These are the times that try men's souls.

I have been off the internet for a couple of days, but so much has come out. This Syria thing is huge, and a plot to assassinate Obama. And this 2001 tape of Obama that's out? Whittle says it all:

We have, in our storied history, elected Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives and moderates. We have fought, and will continue to fight, pitched battles about how best to govern this nation. But we have never, ever in our 232-year history, elected a president who so completely and openly opposed the idea of limited government, the absolute cornerstone of makes the United States of America unique and exceptional.

If this does not frighten you — regardless of your political affiliation — then you deserve what this man will deliver with both houses of Congress, a filibuster-proof Senate, and, to quote Senator Obama again, “a righteous wind at our backs.”

And Dean Barnett died, which makes me sad. I liked him.

My soul is tried these days.

Posted by: Sarah at 02:08 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 176 words, total size 1 kb.

So there's a stock boy at my new job -- I'm gonna peg him at about 18 years old -- who I suspect has a crush on me. Last week he followed me all around the store, gave me a "how you doin'?", and wanted to know how old I am. The look on his face was priceless when I told him. And I figured that would be the end of it, but today he asked me if my band is just a ring or if I'm married.

I've probably been married since he was in middle school.

One of the girls at work says that makes me a cougar.

You know, when I was 16, I worked at a concert arena. I was one of the only females, and I was a good 30 years younger than most people working there. I can't tell you how many times gross 23-year-old roadies would come on to me. I used to get so annoyed at the unwanted attention at work.

And now, shoot, I want to hug this kid.

It has been years since someone has shown an interest in me. It is sincerely the most flattering thing that's happened in a long time. I am just tickled pink that this kid even remotely thought it would be appropriate for me to talk to him. I have been giggling all day.

Now there's an ego boost. Heh.

Posted by: Sarah at 10:34 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 1 kb.

Man, you guys thought I was crazy when I linked voting and taxes:
White People Shouldn't Be Allowed To Vote
(via Amritas)

Posted by: Sarah at 10:23 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

Tim's wife, whom we all know as CPT Patti, was admitted to the hospital. They still aren't entirely sure what's wrong with her. I thought maybe some of you old-schoolers could leave some encouraging comments here for her so she can read them when she gets computer access. Hang in there, Patti. We know you're tough!

Posted by: Sarah at 03:40 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm re-reading Larry Elder's The Ten Things You Can't Say In America, and I came across a timely point:

An economics major in college, Reagan further argued that lowering taxes would increase money coming into federal coffers because it kick starts people into working harder, smarter, and with less need to conceal income.

But guess who else felt that way? JFK. That's right, JFK. In the December 24, 1962, issue of US News and World Report, "Kennedy's Latest Word on Tax Cuts, Plans for Business," in urging a tax cut, Kennedy said that "it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low -- and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now.

"The experience of a number of European countries has borne this out. This country's own experience with tax reductions in 1954 has borne this out, and the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget -- and tax reduction can pave the way to full employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budgetary deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous expanding economy which will bring a budgetary surplus."

Somehow I don't think Obama is the new Kennedy.

Posted by: Sarah at 06:45 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 218 words, total size 1 kb.

I need to read Varifrank more often than I do.
Shoot, I wish I were Varifrank. That man can write.

His post about the blood on the carpet of your soul.
His post on the Truman-Dewey race.
And finally, Monster.

You know, just bookmark him.

Posted by: Sarah at 01:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.

Obama and the Tax Tipping Point:

What happens when the voter in the exact middle of the earnings spectrum receives more in benefits from Washington than he pays in taxes? Economists Allan Meltzer and Scott Richard posed this question 27 years ago. We may soon enough know the answer.

Barack Obama is offering voters strong incentives to support higher taxes and bigger government. This could be the magic income-redistribution formula Democrats have long sought.

Sen. Obama is promising $500 and $1,000 gift-wrapped packets of money in the form of refundable tax credits. These will shift the tax demographics to the tipping point where half of all voters will receive a cash windfall from Washington and an overwhelming majority will gain from tax hikes and more government spending.

In 2006, the latest year for which we have Census data, 220 million Americans were eligible to vote and 89 million -- 40% -- paid no income taxes. According to the Tax Policy Center (a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute), this will jump to 49% when Mr. Obama's cash credits remove 18 million more voters from the tax rolls. What's more, there are an additional 24 million taxpayers (11% of the electorate) who will pay a minimal amount of income taxes -- less than 5% of their income and less than $1,000 annually.

In all, three out of every five voters will pay little or nothing in income taxes under Mr. Obama's plans and gain when taxes rise on the 40% that already pays 95% of income tax revenues.

