Wake Up and Smell the Manure

So, I'm flipping channels last night and land on CNN and Larry King Live. He has a panel of four women - Janine Turner (Northern Exposure) among them - discussing Sarah Palin. Two of the women were for Sarah Palin and two against. The problem: both sides were not actually listening to each other. They would spout their rhetoric and then, while the other side was speaking, they would plan their response, without actually listening. It was just amazing to see the defense/attack of Sarah Palin and/or the Republican Party.

I love the rabidness of politics. I just wish the fervor/passion would be directed in a better manner. Forget about a rabid defense/attack against Sarah Palin, Barack Obama, the Republican Party or the Democratic Party. Your voice, your thoughts, and your energy are wasted. Direct that passion, that fervor, that rabid single mindedness toward something better: fixing the system that no longer works.

The current system of government in the United States is broken, perhaps beyond repair. How much better would our government be if the rabid defenders of either party actually put forth an equal, if not greater, amount of energy toward fixing the problem?

The current candidates are not going to fix the problem. The current candidates are part of the problem. Sarah Palin - love her or hate her - is part of the problem. The American People are part of the problem because we sit back and allow our government to stagnate and decay. We are responsible for who is currently in office, and who will be in office soon. We pick sides, when sides should not exist at all, and rabidly defend our position without looking at the bigger picture. We the people, to borrow a phrase, have failed as much as the government has failed.

It is time that we the people wake up and smell the coffee, roses, or huge piles of horse dung emanating from our nation's capitol. It is time that we the people stepped back from our rabid defense of either party, and focused on the actual ideal of fixing the broken, stagnating, decaying government that has inexorably driven our country into a recession. People are losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, and their hope because we have a government that cannot cooperate with each other, even to save a failing economy.

So, hold onto your fevered beliefs, but direct them in a way that helps, rather than hurts this nation. Defend your politicians of choice, but not so rabidly that you lose sight of the greater picture: we are a country in crisis.

Just because you are Republican/Democrat does not mean you are honor-bound to vote Republican/Democrat. Sometimes, change comes from going against the flow, rather than with the flow. I see most political mind people as lemmings - those cute, adorable little creatures, that have no greater sense than to follow the leader over the cliff to certain death.

Wake up, dear little lemmings!!

S

Random Thoughts About Sarah Palin

Obviously, my I Want list is not working . . . yet. I still have hope.

So, I'm scanning the Internet (cnn.com - favorite news site), and what do I find, an interesting article with a ton of different pieces of information. The best, dear Sarah P talking about her $150,000 make-over. First, I'll admit, there is a double-standard in talking about her hair, make-up and wardrobe. Second - she still accepted a brand spanking new top of the line wardrobe.

According to dear Sarah P "most of the clothes are still in her campaign airplane . . . and the designer clothing she has worn, she said, will be returned, auctioned off or donated to charity" (http://www.cnn.com/). In fact, her "favorite shop is a consignment shop in Anchorage, Alaska, called Out of the Closet" (http://www.cnn.com/).

First - thousands upon thousands of dollars of clothes are just sitting in an airplane? We are in the middle of an economic crisis where people are having a hard time putting gas in their cars and food on their table, let alone buying new clothes - and she has a frigging new wardrobe sitting on her airplane??? Go figure.

Second - the clothes will allegedly be donated to charity after the election. What charity? The RNC??? Like they need more money. I mean, if the clothes are going to be donated to charity, I'd like to think the money would go to a worthy organization . . . American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association, a cancer organization, AIDS organization, etc.

Third - So, if dear Sarah P's favorite store is a thrift store, then why in the heck is she wearing the designer clothes? Why not present herself as a real person, and not some RNC puppet with the strings clearly showing? I'd be far more impressed - if that's even possible - with her had she presented herself to me, and not the image the RNC thought would draw in more votes. For the record - the clothes, the cars, the house, the jewelry - do not impress me. People - on their own, no adornments - impress me. I don't care what you wear, drive, or where you live. I care about you - as a person. It's that simple, and perhaps all politicians should get a clue!

Now, because it's so obvious, I must comment on her choice of stores. Out of the Closet??? Uh, is she sure it's not gay owned (you know her stance on gay marriage by now)???? I'm just saying . . .

I Want . . .

• A day without politics.
• A day I don't have to hear about a McCain supporter allegedly being attacked by an Obama supporter.
• A day I don't have to hear about the fact that the RNC spent $150,000 to make-over dear Sarah P.
• A day without seeing an attack ad by either party.
• A day without all the media hoopla surrounding dear Sarah P - do you realize the sound of her voice makes my dogs bark?? Seriously. No kidding at all. My dogs don't like dear Sarah P. Not only are the boyz adorable, they also have good sense.
• A day without talk about the current economic crisis or plunging stocks. The country is in the current crisis, in part, because of the current Administration; though, the current Administration can only accept part of the blame.
• A day without hearing something about Miley Cyrus, Lindsey Lohan, Brittney Spears, or any other celebrity. WTF, people, do we not have lives of our own???
• A day without any reality television except Project Runway. I'm sorry, but reality tv is carefully edited tv to show the worst in people, rather than the best in people.
• A day where I can sleep past 4 AM. Note to my dogs: if you can read and access the Internet, please pay attention.
• A day so devoid of anything to blog about!!!!!!

