US Department of Education website advises that the address will be moved up to 12pm EDT.

On our way to the public library this evening with my family, we passed by a very peaceful demonstration of approx 30 people in downtown Leesburg.  I noticed the signs for “Support Public Option” (or something very similar).  As I passed by the group and turned north on 15, I adamantly shook my head in disagreement.  That’s when I saw the other signs (most likely the opposite side of the sign I first saw), “Health Care for All”.  So, by expressing my disagreement with the public option, I am also displaying by my opinion AGAINST Health care for all? 

These two are obviously not synonymous; the public option has to do with insurance not the providing of health care.  No one ever states that anyone (with cash or without) can get health care from almost any emergency room across the country.  Regardless, the goal seems to be to link the Public Option with an emotion triggering idea such as “Health care for all.”  Anyone who opposes the public option surely opposes health care for all, right? Ummm….not really.

It’s the same emotional carrot that is dangled in front of the public when politicians/activists promote higher funding for educational programs; it’s FOR THE KIDS, you hate monger!   Sure does generate an emotional response.   I don’t want to be thought of as an uncaring unenlightened schnob that thinks that if you can’t pay for health care, then tough titties.  Who does?  And that’s the bitch of it.  It allows the debate to never talk about the basic fundamentals for each argument. 

In one corner, we have a group that believes that the government is the solution.  Government control is best; government knows best.  Through the government’s intervention, we can provide everyone healthcare.  Popular thoughts:  “Why doesn’t the other side care about the folks who are hurting and struggling; we’re a rich country so we should do something.  If it meant health care for all, I would pay more taxes.”  The rub:  By providing everyone healthcare, the only way to reduce cost (to even sustain this coverage) is to limit access.

In the other corner, we have a group that believes in limited Government.  The Government has its place for regulation and removing barriers to competition (if they actually do this, seems rare now a days doesn’t it?).  It’s only through competition that you can lower costs.  Besides if there more completion, there’s more options and more choices.  Popular thoughts:  “If the other side is so willing to pay higher taxes to provide health care for all, how many people’s health care are they currently paying for (my guess is zero)?  If I feel that I have a case against my insurance company, I can bring them to court.  I can’t bring my government to court if I suspect wrong doing, unethical behavior or otherwise.  How can a private company compete with the government?  Why doesn’t the government allow insurance companies to compete against each other across state lines?”  The rub:  It’s easy to give power to government and it’s hard to give people responsibility for their own well being.

Since these fundamentals do not readily fit on a sign that any person can hold on the corner of a street or in a town hall meeting, I guess we will never get down to brass tacks.

Here’s a study in Hong Kong where half of health care workers would refuse swine flu vaccine.

If this happens in Massachusetts, then half of the health care work force could face a $1000 fine and land in jail. 

How’s this for irony:  Robin Starr’s 16 year-old blind and deaf dog died after accidentally leaving him in her hot car. Who’s Robin?  She’s the CEO of the Richmond Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in Virginia.

Meanwhile, Republican representative Thaddeus McCotter (MI) introduced the “HAPPY Act” or Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years.  The bill allows for pet owners to take tax deductions for their care up to $3500 per year.  You should be proud as this is some really ground-breaking legislation that will make a huge impact in our lives!  Makes me think of a news story about the “Cat Lady” found dead in her home with 258 80 cats and their feces.  She should’ve taken better care of herself; she could’ve gotten $280,000 in tax deductions.  Somehow I suspect that this legislation will not result in the promoting of the welfare of animals (or Americans for that matter).  Wonder what Robin Starr would say?

Also from DC:  Bill Richardson will not be indicted for pay-to-play accusations.  “The decision not to seek indictments was made by Justice Department officials in Washington, they said, speaking on condition they not be identified because prosecutors had not disclosed results of the probe.  ‘It’s over. There’s nothing. It was killed in Washington,’ one of the people told The Associated Press.”

Seems Metro is having more troubles here in the DC area:  A rail car struck another train in West Falls Church (no one seriously injured).  Meanwhile, NoVa are awaiting toll road hikes to pay for this nonsense to be extended out to the Dulles Airport.  Remember the hikes introduced in 2005?

 While back in February Peter Orszag (Obama’s Budget Director or Budget Czar as Glenn Beck likes to call him) states in this video (at 4:36) that Obama will half the deficit by the end of his first term, Mr. Orszag recently raised the 10-year deficit projections to $9 Trillion (many think this to be a very conservative estimate).  Later in the video (6:00), Maddow asks the “Budget Czar” (her words, not mine) to address the accusations that Obama is “soaking the rich” to pay for all of this spending.  Orszag replies that “This is exactly what the President campaigned on…through shared sacrifice.”  I don’t see where the sharing comes in…at least not sharing of sacrifices.  We all know what happens when the rich feel the squeeze of taxes:  they jump ship .  Wonder where our rich will go when the tax collectors come a calling?

I just love used book sales!  Wonderful way to “recycle” your books and pick up a few for you and the family for very cheap…all the while supporting your local libary.  This one is at the Cyr Gates Community Center, 300 Parkview Drive, New Iberia on November 6th.  Check it out!

Here is one in McLean, VA, a little earlier in September.  We’ve found some good ones here!

Better yet, check out this Book Sale Finder website to find one near you!

Here’s the only video I’ve seen so far. 

