American Maggie

I don’t think it is too far-fetched to state that since January 20, 2009, it hasn’t been easy to find a positive news story about the work of the Bush Administration. Frankly, it wasn’t that easy to spot complimentary accounts before January 2009, but that is a whole other story.  It is a shame. There was much good done during the historically tumultuous terms of President George W. Bush.  We should never hesitate to be proud and speak confidently of the successes achieved, especially those pertaining to women.

During the Bush Administration there was an optimistic belief the advancement of democracy, prosperity and security worldwide was not possible without the empowerment of women.  It was understood that when women demanded their rights, freedom and dignity, it benefitted not only women and their families; it strengthened democracy, bolstered economic prosperity and encouraged tolerance.  Across the globe, women were backed with strong support from the United States government and the American people.

Throughout the developing world, in places ravaged by conflict, such as Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as various countries in the Middle East and Africa, women increasingly emerged as courageous leaders.  The United States recognized these women should be celebrated in a public way and helped shine a spotlight brightly on their accomplishments.

Last spring when the Obama Administration announced the creation of the White House Council on Women and Girls, it was as if Washington had never heard of such a groundbreaking idea. While I hope the Council can actually make a difference, by no means is a focus on women and girls a new concept.  I believe the focus on women and families was steadfast and sure throughout the eight years of the Bush Administration.  Let me provide just a few examples of efforts that made a global impact. There are many, many more.  

During the Bush Administration, Secretary Condoleezza Rice created the Secretary of State’s International Women of Courage Award. This award paid tribute to the bravery and leadership of outstanding women around the globe. It symbolized the commitment of the United States to these women as they struggled for social justice and women’s rights.  President and Mrs. Bush graciously welcomed these award winners to the White House and made certain their extraordinary work was known.

Former First Lady Laura Bush launched the United States-Middle East Partnership for Breast Cancer Awareness and Research.  The U.S.-Middle East Partnership for Breast Cancer Awareness and Research joined medical and community organizations from the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan with medical expertise in the United States. This was the first partnership for breast cancer awareness between the United States and a country in the Middle East.  Mrs. Bush became a tireless promoter of its work and continued expansion.  I don’t think the White House ever looked as rosy as it did in October 2008, when Mrs. Bush lit it pink, in honor of breast cancer awareness for the world to see.

President Bush knew that too many women and families were being affected by the horror of domestic violence.  The President’s Family Justice Center Initiative was created and funded by the U.S. Department of Justice and offered assistance to those who had been ravaged by this all too common problem. Family Justice Centers are situated in communities across the United States and offer a variety of services in one convenient location.  They adapt to the needs of their particular community and embrace a victim-centered approach. I hope the newly-appointed White House Advisor on Violence Against Women knows a good thing when she sees it.

Obviously, so much of the public discussion during the Bush years and recently, has focused on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  I would like to mention two significant efforts that came about specifically in these two countries to help women. The U.S.-Afghan Women’s Council and the Iraqi Women’s Democracy Initiative were created during the Bush Administration and have made a huge impact on the women of Afghanistan and Iraq. These entities have given the women of these countries access to the tools they need to survive and flourish. They have also brought Afghan and Iraqi women closer to American women and improved the search for common understanding.

 The United States was and should be, deeply committed to addressing issues of importance to American women and women throughout the world. Frankly, I think American women and women from around the globe care about the same things.  Women want to be robust and respected participants in their communities. Women want access to educational and economic opportunities. Women want to be afforded the same legal rights and be able to see their children (sons or daughters) strive for secure futures.  Women are the backbone of their families and their communities.

It will be interesting to see how this new Administration communicates with women here and abroad.  They would be wise to look back without bias and see the strides that were made and the good that was done. 

******

Andrea (“Andi”) Bottner served as the Director for the Office of International Women’s Issues at the U.S. State Department during the Bush Administration.  Previously, Bottner served as the Acting Director of the Office on Violence Against Women at the U.S. Department of Justice.

In New York State, Americans look to their elected officials and see no more than a subpar work ethic and misrepresentation. This past week, the U.S. Senate voted to defund the grassroots organization ACORN. This vote took place after the US Census Bureau took action to temporarily cease further collaboration with ACORN involving their work on the the most recent U.S. Census, which is funded by taxpayers. As early as September 14th, 2009 there was word from the Brooklyn District Attorney’s office that there would be a possible investigation of the Brooklyn office of ACORN. Each of these actions was in response to this past week’s publicly released videos and recordings of employees of several ACORN offices indicating possible illegal activity and misuse of federal funds.

Only 7 Senators voted to continue dispensing federal funds to ACORN, one of whom is New York’s newly appointed Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. She was also the only female Senator in this gang of 7.  When I contacted Senator Gillibrand’s office in Albany, NY to get an explanation for her vote on this important issue, I asked: “I am calling regarding Senator Gillibrand’s recent vote to continue funding ACORN; does Senator Gillibrand understand that ACORN condones illegal prostitution and voter fraud?” The spokesperson answered “Yes.” Because I was so shocked by this outrageous response, I called for clarification and the spokesperson indicated that she had made a mistake and that “the Senator believes the actions of some of the ACORN employees were reprehensible.” I may not be a sitting Senator but it’s time New Yorkers tell Senator Gillibrand that you can’t have it both ways!