There's my wish list. Now, see what you can do about the last one on the list. Because, so my warped logic dictates, if the last one happens, then all the others would have happened. I'm just saying . . .

S

YMCA

What better thing for a gay man to write about than the Y.M.C.A?? C'mon, you know, you know the dance unless you've been living under a rock for far too long.

The YMCA of Middle Tennessee is "altering its membership plan to become friendlier to all, including same sex couples" (http://www.wkrn.com/). Whoo-hoo! According to the news story, "the family membership category will be changed to two plus, meaning two adults plus dependents that live in the same household would qualify for a membership together, including same sex couples" (http://www.wkrn.com/). Again, whoo-hoo.

Of course, this story is not without its detractors - Cornerstone Church Pastor Maury Davis. According to this allegedly enlightened Pastor, "the change goes against Christian principles".

Yeah, last time I checked, Christian principles were all about discriminating about your fellow human beings. I'm sure theres is some sort of commandment or something in the Bible that states "Thou shall discriminate against people because you feel you should discriminate against people". Okay, so not my best work. Still, you should get my point. I just love it when hypo-Christians take the Bible out of context to suit their own purposes.

The very fact that a Christian organization is willing to change its policies so they are not discriminatory, is admirable. The very fact that an allegedly Christian Pastor has a problem with the decision is just . . . SAD!

It is time to put discrimination of any sort to bed. There is no place for discrimination in today's world. Discrimination is an outdated, ignorant ideal, that needs to become a part of ancient history, and not modern/future history. The time is NOW to stand up against discrimination. I'm just saying . . .

S

p.s. I bet you can't get the words of the song out of your mind right now, can you??? Hate it!

Blogoholic

OMG, this election is turning me into a blogoholic. I used to be a nice, normal (well, not if you ask my sisters - but that's a whole other story, and a few trips to therapy on my part) person. I'd occasionally dip into the blogsphere, post something, and go about my normal life. I did not, did not, did not, post more than once a day. Heck, in the old days (i.e., before this cursed election ruined my life), I was lucky to post once a month, let alone once a day. Now, every time I go onto the Internet, something about this cursed (drat and double drat) election grabs my attention. My mind slips into blog mode and all hope for normalcy (at least until I get home and can pour myself a glass of wine) slips away from me. I become a blogmie (that's a zombie that blogs, just in case you're wondering).

What's happened now, you're wondering? Okay, even if you're not wondering, I'm going to tell you, so you might as well keep reading.

This happened, and then this, and then this (which I blogged about earlier this morning). OMG!!!!!!! It's a Palinlaplooza!!!!

First - dear Sarah P has no clue about what the Vice President actually does. Uh, shouldn't she have researched that before signing up for the job? Talk about no experience.

Second - $150,000 for hair and make-up????? Can't the woman afford to dress herself? Oh, that's right, she left the town of Wasilla, Alaska $27 million in debt after her term as mayor. Of course dear Sarah P cannot afford her own clothes. Again, I ask of you, do we really want this woman as Vice President of the United States. Suzi Orman would be a much better candidate. At least she knows how to manage money. I'm just saying . . .

Third - well, I blogged about that earlier, so go read that post.

Have a nice day!

S

Every Vote Counts

Okay, another election post. I know, I'm tired of them too. Only 13 more days, and then, at least for almost another four years, I can blog about something else. One can hope!

The other day one of my co-workers said to the other: Well, I guess your vote will cancel out my vote. My partner - yes, there is such a thing as a gay Republican (p.s., don't tell the Republican party, they might get scared) - said the same thing to me at one time. In his defense, he doesn't always vote Republican. Anyhow, the point of this post is: every vote counts. If I vote for one party and my partner the other party, both of our votes count. Neither vote cancels out the other vote. That, dear readers, is a frakkin' common misconception. The President of the United States - unfortunately - is not elected by popular vote. If he/she was elected in that manner, than, yes, votes might have the ability to cancel each other out. Since the President is elected based on Electoral Votes, every single vote counts.

So, what I'm saying with this post is: get your butts out there and vote. Do not think, oh, Suzi's vote is going to cancel mine out, so why should I vote???? Your (massive generalization, in case anybody is keeping count) vote counts. I'm just saying . . .