And we have Barney Frank saying outrageous things like this:

I believe later on there should be tax increases. Speaking personally, I think there are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of the money.

I put up a quote from Neal Boortz's piece To the Undecided Voter about how democracy fails when the scales tip and people can vote themselves more money. Andy McCarthy received a similar quote from this blog's namesake, Robert Heinlein.

A perfect democracy, a "warm body" democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction.... [O]nce a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader — the barbarians enter Rome.

I think our country is in serious trouble.

But apparently Sarah Palin's clothes matter more than massive voter fraud and Democrat donation fraud.

"I love mankind; it's people I can't stand."

Posted by: Sarah at 04:55 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 490 words, total size 3 kb.

Second Place To A Cheeseburger
Yes, honey, I dimed you out again on SpouseBUZZ.

UPDATE:

Interesting postscript to the cheeseburger story. Tonight when the webcam pops up, there's my husband, ceremoniously eating a cheeseburger on camera. With this devilish, I'll-show-you look on his face. We both cracked up.

I love how he can turn something irritating into something endearing.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:19 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.

Now here's a Democrat I'd like to have a beer with. (OK, you too, pinko commie friend.)
Orson Scott Card: Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?

Via Powerline. Also via them is this post: "I Was Born In Colombia, But I Was Made in the USA."

Posted by: Sarah at 04:57 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I don't think anyone expects unbiased truth from the media, except the media themselves, who claim to be providing it. It is the profound dishonesty that offends so many. You are unlikely to get a beer with Mr. Card, sorry to say, as I'm 99% sure he is LDS. =)

Posted by: Sig at October 22, 2008 03:38 AM (n369L)

2 Oh yeah, crap Sig...I did know that. OK, a milkshake

Posted by: Sarah at October 22, 2008 03:56 AM (TWet1)

3 trr is the poster child for the Democrat Party, expect nothing and care even less about the consequences. Hell, considering their track record of failed policies, (the top ten poorest cities are run by DÂ’s), it all makes perfect sense. Also, thanks for enlightening me on the reasoning behind ObamaÂ’s support. Just take away reason and accountability from the average personÂ…and youÂ’ll find some of that Hope/Change. You couldnÂ’t be a more perfect example of why IÂ’m a Republican. Thanks. And who you trying to kid, you donÂ’t drink beer, you reek of w(h)ine.

Posted by: tim at October 22, 2008 08:41 AM (nno0f)

4 Hi Tim, Tasty personal attack! I highly doubt that I'm the Democratic posterchild. Truthfully I don't feel that my beliefs are all that different from the average Republican's. I'm all for gun rights and pro life, and whatever talking points you want to throw out there. Having said that, I'd like to address your comment about "expecting nothing" and "not caring about the consequences." I'll stand by not expecting much from a Presidential candidate for a number of reasons. First, the Presidents is in Washington and I live in middle America. If I want change in middle America I should be doing something about it here, not expecting Washington to do it for me. While I should be able to trust that positivity will come (and let's be honest, it did from Clinton, it did from Bush, it will from McCain or Obama) I don't expect the person in the chair to set the tone for the direction my life and affairs will take. So, in essence, I think I take alot of responsibility for my own consequences and that which I have influence over. This is what I don't get - the bile on both sides and the willingness to attach so vehemently. Right now, I think its bad for either party to control all 3 branches. I think this country requires both viewpoints, as neither is all the way correct. The Republican agenda generally has alot of good things going for it and a few black marks (in my opinion) that I can't square with. Having said that, often I vote D based on what I expect the candidate to actually accomplish as opposed to the ideology involved. Different strokes for different folks. I can foresee a day where the issue that I support the D's for to be "handled" to my satisfaction and I might very well vote R with a clear conscience. Oh, and you're right, I'm not a beer drinker, or even a w(h)ine drinker as you suggested. I can't handle much more than a diet caffeine-free Dr. Pepper being such a weak-willed lefty and all. (Insert jokey emoticon here) - trr

Posted by: Sarah's Pinko Commie Friend at October 22, 2008 11:48 AM (n5dnp)

