Nancy Pelosi, Queen of the House of Representatives, has declared that spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on family planning services will boost the economy.
Her rationale?
“Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those – one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.” Source
How many times in the past have Liberals hid behind “it’s for the children” when trying to get support for increased spending? And yet now the rationale for funding contraception and abortions is that it will cut government costs with less children to support? Since when have Dems been concerned with cutting costs?
I bring this up not as a social commentary, but as a political commentary; the Democrats choose their rationales to fit their needs at the time, rather than consistently following their principles. Then again, in order to follow principles, you first have to have them.
In the coming weeks, we will be bombarded with excuses on why a certain addition is worthy of being included in the stimulus bill. So expect more such fiscal nonsense; the Dems in Congress are obviously drunk with power, and are on a spending spree. The last time that they were in a similar position of power was 1993, and look what happened with the 2004 elections.
As I’ve said before, give ‘em enough rope, and they’ll hang themselves.
Yes, the next 2 years will be interesting. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear a proposal from Pelosi in the not-too-distant-future announcing Federal funding of Botox for anyone over 50….

Filed under: Congress, Democrats, Economy, Politics | Tagged: contraception, economic stimulus, it's for the children, miss america, Pelosi
Thus spoke the free-market-demagogue Herod … applause everyone …
Government bodies oftentimes regulate businesses, many of the times to excess. And when governments regulate, free markets are no longer “free markets”. So what is your point?
There are no free-markets … most specially with so many commercial embargos going on …
Free Markets are more of an ideal, and I agree, there are no truly free markets. However, it is my opinion that the US economic system needs to strive TOWARDS a free market, rather than overly-regulated markets as we are seeing more and more of.
I’m not a Pollyanna about this; there are legitimate regulations that are necessary; all one has to do is take a look at the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac debacle to see this. However, getting back to the main theme of this post, government spending only worsen the recession; what’s needed is tax cuts to business to spur growth. It’s proven that by growing businesses and having lower tax rates actually INCREASES tax revenues.
Oh … at last you’re talking some sense … that’s much better than your previous empty claims … but I must remind you that without taxes there isn’t a CAPITALIST state …