Moms into Politics

Stunning Flip Flop

2012-02-07T20:29:00.000-08:00

Today during a conversation with a co-worker on politics, I brought up my growing concern with President Obama's over-reaching government actions, using the "Contraception Mandate" being heavily discussed among the conservative political sphere as a most recent example. She is a self-proclaimed "Obama Girl", so I tread lightly. She had no idea what I was talking about. I gave her a brief summary, and she said "I just can't believe that is true." I assured her it is. She said, "It sounds 'alarmist' to me. It just can't be true." I said, "I know! It sounds ridiculous, but it is true." She asked a few more questions, I gave her the little knowledge I had absorbed from articles here and there. But she wasn't buying that it was a real story. I left a little unsure myself! So as someone who habitually wants to know what she's talking about, I did some more reading up.

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010.

March 24, 2010 President Obama signed Executive Order 13535 ensuring that, "longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions." He continued that it is the responsibility of "numerous agencies, including the Department of Health and Human Services..." ensuring that "these restrictions are enforced".

A News Release from the Department of Health and Human Services on August 1, 2011, stated that the "administration released an amendment to the 'prevention regulation' that allows religious institutions that offer insurance to their employee's the choice of whether or not to cover contraception services."

January 20, 2012, a statement by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius reversed the previously mentioned amendment stating that the "final rule on preventive health services will ensure that women with health insurance coverage will have access to the full range of the Institute of Medicine’s recommended preventive services, including all FDA -approved forms of contraception." The report continued that, "Nonprofit employers who, based on religious beliefs, do not currently provide contraceptive coverage in their insurance plan, will be provided an additional year, until August 1, 2013, to comply with the new law."

I would officially like to report to President Obama, that one of the numerous agencies responsible for protecting health care facilities and providers against "discrimination", is ensuring that your EO 13535 is NOT being enforced! It is being blatantly reversed. How is it that within the same administration, a Secretary of HHS is in outright violation of a major Executive Order, an order that much of the Health Care Reform bill passing was hinging on, and she still has her job?!? It is difficult not to assume that this was a planned policy reversal, coordinated by the Obama administration to pass controversial health care reform piecemeal without the approval of Congress and behind the American public's back. However...

Thank God for Catholics! (And I mean that, thank you God for Catholics for being on top of this!) I doubt I would have been aware of this half page flip-flop statement from Sect Sebelius if it wasn't for the Catholics shouting it from their pulpits! The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote a scathing news release calling the decision "literally unconscionable" and "in effect, the President is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences.... The government should not force Americans to act as if pregnancy is a disease to be prevented at all costs...This is nothing less than a direct attack on religion and First Amendment rights...The Obama administration has now drawn an unprecedented line in the sand".

I agree, Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. And I am standing on the side of the Catholics, and all those "conscience guided" individuals who believe that this is a violation of religious freedom! On an interesting note, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, aka the Mormons, began a "Religious Freedom Series" January 3, 2012. Although I have only skimmed through the three part series, a statement stuck out to me. "Religoius freedom is not simply the freedom to worship or to believe the way one chooses...it is the human right to think, act upon and express what one deeply believes according to the dictates of his or her moral conscience. In fact, religious freedom has always been understood in conjunction with 'freedom of conscience' - the liberty to develop and hold moral convictions and to act accordingly."

Protest Snob

2011-10-07T15:03:00.000-07:00

Classy. Every movement has their crazies. Every protest has the extremes. Every Rally has the pot stirrers. Every party has a pooper. After attending the 2009 Oklahoma Tax Day Tea Party, and following the hundreds to follow and now the Occupy Wall Street movement, I've decided I'm a protest snob. It is so last season. Actually, 2009. Occupy Wall Streeters: get out of your sleeping bags, clean up the sanitation disaster you've made in Zuccotti Park, take a shower, use your tweeting powers to network to get a job, and stop blaming the rich (or 1% as you say) for your problems.

To see the real comparisons of the Occupy Wall Street movement with the Tea Party, see it in pictures.

Occupy Wall Street advertisement

Tea Party advertisement

Occupy Wall Street March

Tea Party March

Occupy Wall Street Arrests: NYC 700+

Tea Party Arrest

Occupy Wall Street Costumes

Tea Party Costumes

Occupy Wall Street

Tea Party

Occupy Wall Street Trash

Tea Party Trash

Occupy Wall Street Youth

Tea Party Baby Boomers

Occupy Wall Street Revolution

Tea Party Revolution

Occupy Wall Street Economic Beliefs

Tea Party Economic Beliefs

Occupy Wall Street Hitler Reference

Tea Party Hitler Reference

Thank you, John Stewart for this gem!

2011-09-16T11:50:00.000-07:00

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

That Custom-Tailored Obama Scandal You Ordered Is Finally Here

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor & Satire Blog

The Daily Show on Facebook

Source of All Truth

2011-09-14T10:09:00.000-07:00

In a repeated effort to bring everyone to the same omniscient level as President Obama, the Obama Administration and Obama for America has reinstated a Big Brother-esque reporting website to help you "Get the facts...and Fight the smears". You may have short term memory loss, and the "Facts are Stubborn Things" video has slipped your mind, or the Reality Check on Health Insurance Reform web page, OR the email address where you could "help the White House keep track of fishy information". I wrote about it on this blog, August 14, 2009.

Apparently the non-confrontational approach wasn't working. The revamped concept can now be found at http://www.attackwatch.com/. What a mild title! New slogan: "Get the facts. Fight the smears." The main page has several headers that can take you to a variety of locations:

News Feed: Gives you not only featured news stories that are labeled "twists the facts" or "flawed understanding" and even "massive jobs lie". Who are the repeat offenders, or in their terms "Attackers"? Glenn Beck, Mitt Romney, and Rick Perry.

Attack Files: This is what you would normally see on Presidential candidate's website labeled, "Rick Perry on the Issues" or "Mitt Romney: The Issues" or even more creative and productive "Newt Gingrich: Solutions". What a novel idea! Solutions? Have we tried that before? But, I digress. Obama for America decided on something a little more understated, "Attack Files". Not the X-Files, or Watch Dog. Attack Files. Are the American people being Punked? Sometimes I wonder.

Report an Attack: If you haven't felt like you've stepped into George Orwell's "1984" yet, venture over to "Report an Attack". Big Brother hasn't progressed to Thought Police, but they are waging a full fledged "attack", becoming "Speech Police". Which seems to be very contradictory to the most quoted freedom from the 1st Amendment.... Freedom of Speech. Do we need to amend that amendment to include "freedom of thought" before its too late?? Out of curiosity, I might report my own blog. Why not? I'm opposed to the majority of what President Obama has done in office, so that is the only qualifier, right? Being opposed to his way of thinking? Having a "flawed understanding"? I guess he hasn't talked enough about the health care reform, or the stimulus, or Stimulus 2.0 (aka the Jobs Bill) for me to gain a better "understanding". What I haven't been able to uncover (which is why I might go "undercover") is what happens to the flagged websites. Is there punishment for disagreeing?

Join Attack Wire: Sign up for this more-annoying-than-spam email alert system (I already did) to not only be notified, but "armed with the facts". Only less than a year ago he delivered a fantastic speech at the Tuscon Arizona Shooting Memorial, where he said "make sure that we're talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds." Armed? Attack? Fight? Is that rhetoric that "heals" or "wounds"? By your own standard, you are failing to "usher in a more civil and honest public discourse".

Support the Truth: And now, the bottom line. Money. Donations can be made by credit card (of course, the new US Currency) ranging from the affordable $10 to the $500 (or other) peak. There are even options for recurring monthly payments and Americans abroad. I'm wondering how far the bottomless pit of funding the Obama for America campaign has raised. How is this not a scare tactic to raise money?

This wealth of knowledge and plan of action is disturbingly displayed in a startling color scheme of black, white and red. I have avoided the extreme right band wagon of "President Obama is a communist!" or "The Democrats are National Socialists (Nazi's)" like the plague. But quite honestly, when I first pulled up this website, my "judge the content by the homepage" reaction was, how does this not look like communist or nazi propaganda. The three most common colors used in nazi or communist propaganda are black, white and red. Again, I feel like we're being punked! They couldn't look more Big Brother if they tried. I typically try to be able to argue the other side, understand their thought process; but in this case, I am at a loss.

Your thoughts?

(Beware. They are watching you!)

9.11.01

2011-09-11T14:07:00.001-07:00

Pearl Harbor.

D-Day.

JFK Assassination.

Berlin Wall coming down.

Columbine Shooting.

9.11.01

These are all infamous dates. Tragic dates. Evidence that there is evil in the world. Those who were alive for those events remember exactly what they were doing that day. Who they were with. How they felt. Even the following days. What they did. How different they felt towards their country. How they felt towards their fellowman. How they felt towards their own life. Vowing to never look at the world differently. Do we still have the same appreciation for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Maybe once a year, on the anniversary of 9.11.01 we will remember.

At least 2,966 victims died in the September 11th attacks, including:

There were 266 people on the four planes:

American Airlines Flight 11: 87

United Airlines Flight 175: 60

American Airlines Flight 77: 59

United Flight 93: 40

In and Surrounding World Trade Centers: 2,595, including:

343 NYFD Firefighters and Paramedics

23 NYPD Police Officers

37 Port Authority Police Officers

125 Civilians and Military personnel at the Pentagon

1609 People lost a spouse or a partner

More than 3,054 children lost parents

Never Forget.

Remember This?

2011-09-10T11:30:00.000-07:00

Well Hello, Mr. Rubio (wink, wink)

2011-08-25T13:27:00.000-07:00

Senator Marco Rubio spoke at a forum at the Ronald Reagan Library's Centennial Celebration. I will need to listen to this speech again...because I'm having a hard time finding fault with it. Which is typically impossible from any politician, from any party. He is an excellent, and natural, orator. Before his prepared remarks, he escorted Mrs. Nancy Reagan in. And thank goodness he did, although his pace may have been to blame, because he caught her before she hit the ground. After his speech, he did an excellent question and answer, dodging questions about being a possible Vice President selection. Please enjoy this pitch perfect discourse on conservative values, including remarks on our Creator (gasp!), without being preachy and demagogic!

President Obama First Tea Bagger

2011-08-24T13:54:00.000-07:00

Who knew that President Obama ran as a fiscal conservative??? Possibly those who remember are those who voted for him hoping he would change Washington (remember, that "transformational" change) instead of expand Washington. Too bad he has one upped President Bush by not adding $4 trillion to the debt in 8 years, he did it in 2.5 YEARS! How patriotic can you get? And racist. This rhetoric must have inspired the Tea Party into formation.

My name is Sarah. I love politics, historical novels, and sushi. And I'm weird.

2011-08-13T15:15:00.000-07:00

Nothing new here. A Mormon being labeled "weird". This time by the Obama Administration leaders. It could be an accurate depiction if using an online dictionary's definition of: 1) Suggestive of the preternatural or supernatural and 2) Strikingly odd or unusual character. Yes, we believe in a supernatural being... God. And being strikingly odd from the rest of society is a great thing! Isn't being odd celebrated by new icons in the media, i.e. Lady Gaga, Glee, etc. I guess this is last month's news (and an old post that I forgot to post a couple weeks ago!) because there is a new preacher, and target in town. Pastor Rick Perry.

BREAKING NEWS

2011-08-07T18:46:00.000-07:00

S&P CONNECTED TO TEA PARTY TERRORIST CELL

With some minimal research, as is the traditional standard in most journalistic endeavors, I uncovered a shocking network connecting Standard & Poors with the Tea Party. It became extremely apparent with the US credit rating downgrade issued by Standard and Poor's, only a few days after the "compromise" struck on the debt ceiling debacle. Many brilliant politicians, such as Vice President Joe Biden, Representatives Nancy Pelosi and Mike Doyle, and administration officials such as David Axelrod, have also been hot on the trail of S&P and their connections to the terrorist network, the Tea Party. David Axelrod connected all the dots with his statement that S&P's downgrade of the United States credit rating from AAA status to AA+ was really a "Tea Party downgrade".

Standard and Poors released their statement regarding their decision to downgrade the US credit rating, Friday August 5. In the statement, S&P used inflammatory rhetoric, such as, "containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements" or "stabilize the general government debt burden" and even "containment of Medicare and other entitlements are key to long-term fiscal sustainability". What racists! These incendiary, racially motivated comments, are obvious talking points prepared by the Tea Party organizations. The Tea Party has found a way to infiltrate S&P, and to aid them in their suicide mission of "blowing up the US economy". With this initial domino falling over, the Tea Party is using its expansive political power to push Moody's and Fitch into the same downgrade direction.

The Tea Party isn't just acting locally, they are thinking and networking globally. The Tea Party has spent an inconceivable amount of money, acquired by cashing in their gold bought through GoldLine, placing Tea Party agents undercover throughout China's multiple provinces. "Internet savvy Chinese are using social networking to share their complaints about extravagant government spending". Ring any alarm bells? It won't be long that we will see "Don't Tread on Me" flags waving in Tiananmen Square. And how will this affect the US? China owns $1.159 trillions of treasury securities, which funds much of our debt. What would happen if Chinese tea partiers start rallies and disturb town hall meetings all over Guangdong and Hunan and Beijing provinces? Their unrest will be our unrest.

How is it that these racist, xenophobic, exorbitantly rich, neanderthals who label themselves Tea Baggers can accomplish the corrupting of S&P, the downgrading of the US credit status, hold the US economy hostage, and infiltrate into China to deter our biggest creditor of more lending? All of that Bible thumping. Their God and their guns can sway many greedy hearts.

Pictures say more than a thousand words

2011-05-02T15:03:00.001-07:00

After my last post, I found the White House's flickr page, with photos taken during the entire strike against Osama bin Laden. As someone who thoroughly enjoys history, I am fascinated at watching history unfold in real time. We have access to images, video's, words instantaneously, as history is being made. The pictures of the President and his advisors say it all.

In the Situation Room.

On the phone with President Clinton and President Bush.

Editing his remarks.

The press conference.

Shaking hands with Mike McMullen after the press conference, with Sect. Clinton and Leon Panetta. Job well done.

Hail to the Chief

2011-05-02T13:51:00.000-07:00

If I were to be honest, I can't think of a time I have been prouder of President Obama than right now. Obviously, he didn't have my vote in 2008. And I am almost one hundred percent positive (unless the Republicans really screw up the nomination) he won't have my vote in 2012. But, as of 10:30pm last night, he has my respect as Commander in Chief.

From everything I've read, President Obama took carefully calculated and decisive action. He didn't try to negotiate, or involve the UN, or even seek permission from Pakistan. He saw an opportunity to take out a mass-murderer, and did it. He used the intelligence we've received from Guantanamo detainees, coordinated with our amazing Navy SEALS, monitored the coordinated attack in the Situation Room (no, not with Wolf Blitzer!). Within 12 hours of the mission, Osama bin Laden's body was buried in the North Arabian Sea.

Last night, President Obama addressed the nation on this amazing news. Although I felt like celebrating, and was almost hoping for a "Yes, we can!" speech, I finally decided his remarks were appropriate, yet subtly envigorating. He laid the facts out there, recognized our amazing men and women in uniform, and honored those killed by Osama bin Laden's terrorist attacks. Initially, I was furious that bin Laden received a "respectful burial according to the Muslim traditions". But practically, it is probably the safest route to take.

This has been an amazing story to follow as it develops, and I have read so much already. I'm going to post some links to articles that have been great reads.

About the SEAL team

Inside the Situation Room during attack

How they found bin Laden

Quotes from Leaders about Osama bin Laden's death

And hopefully I'll add the link with the video/picture proof of his death HERE!

BREAKING NEWS!!!

2011-05-01T20:37:00.000-07:00

Osama Bin Laden is DEAD!

Bring you details as they come in!

Birth Certificate

2011-03-25T11:20:00.000-07:00

Oh. My. Goodness.

Someone a part of the "mainstream media", Mr. Donald Trump, proudly exclaimed he wants President Obama to provide his birth certificate while visiting the ladies at The View. He received some shrill responses from the co-hosts. A question regarding a President Obama's birth certificate is frequently asked of most conservative or Republican political figures while visiting news media shows. Why is this? Who cares? Does it matter?

I will put my opinion out there into the internet void of the blogosphere!

Is President Obama a citizen of the United States? Yes! I believe he most definitely is.

Does it matter? It absolutely matters that he is a citizen, because it is one of the very few criteria that is constitutionally set forth for the President of the United States.

WHY hasn't an original or long form Hawaii birth certificate for President Obama been released and circulated? It is a political ploy on both sides. The liberal side continually asks conservative politicians whether or not they believe the President is a citizen to distract from credible issues. The conservative side could use this as a fiery motive to unite the base. But to the important question, WHY hasn't the original been released? I would like to politically hypothesize that the Obama camp is holding on to this until the 2012 Presidential Campaign. And in the middle of the campaign cycle and mud slinging, the original or long form that does exist, will surface. Then the fact that the birthers were wrong, will be used to make an argument against every claim that the Republican candidates will make. I can see the stump speeches now, "They were wrong about me being a citizen of this great nation. They were wrong about my heritage. What else are they wrong about???" Who else is with me? Brilliant political strategery right? Until then, we will just have to continue to suffer through the constant questioning of Republicans and annoying birthers claims.

"Group Therapy"

2011-02-24T20:26:00.000-08:00

First, my apologies for my absence during a very politically turbulent time. When I think I've got a grasp of a current event or situation, it morphs into something much larger and deeper than I could have expected. (i.e. Wisconsin, Egypt, well the entire Middle East, constitutionality of the Health Care reform bill, to name a few). Now, don't get me wrong, I could give you my knee jerk reactions to all of them: Everyone's getting cutbacks - so put down the picket signs and get back to work, Mubarak was bad - a democracy movement pushed by Islamic extremists very bad, and mandates are UNconstitutional - start over with REAL legislation. However, that is not what I'm posting about.

Instead, I'm posting about a 10 minute segment I heard on our local popular FM radio station called "Group Therapy". A listener with a specific problem calls in, asking for solutions from the DJ's and the audience. Earlier this week, a mother of an almost 16 year old girl called in with a dilemma. Her daughter has had a boyfriend for two years, and they are "in love". They haven't had sex yet, but are very interested and are heading that direction quickly. The daughter asked the mom if they could "do it" in THEIR HOME, where she was "safe" and "felt comfortable"! [Jaw hit the floor!] And the mother was debating on whether or not she should. My jaw remained on the floor during the entire discussion, and callers voicing their opinions. The most common sentence was: "Well, you know they're going to do it anyway..."

"They're going to do it anyway" could be applied to almost everything wrong in our society. This mom was having a personal crisis because she had no expectations of her daughter's morality, therefore the daughter acted accordingly. And she is considering aiding her in doing so! As that phrase "they're going to do it anyway" rang through my head, I applied it to politics, religion, the economy, the work place, etc. On election day, majority of Americans voice their choice of a government representative at all levels with mediocre expectations of the outcome. We "hope" they will not fall prey to the lobbyists, special interests, lining their pockets... but they're going to do it anyway. "We the People", the sovereign, have little or no expectations of productive and efficient solutions from our representatives, so they act accordingly. The lack of expectations and accountability are a means to soften disappointment and responsibility of the steward. It was a wake up call for me, as a mom, that this is the society my young kids will be facing. Lowered expectations, minimal morals, zero accountability or punishment, no concept of right and wrong,

It can be a depressing outlook, until I discussed this with friends, family, neighbors, and realized, I'm not the only one! Us moms have a grave responsibility to continue to fortify our homes as a refuge from the refuse, to instill values, build confidence, and prepare them for the reality of what they are going to face. I would love some input on this!

