Tagged: nanny state Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • just a conservative girl 12:24 PM on 10/10/2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , nanny state, , stamps, usps,   

    More Nanny State, PC Nonsense Costing Tax Payers Millions 

    Aren’t these pretty?  Forever Stamps,   Not so fast.  They are going to be destroyed, yep the entire run.  Why you ask?  Well it should be obvious and an outrage to you.  After all, take a look at the skateboarder.  Where are the knee pads?  The wrist braces?  No helmet?  How can that be?  It is dangerous.  Dangerous I say.  It cannot stand.  A cannonball?  How can that be allowed?  Apparently nowadays you need a helmet to do a head stand.  No helmet you might get hurt.  Oh no.  We can’t let that happen now can we?

    Seriously, I didn’t ride a bike with a helmet when I was little.  I loved, and I mean loved, gymnastics.  To this day, even at my old age, I am one of the most flexible people I know.  I can put both my feet behind my head.  I don’t wear any protective gear.  So far I have never injured myself so badly that I needed medical attention.  We skateboarded without helmets and knee pads.  We survived.  It wasn’t the end of the world.   We even had cars without (gasp) airbags and child safety seats.  How did we survive?  IT’S A MIRACLE!!!!  We should all be dead by today’s standards.

    Honestly, an entire run of stamps will be destroyed because someone on the Presidential Council has decided this may give kids the wrong impression about being active.  Huh?  Do kids even use stamps anymore?  What is it exactly that they are mailing out?  I mean would you have noticed the lack of knee pads had I not pointed it out?

    Well at least the post office is not running in the red.  Oh wait!!!

    just-move-stamps-1024x978

     
    • frank k. 1:12 AM on 10/12/2013 Permalink | Reply

      Not certain about the wrist braces and helmets , but my best guess is that all the available knee-pads were probably consumed by America’s MSM …. frank k. … (N.Va.)

  • just a conservative girl 4:33 PM on 03/08/2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , nanny state, , sugar   

    Hey New Yorkers Dunkin Doughnuts New Coffee Rules 

    Yeah, this is actually happening in the United States of America.  Good job there New Yorkers.  Hope you are happy.

    To be honest, I don’t really feel sorry for those that live there, the voted for his illegal third term.

    dunkin doughnuts NY

     
  • just a conservative girl 4:18 PM on 02/14/2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , faith based charities, , nanny state, ,   

    A World Without Catholic Charities 

    I think it will come as no surprise to anyone that I have strong opinions about a myriad of topics.  The Catholic Church among them.  I am strongly anti-Catholic church, but not Catholic people.  I have no issue with someone who chooses to follow the faith, it just isn’t for me.  One of the reasons that I feel so strongly about it is the hypocrisy of allowing people like Nanny Pelosi to meet with the pope and to receive communion, especially in his presence.  My church wouldn’t allow someone like the strongly pro-abortion politician to receive communion.  You want to espouse those ideas so publicly and pass the laws that undermine church teaching you shouldn’t be allowed to partake in receiving the holy sacraments. 

    But my opinion doesn’t cloud my judgement when it comes to the autonomy that they should receive when it comes to the right to worship.  Catholic Charities does works around the entire world for the betterment of society.  They help the forgotten children get into the homes of the childless among many other things.  I know several people who adopted through Catholic Charities. 

    More than 90% of the homeless shelters and soup kitchens in this country alone are run by faith-based groups.  They never ask what faith, if any, you are.  They will give you shelter and food.  They will give one time loans to the people who may be on the verge of homelessness.  They help people with young children keep the electricity and heat on in their homes.  They clothe the needy. 

    In the aftermath of Katrina the faith-based groups worked tirelessly to help the victims get back on their feet.  They are still there in some cases.  The same is true of Haiti.  Our world is a better place because of faith-based charities. 