S

Need I Say More

Check this out! Apparently, dear Sarah P has altered some of the expense accounts during her Governorship of Alaska. It seems that dear Sarah P took her children on some trips she shouldn't have, but then altered the accounts to make it look like it was official business. According to the article . . . In the amended reports, Palin added phrases such as "First Family attending" and "First Family invited" to explain the girls' attendance. "The governor said, 'I want the purpose and the reason for this travel to be clear,' " said Linda Perez, state director of administrative services. Uh, wouldn't logic - I know, I'm talking about dear Sarah P and have stepped into oxy-moronic territory again - dictate that you fill out the forms correctly the first time, and not once you know the forms are about to become public record. Please, dear Sarah P, give the American people some credit!!!

Here's another of my favorites: The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race, and a trip to New York, where the governor attended a five-hour conference and stayed with 17-year-old Bristol for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel. I mean, when is it official business for the State of Alaska to pay for the Governor and her daughters to watch a snowmobile race???? A 5 day stay for a 5 hour conference? I mean, really, dear Sarah P should have to pay back the State of Alaska for the extra 4 days she stayed in New York . . . at the State of Alaska's expense.

Do we really want this woman one step away from the Presidency of the United States? We have enough of a deficit right now without allowing dear Sarah P anywhere near a governmental expense form. I'm just saying . . .

S

Church burns Porn

Okay, admit it, I got your attention with that title. Here's the story, and it's not about a man named Brady . . . a Church in FL bought some land, upon which stood an old drive in movie theater that used to show porn, lots, and lots, and lots of porn. The church discovered all this porn when they went into the building. So, what's a church to do with an overload of porn??? Why, have a massive bonfire of course!

Okay, can you sense just a little bit of snark in the above paragraph. Of course you do, that was my intent. The church in question, of course, thought the burning of the porn was symbolic in showing a fresh start for the Church and somehow erasing the past of the land. In my opinion, it was only an amazing show of both ignorance and censorship. Number 1 - last time I checked, burning film creates noxious chemicals. I sure as heck hope that all the children and adults present wore masks. Oh wait, I watched the video and none of them did so. Smart move, eh? Okay, now for the ignorance part, the pastor made the comment that burning the films was better than letting them get out in the world. That's the censorship part, just in case you're wondering. Who is he, to decide what should or should not get out in the world. Yes, I understand, he's a man of God and all that jazz. Being a man (or woman, for that matter) of God does not make that man/woman any more intelligent than anybody else. It also, at least in my humble opinion, does not give that man/woman the right to decide what should or should not get out in the world.

As I've mentioned before, and will again and again until ignorance no longer exists in this world (fat chance of that ever happening), I, and probably most humans, are capable of making decisions for themselves. I, we, don't need other people to make these decisions for me/us. If there is a television program I don't like, I switch the channel. If there is a book I don't want to read, or that I find offensive, I don't read the book. No matter what my personal feelings are about porn, if somebody wants to watch it in the privacy of their own home - more power to them. Forget the symbolism of burning the porn to create a fresh start. The burning of the porn was an act of censorship, of that particular church attempting to send a message about what they believe is right or wrong. For the love of (insert favorite Deity here), if we weren't meant to procreate, we wouldn't have been instructed to go forth, be fruitful (I handle that one really well, btw), and multiply. There is no dictate, at least none that I know, that says how we must go forth, be fruitful, and multiply. Those films probably had some pretty good suggestions. I'm just saying . . .

S

Sarah Palin is at it again. Shouldn't her views be quite similar to that of John McCain, especially since she is his running mate? Yes, I thought so too. Recently, however, she opened her mouth and . . . well, we all know what happens when she opens her mouth. Nothing good. Explosive gas. Anyhow, she clearly stated that she goes against McCain's beliefs about same sex marriage, and the fact that there should be a constitutional amendment prohibiting such marriages.

Sarah Palin is a throwback to an ignorant past America can no longer afford to embrace. It is time for our country to move forward, and not backward. It is time for the People in Power (PiPs), to embrace change, rather than continue to stagnate in the Pool of Outdated Beliefs. It is time to stop oppressing people on a daily basis. It is 2008, people, not 1908. We are an allegedly enlightened society. Discrimination is wrong. Applying Biblical passages out of context to suit your own ignorance, is wrong. Wake up and smell the Starbucks!

Now that I've ranted about that, let's explore the issue of marriage.

First off - marriage is based on religious beliefs. It doesn't matter whether a judge marries a couple, a priest, a pastor, someone with an Internet minister license, or a justice of the peace. The concept of marriage is religious based. It's in the Bible, after all.

Second - the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America clearly sets forth a separation between Church and State.

Third - so, if marriage is a religious based institution, and you enact laws to prohibit marriage between same-sex couples, isn't that unconstitutional since there is clearly not a separation of Church and State in that instance? Hmmmm . . . In my opinion - YES! Since there is no way to remove the religious stigma from marriage, it does not seem legal (at least to me) for individual states or the country as a whole to enact legislation that prohibits marriage between same sex couples without violating the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Fourth - why in the hell hasn't someone challenged the legislation enacted???