MC Baier

2011-01-27T10:29:00.000-08:00

I rummage through a variety of websites, including Media Matters. A few days ago I stumbled on FoxNews host of Special Report, Bret Baier performing the 1979 hip hop classic, "Rapper's Delight". He was one of the 52nd Bob Hope Classic charity golf tournament in California. He did Sugarhill Gang proud! Enjoy!

Pomp and Pageantry

2011-01-26T07:19:00.000-08:00

Confession: I didn't watch the State of the Union, or Rep. Paul Ryan's Republican response. I know, I know. Here's why: I have been stuck at home with a house full of Influenza A ridden kids for 5 days straight. I had a birthday dinner to go to, and I jumped at the chance. I planned on watching and reading both this morning, but I can't force myself to do it. I've started BOTH videos, and I felt like I was ready to vomit along with my kids, for different reasons obviously. I typically love the time honored traditions of our political process.

But the politically inflated words are falling on deaf and cynical ears. Both parties are desperately trying to repair their image. Republicans made a grandiose gesture of reading the most recent version of the US Constitution at the opening of this congressional session. Nice gesture. We're not fooled. It was a political stunt playing to the cries from the conservatives to return to the correct form of the federal government: limited. (Which is specified in the constitution.) I'll believe it when I see it. Democrats suggested playing musical chairs, removing the dividing aisle between the two quarreling parties. Integrating the party seating. Nice gesture. I'm not buying it either. Especially when you are interviewed on the talking head news shows bad mouthing your political counterparts.

My point: When I feel like I can waste an hour and a half listening to speeches written by someone other than the orator, then I might give my two cents. But as of right now, my two cents is, WHATS THE POINT?!?! Words given at the State of the Union address are just that, words. President, let's see what you actually do to improve the economy instead of throwing hundreds of billions at it. Congress, let's see if you can actually work together to cut spending at all levels, in all sectors, and incentivize business to keep business in the US.

Here is the SOTU address.

Here is Rep. Ryan's response.

Cute and Cuddly STD's

2011-01-20T09:34:00.000-08:00

A friend of mine had to make a visit at the Oklahoma Department of Human Services, and stumbled upon a very informative booth informing the public about Oklahoma's most common STD's.

"You don't look like you have anything. Get tested for everything."

Sure, there is nothing out of the realm of possibility.... but a Priest? Really? I don't think that a man of the cloth is your target audience. Hopefully STD's don't get passed around in the confessional!

Alas, it gets even better! In order to help people understand sexually transmitted diseases even better, they hired a cartoonist to give a fun twist to Oklahoma's most popular STD's. Lets check them out!

Syphilis. Apparently with a nose like that, Syphilis reminds me of Tigger. You know: "Their bottoms made out of a spring, They're bouncy, bouncy, bouncy, bouncy; Fun, fun, fun, fun, fun!"

Human Papilloma Virus: This gumball gone wrong, still seems to be content in his STD state of being. Watch out kids, this isn't candy!

HIV: This kid friendly caricature seems more inviting than frightening! Like one of those warm fuzzies that your teachers would give you in the 1st grade.

Herpes: Now this cartoon is a little more sinister looking. It might have been a little more frightening if the graphics were a little better!

Gonorrhea: This STD looks like an elderly, overly tanned, surrounded by cigarette smoke granny in a track suit playing the slots at a Casino in Las Vegas. Well, probably more like Reno.

Although this is quite hilarious, I find it slightly disturbing. Either the DHS offices in Oklahoma are targeting kids with cartoon caricatures of STD's, OR (and possibly more likely) they assume their target audience is so intellectually challenged that they had to dumb the truth down. I'm praying that it isn't the first, because the way this disfunctional STD cartoon family has been assembled, coloring pages and puppets aren't much further down the road! In all seriousness, I'm a huge proponent of knowledge and uncomfortable truth. These cuddly STD's are more inviting than a huge crotch shot of an infected genital, but which would be a better deterrant?

So Much for Civility

2011-01-20T07:56:00.000-08:00

And this is one reason I love Anderson Cooper...and maybe why I find him somewhat attractive! I typically try not to comment on other people's comments, and instead blog my opinion on current events or political issues. But I thought this was too good, and just shows that there are some reporters who still ask the hard questions to BOTH sides. Anderson Cooper interviews democrat Rep. Steve Cohen from Tennessee, regarding his comments comparing Republican's or any who oppose President Obama's Health Care Reform bill to Goebbel's Nazi propaganda machine. It is a great discussion between the two.

A Mormon Perspective

2011-01-15T09:01:00.000-08:00

This article was posted to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Newsroom website in 2009, that is the "Official resource for news media, opinion leaders, and the public". I found it an absolutely essential read for everyone, not just the members of our Church. As typical with their timing, they are largely ahead of the game, and their words are more needed today than 2009. Without further adieu:

The Mormon Ethic of Civility

What a Miracle!

2011-01-14T14:28:00.000-08:00

When I saw this ABC News World Report, I got chills. It is heartbreaking to watch the families of the victims bury their family member or close friend. Yet, it is also an amazing story of survival and strength. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and astronaut husband Mark Kelly the prayers of a country are with you and the other survivors!

Click HERE to watch the report.

Sociopath

2011-01-13T13:18:00.000-08:00

Sociopath: A person with an anti-social personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse. See also Timothy McVeigh, John Allen Muhammad or "DC Sniper", Charles Manson and recently Jared Loughner.

Good News Wednesday

2011-01-12T20:46:00.000-08:00

President Obama spoke at the Memorial Service today for the victims of the assassination attempt on Rep. Gabriella Giffords. A memorial service is not typically good news, but I thought the tributes he gave of the deceased was eloquent and personal. It was encouraging to hear the heroic acts that everyday citizens performed. I won't dissect his speech tonight, not sure if I will. I will only leave it as his words, my future critiques will be in what legislation is proposed to "enable more civil and honest" debate. Or should I say "Fair". However and most importantly, my heart goes out to the families who will have to continue to grieve and cope long after the media circus leaves town.

TEXT here and VIDEO here.

We Are Not the Rest of the World

2011-01-10T09:38:00.001-08:00

A genuinely tragic and fatal event occurred in Tuscon, Arizona on Saturday morning, January 10. Jared Loughner, targeting Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, opened fire on a crowd gathered at the Congresswoman's "Congress on your Corner" event. After murdering 6, and injuring 20 including Giffords who received one shot to the head, the gunman was tackled to the ground by by-standers until law enforcement could arrive. Congresswoman Gifford is recovering in a local hospital, still in critical condition.

Judge John Roll, a U.S. District Judge appointed by the first Pres. Bush in 1991, was shot and killed. Along with these five others. Gabe Zimmerman was Mrs. Giffords director of public outreach, with a Masters in Social Work, and was engaged to be married in 2012. Phyllis Schneck, 79, was at the wrong place at the wrong time. Not politically active, and typically doesn't shop at the Safeway where the shooting occurred, she was shot and killed leaving 3 children, 7 grandchildren, and 1 great grandchild. Dorwan Stoddard was killed when trying to protect his already injured wife by shielding her from the gunman. Dorothy "Dot" Morris was also shot and killed, although her husband tried to do the same as Stoddard, in shielding her from the gunfire. A 9 year old Christina Taylor Green, was the day's youngest victims. She was athletic, being the only girl on her little league baseball team, intelligent, and was apparently an aspiring politician. In a twist of tragic irony, she was born on a tragic day and died on a tragic day. Her birthday was September, 11, 2001.

Of course, the question of the day, who's to blame? The fingers are wagging, and some in the media and politics are salivating at pointing the blame on talk radio, Fox News, popular conservative politicians specifically Sarah Palin. This is just as outrageous as stating that Jared Lee who held the Discovery Channel headquarters hostage was influenced by Al Gore! The only person to blame was the one who pulled the trigger. How is it that more blame has been placed on the typical targets of Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin, than any questioning his parents or those closest to him? He was kicked out of college with suggestions of psychological testing, he was denied enlistment by the U.S. Military, those who were in contact with him said he was deeply disturbed. Has any questions been raised that this might have been an anti-Semitic attack, connecting his apparently favorite book "Mein Kempf" and Mrs. Giffords being Arizona's first Jewish Congresswoman? There are infinite possibilities, but one fact is certain, Jared is a mentally unstable extremist. To suggest that our unfettered political discourse, our first amendment right of free speech is to blame, is to resolutely state that we are like the rest of the world.

We are not the rest of the world. The United States political movements are not enacted by violent extremists. The United States has peaceful transitions to power at all levels, seen most recently in Congress. The United States political parties or private corporations do not fund violent upheavals, assassinations, or anarchy. We are not the Ivory Coast, where the incumbent refuses to cede the Presidency to the electoral victor. We are not Pakistan, where a governor and "Advocate of Tolerance" was assassinated by one of his own guards. We are not Tunisia who is suffering from violent protests due to high unemployment. We do not have state sponsored, politically advantageous assassinations in the United States. To suggest that any political party or talk show host or celebrity is to share blame in this inexplicable tragedy, only removes all personal responsibility which eventually destroys the credibility of our government which is established "by the People", relying primarily on self-governance. If we have to silence voices of opposition to "maintain peace", we have lowered ourselves to the anarchist-tyrannical cycle that is largely the rest of the world's political cycle. The United States is above that. We have the Constitution. We are a nation of the rule of law. We believe in justice. We believe in equality. We believe that those, like Jared Loughner, who's solely to blame for those who lost their lives, will be held accountable. If we turn away from the proven formula of the Constitution, rule of law, and our justice system, we will lose our freedoms all together. We would no longer deserve them. But I believe the majority of Americans don't buy into the political spin and blame game when hit with crisis. I believe that we are smarter and stronger and more independently minded than that. We are the United States.

Good News Wednesday

2011-01-05T13:52:00.000-08:00

I haven't blogged. In a while. Holiday rush. Sick kids. You know the drill! When I get out of the habit, it usually takes some large scandal or hot topic to get me back on the soapbox. However, this story is an inspiring news story, ones that need to be shared more often! And I think I need to get in the habit of searching for good stories, not just getting fired up with all that is wrong in this world and what needs to be fixed. I love when an issue gets a spotlight, and generous people fill the need. Meet Ted Williams. Ted is a homeless man in Columbus Ohio, who's sign read:

" I have a GOD given gift of voice.

I'm an ex radio announcer who has fallen on hard times.

PLEASE! Any help will be greatfully appreciated. :)

Thank you and God bless/Happy Holidays."

Click on the picture to view the video that has not only made him famous, but possibly given him numerous job offers including one with the Cleveland Cavaliers - which included the bonus of paying off a mortgage on a home for him! This story is only a day old, but it is amazing to see how the internet and the speed of information can be used to completely change someone's life. I hope to keep up the "Good News Wednesday" postings, because midway through the week I need a natural upper!

Last Line of Defense

2010-11-16T14:00:00.000-08:00

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"

~ Benjamin Franklin

Today is the busiest travel day of the year. Instead of preparing entertaining carry-ons for your young kids, you need to mentally prepare them for a possible "pat down" at the airport. You will be contradicting everything you have taught them about their bodies being private and that no one should ever touch them in a way that makes them feel uncomfortable. Not only may they receive a "pat down" against their will and yours, all will be subjected to the new scanners which leave nothing to the imagination. I agree with Ben Franklin that those who "give up essential liberty", which I would include flashing my genitals on a TSA screen as pretty essential, do not deserve liberty or safety. However, the American people are now voicing their complaints loud and clear that they are not "giving up their essential liberties" the government is taking them.

A few arguments against the new airport security measures.

1. Fourth Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated..." We have a Constitutional and God given right to the privacy of our bodies, or "persons". A 3 year old, a Nun, cancer patients, a 6 year old boy made shirtless, a young man who passed the metal and enhanced scanners, do not present a reasonable threat, or solicit a reasonable search. Furthermore, in order to pose a reasonable threat, there must have been some sort of cause or "reason" to indicate a possible threat. Randomness, prosthetics, shrapnel, reconstructive implants, to name a few, do not warrant invasive, embarrassing, and unconstitutional of citizens person.

2. Profiling: Ah oh, I'm treading on politically incorrect territory, flag Big Brother! All security and law enforcement agencies use some sort of profiling. It is not always racial, it is socioeconomic, age, religion, political affiliations, etc. Profiling is using statistical evidence to narrow the suspect pool. When tracking a serial killer, they typically look for a white, male, middle of life, intelligent, unstable abusive backgrounds, typically grew up in poverty. Why isn't there more of a terrorist profile screening? It is more reasonable to ask detailed questions when purchasing a ticket, than viewing x-ray-naked hybrid images of people once entering the airport. How much quicker would their be outrage if there were standard questions such as, race, religion, recent travel, international citizenship, etc.

3. Double Standard: Where is the ACLU? Where is NOW? During the later Bush years, there was outrage at the invasive Patriot Act, which included wire taps, information sharing, access to records, foreign intelligence wire taps, "sneak and peek warrants", to name a few. The ACLU responded to the Patriot Act with their "Reclaiming Patriotism" report. (Doesn't it sound like a Glenn Beck rally?!) If I could use a few of their own words, in expressing my outrage at the new TSA standards. "[TSA] has expanded the government's authority to pry into people's private lives with little or no evidence of wrongdoing. [TSA] must recognize that overbroad, ineffective, or abusive surveillance programs are counterproductive to long-term government interests because they violate constitutional standards and undermind public confidence and support..." If you would like to use an absolutely elloquent argument against TSA, go to the ACLU's Reclaiming Patriotism report. Do I need to point out that at least the Patriot Act went before Congress to get passed, and also in 2006 to get it's provisions extended? I would assume that one of the most invasive counter-terrorist acts, the current screenings and pat downs would not have passed the Congress, if they were even given that chance.

4. LAST Line of Defense: Has the Department of Homeland Security raised the threat level? No. What was the last known terrorist attempt? The thankfully thrwarted printer bombs travelling in cargo from Yemen. Have we exhausted all other investigative measures before we, by definition, sexually harass travelling citizens who majority are law abiding citizens? No, we refuse to gather intelligence on travellers, with the fear of not being politically correct. Do we enforce pat downs and screenings onto anyone travelling into our country, where the greater threat lies? Yes, that is part of Secretary Napolitano's new directives. As I have read more, I have been surprised to find all levels of travel have new restrictions. Cargo, international to the US, domestic, carry ons, etc. However, I still believe that the vital and essential aspect of investigation, intelligence gathering or some might call profiling, is still missing. I see pornographic screenings and enhanced pat downs as the absolute last line of defense. Until absolutely every effort is made, every investigative tool is used, there is no need to violate law abiding citizens rights in the name of safety. However, the influx of safety measures begs the question:

What do they know that they are not telling us?

5. My last point is, where do we draw the line? What if the next terrorist attempt is a chemical tube hidden where the sun don't shine? Will there ever be a point where cavity searches are necessary to fly? What about strip searches? We have already seen a few instances nation wide. When you open the door to infringing on not only someone's "houses, papers, and effects" but their "persons", when will an act not be justified. If scanning children, removing their any of their clothes, touching private and typically deemed sexual parts, is not crossing the line, what is? I am not willing to give up my house, papers, effects, and especially my body for safety.

YES WE DID!!!

2010-11-03T09:34:00.000-07:00

A historic election on local and national levels. Here in my neck of the woods, Oklahoma, our state elected a woman for the first time as Governor. Mary Fallin, a former U.S. Representative, handily won the Governor's seat. Republicans swept almost every single state elected office. Nationally, the Republicans won back the House of Representatives, taking over at least 60 seats! Not since Herbert Hoover has a political party picked up 60 seats in a mid term election. This is bigger than the "Contract for America" election of 1994. Another story worth recognition, is the election of two black Republican representatives to the U.S. House. This is the first time in seven years that the Republican Party has been represented by black Representatives.

What does this mean? Looking from state elections, to state questions that were proposed, the Conservative values were upheld almost every single time. Oklahoma resolutely voted against Obama care with state question 756. California struck down legalizing marijuana. Iowa voted out three Supreme Court Justices who upheld same sex marriage. At every level, Conservatism won. This was absolutely a referendum on President Obama, but beyond him, the progressive agenda that has had control of our country since 2006.

So, now what? Repeal, repeal, REPEAL! Most of the Republicans ran on the platform of repealing the Health Care legislation, extending or re-instituting the Bush tax cuts, balancing the budget, etc. I want to hold their elephant feet to the fire, and if they don't follow through, they are out in the next round of elections. I truly believe that whether or not President Obama is re-elected depends on the Republican's next 2 years in power. If they show the same embarrassing display of ethics and greed, President Obama will have the fuel to be re-elected. However, if they deliver on what they promised of smaller government, fiscally responsible congress, being responsive to their constituents, the conservative movement will continue to take over, and President Obama will be voted out. The 2012 election will be ours to lose.

Some expressed worry, or frustration that the conservative movement does not have a national leader. Some may signify Sarah Palin, or Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh, but they did not organize the tea parties. They did not organize the massive attendance at the town hall meetings. And instead of sharing the concern of others over the lack of a national leader, I relish in it. Having your "hope and change" pinned on one person, you will always lose. One person is fallible. If they make mistakes (which they will) or push it too far (which power drives them too) or fall short (expectations too high), then the movement loses steam and eventually gets derailed. However, if like the current conservative movement, there is no face to place blame, no "Messiah" to worship and follow, no greedy politician, the chance of it being derailed is slim. When the people are the movement, the movement will succeed. Because all of our hopes and dreams for the 2010 mid-term elections were NOT pinned on Sharon Angle or Christine O'Donnell or Carly Fiorina or Meg Whitman, then when they lost, we didn't lose with them. I pray that those elected into this congressional session will listen to their constituents and move forward with the conservative agenda.

GO VOTE!!!

2010-11-02T05:45:00.000-07:00

Two years ago, I was voting against someone. I was voting against a candidate who promised a fundamental change of our country. I voted against someone who promised universal health care, student loan reform, cap and trade legislation, immigration reform which included amnesty. I voted against someone who was considered the most liberal Senator. I voted against someone who promsised to "spread the wealth around". I voted against someone who saw the US Constitution as a document of negative liberties, and didn't "go far enough" and should have enumerated what "government should give the people".

THIS YEAR, I am voting for representatives that believe in the United States Constitution, as a LIMIT to the powers and expansion of the Federal Government. I am voting for representatives who stood unapologetically against the biggest industry take overs in our nations history, automotive, banking, student loans, and health care. I am voting for representatives who believe in states rights, and that the powers they have come from the people. I am voting for representatives who didn't villify those who voiced their concerns at town hall meetings, instead acting as our voices in Congress. And I just voted, and it felt GREAT!

If you need more motivation, here are some great quotes from some of this country's greats.

