Stimulating Marriage – Update: New Video

Somehow I missed this. This country looks more and more like old world socialism every day. Next we will be paying people to have children … no wait we are doing that now. The government now decrees that marriage is a good thing. The Dear One has so declared. Had Jesus Christ declared that … in their world … it would be bad, or no one’s business. Oh wait … He did, and they did.

The list of initiatives covered under the federal stimulus seems almost endless.
The $787 billion package includes $5 million to launch a media campaign promoting marriage. The campaign, set to launch later this month, encourages young singles to take a look at the benefits of marriage.

Supporters believe this is a way for the federal government to invest in America’s future. The theory is happy homes mean happy people, happy workers and happy contributors to society. “I think it would help the economy tremendously if some co-habitors got married,” said Mary Cummings, a wedding coordinator with a decided vested interest.


Posted in

Jim Vicevich

Jim is a veteran broadcaster and conservative/libertarian blogger with more than 25 years experience in TV and radio. Jim's was the long-term host of The Jim Vicevich Show on WTIC 1080 in Hartford from 2004 through 2019. Prior to radio, Jim worked as a business and financial reporter for NBC30 - the NBC owned TV station in Hartford - and as business editor at WFSB-TV in Hartford for 14 years while earning six Emmy nominations and three Telly Awards.


  1. Darlene on March 2, 2009 at 1:01 pm

    I think it would help the economy for all, married and single, to want to improve their lives, however they see fit.  Most would agree that included prosperity.  But, wait, if you persue prosperity, you will lose it to the government, who will then make decisions for you.  Hmmmmm, am i missing something here?

    • rush on March 2, 2009 at 2:57 pm

      Exactly what I was thinking.

  2. Janet on March 2, 2009 at 3:42 pm

    The man in the video makes a great point about clergy being better qualified than Uncle Sam to address such a personal matter. While the government is busy dispensing unasked-for advice, it should at least encourage serious pre-marital counseling in preparation for marriage.

    Many in the 18-to-30-year-old age bracket that this campaign targets are children of divorce, my own among them. These young people (and anyone getting married) would benefit from support designed to help them create healthy, stable, loving relationships.

  3. Dimsdale on March 2, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    Methinks that Obama and the socialist Democrats are doing to marriage what they are doing to charities and health care: undermining any non-governmental responsibility to provide for these things, then "deciding" that these things are once again good but must be disbursed from the government (because that is all that is left).

    All a part of the the Ayers-Obama socialist plan for America. 

    Saul Alinsky must be smiling somewhere….

  4. Anne-EH on March 3, 2009 at 5:15 am

    How ironic, a government that has undermind mariage and family life now wants to save both?

    • Dimsdale on March 3, 2009 at 1:56 pm

      Like I said on the blog today, Anne: what next, abortion is bad?

      Up is down, left is right, and you can't identify the players without a program!

    • Anne-EH on March 3, 2009 at 2:11 pm

      …And poor Jim I thought today was about ready to cry because he could not take all the talk from that audio about stimulating marriage. 

  5. sqkingsley on March 5, 2009 at 5:09 am

    Obama's tax increase actually discourages marraige.  Bracket goes up if you are a FAMILY making $250,000 or more.  So, if I make $100,000 and want to marry someone who makes $150,000, we would pay more taxes.  So, typical of the democrats, they say one thing, do another.

  6. sqkingsley on March 5, 2009 at 5:13 am

    As usual, the democrats and talking one thing and walking another.  Obama's new income tax actually discourages marraige.  Tax bracket goes up for family's making $250,000, not individuals.  So, If I make $100,000 and want to marry someone making $150,000, we would be penalized.

  7. ctyank on March 5, 2009 at 5:21 am

    How does President Obama define marriage?  Does he mean one man and one woman?  I am not surprised that his administration wants marriage reform but what form will that take?

The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.

You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.

The site is not broken.