This back and forth conversation with a member of Senator Gillibrand’s staff begs the question of whether she, or her staff, have done any due dilligence on an organization that she is willing to vote to receive federal funds in addition to the $8.5 billion allocated out of the first stimulus bill. As she proudly notes her rigorous legal training and background on her website, Senator Gillibrand is an attorney and she has a legal obligation to uphold the constitution; her legal training alone should be reason enough for her to vote to cut federal funds for an organization that’s operations are legally questionable.  Additionally, Senator Gillibrand has positioned herself as a champion for womens’ rights – yet her vote on ACORN speaks otherwise.

If Senator Gillibrand were actually concerned about her New York constituents, her office should have immediately contacted the Child Protection Services in the State of New York for possible illegal child trafficking, Amnesty International for the possible forced illegal immigration and various other human rights organizations. Like all of her votes, Senator Gillibrand’s vote for the continuation of funding of ACORN appears to be for political expediency – after all, she is a politically expedient Senator gearing up for her election in 2010.

Republican Leader Dean Skelos has requested that New York’s Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and New York’s Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli halt any state or federal funding to ACORN. Senator Gillibrand is notably absent from taking action.

Senator Gillibrand’s office should confirm whether she has ever met with any individuals from New York’s ACORN office and whether she has ever received any campaign contributions from ACORN or ACORN affiliates. Senator Gillibrand should also demand that the Maryland Attorney General initiate an investigation into ACORN, instead of pursuing an investigation of the two young reporters who posed as a pimp and prostitute. The 20 year old young woman was very eloquent in follow up interviews and speaking to the media as to why she chose to pursue this investigation into ACORN. And as a taxpayer, I think what her video has unearthed has done her fellow citizens a tremendous public service. 

Senator Gillibrand, former Congresswoman of New York’s 20th Congressional district, is demonstrating yet again that her beliefs and political ideals are up for grabs to the highest political bidder. After all, this is not the first time Senator Gillibrand has done a 180-degree turn in her beliefs, but I believe that her recent vote on ACORN will be the most damaging to any further political aspirations.

Already, it is apparent that Senator Gillibrand has seen the critical mistake. At her latest press conference, she refused to answer questions regarding her ACORN vote and instead encouraged reporters to contact her office “offline.” She has yet to issue an official statement on the matter – New Yorkers should know by now that when things become politically inexpedient, mum’s the word for Senator Gillibrand.

Any opponent running against Senator Gillibrand for the 2010 senatorial contest need only use the ACORN video footage advertising that Senator Gillibrand condones the possible misuse of taxpayers fund for possible illegal practices including prostitution and child trafficking.

Senator Gillibrand, New Yorkers do not need your senatorial skills now or in the future.

******

Melanie Stefanik is a business executive residing in Upstate New York.

Americans Have Become Desensitized to Large Numbers for Health Care, the Deficit, and Just About Everything Else. Time For Some Sticker Shock.

Dr. Evil:  ”Here’s the plan. We get the warhead and we hold the world ransom for… ONE MILLION DOLLARS!”

Number Two:  “Don’t you think we should ask for more than a million dollars? A million dollars isn’t exactly a lot of money these days.”

- From the movie Austin Powers, International Man of Mystery

The largest dollar bill ever issued was $100,000. It featured a dapper Woodrow Wilson in tie and glasses on the front (chosen, no doubt, for his invention of the Federal Reserve) and was discontinued in 1935. Today, the highest note in circulation is $100. Estimates on the cost of Obama’s health care plan range from several hundred billion to 1.5 trillion. What would paying that off look like?

Answer:  a LOT. Let’s start with an even trillion, for the sake of simple math. It takes 10 thousand of our largest bills to make a million. It takes 10 million of them to make a billion. And of course, 10 billion $100 bills for a cool trillion. At a width of .0043 inches a bill, a trillion dollars in Ben Franklins comes to about six miles high. But that’s just saving trees. Using $1 denominations, the length increases to 67,866 miles high, or nearly three trips around the equator. That’s a lot of air miles on Delta (several free round trips to a Swiss bank, at least).

Now here’s the real ticker kicker:  that’s more money than the U.S. currently has in circulation. Estimates for 2008 were that $853.2 billion was in motion, and $625 billion dollars of that was in $100 bills. If those numbers are a challenge to grasp, put on your swim suit. In $100 bills, Obama’s $1 trillion would fill 4.5 Olympic swimming pools. The currently available $625 billion dollars in $100 denominations would only fill 2.8 Olympic swimming pools. That’s a lot less splash room than we need for the health care plan. The cost wouldn’t come all at once, of course (Obama currently proposes paying it out over 10 years), but it’s easy to see why this amount of money is so troubling.