We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds...we will] have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers... And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for[ another]... till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery... And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.

~ Thomas Jefferson

But I go on this great republican principle, that the people will have virtue and intelligence to select men of virtue and wisdom. Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks -- no form of government can render us secure. To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea. If there be sufficient virtue and intelligence in the community, it will be exercised in the selection of these men. So that we do not depend on their virtue, or put confidence in our rulers, but in the people who are to choose them.

~James Madison

It is vital that we follow this counsel from the Lord: "Honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil" (D&C 98:10). Note the qualities that the Lord demands in those who are to represent us. They must be good, wise, and honest.

~Ezra T. Benson

Oklahoma State Questions

2010-10-19T11:31:00.001-07:00

I love the fall for many reasons (weather, sports, school, clothing) but one of them is election time. It reminds citizens to pay attention to what is happening locally and nationally. There is more awareness of current issues and political leaders. I have had a few people ask me to post about our local state questions and local candidates. Here is my first attempt at the state questions.

State Question 744: The measure requires the state legislature to set a minimum average the state must spend on each student.

Yes on 744: makes OK more competitive with other state's per student spending, could help prevent teacher layoffs, could improve technology and textbooks, could help set higher teacher standards,

No on 744: No funding mechanism (estimated $850 million cost), pulled from other agencies, nothing in 744 mandating money spent on students/classroom.

My Take: If you couldn't tell already, I am currently against SQ 744. I fully endorse spending more money, time and effort on the education of our kids. It is embarrassing how poorly Oklahoma ranks overall (spending and scores). We have to do better. HOWEVER, this is not the way. What happened to the lottery funding a better education? How are we doing worse off, when passing the lottery was the answer to all of our educational woes! And who is helping fund the Yes on 744? Teacher's unions! Because they know that 85% of the lottery money intended for education goes to salaries from the top (administrators) trickling down to the bottom (teachers). Teachers need to be paid better, but just like I was opposed to the lottery, I don't trust our state government to actually spend the new "windfall" on the kids, their classrooms, books, and technology.

SQ 746: Photo ID required to vote.

My Take: Yes on 746. Carrying a photo ID is not difficult, most voting aged adults do so on a constant daily basis. This would hopefully prevent voter fraud, illegals voting, and keep the system more honest.

SQ 747: TERM LIMITS! Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, Treasurer, Treasurer, Commissioner of Labor, Auditor and Inspector, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Insurance Commissioner: 8 years each. Corporation Commissioner: 12 year limit.

My Take: YES!!!!! Absolutely YES!!!! I have been begging for this at a national level, so lets start small then move onward and upward. I am a huge advocate for having term limits on State and Federal Congressmen and Senators. If this is one small step in that direction, count me in!

SQ 748: Requiring Legislature to make an apportionment after each 10 year federal census. If not, a Apportionment Commission must do so.

My Take: Yes. It makes sense to re-figure apportionment every 10 years, communities change, develop new areas, dwindle in others. As of right now, I will vote Yes for required updated apportionment.

SQ 750: Changing required voter signatures on Initiatives and Referendums. It lowers the required percentage voter signature requirements.

My Take: Yes. I don't want initiatives and referendums to be easily created to blow with every changing wind in society, however I am afraid that these next few years we will need as little red tape and hoops to jump through to undo or prevent what the President and the federal government have been and are pushing through.

SQ 751: State's "official actions" will be written in English and no law suit could force a state agency to use a language other than English.

My Take: YES! This is a small step towards an "official state language". I am in favor of having a national language, just like majority of other countries throughout the world. Why should the state have to translate their "official actions", such as laws, into a variety of other languages? If you are drawn to the United States for our freedoms and opportunities, you should be willing to speak the language, and not force companies, schools and the government to accommodate you.

SQ 752: Adding two "At large" Judicial Nominating Commission members, nominated by Senate President Pro Tempore and Speaker of the house and the Governor.

My Take: Yes. Much of what I've read, suggests the point of this law is to "dilute the influence lawyers have on the selection list" of possible Supreme Court nominees. Why not?

SQ 754: Appropriations will not be determined by "predetermined constitutional formulas, how much other states spend, or how much any entity spends". Also, the measure could not be effectively amended or repealed.

My Take: No. This was written largely in opposition in SQ 744. If 744 passed, our Education funding would be partially determined by other states funding, which if passed 754 prevents. Formulas are occasionally necessary. Although I would agree that our state's budget shouldn't be determined by other state's budgets, I find anything that is set in stone dangerous. Without the ability to amend or repeal, this could be a powerful referendum with the consequences completely unknown.

SQ 755: Makes courts rely on state and federal laws, and forbids courts from considering or using international law when deciding cases.

My Take: No. While researching this issue, it was difficult to find a "No on 755" supporter. I was blasted with "Stop Sharia Law!" websites, however there was much more to the wording than just prohibiting a religious legal system. It forbids courts from considering international law, which includes international states, organizations, companies, etc. This could (and most likely will) deter foreign companies from doing business in Oklahoma, could make international marriage certificates invalid, etc. For a great legal analysis on why to vote No on SQ 755 go HERE

SQ 756: Prohibits forcing a person, employer, to participate in a "health care system", prohibits forcing a health care provider provide treatment in a health care system, allows persons/employees to pay for treatment directly, and provider to accept payment directly, allows purchase and sales in private health care systems.

My Take: Hell yes! (Currently repenting for my profanity, my apologies!) This shuts down almost every aspect of the ridiculous Health Care bill that the federal government enacted. It protects our employers from participating in and being punished by the federal governments take over, as well as individual citizens. It follows the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution that states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." Oklahoma needs to say NO!

SQ 757: Increases the "Rainy Day Fund" created by the surplus revenue from the current 10% to 15%.

My Take: Yes. If we have the ability to have a 5% larger "Rainy Day" fund, we should do it. Families should also follow the same actions, and increase what they put into their own rainy day funds.

Hopefully that helps you Okies who read this blog. The rest of you, are probably as overwhelmed as I was when I saw our long list, so good luck! I am working on our state candidates as well, but wanted to take a little more time researching that. Here is the Oklahoma State Election Board's website if you want more info.

Mormons and Gays

2010-10-12T14:18:00.000-07:00

I had started a long, carefully worded response to many cries of bigotry and hate towards our Church following President Boyd K. Packer's most recent General Conference talk. Following his message, there was thousands of hate mail, hundreds of critical headlines, petitions and protests. Even within Mormon bloggers, there was dissent. Which I found the most disturbing, was the level of disrespect and disassociation people had towards one of their leaders. I believe that this is because there is a misunderstanding in our Church's stance on homosexual behavior and separately how we should treat our fellow man including those in the gay community. Before I could finish my thoughts, the Church released their version, which of course is a much more elloquent and appropriate. Instead of posting my mediocre attempt, I will second what is said in this press release, and call it good!

HERE is the Church's Press Release.

My Rally's bigger than your Rally

2010-10-03T16:01:00.000-07:00

The 2010 Word of the Year is RALLY!

Everyone from Glenn Beck to Reverend Al Sharpton to major labor unions are participating in the hot new trend of organizing rallies. Tea Parties have covered the country, at the local level, and national rallies on Tax Day, and the day of signing the health care legislation. Typically the political rallies are organized in opposition to something. Tea Parties are in response to the out of control spending that started in the Bush era, "Taxed Enough Already". Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally was more like a revival than a rally, discussing heavily the divine providence of our country. Al Sharpton rallied in Martin Luther King Jr's memory. The One Nation rally this past weekend was heavily funded by progressive groups, labor organizations, and other liberal groups such as Planned Parenthood.

There was A LOT of debate over the attendance number of Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally ranging from 87,000 (CBS News) to 500,000 (Beck). In trying to find out more about yesterday's "One Nation" rally, it was very difficult in obtaining a crowd picture. There were several who had pictures from the Lincoln steps out into the crowd, where the crowd was a blurry background. Surprisingly, on MANY websites, I saw an impressive image displaying a large crowd, with the large title "One Nation Rally in Washington" (or the like). Once clicking on the article, in small captions underneath the picture it read "August 28, Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor rally", yet the entire articles covering the "One Nation" rally. In many articles, they quoted the crowd as being "tens of thousands".

If this is "tens of thousands"

Then what is THIS????
I think it is an exciting time in the country, more political involvement on both sides. (Fabricated or "grass roots" involvement). More involvement means more demand for accurate information on both sides. All I can say, is I hope these pictures are indicative of what will be coming on Election Day in November! The best way to "rally" is in the voting booth, and it is your civic duty and responsibility.

Amen

2010-09-10T10:10:00.000-07:00

I love political cartoons. For this exact reason. A picture is worth a thousand words. This one is worth more!

How dare he! (Gasp!)

2010-08-27T15:56:00.000-07:00

If there is a time to be incensed by the actions of the radio show commentator, Glenn Beck, this is the weekend! The political propagandist is flaring his extremist muscles, correction flab, in creating, promoting and eventually destroying our country with his "Restoring Honor" rally. If the name isn't inflammatory enough, the date of the event, August 28, 2010 will send you overboard. August 28, 2010? The date of the "I Had a Dream" speech, by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This speech occurred in the same location, same date, 47 years earlier. How dare Glenn Beck taint this date with his ketchup and cheese fries covered fingers! Doesn't he know he's a white conservative and can't possibly appreciate Dr. King, the civil rights movement, or patriotic actions by brave historical leaders?

What is this rally, you may ask? Tea Party? No. Political driven freak show? No. According to the website, "come celebrate America by honoring our heroes, our heritage and our future." Celebrate America? How can you do that without being a right wing extremist nut? Not possible. Fund raising for our troops? This must be a cover for the underground fundraising for Palin 2012. And what kind of title is "Restoring Honor". Honor is an antiquated tradition of our foundin father's who are outdated, old fashioned, and racist. This is apparently another attempt at Beck to brainwash his followers, if anyone even attends, into his pro-America, capitalist, freedom loving mentality. And I for one, must take a stance against it. How dare he.

Quick to Point Fingers

2010-07-21T05:18:00.000-07:00

Both sides of the political spectrum are pots calling the kettles black in this current "you're a racist" tug-o-war. On the right, while aggressively condemning NAACP's resolution repudiating racial elements in the Tea Party; one of the Tea Parties prominent leaders Mark Williams sent an embarrassing and racially charged so-called-satire post from the perspective of a "colored man". Mark Williams and his entire organization, Tea Party Express, was expelled from the National Tea Party Federation. On the left, while pointing the finger at the Tea Party, they refuse to include in their resolution, the new Black Panther Party's leaders who are asking for the "killing of cracker babies". [Now enters Shirley Sherrod].

Shirley Sherrod. Shirley Sherrod typifies this artificially created racial battle between the right and left. A right-biased website powered by Andrew Breitbart, BigGovernment, posted an incomplete video of a federally appointed USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, Shirley Sherrod, speaking at a NAACP dinner in March. In her speech, she recounts a story which takes place 26 years ago, while she was working for a nonprofit rural aid group, where she did not help a white farmer to her complete ability because he was white. End of sound-byte.

The NAACP quickly put out a statement condemning her remarks, without contacting her for verification or explanation says Sherrod. Almost as quickly as the incomplete video hit the air waves, the USDA Deputy Undersecretary Cheryl Cook called Sherrod while she was driving, and informed her "the White House wanted her to resign because her comments were generating a cable news controversy" naming Glenn Beck specifically. She resisted. In the final of the three phone conversations, "they asked me to pull over to the side of the road and submit my resignation on my Blackberry, and that's what I did." She told CNN that "it hurts [her] that [the administration] didn't even try to attempt to see what is happening here, they didn't care."

Who is coming to Shirley Sherrod's defense? The NAACP who has done a quick 180, the specifically named by the administration Glenn Beck, and even the white farmer she was speaking of! "We probably wouldn't have (our farm) today if it hadn't been for her leading us in the right direction," said Eloise Spooner, the wife of farmer Roger Spooner of Iron City, Ga. "I wish she could get her job back because she was good to us, I tell you." Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsak defended his call for her resignation, even as more of the story poured out vindicating Shirley Sherrod's reputation, saying "the controversy surrounding her comments would create a situation where her decisions, rightly or wrongly, would be called into question making it difficult for her bring jobs to Georgia." The term “rightly or wrongly” suggests that the truth does not matter -- only perception, the politics of the situation.

The Shirley Sherrod drama illustrates that every organization, NAACP, Black Panthers, Tea Party, even government agencies, are full of humans. Humans who make mistakes, have prejudices to overcome or succomb to, learning lessons we are all faced with. The sad irony in the case of Shirley Sherrod, is the entirety of the video shows that she overcame her prejudices, and she eventually came to work closely with the white farmer and that she was trying to impart a lesson about how important it is to get beyond the issue of race.
“I went on to work with many more white farmers,” she said. “The story helped me realize that race is not the issue.”

Word of the Day: Racism

2010-07-19T12:38:00.001-07:00

Word of the day: Vague

2010-06-16T13:55:00.000-07:00

1. a. Not clearly expressed: stated in indefinite terms

b. Not having a precise meaning

2. a. Not clearly defined, grasped or understood

b. Not clearly felt, or sensed, somewhat subconscious

If I had one word to describe President Obama, it would be vague. Especially after looking up the specific definition of vague, my opinion was solidified. He has been vague regarding the economy and his exact plan of action. He has been vague regarding the health care reform, leaving the details to the legislators. I believed it was intentional, because we wouldn't like the details. He has been vague about his "plan for withdrawl from Iraq" that he campaigned heavily on. And finally, we saw last night, that he was very vague on our plan of action regarding the oil spill in the Gulf Coast. And after the past 18 months, the oil slicked tide seems to be shifting. His public approval ratings have dramatically dropped over the past year, but now we catch a glimpse of his adoring news media faultering in their faith. And I believe it is because he is too vague. It is pitiful that it took a tragedy of this magnitude to show the inability in his vagueness.

HERE is the fabulous link.

And yes, it is MSNBC! You are NOT watching FoxNews.

Great Debate

2010-06-02T07:03:00.000-07:00

Last night I clicked over to John Stewart's Daily Show, and saw him hashing it out with Arthur Brooks, the author of The Battle. They had a GREAT measured, well-informed debate, where I found myself with agreeing with both of them at different points through the conversation. It was very interesting, and thought I would put it out there. HERE is the link. Check it out, and let me know what you think!

I miss Mayor Giuliani!

2010-05-04T06:34:00.000-07:00

May 1, an SUV filled with fertilizer was left in New York City's Time Square, as an attempt at a terrorist attack. An impressive quick response, included evacuating and closing down Times Square, while the bomb was diffused and the investigation ensued. Most were careful not to jump to conclusions, no unnecessary and unfounded claims of middle east, Taliban or Al Qaeda ties were made. Unless you listened to Mayor Bloombergs assessment on CBS's Evening News' interview with Katie Couric.

In the interview, he preceded his conclusion with this evidence.

"There is some speculation that the materials in the Nissan Pathfinder were similar to ones that were found to some failed attacks in the U.K." He also states, "You'd need a timer, you'd need a battery as an energy source you'd need some explosive and you'd need something to enhance it. That's going to be true no matter where or when the...another attack took place. So, anything would have enough commonalities for the conspiracy theorists to blow it up if you don't mind the pun and make something out of it." He continues, in saying, "There is no evidence that it's tied in to anything else. It looks like an amateurish job, done by at least one person".

After his statements diminishing "conspiracy theorists" and pointing out commonalities with failed attacks in the U.K., he gives his two cents, or he states his "twenty five cents":

"If I had to guess, twenty five cents, this would be exactly that," Bloomberg said. "Homegrown, maybe a mentally deranged person or someone with a political agenda that doesn't like the health care bill or something. It could be anything."

If I were in Katie Couric's highly paid and expensive journalist shoes, instead of interjecting the same conclusion of "homegrown", I would have given a follow up question, such as this "Mayor Bloomberg. You cited evidence of some commonalities with failed U.K. bombings, and yet came to the conclusion this is possibly motivated by someone who is against the health care bill or homegrown. Is there any evidence to support these claims?" Where were you on that one Katie? I find this completely astronomical! Heaven forbid anyone comes to the conclusion of this as a possible foreign terrorist attack, even though the evidence is stacked in that direction. But how easy and unquestioned by a journalist to point the finger at the American people who disagree with the health care bill? I was shocked! How many hundreds of thousands of American's have participated in town halls, tea parties, rallies across the country and have broken any laws, committed any violence, planned any terrorist attacks?!? NONE, Mr. Bloomberg! Yet, this is the group you first suspect with your twenty five cents? You should be ashamed Mayor Bloomberg. I ache for patriotic leadership like Mayor Giuliani.

Where were you?

2010-04-19T07:24:00.000-07:00

My husband was in a high school classroom, about 3o miles from the Murrah Federal Building. At 9:02am, the class heard a loud rumble, like thunder. He asked if he could go outside to see if there was a storm, as their classroom didn't have windows outside for tornado safety. To his surprise, he walked outside to a beautiful clear sky, warm spring morning.

Several minutes later, someone came over the speaker system announcing what had taken place. Coincidentally or divine intervention, the school had scheduled a blood drive for that day. They decided to close school to allow the community to come donate blood, which they did by the hundreds.

168 deaths. 19 children. 5 pedestrians who happend to be outside the building at the time. Over 600 others injured.

The Oklahoma City Bombing Memorial is a sacred place. It is a place to remember what pure terrorism is, and the strength the United States of America has. The strength of our local communities, the willingness to give, even our lives.

Camp OFA

2010-04-17T08:27:00.000-07:00

Sarah --

Wall Street reform. Electing folks who will support the President and fight for change. Working for a clean-energy economy. Protecting the progress we've already made, while still fighting for more.

These are just some of the battles ahead.Will you be there with us?

As we continue fighting for the President's agenda and gear up for the elections in the fall, we need to make sure we're all ready to organize as effectively as possible.

So we're holding Camp OFA training sessions across the country, to make sure that OFA supporters like you have the skills you'll need to make it happen.You'll hear from local community organizers, volunteers, and staff on the best ways to organize local events and build neighborhood teams, how to make the case for the President's agenda for change, and what OFA is planning to do in the months ahead.

No prior experience with OFA is necessary, but you'll leave fired up and ready to power legislative and electoral victories in the coming months.We won a big victory on health insurance reform -- and it was because of you. Now let's keep it going, and win the fights ahead.

RSVP today to join us near you: http://my.barackobama.com/CampOFA2010

Thanks,

Nicole

Nicole Derse

National Training Director

Organizing for America

WHAT?!?! Seriously, there is a "training camp" to learn how to actually defend President Obama's agenda? I still find it baffling that there is a separate organization from the DNC for the President to do his "community organizing", let alone a "training camp" to convince the few supporters he has left why he is still Captain Awesome?! President Obama still refers back to the previous administration (most recently the mining tragedies), so lets imagine if the Bush administration had a georgewbush.com that was constantly fund-raising, organizing community teams and "training" them on his agenda. I can see the head-lines now!