Okay, that's about it for right now. With Sarah Palin around, and 13 days left until the election, I'm sure I'll have plenty to blog about in the coming days. She is just an absolute joy, isn't she? She provides so much fodder for my blog. Geesh!

S

Comments

Just a little note about comments for my blog. I moderate all comments. I do not do this to limit free speech or censor any one's thoughts. I do this to stop the crazy spammers in the world, and the people that insert links into their comments. I do not necessarily agree with the comments I allow on my site. I still allow them, for the most part, unless they are extremely derogatory, hateful, and all that jazz.

I made an exception with a comment I allowed earlier today: there's an embedded link in the comment. I will not make such an exception a second time. For anyone who is a part of blogger, your name appears in the comment and people can click on your name to review your profile and see whatever blogs you have through blogger. Please, whatever you do, do not insert a link to your blog within your comment. It will not get posted. Any comment with a link will not get posted. It's how I operate. It is my blog after all.

S

Brilliance

I just hate it when someone with greater brilliance then I have, beats me to the punch. I couldn't have said it better. In fact, I couldn't come close to saying it better. I bow to the greater brilliance of Garrison Keillor. In a recent article he wrote the following:

It was dishonest, cynical men who put forward a clueless young woman for national office, hoping to juice up the ticket, hoping she could skate through two months of chaperoned campaigning, but the truth emerges: The lady is talking freely about matters she has never thought about. The American people have an ear for B.S. They can tell when someone's mouth is moving and the clutch is not engaged. When she said, "One thing that Americans do at this time, also, though, is let's commit ourselves just every day, American people, Joe Six-Pack, hockey moms across the nation, I think we need to band together and say never again. Never will we be exploited and taken advantage of again by those who are managing our money and loaning us these dollars," people smelled gas.

Here is the full article. Have I mentioned I think this article is brilliant? If not, I do. If I did . . . well, get over it. I'm allowed to repeat myself. It is my blog after all. Read the full article. He really nails things down. I just love the visual of the above paragraph, especially the line "people smelled gas". Too damn funny.

S

Bush to Give Pep Talk to Anxious Country

The title of this blog is a headline on one of the news services this morning. Isn't the title an oxy-moron? I'm finding more and more of those lately, btw. I think the oxy-morons had a party with a little Viagra involved and are breeding like rabbits now. I'm just saying . . .

So, dear (add heavy dose of sarcasm/snark to that word) President Bush is going to give a pep talk to an anxious country about the mess he created. Oh wait, sorry, he didn't create, he just pushed it over the precipice into a bottomless pit. I mean, really, people, is anything he can say going to change the current economic crisis? No! Is anything he is going to say really going to calm the fears of the nation when unemployment continues to increase and the stock market continues to tumble? What words can he say to ease the fear of someone who lost $32,000 out of their 401K? What about 100,000 thousand? What about people who no longer have homes because the banks lent them money that the banks knew they could not pay back? What comfort can a - thankfully - departing President, who did more harm to this country (at least in my snarky opinion) than good), offer right now? What fears can he allay? How many times can he go on television and read the words off a tele-prompter before he realizes that nothing he says can actually turn this country around or ease the fears of people watching their retirement savings shrink into nothingness?

There is nothing he can say or do that will change what has already happened, and what is currently happening. The time for change was four years ago when he was mistakenly elected to office a 2nd time. Boy, didn't this country pay for that mistake? Yes, I know, he's not solely at fault for the current crisis or the problems in the country. He is a part of the problem, however, as is the current administration, and I'll go so far as to say the current House/Senate/Whatever. We need dramatic, positive change in this country where the Administration does not bow down to the whims of the rich and conservative. I'm just saying . . .

S

Where's Forrest Gump When You Need Him?

The phrase "stupid is, as stupid does" popped into my mind just a little bit ago. I told you somebody, somewhere would do something stupid . . . Boy, was I right, and I didn't have to wait more than an hour or so.

You go to college, take all the required courses, make good grades, and reach graduation day. The routine of millions of people every year. Once you graduate, you have your diploma and go out into the real world to - hopefully - find a decent job based on your college degree. The degree is, after all, just a little bit more than a piece of paper. It is the magic key to allegedly higher paying jobs. What happens when the magic key is taken away? A recent graduate of Brigham Young University (that Mormon school) is about to find out.

Brigham Young University just sent a letter out to one of it's recent graduates (Aug 15, 2008 graduation date) and basically told him his degree is worth nothing because he is "not in good honor code standing to graduate because you had been excommunicated from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the affiliated sponsor of BYU". Why was he excommunicated? Because this recent graduate created a Mormon Beefcake (yummy!) calendar. Let me tell you, those Mormon's are good-looking. So, there is a hold on this young man's graduation until he is "reinstated as a member of the Church in good standing".