5 “I'm all for gun rights and pro life, and whatever talking points you want to throw out there.” So to you, the 2nd Amendment and the rights of an unborn child are merely “talking points”? I’d say they are just a tad more than that and evidently above your pay grade. “I'll stand by not expecting much from a Presidential candidate for a number of reasons. First, the Presidents is in Washington and I live in middle America. If I want change in middle America I should be doing something about it here, not expecting Washington to do it for me.” So you can’t comprehend that what happens in Washington actually affects and has the potential to change your life ALL the way over in “Middle America”? So when Pres. Obama, (no, I’m not conceding), in Washington, raising taxes, and he will, you won’t be affected ‘cause your WAY over there? While I commend you on you attitude of “not expecting Washington to do it for me” I don’t see the correlation to your (incorrect) theory that what happens in Washington stays in Washington. Can I assume you’ve heard of the Supreme Court? By they way, the next president will probably appoint 4/5 new justices. Though don’t worry, what they decide won’t affect anything where you live. “While I should be able to trust that positivity will come (and let's be honest, it did from Clinton, it did from Bush, it will from McCain or Obama)” It would depend on what you mean by positivity and since that’s seems to be such a broad term, I’ll let that one go. “I don't expect the person in the chair to set the tone for the direction my life and affairs will take.” I don’t know anybody who believes otherwise. So again, you’re mixing apples and oranges. “So, in essence, I think I take alot of responsibility for my own consequences and that which I have influence over.” Tell me again why you’re a Democrat… “This is what I don't get - the bile on both sides and the willingness to attach so vehemently.” I don’t have a problem with our politicians being passionate about the views and principles they hold. Hell, I want them to be. Their jobs involve serious issues that impact us all, well not you apparently, and have the potential to impact us in various ways. But lying, conniving and being untruthful are unacceptable, yes. And I’m not a fan of nuanced, double speak that is favored by lawyers like the Obama’s , Clinton’s and the Edward’s. “The Republican agenda generally has alot of good things going for it and a few black marks (in my opinion) that I can't square with.” And so you’re a Democrat because… “Having said that, often I vote D based on what I expect the candidate to actually accomplish as opposed to the ideology involved.” I don’t see how a candidate will meet you expectations without relying on their ideology, that being their beliefs and ideas? What else is left, Hope/Change? Though I guess since you don’t expect “much from a Presidential candidate” I can see why you’re a Democrat and why no doubt you’ll be voting for Obama. ‘The Democrat Party –expect nothing, ‘cause that’s what we deliver.’ “I can foresee a day where the issue that I support the D's for to be "handled" to my satisfaction and I might very well vote R with a clear conscience.” WTF are you trying to say? You need to figure out what you believe in and pick a party that honors those beliefs. To say you’re confused about which party represents your views is a major understatement. It doesn’t make you a bad person, I’m just sayin’…

Posted by: tim at October 23, 2008 07:15 AM (nno0f)

6 Ok, here we go. "So to you, the 2nd Amendment and the rights of an unborn child are merely “talking points”? I’d say they are just a tad more than that and evidently above your pay grade." Comments about my pay grade notwithstanding my point was that I don't blindly commit to either party's ideology. some things I think the dems have "right" some things the Republicans have better. "So you can’t comprehend that what happens in Washington actually affects and has the potential to change your life ALL the way over in “Middle America”?" I can comprehend it just fine, its just that the only influence I have is a voice every few years. Therefore I don't sweat it, I deal with what comes and take responsibility for what I can control. "Tell me again why you’re a Democrat…" Never claimed to be one. Often I vote Dem. Sometimes I might not. I vote the candidate and what I expect them to be able to control as neither party has it all right and I don't feel obligated to throw in my lot with either. "I don’t see how a candidate will meet you expectations without relying on their ideology, that being their beliefs and ideas? What else is left, Hope/Change?" My expectations are don't embarass me, don't get me killed, and leave it better than you found it. Their ideology certainly matters, but doesnt set the tone since there are other branches of government that influence what legislation is passed. The president is one cog in the wheel - important to be sure, but not he end-all and be all. I don't want either party in control of all 3 branches, therefore sometimes I like the pres to be a Dem and sometimes not. "WTF are you trying to say?" What I mean is that I support the Dem agenda when it comes to ending abstinence-only sex-ed, gay rights, a diminshing of pandering to the religious right, etc. That's how I feel and I respect that others feel differently. There are some things that I expect to be addressed as time goes on. The Dems seem to be more about enforcing a perceived equality. On certain issues, I think we still need that approach. On others (affirmative action for instance) I think we need to rely on the fact that opportunity does exist rather than trying to force it. "You need to figure out what you believe in and pick a party that honors those beliefs. To say you’re confused about which party represents your views is a major understatement. It doesn’t make you a bad person, I’m just sayin’…" I know exactly what I believe in. And I'm not confised about which party represents my views because neither does a very good job of representing me. I will say this - the politics of the last few years have promoted the idea that each person should be able to be summed up by adherance to one party's ideology or the other. I just disagree with this. Some Democratic policies make me very uncomfortable. redistribution of wealth for instance - I run a business and I want to keep my money! How about socialized health care? I really don't think that's going to solve anything. But as I said before there are a few things that the Republican ticket promotes that I don't buy into. Ergo, I may be represented by either party or neither, but don't try to sell me that I have to cast my lot with one other. I think its rather dismissive to judge someone as confused because they don't feel that their beliefs align perfectly with a given party. At any rate, I appreciate your response. I realize that I probably don't hold that same values as many of Sarah's loyal readers. Having said that, I can admit that the views expressed on this blog have helped to shape my own beliefs, and I hope that the "other side of the aisle" can see the why there are differing opinions. - trr