    Over the weekend at CPAC I was having dinner with a friend who ran into a friend who is a liberal and she joined us for dinner.  She told me that she didn’t see it as an attack on the church.  She reminded me that many catholic women use birth control.  Ok, I suppose that is true.  But it doesn’t matter if many Catholic women use birth control or not.  The church doesn’t run by polls.  It runs by a doctrine based upon the belief system set out in the bible.  Just because many of the “faithful” choose not to follow the doctrine doesn’t mean that the doctrine doesn’t exist.  It doesn’t mean that the doctrine should be changed.  It doesn’t mean that the doctrine is misguided.  Nor does it mean that the church should have to pay for it.  All human beings fall short of the will of God.  Every last one of us.  Sadly, far too many Christians fall into the cafeteria style religion that has become all to common in modern-day society.  We pick and choose what we take from the faith and leave the things that we find hard or go against what modern-day society tells us is acceptable in the world. This being the case makes it even more imperative that the church stands its ground.  The moral guidance that faith gives our society should not be watered down. 

    The exemption for faith-based groups exist.  They are so stringent that they are hard to achieve, but not impossible.  I once worked for a charity called the prison fellowship ministries.  I only worked there on a contract basis, but the full-time employees have to sign something saying that they accept Jesus Christ as their savior.  If you are unwilling to sign it, you can’t be an employee there.  It is that simple.  But most faith-based charities don’t require that.  You can be of any faith to work there and they will help anyone of any faith, or lack thereof. 

    I asked this woman if she would be alright if Catholic charities and other faith-based groups stopped helping people of different faiths.  She told me she would fine with that.  Really?  You are willing to forgo the good these organizations do just to prove a point about birth control?  I was stunned to say the least.  I would like to think she doesn’t have a firm idea of what faith-based groups do around the world. 

    But I got to thinking, maybe that is the point.  Maybe this is the whole reason that they are pushing this.  Stay with me now.  Say that many faith-based groups do decide to change the way they run their organizations.  They will only administer help to people within their own faith in order to stay in compliance with the exemption.  What happens to all the others who will no longer be getting the help that they give?  They have to turn to the state.  Especially if they are not people of faith. 

    It would be virtually impossible for the faith-based groups to know if the people they are helping are truly people of that faith.  I wouldn’t put it past atheist activists to try to get services from a faith-based group and then publicize the fact that they were not truly just administering to the “faithful”.  Many good people would lose jobs at Catholic University’s and hospitals.  Many people in need of service would be turned away. 

    Many government grants go to Catholic charity groups all over the country.  They are much better at administering to the needs of the poor and underprivileged.  This will all have to stop.  The programs again would fall back to the pervue of the federal and state governments.  The entire reason that they were given to the faith-based groups in the first place was that they helped more people for less money.  They understand the needs of an individual community much better because they live there.  They dont’ fall into the one size fits all mentality that is the norm with government based programs. 

    So the next time that President Obama talks about helping the poor we need to remind ourselves of the damage he will cause by pushing this mandate to its logical conclusion.  The poor will become even more underserved, unless of course they happen to be of the same faith of the organization down the street that could and would help. 

    I don’t think this was the hope and change that people voted for.

     
    • nicedeb 4:57 PM on 02/14/2012 Permalink | Reply

      Linking from Nice Deb…

      Where were you at CPAC? How did we miss each other?

      • just a conservative girl 4:59 PM on 02/14/2012 Permalink | Reply

        I spent most of my time helping the Newt campaign. My friend is the volunteer coordinator for the campaign. I was in the hallways giving out Newt stickers and signs to help him out.

    • nicedeb 5:53 PM on 02/14/2012 Permalink | Reply

      Ahhhh. Dang. We were supposed to meet up. Oh well, there’s always next year.

      • just a conservative girl 1:04 AM on 02/15/2012 Permalink | Reply

        Oh, but I did get the chance to sign up for shooting lessons for the gun I got for my birthday. I am very excited about that.

    • Quite Rightly 5:55 PM on 02/14/2012 Permalink | Reply

      Excellent post, Girl. I would point out that there is one religion that exclusively provides charity only for its members: Islam. So restricting Christian faiths from ministering to all, according to the Christian view of charity, would not violate the Islamic view of charity.

