When I heard about this I was appalled. This treaty was first brought in front of President Clinton in 1995 but he refused to sign it. Now congress with Barbara Boxer taking the lead is attempting to get it on President Obama's desk. It is meant to protect children but instead if signed the UN led by a group from Switzerland will tell you how to educate and discipline your children. The only video I found to embed is kind of shaky so if you are looking for a better one you can go to Fox News.
Here is a great article that explains this in further detail.
Boxer Seeks to Ratify U.N. Treaty That May Erode U.S. Rights
I am still trying to figure out what we can do to prevent the president from signing this. Stay tuned for more updates on this very important issue.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Why Is President Obama So Negative Towards Rush Limbaugh?
I'm sorry it has been a while since I've updated this blog. I will try my best to post every week.
The media is questioning who is the leader of the Republican party. Some of them believe that newly elected RNC chair Michael Steel while others have said that Rush Limbaugh is
the current leader of the Republican party. Michael Steel should be the one organizing a grass roots movement to elect more Republicans to public office. Steele is the one that should be energizing the right. But is he?
Limbaugh is the leader of the conservative movement but he is not an elected official. Therefore I do not believe that he is the leader of the Republican party. After his "First Address to the Nation" at CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) this past weekend Limbaugh has become even more popular. He is energizing conservatives across this country but I do not believe he is the leader of the Republican party. He is the leader of the conservative movement.
Conservatives need to get energized and work to elect officials that represent their conservative values. These core conservative values are as follows:
"We believe that the Constitution of the United States is the best political charter yet created by men for governing themselves. It is our belief that the Constitution is designed to guarantee the free exercise of the inherent rights of the individual through strictly limiting the power of government.
We reaffirm our belief in the Declaration of Independence, and in particular the belief that our inherent rights are endowed by the Creator. We further believe that our liberties can remain secure only if government is so limited that it cannot infringe upon those rights.
We believe that capitalism is the only economic system of our time that is compatible with political liberty. It has not only brought a higher standard of living to a greater number of people than any other economic system in the history of mankind; more important, it has been a decisive instrument in preserving freedom through maintaining private control of economic power and thus limiting the power of government.
We believe that collectivism and capitalism are incompatible, and that when government competes with capitalism, it jeopardizes the natural economic growth of our society and the well-being and freedom of the citizenry.
We believe that it is the responsibility of the individual citizen, whenever his inherent rights are threatened from within or without, to join together with other individuals to protect these rights, or, when they have been temporarily lost, to regain them.
We believe that any responsible conservative organization must conduct itself within the framework of the Constitution; in pursuance of this belief we refuse to countenance any actions which conflict in any way with the traditions of the American political system.
The American Conservative Union is created to realize these ends through the cooperation in responsible political action, of all Americans who cherish the principles upon which the Republic was founded.
The American Conservative Union will welcome all Americans who are prepared to fight for the realization and preservation of these principles through political action at the local, state and national level.
The Sharon Statement
The following is the first statement of principles of the modern conservative movement, written by former ACU Chairman M. Stanton Evans and adopted in conference at Sharon, Connecticut (at the home of early ACU supporter William F. Buckley Jr.), on September 11, 1960.
In this time of moral and political crises, it is the responsibility of the youth of America to affirm certain eternal truths.
We, as young conservatives, believe:
That foremost among the transcendent values is the individuals use of his God-given free will, whence derives his right to be free from the restrictions of arbitrary force;
That liberty is indivisible, and that political freedom cannot long exist without economic freedom;
That the purpose of government is to protect those freedoms through the preservation of internal order, the provision of national defense, and the administration of justice;
That when government ventures beyond these rightful functions, it accumulates power, which tends to diminish order and liberty;
That the Constitution of the United States is the best arrangement yet devised for empowering government to fulfill its proper role, while restraining it from the concentration and abuse of power;
That the genius of the Constitution—the division of powers—is summed up in the clause that reserves primacy to the several states, or to the people, in those spheres not specifically delegated to the Federal government;
That the market economy, allocating resources by the free play of supply and demand, is the single economic system compatible with the requirements of personal freedom and constitutional government, and that it is at the same time the most productive supplier of human needs;
That when government interferes with the work of the market economy, it tends to reduce the moral and physical strength of the nation; that when it takes from one man to bestow on another, it diminishes the incentive of the first, the integrity of the second, and the moral autonomy of both;
That we will be free only so long as the national sovereignty of the United States is secure; that history shows periods of freedom are rare, and can exist only when free citizens concertedly defend their rights against all enemies;
That the forces of international Communism are, at present, the greatest single threat to these liberties;
That the United States should stress victory over, rather than coexistence with, this menace; and
That American foreign policy must be judged by this criterion: does it serve the just interests of the United States?"