Posted by: Sarah's pinko commie firend at October 23, 2008 01:06 PM (xAF2d)

7 *eating popcorn* I come here today to watch the intellectual volley between Tim, and the Pinko

Posted by: awtm at October 24, 2008 06:00 AM (skcC5)

8 Well, I don’t want to disappoint awtm…the popcorn smells great… “I don't blindly commit to either party's ideology.” Didn’t expect you too, I don’t. I suspect most people don’t. “…, its just that the only influence I have is a voice every few years. Therefore I don't sweat it, I deal with what comes and take responsibility for what I can control.” No, you only have one vote. You can influence people with your words and actions and do I dare say, you can join a party and/or an organization(s) (NFIB, US Chamber of Commerce, etc.) that best represents your views and values. “Often I vote Dem.” That would make a Dem. “What I mean is that I support the Dem agenda when it comes to ending abstinence-only sex-ed, gay rights, a diminshing of pandering to the religious right, etc.” Sex-Ed in the late 70’s was NOT abstinence-only sex-ed so I doubt it is now. Gays don’t have rights? Really, didn’t realize that. Is that so important to you, are you gay? And I’m not asking derogatorily, I don’t care what you or anybody does in their bedroom. What wrong with the religious right? I’m an atheist and I don’t have a problem with the R’s in regard to this. I hardly think they pander. “The Dems seem to be more about enforcing a perceived equality.” Now we’re getting to the meat of it all. The Dem’s want to take from the ‘Have’s’, people that have earned what they have, and give it to the ‘Have Nots’, people who are were they are because of no fault but their own. This is the fundamental difference between the Party’s. “I know exactly what I believe in. And I'm not confised about which party represents my views because neither does a very good job of representing me. I will say this - the politics of the last few years have promoted the idea that each person should be able to be summed up by adherance to one party's ideology or the other. I just disagree with this.” Most people are able to prioritize things that matter the most to them and figure out which party best represents them the best. Me, I’m for national security, low taxes, less government, this are the things that make me an R. I’ve always viewed people such as yourself as a lot like bisexuals- make up your freakin’ mind already. If you don’t belong to party how do you expect to have a voice? Last time I checked, Independents didn’t have a convention, nor a candidate running for POTUS. You’re in the creek without a paddle or a chance. “Some Democratic policies make me very uncomfortable. redistribution of wealth for instance - I run a business and I want to keep my money! How about socialized health care? I really don't think that's going to solve anything.” Agreed, I’m a small business owner myself. So you’ll be voting for McCain then right? I would think this would take precedent over gay rights, sex ed. and such. “Ergo, I may be represented by either party or neither, but don't try to sell me that I have to cast my lot with one other. I think its rather dismissive to judge someone as confused because they don't feel that their beliefs align perfectly with a given party.” Again, most people aren’t in lock step with their respective party. But most people pick a party based on what is important to them, what BEST represents their values and beliefs. I apologize for my dismissiveness and it seems we have more in common than not. Anyways good chatting with ya’. Sorry if my answers were too brief, time is short today and there was much, probably too much, to cover in this exchange.

Posted by: tim at October 24, 2008 11:24 AM (nno0f)

9 “As far as only having one vote, well I don't even really get that with the electoral college and all.” Ah come on man, certainly you understand how it works, how individuals votes actually count toward the Elec. Coll., right? “As far as national security, low taxes and small governmentare concerned I'm in agreement. I don't buy into the fact that the president is responsible for natsec” You really don’t understand what a president can and cannot do, do you? How’s this – “I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems. [snip] I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons. I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material. And I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBM’s off hair-trigger alert.” see here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o84PE871BE That’s from the man you are going to vote for. Sleep tight. “Nevertheless I think we made the decision and we have to take the responsibility to see it through no matter how long it takes.” Again, your man Obama wants TO GET OUT!!! Gezz, dude why the eff are you voting for a guy who is totally at odds with what you seem to value the most? Please watch the video, its’ in his own words! And I AM trying to influence you and anyone who is reading this. Get the facts, educate yourself, don’t take my word for it. Vote for the person who best represents what you determine is most important to you. More importantly don’t cling to flowery words and just blindly go along with the crowd. I’m going now and bang my head against the wall, maybe then I’ll understand the Hope/Change thing you people are grasping at. ARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!