    • SignPainterGuy 9:19 PM on 02/14/2012 Permalink | Reply

      Excellent post and reasoning, jacg ! You are spot on ! Remove all other choices for help in times of need and the only source left will be the government. Then the government can decide the needy`s outcome. Frightening indeed !

      Power, control and $Trillions !!

      • Sherry 11:25 AM on 02/16/2012 Permalink | Reply

        We’re going to have to be willing to give anyway, to work anyway, to ignore these immoral fiats and grabs for power designed to demand that all religion be reduced to nothing but warm fuzzy meaninglessness, we’re going to have to decide that we will hold tight to the cross and tell the government, it’s rules are taking it to a much worse place than jail, a much less forgiving place than even the government can create.

  • just a conservative girl 3:20 PM on 01/18/2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: nanny state, ,   

    Quote of the Day – Michael Williams Edition 

    “The moral fiber in our community is dwindling, if not now, when? Because its pajama pants today, next it will be underwear tomorrow.”

    Commissioner Michael Williams of Caddo Parish on his proposed ban on wearing pajamas  in public.

    Wew, now we know why there are no morals in our society anymore, it is pajamas.  Ban those dreaded pj’s!!  They are going to be the downfall of western civilization as we know it.

    I would not wear my pajamas out in public, but this is taking the nanny state a little too far.

     
  • just a conservative girl 4:42 PM on 11/18/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: lonely conservative, nanny state, , window blinds   

    Zero Risk? 

    Yep, the desire for the Obama administration to create a cradle to grave nanny state continues.  Now they have it in their little heads that we can no longer have cords on our window blinds.  They want to outlaw the sale of blinds with cords.  To heck with the fact that not all homes have children or pets.  The heck with the fact that they are much more expensive.  (I sell them so I know).  To heck with the fact that some windows are very high in some of the newer larger homes and the cords are necessary because can’t reach the window without getting on a ladder.  I guess they can just spend the additional $500 or so to get remote control.  The statement literally says zero risk:


    In a speech this summer, CPSC Chairman and Obama appointee Inez Tenenbaum told the audience it was time to “eliminate” the strangulation risk from window blind cords. “Notice how I did not say, ‘reduce the hazard,’” she added. “I said, ‘eliminate the hazard.’”

    I also read today on Pundit and Pundette that in Toronto kids in school will no longer be able to play with “hard balls”, they must be “soft” balls only.  Children may get hurt by a tennis ball or something.  


    So, I got to thinking about all the other things we must also outlaw:

     

    1. Wet leaves.  You may slip and fall.  Don’t laugh, I did once and broke my tailbone.  I guess we have to cut down all the trees that have leaves that fall off in the fall.  Of course the planet would die if we did, but remember, zero risk.  
    2. Cars.  They are very dangerous.  Especially now that Obama administration made the mileage standards higher.  The cars will be lighter, which of course gives you less safety.  It won’t help a whit with “global warming” but the treehugers will be happy.  Oh, wait we have to get rid of trees too.
    3. Showers.  All must take baths or install a chair/seat in your shower.  You may slip.  Wait, you might drown in a bathtub.  So, only the showers with chairs.  
    4. Razors.  Hey American men out there, get used to your women being hairy.  Don’t worry the Europeans survive with hairy women, so can you.  Because even the waxing can cause burns.  
    5. Beds without bed rails.  You know some older people and younger children can roll out of bed and hurt themselves.  
    6. No deep-frying your turkeys next week.  Too big a risk for a fire.  Actually all cooking must be outlawed.  Too risky.  Get used to vegan diet folks.  It is the wave of the future.
    7. We have to find a way to outlaw snow and ice too.  Very risky.  Since that may not be possible, we will have to pass a law that you can’t leave your home while there is snow or ice on the ground.  
    8. No electrical outlets in the home.  Children may stick a fork in there or something.  
    9. No long coats or sweaters.  They might get in a door.  
    10. No laces on your shoes.  You might trip and fall if they are not tied correctly.

    Zero Risk?  Life is not possible with zero risk.  Accept it liberals.  Life has risk.  


    H/T to The Lonely Conservative

     


     

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel