fearless leader have spent one billion an hour in the first fifty days. And all with no waste whatsoever! I know because the President and the government said so, so it must be true. Owning a calculator, I decided to figure out how much that translates to a minute and then a second.

At 277,777.77 per single second, 1,200,000,000,000 have vanished in less than two months. At current course and speed, if we survive the next four years and we still have 33,840 hours to go, we’ll pony up 33,840,000,000,000. What comes after a trillion? A Quadrillion. We’ll be talking about 33 Quadrillion. That’s….insane.

Now I know there are people out there saying “Pshaw.”
Of course we won’t get to a quadrillion.

We’ll be bankrupt first.

Our country is home to 350 million people. Using only what we have already spent, we could have given everyone $3,428.57 regardless of age, gender or immigrant status. Talk about a stimulus package! This home would have reaped $37,714.28 under that plan. I know it isn’t popular to say such things, but this President has spent more than any previous president…ever.

Maybe we could save time and some money by just asking the government “How much are we allowed to keep?” The argument has been put forth that while some people will suffer from these tax increases like small businesses and the like, these demands for money by the government are “for the greater good.”

Why doesn’t anyone ever admit these sorts of things are “for the lesser evil?” We’ll be unjust to you but it squares out because we’re being more than fair to more people than we are unfair. It’s just that since you had good things now, it’s okay if you take a bigger hit.

So, I’m worried for this country and I’m worried about fiscal responsibility. Saying, “The republicans were bad before me…” does not equal a defense. It's never worked in my house if one of my kids said, but my brother/sister was doing it first. That just means they're both in trouble. Memo to Democrats and the President: It’s part of why they were voted OUT of office. We wanted people to be fiscally responsible, like we have no choice but to be in our daily lives.

However, since we must suffer the reality that elections are not for another two years, I’d like to have just a second of the government’s time.

That will be two hundred seventy seven thousand seven hundred and seventy seven dollars and seventy seven cents please.

Why Resolutions Don't Work in 2009

It's 2009. I didn't make a resolution. But then I haven't bought a converter box yet either. Maybe it's the times. Maybe it's emotional and intellectual and physical sloth but resolutions these days seem very fossil fuel. Much of what we seek to change or improve has been either rendered unnecessary or made mandatory, such that it isn't so much a resolution involing personsal responsibility as an obligation we didn't know we signed on to before getting the New Year's To-do list.

10) Resolving to be fiscally responsible. In this day and age, with Congress doling out the dough to every institution that knocks on the door, it would be the height of folly to practice frugality in light of the free largesss the government wishes to pass out to the needy massive corporations. Saving money in 2009 is the equivalent of passing up 20 Trillion sitting on the street waiting to be picked up. You could do it but in heaven's name why?

9)Losing weight. Southbeach, Adkins, Tae Bo, Lippo, Gastro, Phen phen, Jenny Craig, Weight watchers, even Oprah couldn't manage it and she's got personal chefs cooking for her. If millionare president pickers can't beat the bulge, what chance do the rest of us have against Krispy Kremes, french fries and all things chocolate. Let's just call Congress, ask them to rewrite the Body Mass Indexes/average weights to incorporate our greater girth and change the standard deviation such that 75% is within the 3/4th range.

8) Becoming better educated. Between Google and Wikipedia, there is so much information and misinformation, everyone can become an instant expert or idiot on virtually anything, just ask Caroline Kennedy, Al Franklen, Blago, Burris, the list goes on. Today, all you need is a staff and and a blackberry and you need never crack a textbook again. So kids, cram for the tests and forget all the rest.

7) Being Counter-cultural. What would this mean? What would it look like? Reading a newspaper? Using incandescent bulbs? The Amish?

6) Volunteering. With the economy going down the drain, this formerly noble impulse to serve without pay is rapidly become the norm of the actual capitalistic business model. We Americans need to work more and get paid less. It's more "patriotic." Break out the fireworks and the cheap hotdogs and pay your taxes. Whee.

5) Green living. Perusing all the "simple everyday tips" for being more Earth friendly offered in this week's paper alone, I should give up all paper products, coffee, heat, electricity, fruits not in season, one's car, use of planes, computers, printers, baths, tin foil, milk, beef, fish, chicken, processed sugar, leather products, bottled water, appliances and beauty products. I've seen this some place before...oh yeah, Europe.

4) Correcting/improving spelling, writing and grammar. These days, who would notice?

3) Becoming famous. With Youtube, Facebook, blogging, call-ins to every television show and reality television shows popping up faster than kudzu alongside the highways, this isn't so much a goal of any year, as it is something one must actively seek to avoid.

2) Learning all the things that are on the 2009/2008 In/Out list. It's simple. If you knew what they were, and what they are, you're in. If you didn't, you're out. If you have to ask...(Note, saw the list, was able to identify 6 of the in, 10 of the out, of 100).

1) Having more actual fun. I'm not sure this is still allowed by federal law.

On a personal note: Planning to lose weight, save money and stay organized while learning to play the drums on the Wii, master french, finish my book, keep my house neat, get published 52 times and learn three pieces on the piano, read 12 actual books and have more fun daily, pray the rosary and maintain my Saint Bridgette's discipline. There, I made resolutions. Now That's Counter-cultural.

Happy New Year!

The Cost of Sweet Nothings

The News is screaming these days about the price of food.

It seems to have increased by a third.

I haven’t noticed, not because I don’t shop, or because our budget hasn’t been hit.

I haven’t noticed, because for the past five years, whatever food I bring home gets ripped through by a horde of happy raccoons within five minutes of darkening our doorway.

So I’m aware that it cost more, for the price of air.

The other day, I spent two hours at the store. I had brought a list. I had planned a menu. All the organizer/budgetary/helpful how to manage your family type books and web sites suggest using such things. I had even used coupons. I felt like a good mom. I unloaded and then went to pick up my little darlings from Mother’s Day Out and school.

When I got home, there was a need for a double diaper change which took me out of commission for a few minutes, followed by a phone call and a frantic search for the Spanish to English Dictionary for one’ child’s homework. I returned to the kitchen to prepare snack.

You know that 70’s commercial about the American Indian crying by the side of the freeway at the sight of pure devastation?

Green apples in refrigerator –gone. Well, okay, that’s alright, at least it was healthy. Sure I planned to hand those out the next day for school lunches but…hey…the apples are still here, on the table. Five of them have bites out of them. Who was the apple eater? Goldilocks had sampled the fruit until she found the one that was JUST RIGHT. Then there was the little matter of the two children opening a cereal box, and a fourth making two peanut butter and banana (Nuts, that’s my back up plan for tomorrow’s fruit in lunch), sandwiches.

Lest one think I only deal in healthy issues, I checked the closet. The box of five sets of Zebra Cakes? Open. Down to two. The Chips Ahoy, the only processed cookie my middle son eats? A sleeve is missing.

OKAY. I do not use my inside voice. WHO HAS EATEN? I wait for responses. It seems, each of them have now had a snack, they just each chose different ones, leaving six separate foraging trails for me to follow. I declare war. I threaten major chaos. I promise a semester worth of snack baggies filled with nothing but raisins and celery if I don’t see some major clean up detail. I promise to purchase freeze dried space bar ice cream and store brand beef jerky instead.

They think I’m bluffing.

So I remind them, I write fiction. I write articles. I could make a query to a magazine…Frugal Mom or some such on how to economize during this fiscally turbulent time. We’ll live on oatmeal, pasta and eggs for a month. It will make a great piece, feeding a family of ten on just ten dollars a day…what a hook…

There is a flurry of cleaning activity and a few verbal commitments to follow the menu schedule. Still, there is a seventh child I haven’t seen yet. I take the remaining fruits out to the second fridge to keep them safe until the next day. There is my four year old in pure chocolate bliss, having found the Double Stuff Oreos and done just that.

“These are my favors Mom.” He says in a goey voice. There is a layer of top soil cookie crumbs on his hands and face. He offers me a cookie.

Looking at the refrigerator, I eat the cookie and take another. It’s very expensive rare air, but it still tastes good.

For more tastey mental treats, try http://www.humor-blogs.com/!