Posted by: tim at October 25, 2008 09:28 AM (nno0f)

10 trr, Chew on this- Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) of Fannie-gate fame, announced yesterday that he wants a 25% cut in military spending. AND (same article)- House Democrats Contemplate Abolishing 401(k) Tax Breaks Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nationÂ’s $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive. Read it all- http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/10/it-has-begun-dem-leaders-call-for-25.html#comments Yup, don't know why I'm a R, nope can't figure it out... Hope/Change

Posted by: tim at October 25, 2008 09:43 AM (nno0f)

11 "Ah come on man, certainly you understand how it works, how individuals votes actually count toward the Elec. Coll., right?" Yup, I get it, its more the issue that some folks believe in one-man-one-vote and that's not really how it works. I live in Illinois - my vote is pretty much unimportant as my state's E-votes are going to the Dems. "You really don’t understand what a president can and cannot do, do you?" I get it plenty - what I'm saying is that the president isn't doing the work. Budgets and all that don't worry me - like most of us the people who are tasked with taking care of us will make do with what they have. Also, the president may have an agenda, but there are 2 other branches of government to temper that agenda. I sleep fine - our military is the most dominant on the planet. Nuclear threats don't worry me - its individuals that we have to worry about these days. This is more of a personal thing now - law enforcement and men-on-the-ground less than missle systems and what not. Are you really still worried about negotiating with Russia? I get that he wants the pull-out and I'm not necessarily in favor of that. But don't make the mistake of presuming that you understand what I value most. Once again the "you people" commentary is what I object to, as is your assertions that someone should pick a side and stick with it. That's the problem with the politics of the last 8 years (of which both sides are guilty). I refuse to buy into "you're either with us or against us" - look, I log into this site because Sarah is an old-school friend of mine. I don't dismiss all Republicans with judgmental commentary and empty generalizations. I genuinely feel that I understand the Republican agenda much more than I used to, and I agree with some of it. I don't buy into hope/change either. Its kinda why I've bothered to remain in this discussion - I don't think that all Republicans are war-mongering rednecks or any other silly stereotype you want to apply, nor do I think its fair to apply to the Dems (even though once again I don't consider myself a Dem). If it had come down to say Huckabee and Clinton I would've voted Huckabee. If it had been Romney/Clinton I'd have had quite a quandry as I really don't believe in either. Ergo, I vote the sitution and not the party. Right now McCain doesn't fill me with confidence. I think he has no opinion of his own, and he's allowing a campaign to determine his future. Now before you roast me on that, Obama and any other candidate will do the same thing. I just dont feel that McCain is a guy I can trust to do the job - I trust Obama to makes speeches and deal on his feet than McCain. I trust him to make decisions better than McCain and what I have to go on is their campaigns at this point. McCain has run a scattered, pandering campaign. That's my take. I believe that Obama is the lesser of two evils at this point. Not necessarilty a desirable candidate, but I only get 2 choices. I'd love to see Obama come in as president and see the house or senate go back to the Republicans. I would think we'd get a little more moderate decision making on the issues that you and I are concerned about (taxes, economy, security, etc). time to put this discussion to bed yet?

Posted by: sarah's pinko commie friend at October 25, 2008 09:48 AM (C8APQ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I love Penn and Teller's show. And this final episode maybe actually was "The Best." It was the perfect end to a really good day.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:29 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

There's a story going on here in town that I simply do not understand. I thought maybe you could help me see what I'm missing.

A gas station owner has been fined $5000 for price gouging during hurricane season last month, when all the gas jumped. Most gas in town went to around $4.00, but apparently this guy was charging $5.50. And apparently he was the only one who raised his this high.

I don't see why this is illegal.

Gas is the most advertised commodity we buy. Ask anyone to tell you the price of milk or detergent, and I bet few people could do it. But everyone knows what gas costs. It's advertised on every street corner. If someone sold gas that day for $5.50, I would've had so much sticker shock that I would've kept going to the next gas station. Problem solved. If I did buy it there, well, I'm a sucker if it was $1.50 cheaper down the street.

But here's what I don't get. Let's say I own a store. I decide I want to sell a two-liter of Pepsi for $45. Is that illegal? It's stupid, but is it illegal? Is it price gouging? Is it only price gouging if there's a natural disaster?

I don't understand why this gas station owner couldn't set the price of gas at whatever he felt like. Is it because other gas stations would see his price and raise theirs? I know gas stations have price wars. Is there some regulating body that decides a price range for gas on any given day?

I really don't get this. What am I missing?

Posted by: Sarah at 01:10 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 279 words, total size 1 kb.

Dear John McCain,

You're crusin' for a bruisin'. Seriously.