So, this recent graduate's degree is not worth the paper it is printed on because he produced a beefcake calendar. WWJD???? I guess he'd pull a persons degree according to BYU.

Can you get any more idiotic than this? Yes, I'm sure you can, and I'm sure someone will, and I'm sure my fingers will be flying over the keyboard in response any moment now. I'm just saying . . .

S

Family Portraits

Since the election is - thankfully - almost over, I figure I'd better find some other things to write about. Oh, I know, somebody, sometime soon, is going to make an allegedly stupid comment and force me to respond on this blog. The holiday season is coming up. What was it last year? Oh, that's right, no Christmas trees because they might offend somebody. Scroll through the archives of this blog and you'll find an entry or two about that bit of stupidity from human society!

Today, I'm going to write about family portraits. Why? Well, because a friend of mine just had one done. He was all dressed up in a fancy suit, the wife in her pretty dress, and the two kids in equally pretty dresses (oh, the kids were both girls, just in case you were wondering). My question: why in the heck do we dress to the nines for family portraits? What's wrong with dressing casually, in everyday wear? Why does society insist that family portraits must look stuffy and uncomfortable? Trust me, I have a black and white family photo (this was before digital cameras and, I guess, before color film - I'll have to research that one a little more, I'm not that old) of my brother, sisters, and I taken when I was about two. I was a cute little devil. Not much has changed in the intervening years. My sisters have on their matching dresses and my brother and I are in our little suits with bow ties (yes, another ancient custom that is - thankfully - no longer in practice). I did look pretty sharp (and cute) with my bow tie. The thing is, I was also probably as uncomfortable as hell. Perhaps that's where my dislike for suits and ties originated. I'll have to ask a therapist about that.

What I'm really trying to say is, why do we take pictures of ourselves, that don't actually represent ourselves? Is that the real me (cute as can be) in the suit with the bow tie looking absolutely adorable? Of course not! I was two years old. I was probably more comfortable running around in a diaper . . . or naked, for that matter. I was two after all. Clothes aren't really that important to a two year old. I'm just saying . . .

So, at what point in our lives, do we decide that we need to dress all nice for a family portrait, if that dressing nice is not actually representative of the person having their portrait taken? I do not have an answer to that question. I guess it's just another one of those mysterious things that happen, kind of like the sock going missing in the dryer, or once a person reaches age 50, how gravity tends to affect certain parts of the human body.

S

Relationships

For a change, this blog is not going to discuss politics. Instead, I'm going to discuss the lovely subject of relationships, or rather, the break up of relationships. Yes, I know, a very delicate subject.

Picture it: your best friend is dating someone, they seem to have a good relationship, you like the person your friend is dating, they move in together, and then - BAM (Emeril at his best) - they have broken-up. What in the heck is a gay man to do when two people he likes breaks up? I mean, I like them both. Okay, so I've known one longer than the other. I like them both. Oh, man, I've suddenly found myself between the proverbial rock and a hard (don't even let your nasty little minds go there) place. Let me tell you. It's a very tight squeeze . . . almost tighter than trying to fit into my jeans about a month or so ago. Too much ice cream over the summer. Oh, did I mention that one half of the couple started dating another man within a week???


Picture it - the sequel: your best friend is dating someone, they seem to have a good relationship, and then - BAM (the whole Emeril thing again) - they break-up. Your friend is devastated. A few weeks later you learn that another friend is now dating the ex-boyfriend of your friend. Whoa!!!


So what do you do in situations like this? Run screaming into the night and never look back. Okay, that's not really an option. Pretend you're a politician and lie like hell! Dang, and I was trying not to talk about politics. Pretend that you know nothing about nothing! Ooops, there I went back into the whole political thang!

In the first scenario, only a week and all that jazz, you just do the best you can do. I mean, how do you tell a friend that his ex-boyfriend is already seeing somebody else? This is not something you can bring up in casual conversation. "Hey, man, did you know your ex is banging the waiter in the back alley?" Trust me, that's not a good start to a conversation. In that instance, discretion is definitely the better part of valor. Say nothing and deal with the consequences later. Let someone else be the bearer of bad news. Run screaming into the night.

In the second scenario, it's a little more tricky since you're good friends with both parties involved. Again, run screaming into the night seems the best option, especially if the one friend doesn't know anything at this point, but has strong suspicions. Sometimes, however, you just have to bite the proverbial bullet and be the bearer of bad tidings. My simple advice in this area was that someone needs to tell the friend that his ex-boyfriend is already dating somebody else. Do not, whatever you do, mention the name of that somebody else. The crap is going to hit the fan soon enough and you, the bearer of bad news, do not necessarily need to get splattered by the crap quite so soon.

