Despite repeated attempts by pro-life legislators on both sides of the aisle, taxpayer funding for abortion is back with a vengeance in ObamaCare proposals.
Thus far, all 17 proposed amendments that would prohibit taxpayer funding for abortion in ObamaCare have been defeated, and pro-life Congressman Bart Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan, said of the House's 2,000-page bill (H.R. 3962), "Language in the bill still does not do enough to prevent federal funding from going to abortion services.
"I am disappointed the Capps Amendments has remained intact (in the House bill), mandating abortion services for the first time in the nation's history."
Here are some more details and facts:
-In the Senate version, the 10% of doctors who submit the most reimbursements for Medicare patients will have their pay docked by five percent. This inevitably will lead to rationing of care for seniors, and make "death panels" inevitable as doctors strain to stay below the threshold.
Finally, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) describes the House bill this way: "This 2,000-page bill includes a job-killing employer mandate, an individual mandate that requires Washington bureaucrats to define what kind of coverage is acceptable, burdensome tax increases, Medicare cuts, and a huge expansion of Medicaid that will break already strained state budgets."
Let your congressional representatives hear your voice!
Monday, November 02, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
The Origins of Halloween
This weekend a lot of us will be dressing up and playing ghosts and goblins. I am not trying to spook anyone, but I think as believers we should know the origins of Halloween.
Here is a fact sheet we wrote about Halloween...
Origins Of Halloween
For a proper understanding of the modern American celebration on October 31st, we must look at three early celebrations that have come together to form today's Halloween.
The first of these precursors to Halloween goes all the way back to pre-Christian Ireland and Scotland to a celebration of the Druids or Celtic priests. The Celtic year began on November 1st with the festival of Samhain. On the eve of Samhain, October 31st, laughing bands of young people disguised in grotesque masks carved lanterns from turnips and carried them through the villages. It was sort of a harvest festival, and in addition, it was thought of as a festival of the dead. The druids believed it was on that night when the earth comes into closest contact with the spiritual world; and consequently ghosts, goblins and witches supposedly destroyed crops, killed farm animals and wreaked havoc on the villagers. As these spirits of the dead roamed around, villagers lighted bonfires to either drive them away or to guide the spirits of the dead back to their homes.
The second precursor to Halloween goes back to the Dark Ages in central Europe. There, the Christian church destroyed many of the temples of various pagan gods and goddesses, such as Diana and Apollo. However, this pagan worship was never completely eradicated and took on the form of witchcraft. One of the most important aspects of witchcraft is a number of celebrations each year which are called "Witches' Sabbaths." One of the highest of the Witches' Sabbaths is the High Sabbath or the Black Sabbath of Witches on October 31st. Much of the Halloween folklore of today such as black cats, broomsticks, cauldrons and spells come from the Black Sabbath.
The third precursor to Halloween goes back to the early Roman Catholic Church. The church had appointed certain days to honor each saint and basically ran out of days in the year for all their saints to have a day, so they decided to have one day to remember all the saints. They called it All Saints' Day. In the eighth century, Pope Gregory III changed All Saints' Day from May 13th to November 1st, and in the year 834, Pope Gregory IV extended this celebration to the entire Roman church. This event was called Allhallowmass, and as you might suppose, there was a celebration on the evening before on October 31st, called All Hallow E'en, "all hallow" meaning all of the hallowed ones. As you might guess, the contraction of hallow and e'en is where the word Halloween is derived.
The modern custom of going door to door begging for candy while dressed in costumes called "trick or treating," goes back to the pagan new year's feast in Ireland. The spirits that were thought to throng about the houses of the living were greeted with a banquet. At the end of the feast, villagers disguised as souls of the dead, paraded to the outskirts of the village leading the spirits away. This was done to avoid any calamities the dead might bring. Another way the villagers tried to appease the dead was to set out bowls of fruit and other treats so the spirits would partake of them and leave them in peace. Later when the belief in ghosts and goblins declined, youths dressed up as ghosts and goblins and threatened to play tricks on those who failed to be generous with treats.
The jack-o-lantern, also known as will-o-the-wisp, fox fire and corpse candle, among other things, was believed to be a wandering soul which could not find refuge in either heaven or hell because of a particularly evil deed committed in its lifetime. The Finns believed that it was the soul of a child buried in the forest. A corpse candle is said to be a small flame moving through the air in the dark and is believed by the superstitious to be an omen of the observers imminent death.
According to ancient folklore from many places, a will-o-the-wisp wanders about swamp areas, enticing victims to follow. These strange fires were also known as "foolish fire," because only a fool would follow them. Today's pumpkin face is symbolic of that mocking spirit. It is always wise to look into any customs associated with holidays and be aware of their roots.
Here is a fact sheet we wrote about Halloween...
Origins Of Halloween
For a proper understanding of the modern American celebration on October 31st, we must look at three early celebrations that have come together to form today's Halloween.
The first of these precursors to Halloween goes all the way back to pre-Christian Ireland and Scotland to a celebration of the Druids or Celtic priests. The Celtic year began on November 1st with the festival of Samhain. On the eve of Samhain, October 31st, laughing bands of young people disguised in grotesque masks carved lanterns from turnips and carried them through the villages. It was sort of a harvest festival, and in addition, it was thought of as a festival of the dead. The druids believed it was on that night when the earth comes into closest contact with the spiritual world; and consequently ghosts, goblins and witches supposedly destroyed crops, killed farm animals and wreaked havoc on the villagers. As these spirits of the dead roamed around, villagers lighted bonfires to either drive them away or to guide the spirits of the dead back to their homes.
The second precursor to Halloween goes back to the Dark Ages in central Europe. There, the Christian church destroyed many of the temples of various pagan gods and goddesses, such as Diana and Apollo. However, this pagan worship was never completely eradicated and took on the form of witchcraft. One of the most important aspects of witchcraft is a number of celebrations each year which are called "Witches' Sabbaths." One of the highest of the Witches' Sabbaths is the High Sabbath or the Black Sabbath of Witches on October 31st. Much of the Halloween folklore of today such as black cats, broomsticks, cauldrons and spells come from the Black Sabbath.