Bush is Brain-Washing at the Local Level

As a non-emotional observer, I find President Obama's "community organizing" brilliant. And the advances he's made to utitilize technology will be essential for any future national leader, especially President. However, as I have said before, to have a separate organization, separate from the White House and from his party the DNC, is unsettling. He can publish propaganda without any check or balance, and is constantly fund-raising, FOR WHAT?! He's not running for two years. I wish more would be looked into with this, because it isn't sitting right with me.

Why I didn't attend a Tea Party

2010-04-16T11:00:00.000-07:00

Last year I attended the Tax Day Tea Party at the Oklahoma state capitol, and you can see pictures here. I had every intention of going this year, but I changed my mind. There were several reasons, and for cathartic reasons, I will share them with you.

I did not want to drag my 3 kids without a double stroller (because I backed up over it, and broke it!) downtown by myself. I had offers of babysitting help, and possible people to go with. But as I thought about the concept "when there's a will, there's a way!", I decided I didn't have that same strong desire to attend.

Last year, I wanted to join others who shared the same beliefs of limited government, lower taxes for EVERYONE (including business and the evil wealthy who employ my husband), and to hopefully show power in numbers to stop the cap and tax, health care, stimulus plans the federal government was pushing through. Naively I believed that if they saw how many Americans were opposed to this legislation, they would vote with the will of the people as they are elected to do. Instead, they bought votes, strong armed representatives, used technicalities to get the health care passed. They believe they know better than the majority of Americans, and will continue to supersede any efforts of dissent. What they are doing is unconstitutional, unprecedented, and unethical. And they don't care! I know now that they only way to send an effective message is at the ballot box.

Interestingly, majority of the media coverage prior to the rallies centered around the "anger" and "racial undertones" and "violent rhetoric". To their amazement, there were no reported incidents, and in the words of the liberal leaning David Gergen who attended the Boston Common Tea Party rally: "What’s striking to me is that it’s a very friendly day out here with a lot of people who support Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. I don’t find a lot of anger out here or bitterness which I find interesting. These are good citizens, they pay their taxes, and they send their kids to war. So they disagree with the mainstream in a state like Massachusetts but they’re still citizens in good standing so I have a lot of respect." Thank you David Gergen for reporting the FACTS! Yes, there are the crazies who attend, but the vast majority are civil, friendly, non-racist, concerned citizens who want their voices heard. Speaking of race, an interview by Kelly O'Donnell for NBC with a black tea party attender can be seen here. The asks him, "Have you ever felt uncomfortable?" He politely responds, "No... these are my people, Americans." He should have responded, "I was not uncomfortable until a biased news reporter with a blatant agenda of stoking the non-existent racial fire asked an ignorant and ridiculous question!"

There are two reasons someone on the left plays the race card: 1. To put the opposition on the defense. No one wants to be labeled a racist, homophobes, bigot. They will automatically switch to defense, to try to dispel, the argument that they disagree with President Obama based on race or are apart of the tea parties because they "hate all black people". Which brings me to my second point, 2. Change the topic. If you can't play a good defense, which I believe defending the health care reform is extremely difficult because their arguments are flawed and weak and are Utopian ideological instead of factual, then make the opposing "team" play defense. If you change the topic of health care reform to race relations, it is very unlikely you will return to this health care reform monstrosity and by default win the argument or call a draw.

I didn't need an affirmation that "I am not alone" in my beliefs. I didn't need to show my representatives my opinions, because the great Senators and Congressmen of Oklahoma listen to their constituents, and those who strapped this new entitlement on mine and my children's backs don't care to listen. I am grateful that there is a forum or an outlet for those who disagree to voice their opinion. That is one of the many reasons I am grateful I am an American.

Gun Care

2010-03-26T15:08:00.000-07:00

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." ~ Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution

President Obama, who has typically voted for stricter gun control, is now pushing legislation to guarantee every American the equal access to a firearm. "Having greater access to affordable firearms should not be a right of the rich, or those who hunt, or those who thump their Bibles. It is an inalienable right and dream of every mom and dad, to be able to provide for their children." As a former constitutional professor, he understands that it only makes sense that if a right that is not guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution, for example health care, which is now available to almost every American, so should the rights that are expressly granted in the Constitution. "If we can grant assumed rights, such as health care, than how can we let the American people not have access to the rights expressed in the Constitution? We can't! No we can't!"

For the first time since President Obama has landed on the national stage, he has the full support of gun rights organizations as the NRA, Gun Owners of America, and People's Right Organization. The current NRA President, Ron Schmeits, happily endorses this legislation. A bewildered gun control left is speechless, and is taking some time to prepare a response.

Dr. Obama

2010-03-25T11:27:00.000-07:00

While the wacko birthers were scavaging every dark corner in President Barack Obama's skeleton closet for the missing birth certificate, they missed one major document! His MD Certificate! He graduated from the Barack School of Medicine, also known as the B.S.M.D. Thank goodness for his background in medicine, because he has an insiders understanding of how the business works. How doctors lose money with every Medicare patient they take on. How liability insurance is one of their major expenses. How they are afraid of not administering every test possible to avoid law suit. How since the creation of Medicaid and Medicaid, medical costs per individual has almost tripled every decade, when years before it was on a slower increase. How doctors go to a decade of schooling to learn that they can make money by unecessarily amputating a diabetics foot, or a child's tonsils.

Thank goodness he knows emergency first aid, because at almost every single rally or speech he gives, someone faints. I will conceed that he is one of the most handsome Presidents, but come on people! But Dr. Obama comes to the rescue, prescribes "more room" and "take in some deep breaths" and "maybe give them some water, STAT!" What would we do with his "common sense solutions" to not only our health while attending a rally, but for the entire medical industry! And in his most recent campaign speech today in Iowa, Dr. Obama simply said that this legislation "paves the way to universal health care". All of the talk that his isn't a "government takeover" is accurate. But it is, as Dr. Obama has said along with every other democratic leader, that this paves the way or opens the door to universal health care, which is a government take over. Our country was based on free market principles, with necessary regulations from the government. This piece of legislation moves us further away from those principles than any other since the Great Society.

Good Protest versus Bad Protest

2010-03-23T06:01:00.000-07:00

Tea Party has become synonymous with bigot, racist, hate, violent, and the likes. This past rally in Washington DC, on the eve of health care reform, didn't help our cause. There were reports of racial slurs directed at Civil Rights activist and now congressman John Lewis, homophobic insult at the outed Barney Frank, and some outrageous protester spit in Congressman Emanuel Cleaver's face. This is despicable and inexcusable behavior. Many of the attendees near the incidences, including William Owens, a black Tea Party activist from Nevada, said that in the case of Rep. Lewis, he didn't hear any racial slurs or shouts. And those surrounding the Barney Frank incident, recalled the representative walking directly over to the "protester" who had only approached minutes before Franks arrival, directed an expletive at him, and he responded with his derogatory comeback. Regardless of the claims, I will always be against using profanities or slurs and violence in place of an honest and factually sound argument. Now, the latest "Breaking News" is that Reps. Stupak and Slaughter have reportedly received death threats.

We are currently in such a volatile political environment, and ignorant outraged extremists are giving the constitutionally sound and majority driven cause a dangerously bad rap. And I believe that those in power are exploiting these typically sensitive topics to further their cause. To make those who honestly oppose this administrations efforts to expand the scope and depth of the federal government afraid of voicing their dissent, in fear of being labeled racist, violent or bigots. My fear is that isolated incidents of radical measures, like those being covered, will be accepted as typical and discredit any valid arguments opposition has to offer. We do not need to resort to violence because are educated, law-abiding, freedom relishing citizens. We uphold our laws, especially the highest law of the land, the Constitution. I pray that this is the last we hear of such violence and that the coverage received doesn't encourage those seeking publicity to use similar extreme measures. We need to fight this in the courts, on the floors of the Capitol and at our local level.

Oh, no they didn't!

2010-03-21T20:32:00.000-07:00

Yes, they did. The House passed the Senate's version of health care reform. There is so much to cover, and so much to digest. They didn't listen, and I pray that the American people who are outraged now, don't forget by the time November rolls around. Thomas Jefferson, sums up my conservative view with our government:

A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.

I must be special!

2010-03-17T21:35:00.000-07:00

I just received an e-mail from President Barack Obama! He referred to me as his "friend"! He also included a link to his campaign website, which has been fundamentally transformed to aid in the "final march for reform", health care reform that is. I can either call, write, attend or share. I intend on using all of the options given to get my voice heard.

What I found extremely patronizing is that when you select the "write" option, after you fill in information to locate your district, it brings up an automated e-mail to send to your representative. It reads:

I'm writing to let you know that I support health insurance reform, and I hope you will reconsider your opposition.
I don't support favoring big insurance companies over the American people, and I'm not alone -- voters in our state have pledged thousands of volunteer hours to fight for candidates who support reform.
Your constituents are counting on you to place our well-being over partisan game-playing. Please support reform.
Thank you.

Just because majority of the representatives who are voting in favor of either the House or Senate bills don't read their legislation, doesn't mean that their constituents don't know how to write an e-mail articulating their opinions! How simple minded do they believe the American public is? The website suggested "personalizing the sample letter". Here was my amended letter to Rep. Mary Fallin of the U.S. House of Representatives:

I'm [RE]-writing [THIS MASS E-MAIL FROM THE PRESIDENT'S WEBSITE] to let you know that I support [YOU IN THE FIGHT AGAINST THE PRESIDENT'S] health insurance reform, and I hope you will [STAND TRUE TO YOUR PRINCIPLES AND NEVER] reconsider your opposition.
I don't support favoring big [GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS OVER] insurance companies [ESPECIALLY WHEN IT WILL] over [TAX] the American people, and I'm not alone -- voters in our state have pledged thousands of volunteer hours to fight for candidates who [REFUSE TO] support [THIS KIND OF] reform.
Your constituents are counting on you to place our well-being over partisan game-playing. [DO NOT PLAY THE DIRTY POLITICS OF THIS NEW ADMINISTRATION]. Please support [GOVERNMENT] reform. I KNOW I WILL IN NOVEMBER AND ALSO 2012.
Thank you [AND GOD BLESS AMERICA AND FREEDOMS GRANTED UNDER THE CONSTITUTION].

I highly suggest you also use the President's website to let your voice be heard about the business being conducted in Washington, D.C. Does anyone else find this type of efficient organization for campaigning post-campaign a little big-brother-esque? For this much calculated effort to be in place and still have the American people (who voted him into office) be against the health care reform bill speaks volumes of the 180 degree turn around that has occured. No matter how much calculated effort, or stump speeches you make, or easy to use spoon fed websites you create, WE WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS. Listen to the American people!

Let me be clear, Mr. President

2010-02-25T09:01:00.000-08:00

Let me be clear, Mr. President. You have been clear enough. No more explanations or simplifying complex issues for us neanderthals will change our positions on hot-button issues.

Let me be clear, Mr. President. You were the agent of change, transparency, and a new era of politics. I see the same closed door, pork barrelling, buying votes politics of the past.

Let me be clear, Mr. President, a televised health care summit will not solve the issues with the medical industry. It is a six hour photo op for the President, and representatives on both sides of the aisle.

Let me be clear, Mr. President, if you wanted to showcase your new era of politics and transparency, you should have started with the closed door transactions between the democrats while crafting the House and Senate bills. The health care summit with microphones, numerous camera positions, and possibly hair and make-up, is a shallow and not genuine attempt to placate your consituents.

Let me be clear, Mr. President. I am not apart of the "party of no", simply the "party of not that". Not that health care bill. Not that deficit of $1.17 trillion dollars.

Let me be clear, Mr. President, I am not one of the "I hate Obama" supporters. I am not automatically shuting down everything you or your administration does. I support your troop increase. I am impressed with the capture of several high ranking Taliban operatives. Of the "Stimulus bill", I fully supported the lengthening unemployment and COBRA coverage. There are great things in certain bills, including the health care bill. Don't ruin them by allowing yourself or Congress to fall victim to greed.

Let me be clear, Mr. President. If this health care bill is the manna from heaven for all those uninsured, or are excluded because of pre-existing conditions, or have filled bankruptcy because of overwhelming medical debt; why not push it through? You have the numbers within your own party to push through any legislation you want. You don't want to only have democrat votes on these bills, because when this bankrupts our system, you don't want to be the ones blamed. When the $1 trillion price tag triples, which costs usually triple from preliminary estimates, and the angry American public comes knocking, you want others to share the blame.

Let me be clear, Mr. President. You need to listen to the American public. The majority of us do not support government run health care. And I might need to remind you, you were elected with a small majority of 53%. And right now, according to Gallup, you only have a 48% approval rating, when a year ago you had 68%. This is not a coincidence.

Automatic Labeling

2010-02-19T05:58:00.000-08:00

It is amazing how it has not been 24 hours, the building is likely still smoking, and the act of terrorism by Joseph Andrew Stack is already being politicized. Yes, I believe his suicide flight passes the terrorist litmus test. Radical views? Check. Desire to make a political statement? Check. Views violence is the only answer? Check. Terrorist. This is one label that needs to be quickly made. The other labels I am referring to are the quick efforts of both sides to begin the blame game. Is he a right-wing, anti-tax, anti-government extremist tea bagger? Or is he a left-wing, anti-corporation, anti-Bush, anti-capitalism radical? The answer is yes.

If the "suicide note" proves authentic, this gives us insight into the duplicitous mind of Stack. He spouts off rants that resemble the extreme of both extreme sides of the political spectrum.

On the right hand, he quotes the founding fathers "taxation without representation". On the left, he refers to big business as "thugs and plunderers" who hope "dead people don’t get in the way of their corporate profits rolling in". On the right, he slams the big bail outs of GM. Then on the left, he bemoans " the joke we call the American medical system, including the drug and insurance companies, are murdering tens of thousands of people a year". On the right, he spews hatred for the murderous rich or "incompetent cronies". On the left, he writes about his rage regarding "the recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies". He is anti-government, anti-taxes. Yet anti-big corporation, anti-Bush and his cronies, etc. He opened with a more right-wing paragraph, yet his final two anti-capitalist sentences lean across the aisle saying "The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed."

He sounds like he is just anti-life and wanted to blame everyone and anyone for his problems. From big corporations to Big Brother. So to label him as a right-wing extremist, as many news organizations already are, is inaccurate. He is not right wing or left wing, he is the crazy wing of the psych ward. And unfortunately, he saw this desparate act of violence as the only solution.

Brilliant Advertising

2010-02-09T12:22:00.000-08:00

Out of all of the Superbowl commercials, this was my favorite. I thought it was pure genius. It balanced promoting green technology, while mocking green fanatics enough to make those on the right who are tired of the "global warming movement" enjoy the commercial. Two big green thumbs up! Nice work Audi.

Superbowl Appropriate?

2010-02-02T18:59:00.000-08:00

How many Super Bowl commercials have we watched where we need to cover our kids eyes? I still remember one from last year featuring Danika Patrick for GoDaddy involving a shower scene. So which one of the filthy, provocative, scantily-clad women filled, commercials is making headlines this year?One featuring Heisman trophy winner, Tim Tebow, for Focus on the Family. Although the oganizations protesting this commercial have not seen what is actually in it, they have begun labeling it "anti-abortion" instead of pro-life or pro-family. Where were these womens organizations every year when companies are practically selling women's naked bodies to endorse their products? I don't hear their outrage! From all the reports I have seen and heard about this commercial, he discusses a personal experience he and his family has had with abortion. While his mom was pregnant with him, the doctor suggested she get an abortion because they believed he was a fetal mass of tissue, and she refused. Now he is an outstanding, record breaking, Heisman trophy winner, and seemingly stand-up guy. I've heard people refer to him and his message as 'hateful'. Why is it hateful for him to share what he believes, not tearing someone down in the same breath, but patriotic for others who believe in a more mainstream view to stand up for theirs? The double standard is staggering.

I've heard several celebrities respond when asked about this hot topic, and almost all have responded in the same manner. The most recent was Ashton Kutcher on The View this morning. He said something to the affect of, "I wish he would just play football instead of comment on political topics". Then how does that apply to you Ashton when you were traveling endorsing President Obama during the 2008 campaign? I wish you would just stick to acting, or punking people instead of telling me who to vote for. But just as you have the right, Tim Tebow definitely has the right. And I appreciate him for standing up for what he believes in, although it is not the most popular position.

Contact CBS and let them know what you think HERE.

State of the Union

2010-01-28T06:40:00.000-08:00

Last night television was monopolized by the yearly State of the Union Address. What was to be expected was delivered. A crafted speech, excellently and powerfully delivered to standing ovations of about 58% of the audience. Lofty notions and vague promises, broken campaign pledges and scathing rebukes. Private (yet caught on camera) dissent from the peanut gallery (S.C. Justice Alito), and cheers from the left of the aisle. My opinion is the State of the Union is just another campaign stump. Maybe 10% of what was promised will be actualized. Here are some of my thoughts:

Bank Fees: He has proposed a fee on banks who make over $50 billion, to recoup the TARP bail out money. However, the fee applies to all banks, whether or not they have paid back the loans with interest, and even those who didn't get any bail out. This is ridiculous. How is this going to benefit the tax payer? Possibly pay off some of the massive taxes we will be facing with the federal governments excessive spending? I doubt it! They will do as governments in the past and funnel the money made there into other spending programs.

Stimulus: He did credit where credit was due, the COBRA extension and assistance. I believe that out of the entire stimulus package this was the best well spent money. I personally know individuals who were laid off (some expecting a baby) and didn't go in the financial crapper because of this benefit.

Jobs: Unemployment is still around 10%, and he claimed to have saved/created 2 million jobs through the stimulus plan. Yet, in adding up all of the monthly job losses from February 2009 to December 2009, it climbs very close to 2 million. And is he using his trusty Recovery.org numbers, which had non-existent congressional districts and fabricated numbers according to many representatives. What is the point of 'transparency' if it is fabricated?

Clean Jobs: Apparently, Washington has been telling the US to wait on creating clean jobs. It hasn't been heard in Oklahoma, who has been rated one of the "recession proof states" because it's economy is thriving on clean energy production. Without federal government assistance! Mr. President, look at the products and companies who are already making advances without the governments help! Instead of the claim for "clean coal"!

Health Care Reform: "I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people." No Mr. President, you don't need to use smaller words or more diagrams or simplified equations (i.e. no reform = R.I.P) to get the American people on board. We don't want it. "But if anyone from either party has a better approach...let me know." You mean when the Republican's wanted to be apart of the House and Senate negotiations, they should have just knocked on your door and you would have granted them access to the private, closed-door negotiations that were supposed to be broadcast on C-SPAN? We are not that stupid.

Spending Freeze: "Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years." Give us a year to spend ourselves drunk, then we'll cut back. And honestly Mr. President, the spending freeze would have come after the 2010 mid-term elections with or without your help, because more fiscal conservatives will be voted into office, replacing spending junkies like Sen. Reid. And the concept of "spending freeze" sounds vaguely familiar, possibly from Sen. McCain's campaign promises that you unapologetically shot down? Anyway, "the anticipated savings from this proposal would amount to less than 1 percent of the deficit".

Lobbyists: "We've excluded lobbyists from policy making jobs, or seats on federal boards and commissions." Not true. The Obama administration has made seven "waivers", such as U.S. Trade Representative Kirk, who was a lobbyist for Merrill Lynch.