I heard that union members got there around 3pm then the constituents were allowed (wonder if those union members were constituents as well).  Howard Dean was supposed to speak as well.  All I saw were the super duper lines outside, which made me proud to know that so many people came out to voice their opinion, whatever it may be.  Would love to hear your thoughts, experiences or related links.

Update:  Thank you for the first-hand reports coming in from those who attended.  Please keep them coming!  The news outlets are now reporting on the town hall:
Washington Post
MyFox5 (includes videos)
Washington Examiner (reports that it “Descended into Chaos”)
ABC News 7 (Very meager reporting here!  Step up ABC!)

Here are some “Tweeters”:
Jim Geraghty

Meanwhile Wolf will have a Town “Call” meeting (which I think is pretty lame, but pretty much in line with most VA Republicans).

Have you been to a Tax Day Tea Party (locate one here!)?  Do share your thoughts and experiences.  Please include the following:

• Location and Time of Tea Party
• Reason for attending
• General Thoughts and/or Specific Experiences

While this is only a suggested list, I’d also like to know (1) approx. how many people were in attendance (please provide basis), (2) were there any weather issues, (3) composition of the crowd, (4) interesting conversations, etc.

Thanks!

I am hungry just thinking of writing this post.  We recently partook of the newest restaurant to grace downtown Leesburg:  The Cajun Experience.  It definitely was an Experience!  If you don’t look out of the window to check your bearings, your fast-pasted DC metro life becomes irrelevant and slowly melts away.  Don’t look now; you are in slower pace Louisiana now and the only things that matter are your family, the food in front of you and the company at your table (and possibly surrounding tables).  Owned and operated by native Louisianans, the Experience offers traditional Cajun (not to be confused with creole) dishes: etouffee (pronounced A-Too-Fay), gumbo, po-boys, etc.  Being from Louisiana, Lafayette to be exact (and about as Cajun as you can get!), I really, REALLY like my husband’s etouffee.  The Experience’s etouffee makes my husband’s etouffee taste like a Chef Boyardee right-out-of-the-box knock off (I hope he is not reading this!).  The etouffee is rich, flavorful and served with a side of potato salad.  As it is seasonal, order the etouffee as long as you can!  First-timers, don’t be shy with the potato salad.  Go ahead and mix it with the etouffee; your taste buds will thank you!  I also recommend the beignets and coffee, both of which are reminiscent of a certain New Orleans cafe.  Needless to say, I cannot wait to try more dishes (red beans and rice, chef’s special and pecan pie?) during the Leesburg Flower and Garden Festival this weekend.  By the way, last chef’s special was blackened Talapia on a bed of etouffee.  C’est tres bon!

The Cajun Experience is located at 14 Loudoun Street SE, Leesburg, VA 20175 (and they are hiring!)

One of the District of Columbia’s latest priorities is setting up Global Positioning System for their snow plows as a public service…after all

“Citizens want information in real time,” Kundra says, “because now, with mobile technology being deployed, the expectations are increased.”

What a pathetic reason to fund or provide this service; it is plain irresponsible. I would think that the money could be used for other priorities like crime prevention/prosecution, infrastructure or other local efforts. When you hear your elected official telling you that it’s all about priorities and “smart” spending, take a closer look at what exactly that means.  

Speaking of irresponsible spending: DC currently spends the 3^rd most in the country on education (based on dollars per student).  Meanwhile, DC education has recently ranked dead last in the nation for Elementary and Middle School levels.  I don’t pay many local DC taxes, but part of their budget comes from national tax revenue…so, yes I feel like I have a stake in the city.  I expect the schools to perform better….I’m waiting!

Hillary will be a great secretary of state, says Bill Clinton

Just like Colin Powell before her, Hillary will go out of her way to use her position in secretary of state to sabotage and undermine the administration she serves. I don’t like giving Obama free advice, but this is likely a trial balloon and he is not seriously considering this. It would be a disaster for his administration. I look forward to the headline: “Hillary will make a great junior Senator from New York”.

This is a good day for the law-abiding citizens of Washington D.C. and a good day for America:

Here’s the “wire” from the A.P. because…obviously if the “wire” doesn’t say it, it doesn’t happen.

Gun Ban in DC ruled Unconstitutional

The opening paragraph of the majority opinion summarizes the case:

District of Columbia law bans handgun possession by making it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm and prohibiting the registration of handguns; provides separately that no person may carry an unlicensed handgun, but authorizes the police chief to issue 1-year licenses; and requires residents to keep lawfully owned firearms unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device.

Respondent Heller, a D. C. special policeman, applied to register a handgun he wished to keep at home, but the District refused. He filed this suit seeking, on Second Amendment grounds, to enjoin the city from enforcing the bar on handgun registration, the licensing requirement insofar as it prohibits carrying an unlicensed firearm in the home, and the trigger-lock requirement insofar as it prohibits the use of functional firearms in the home. The District Court dismissed the suit, but the D. C. Circuit reversed, holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess firearms and that the city’s total ban on handguns, as well as its requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense, violated that right.

And here’s the summary of the Majority opinion:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms.
(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved.
(c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous armsbearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment.
(d) The Second Amendment’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms.
(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion.
(f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553, nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, 264–265, refutes the individualrights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.

2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home.

478 F. 3d 370, affirmed.
SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined.

More to come, I’m sure…