The third precursor to Halloween goes back to the early Roman Catholic Church. The church had appointed certain days to honor each saint and basically ran out of days in the year for all their saints to have a day, so they decided to have one day to remember all the saints. They called it All Saints' Day. In the eighth century, Pope Gregory III changed All Saints' Day from May 13th to November 1st, and in the year 834, Pope Gregory IV extended this celebration to the entire Roman church. This event was called Allhallowmass, and as you might suppose, there was a celebration on the evening before on October 31st, called All Hallow E'en, "all hallow" meaning all of the hallowed ones. As you might guess, the contraction of hallow and e'en is where the word Halloween is derived.
The modern custom of going door to door begging for candy while dressed in costumes called "trick or treating," goes back to the pagan new year's feast in Ireland. The spirits that were thought to throng about the houses of the living were greeted with a banquet. At the end of the feast, villagers disguised as souls of the dead, paraded to the outskirts of the village leading the spirits away. This was done to avoid any calamities the dead might bring. Another way the villagers tried to appease the dead was to set out bowls of fruit and other treats so the spirits would partake of them and leave them in peace. Later when the belief in ghosts and goblins declined, youths dressed up as ghosts and goblins and threatened to play tricks on those who failed to be generous with treats.
The jack-o-lantern, also known as will-o-the-wisp, fox fire and corpse candle, among other things, was believed to be a wandering soul which could not find refuge in either heaven or hell because of a particularly evil deed committed in its lifetime. The Finns believed that it was the soul of a child buried in the forest. A corpse candle is said to be a small flame moving through the air in the dark and is believed by the superstitious to be an omen of the observers imminent death.
According to ancient folklore from many places, a will-o-the-wisp wanders about swamp areas, enticing victims to follow. These strange fires were also known as "foolish fire," because only a fool would follow them. Today's pumpkin face is symbolic of that mocking spirit. It is always wise to look into any customs associated with holidays and be aware of their roots.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Maine Evenly Split on Historic Marriage Vote
Latest polling from Maine show residents equally split two weeks ahead of a historic vote which will decide if marriage is redefined in that state.
Here is the story.
What's important here is not whether Mainites will vote for legitimizing homosexual marriage, but whether they will choose to redefine marriage.
In 2006 Coloradans added a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman, 57-43 percent.
Here is the story.
What's important here is not whether Mainites will vote for legitimizing homosexual marriage, but whether they will choose to redefine marriage.
In 2006 Coloradans added a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman, 57-43 percent.
Medical Marijuana Law a Front for More Marijuana Use?
I love social do-gooders. Much of the time I am one myself.
But, Colorado's medical marijuana law, passed with good intentions to help chronically illl Coloradans has gone bust.
Find this story here.
In 2000, Colorado voters approved Amendment 20 which legalized small amounts of cannabis to be used by patients under the care of a physician. The rationale- many Coloradans with serious illnesses would finally get relief with medical marijuana. Right.
Most of us knew what would eventually happen. Word would get out and the fraudulent schemes would occur. In essence, marijuana use would be legalized in Colorado. Now, the number of Coloradans claiming a need for it is soaring!
My opinion. This law needs to be repealed.
But, Colorado's medical marijuana law, passed with good intentions to help chronically illl Coloradans has gone bust.
Find this story here.
In 2000, Colorado voters approved Amendment 20 which legalized small amounts of cannabis to be used by patients under the care of a physician. The rationale- many Coloradans with serious illnesses would finally get relief with medical marijuana. Right.
Most of us knew what would eventually happen. Word would get out and the fraudulent schemes would occur. In essence, marijuana use would be legalized in Colorado. Now, the number of Coloradans claiming a need for it is soaring!
My opinion. This law needs to be repealed.
H1N1 Vaccine Shortages-How Did This Happen?
This may have been the biggest under reported story yesterday.
However you slice it, the government has botched up the H1N1 flu virus supply line.
If you missed this story, here it is...
However you slice it, the government has botched up the H1N1 flu virus supply line.
If you missed this story, here it is...
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Montana judges smack down parental rights
Montana is not Colorado but its close.
This story should chill you particularly if your a parent.
What a Montana court has done is stand on its head the right of natural parents to have sole claim on their child. Instead, there is legal precedence for third parties to make a parenting claim on a child.
This is not new news in Colorado. Colorado law allows an individual (non-parent) to petition for parental responsibilities when he or she has had physical care of the child for at least six months.
What we object to is a court determining that a non-parent's claims to parenting time trumps those of a fit natural parent...
This is a bad decision that needs to be overturned.
This story should chill you particularly if your a parent.
What a Montana court has done is stand on its head the right of natural parents to have sole claim on their child. Instead, there is legal precedence for third parties to make a parenting claim on a child.
This is not new news in Colorado. Colorado law allows an individual (non-parent) to petition for parental responsibilities when he or she has had physical care of the child for at least six months.
What we object to is a court determining that a non-parent's claims to parenting time trumps those of a fit natural parent...
This is a bad decision that needs to be overturned.
Monday, October 12, 2009
One of the slickest statistics to rope in are marriage stats. Our friends at the Institute for American Values have develop a new tool that we will use in our work here in Colorado....Maggie Gallagher explains more below.
How do you measure a marriage culture?
The Institute for American Values, in conjunction with the new National Center for African-American Marriage and Parenting has just released a new "Marriage Index" that for the very first time in American history creates a tool to measure the health of marriage in America.
It's a brilliant conceptual idea, long overdue. This is a GDP for marriage, a way to statistically sum up complex trends in a way that allows us to capture a core truth: Is marriage getting weaker or stronger?
The report (available at www.americanvalues.org) begins by asking key questions: "What helps us the most to thrive, as individuals and as a society? Money or marriage? Assets or relationships? Here's what we know: A large body of research suggests that the status of our marriages influences our well-being at least as much as the status of our finances."
So why, the report's authors ask, do we work so hard to create a consensus measure of our leading economic indicators and not our marriage indicators?
The leading economic indicators are not mere dry statistical artifacts; they are a living part of our intellectual, social, media and political culture. "These indicators are generally accepted by elites and by the broad public as both accurate and important. As a result, they matter. We read about them in publications and hear about them on TV. Policymakers and opinion shapers pay attention to them. If they are improving, we tend to rejoice. If they are declining, we tend to fret, and ask, 'What can we do?'"
But these authors point out: "There is no equivalent effort to focus on marriage. ... Consequently, policymakers and opinion leaders rarely seem to care about marriage trends, or even notice them."