Supreme Court: "With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests..." With the disclaimer regarding separation of powers, I will still slam the Supreme Court for their recent decision. If it was appropriate for him to make that comment, then it was absolutely appropriate for S.C. Justice Alito to shake his head, saying "that's not true".

Earmarks/Bi-Partisan Support: If you really want to send a message, promise to veto any bill that has excessive earmarks (i.e. health care bill) and veto any bill that has support drawn down party lines. The reason Republican's did not give any support for cap-and-tax and the health care bills is because they were kept out of any of the negotiations. If you claim to want our support, include our input!

Blame Game: Throughout the speech, he credits people's doubts to those on Wall Street, bank's CEOs, lobbyists, selfish TV pundits, and even continues to blame the 'previous administration'. Mr. President, the American people voted you in on change. They voted for transparency. They voted for a new type of politics. Yet, business was not just conducted as usual, it was done behind locked doors, promising hand-picked states (crucial votes) millions-billions of aid, spending trillions of dollars while in a deep recession, while slandering those who disagree. The American people are smarter than you give us credit for, and although appreciate your grand rhetoric, are waiting for your actions to match your speeches.

Scott Brown Won!

2010-01-19T19:52:00.000-08:00

Although I am greatful the Senate does not have the 60 seat filibuster proof majority, was the only good Republican candidate in Massachusetts have to have posed for a Cosmo in a 1982 nudey centerfold for a "sexiest man" contest? Do you think I'm kidding!?!? I couldn't make this stuff up! Well, hooray for a slightly tipped balance of power.

Honkie Talk

2010-01-11T08:13:00.000-08:00

By now, most of you have heard the headlines that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid referred to the then Presidential candidate Barack Obama as the "light skinned" African-American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one." These quotes come from a newly released book, "Game Change", which gives behind the scenes accounts of the 2008 Presidetial campaign. In typical political fashion the democrats rush to his side, defending him as a non-racist. DNC chairman, Tim Kaine explains away the racial undertones saying, "It definitely was in the context of recognizing in Senator Obama a great candidate and future president." So then, it is excusable. Lesson to learn: if you are being complimentary of someone of a different race, it is ok to use racial slurs.

The republican's quickly point the finger, some calling for his resignation. The RNC chairman, Michael Steele remarks, "If [Senate Republican Leader] Mitch McConnell had said those very words, then this chairman and this president would be calling for his head and they would be labeling every Republican in the country a racist for saying exactly what this chairman's just said. There is this standard where the Democrats feel that they can say these things and they can apologize when it comes from the mouths of their own. But if it comes from anyone else, it's racism." Reportedly, Senator Reid has already phoned President Obama to apologize. And as expected, President Obama accepted the apology.

My Take: There is a HUGE double standard. When a liberal misspeaks, which I do believe Harry Reid did misspeak, his liberal colleagues ask for understanding. He wasn't revealing his actual racist beliefs, he just made a 'misstatement'. Yet, when a conservative makes any comparable comment, even if it doesn't use the same racial slurs (i.e. "You lie!", or Sen. Trent Lott's comments honoring Strom Thurmond) the obvious intent is to degrade the minority, showing their true colors as card carrying racists.

For example, Senator Feinstein defended Reid saying, "Clearly, the leader misspoke. He has also apologized." And standing by her standard regarding the Sen. Lott scandal, she says "I saw no Democrats jumping out there and condemning Senator Lott." Yet, she was one of those pointing the same finger in 2002 when she said of Lott, "This statement casts a dark shadow over Sen. Lott's ability to be a credible party leader". Senator Landrieu also said at the time, "I can tell you if a Democratic leader said such a thing, they would not be allowed to keep their position". One observation I have made, which I believe only magnifies the double standard is how many questioned the conservative Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney's racial beliefs just for belonging to a Church who did not grant black members the same priesthood authority 30 years prior, although he had not made any derrogatory statements regarding anyone of another race. Yet, Harry Reid, a liberal member of the same church, is not a racist while uttering racial slurs.

My conclusion is to give them the benefit of the doubt, both sides. I do find Harry Reids more derrogatory than some of the other's in recent history, however, I do not believe he is racist. Just like I don't believe Senator Lott, Senator Wilson, Vice President Joe Biden, are not racists. That is my standard. But I have not set the standard that both sides hold on the other party, they do not give the benefit of the doubt, unless it is their guy. But this is my honkie talk, which I don't think it is much different it is from 'negro dialect'.

Top 10

2010-01-08T07:04:00.001-08:00

Top 10 Indicators You Are Enrolled in the Proposed Government's Health Care Plan

10. Your anual breast exam is done at Hooters.
9. Directions to your doctor's office include, "Take a left when you enter the trailer park".
8. The tongue depressors taste faintly of a Fudgesicle.
7. The only proctologist in the plan is Gus from Roto-Rooter.
6. The only item listed under Preventative Care Coverage is "an apple a day..."
5. Your primary care physician is wearing the pants you donated to Goodwill last month.
4. "The patient is responsible for 200% of out-of-network charges" is not a typographical error.
3. The only expense covered 100% is embalming.
2. Your Prozac comes in a variety of colors, with little "M's" on them.
1. You ask for Viagra and they give you a popsicle stick and duct tape.

Merry Christmas to all....

2009-12-23T13:34:00.000-08:00

Gather-round children, Grandpa Burris is going to read a modern rendition of a Christmas classic. Afterwards, we will go carolling, and sing updated versions of several traditional Christmas carols.

Away in a Manger

Away in the Senate,
No room for dissent,
With the little Senate leader
Rules of decorum he bent.

The cash for bill cloture
The back-door deals are made,
Senators selling their souls,
While bankrupting Medicaid.

Oh, Come, All ye Senators

Oh, Come, All Ye Senators
Sell your souls for health care.
Oh, come ye, oh come ye to Harry Reid's door.
Come and betray us,
Those who put you in office.
Oh, come get cash for cloture,
Oh, come get cash for cloture,
Oh, come get cash for cloture,
All for Health Care 'reform'.

Congratulations Harry Reid. You did it. You bought yourself health care reform. I guess the "new era of politics" is that the ends do justify the means, even though the "ends" is further in debt, cutting Medicare and Medicaid coverage, more taxes on individuals and businesses during a major recession, and establishing more inefficient government bureaucracies. Merry Christmas to all, and to all GOOD LUCK!

Dr. Dean: New Republican Leader?

2009-12-19T08:08:00.000-08:00

"Hee-Yah!!!!"

Do the Republicans finally have a straight-talking, maverick, leader who will cut through the political game played in DC? Only if former Governor Howard Dean plans on switching teams! In an interview on Good Morning America with George Stephanopolus (btw, I miss Diane Sawyer!) Howard Dean made some fabulous arguments against the current Senate's health care reform bill. Here were the highlights:

The Washington game has become "passing any bill is a victory"
“Decisions are being made for the long term future of this country for short term political reasons”
In response to the reforms the White House claims are in this bill, “creating new bureaucracies and not changing health care”
"My job is not to convince Senators, my job is to say what I think is right!"

Amen! Now I am not so deluded to think that Howard Dean and I espouse the same beliefs regarding health care reform. I know he is a progressive. I know he wants a public option. HOWEVER, he calls BS when he see's it, and I respect that. The current law-makers are making promises to everyone and anyone just so they can have any kind of "health care reform" bill passed to use as a victory to exploit in their 2010 campaign promos. It is refreshing to see someone with completely different political ideology call itlike he sees it. Would he step out on his party like this if he was still in the Washington rat race, and not in the private sector? I doubt it, but it is still appreciated! Nice work, Dr. Dean!

Here is the link to watch the interview.

The Season Bringing People Together!

2009-12-17T07:52:00.000-08:00

For some reason, Senator Orrin Hatch from Utah wrote and/or produced a Channukah song.

After all these years that is all they can come up with about Mormons? That Donny and Marie are Mormons and we don't drink? Too funny! Tis the Season....which ever you celebrate!

Big O at the Big O House

2009-12-14T12:38:00.000-08:00

Of course I DVR'd Oprah at the White House Christmas Special. I love seeing the inside of the White House. All of the history. All of the grandeur. All of the fawning...wait, that is just Oprah! I know that they are probably BFF's since the campaign, but it was hilarious watching her try to mask her adoration of the Obama's. Several times during the interview, during an answer to one of her "difficult" questions, she would pucker her lips almost as if to hide a creeping smile. Or you know when you are really happy, or you are enjoying yourself out in the sun, and your eyes water just a little bit, not enough to form tears but almost like a sensory overload? She had that! You could see her mind working, "Try to keep a straight face!" But I didn't expect anything less, thank goodness she contained herself from falling to the floor and kissing his feet! That would have been a little much.
After the sugar coating shock wore off, I very much enjoyed it. I think it is good to have reminders that people in the public eye, are just that: PEOPLE! Although I completely and passionately disagree with his political positions and his solutions on how to remedy many issues plaguing our country...I enjoyed him as a person. He is smart, thoughtful, seemingly a great dad and husband. He is like that friend that you think highly of, even though they think highly of themselves too...and probably more so than you do! And I was also very impressed with Mrs. Obama. She is very classy, yet down to earth. And do I really need to comment on his B+ rating? Here's my take: That is the proper answer. He can't rate himself lower, because you want a confident President. He can't rate himself any higher (even though, he would if health care passed: which I interpreted as "if Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed would run their houses like I run mine!", anyhoo, I digress.) So who cares what he thinks of himself. It is becoming more apparent what the country thinks of the job he is doing. And if I remember correctly, most of the polls are similar to my feelings. You approve of the President as a PERSON, but don't agree with how he is handling issues like health care, Afghanistan, cap and tax, 9-11 mastermind's trials, etc.

Palin-Envy

2009-11-17T13:26:00.000-08:00

...or Hatred? I'm not quite sure.

Of course, I watched the promoted showdown between two media darlings, Oprah v. Palin. In the left corner, we have Oprah; and in the right, Palin. And instead of a knock out heavy weight fight, I got a "friendly-dancing-around-the-ring" round! Out of curiosity, and boredom, I found my way to Oprah's message boards. I found more than I had expected! I anticipated the "don't-cha-know" stay at home mom's, Sarah Palin supporters, rehashing Obama's birth certificate and pallin' around with terrorist talk. Which, I think I saw one or two. But instead, Harpobear, the community moderator had to step in frequently to remind the Palin-Haters to keep the discussion "respectful".

Which leads me to my point. I am completely baffled at the absolute disdain, despise, detest, and even hatred some people have regarding Sarah Palin. Although I find her relatable, practical, and entertaining, at this point I would not vote for her. In the same sense, I consider Hillary Clinton a very intelligent, driven, and accomplished, and would not vote for her. But I do not spew venom when talking about her, the way some liberals do when discussing Sarah Palin. Most especially the women! And in my quest for understanding, I stumbled across a few blogs, articles, and discussions. But they can have the same disagreements with other politicians (namely men) without the same vitriol. So what makes her such a target?

I googled "I Hate Sarah Palin", which brought up t-shirts, bumper stickers, and other merchandise. I also found several blogs which created lists for why the liberal women hate her. I found ridiculous reasons such as "she was a beauty pageant contestant" and "she married her high school sweetheart". The only substantive issues women had with her were completely policy based. She's pro-life, pro-guns, pro-traditional marriage, pro-energy (which equals anti-earth), pro-death penalty, etc.

Here was a fabulous explanation, which seems pretty accurate: "She is the embodiment of the anti-choice, the opposite of every choice that lefty elites have ever made (wife, mother to five, rural, conservative) That everything she is is the antithesis of everything that liberal urban elites are, so it's not just enough to say, 'I disagree with you,'; she has to be repudiated and crushed." (Hugh Hewitt) Jim Garaghty continues, "To the left, I think, she embodies a sort of comfort with ignorance that they think characterizes most/all conservatives. If liberals are right that Palin really is ignorant, and moreover, completely comfortable with that ignorance, and moreover still, thought she ought to be Vice President of the United States, they have perhaps ample reason to dislike her. On the other hand, if they dismiss Palin because she looks pretty or talks funny or doesn't read the same newspapers they do, that goes to their being snobs."

So is the anti-feminist? Is she the absolute antithesis of everything that feminism has tried to accomplish? I would argue that she is a perfect example of it! You can have a beautiful family, adoring husband, and still be a strong, confident woman with a career you created. Is anyone else completely puzzled over all of this Palin-envy, especially by her fellow females?

A Civilian Trial!?!?!?

2009-11-16T13:20:00.000-08:00

Disclaimer: Although I am dying to go to law school, and study all the legal in's and out's of our judicial system, I am definitely not there yet. As I was reading articles, case studies, encyclopedia entries, I realized I jumped in the deep end of a wave pool wearing arm floaties! Especially when you throw on top of civilian court cases, military tribunals, the Geneva Convention, acts of war, enemy combatants, etc! I was drowning in too much information. However, I needed a forum to verbalize my outrage, so I can get the inner dialogue out of my head!

What in the world was Eric Holder thinking?!? When Khalid Sheikh Mohammed mass murdered 2974 innocent victims, including 55 military personnel at the Pentagon, he commited an act of war and should be tried in a military tribunal. Khalid was not a citizen of the United States, nor were his associates. They are unlawful enemy combatants, because they are apart of a non-state terrorist organization. Because of this, they are not subject to the protections of the Third Geneva Convention. Will their Constitutional rights be envoked ex post facto? Will evidence be thrown out because they were not mirandized, or because they were not granted the right to a speedy trial? Will there be a mistrial because they can not find an impartial jury of their peers? Will their confessions be thrown out because of the interrogation tactics used, or because they didn't have their lawyers present?

I believe that this is an attempt by this administration, to put former President Bush's policies regarding the War on Terror on trial, instead of seeking justice for the thousands of victims of this horrorific crime! When Khalid asked to receive the death penalty, why didn't we grant him his wish, and swiftly send him to our Perfect Judge, instead of his anticipated 74 virgins? This is an outrageous decision where I do not see any positive outcome for those of us who are citizens of this great country, and uphold the Constitution Khalid and his terrorist allies spit on.

This was HILARIOUS!

2009-11-09T14:21:00.001-08:00

If it wasn't for SNL's political skits and Kristen Wiig's characters, I would have stopped watching a long time ago! And this is a great combination of both. Fox News has been setting itself up for this perfect parody. I would say the Glenn impression was my favorite, but all of them were spot on!

Video Recaps | Full Episodes | Webisodes

Reporters v. Commentators

2009-10-23T14:37:00.000-07:00

There has been a war of words between President Obama and his administration and Fox News. Each side enjoying the drama. The administration relieved that the focus has been taken off the lack of an actual written health care bill and the Afghanistan debacle. Fox News honored for being the singled out media organization by the evil empire.

David Axelrod asserts that Fox News is "not really a news organization", and "other news organizations like [George Stephanopolus, who was Clinton's White House communications' director] ought not to treat them that way". Rahm Emmanuel expressed President Obama's worries that Fox is corrupting other networks, and is concerned that "the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox." Anita Dunn, Obama's communication director labeled the entire Fox News network as "opinion journalism masquerading as news".

What is considered "news"? What separates journalists and commentators?

Is the White House suggesting that MSNBC is a news organization and Fox News isn't? That Keith Olbermann is a reporter and not a commentator like Bill O'Reilly? Is President Obama labeling Fox News as a talk radio because Glenn Beck has been in both media outlets, and somehow that comparison doesn't apply to Rachel Maddow, a former liberal radio host on Air America? The only difference I see between MSNBC and Fox News is which side of the political spectrum they fall. And where would MSNBC be without Fox News?

But the war of words escalated into the White House's attempt to exclude Fox News from the live feed of an interview with the pay advisor, Kenneth Feinberg. Thankfully the real media outlets protested, and the White House caved. Was the President and his advisers attempting to punish Fox News for having differing opinions? When pressed by ABC's Jake Tapper about the appropriateness of President Obama's opinion regarding Fox News, or "sweeping declarations", Robert Gibbs responded "That's our opinion." Yes, Robert Gibbs, that is all it is, opinion. And in my opinion, if you exclude Fox News because of their format and who they include in their programs, MSNBC should also be excluded. Do we need to remind you, you are the President of both MSNBC viewers and Fox viewers?

Publicity Stunt?

2009-10-16T06:43:00.000-07:00

Is being on t.v. the new American dream? There is only speculation that this family faked the emergency that their young son had climbed into a helium balloon and needed to be rescued. It does seem a little orchestrated. You be the judge! Crazy!

A Preemptive Peace Prize?

2009-10-09T06:05:00.000-07:00

I woke up to a shocker this morning. President Obama has been awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize! The nominations were February 1st, only 12 days after he was sworn into office. Other nominees were President Sarkozy of France, who proposed the cease fire plan for the Gaza Strip, and as the EU President proposed a progressive energy package to reduce carbon emissions. Or Ingrid Betancourt, a French-Columbian senate candidate, who was kidnapped and held captive by Marxist nationals for 6 1/2 years. Or Dr. Denis Mukwege, the only Congo gynecological doctor who has treated 21,000 women suffering from devastating gynecological injuries as a result of rape in Congo's brutal war.

Geir Lundestad, Director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute, said today that President Obama was awarded the prize because "he has emphasized multilateral diplomacy, he has addressed international institutions, dialogue negotiations. He has inspired the world with his vision of a world without nuclear arms. He has changed the U.S. policy dramatically. There's a whole list."

Previous winners are recognizable symbols of peace, Martin Luther King, Jr, Nelson Mandela, and Mother Theresa. Muhammad Yunus was the 2006 winner, for their establishing of the Grameen Bank, which instituted the micro credit loans to help women pull their families out of poverty. Other winners have been awarded the prize because of their efforts in the green peace movement. Al Gore in 2007 and Wangari Maathai in 2004 for her Green Belt Movement in Kenya.

My take: In reading several statements by the Norwegian Nobel Institute, and others who are giving their congratulations across the world including former winners, used the words like "anticipates an even greater contribution" or "Nobel committee hopes the award will enhance his moral authority" or "he gave hope". I didn't read any actual policies enacted, treaties written, or international actions taken, which validate this award. Lech Walesa, who won the prize in 1983, spoke for many with his reaction. "Obama? So fast? Too fast - he hasn’t had the time to do anything yet," the former Polish president told reporters in Warsaw. Michael Cox, a North America expert at the Chatham House thinktank, said: "It is difficult to see why it would be awarded to him at this stage in his presidency. There are problems in the Middle East and an ongoing war in Afghanistan. You could say it is a little bit premature." Why did President Obama win the Nobel Peace Prize? Hope. Hope for peace. Let's see how far this "hope" takes us. How will this affect his policies in Afghanistan and Iraq? Is the world setting the US up for great accomplishments or tragic failure? In reading over several of the other nominees, I believe they were far more deserving. They are doing the day-to-day grind, hard work, in actually being the change. President Obama may be the spokesman for change, but I have not seen anything more than words. Now the question may be, will he follow Al Gore's footsteps and this be the first of future awards? Oscars? Grammys? World's Best Dad?

Worship or Respect?

2009-09-29T13:17:00.000-07:00

There has been much conversation about the videos posted on YouTube with school children singing about President Obama. I have seen several of these videos, including the currently popular one filmed in New Jersey. Mmm...Mmm...Good! Barack Hussein Obama!