We sent your campaign money. And you've spent several dollars of it sending me junk mail every day asking me for more money.

Stop doing that.

All you're doing is making me mad I got on your mailing list. It's not making me want to send you more money.

But I did like the photo of you and Sarah that you sent. It's on the fridge. (And I'm totally going to be Sarah Palin for Halloween.)

Knock it off with the mail. Please.

Sarah

Posted by: Sarah at 08:37 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

1 And I'm totally going to be Sarah Palin for Halloween. You must post photos of yourself in costume!

Posted by: Amritas at October 21, 2008 09:38 AM (+nV09)

2 I feel the same way about all the multiple NRA mailings...

Posted by: Green at October 21, 2008 12:22 PM (6Co0L)

3 I got an email asking for volunteers to either go to a swing state to get out the vote or make phone calls from home following a pre-written script to undecided voters. If I can talk my hubby into being a moose for halloween, I'm going as Sarah in hunters camo.

Posted by: Pamela at October 21, 2008 12:45 PM (9Twxi)

4 Ditto,ditto and ditto. I actually yelled at the latest envelope "STOP IT! Spend the money on TV ads! Not to mail me more things!" I need to go shoot some more money at him..right now..

Posted by: MaryIndiana at October 22, 2008 08:44 AM (SRyvm)

5 Hey, that was my idea. I was going to be Sarah Palin for Halloween. I already get funny looks downtown whenever I wear my glasses to work. But I have to admit, I am tempted to send just enough money (according to their email) for them to send me a lapel pin. Hmmm... Only thing is, I'm not sure sending more money would actually do any good.

Posted by: Emily at October 22, 2008 10:35 AM (jAos7)

6 I've gotten two mailings with that photo. And more letter-sized mail than I can count. What they don't know is that I don't have the spending money to contribute, so all those mailings, as you noted, are a waste of what money they already have...

Posted by: Miss Ladybug at October 22, 2008 04:12 PM (zoxao)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Oh yeah, are we getting another stimulus check? Really?

Can we refuse it?

Because last week my husband bought me a Garmin for my birthday, I bought a handgun, I dropped some money buying clothes for my new job, and I had to pay for a fertility treatment.

We're doing a plenty good job of spending our own money right now. I don't need to spend someone else's.

Stop taking money from a taxpayer and handing it to me to spend. Cuz I'd just buy a Glock.

Oh wait, on second thought...free Glock. Hand it over.

Some rich guy is out his hard-earned money and I get a free gun. Sounds totally fair to me, right? Sigh.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:58 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.

Some Soldier's Mom left a comment at AWTM, and this part caught my eye:

... and you just want to ask Barrack Obama, "Since when did it become acceptable in America to punish hard working people by taking their money and giving it to others because you think that's "fairer"? and that you can't imagine how he justifies giving tax "refunds" to people who don't even pay taxes! You see this as taking your "A" grades in school and giving them to people who got lower grades to make it "fairer".

Did I ever tell you that this is exactly what happened to me in France? I took a literature class, and we had some paper to write. After they were all turned in, the teacher reprimanded the class for missing the point of the paper. She explained what a good paper would've looked like. I felt pretty sure that what I had written was close to what she was looking for, so I was in the catbird seat. But then she laid this kicker on us: She had decided to go ahead and average all the grades and give us the average. I ended up with a C.

I wish I were making that story up. Or I wish it had been like a trick on the teacher's part, a way to teach us a lesson. Nope. It was real and the grade stuck.

I had done the assignment correctly and I got a C. Someone else who had turned in an F was feeling pretty awesome at this point.

I don't see how that's even remotely fair.

And Some Soldier's Mom is right that it's a good analogy for the taxes.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:06 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 289 words, total size 2 kb.

At the Milblogs Conference, during the tribute to our fallen, I mentioned Bunker Mulligan. Or, I tried to: I immediately choked up and barely managed to sob the words out.

It's been three years since the death of a man I never met, and it still hurts that much.

A while back, I found this old comment he left:

There are just too many things in this country I haven't seen to go wandering around the world looking for more. I still haven't been to the Black Hills, and I want to see Yosemite again. Washington is one of my favorite cities in the entire world--so much to do there. I've been four times and still want more.

I keep trying to plan a road trip from Corpus Christi through Big Bend to Vegas, then back along the northern route to the Grand Canyon, Painted Desert, then back to Corpus across the Llano Estacado and Comanche Country.

There will be time for golf when you get back!

He didn't get to do these things. We didn't get to play golf.

Mike is buried in San Antonio, and I had to see him while I was there. We located his marker and my friends stayed in the car as I got out to pay respects.

The sobbing started even before I saw his name.