Until now.
The Marriage Index is the product of a bipartisan group of scholars and leaders who selected five indicators as fundamental. What are these five?
(1) A marriage rate measure -- the proportion of adults under age 54 who are married. (The focus on younger Americans is in order to avoid conflating longer life and more widows with the decline of marriage.)
(2) A divorce measure -- the proportion of first marriages that are still intact.
(3) A marital happiness measure -- the proportion of married people who say their marriage is "very happy" (because quality matters, too).
There are also two child-centered measures:
(4) The proportion of babies who are born to married people.
(5) The proportion of all children who live with their own two married parents.
These last two are to many of us the most important. "Why devote two-fifths of a Marriage Index to children?" the authors ask. "These last two indicators concern more than just children: Fundamentally, they reflect the link between adults and children that marriage is designed to create and secure. At its essence, marriage is a social institution that, when it's working, meets social needs -- and perhaps the greatest of these needs is supporting the helpless offspring that result from the sexual union of two people."
So how are we doing on marriage? No one will be surprised to hear the answer: not well. Overall, since 1970 the combined Five Leading Marriage Indicators dropped from 76.2 percent to 60.3 percent.
But the news is not all bad. Since 2000, three of the five leading marriage indicators have actually stabilized or begun to improve: The proportion of first marriages that are intact plunged from 77 percent to under 60 percent between 1970 and 2000; it actually climbed three-tenths of a percent since 2000. The proportion of children living with their own married parents similarly ticked up half a percentage point. And the proportion of marriages that are "very happy" has been stable. We can learn to do better.
Of course, the very best scientific indicators will capture only a portion of why we really care about marriage. Maps are not roads. But that is precisely why they are useful.
How do you measure a marriage culture?
The Institute for American Values, in conjunction with the new National Center for African-American Marriage and Parenting has just released a new "Marriage Index" that for the very first time in American history creates a tool to measure the health of marriage in America.
It's a brilliant conceptual idea, long overdue. This is a GDP for marriage, a way to statistically sum up complex trends in a way that allows us to capture a core truth: Is marriage getting weaker or stronger?
The report (available at www.americanvalues.org) begins by asking key questions: "What helps us the most to thrive, as individuals and as a society? Money or marriage? Assets or relationships? Here's what we know: A large body of research suggests that the status of our marriages influences our well-being at least as much as the status of our finances."
So why, the report's authors ask, do we work so hard to create a consensus measure of our leading economic indicators and not our marriage indicators?
The leading economic indicators are not mere dry statistical artifacts; they are a living part of our intellectual, social, media and political culture. "These indicators are generally accepted by elites and by the broad public as both accurate and important. As a result, they matter. We read about them in publications and hear about them on TV. Policymakers and opinion shapers pay attention to them. If they are improving, we tend to rejoice. If they are declining, we tend to fret, and ask, 'What can we do?'"
But these authors point out: "There is no equivalent effort to focus on marriage. ... Consequently, policymakers and opinion leaders rarely seem to care about marriage trends, or even notice them."
Until now.
The Marriage Index is the product of a bipartisan group of scholars and leaders who selected five indicators as fundamental. What are these five?
(1) A marriage rate measure -- the proportion of adults under age 54 who are married. (The focus on younger Americans is in order to avoid conflating longer life and more widows with the decline of marriage.)
(2) A divorce measure -- the proportion of first marriages that are still intact.
(3) A marital happiness measure -- the proportion of married people who say their marriage is "very happy" (because quality matters, too).
There are also two child-centered measures:
(4) The proportion of babies who are born to married people.
(5) The proportion of all children who live with their own two married parents.
These last two are to many of us the most important. "Why devote two-fifths of a Marriage Index to children?" the authors ask. "These last two indicators concern more than just children: Fundamentally, they reflect the link between adults and children that marriage is designed to create and secure. At its essence, marriage is a social institution that, when it's working, meets social needs -- and perhaps the greatest of these needs is supporting the helpless offspring that result from the sexual union of two people."
So how are we doing on marriage? No one will be surprised to hear the answer: not well. Overall, since 1970 the combined Five Leading Marriage Indicators dropped from 76.2 percent to 60.3 percent.
But the news is not all bad. Since 2000, three of the five leading marriage indicators have actually stabilized or begun to improve: The proportion of first marriages that are intact plunged from 77 percent to under 60 percent between 1970 and 2000; it actually climbed three-tenths of a percent since 2000. The proportion of children living with their own married parents similarly ticked up half a percentage point. And the proportion of marriages that are "very happy" has been stable. We can learn to do better.
Of course, the very best scientific indicators will capture only a portion of why we really care about marriage. Maps are not roads. But that is precisely why they are useful.
Friday, October 09, 2009
Letterman and Marriage- Do the Right Thing Dave..
David Letterman has a lot to learn about being married. We all do.
Let me say first off, that I am no marriage expert and I am not judging David Letterman or his wife.
Suffice to say, perfect marriages don't exist. Marriage is often a tough relationship between two flawed people. Don't let anyone tell you that there is a perfect marriage, because short of this side of heaven, marriage is a work in progress. Even the best marriages have their moments of failure, doubts, disagreements, etc.
So what about Letterman? Here is my advice to the late night comic:
Being married is not akin to having an affair. Toss out the jokes. The loser in all of this is your young son, Harry. Be a man Mr. Letterman. Admit your mistakes and seriously repair the relationship (if she will let you) with your son's mother...
Let me say first off, that I am no marriage expert and I am not judging David Letterman or his wife.
Suffice to say, perfect marriages don't exist. Marriage is often a tough relationship between two flawed people. Don't let anyone tell you that there is a perfect marriage, because short of this side of heaven, marriage is a work in progress. Even the best marriages have their moments of failure, doubts, disagreements, etc.
So what about Letterman? Here is my advice to the late night comic:
Being married is not akin to having an affair. Toss out the jokes. The loser in all of this is your young son, Harry. Be a man Mr. Letterman. Admit your mistakes and seriously repair the relationship (if she will let you) with your son's mother...
Obama and the Nobel Prize-I Have Hope!
Once again, the great thing about Obama is that he gives hope to little guys like me!
Wow, not only is our President the messiah, the great communicator, world leader, rock star and soon, to star in his own movie series but now a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
I am still not sure what he has done to garner the award, but hey, style and sizzle carry the day. Substance does not.