(source: American Conservative Union)
Alright so I already stated that Limbaugh is the leader of the conservative movement and not the Republican party. So why is our president so negative towards him? I believe that Obama feels threatened by Limbaugh. This theory may not make much sense to you because he is not a public official. Limbaugh is an entertainer. I don't think he will ever run for public office. However, Obama feels threatened by him because Limbaugh knows how to energize the right and has influenced elections in the past. If his popularity continues to rise the country could elect more Republicans to congress in 2010. That is just a year away. Obama needs to keep his Democrat majority in congress in order to pass his radical socialist agenda.
It is up to conservatives like us to speak up and elect more government officials who will represent our values. Now for my initial question, who is the leader of the Republican party? I don't believe their is one. It is up to us to decide who that leader will be. There are several rising stars that spoke at CPAC. They also had a straw poll at the convention to see who would be a popular candidate for president in 2012.
Speak your mind. I am listening. If you still believe that President Obama's socialist agenda is going to pull us out of this economic mess I have some advice for you. Take two and call me in the morning.
Cascia
The media is questioning who is the leader of the Republican party. Some of them believe that newly elected RNC chair Michael Steel while others have said that Rush Limbaugh is
the current leader of the Republican party. Michael Steel should be the one organizing a grass roots movement to elect more Republicans to public office. Steele is the one that should be energizing the right. But is he?Limbaugh is the leader of the conservative movement but he is not an elected official. Therefore I do not believe that he is the leader of the Republican party. After his "First Address to the Nation" at CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) this past weekend Limbaugh has become even more popular. He is energizing conservatives across this country but I do not believe he is the leader of the Republican party. He is the leader of the conservative movement.
Conservatives need to get energized and work to elect officials that represent their conservative values. These core conservative values are as follows:
"We believe that the Constitution of the United States is the best political charter yet created by men for governing themselves. It is our belief that the Constitution is designed to guarantee the free exercise of the inherent rights of the individual through strictly limiting the power of government.
We reaffirm our belief in the Declaration of Independence, and in particular the belief that our inherent rights are endowed by the Creator. We further believe that our liberties can remain secure only if government is so limited that it cannot infringe upon those rights.
We believe that capitalism is the only economic system of our time that is compatible with political liberty. It has not only brought a higher standard of living to a greater number of people than any other economic system in the history of mankind; more important, it has been a decisive instrument in preserving freedom through maintaining private control of economic power and thus limiting the power of government.
We believe that collectivism and capitalism are incompatible, and that when government competes with capitalism, it jeopardizes the natural economic growth of our society and the well-being and freedom of the citizenry.
We believe that it is the responsibility of the individual citizen, whenever his inherent rights are threatened from within or without, to join together with other individuals to protect these rights, or, when they have been temporarily lost, to regain them.
We believe that any responsible conservative organization must conduct itself within the framework of the Constitution; in pursuance of this belief we refuse to countenance any actions which conflict in any way with the traditions of the American political system.
The American Conservative Union is created to realize these ends through the cooperation in responsible political action, of all Americans who cherish the principles upon which the Republic was founded.
The American Conservative Union will welcome all Americans who are prepared to fight for the realization and preservation of these principles through political action at the local, state and national level.
The Sharon Statement
The following is the first statement of principles of the modern conservative movement, written by former ACU Chairman M. Stanton Evans and adopted in conference at Sharon, Connecticut (at the home of early ACU supporter William F. Buckley Jr.), on September 11, 1960.
In this time of moral and political crises, it is the responsibility of the youth of America to affirm certain eternal truths.