Now, while I'm talking about relationships. Here's something you shouldn't do when trying to keep people from finding out about your new relationship: do not go to the local gay bar two weekends in a row with your new boyfriend. I'm just saying . . . There's no such thing as a secret in the gay community. Telephone! Telegraph! Tell-a-gay-man! The gayvine knows no limits and is the source of all information, and misinformation within the community. Be discrete. Stay home with the new love of your life. That way, dear friends, your new boyfriend's ex-boyfriend won't have a clue . . . at least until the next time you appear in public with your new boyfriend, who happens to be the ex-boyfriend of your good friend. Whew!!

As all the above situations remind me, sometimes, life is a bitch! I hate it when friends break-up. I never know what to do, who I should invite to margarita night, who I shouldn't invite, and all the other fun - heavy on the sarcasm on that word, just in case you're wondering - social situations that crop up after a break-up. It would be nice if I could just only like one person in a relationship. That rarely happens, my friends. My advice to all my friends who are currently couples: please don't break up, because I'll have to disown both halves of the couple just to remain fair to all. I'm just saying . . .

S

Sarah Palin's World of Delusion

What world is Sarah Palin (Sarah P for short) living in? It's definitely not the real world. As everyone should know by now, unless they're still living under the proverbial rock, Sarah P's ethics were in question over the firing of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. In effect, a bi-partisan committee (though McCain's campaign alleges the committee is partisan) found that "Palin's efforts to get Wooten fired broke a state ethics law that bars public officials from pursuing personal interest through official action" (cnn.com) - see full article here. The official response from Palin's camp is: Branchflower's conclusion that Palin had violated state ethics law was wrong, because no financial interest was involved. Palin told reporters over the weekend that she had been "cleared of any legal wrongdoing, any hint of any kind of unethical activity there."

Now my question: what world is Sarah P living in? Obviously, it is a world of delusion. The report clearly states she violated ethics; yet, her attorney states she did not. Sarah P thinks she did nothing wrong.

Sarah P needs to go back to her delusional world and let someone who actually knows the difference between right and wrong run for Vice President and, in the bigger picture, run the government. Oh wait, that totally eliminates everyone currently serving/running our government. Dang, hate it when that happens. Well, at least, someone less delusional than Sarah P should be the Republican Vice Presidential candidate. Is that even possible? I'm just saying . . .

S

Association

The entries just keep coming! Check out this article from cnn.com. The word for the day is association. Barack Obama is continually being slammed by the Republican candidates for President and Vice President for his association with William Ayers, a 1960s radical; a terrorist. This article turns the table on Senator McCain and lists a few of his associates: Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond, and Robert Byrd. Each of these men were racists, to such an extreme that one of them belonged to the Klu Klux Klan (definitely a terrorist organization) and all of them wholly supported the segregation and oppression of African Americans. Now, as the article points out, based on the logic of John McCain and Sarah Palin with Obama's association with Ayers, McCain is associated with . . . well, I painted the picture for you, and I'm sure you can see it clearly.

As I pointed out to my co-worker the other day, nobody truly knows their friends. You might have hung out with a great guy in high school, only to find out that he's a rapist. Your best friend might abuse her children. There might be a sex offender living in your neighborhood. By the (misguided) logic used by McCain and Palin, you (yes, a generalization that would make any English teacher . . . or school principal cringe) are guilty by . . . association. Since you knew the child abuser, rapist, or lived in the same neighborhood as the sex offender, you are - in the words of Sarah Palin - palling around with them. Don't you hate it when your words come back to bite you in the nether region????

In the end, as the article points out, the association argument is "weak and impotent" (where's Bob Dole when you need him - EDS commercial, people!).

Lastly, the best point of all of the article is: What I find to be more deplorable is to hear McCain advisers say they want to turn the page to anything but the issue number one -- the economy. (cnn.com - 10/08/2008)

Amen to that, my brother!!

S

Read This

Go here. The link is to a blog written by an 82 year old woman about Sarah Palin. I find it absolutely hysterical. Too dang funny. OMG!!!

The Debate

This will be brief and to the point. At last night's debate, when Senator McCain was asked to prioritize three things (health care, economy, and something else - sorry, first cup of coffee hasn't hit yet), he made the statement that he would work on all three at the same time. Excuse me, is that the sound of ice forming in hell? This is the same man who could not multitask and focus on his campaign and the economic crisis at the same time. This is the same man who suspended his campaign to help the economy. BTW, in case anyone is wondering, the economy is still in the crapper.

As I was thinking about this entry this morning, I realized one simple thing: I was assuming that Senator McCain was incapable of multitasking, i.e., running his campaign and dealing with the economic crisis. After careful thought, I realize that there wasn't any multitasking involved at all. Senator McCain is not running his Presidential campaign, his co-workers, advisers, and speechwriters are running his campaign. They tell him where to go, hand him a speech, and prepare statements for him when he wants to attack Barack Obama. So really, there was no need to suspend his campaign since he wasn't really - at least in my opinion - doing much in the first place. Now, if he'd just quit whining about suspending his campaign, which, technically was never suspended, since all the little people were still working behind the scenes, I'd be a really happy camper.