All of this in only 9 months in office. I cannot possibly imagine what we will accomplish with the rest of his term!
Maybe, the Norwegians got some of our stimulus monies...?
Wow, not only is our President the messiah, the great communicator, world leader, rock star and soon, to star in his own movie series but now a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
I am still not sure what he has done to garner the award, but hey, style and sizzle carry the day. Substance does not.
All of this in only 9 months in office. I cannot possibly imagine what we will accomplish with the rest of his term!
Maybe, the Norwegians got some of our stimulus monies...?
Monday, October 05, 2009
Lessons for Colorado from California
Apologies to any Californians who may see this blog. I am a native Californian, but boy am I glad to only visit now not live there.
Let me just say that the bubble has burst in the Golden State. Pick your poison- wildfires, bankrupt state government, no economic growth, thousands of former homeowners, 12 percent unemployment rate, political gridlock, etc., etc. The list goes on and on.
California could become the first failed state in our nation's history. Another Obama bail-out/buy-up could be coming!
There are four lessons to be learned here in Colorado from the California implosion. Here they are:
1- The coming tax revolt. It will happen soon. Americans will rebel at some point and place and it will spread like wildfire. The Colorado lesson: Keep taxes low. Don't try and trick Coloradans by saying that new taxes are just "fairness fees."
2- The brain drain. Entrepeneurs (if any are still left) and job-creators are leaving California like rats from a sinking ship. The reason: stifling business taxes and regulations. The trickle up economic theory does not work. A poor man will never create a robust job for someone else. Colorado lesson: Create and maintain a healthy business climate with low business taxes and regulations. Remember that real jobs are created by folks who have a passion for a product and a profit motive to succeed.
3- Help the helpless and forego the clueless. I love helping the helpless and unfortunately today there are many of these folks. However, we have a growing cadre of the clueless, many of whom are well-educated but utterly dense when it comes to how life really works. Many of these folks wind up sticking to entities which advocate for issues that either don't work, are contrary to the laws of nature or are simply too expensive. Colorado lesson: The Guv and the legislature need to keep the temperature of the electorate front and center and not make public policy based on shrillness or political payoffs. Many of the clueless can be ignored.
4- Not everyone needs a handout or deserves a government solution. For years, Californians have spent public dollars creating huge entitlements and public dependencies. Now, that bill is coming due. With decreased tax revenue (see #1 and #2 above), the state government can no longer pay its bills. This is the worst conclusion-it would have been better off for families who now depend on these entitlements to have not had government support than to now cut them off. Colorado lesson: Its easy for politicians to promise goodies in exchange for votes. The problem is is that when revenue streams dry up, many families are left high and dry.
Colorado Democrats who currently rule the political roost here and many of the same proclivities of governance as their California cousins who have run that state into the ground. Let's pray that they follow a different path.
Let me just say that the bubble has burst in the Golden State. Pick your poison- wildfires, bankrupt state government, no economic growth, thousands of former homeowners, 12 percent unemployment rate, political gridlock, etc., etc. The list goes on and on.
California could become the first failed state in our nation's history. Another Obama bail-out/buy-up could be coming!
There are four lessons to be learned here in Colorado from the California implosion. Here they are:
1- The coming tax revolt. It will happen soon. Americans will rebel at some point and place and it will spread like wildfire. The Colorado lesson: Keep taxes low. Don't try and trick Coloradans by saying that new taxes are just "fairness fees."
2- The brain drain. Entrepeneurs (if any are still left) and job-creators are leaving California like rats from a sinking ship. The reason: stifling business taxes and regulations. The trickle up economic theory does not work. A poor man will never create a robust job for someone else. Colorado lesson: Create and maintain a healthy business climate with low business taxes and regulations. Remember that real jobs are created by folks who have a passion for a product and a profit motive to succeed.
3- Help the helpless and forego the clueless. I love helping the helpless and unfortunately today there are many of these folks. However, we have a growing cadre of the clueless, many of whom are well-educated but utterly dense when it comes to how life really works. Many of these folks wind up sticking to entities which advocate for issues that either don't work, are contrary to the laws of nature or are simply too expensive. Colorado lesson: The Guv and the legislature need to keep the temperature of the electorate front and center and not make public policy based on shrillness or political payoffs. Many of the clueless can be ignored.
4- Not everyone needs a handout or deserves a government solution. For years, Californians have spent public dollars creating huge entitlements and public dependencies. Now, that bill is coming due. With decreased tax revenue (see #1 and #2 above), the state government can no longer pay its bills. This is the worst conclusion-it would have been better off for families who now depend on these entitlements to have not had government support than to now cut them off. Colorado lesson: Its easy for politicians to promise goodies in exchange for votes. The problem is is that when revenue streams dry up, many families are left high and dry.
Colorado Democrats who currently rule the political roost here and many of the same proclivities of governance as their California cousins who have run that state into the ground. Let's pray that they follow a different path.
Your Tax Dollars at Work Stimulating the Economy
Before you read this let me make a couple of comments.
First, I love helping people who need help. Second, I love to see new jobs created, families prosper and Americans have most of their earned money in their wallet.
What you see below is a shame. Its a shame because of the title. This program will not create many jobs if any at well. After all, isn't that what a stimulus is supposed to do? This is nothing more than more government spending...At best, it is disingenuous.
Now, some people will get good services from private providers. But, don't call it something that it is not.
American Recovery Reinvestment Act of 2009 Communities Putting Prevention to Work Funding Opportunity Number: CDC-RFA-DP09-912ARRA09
CFDA Number(s): 93.724 -- Prevention and Wellness--Communities Putting Prevention to Work
Executive Summary: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), signed into law February 17, 2009, is designed to stimulate economic recovery in various ways, including preserving and creating jobs and promoting economic recovery, assisting those most impacted by the recession, stabilizing State and local government budgets in order to minimize and avoid reductions in essential services and counterproductive state and local tax increases, and strengthening the Nation’s health care infrastructure and reducing health care costs through prevention activities. The Recovery Act includes $650 million for evidence-based clinical and community-based prevention and wellness strategies that support specific, measurable health outcomes to reduce chronic disease rates. The legislation provides an important opportunity for states, cities, rural areas, and tribes to advance public health across the lifespan and to reduce health disparities. The CDC will support intensive community approaches to chronic disease prevention and control in selected communities (urban and rural), to achieve the following prevention outcomes:
Increased levels of physical activity;
Improved nutrition (e.g. increased fruit/vegetable consumption, reduced salt and trans fats);
Decreased overweight/obesity prevalence
Decreased smoking prevalence and decreased teen smoking initiation; and
Decreased exposure to secondhand smoke.