We, as young conservatives, believe:
That foremost among the transcendent values is the individuals use of his God-given free will, whence derives his right to be free from the restrictions of arbitrary force;
That liberty is indivisible, and that political freedom cannot long exist without economic freedom;
That the purpose of government is to protect those freedoms through the preservation of internal order, the provision of national defense, and the administration of justice;
That when government ventures beyond these rightful functions, it accumulates power, which tends to diminish order and liberty;
That the Constitution of the United States is the best arrangement yet devised for empowering government to fulfill its proper role, while restraining it from the concentration and abuse of power;
That the genius of the Constitution—the division of powers—is summed up in the clause that reserves primacy to the several states, or to the people, in those spheres not specifically delegated to the Federal government;
That the market economy, allocating resources by the free play of supply and demand, is the single economic system compatible with the requirements of personal freedom and constitutional government, and that it is at the same time the most productive supplier of human needs;
That when government interferes with the work of the market economy, it tends to reduce the moral and physical strength of the nation; that when it takes from one man to bestow on another, it diminishes the incentive of the first, the integrity of the second, and the moral autonomy of both;
That we will be free only so long as the national sovereignty of the United States is secure; that history shows periods of freedom are rare, and can exist only when free citizens concertedly defend their rights against all enemies;
That the forces of international Communism are, at present, the greatest single threat to these liberties;
That the United States should stress victory over, rather than coexistence with, this menace; and
That American foreign policy must be judged by this criterion: does it serve the just interests of the United States?"
(source: American Conservative Union)
Alright so I already stated that Limbaugh is the leader of the conservative movement and not the Republican party. So why is our president so negative towards him? I believe that Obama feels threatened by Limbaugh. This theory may not make much sense to you because he is not a public official. Limbaugh is an entertainer. I don't think he will ever run for public office. However, Obama feels threatened by him because Limbaugh knows how to energize the right and has influenced elections in the past. If his popularity continues to rise the country could elect more Republicans to congress in 2010. That is just a year away. Obama needs to keep his Democrat majority in congress in order to pass his radical socialist agenda.
It is up to conservatives like us to speak up and elect more government officials who will represent our values. Now for my initial question, who is the leader of the Republican party? I don't believe their is one. It is up to us to decide who that leader will be. There are several rising stars that spoke at CPAC. They also had a straw poll at the convention to see who would be a popular candidate for president in 2012.
Speak your mind. I am listening. If you still believe that President Obama's socialist agenda is going to pull us out of this economic mess I have some advice for you. Take two and call me in the morning.
Cascia
Thursday, February 12, 2009
President Obama's Long Term Goals
The stimulus plan, quietly signing an executive order which will change the voting districts in the US, and reversing President Bush's order to stop funding to foreign countries for abortions are just a few things that the new president has done in his first weeks in office.
What exactly is his long term plan? We already know that he is trying to steer this country as far left as possible and he is using the help from the Democratic majority in congress. His speeches still sound like campaign speeches and he is touring the country to promote his socialist agenda. This is what I believe President Obama wants to do.
It is all about getting elected.
In my opinion President Obama is not a great leader but he is a brilliant politician. He knows how to persuade the American people into thinking that government is the only thing that will pull us out of this economic mess. Even though he is already in office he has been acting like he's still on the campaign trail. And the media love affair is still going on. How long is this going to last?
Before we turn into a country similar to the socialist nations of Europe we need to do something. Write to your senators and congress men and women. Voice your concern about the stimulus package and the direction this country is headed. In 2010 vote for representatives that will work for you and not for Obama's socialist agenda. Only you and I can change the direction of this country. Our voices need to be heard.
Cascia
What exactly is his long term plan? We already know that he is trying to steer this country as far left as possible and he is using the help from the Democratic majority in congress. His speeches still sound like campaign speeches and he is touring the country to promote his socialist agenda. This is what I believe President Obama wants to do.
- Promote his socialist agenda to make the American people believe that only the government can help them prosper.
- Have congress pass all of his government controlling socialist programs.
- By the time he is up for re-election make certain that the people are dependent upon these social and welfare programs so that they will re-elect him.
It is all about getting elected.
In my opinion President Obama is not a great leader but he is a brilliant politician. He knows how to persuade the American people into thinking that government is the only thing that will pull us out of this economic mess. Even though he is already in office he has been acting like he's still on the campaign trail. And the media love affair is still going on. How long is this going to last?
