The Audacity of Dopes

This is not a blog about president Barack Hussein Obama's heralded drug abuse in his youth, which made him the cool guy that the majority of the youth of America voted for in 2008.  Maybe I'll get to that subject in the future. The subject this time will be the audaciousness of Obama supporters in general.  Maybe, I can convince some of the Obama addicts--I'm not too hopeful here, to be honest-- to rethink the "Audacity of Hope" slogan, as I tried with the other baffling Obama battle cry, "Hope and Change!" But then I am an eternal optimist, I guess.

I noticed that Susan Fluke has gone out on the campaign trail with President Barack Husein Obama (umm,  umm, umm) in Colorado to help stoke up the "women’s vote". If you have been paying attention you know that Miss Fluke testified before Congress about the need for “free” contraception for American Women. She argues that Romney wants to take away women’s health care.  If you remember, the question at the time of Fluke appearing before Congress was whether government could force religious institutions to provide contraceptive and abortion services to their employees when their doctrines are in opposition to those services.  Since Miss Fluke, a law student,  apparently had a very healthy sex life—she said the cost for her contraceptives for a year was more than she, as student made during the summer—she was called as an expert witness.  Clearly, if any normal contraceptives buyer were to check into the costs they would be surprised that pills or condoms could cost so much.  Would it be unfair the suggest that the unmarried Miss Fluke engages in sexual intercourse as a source of entertainment, since it seems to be engaged in pretty often?  Maybe it's her hobby. Of course if she is prescribed birth control pills to help control migraines, which I understand can be the case, it might be a different argument, but she says it is about women’s reproductive health.  Therefore, I assume that unmarried women, single by choice, either by choice, divorce or the death of their spouse, are wanting to be able to have unhampered recreational sexual intercourse.  Should I also assume that Miss Flukes entertainment costs as regards to sex are hers alone?  Be that as it may, how does she and the millions of other women who apparently agree with her come to the conclusion that the rest of us should help pay for her leisure activities?  Why not pay for her other date activities? Why not pay for the dinner, the movie, the play etc? How about her big flat screen HDTV and her cable bill? I probably shouldn’t even kid about it because ten years ago we would have laughed about tax money being “given” to women to express themselves sexually without consequences.  Let’s face it: Fluke and her ilk are dopes and they are audacious. Oh, I almost forgot, should we assume that Miss Fluke has cut back on her ponderous sexual activity to be able to afford to go on the campaign trail with the president? A trip like that might take a lot of her summer income. Maybe the tax payers should reimburse her for that so she can afford her hobby.

Then there is the report today that we now have 110,000,000 Americans receiving government assistance (Welfare) of some source.  This number precludes social security checks or Medicare or Medicaid.  Social Security is owed to the recipients because they or those they depended on paid into the program their whole lives.  Incidentally, we are now paying out more than we are taking into the Social Security coffers—of course there are no such coffers, they have been open to government uses since the Johnson administration and his Democrat controlled Congress. If you are 50 or younger, you will likely never get anything back for your S.S. contributions.  That 110,000,000 Americans number represents 1/3 of the country’s population.  Also, we have nearly 46 million on food stamps, (15%).  I’m guessing a lot of these people have cable TV, a couple cars, buy cigarettes—possibly dope as well— alcohol and lottery tickets.  Don’t get me wrong, I understand that all of these things are legal, except dope in some states. The problem is that people are losing their shame and the governments, especially the democrats in government, are perpetuating such shamelessness. Have you heard of the woman who won millions in a lottery but continued to use food stamps? She said, in essence, that since the government continued to give her the stuff and she was unemployed that it was okay. I mean really? We want this to continue? Does the words “$16,000,000,000,000 in government debt” mean anything to the 47% of Americans who do not pay federal income taxes—again , social security taxes are supposed to be returned to us when we retire, so it should not be considered a tax—but seem to expect the other 53% (NOT JUST THE TOP 1%) to pay for their jollies? Pretty audacious, I would say. They obviously think we tax payers are dopes. If we let this continue, we will prove them correct.