Background: In the United States today, seven of ten deaths and the vast majority of serious illness, disability, and health care costs are caused by chronic diseases, such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Key risk factors–lack of physical activity, poor nutrition and tobacco use–are major contributors to the nation’s leading causes of death. More than 75% of health care expenditures in the United States are spent to meet the health needs of persons with chronic conditions (www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/overview.htm). Many Americans die prematurely and suffer from diseases that could be prevented or more effectively managed. communities in
First, I love helping people who need help. Second, I love to see new jobs created, families prosper and Americans have most of their earned money in their wallet.
What you see below is a shame. Its a shame because of the title. This program will not create many jobs if any at well. After all, isn't that what a stimulus is supposed to do? This is nothing more than more government spending...At best, it is disingenuous.
Now, some people will get good services from private providers. But, don't call it something that it is not.
American Recovery Reinvestment Act of 2009 Communities Putting Prevention to Work Funding Opportunity Number: CDC-RFA-DP09-912ARRA09
CFDA Number(s): 93.724 -- Prevention and Wellness--Communities Putting Prevention to Work
Executive Summary: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), signed into law February 17, 2009, is designed to stimulate economic recovery in various ways, including preserving and creating jobs and promoting economic recovery, assisting those most impacted by the recession, stabilizing State and local government budgets in order to minimize and avoid reductions in essential services and counterproductive state and local tax increases, and strengthening the Nation’s health care infrastructure and reducing health care costs through prevention activities. The Recovery Act includes $650 million for evidence-based clinical and community-based prevention and wellness strategies that support specific, measurable health outcomes to reduce chronic disease rates. The legislation provides an important opportunity for states, cities, rural areas, and tribes to advance public health across the lifespan and to reduce health disparities. The CDC will support intensive community approaches to chronic disease prevention and control in selected communities (urban and rural), to achieve the following prevention outcomes:
Increased levels of physical activity;
Improved nutrition (e.g. increased fruit/vegetable consumption, reduced salt and trans fats);
Decreased overweight/obesity prevalence
Decreased smoking prevalence and decreased teen smoking initiation; and
Decreased exposure to secondhand smoke.
Background: In the United States today, seven of ten deaths and the vast majority of serious illness, disability, and health care costs are caused by chronic diseases, such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Key risk factors–lack of physical activity, poor nutrition and tobacco use–are major contributors to the nation’s leading causes of death. More than 75% of health care expenditures in the United States are spent to meet the health needs of persons with chronic conditions (www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/overview.htm). Many Americans die prematurely and suffer from diseases that could be prevented or more effectively managed. communities in
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
A Common Sense Colorado Solution to Health Care
This story makes sense.
We need some sense right now regarding the health care debate and practical solutions. While our political leaders fight in D.C. about Obama care, Coloradans are enjoying new health care options in local Walmart stores or other storefronts.
Here is an encouraging story about the burgeoning growth of health care clinics in retail store outlets here in Colorado.
Increasingly, retail store health clinics (found in many Walmarts and Walgreen's) are offering low cost services which fill one of the major gaps in our current health care system.
The gap- access to reasonable pay as you go primary health care, like shots, care for broken bones, fever, etc.
Our political leaders need to take note. It shows American ingenuity and innovation without government interference.
What I like even more about these services is that the government has no role in them. Let free market entrepreneur's establish these services where customers receive quality care and a reasonable profit can be made.
The winners: Colorado families.
We need some sense right now regarding the health care debate and practical solutions. While our political leaders fight in D.C. about Obama care, Coloradans are enjoying new health care options in local Walmart stores or other storefronts.
Here is an encouraging story about the burgeoning growth of health care clinics in retail store outlets here in Colorado.
Increasingly, retail store health clinics (found in many Walmarts and Walgreen's) are offering low cost services which fill one of the major gaps in our current health care system.
The gap- access to reasonable pay as you go primary health care, like shots, care for broken bones, fever, etc.
Our political leaders need to take note. It shows American ingenuity and innovation without government interference.
What I like even more about these services is that the government has no role in them. Let free market entrepreneur's establish these services where customers receive quality care and a reasonable profit can be made.
The winners: Colorado families.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Colorado Republicans Claim They Are Back-We'll See...See My Checklist!
We will see if Colorado "R's" are back.
Colorado Republicans have taken their lumps over the last three election cycles. But, according to insiders, a fresh wind of hope, direction and palatable ideas are re-invigorating the GOP.
From my angle, I hope so. But, to make dreams become a reality, there is a short checklist that should be discussed before any victory laps:
-Money. Colorado Dems have a seemingly un-ending stream of money from a dedicated core of big-monied sympathizers. Unless the Republicans can trump the money gusher with superior candidates and ideas, they will be outspent and lose.
-On message. The "R's" have lacked a palatable statewide message on key issues like health care, taxes, jobs, education, transportation, etc. I think you get the picture. To their credit, good folks like State Senator Mike Kopp and others have tried to get the party apparatus on the same page saying the same thing. But, its not gained traction yet. No message equals no wins in 2010.
-Unity. There's an old Colorado proverb that goes like this- there are four parties in Colorado: Democrats, Independents, Liberal Republicans and Conservative Republicans. The bottom line is this: the Focus on the Family "R's" must make peace with the liberal and libertarian "R's" and decide that they do have common ground. Dems have exploited this breach for years, playing both sides off each other.
-Independents. They are now the majority party in Colorado. To win, the "R's" must address their concerns which are: health care, good jobs, the environment, education and fiscal restraint. If your ideas don't play here there will not be wins in 210.
2010 could be the year of the return of conservatism in Colorado. But it will only be carried in by a unified, on message Republican party...
Colorado Republicans have taken their lumps over the last three election cycles. But, according to insiders, a fresh wind of hope, direction and palatable ideas are re-invigorating the GOP.