Before we turn into a country similar to the socialist nations of Europe we need to do something. Write to your senators and congress men and women. Voice your concern about the stimulus package and the direction this country is headed. In 2010 vote for representatives that will work for you and not for Obama's socialist agenda. Only you and I can change the direction of this country. Our voices need to be heard.
Cascia
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
The Problems With President Obama's Stimulus Plan
Only 38% of Americans support the presidents stimulus plan as it is written today. Personally I do not believe that it is a stimulus at all. In my opinion this is just another Democrat spending bill. The Democrats decided to put in as much pork as they could fit into this bill on programs that in their opinion were neglected during the Bush administration. All of this spending does not create jobs and they should be separate bills.
Here is a list of a few spending proposals that will not create a stimulus in our economy.
Rush Limbaugh has a unique approach to the stimulus bill. He believes that "there's an opportunity for genuine compromise." Here is what Rush has proposed.
" Fifty-three percent of American voters voted for Barack Obama; 46% voted for John McCain, and 1% voted for wackos. Give that 1% to President Obama. Let's say the vote was 54% to 46%. As a way to bring the country together and at the same time determine the most effective way to deal with recessions, under the Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan of 2009: 54% of the $900 billion -- $486 billion-- will be spent on infrastructure and pork as defined by Mr. Obama and the Democrats; 46% -- $414 billion -- will be directed toward tax cuts, as determined by me."
I think that is a great idea. Although, it would be nice if the Republicans got their way. (I know that would never, ever happen with a Democrat majority and a Democrat in the White House). Rush has proposed a great compromise. In the meantime I will continue to dream of a better job for my husband and a better life for my children while I wait for this economy to turn around.
Here is a list of a few spending proposals that will not create a stimulus in our economy.
- $29.68 billion on improving the highways. This will only create temporary jobs.
Once the project is over then the economy will be back where we are today. - $16.13 billion in Pell Grants and student aid. We will not see this have an impact on our economy until after those students graduate from college. This will also depend on whether or not there are jobs for these graduates or not.
- $14 billion on school renovations, $13.60 billion on special education, $13 billion on programs for disadvantaged children. These are are all great programs and I believe in investing in our future, but again this will not create jobs. I believe this should be a separate bill and not be included in the stimulus plan.
- $2.4 billion on other programs like a new lawn in Washington, new furniture for a federal building, new cars for federal employees, money for STD research and contraceptives and the list goes on and on. None of these will create jobs.
Rush Limbaugh has a unique approach to the stimulus bill. He believes that "there's an opportunity for genuine compromise." Here is what Rush has proposed.
" Fifty-three percent of American voters voted for Barack Obama; 46% voted for John McCain, and 1% voted for wackos. Give that 1% to President Obama. Let's say the vote was 54% to 46%. As a way to bring the country together and at the same time determine the most effective way to deal with recessions, under the Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan of 2009: 54% of the $900 billion -- $486 billion-- will be spent on infrastructure and pork as defined by Mr. Obama and the Democrats; 46% -- $414 billion -- will be directed toward tax cuts, as determined by me."
I think that is a great idea. Although, it would be nice if the Republicans got their way. (I know that would never, ever happen with a Democrat majority and a Democrat in the White House). Rush has proposed a great compromise. In the meantime I will continue to dream of a better job for my husband and a better life for my children while I wait for this economy to turn around.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Paul and the False Prophets
I want to thank everyone for taking the time to read this blog and helping me as one of my commenter's stated: "start this blog out with a bang!" Right now I only have time to update it once a week but if demand goes up, the comments keep coming and I get more readers I might make the time to update it more often.
I'd like to expand on a comment I received from a reader because it really struck a chord with me. She stated:
"You know, I'm in the middle of a Bible study in my women's class by Kaye Arthur, called "Lord, Give Me a Heart for You". It's a study of 2 Corinthians, and therefore of Paul and his dealings with a wishy washy group of people who tended to listen to false prophets and go whichever way the wind blew. And those false prophets just trashed Paul.. he wasn't a good speaker, didn't "look" like an apostle, etc. And as I read parts of the study and delved into the Scripture, I began to see a direct correlation between 2 Corinthians and 2000-2008.. the media vs. George W. Bush. I get really, really hot under the collar at the power held by the media and the entertainment industry (Alex Baldwin and Susan Sarandon and, of course, Oprah.. as political gurus... WHAT are we thinking???). Cascia, you have the heart of Paul; you simply call it as you see it, and if it isn't popular, then TOO bad. Love it, girlfriend... but buckle your seat belt and prepare for a rocky road! You'll get a lot of hits, but you probably WON'T be well-liked. Make sure you don your thick skin, and you'll be OK! With prayers and praise for your boldness..."