Crank Party Platform, Filet O'Fish, Politics and Hillary Too

It’s Thursday, so I do my weekly Political rant type thing.

I scrapped my Richard Blane for President piece, W.W. R.F. C. D. (What would Rick from Casablanca Do?) because it just wasn't working. Too forced. So here's my stab today at political analysis and satire, all rolled up into one, sort of like sushi...you eat it, you sort of like it, you know you sound cool if you can say you had it --or in the case of politics, you talked about it, but truth be told, you'ld rather hit the drive thru at McDonalds for a Fish Filet during Lent...at least then you get fries and a diet coke.(I know you're out there, you closet Filet o'Fish eaters you, that's why they're still on the menu!)

Like the New England Patriots before her, Hillary is in danger of having a perfect season end with losing the Super bowl. And Why?

Because people love new more than old, they want pretty over nuance, and mostly, Hillary has been running on two ideas that do not mesh.

1) I have 35 years experience in policy and politics because I was there during the campaigns and years in the governorship and presidency. By that same logic, I should hang out a shingle, Sherry Antonetti, Attorney at Law. 41 years observing Lawyers make me imminently qualified to handle any legal matters you might have. Of course, there’s the little matter of not having a Law degree or being licensed by the State bar but those are details. I’m really a very good lawyer. I bill a reasonable $250 an hour, prorated by the quarter.

2) I’m the outsider, non establishment candidate, not bound to the Democratic party or its establishment base, even though I helped hand pick the leader of the DNC, am the most senior experienced candidate in the Democratic race and have those 35 years of experience. That’s right, I’m a rebel and a maverick. Did you see me cry yesterday? Wasn’t it moving?

By the same token, John McCain has made his entire career one of ticking off the Republican establishment by cozying up to Democrats, spoiling legislation backed by Republican leadership, rendering the light majority held before the 2004 elections inept and meaningless. Now, he too has chosen to embrace a platform of equally incongruous ideas.

1) I am Republican mainstream. Yeah, I disagree on immigration, tax reform, stem cell research and the role of government in the war on terror, but really, I represent the GOP at its core. Ignore any of those conservative Radio talk show hosts that say otherwise, don’t pay attention to the man behind the curtain…the Great and Terrible Oz has spoken!

2) Those youthful indiscressions of my maverick days in the Senate ---I was just fooling you know? Like Dubya’s drinking and Clinton’s sexcapades, they were just things I did then, I won’t have any flaws when I get to be president. You’ll see. It was just, I needed to assert my own voice. Sure it cost the party seats in the off year election. Sure it enabled Democrats and Republicans to super load any bill with billions in pork, but America will thank me for any policies I help shape…eventually, or they should anyway. Humph! Ingrates.

What strikes me most about both these sterling examples of American Politics at its sausage worst, is they both have the same motivation for running and expecting to win. Indeed, pundits have given their reasons as explanations for why they will vote for Candidate HiLIARY or ABCMcCain, their past sufferings make this position something they are OWED. Hill for standing by her cheating man and covering for him during that second administration, and McCain for his years at the Hanoi Hilton and long string of past runs for the office that have failed. Give the Old War Horse his turn. It’s Time for a Woman’s Turn.

Both are saying, not to give them their chance at this is akin to simply not being fair.

And we Americans like to think that we are fair.

So to be fair, really fair, I want a third party. The Democrats have a donkey, the Republicans, an elephant, my party, the Crank Party will have a flying pig as the mascot. The flying pig will land at the government trough and eat all the dollars. Our platform? To give all Three Trillion dollars back! That’s right. I want a real Rebate, proactively of every last red cent. We’ll close it all down and see if anyone notices.

After all, if we’re not going to enforce our laws, be they about campaign finance or borders, why do we need a government? We don’t need to pay our elected officials because after all, they’re so well off they can easily do two or three speeches about how America stinks and it’s all Bush’s fault and net a cool 3 to 20 million from Europhiles, journalists, university types and political sycophants who will just lap it up. I mean, Hillary’s a junior senator and she just lent her own campaign 5 million. When asked where the money came from, Hillary’s eyes moistened and she gave her best warm smile, “You know, I’m so glad you asked that. Being in touch with my feminine side, I just squirreled away the coins from when I’d vacuum the couch over the years and Bill was always so frugal, he’d empty his pockets every night. The money just sort of added up.” She gushed.