From my angle, I hope so. But, to make dreams become a reality, there is a short checklist that should be discussed before any victory laps:
-Money. Colorado Dems have a seemingly un-ending stream of money from a dedicated core of big-monied sympathizers. Unless the Republicans can trump the money gusher with superior candidates and ideas, they will be outspent and lose.
-On message. The "R's" have lacked a palatable statewide message on key issues like health care, taxes, jobs, education, transportation, etc. I think you get the picture. To their credit, good folks like State Senator Mike Kopp and others have tried to get the party apparatus on the same page saying the same thing. But, its not gained traction yet. No message equals no wins in 2010.
-Unity. There's an old Colorado proverb that goes like this- there are four parties in Colorado: Democrats, Independents, Liberal Republicans and Conservative Republicans. The bottom line is this: the Focus on the Family "R's" must make peace with the liberal and libertarian "R's" and decide that they do have common ground. Dems have exploited this breach for years, playing both sides off each other.
-Independents. They are now the majority party in Colorado. To win, the "R's" must address their concerns which are: health care, good jobs, the environment, education and fiscal restraint. If your ideas don't play here there will not be wins in 210.
2010 could be the year of the return of conservatism in Colorado. But it will only be carried in by a unified, on message Republican party...
Lack of Common Sense: Florida Teacher Finger Prints Her Students!
There's nothing like being accussed of something you did not do particularly when you are a youngster.
This is one of those see it to believe it stories....Click here.
I was not aware that teachers were really undercover law enforcement agents.
The teacher should have been fired.
This is one of those see it to believe it stories....Click here.
I was not aware that teachers were really undercover law enforcement agents.
The teacher should have been fired.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Problems with New Health Care Lite
Democratic Montana Senator Max Baucus, a genuinely good and thoughtful man, has offered a new healthcare alternative.
Unfortunately, it still sounds like and looks like a duck.
The issue: the resurrection of the "co-op" versus the public health care option. Senator Baucus wants to replace the government option with a community based co-op system. This system has been tried before.
It's DNA is this: regional groups of employers and community leaders would use Federal subsidies to setup a health care co-op. They would then negotiate costs and services with local health care providers. They also would build a membership base many of whom would be poorer families buying policies with new federal subsidies. These members would in turn own the co-op. Costs would be controlled by emphasizing preventive and primary care versus expensive emergency room services.
Sound good? Not so fast. Here are some historic problems with co-ops. Problem one- since co-ops will not be mandatory, it will take years for these entities to gain enough membership to have any cost-cutting power in the marketplace. Problem two- they will attract patients who have expensive medical needs and are unable to secure coverage elsewhere. Finally, it will likely cost more money and procure less medical services that traditional plans.
These historic problems remain.
Sounds like another bad idea for your family.
Unfortunately, it still sounds like and looks like a duck.
The issue: the resurrection of the "co-op" versus the public health care option. Senator Baucus wants to replace the government option with a community based co-op system. This system has been tried before.
It's DNA is this: regional groups of employers and community leaders would use Federal subsidies to setup a health care co-op. They would then negotiate costs and services with local health care providers. They also would build a membership base many of whom would be poorer families buying policies with new federal subsidies. These members would in turn own the co-op. Costs would be controlled by emphasizing preventive and primary care versus expensive emergency room services.
Sound good? Not so fast. Here are some historic problems with co-ops. Problem one- since co-ops will not be mandatory, it will take years for these entities to gain enough membership to have any cost-cutting power in the marketplace. Problem two- they will attract patients who have expensive medical needs and are unable to secure coverage elsewhere. Finally, it will likely cost more money and procure less medical services that traditional plans.
These historic problems remain.
Sounds like another bad idea for your family.
World's Tallest Man Looking For A Wife
A quick sidebar fun story:
Let me preface this one by saying that marriage not only transcends race, ethnicity, age and economic status, but now height.
A towering Turk was officially named the world's tallest man last week. Measuring in at 8 feet 1 inches, Sultan Kosen, from Mardin, Turkey is looking for love.
He reports that in the past women were scared of him because of his height. Now, according to Kosen, "hopefully, now that I am famous, I'll be able to meet lots of girls and get married."
Any takers? If so, carefully considered how tall the kids could be...
Let me preface this one by saying that marriage not only transcends race, ethnicity, age and economic status, but now height.
A towering Turk was officially named the world's tallest man last week. Measuring in at 8 feet 1 inches, Sultan Kosen, from Mardin, Turkey is looking for love.
He reports that in the past women were scared of him because of his height. Now, according to Kosen, "hopefully, now that I am famous, I'll be able to meet lots of girls and get married."
Any takers? If so, carefully considered how tall the kids could be...
Monday, September 14, 2009
Public Health Care and Abortions: Do You Trust the Fox in the Hen House?
In Colorado, our constitution prohibits public tax dollars being used on abortions. Its common sense and should remain so.
Currently, there is also a federal ban on using tax dollars to fund abortions.
However for years, liberals have wanted a public health care option that would include funding abortions with your tax dollars. And they are about the business of undoing these current restrictions.
That same storm is raising its ugly head again in Congress. Despite denials by the abortions rights crowd to contrary(akin to asking a fox in the hen house if the chickens are safe), Obama himself has affirmed that he wants health care reforms to cover reproductive services.
Congresswoman Louise Capps, a Democrat from California has introduced an amendment to one of the House bills that would allow abortions to be paid for with beneficiary premiums rather than federal dollars. This plan also requires private insurers who want to participate in government subsidized policies to offer two plans- one that would cover abortions and another one that would not. But that is a shell game and either way you slice it, directly or indirectly your tax dollars are going to pay for abortions.
So who is telling the truth?
So my question- do you trust the fox in the hen house to tell you if the chickens are well?
Currently, there is also a federal ban on using tax dollars to fund abortions.
However for years, liberals have wanted a public health care option that would include funding abortions with your tax dollars. And they are about the business of undoing these current restrictions.
That same storm is raising its ugly head again in Congress. Despite denials by the abortions rights crowd to contrary(akin to asking a fox in the hen house if the chickens are safe), Obama himself has affirmed that he wants health care reforms to cover reproductive services.
Congresswoman Louise Capps, a Democrat from California has introduced an amendment to one of the House bills that would allow abortions to be paid for with beneficiary premiums rather than federal dollars. This plan also requires private insurers who want to participate in government subsidized policies to offer two plans- one that would cover abortions and another one that would not. But that is a shell game and either way you slice it, directly or indirectly your tax dollars are going to pay for abortions.