Thank you so much, Pam. I agree with you completely. And yes, I am not going to give up. I don't care how many people hate me for creating this blog. I believe that our voices need to be heard. Especially during the next four years.
I am a Christian, Catholic in fact. And despite what most people think about Catholics I do read the bible. After reading her comment I got my bible out and looked over Paul's second letter to the Corinthians. I couldn't find the exact passage that Pam was referring to so I assume she meant the whole letter. If I understand her correctly the wishy washy people (Corinthians in Paul's time) are the Americans that are listening to the liberal media and believing every word that they say. The symbol I have for them on this blog is the lady turning into a donkey. The liberal media, therefore is the false prophets. You hit it right on the nail, Pam. Thank you for comparing me to Paul. I am humbled.
During Bush's presidency liberal reporters like Katie Couric never had anything good to say about him. Bush is a good man. Rush Limbaugh said in an interview with Shawn Hannity that Bush stuck to his guns and did what he believed was right putting partisan politics aside when he made decisions. He took the office of the presidency very seriously. Bush didn't base his decisions on public opinion like other former presidents did (Bill Clinton was known to watch the polls very closely).
Another thing that I admire about George W. Bush is that he is a very spiritual man. He has a close relationship with our Lord and always took his faith to heart when making decisions.
The liberal media always knew how to make him look stupid. But he took all the criticisms with grace and humility.
I was embarrassed when I heard how the crowd reacted at the inauguration last week when President Bush was introduced. If you didn't hear or see it thousands of people, grown adults mind you, decided to chant the old song, "Na, na, na, na,...hey, hey, hey...goodbye," to the outgoing president. This was extremely disrespectful and I don't understand why grown adults would stoop that low. Four years ago some of these same people could have voted for the man that they were then booing. I just don't get it. Bush must be a very strong man to be able to put up with that. And did you notice that the liberal media did not say a word about this incidence? Maybe they put the crowd up to it.
I'd like to expand on a comment I received from a reader because it really struck a chord with me. She stated:
"You know, I'm in the middle of a Bible study in my women's class by Kaye Arthur, called "Lord, Give Me a Heart for You". It's a study of 2 Corinthians, and therefore of Paul and his dealings with a wishy washy group of people who tended to listen to false prophets and go whichever way the wind blew. And those false prophets just trashed Paul.. he wasn't a good speaker, didn't "look" like an apostle, etc. And as I read parts of the study and delved into the Scripture, I began to see a direct correlation between 2 Corinthians and 2000-2008.. the media vs. George W. Bush. I get really, really hot under the collar at the power held by the media and the entertainment industry (Alex Baldwin and Susan Sarandon and, of course, Oprah.. as political gurus... WHAT are we thinking???). Cascia, you have the heart of Paul; you simply call it as you see it, and if it isn't popular, then TOO bad. Love it, girlfriend... but buckle your seat belt and prepare for a rocky road! You'll get a lot of hits, but you probably WON'T be well-liked. Make sure you don your thick skin, and you'll be OK! With prayers and praise for your boldness..."
Thank you so much, Pam. I agree with you completely. And yes, I am not going to give up. I don't care how many people hate me for creating this blog. I believe that our voices need to be heard. Especially during the next four years.
I am a Christian, Catholic in fact. And despite what most people think about Catholics I do read the bible. After reading her comment I got my bible out and looked over Paul's second letter to the Corinthians. I couldn't find the exact passage that Pam was referring to so I assume she meant the whole letter. If I understand her correctly the wishy washy people (Corinthians in Paul's time) are the Americans that are listening to the liberal media and believing every word that they say. The symbol I have for them on this blog is the lady turning into a donkey. The liberal media, therefore is the false prophets. You hit it right on the nail, Pam. Thank you for comparing me to Paul. I am humbled.
During Bush's presidency liberal reporters like Katie Couric never had anything good to say about him. Bush is a good man. Rush Limbaugh said in an interview with Shawn Hannity that Bush stuck to his guns and did what he believed was right putting partisan politics aside when he made decisions. He took the office of the presidency very seriously. Bush didn't base his decisions on public opinion like other former presidents did (Bill Clinton was known to watch the polls very closely).