I had tried to think of something I could leave there for Mike, but I couldn't come up with anything and was empty handed. My fellow SpouseBUZZ author Toad surprised me with the most perfect idea: he had brought a golf ball and a Sharpie for me.

I left Mike a little note on the golf ball and then sat there and wept.

I still miss him so much.

And I want this blog post to be better, because he deserves better, but I just don't know what else to say.

Damn, this weekend was rough.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:17 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 325 words, total size 2 kb.

I'm catching up on some blogs and came across this hilarious post-debate line by Varifrank:

SO - we no longer ask our Presidential candidates any questions that involve the military?
[...]
Three debates and I don't get any answers on these and many other important issues, I get the equivalent of what it feels like to have two used car salesman run back and forth and "ask their manager" if they can get me a "discount on the price for the undercoat" ( an undercoat that I don't want or particularly need, but will be forced to take to get off the car lot with my wits and my wallet mostly intact.)

Heh.

Also, two tax posts, since I just lurve talking about taxes.
One, from Kim du Toit, on what John McCain should say.
Two, some nuts and bolts on the Obama plan from a The Corner reader.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 156 words, total size 1 kb.

I bought Stranger Than Fiction because AWTM liked it. So much of Palahniuk's stuff in this book reminds me of blogging. Take, for example, You Are Here:

Okay, okay, so maybe weÂ’re headed down a road toward mindless, self-obsessed lives where every event is reduced to words and camera angles. Every moment imagined through the lens of a cinematographer. Every funny or sad remark scribbled down for sale at the first opportunity.

A world Socrates couldnÂ’t imagine, where people would examine their lives, but only in terms of movie and paperback potential.

Where a story no longer follows as the result of an experience.

Now the experience happens in order to generate a story.

Sort of like when you suggest: “Let’s not but say we did.”

The story—the product you can sell—becomes more important than the actual event.

One danger is, we might hurry through life, enduring event after event, in order to build our list of experiences. Our stock of stories. And our hunger for stories might reduce our awareness of the actual experience. In the way we shut down after watching too many action-adventure movies. Our body chemistry can’t tolerate the stimulation. Or we unconsciously defend ourselves by pretending not to be present, by acting as a detached “witness” or reporter to our own life. And by doing that, never feeling an emotion or really participating. Always weighing what the story will be worth in cold cash.

That is how a hardcore blogger lives. Every life experience is seen through the lens of how it's going to be blogged. Everything is a vignette, put out there for all to read. And while you're living the joy or sorrow of a situation, in the back of your mind you're also composing the blog post about it.

It's a way to process. A way, like Palahniuk says, to step outside the situation a little and view it as a "detached 'witness.'"

Because sometimes you need that.

Like today.

I'm not pregnant.

Posted by: Sarah at 02:04 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 337 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Big huge hugs to you.

Posted by: Reasa at October 18, 2008 06:00 PM (2W7Iu)

2 Big hugs from this corner, too.

Posted by: FbL at October 18, 2008 07:22 PM (HwqvF)

3 Damn. Just, damn. Go hang with Carren. Her fertile myrtle genes should rub off on you. Of course, the fun is in the trying, as it doesn't involve diapers. Okay, there was that one time, but I'm not supposed to talk about that. After today, You could have one of ours, if you like. --Chuck

Posted by: Chuck at October 18, 2008 07:23 PM (q4psF)

4 Oh... I'm so, so sorry... *hugs*

Posted by: kannie at October 18, 2008 08:17 PM (f+LJo)

5 *hugs*, Sarah.

Posted by: Emily at October 18, 2008 09:21 PM (cZoqf)

6 So sorry, Sarah. big {{hugs}} your way.

Posted by: Susan at October 19, 2008 10:30 AM (IfQM3)

7 Crap. I wanted to be there this weekend to hold your hand & hug you. My presence honestly was needed at my sister-in-law's wedding this weekend...when you're ready for a good laugh I have some stories. Love you, chica.

Posted by: Guard Wife at October 19, 2008 11:42 AM (eb8pN)

8 i checked in tonight quick because i was thinking of you and wondering when you would know. apparently you know now and it's one more time for you to have to say "it's not my time". i'm so sorry. uh, and on top of it all, i forgot to say happy birthday

Posted by: Kate at October 19, 2008 03:23 PM (576n8)

9 I second the damn motion. I share your row boat on this. Oh how you know I do. I'm still sorry. btw that quote totally hits the nail on the head about us hard core ones too.

Posted by: DARLA at October 19, 2008 08:55 PM (hRWl6)

10 I'm sorry, Sarah.

Posted by: Anwyn at October 20, 2008 07:51 AM (dzxw9)

11 I'm sorry, Sarah.

Posted by: Deltasierra at October 20, 2008 02:21 PM (GWr7v)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I'm leaving soon to start my journey to SpouseBUZZ Live San Antonio.
More later.