So who is telling the truth?
So my question- do you trust the fox in the hen house to tell you if the chickens are well?
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
Colorado Budget Woes Pinch State Services
We have a dilemma in Colorado. Click here for the Denver Post's latest article. The subject du jour is how state services will affect Colorado's poor and needy.
For years, many of us foretold of this day. It has now arrived. There are some very tough choices for us and our leaders.
Here is the nexus: Colorado's state expenses are higher than our current tax revenue.
My point today is not to play "gotcha" or "I told you so" but to offer three sober solutions plus a bonus idea.
Here they are:
Option One: Cut expenses at the risk of snipping state services that many Coloradans have come to be dependent upon them. These soft programs are not constitutionally protected for annual funding hikes(like public education funding and Amendment 23 guaranteed) and are subject to funding cuts. A good example is the proposed cut of a nursing unit in Grand Junction which will save the state gov $1.3 million but will also displace many fragile patients. The folks at home are not going to like this one.
Option Two: Take a page from the federal government or the state of California playbooks and continue spending and hope someday that Santa Claus, the federal government or a lucky star falls into the state coffers eliminating the debt. Unlikely, because rat holes simply get bigger.
Or Option Three: Take a page from the book of business common sense and enact policies that will increase tax revenue, like cutting corporate taxes and lowering other tax rates on job producers and taxpayers. Less taxes means more income that will be spent on new jobs which creates spending which in turn creates more dollars for the state treasury.
Finally, the bonus option: offer private charities incentives to expand their services to Colorado's needy. A century ago, public compassion was done excellently through private charities. These entities are more often than not well equipped to offer excellent care for those in need.
We need a stiff wind to blow away the fog which is blinding our state's leadership.
For years, many of us foretold of this day. It has now arrived. There are some very tough choices for us and our leaders.
Here is the nexus: Colorado's state expenses are higher than our current tax revenue.
My point today is not to play "gotcha" or "I told you so" but to offer three sober solutions plus a bonus idea.
Here they are:
Option One: Cut expenses at the risk of snipping state services that many Coloradans have come to be dependent upon them. These soft programs are not constitutionally protected for annual funding hikes(like public education funding and Amendment 23 guaranteed) and are subject to funding cuts. A good example is the proposed cut of a nursing unit in Grand Junction which will save the state gov $1.3 million but will also displace many fragile patients. The folks at home are not going to like this one.
Option Two: Take a page from the federal government or the state of California playbooks and continue spending and hope someday that Santa Claus, the federal government or a lucky star falls into the state coffers eliminating the debt. Unlikely, because rat holes simply get bigger.
Or Option Three: Take a page from the book of business common sense and enact policies that will increase tax revenue, like cutting corporate taxes and lowering other tax rates on job producers and taxpayers. Less taxes means more income that will be spent on new jobs which creates spending which in turn creates more dollars for the state treasury.
Finally, the bonus option: offer private charities incentives to expand their services to Colorado's needy. A century ago, public compassion was done excellently through private charities. These entities are more often than not well equipped to offer excellent care for those in need.
We need a stiff wind to blow away the fog which is blinding our state's leadership.
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Give Obama A Break
Some folks on the right are acting like Barack Obama is Darth Vader. Maybe in time he will become the masked crusader for the evil empire.
But for now let's give him a chance. While the latest White House gaffe over positioning the President's desire to speak to public school students is yet another faux pas in a string of public relations fumbles, the President deserves an opportunity to speak to kids in a voluntary forum.
Many Presidents of have inspired students with the timeless challenge to succeed and for the most part their words inspired many students. There was Kennedy's speech in the 1960's; Carter in the mid- 1970's; Reagan in the '80's, etc., etc.I heard all of them and never considered their political orientation much.
Back in those days, our nation buried elections and the political aftermath the day afterwards. There were no 24 hour cable news channels and we all went back to being Americans. No one was talking then about the next presidential election 4 years down the road. Unfortunately, we now live in the future where many Americans are professional political partisans, earning a living by ripping the other side a new one.
Okay, I am a social conservative. I don't agree with Obama's leftist policies but it doesn't mean that I don't want him to inspire students as the President of the United States. Like it or not, he is the elected President of our nation for the next 4 years. He does have a compelling story which will inspire many young people. Now, I don't want schools to force students to watch it but it shouldn't be castigated either.
Relax, let him speak.
But for now let's give him a chance. While the latest White House gaffe over positioning the President's desire to speak to public school students is yet another faux pas in a string of public relations fumbles, the President deserves an opportunity to speak to kids in a voluntary forum.
Many Presidents of have inspired students with the timeless challenge to succeed and for the most part their words inspired many students. There was Kennedy's speech in the 1960's; Carter in the mid- 1970's; Reagan in the '80's, etc., etc.I heard all of them and never considered their political orientation much.
Back in those days, our nation buried elections and the political aftermath the day afterwards. There were no 24 hour cable news channels and we all went back to being Americans. No one was talking then about the next presidential election 4 years down the road. Unfortunately, we now live in the future where many Americans are professional political partisans, earning a living by ripping the other side a new one.
Okay, I am a social conservative. I don't agree with Obama's leftist policies but it doesn't mean that I don't want him to inspire students as the President of the United States. Like it or not, he is the elected President of our nation for the next 4 years. He does have a compelling story which will inspire many young people. Now, I don't want schools to force students to watch it but it shouldn't be castigated either.
Relax, let him speak.
Monday, September 07, 2009
Honest Requiem on Ted Kennedy's Passing
Ted Kennedy's passing last week ends an era. The media tried to spin his passing as the end of a legendary statesman career, one built on his championing causes for the "little guy." But was this assessment true or was it yet another media spin job obfuscating Kennedy's real agenda and life?
One group of "little guys" that got no help from Kennedy were the unborn.
Many Catholics were appalled at Kennedy's policies and beliefs and deeply bothered that Kennedy was provided a full public Catholic funeral. And frankly, most of his ideas were no in adherence to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Reverend Thomas Euteneuer is the President of Human Life International. As a Catholic priest he accurately summarizes Kennedy's life. Here it is:
Human Life Internationale's Statement on the Passing of Senator Edward Kennedy.