Several conservative talking heads have compared this to indoctrination of the Hitler Youth. I believe to make that weighty comparison accurate, the children would have to be taught through an organized cirriculum handed down from the administration itself. So, I completely dismiss that over-generalization.

However, it begs the question, did President Obama finally restore respect for the office of the President, or is Rock Star Obama the new American Idol accepting fan mail and idol worship? At what point does enthusiasm cross the line from respect to worship? Several of the lyrics from one song, I believe, crossed that line. "We are all equal in his sight", for example. Yet, there was another video that spoke about him being our 44th President, and how the kids want to get an education to become the President in 2048.

My Take: There are currently only a handful of these videos on YouTube, in different parts of the country. The parents of the children who attend these schools should be the only ones to get their parental panties in a twist. It is not educational material passed down from Lord Obama, it is over-enthusiastic teachers either encouraging respect for our President and our great nation, or singing praises to their new Prophet in Chief. And I would not be surprised if there were several classrooms across the country (particularly in Texas), who sang songs about President Bush following 9-11. Too bad YouTube wasn't around then!

ACORN Employment Application

2009-09-17T19:10:00.000-07:00

1. Name:

2. Age:

3. Circle Political Party Affiliation

a. Democrat

4. Circle applicable work experience

a. Receptionist/Secretary

b. Telemarketor

c. Grave digger

d. Illegal immigrant transporter

e. Pimp

f. Accountant

g. Loan officer for Fannie/Freddie

5. Please check any of the following that would make you uncomfortable (if left blank, continue with application. If any are checked, discontinue application).

a. Spending your Saturday on a protesting bus tour of major corporations executives' homes.

b. Voter fraud

c. Breaking and entering

d. Smuggling underage El Salvadorian girls

e. Advising pimps on instituting prostitution ring

f. Legal counsel for "self-defense" murder

6. How do you accept payment:

a. Cash

b. Automatic deposit

c. A pack of cigs

d. Liquor

e. Dimes

f. ProstitutePal

This seems to be the only plausible application for ACORN considering all of the "isolated incidents". Either they have the most ridiculous hiring practices (as seen above!) or there is something more to their organization. I would like to believe the former, but with the mounting evidence to the contrary is making it seem unlikely.

Disagreement = Racism

2009-09-16T07:30:00.000-07:00

"An overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African-American. And I think it's bubbled up to the surface because of a belief among many white people, not just in the South, but around the country, that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It's an abominable circumstance and grieves me and concerns me very deeply."

According to former President Jimmy Carter, those of us who disagree with President Obama's policies and have actively demonstrated our opinions, are only doing so because of the color of his skin. And not only that, taking it one step further, that we believe that any African-American could be qualified to lead this great country. Apparently, we can not debate the content of someone's positions without directly tying it to the color of the skin.

What about those who protested the Iraq War and had pictures of Condoleezza Rice or Colin Powell on their protest signs? Were they racist? Or those who plastered former President Bush's picture on protest signs with Hitler's mustache, were they labeled anti-Christian? Or those who disagree with Senator Joe Lieberman's policies, are they labeled anti-Semitic? Or those who didn't vote for Mitt Romney, are they labeled anti-Mormon?

It is a desperate attempt to scare those of us who are speaking out against his policies. No one wants to be labeled as hateful, bigotted or racist. And typically, when someone is labeled as such, they go above and beyond to prove otherwise. Not me. I am absolutely not a racist and I am disagreeing with President Obama and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid based solely on policy. And I believe that an absolute majority of Americans can agree to disagree without fabricating alterior motives, unlike politicians and news organizations on both sides.

Thanks for the bad rap

2009-09-13T19:30:00.000-07:00

Dear South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson:

I wanted to send my deepest appreciation for your help in bringing us conservatives some positive media coverage. As you know the past few months the media and the administration has labeled the majority of us as being part of an "angry mob" with an inability to control our tempers, and we needed one such opportunity to clear our names and give us a fresh start.

I would also like to thank you for bringing some expression back into the perpetually tightened and botoxed face of Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. Vice President Joe Biden's hairplugs slightly moved as his brow furrowed. It is a relief to see that neither of them have been completely embalmed.

Again, thank you!

momsintopolitics.

Home for Sale!

2009-08-31T11:51:00.000-07:00

My apologies it has taken me this long to post about this. I watched this clip on John Stewart's The Daily Show a couple weeks ago, and was laughing so hard I was crying. I would do it a great injustice to try to summarize, other than it is regarding Timothy Geithner's home in New York which is on the market. You can take a look at the property here. You can view the video here. If you need a good laugh, take a look!

Using the Wrong Argument

2009-08-27T13:42:00.000-07:00

I. Am. Tired. No, I am not referring to my sleepless nights spent with my newborn. No, I am not referring to keeping up with my two year old. I am tired of the back and forth mud slinging regarding the Health Care Reform bills. I believe you can have a passionate debate about this hot button issue without referring to either side as Nazi's, or mobsters.

Although I find the expansion of the national government frightening (not in the "KGB kicking down my door" way, but in the "federal government bankrupts itself and can't run anything effectively" way); my argument can stand alone without name calling and yelling. I believe many of the conservative talking heads and outraged citizens attending town hall meetings are making the wrong argument.

Congress can not draft any legislation, enact any bill, vote on any proposal, without getting the BIG approval from one source. The Constitution. This document is the ultimate check on the expansion of their power, if they abide by it. It expressly gives our representatives their roles and duties to the United States and to the people. There are two portions of the Constitution which, I believe, should prevent Congress and President Obama from enacting either health care bill.

Promote General Welfare: There is a huge difference between "promoting" and "providing". Congress and the President have the authority to "promote general welfare", which health care falls under. It does NOT say that the national government should provide for the general welfare. Congress and the President can regulate, tax, enact tort reform, all of which promote general welfare. Even if you believe that health insurance is an unalienable right (which I would disagree with you), it is not within the scope of the national government's powers. If it is not an expressly written power granted to the national government, it is reserved to the states.

Tenth Amendment: Although I just paraphrased this pesky amendment, I want to include the actual text. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The tenth amendment is the most violated part of the Constitution by a trillion miles (we're so comfortable with the concept of measuring things in the trillions). If President Obama and Congress want to enact health care reform, the golden restraints of the Constitution, should limit them to their own states. Yet, just as every politician at the national level has in the past (Republicans and Democrats both included) they are overstepping their limits. It is only through the states that health care reform should take place. For example, Massachussets. If the citizens of Massachusetts wants universal health care, go for it. However, an editorial written in the Boston Globe, does not give glowing reviews. If California wants to overspend in their entitlements and bankrupt itself, go for it. But the other 49 should not have to foot the bill. This should be a state issue, not a national government issue.

There are many reasons to be for or against universal health care, or a public option, or a co-op, or whatever they term giving the national government power over our health. And those are people's opinions. However, the founders were explicit, if it isn't written in the Constitution, the national government should not touch it. Period.

2009-08-14T14:14:00.000-07:00

(Ironically, this poster was made while Pres. Bush was in office. Instead of being a message from Homeland Security, today it would be a message from Robert Gibbs, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer)

Un-American. Mob. Nazi. Astroturf. Extreme

I wasn't aware that I somehow fit into these categories. Those who attend the townhall meetings, to voice their dissent to their representatives over the proposed health care plans coming from the Senate and the House, are being maligned by the media, the Democratic National Committee, and their democrat representatives. It has been infuriating watching how these outspoken citizens have been covered, especially the claim of being "astroturf" or "fake". Every clip that I have seen of these "recruited" constituents, they have been average looking, unpolished, holding their handwritten notes in their often nervously shaking hands. There obviously is your handful crazies, that are the loudest squeaky wheel, that is getting the most attention. It is absolutely maddening seeing the double standard. Those who protested the Iraq War or Bush were seen as heroic, even if their posters painted him as Hitler-esque mustache and wardrobe, or even as Satan. Yet, if a questioner's voice raises, or they seem a little heated, they are described as "un-American" or "extremist".

For those of you who disagree with my opinions or think that my analysis of the situation seems "fishy", by all means notify the White House! Apparently, if you receive a "chain e-mail" or are engaged in "casual conversation" which contains any "disinformation", you need to e-mail the White House. Because they "can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help." Here is the e-mail address: flag@whitehouse.gov. Can you imagine if President Bush proposed this initiative, especially following the extremely intrusive Patriot Act? This is the most ridiculous proposal coming from the White House so far in President Obama's presidency. I would consider it a badge of honor, maybe like a Medal of Freedom, to be flagged to the White House. What is happening to our country?

Curious Quote

2009-07-29T23:57:00.000-07:00

"When you rush these budgets that are a foot high and nobody has any idea what's in them and nobody has read them...It gets rushed through without any clear deliberations or debate, then these kind of things happen. And I think it is some ways what happened to the [Fill in a politicized piece of legislation from the past]. I mean you remember there was no real debate about that. It was so quick after [fill in with challenging time in our country] that it was introduced that people felt very intimidated by the administration."

Who said this and when? Find out in the "Comments".

Superman's Kryptonite?

2009-07-27T15:29:00.000-07:00

President Obama is trying to make good on his campaign promise of reforming health care. But the once invincible and fearless super hero might have found his kryptonite. I can't tell if it is specifically the health care legislation, or if it is too much too soon. Too much spending too soon. Too much transformative legislation too soon. But either way, President Obama's support is slipping.

Depending on which poll you look at, his approval numbers are slipping. In a CNN poll, over 41,000 people voted on the question "Would you be willing to pay more in taxes for the promise of reducing your health care costs? " I was shocked to see that 70% of those polled said "No". There was also a fabulous article written by CNN Money's Editor at Large wrote an article, "You'll lose 5 Key Freedoms in Health Care Reform". Here is the article. He discusses both the House and Senate bills, and how the fine print contradicts the promises President Obama is making in the press. I would expect an article like this on FoxNews' website, but CNN? Never! It has been interesting to watch the democratic leaders in the House and Senate, slowly put on the breaks to this massive health care overhaul in response to the voting public's hesitations. Especially, not meeting the President's deadline. Will this actually pass? Who knows at this point. But I think President Obama has finally hit his first major speed bump of his Presidency.

Thank you, President Ambien!

2009-07-23T06:10:00.000-07:00

I have a hard time sleeping. My mind is typically racing of all the many things I need to get done in the next 8 days, before my little bundle of joy comes (which feels like a 20 pound bowling ball underneath my skin)! So last night, around 3:00am I decided to see what was on CNN. It was a re-broadcast and analysis of President Obama's health insurance press conference. I had regretably missed the live airing, I was watching So You Think You Can Dance. Before begining my viewing, I was wide awake. And thankfully, several long minutes later, I had drifted into a peaceful sleep. I decided to record this press conference, to help in other sleepless nights.

I'm unsure if it was his long, drawn out, inconclusive answers. Or his soothing, yet monotone voice. Or just the fact that I was watching CNN at 3am. But it was stronger than taking 2 Ambiens! I have since read the transcript from his prepared message, and find myself confused at some of his remarks, ideas, and plans for our health care.

1. "And it's about the fact that the biggest driving force behind our federal deficit is the skyrocketing cost of Medicare and Medicaid." I thought that this legislation would not only be "budget neutral" but after 10 years provide billions of dollars in revenue. I don't understand how the current government program for a small percentage of the population is the "biggest driving force behind our federal deficit", yet this new plan will provide a revenue.

2. "If [the federal government] does not control these costs, we will not be able to control our deficit" soon followed by: "It will keep government out of health care decisions". How will the government stay out of health care decisions, yet control costs. And the more he talks about "controlling costs" the less I think this legislation is about giving uninsured coverage, and putting more "caps" on the medical industry.

3. He refers to the "game of politics" and lists two Republican comments made recently about his plan. Yet, he can do this without the Republicans, it is the conservative Democrats that will possibly put a stop to this bill. So he is playing the game with the rest of them, and really the Republicans are sitting on the political bench, unable to put a complete stop to his policies.

Now I haven't had a chance to read his lengthy responses to the Question and Answer portion, and will hopefully have some analysis for those soon. But so far, I found his message to be concerning. What do you think?

Acceptable Power

2009-07-13T14:21:00.000-07:00

Power: (noun) The ability or official capacity to exercise control; authority.

Politics is a pure power struggle. The founder's attempted to prevent this by creating three branches of government, fearing an over reaching federal government. With every new President, Congress, and Supreme Court Justice, the powers of the federal government have expanded. Each side of the aisle cherry picks what kind of national power is acceptable, then criticizes their oppositions selection of approved federal power.

Conservatives, or the "small government" side of the political game, claim to abhor a strong national government. However, when it comes to defense or social issues, they expect the federal government to have a strong hand. During the Bush Administration, several weeks after 9-11 the Patriot Act was passed with a high bi-partisan vote. Yet, many on the left later criticized how much invasive power that gave the evil feds. "You can't listen to my phone calls if I'm a possible terrorist without a warrant!" In regards to the "right to privacy", what happens behind closed doors, the left is strongly opposed to a big bad KGB-esque national government.

Liberals, or the generous "large government" of the political game, claim to desire national intervention in their lives. It is the national government's role to be the great equalizer. They should have the authority to provide health care, child care, regulate your personal energy usage, to name a few. The government should step in when we can't provide for ourselves. Yet, many on the right criticize this philosophy, arguing that gives the national government too much power within the economy and within our own lives. As long as the aspect of health care doesn't involve your reproductive organs or sexual orientation.

In reality, both parties want to give the federal government power, but only in the areas they deem appropriate. With President Obama in the White House, he is pushing forward a liberal agenda, creating an uproar from the right. Which is the exact same situation when President Bush was in office. So here is my question, how can any of us on either side be not understanding of the other party, when we are guilty of the same thing in different respects. We are told by our representatives or outspoken critics that we are the only ones who are in the right, that the other party is demanding too much. The conservatives demand too much regarding national defense, and the right to privacy. The liberals demand too much in providing the "necessities", and regulating the economy. Both are guilty of what they are accusing the other of. I am just tired of the finger pointing and power grabs from both sides.

What in the world?

2009-07-05T17:40:00.000-07:00

Friday's are typically slow news days. Especially Friday's before a holiday weekend, like Independence Day weekend. However, I'm sure most of you heard the late breaking news that Sarah Palin is resigning at the end of this month. In a press conference Friday afternoon, she (kind of???) explained her reasons for leaving. Ethics investigations, family under pressure, didn't want to be a "lame duck Governor", blah, blah, blah. Most of the press conference was a thorough, and overheard, resume of her accomplishments and why Alaska is such a great state. But, she quit.

I have a few ideas of why she is really resigning. Here are a few:

(This, for me, is the only good and respectable option) She is getting out of politics to spend time with her family. They have been under enormous scruitiny, pressure and criticism, and they need to take a step back.
Something is about to hit the fan. There is some scandal or embarrassing skeleton that is about to come out, and she is trying to step out of the national spotlight before the dirty laundry is aired.
She is preparing for a 2012 Presidential Election. And by doing so, she thought it would beef up her political resume to become elected Governor in 2006, campaign forabout 6 months in 2008, and quit at least a year early in 2009.
(Possibly most likely) Pay off debts. She mentioned a $1/2 million personal legal tab from the ethics investigations, and she needs to pay it off. I've heard she has a book deal, wouldn't doubt Fox News would give her a show, or get paid per conservative speaking engagement. With any of these options, it is obviously difficult to do while you are a public servant, and would be distracting to her job.

I'm sure we will all be sitting at the edge of our seats until we find out the real scoop. Do you have any other ideas why she quit?

Happy Independence Day!

2009-07-03T18:11:00.000-07:00

I am a huge fan of the Fourth of July. I am an avid local parade attender, although my husband absolutely loathes sitting in the sun watching medeocre floats and high school bands pass by. The only enjoyment he receives is taunting the local beauty queens, calling them by name and practically embarrassing them, and me! I cry when the Purple Heart truck passes, or the Veterans, or every time the National Anthem is played. I love the fireworks, the barbeques, and the family traditions of homemade chocolate mint brownies and ice cream. I also take time to reread documents of our founding fathers, finding such inspiration and wisdom in their words. Here is the document we are in essence celebrating, and I've included my favorite passages.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.... And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Shuffling Money

2009-07-01T06:42:00.000-07:00

Besides Michael Jackson, there have been other stories that I have found "news worthy". One in particular is the Waxman-Markey bill, or as the right has labeled it, "Cap and Trade" bill and as the left has labeled it, "Clean Energy Bill". Both are correct. It is a cap and trade bill that is enforcing clean energy standards. If you would like to be one step ahead of the majority of the Congressmen who voted on this bill, you can read the entire text, here.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this bill will increase the average American household energy costs by $175. I don't know about you, but adding a $175 bill doesn't 'stimulate' my household's economy! But if it is to save the earth, I guess my children's children will be thanking me. Right? Actually, the environmental organization, Greenpeace, says that this legislation "sets emission reduction targets far lower than science demands, then undermines even those targets with massive offsets." So lets tax ourselves sick, but it won't do enough according to science. What does this mean for energy companies?

"The key provisions of the bill include requiring electric utilities to meet 20% of their electricity demand through renewable energy sources and energy efficiency by 2020, investing $190 billion in new clean energy technologies and energy efficiency, mandating new energy-saving standards for buildings, appliances, and industry, introducing a federal cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon emissions by 17% by 2020 and over 80% by 2050 compared to 2005 levels, and protecting consumers from energy price increases."

What is wrong with this picture? The government is mandating current energy companies to invest in new 'clean energy technologies', technology deemed appropriate by the federal government. They are taking money from one sector of the industry to fund the expansion of another sector of an industry. The oil and gas industry will essentially be funding the growth of their competition.

This concept is not exclusive to Clean Energy. This new Obama Business Model is found in the Public Health Plan. This legislation is proposing to tax employer paid health care to help fund the government's new health care. Again, the government is taking money from one sector of the industry to fund the expansion of another sector of an industry. This is absolutely and unequivocably un-capitalistic and un-American. Yes, I said it, UN-AMERICAN. America was founded upon the principles of freedom, capitalism, the power of the dollar, and both of these massive pieces of legislation dismantle almost every aspect of what our economy was founded on!

Rest in Peace

2009-06-30T00:16:00.000-07:00

I am a massive fan of Michael Jackson. He is the ultimate entertainer. A legend. A musical genius. He created a new genre of music, Pop. His dance skills were perfection. His personal life was confusing, but his music was amazing.

With that said, I am so tired of every aspect of his life and death dominating every news channel. Even if I wanted to know what else is going on in the world, I would have to become an investigative journalist and scouer the internet for non-Michael Jackson news. What is happening in Iran? What is really in the "Cap-and-Trade" bill? Was Bernie Madoff's sentencing fair? What is going on in Hondurus? There are hundreds of things that Anderson Cooper and Charlie Gibson and Bill O'Reilly should be talking about, and yet ever since last Thursday, they have talking almost exclusively about Michael. Thank goodness for local news. It gives me a half an hour breather from everything Michael Jackson. And I am disappointed that credible news channels have transformed into a glorified Access Hollywood or Entertainment Tonight, where the only thing that differentiates the two is the running ticker at the bottom of the screen. What is wrong with the news industry? I will miss Michael Jackson, but I can not wait for this news story to Rest in Peace.