So what can the President do? Print money? Well, yes. Despite claiming in March of 2009 that he “can’t print money,” Obama defied even his own low expectations and went ahead to do just that. The technical term is “quantitative easing” but the danger is the same – inflation. With Americans pinching every dollar, the last thing we need is a dollar that’s worth less. 

Sources:  U.S. Treasury, CNBC, and a calculator. 

******

Skyla Freeman is a former writer for President George W. Bush.  She blogs about style and culture at Sanity Fair online (sfair.blogspot.com).  

This weekend’s Taxpayer March on Washington was the culmination of a season of discontent. Beginning last year with the first bailout, things started to heat up with the spring and summer tea parties and really gained momentum in August with the town hall meetings around the country. Americans have been raising their voices in opposition of a government that wants to take over everything from banks to health care. On Saturday, they came to Washington.

We were there. And while there were some pretty entertaining signs this weekend, the most exciting part of the experience was meeting the people – the individuals who saved their money and gave up summer vacations to come to Washington by planes, trains, and automobiles. Politicians would do well to realize that the people marching on Saturday were from every corner of this nation, and they represent every kind of voter imaginable. There were conservatives, libertarians, independents, Republicans, Democrats, young, old, middle-aged, white, black, Asian, Hispanic, female, male, straight, gay, single, married, poor, rich, middle class, activists, teachers, miners, stay-at-home moms, bloggers, students, small business owners, and the list goes on. Most importantly, we are all Americans, we are all voters, and we are all tuning in.

The two of us writing this article signify one of the balancing acts that exists within this movement, representing two different elements of the conservative spectrum. One of us is a long-time Republican and the other is a political new-comer with conservative tendencies. We are from opposite sides of America – one of us lives in Washington DC; the other is from Washington State.

One of us has worked for campaigns, on Capitol Hill, and at DC think tanks; the other works for a nonprofit during the day, goes to improv comedy rehearsals at night, and organizes rallies on the weekends. We represent the DC establishment and the Seattle protestor – and it takes both for a national grassroots political movement to truly succeed.

What do we have in common? We are both young women who marched from Freedom Plaza to the Capitol lawn this weekend to tell Congress and the President that we can do a better job of spending our own money and managing our healthcare than the federal government.

There are wildly divergent estimates of the size of the crowd. Over the weekend the MSM reported that there were numbers ranging from the “thousands,” a la the New York Times, to the more generous estimate of “tens of thousands” used by most other media outlets. Those estimates are completely at odds with some day-of reports that claimed attendance of over one million. Our guess at the time was between 250,000 and 500,000 marchers – most certainly in the hundreds of thousands. New aerial photographs recently released by Freedom Works are finally demonstrating the actual size of the rally.

But no matter how many people were present at the March, one thing is undeniable: The protestors who took to the streets of Washington and flooded Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House to the Capitol represent the views of millions upon millions of Americans across the country who stayed at home on Saturday and have profound concerns about the President’s plans for their health care.

With public opinion on healthcare deeply divided, with more Americans disapproving of Obama’s handling of health care policy than approving, with hundreds of thousands taking to the streets around the country in protest, it is almost humorous to watch the Democrat leaders in Washington flounder in response.

When David Axelrod says the anti-ObamaCare protestors are “not representative of the majority,” we say: Keep fooling yourself.

When Nancy Pelosi calls Americans who go to their Congressmen’s town hall meetings to express their views as “un-American,” we say: Keep digging your Party’s political grave.

Clearly, this moment in American political history provides a huge opportunity for the Republican Party to begin building a majority again – and the GOP can and should take advantage of it. But the biggest mistake the Republicans could make is to believe that any of what is going on right now is a result of the actions taken by the GOP. All of the fervor, all of the fury of this nationwide grassroots movement has been a negative reaction to proposals from President Obama and Democrats in Congress, not national excitement for Republican proposals. The signs at the March on Washington reflected this mood, with the popularity of negative statements – from the classic “Don’t Tread on Me” flags to the home-made “I am not your ATM” sign – rather than positive statements.

There is no natural link between this movement and support for the Republican Party – yet. Many activists at tea parties and town halls around the country were independents. Many protestors at the March in Washington were apolitical, never having attended a political rally before. The challenge of the GOP is to galvanize this national sentiment against this Administration and this Congress, translate it into a reason to support Republicans, and mobilize it into votes for our candidates at the polls in 2010 and 2012.

To this end, there is something truly hopeful in our personal experience at this weekend’s March. After having taken extraordinarily different paths in life, this weekend we found ourselves walking shoulder to shoulder down Pennsylvania Avenue armed with one, united message: a government big enough to give you everything you need is big enough to take everything you have, including your freedom. From one Washington to another, we hope the politicians listen.

******

Keli Carender is a tea partier and founder of the activist network, the Seattle Sons & Daughters of Liberty.  Rachel Hoff is a young Republican activist based in Washington, DC.