Also, in case you watched the debate, go here to get the facts. Oh, and lastly, John McCain repeated some of the things Sarah Palin said about Barack Obama during the Vice Presidential debate. I guess it's fairly obvious now that originality does not exist with the Republican ticket. I'm just saying . . .

S

Sarah Palin Forgets To Tell the Full Truth . . . Again

Here we go again . . . does she never learn?

Republican vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin said Saturday, October 4, that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is "someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country." (cnn.com)

Once again, poor, deluded Sarah Palin makes a - mostly - false comment. She is, in part, according to this article, referring to 1960s radical William Ayers, who happens to live in the same neighborhood as Barack Obama. This is not somebody that Obama pals around with, only someone who lives in the same neighborhood. A fact which Obama brought up earlier this year.

The actual facts that poor deluded Sarah Palin failed to relay in her speech are:

There is no indication that Ayers and Obama are now "palling around," or that they have had an ongoing relationship in the past three years. Also, there is nothing to suggest that Ayers is now involved in terrorist activity or that other Obama associates are. (cnn.com - factcheck)

I guess her false statements should be expected. Barack is making similar statements. What's a poor voter to do? Go to one of the many fact check sites and spend a little time researching the truth before making the final decision to vote. The fact is (at least in my opinion), there is not a politician alive who allegedly tells the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Politicians have a history of taking things out of context and presenting them as truth, hoping beyond hope that voters are going to take them at their word. Isn't that another one of those oxy-morons? What person in their right mind would believe what a politician tells them? Have we learned nothing from no new taxes? Or wait, what about the infamous - and nonexistent - WMDs???

I'm just saying . . .

S

Is it so hard for a politician to tell the truth?

Case in point - during last night's debate, Sarah Palin made the following statement "Barack had 94 opportunities to side on the people's side and reduce taxes, and 94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction — 94 times."

What Sarah, obviously either at her own discretion or the insistence of the Republican Party, failed to mention was the following:

–23 were against proposed tax cuts.

— 7 were "for measures that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on a relative few, either corporations or affluent individuals."

– 11 were to increase taxes on people making more than $1 million a year, to help fund programs such as Head Start, school nutrition, or veterans' health care.

– 53 were votes on budget resolutions or amendments that "could not have resulted by themselves in raising taxes," though many "were clear statements of approval for increased taxes"

The total also includes multiple votes on the same measures. Annenberg says a close look at the record reveals that Obama has "voted consistently to restore higher tax rates on upper income taxpayers but not on middle- or low-income workers."

The Fact Check Verdict: Misleading. Palin's summary ignores the fact that some of the votes were for measures to lower taxes for many Americans, while increasing them for a much smaller number of taxpayers. The total also includes multiple votes on the same measures and budget votes that would not directly lead to higher taxes.

Note: All of the above information came from this article on cnn.com.

The fact is, Sarah Palin told enough of the truth for her statement not to be an outright lie. She just failed to fill in pertinent details, obviously hoping the voting public was ignorant and would not bother checking facts. What, is she living beneath a rock?? Google is my friend. A good portion of the voting public knows how - and will - to check facts. Perhaps Sarah, and every other politician out there, might want to consider that option before they lie by omission.

Now, since I'm being fair here, let's pull out the following statement from Joe Biden - "As a matter of fact, John recently wrote an article in a major magazine saying that he wants to do forthe health care industry (is) deregulate it and let the free market move like he did for the banking industry."

Now for the facts, my friends.

In Congress, Sen. John McCain has frequently supported deregulation. Some aspects of that deregulation are now widely blamed for the problems on Wall Street.

In the current issue of a magazine for the American Academy of Actuaries, McCain discussed a change he wants to bring to the health care market: allowing people to buy plans across state lines. "Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the lastdecade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation," he wrote in the magazine called "Contingencies."

Biden and Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama have pointed to the first part of that quote to bolster their argument that McCain wants to see the health care industry undergo the same changes as the banking industry. But the reform McCain wants for health care — state deregulation — is only one of several types of deregulation that reshaped the banking industry. McCain has not proposed reshaping the health care industry in all the same ways as banks.
McCain and his opponents disagree over what impact state deregulation could have on the health care industry. McCain says the increased competition would benefit consumers; Obama says consumers would lose key protections, and insurance companies would be given more power.

Though a frequent fan of deregulation, McCain blames the current Wall street mess partly on federal regulatory agencies failing to do their jobs, and vows to "replace the outdated patchwork quilt of regulatory oversight" with a high-level, bipartisan oversight board.