Now THIS is how you have an affair!

2009-06-25T14:16:00.000-07:00

I know this is a far cry from my last post, but since it is the "Hot Topic" in the news reel today, I must put in my two cents.

When you think of political sex scandals, you typically dry heave in your mouth and try to think of happy thoughts. They are typically conducted by an unattractive, womanizing, yet awkward politician who typically has to pay for favors (Spitzer), use his extreme power or 'charm' (Clinton), swing the other way (Greevy), or tap his feet (Craig). Those stories are a thing of the past! We have the 7 new guidelines on "How to have an affair: Politician Edition", written by South Carolina Governor, Mark Sanford, and Foreward written by former President Bill Clinton.

Go international! Forget the days of sleazy interns, New York City call girls, or underage congressional pages! Make it a destination affair, it will be all the more enjoyable and relaxing.

Instead of explicit texts or phone calls, take notes from Danielle Steele, and make your e-mails masterpiece literature. Instead of your affair infuriating the stay-at-home mom voting population, they will secretly wish you were their Fabio and taking them somewhere south of the border! (Read a selection of his e-mails HERE).

No need for an elaborate excuse to make your escape, just tell everyone you have gone hiking…or grocery shopping…or walking your dog. It will only make your actual story all the more glamorous when you get home and tell them what you’ve really been doing!

Immediately flaunt your newly acquired Argentine sun tan at press conference.

Have the hanky ready, to wipe your tearful indiscretions away, and ask for forgiveness.

Don’t share camera time with your bitter and miserable wife. Her facial expressions will always discredit your words.

Don’t resign from everything. Start small, then find some middle ground with your angry constituents. It is the art of political bargaining.

If you follow these guidelines, you will not only get your wife to be willing to "resurrect your marriage", but also romance your female (and some male) constituency with your story-book affair.

Iran's Cry for Help

2009-06-22T14:24:00.000-07:00

After Iran's Presidential Election, and the announced win of incumbent Ahmadinejad, the Iranian people who backed the defeated Mousavi took to the streets to protest the results. Mousavi encouraged peaceful demonstrations, but the Iranian government, who majority of Western news agencies placed in Tehran claim rigged this election, is crushing the protesters with lethal force. The Iranian government has cut majority of Western media coverage within the country, and is having more difficulty in preventing the Iranian people from documenting the devestation.

What is the United States response? "The last thing that I want to do is to have the United States be a foil for those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States," President Obama stated. He responded in an interview that it would be counterproductive for the United States “to be seen as meddling” in the disputed Iranian presidential election. This position does not surprise me. It is a very 'diplomatic' attitude, not taking sides, or involving the United States in anyway. However...

What do we stand for? Why on earth do we have values and principles and a belief in freedom and democracy and the right to voice your opinion....AND NOT VOICE IT?!?!? We need to speak out against the tyrranical government's actions: cutting off media communications, lethal force, ignoring blatant voting fraud, the list continues. Do they need our support? Do the protesters want a "stamp of approval" from the United States? I argue: ABSOLUTELY YES!

How did the Iranian protesters get pictures and video and information out to the rest of the world? They used United States social networking websites Facebook, Youtube and Twitter. Even the leader of the opposition, Mousavi, has a facebook account. Another thing I found interesting is how many of their protest signs were in English. Of course a majority of the world speaks English along with their native language, but why wouldn't they use their native language if they didn't want the United States and the Western world to not only understand their plight but to stand with them, voicing an opinion against an oppressive regime?

President Obama doesn't want the U.S. to be a distraction used by the Iranian government, but guess what? Even with his hands off approach, President Ahmadinejad has already blamed the U.S. and Brittain with intruding. When dealing with foreign relations, President Obama will learn that the United States is damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Since the outcome is the same, we must stand for what we believe. What is the point of having principles if we don't apply them and stand with those who are fighting for the same rights? If we don't, they are worthless.

Call me Senator Boxer if you're nasty!

2009-06-19T11:50:00.000-07:00

As a student of history and politics, I have always held extreme reverence for titles, oaths of office, the formalities and history behind our political system. In writing about our leaders, I have tried (probably not perfectly) to use their titles, President, Vice President, Secretary, etc. It is a sign of respect. There are other terms to show respect, and living on the edge of the south, "ma'am" has become a term I absolutely enjoy. Apparently, Californian women don't appreciate being called ma'am.

While questioning Brig. General Michael Walsh about the New Orleans levees, an interesting exchange happened. He responded to her as "ma'am", where she interrupted him by saying, "Could you say 'senator' instead of 'ma'am'. It's just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title. I'd appreciate it." You can view the clip here. (Don't worry, the clip doesn't involve any "right wing" commentary or introduction.) When I heard the exchange, it sounded vaguely familiar....where had I heard the line "I think I've earned it" before....???

That's right! The overly inflated, egotistic Colonel in "A Few Good Men" played by Jack Nicholson insists that Tom Cruise "addresses me as Colonel or Sir. I believe I've earned it". I wish I could see a full clip of the questioning of Brig. General Walsh, to see if Senator Boxer ever referred to him as General or Brigadier or even Sir. Possibly her history of having a relatively hostile attitude with honorable men in the military has elevated a simple exchange to something newsworthy. My only wish was that instead of saying, "Yes, Senator."; Brig. General would have responded the way Judge Randolph did in "A Few Good Men" to Jack Nicholson's arrogant behavior saying, "And the Senator will address me as Brigadier General or Sir. I'm quite certain I've earned it. You may continue." It appears he is much more of a gentleman, or one of our own few good men.

Health Care

2009-06-18T15:51:00.000-07:00

There has been MUCH talk about health care in the news lately. And MUCH talk about health care in our home as well. I've read the text of President Obama's speech, and the text of the Republican's proposal. I completely disagree with major concepts in both. First, President Obama's proposal. His speech covers everything from paperless medical records to preventative care. From compensating doctors based on the patients outcome instead of cost of treatment, to revamping Medicaid and Medicare. All with the price tag of around $1 trillion over the next 10 years. While reading his speech, he kept using the phrase "we need to..." and I want to know who the "we" is. He was speaking to an audience of the American Medical Association, i.e. doctors. Does he mean the medical industry? Or the more likely answer, the federal government. Does that mean that within the Department of Health and Human Services, Sect. Sebelius would have control over all that he suggested? Would a new government agency be formed? I find that the most likely answer to all of those questions extremely frightening.

Now for the Republican Response. Of course there is a counter argument, this is politics. In typical fashion, the Republican proposal is considerably less wordy. I've seen longer prescription ads in my favorite hollywood magazines. Yet, I found their ideas almost as disturbing. First they suggest the states create a "State Health Insurance Exchange", which sounds like a government version of Progressive Auto Insurance (with that annoying spokeswoman, which was thinking about tacos...you know the ads). At least they didn't suggest a Federal Health Insurance Exchange, I'd run for the hills! Second, they suggest taxing the money employers spend on health insurance. Why on earth would employers continue to provide benefits to their employees? They wouldn't! And the best coverage I've gotten is through employment. Lastly, they want to revamp the Medicaid and Medicare systems.

All I have to say is, when has more government involvement been a good thing. Please give me one example! And recently, the insurance company that the state employees use here in Oklahoma hadn't paid the doctors and dentists for their services for over 6 months. One local practice was owed over $100,000, which is only now being paid. How will that help the "small business or self-employed" both parties insist they are helping? It actually does the opposite.

A Must Read

2009-06-02T20:03:00.000-07:00

What kind of qualifications do you need to dismantle General Motors, the fourth largest bankruptcy filing in US history? Decades of hands on experience? An understanding of the auto industry or at least the industrial industry? At least an MBA or business experience? Nah! Why not tap into the brain of a not-quite law school graduate working in his first government job? You will be shocked when you read this article found in the New York Times about Brian Deese, who serves on the National Economic Council, a special adviser to the President, and the GM Dismantler. I feel confident in the "uniquely qualified individuals" President Obama has given the authority to "rewriting the rules of American capitalism" in "what may become President Obama's biggest experiment yet in federal economic intervention".

News Review

2009-06-02T13:24:00.000-07:00

There have been many interesting news stories that have caught my attention the past few days, and instead of doing a typically in depth post about each, I only have time to give my slant on several at one time. So here is my news review.

Social Issues:
Murder of Abortion Doctor: Sunday, May 31 Dr. George Tiller was shot to death while attending religious services. The suspect, Scott Roeder, was soon after apprehended. Dr. Tiller was one of the few abortion doctors in the nation who would perform late-term abortions, and has been the victim of previous attempted attacks. Because of this attack, abortion clinics nation wide are beefing up security. Let's follow the logic of Scott Roeder and other anti-abortion violent protesters: We abhor the destruction of life, so we take the life of another person who performs such acts. Hmm... you become what you despise.

Dick Cheney Pro-Gay Marriage: Two weeks ago, Dick Cheney was proclaimed the anti-Obama spokesperson regarding the War on Terror. Most media commentators begged former Vice President Cheney to step away from the public eye, and shrink away into retirement. I was leaning towards the same attitude. And now he is back with vengeance, and most media outlets are heralding his return! What could make them have such a dramatic change of heart? He is for "equal rights for everybody that people ought to be able to enter into any kind of relationship they want." Cheney is pro-Gay Marriage? And what liberal biased drive by mainstream media broke this story? None other than the anti-homosexual, bigoted, unfair and completely imbalanced Fox News!!! He continued on to state that "the states ought to retain the ability to regulate and determine what's marriage and what the legal status of those unions are. It should not be a federal issue." Which I completely agree with. You do not apply for a federal marriage license, you apply for one within your own state. I am curious to see how this will change Dick Cheney's image within the main stream media. Before now he has been played as the master-mind behind all of the Bush Administrations evil doing, plotting the trampling of civil rights while smiling crookedly. Will he now be the poster child for the republican party? The democrats can only hope.

Ahhh...it's Date Night!: Us moms can appreciate any husband taking his gorgeous wife out on a much needed date away from The House, right? I could care less what the Presidential couple did on their date, but I think it is nice he held up his end of the bargain of taking his wife to a Broadway show. I just wish President Obama didn't make us, the taxpayers, go Dutch! Although President Obama paid the bill for dinner and the show, but the majority of the cost, $24,000 of traveling fees is charged to the Tax Payer Platinum Credit Card. Apparently, we have an unlimited credit limit (which sounds like an oxymoron right).

Which brings me to the next section....Economics!

Geithner's Comedy Tour: He must have Conan O'brien or Seinfeld writing his material, because he apparently had students at the University of Peking, China rolling in the aisles! His hilarious one liner that prompted the laughter was, "Chinese assets are very safe". Ba! Ha! Ha! Ha! He continued his shtick with "the Obama administration will cut it's huge fiscal deficits" and promised very "disciplined spending"! Ba-dum-ching! Drum roll please, for the final closing joke: "possibly including reintroduction of pay-as-you-go budget rules instead of nonstop borrowing. Thank you, and Goodnight!" I'm shocked that this comedic routine went over like it did, especially since China is the biggest foreign owner of US Bonds, and has slowed almost to a stop of their purchasing these bonds. I'm sure they can identify with us being like the sole shareholder of a failing company, like GM, who is inevitably filing for bankruptcy. I wonder if their leaders are saying to their people, "The US is too big to fail!"

How are we $546,668 in debt? We don't have any credit card debt, how can we possibly be half a million dollars in debt???? Oh, I forgot! The former President, George W. Bush had a Tax Payers Platinum Credit Card taken out in my name, and my household's taxpayer obligation is $546,668 for 2008. That crazy cowboy wracked up that much debt in one year!?!?!? And how much more will the spendaholic Obama administration deepen this debt in 2009? We need an intervention! Where is Dr. Drew? Or Dr. Oz? Or Suze Orman??? I'll take anyone at this point!

Too Big to Fail: Last November, the prospect of GM filing for bankruptcy would have been "devastating", according to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Congressman Barney Frank called it "particularly troublesome" and a financial expert explained that it would be "as close to reorganizing the whole U.S. economy as you could get". These were the blaring facts of why we had to bail out GM in November 2008. And yet, even with the government rushing in "To save the day!", they still had to file for bankruptcy? According to the previous fear filled comments, we need to prepare for an economic Armageddon! Wait, now they are saying what?!?!? CEO of GM, Fritz Henderson said that the reorganization allowed through filing bankruptcy "will create a leaner, quicker more customer and completely product-focused company, one that’s more cost competitive and has a competitive balance sheet". Everything is coming up roses! Where was this hope filled discussion before the bail outs? The fact that letting a company fail can only make it stronger, more cost efficient and competitive? I don't understand how anyone at this point can argue for more bail outs for any industry! Because apparently, this will be a good starting point for GM. I love the four words, "I told you so".

Common Sense Comedy Tour Review

2009-05-28T13:16:00.000-07:00

Glenn Beck challenged his listeners to write a preemptive review of his upcoming Comedy Tour, in the form of a liberal journalist. I thought if I had a minute today, I would see what I could come up with. Surprisingly, I did have a few minutes! On his website, he had a few points we had to cover. And I think there is a prize for the "most accurate". Anyway, here is what I came up with.

Those of us who live in the real world, brace yourselves! Banjo-playing, Bible-thumping, sheet-wearing, radical right wing zombies are braving an evening away from their apocalyptic bunkers and dozens of brainwashed kids for a night on the town. Is it another embarrassingly unsuccessful Tea Party? Surprisingly, no. It is in support of their fearless, or fanatical leader, Glenn Beck.

Glenn Beck, shock jock turned investigative journalist, is stepping out of his “War Room” in the Fox News compound, and into the world of comedy. Or so he is advertising with his Common Sense Comedy Tour. Possibly the task of verifying simple facts became overbearing, and since the rest of the world was laughing at him, he might as well profit from it.

The Common Sense Tour is a typically excruciating Glenn Beck production, which inevitably involves bulging forehead veins, streaming tears, pit stains, and a frightening look into the future. If you tune out the Republican shill disguised as comedy, and focus singularly on his laughable appearance, you might get your money’s worth. Instead of listening to his sardonic monologue, picture him walking the halls of your junior high. What ridicule an overweight, almost translucent skinned, perpetually perspiring, prepubescent must have endured. Most grow out of their awkward stage. Instead Mr. Beck added to the unfortunate list an unknown hair color and loud mouth demeanor.

The emotional and overcharged evangelical style might appeal to the small-minded disenfranchised minority of Americans, but for the rest of us who still have our spinal chord attached to our brain, save your money! To paraphrase an overused quote by Mr. Beck, “if you pay money to listen to his comedic gospel, you’re an idiot.”

Lady Justice?

2009-05-27T14:50:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday President Obama announced his nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for Supreme Court Justice. I have not done my own vetting process of her, and know very little. So I will reserve my confirmation until I know more about her and her qualifications. Instead, I am writing about something that President Obama said while introducing her. He gave two qualities that are essential to a Supreme Court Justice: a rigorous intellect and a recognition of the limits of the judicial role. Woo-hoo! I couldn't agree with you more, Mr. President! I couldn't believe my ears, but before I could do my celebration dance, he continued and inevitably contradicted himself.

He stated, "...yet, these qualities alone are insufficient. We need something more. For as Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, "The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience." Wait...WHAT?!?!? Were you just sweet talking me with your pick up line about limits of the judicial role? And now you are quoting from a Legal Realist, and suggesting that someones life experience should not only play a small role, but an essential role in their judicial decisions? Complete contradiction.

Without boring you with legal mumbo-jumbo, which I hope to eventually formally study, I want to get your thoughts on legal realism versus legal formalism. Before President Obama's introduction of a possible Supreme Court Justice, I was unaware of these opposing school's of thought. Legal Realism is the concept of the law being "indeterminate"and should be used as "a tool to achieve social purposes and to balance competing societal interests". Legal Formalism argues that "decisions rest on a relatively closed-set of logically-organized rules" and judges should be constrained in their interpretations.

It seems obvious that President Obama, and Sonia Sotomayor, interpret the judicial role of the Supreme Court as a way to "achieve social purposes and balance competing societal interests". Why would they believe that her "life experience" is one of the essential factors as to her qualifications? A Legal Formalist (which from what I understand about the ideology, I fall under) would argue it should have absolutely no bearing on her qualifications. Whether she is male, female, white, black, hispanic, rich, poor, should not matter! Lady Justice should be blind, and free from prejudice and passion. I'm no idiot, I know there have been conservative judges that interpret the law differently because of past experiences. This is not exclusive to Sonia Sotomayor or President Obama. But this is the first time I have been aware of it, and I think it is wrong. Just as President Bush put in a more conservative justice while he was in office, President Obama is nominating a more liberal judge. Fine. The Supreme Court should be balanced in ideology. But the entire concept of her "rigorous intellect" being "insufficient" without not logic, but experience; is absolutely wrong.

True Convictions

2009-05-21T07:21:00.000-07:00

Conviction: (noun) an unshakable belief in something without need for proof or evidence.

I watched an interesting segment on a morning television talk show this morning featuring five lionesses and apparently a relatively unknown radio and television show host. Without delving into the hilarious mess that it became, there was an interesting dialogue I wanted to write about. The lead 'investigative journalist' asked the guest "What are your true convictions" and after several ADD moments, he answers the question: God, founding of our country, and family. While staring deep into his tear-filled eyes, she professionally follows up with, "I think we all believe in the country, in God and family. So what are your true convictions?" Part of the audience had a similar reaction to mine, laughter! Is she serious? Does she think his answer is going to be different? It made me think her question, "What are your convictions?"

By looking at the definition, I believe that most everyone, as Ms. WaWa herself pointed out, has the same convictions. This is the common ground that binds the human race. What do you have an "unshakable belief in" that doesn't need any "proof or evidence"? My convictions are absolutely an unshakable belief in God, in His Son, Jesus Christ, and that they have a plan for all of Their children. And that the foundation of that plan is rooted in the family. I have an unshakable belief in freedom and that it is a right endowed to everyone. All of my "opinions" or "political positions" stem from my beliefs. How I apply my convictions to my political positions is what separates me from a liberal. It isn't good versus bad, it is just different. But as I have said previously, our convictions is where we can most likely find common ground.

American Idol Finale

2009-05-15T07:11:00.000-07:00

And the Final Two are:

A very good looking hobbit and....

A theatrical mix between Emo boy and a glam rocker from the 90's!

Yes, that really is a picture of Adam Lambert. Word to the wise: Don't Google his name... it ain't pretty! This is one thing about this season of American Idol that has been surprising to me. Typically the producers throw their "non-family-friendly" contestants under the bus. If they have a criminal record, if they have taken explicit or even questionable pictures, etc. But nothing has been said about Adam Lambert, other than he is the Musical Messiah! In my musical opinion, he is an amazing singer. He can hit any note effortlessly. However, when he really belts the power notes, his tongue hangs out like a dog sticking it's head out the car window. His over-dramatized performances have become as difficult to stomach as the Rocky Horror Picture Show...and no, I haven't actually seen Tim Curry in drag. But I have to ask myself, who's album would I actually buy? Easy answer.

