Question from Arnie in LA:
What do you think is the difference between Fox News and other news?
__________________________________________________
Momma Roni:
Main difference between Fox and most others lays here:
Fox compliments its audience by giving un-edited info - hemorrhoids, bad breath and all; a nice way of giving people credit for being smart, and having independent, critical thinking abilities enough to winnow the wheat from the chafe.
Contrast that to the media outlets that are so glued to thinking you're stupid, that they lie while sneeringly goading you to buy products that are too costly, not wanted or needed, have no use and are defective.
How much do you suppose media outlets gave in "un-reported in violation of FEC rules contributions" to candidates this past election cycle?
MOMMA RONI - as a young farm girl.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Saturday, October 10, 2009
BIBLE IS THE FIRST AND LAST WORD ON MARRIAGE
Question from A.Y.
What do you think about gay marriage?
Momma Roni:
Mother always told me, "Marriage is tough enough when it's made up of two who are of the same religion, race, educational level and background. Why in the world would you deliberately set out to marry someone outside of that, and make it even tougher?"
The Bible has the first and last word on marriage.
Because the genesis of the word marriage is the Bible, any change to its meaning should be taken up with ecumenical councils...not governments.
Regards partnerships of any kind, we already have pre-existing laws that honors ones designation of property/visitation/wills/insurance/taxes etc. to another.
What do you think about gay marriage?
Momma Roni:
Mother always told me, "Marriage is tough enough when it's made up of two who are of the same religion, race, educational level and background. Why in the world would you deliberately set out to marry someone outside of that, and make it even tougher?"
The Bible has the first and last word on marriage.
Because the genesis of the word marriage is the Bible, any change to its meaning should be taken up with ecumenical councils...not governments.
Regards partnerships of any kind, we already have pre-existing laws that honors ones designation of property/visitation/wills/insurance/taxes etc. to another.
UNION INSURANCE
Question:Your comments wanted on the health care bill. Sen. Mark Udall
Momma Roni:
If the partisan Democrat insurance plan is sincere about its "public option" - they should complete this so-called public option circle by forcing unions to be a part of - and make public, the cost of their insurance program.
Prospective union members should have these cost comparatives in order to make wiser health care decisions, and ability to tailor costs to their own individual situations.
This would allow them the un-tethered freedom to opt out of union membership/insurance/dues, and purchase policies they choose based on factual comparatives and personal needs.
Union members should be assured their union will never subject them to any form of un-kind treatment what-so-ever, if they choose a non-union policy.
Do union members get a good value from the insurance premiums they pay?
If union members drew on their pensions simultaneously, would they get their money?
Because there is absolutely not one iota of difference between a union boss and the corporate managers/owners they knee-cap so vigorously, are they expected to likewise make public their base plus compensation (i.e. all monies they take in)?
If not, why not?
Momma Roni:
If the partisan Democrat insurance plan is sincere about its "public option" - they should complete this so-called public option circle by forcing unions to be a part of - and make public, the cost of their insurance program.
Prospective union members should have these cost comparatives in order to make wiser health care decisions, and ability to tailor costs to their own individual situations.
This would allow them the un-tethered freedom to opt out of union membership/insurance/dues, and purchase policies they choose based on factual comparatives and personal needs.
Union members should be assured their union will never subject them to any form of un-kind treatment what-so-ever, if they choose a non-union policy.
Do union members get a good value from the insurance premiums they pay?
If union members drew on their pensions simultaneously, would they get their money?
Because there is absolutely not one iota of difference between a union boss and the corporate managers/owners they knee-cap so vigorously, are they expected to likewise make public their base plus compensation (i.e. all monies they take in)?
If not, why not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)