We must, as a matter of precept, pray for the salvation of heretical Catholics like Senator Edward Kennedy, but we do not have to praise him let alone extol him with the full honors of a public Catholic funeral and all the adulation that attends such an event. There was very little about Ted Kennedy's life that deserves admiration from a spiritual or moral point of view. He was probably the worst example of a Catholic statesman that one can think of. When all is said and done, he has distorted the concept of what it means to be a Catholic in public life more than anyone else in leadership today.
Obviously we don't know the state of Senator Edward Kennedy's soul upon death. We don't pretend to. We are told by the family that he had the opportunity to confess his sins before a priest, and his priest has said publicly he was "at peace" when he died. For that we are grateful. But it is one thing to confess one's sins and for these matters to be kept, rightfully, private. It is another thing entirely for one who so consistently and publicly advocated for the destruction of unborn human beings to depart the stage without a public repudiation of these views, a public confession, as it were.
It is up to God to judge Senator Kennedy's soul. We, as rational persons, must judge his actions, and his actions were not at all in line with one who values and carefully applies Church teaching on weighty matters. Ted Kennedy's positions on a variety of issues have been a grave scandal for decades, and to honor this "catholic" champion of the culture of death with a Catholic funeral is unjust to those who have actually paid the price of fidelity. We now find out that President Obama will eulogize the Senator at his funeral-an indignity which, following on the heels of the Notre Dame fiasco, leaves faithful Catholics feeling sullied, desecrated and dehumanized by men who seem to look for opportunities to slap the Church in the face and do so with impunity simply because they have positions of power.
It is not enough for Kennedy to have been a "great guy behind the scenes" as we have seen him referred to even by his political opponents. It is also not praiseworthy to put a Catholic rhetorical veneer on his leftist politics that did nothing to advance true justice as the Church sees it or to advance the peace of Christ in this world. Every indication of Senator Kennedy's career, every public appearance, every sound bite showed an acerbic, divisive and partisan political hack for whom party politics were much more infallible than Church doctrines. Whatever one's political affiliation, if one is only "Catholic" to the extent that his faith rhymes with his party line, then his Catholicism is a fraud.
As the Scriptures remind us, there is a time for everything under the sun. This, now, is the time for honesty about our Faith and about those who are called to express it in the public forum. If we do not remind ourselves of the necessity of public confession for public sins such as Senator Kennedy was guilty of, then we are negligent in our embrace of the Faith and we are part of the problem. As Pope Benedict has reminded us recently, charity without truth can easily become mere sentimentality, and we must not fall into that error. A Catholic show of charity for the family must not eclipse the truth that is required of all with eyes to see and ears to hear.
Senator Kennedy needs to be sent to the afterlife with a private, family-only funeral and the prayers of the Church for the salvation of his immortal soul. He will not be missed by the unborn who he betrayed time and time again, nor by the rest of us who are laboring to undo the scandalous example of Catholicism that he gave to three generations of Americans.
One group of "little guys" that got no help from Kennedy were the unborn.
Many Catholics were appalled at Kennedy's policies and beliefs and deeply bothered that Kennedy was provided a full public Catholic funeral. And frankly, most of his ideas were no in adherence to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Reverend Thomas Euteneuer is the President of Human Life International. As a Catholic priest he accurately summarizes Kennedy's life. Here it is:
Human Life Internationale's Statement on the Passing of Senator Edward Kennedy.
We must, as a matter of precept, pray for the salvation of heretical Catholics like Senator Edward Kennedy, but we do not have to praise him let alone extol him with the full honors of a public Catholic funeral and all the adulation that attends such an event. There was very little about Ted Kennedy's life that deserves admiration from a spiritual or moral point of view. He was probably the worst example of a Catholic statesman that one can think of. When all is said and done, he has distorted the concept of what it means to be a Catholic in public life more than anyone else in leadership today.
Obviously we don't know the state of Senator Edward Kennedy's soul upon death. We don't pretend to. We are told by the family that he had the opportunity to confess his sins before a priest, and his priest has said publicly he was "at peace" when he died. For that we are grateful. But it is one thing to confess one's sins and for these matters to be kept, rightfully, private. It is another thing entirely for one who so consistently and publicly advocated for the destruction of unborn human beings to depart the stage without a public repudiation of these views, a public confession, as it were.
It is up to God to judge Senator Kennedy's soul. We, as rational persons, must judge his actions, and his actions were not at all in line with one who values and carefully applies Church teaching on weighty matters. Ted Kennedy's positions on a variety of issues have been a grave scandal for decades, and to honor this "catholic" champion of the culture of death with a Catholic funeral is unjust to those who have actually paid the price of fidelity. We now find out that President Obama will eulogize the Senator at his funeral-an indignity which, following on the heels of the Notre Dame fiasco, leaves faithful Catholics feeling sullied, desecrated and dehumanized by men who seem to look for opportunities to slap the Church in the face and do so with impunity simply because they have positions of power.
It is not enough for Kennedy to have been a "great guy behind the scenes" as we have seen him referred to even by his political opponents. It is also not praiseworthy to put a Catholic rhetorical veneer on his leftist politics that did nothing to advance true justice as the Church sees it or to advance the peace of Christ in this world. Every indication of Senator Kennedy's career, every public appearance, every sound bite showed an acerbic, divisive and partisan political hack for whom party politics were much more infallible than Church doctrines. Whatever one's political affiliation, if one is only "Catholic" to the extent that his faith rhymes with his party line, then his Catholicism is a fraud.
As the Scriptures remind us, there is a time for everything under the sun. This, now, is the time for honesty about our Faith and about those who are called to express it in the public forum. If we do not remind ourselves of the necessity of public confession for public sins such as Senator Kennedy was guilty of, then we are negligent in our embrace of the Faith and we are part of the problem. As Pope Benedict has reminded us recently, charity without truth can easily become mere sentimentality, and we must not fall into that error. A Catholic show of charity for the family must not eclipse the truth that is required of all with eyes to see and ears to hear.
Senator Kennedy needs to be sent to the afterlife with a private, family-only funeral and the prayers of the Church for the salvation of his immortal soul. He will not be missed by the unborn who he betrayed time and time again, nor by the rest of us who are laboring to undo the scandalous example of Catholicism that he gave to three generations of Americans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)