Frodo Baggins...I mean, Kris Allen. Doesn't he have a hobbit-esque appearance, in an adorable boy next door kind of way? Although he doesn't have as wide of range as Adam, or all the bells, whistles, fireworks, eye-liner, he get's my vote. He has a cool, accoustic, style that reminds me of Jason Mraz, who I'm also a huge fan of. I have loved almost every performance, and he seems to be genuine, hard-working, and an average-everyday kind of person. He is definitely the underdog, Adam Lambert not only getting Bono's approval, but all of the judges and Katy Perry's endorsements. Hopefully, they'll all be shocked when Ryan Seacrest announces the "greatest upset in the history of American Idol"!

I want to be a comedian

2009-05-12T09:40:00.000-07:00

Apparently, if you are a comedian, you can get away with anything. Because "it's funny"! Of course, some of your bits might not go over well with your audience, but don't worry! It will only help your career, because that means you are now "edgy". Here are some suggestions for possible comedian material which has previously been viewed as "off-limits" or "inappropriate". Let's see if we can put on our comedian hats and find a way to make them funny:

Parkinsons

Youth Suicide

9-11 Hijackers

Kidney Failure

The holocaust

Rape

Cancer

Torture

School Violence

Barbara Walters

There is still one topic that hasn't made the "Now its funny" list, and that is President Barack Obama. This was made obvious at the White House Correspondence dinner, when he was the only one allowed to make fun of the new President. Typically this fundraiser dinner turns into a roast of our Commander in Chief. Wanda Sykes instead roasted President Obama's outspoken opponents, calling one treasoness. In the President's stand-up routine, he did a fine job poking fun at himself.

Feliz Cinco de Mayo

2009-05-05T12:18:00.000-07:00

How to beat Swine Flu:

Don't travel to Mexico. Even if you planned for it. Even if you paid for your cruise and they will refuse any reimbursements. Even if you've never traveled outside the country. Just don't do it.
Wash your hands. This precaution may seem extreme. Out of the ordinary. Might throw off your daily schedule. This kind of warning might cause fear-crazed citizens to start stock piling Tamiflu, but heed this advice. Wash your hands.
Don't panic. Although the constant media coverage and the billions of dollars our government is pumping into prevention might instill some fear, don't give in. The World Health Organization has only confirmed 30 deaths worldwide, 29 in Mexico and 1 in the United States. To give some comparison, the CDC reported 1,161 cases of Influenza within the United States during 2007 -08. The mortality rate peaked at 9.1% during that time, which would estimate to being around 105 deaths. Just in the United States. Could Influenza be considered a pandemic? Until this H1N1 strand mutates into a more deadly virus, I'm not going to go out and buy face masks.

Feliz Cinco de Mayo!...unless you live in Mexico!

Sex Ed

2009-04-20T12:14:00.001-07:00

I am a mom of very young kids. I don't have to worry about having the birds and the bees talk with anyone for hopefully many years! But there has been much publicized about youth and sex and new technology that is making my head spin! Articles and news blurbs about "sexting", parents finding naked pictures of their kids on Google, oral sex parties. Hello Sodom, meet Gomorrah!

I naively thought nothing would surprise me, until I was watching an Oprah episode, the Oprah episode, with her favorite 'sex doctor'. Topic of discussion was masturbation. (I apologize to the virgin ears and eyes who visit this blog in advance!) Dr. Laura Berman was encouraging moms to introduce "self pleasure" to their junior high aged daughters, so they could fully own their sexuality and be in control of their pleasure. "It is the hugest gift you could give your daughters". While I was engrossed in the absurdity of this episode, jaw stuck to the floor, my husband asked why I would even watch this. And I realized I am not afraid of my kids, I know what my standards were as a youth and no matter what is taught at school or accepted practices of their peers, my kids will be taught what I believe is right. However, I am terrified of what other mom's will now be teaching their kids. How many of them will listen to the sage advice of a multi-billionaire non-mom when doling out sex ed advice?

During the entire discussion the concept of self-control was not even mentioned. How can it be healthy to teach a young pre-teen girl who's hormones are out of whack, who's frontal lobe or 'rational decision making center' isn't fully developed, to become sexual beings by "owning their self-pleasure"? Why on earth will this help prevent promiscuity with boys? There is a difference between having open and informative dialogue with your kids and encouraging sexual behavior. I find it frightening that self-control has completely been brushed under the rug when discussing something so life-altering as sex. The wide acceptance of teen sex has become a dangerous limbo game, where the bar is quickly lowered as our kids pass underneath it. "How low can we go?"

Am I alone?

If we just ignore them...

2009-04-15T20:27:00.000-07:00

Will they go away?

It appears that most major media outlets, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Robert Gibbs and even President Obama are using the tactic of ignoring the squeaky wheels, hoping they will just go away. What they don't understand, is that is the very reason we are angry. President Bush ignored us. Conservatives in Congress and in the Senate ignored us, and still are. Majority of those in current power at local, state, and federal levels are ignoring us, regardless of your political party.

We want the excessive government spending to STOP.

We want the expansion of the federal government to STOP.

We want the passing of un-read legislation because "we don't have time" to STOP.

We want the labeling of those who disagree with the current administration as racist, extremist, radicals, to STOP.

We want our representatives, whether elected or appointed, held to the same legal standard as the rest of us law-abiding citizens. (especially tax code)

The similarities between our goals and those of the colonists who threw tea into the Boston Harbor are apparent. Charles Townshend of the House of Commons, a.k.a. the Barney Frank of colonial times, explained "Why shouldn't the Americans -- children planted by our care, nourished by our indulgence, pay off England's debt?" The logic of the government spending without respect to the people they represent is a universal and timeless practice. And I agree fully with Supreme Court Justice John Marshal when he said, "An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation." The tea parties were attended by people who are fearful that all levels of government are spending outrageously which gives them the ability to tax us without limits in the future.

Tea Party

2009-04-14T15:45:00.001-07:00

I had every intention of writing about the Tax Day Tea Parties a long time ago. But life happens! So the night before D-Day, or T-Day, I am finally putting my thoughts down! The grass-roots movement's purpose has been to connect those who advocate the free-market system, and can join in a protest against out of control government spending. Where do I sign up?

I am an advocate of the free-market system. Check.

And I have been blog-protesting against out of control government spending. Check.

Although I feel my state representatives are doing a pretty good job being a voice for us Okies, I can sympathize with those living in the states who's representatives have been quoted as saying "My constituents just don't understand." The biggest spending bills in history, which will turn into the biggest tax increases for future generations, are being voted on by people who are not listening to those that voted them into office. Taxation, without representation. A cause worthy of a Tea Party. Even in my humble state of Oklahoma, has 11 "Official Tea Parties" on schedule. But states like Texas, I counted over 70. All the conservative talking heads have jumped on the band-wagon, and will ride this to the ground. But, when it is all said and done, what will happen next?

There will be light national media coverage (other than Fox, of course!) in the name of "fairness". Several Republican representatives might have some sense knocked into them. Will this affect any of President Obama's policies? Absolutely not. I believe President Obama, Sen. Harry Reid and Cong. Nancy Pelosi are trying to push as much funding and legislation through before mid-term elections and the country revolts and they lose their winning numbers. It happened with Clinton. And how did he rule afterward the "Contract with America"? From the center. I doubt this will be a wake up call for those in the governmental trinity, Obama, Reid and Pelosi. If anything, I feel it is a unifying event for those of us who feel our country is not headed in the right direction. And what I find liberating, is that we are not unifying behind one person. But behind a movement based on common principles and traditional fiscal values. What were liberal's saying about Rush being the head of our party? I think this proves that we are in charge of our party, not one person.

You might be a right-wing extremist if...

2009-04-14T12:59:00.000-07:00

You might be a right wing extremist if get dressed up to go to Wal-Mart.

You might be a right wing extremist if you support groups that reject federal authority over state and local authority.

You might be a right wing extremist if you think a stock tip is advice on worming your hogs.

You might be a right wing extremist if you are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

You might be a right wing extremist if you've been married three times and have the same in-laws.

You might be a right wing extremist if you oppose possible passage of new restrictions on firearms.

You might be a right wing extremist if your Harley has a gun-rack.

You might be a right wing extremist if you are antagonistic toward the new presidential
administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration, social issues, and gun control.

You might be a right wing extremist if directions to your house include "turn off the paved road".

You might be a right wing extremist if you had already heard about the "Rightwing Extremism:
Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" report by the Obama Administration, by listening to hate-mongering propaganda spewing conservatives such as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity.

How Dare You, AIG

2009-03-23T13:56:00.000-07:00

As many of you read this post, it will become obvious that it is not as structured, researched, or probably as good, as my typical style. But time constraints and lack of patience for our current national leaders has left me no choice but to do a 'ranting-post'. So my apologies.

With my disclaimer out of the way, I can continue on with my thoughts. President Obama went on his, what I'd like to call, "Outrage Campaign" last week. His outrage is in unison with the majority of American's who are outraged with Wall Street's actions, government bail outs, etc. One remark summarized his thoughts, "How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?" I would like to rephrase his statement, hopefully without changing the meaning, but proving a bigger point:

"How dare AIG continue doing business as usual?"

What did the government expect? They give hundreds of billions of dollars to a failing financial institution, which is failing because of horrific business decisions, greed, and lack of regulations; put zero, ZERO, restrictions on how the money is spent, and they are shocked that they are continuing on as usual? Those of us who were opposed to government bailouts from the beginning could see this coming. And yet, they are still "too big to fail". The Federal Reserves is now discussing using trillions, trillions, of dollars to buy "toxic assets" to bailout suffering institutions. The Treasury Department is also considering similar plans. What does this excessive, ridiculous spending mean for us? The Middle Class?

President Obama's entire campaign revolved around restoring and uplifting the middle class. "Oh yes, we can!" How does his latest actions affect those who got him elected? I believe that the trillions of dollars that the government is spending to "stimulate" or "bailout" or "rescue" our financial foundations will inevidibly and absolutely result in massive inflation. The government is counting on this. If the dollar inflates, than in 5 years or 10 years when the taxpayers are expected to pay of this blackhole of endless debt, the trillions of dollars won't seem as much, because the dollar is worth so little. Who does that hurt the most? In my opinion, the middle class. We are the ones putting money away for savings, retirement, college education, etc. And when the value of the dollar decreases, which increasing the money supply without the assets will do, it will be worth less. I see all of these "rescue efforts" as tipping the first donimo, and President Bush and Sect. Paulson started it. The domino's that will inevitably follow are massive inflation, increased unemployment, higher taxes, all of which could turn this deep recession into a depression.

Dora hits puberty!

2009-03-17T21:04:00.000-07:00

Yes moms, Dora is no longer an explorer. She is an emotional, fashion conscious, bi-lingual, tweenager! So if you found the repetitive, loud-speaking, sing-a-longs annoying, morph her with Hannah Montana, and you've got Mattel's latest product! Apparently puberty transforms a football shaped head and round belly into long, flowing locks and a sleeker figure! "Dora, our heroine has moved to the big city, attends middle school and has a whole new fashionable look", according to Mattel and Nickelodeon's press release.

What I'm wondering is if the new, older Dora will have to deal with "real-life" situations found in junior high. Will her adventures change from Chocolate Mountains to bags of weed? Or will Boots be replaced with a boyfriend who wants to help her cross another type of bridge? Will the map be replaced with the Sex-Ed handbook given out in Health Class? Will her backpack now contain a cell-phone with unlimited texts, the new Jonas Brother's CD, and a fake drivers license?

I don't want my five-year old growing up to fast. Why must Nickelodeon and Mattel want to age a perpetually pre-school aged character? Elmo has remained a 3 1/2 year old red furry staple in the Muppet and Sesame Street line up. He never experienced the voice change or had girl problems. And he is still successful. The Simpson's have not aged in 20 years, and are still popular and relevant. Joan Rivers has surgically stopped the aging process and is now a successful competitor on the Celebrity Apprentice. Why must Dora grow up? I find it very disturbing....

Fundamentals are strong

2009-03-16T14:03:00.000-07:00

In an interview on Meet the Press, Christina Romer, an economic adviser for President Obama answered the question "Are the fundamentals of the economy sound?" with this response:

"The fundamentals are sound in the sense that the American workers are sound, we have a good capital stock, we have good technology".

I know my memory is short and shoddy, but this is a familiar quote. I am pretty sure I've heard someone say, the "fundamentals of the economy are strong" before. Maybe she is only echoing the message of her boss, President Obama. In a brief press conference, President Obama said on Friday the 13th, that they are "keeping focus on all the fundamental, sound aspects of our economy, all the outstanding companies, workers, all the innovation..." This is a drastic contrast from his pre-Stimulus Package rhetoric which painted our economic situation as almost "irreversible" catastrophe. But with our unemployment rate at 8.1%, the US government further in debt, a larger percentage of foreclosures, I would argue that we are worse off than we were a few months ago. Let's say, worse off than September 16, 2008, also known as "Black Monday".

In a campaign speech which I believe ended his Presidential bid, Senator John McCain made the comment that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong". Following his remarks, Barack Obama's campaign went in attack mode, referring to John McCain as being "out of touch" to the rest of America with his 7 homes. (Remember those campaign commercials?) Sen. McCain attempted in vain to explain his remarks by saying the "workers and innovation of the American people are fundamentally strong". I agreed with Sen. McCain then, and I agree with President Obama now. This is not where I take issue. I am frustrated that the McCain comment was the last nail in his presidential coffin, and yet the exact same message in much more dire circumstances from President Obama, is accepted.

Is it the message or the messenger?

HBO vs LDS

2009-03-12T07:44:00.000-07:00

Is it surprising that the HBO series "Big Love" is causing an uproar among the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly known as the Mormon Church? I have received many forwarded e-mails this past week, but had assumed it was only making headlines among Church members. That was until I was watching Good Morning America, and it was one of their lead stories! I was surprised this story followed "Bernie Madoff Goes to Jail".

First, in full disclosure, I have never seen "Big Love". We don't have a subscription to HBO. And I have no desire to see it or subscribe. I've followed some of the controversy surrounding this series, especially in regards to my Church. With one hand, "Big Love" creators ease the Church's concerns of tying them in with polygamists (who have not been members of our Church since the 1890's); and then with the other hand smack us across the face with constant connections, blurred lines, and complete factual inaccuracies. I have grown accustomed to the naive assumptions made about our Church, questions if I have "sister-wives", among other Mormon myths. I guess this is why the concept of the show "Big Love" really didn't bother me.

However, in the attempt to capture ratings and press attention, the writers decided to make it "crucial to the plot line" to include a ceremony performed in an LDS temple. This ordinance is considered sacred to the members of our Church, so much so that we don't discuss it outside the temple. Although HBO refuses to remove any scenes depicting the endowment ceremony, they assured us that "obviously, it was not [their] intention to do anything disrespectful to the Church, but to those who may be offended, we offer our sincere apology". According to producers, "the dramatization of the ceremony was vetted for accuracy by an adviser familiar with temple ceremonies". If they were stressing the need for accuracy, two contradictory and very inaccurate concepts occured to me.

First, many of the break away sects of the LDS Church (which the characters are apart of) have their own temples, with similar ordinances performed. From what I understand, they are different from what the mainstream Church practices although similar in nature. If the main family are apart of the breakaway sect, their temple scenes would be vastly different to what the Mormon Church performs, not needing a former Mormon to check for accuracy. They would need a former Fundamentalist LDS member to check for accuracy. Second, someone such as the main character in "Big Love", who according to HBO, "goes through the endowment ceremony as she faces losing her membership in the Mormon church" by the standards of our Church would not be allowed to perform in any temple ordinances while practicing polygamy or if her membership is in jeopardy. So in either contradictory case, HBO is being anything but "accurate".

Do I believe it is coincidental that HBO finally crossed this offensive line at this time? Absolutely not. During the Proposition 8 uproar, Tom Hanks, actor and executive producer of "Big Love" made disparraging remarks specifically towards the LDS members, which he later retracted. Is it coincidental that one of the guest-writers for "Big Love" is Dustin Lance Black, Oscar winning writer for "Milk" and former Mormon, who in his acceptance speech spoke about the Mormons? I believe the writers and producers of "Big Love" have been planning this disrespectful exploitation of our beliefs, and was waiting for the right time.

Why do I believe this has caught some media attention? I believe it is because many American's don't attend a Church who still practices sacred ordinances. The concept of "sacredness" has escaped many religious services, in the hopes of becoming "relevent" or "acceptable" or "mainstream". Even something as sacred as Christ's crucifixion has become materialized into ornate crosses or grusome pictorials. Our personal relationship with our Savior should never be exploited, idolized, or carelessly depicted for an HBO series. It is abhorrent to do so to any religion, and I would hope I would be as outraged if it was happening to the Catholics, Jews, or Muslims. I even hesitated voicing my opinion on this topic, not wanting to give HBO their desired goal, free publicity and higher ratings. Yet, I felt since I obviously have an opinion on this issue and a place to share it, I took advantage of that. I believe the Church leaders who issued an official statement regarding this topic were absolutely correct. "There is no evidence that extreme misrepresentations in the media that appeal only to a narrow audience have any long term negative effect on the church." Here is the Church's response in it's entirety. If you would like to voice your opinion to HBO, here is a link.

Gaffes: the gift that keeps on giving

2009-03-10T07:06:00.000-07:00

One of President Obama's campaign promises was to improve our image abroad. His articulate and even-tempered nature was a drastic contrast to the past eight years, and I believe the world was ready for this new chapter of American foreign relations. However, the past week has proved to be embarrassing for the new President and his Secretary of Gift-Giving.

I know money is tight. I know we are all cutting back, possibly giving gifts from the heart. Homemade goodies, handwritten letters, or even the unspeakable, re-gifting. Apparently, the President is no exception! Prime Minister Gordon Brown came bearing gifts, when he met with President Obama for the first time late last week. Prime Minister Brown presented President Obama with a pen holder, "crafted from the timbers of the 19th century British warship HMS President (whose sister ship, HMS Resolute, provided the wood for the Oval Office's desk)". Clearly a unique and thoughtful gift. What did the bridge-building, relationship-mending, foreign relations master give in return? A DVD BOX SET! Not only does it pale in comparison, many in the UK found it offensive. Not only is Brown blind in one eye and will most likely have difficulty watching Wizard of Oz or Casablanca, the majority of American DVD's are incompatible with British DVD players! President Obama meets with the Queen of England next month, I'm wondering if he will present her with Michael Jackson's Greatest Hits!

And the gaffe giving doesn't end with President Obama. While visiting with the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton presented him with a red button. Not just any red button. One that resembles the end of the world buttons you see in movies, the one that no one should ever push. This red button had the English word "Reset" across it, followed by the Russian word, "peregruzka". This clever, yet cheap, gift was referring to Vice President Biden's call for the two countries to "press the reset button". What a great thought, if it wasn't lost in translation! Instead of saying "Reset", the Russian translation was "Overcharged". If one word could describe American right now, it would be "overcharged"!

How in the world will this help our image abroad? If there one person that needs to be fired is the Secretary of Gift Giving! This is hilarious and yet very embarrassing. So far the gaffe's have been made with our "allies". I hope we get it right by the time we meet with some of our "enemies!"