Another thing that I admire about George W. Bush is that he is a very spiritual man. He has a close relationship with our Lord and always took his faith to heart when making decisions.
The liberal media always knew how to make him look stupid. But he took all the criticisms with grace and humility.
I was embarrassed when I heard how the crowd reacted at the inauguration last week when President Bush was introduced. If you didn't hear or see it thousands of people, grown adults mind you, decided to chant the old song, "Na, na, na, na,...hey, hey, hey...goodbye," to the outgoing president. This was extremely disrespectful and I don't understand why grown adults would stoop that low. Four years ago some of these same people could have voted for the man that they were then booing. I just don't get it. Bush must be a very strong man to be able to put up with that. And did you notice that the liberal media did not say a word about this incidence? Maybe they put the crowd up to it.
We can not change the mentality of Americans but we can influence and educate. That is the whole point behind Take Two. So if you think you are being influenced by the liberal media here is my advice.
Take two and call me in the Morning.
Take two and call me in the Morning.Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Why I Will Not be Watching the Presidential Inauguration
All the hype about the inauguration is making me sick. It is all over the blogosphere, the radio, and television. Even Disney is getting into the action with a concert tonight. On the radio this morning I heard that schools in the Sacramento area are making the children watch the ceremonies on television. Thank goodness my daughter is attending a Catholic school. I don't think they will be watching the ceremonies. If they are you bet I will be talking to the principal.
No, I am not a sore loser. I have very good reasons to protest this inauguration. The government is spending more than $170 million dollars on this inauguration. That is over 125 million more than what President Bush's inauguration cost back in 2005. Most of this money is coming from the taxpayers. I guess the government does not care about the current recession and the billions of dollars that has already been spent to bail out the banks and financial industry.
The media's argument is this: He is the first African American president. This is a historic event. My reply; big fricken' deal! No I am not racist. I never have and never will be. If Obama was a Republican they would not be making this into as big of a deal, trust me.
The majority of the media are liberals and they will do anything to brain wash the citizens into believing their far out left ideas. This includes putting Obama on a pedestal making him look like the savior of the world and capitalizing on his presidency. Have you seen all the Obama merchandise and crap out there? You can get Obama mugs, t-shirts, and don't forget to get your Obama commemorative plate. All this hype is a bunch of crap if you ask me. I don't remember ever seeing a Bush commemorative plate, do you?
But just wait, after all the hoopla, crowds, balls and concerts all the hype will die down. The American people will soon learn more about who they really elected as President. His socialist, big government, tax and spend views will soon take effect and he won't be the savior that everyone once thought.
If you are falling for all this media hype, here is my advice...Take Two and Call Me In the Morning.
Cascia
Find out what other Moms are saying about the Presidential inauguration at Five Minutes For Mom.com
No, I am not a sore loser. I have very good reasons to protest this inauguration. The government is spending more than $170 million dollars on this inauguration. That is over 125 million more than what President Bush's inauguration cost back in 2005. Most of this money is coming from the taxpayers. I guess the government does not care about the current recession and the billions of dollars that has already been spent to bail out the banks and financial industry.
The media's argument is this: He is the first African American president. This is a historic event. My reply; big fricken' deal! No I am not racist. I never have and never will be. If Obama was a Republican they would not be making this into as big of a deal, trust me.
The majority of the media are liberals and they will do anything to brain wash the citizens into believing their far out left ideas. This includes putting Obama on a pedestal making him look like the savior of the world and capitalizing on his presidency. Have you seen all the Obama merchandise and crap out there? You can get Obama mugs, t-shirts, and don't forget to get your Obama commemorative plate. All this hype is a bunch of crap if you ask me. I don't remember ever seeing a Bush commemorative plate, do you?
But just wait, after all the hoopla, crowds, balls and concerts all the hype will die down. The American people will soon learn more about who they really elected as President. His socialist, big government, tax and spend views will soon take effect and he won't be the savior that everyone once thought.
If you are falling for all this media hype, here is my advice...Take Two and Call Me In the Morning.
Cascia
Find out what other Moms are saying about the Presidential inauguration at Five Minutes For Mom.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