So I submit all government money should simply be returned. All of it. According to the census bureau, there are 303,389,465 Americans, 76,460,574 of which are children. If the 3 TRILLION dollar budget was divided just amongst the adults –ages 18 and up, the checks would come out to be $13,220.00 each. Talk about a stimulus package!

Don’t worry, we’d only proclaim a one year government fast, but have it happen every nine years as a means of ensuring that the country wouldn’t grow too dependent upon the three branches for its daily livelihood.

Now. Imagine if people still worked their jobs. Now, what if we did this on the State and local level as well, it would be a 7-10K swing when all was said and done. 20 Thou back in your pocket. Imagine.

People could open businesses, pay off credit card debts, open new businesses and hire more workers. People would invest and have enough to manage buying prescription drugs and still eat something better than dog food. They could go to the doctors and pay the copay or even buy private insurance. Nirvana would reign for one blissful year and then we’d have to get back to work and figure out what in fact, we really needed or wanted from our government.

We’d need a candidate though…a flying pig Crank candidate…I nominate ….Donald Trump. Can you imagine the ratings on the Apprentice if he was dealing with Senators?
“You’re fired!”
“But I work for free…”

“You’re still fired.”

THE CRANK PARTY IN 2008, THINK IT WILL WIN? SURE, WHEN PIGS FLY!
for political commentary and unrelated stuff that is just as useful, try http://www.humor-blogs.com/!

Man Shop

The battle of the sexes is never more clearly thrown into relief than in the quest for food. There is something of a primal revolution between the hunter/gatherers and the nurturer/growers that takes place when one or the other utters the phrase, “Honey, I’m going to the store, do you need anything?” When this Darwinian battle between male and female is combined with the stated New Year’s Objective to be frugal about spending and only buy what we need, not what we want, there are issues.

First day. Man makes the offer, more as a courtesy, as he already has a preconceived notion of what he will get. Woman responds by saying, “Wait a minute, I’ll make a list.” Man is impatient. Wants to get going. Waits for list. List is left in car. Woman angrily goes to grocery store to get items on list, also feels entitled to free associate spend, after all, he did. Critical items get forgotten until a third necessity shop via running into the 7-11 is done.

Four days later. Man makes the offer. Woman is ready, having pre-prepared the list with legible print. She hands him list and coupons. Man follows list fitfully and willfully ignores coupons due to hassle factor. Woman complains about budget. She shops the next day, uses coupons and gets things, makes a point of how she saved money. Man points out they would have saved more if she hadn’t shopped at all.

Friday. Man is driving home. Gets drafted to shop by Woman via a text message list. Man goes in to get target items only. Man cannot find items on list. Buys every possible alternative he can think of, except the ones that would actually serve as acceptable substitutes.

Weekend. Woman decides to go shopping for the week. Man gives budget. Discusses need to pare down and simplify. Woman goes and gets items SHE KNOWS she will need . Blows budget by a factor of 4. Man shakes head.

The Next Week. Man decides to go shopping next week. Gets items sparingly. Stays in budget. Brings home humble offerings. Woman and man both complain that there aren’t any special things on the menu. Midway through week, order take out the rest of the nights for dinner.

The following week. Woman decides to go shopping and splurges just a little bit, staying mostly on budget, cutting corners where she can and still getting a few extras for a gourmet meal that evening. Man has invited friends over for dinner that weekend. A splurge shop at the high priced gourmet grocery store follows.

The Tipping Point. Man goes to shop with sole stated goal of staying on budget. Comes home with Four gallon Jar of Ragu and seventeen boxes of pasta. “We’ll drink water.” He says. After three days, both go together to the store and buy like drunken sailors.

They also order pizza to eat for dinner, being too exhausted from gathering food to cook.

Next Week’s Battle of the Sexes: The Laundry would take up much less of our time if you just followed my system.