And yes, I am more than freaked out by this.

I can't even talk about it anymore.

I am an emotional, ridiculous mess today. I feel strung out and beaten.
God, I hope that means I'm pregnant.

Posted by: Sarah at 08:19 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Is it hyperbole to remind people that historically, democracies have a life span and we’ve exceeded the average? (Note to self: must buy stock in liquor companies ‘cause it’s gonn’a be a LONG 4/8 yrs.)

Posted by: tim at October 16, 2008 08:42 AM (nno0f)

2 I thought this was interesting, and thought you might, too: http://www.zombietime.com/lefts_big_blunder/

Posted by: Emily at October 16, 2008 09:07 AM (jAos7)

3 I'm just hoping the silent majority – you know, the ones who have a head on their shoulders and understand what this country is about – rise up and vote for McCain. I'm thinking it's time to get my husband his gun, concealed carry permit, and stock up on ammo. I have my trusty shotgun, which also needs ammo. Sort of off-topic, will you be going to the Tacoma SpouseBuzz, too? 'Cause my husband (Sig) and I will be there!

Posted by: Deltasierra at October 16, 2008 09:11 AM (il0E1)

4 That's what I'm talking about. I feel like we are swimming upstream in jello and the world I am leaving to my children and grandchildren (and that new baby of yours!) is so unlike the one I've lived in. I am so sad for that, you cannot imagine how it makes me feel that my generation has failed. We hear a lot about the Nazi's but there were and are, and will be many forms of fascism. Last night we were cheered by John McCain's coming alive, but with all that my husband just kept saying about Obama, Mussolini, Mussolini. Look him up. He was voted in, didn't get in with a Putz like Hitler or Stalin. We are in scary times. But the Anchoress cheers me. She has a good spirit , I wish I did. PS One of my kids and his family live in San Antonio.

Posted by: Ruth H at October 16, 2008 10:06 AM (BkiKe)

5 Enjoy your time in TX! Wish I were going to be there!! Call me if you want/need. I think the phone conference w/AWTM and me is a good idea still.

Posted by: Guard Wife at October 16, 2008 02:30 PM (eb8pN)

6 Emily, Thanks for the zombietime article. It's given a lot to think about until Sarah posts from San Antonio (I can't wait!), and its lessons will remain relevant long after the election is over.

Posted by: Amritas at October 16, 2008 03:54 PM (HWSu7)

7 I've said it before: Once the gummint starts to bribe the citizenry with their own money, and the citizenry is either too lazy or too stupid to care or realize it we, as a republic, are doomed. we are so doomed.

Posted by: Chuck Z at October 17, 2008 02:33 AM (bQVIy)

8 Deltasierra: I'll be there.

Posted by: Emily at October 17, 2008 01:25 PM (cZoqf)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

John Murtha, classy as ever.

Mr. Murtha said it has taken time for the state's voters embrace a black presidential candidate.

"There's no question Western Pennsylvania is a racist area," said Mr. Murtha, whose district stretches from Johnstown to Washington County. "The older population is more hesitant."

Hogwash. My grandparents live right over the border in small-town Western New York. My 83-year-old grandmother is most likely voting for Obama.

Quit pointing out imaginary racism, Democrats.

Posted by: Sarah at 11:17 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.

Obama's proposed tax credits:

Here's the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer -- a federal check -- from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this "welfare," or in George McGovern's 1972 campaign a "Demogrant." Mr. Obama's genius is to call it a tax cut.

The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year.

We're so far from the concept of a "safety net" here that it's sickening. And there's more, as The String Beans say:

There's another catch: Because Mr. Obama's tax credits are phased out as incomes rise, they impose a huge "marginal" tax rate increase on low-income workers. The marginal tax rate refers to the rate on the next dollar of income earned. As the nearby chart illustrates, the marginal rate for millions of low- and middle-income workers would spike as they earn more income.

Some families with an income of $40,000 could lose up to 40 cents in vanishing credits for every additional dollar earned from working overtime or taking a new job. As public policy, this is contradictory. The tax credits are sold in the name of "making work pay," but in practice they can be a disincentive to working harder, especially if you're a lower-income couple getting raises of $1,000 or $2,000 a year. One mystery -- among many -- of the McCain campaign is why it has allowed Mr. Obama's 95% illusion to go unanswered.

So both poor and rich people have a "disincentive to working harder" under the Obama tax plan. Boy, that sounds like a winner for the future of America.

(via CG)

Posted by: Sarah at 02:50 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.