Verdict:Misleading. McCain does want to overhaul state oversight of health care, but the deregulation he is calling for is not nearly as extensive as what was done to the banking system.

Note: All of the above information came from this article on cnn.com.

Again, Biden told a partial instead of a full truth. In effect, like Sarah Palin he lied. Enough with the lies, people. Try telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth for a change.


Also, check out this - very interesting.
S

Whine, whine, and more whine . . .

Whine, whine, and more whine . . . and the election continues! Is it November yet??? What's the latest whine from Republican country. Click here.

Basically, John McCain is down in the polls. His response, as can be found in the linked article is quite classic. According to the article, "Sen. John McCain jokingly said Thursday that Sen. Barack Obama's poll numbers are rising as the economy seems to sink "because life isn't fair."" (cnn.com). Sen. McCain went on to clarify (didn't read like a joke to me - I'm just saying . . .), "He certainly did nothing for the first few days," McCain told Fox News on Thursday. "I suspended my campaign, took our ads down, came back to Washington, met with the House folks and got on the phone, and also had face-to-face meetings." (cnn.com)

For the record, Obama did not do nothing. He did make plenty of phone calls - as McCain reluctantly acknowledges.

Would you like some cheese with that whine, Senator McCain? I mean, really. The only thing the suspension of his campaign proved (to me, and quite a few people I talked with) is that the man who hopes to become the next President of the United States is unable to focus on two things at once. I can picture it now: there's a hurricane a coming and nature is calling. What's a man to do? He can't handle two things at once. Oh well, guess since he's distended he'll have to go void. Okay, so two totally different things, but I think you get my point. Senator McCain - like Barack Obama - should have kept his campaign going and called whoever he needed to call to get things moving toward the economic bailout. This is the age of technology after all - telephones, cell phones, instant messaging, emails, and all that jazz. What he did in person, he could have done in some other way. There was no need to suspend his campaign. He should have proven, to himself and the country, that he is capable of multi-tasking.

Now that his decision is biting him in the nether regions, all he can do is . . . whine, whine, and more whine!

Senator McCain made a choice that did not turn out as well as he expected. That happens to everybody at some point in their life. I have three words for you Senator McCain: Get Over It! I'm sorry, I know this is probably harsh; but he sounds like a spoiled brat who did not get his way. Life is not fair, Senator McCain. Bad things happen all the time. If you cannot accept responsibility for your choices as a Senator, how in the heck are you going to take responsibility for your choices as the - potential (hopefully not in the lifetimes of anybody I know) - next President of the United States. Well, uh, I really didn't press that red button!! BAM!

S

Age

In a recent speech, Sarah Palin - again reading words written for her, because after the Katie Couric interview, everybody knows she can't speak on her own - made the following comment about Joe Biden: "I haven't met him, but I've been hearing about him since, like, second grade." Okay, here's the rub: Joe Biden is younger than John McCain. Isn't her slap in the face to Biden a double slap to McCain? I would think the Republican drones that write the speeches, would have a little more sense - oh, wait, that's an oxymoron isn't it? - than to bring up Biden's age, when McCain is older. I'm just saying . . .

S

Suspended Campaign

I'm sure by now everyone has heard that John McCain wants to temporarily suspend his political campaign for President so he can help deal with the current economic crisis. WTF!!! As a dear friend of mine pointed out: when he becomes president, will he not be able to handle two things at one time???? I agree 100%.

I also think that McCain has probably done one of the more stupid moves in his political career. If one person - my dear friend - has the thought that McCain cannot handle more than one thing at a time (definitely not an assest for the leader of a country), than other people have thought the same thing. I know that if I had any confidence in McCain's ability as a leader in the first place, it would have completely disappeared after his latest statment.

Now, some might say - oh, it's a good thing, he's showing priorities by focusing on the economy. The question is: as President, what happens when there are two major things he needs to focus on at the same time? You can't just suspend one major thing to deal with another major thing. Life, unfortunately, is not that simple. We don't have the leisure to decide what we want to focus on in this life. To me, it is a slap in the face to the American people for John McCain to suspend his political campaign. He should be able to campaign and focus on the economic crisis. If he can't, then perhaps he needs to bow out of the election.

S

Clay Aiken is Gay

And this is news? I mean, unless you've been living under a rock, I think everybody figured out which team Clay played on. I mean seriously, folks, this is the biggest un-announcement since Ellen announced she was gay. I'm just saying . . . I mean, he's actually come out of his supersized closet and announced he was gay to the two people who did not know!!! Ah, the joys of living life in the Land of Delusion.

S

Women Cheat Too . . . and other things

Okay, I know that's an odd title, but . . . I was watching The View this morning and one of the hot topics was men cheating. The whole discussion centered on men - never once did any of the ladies of The View mention that women also cheat. It was all about the men today. Obviously, the ladies of The View have never watched Lifetime TV, because in those movies, women cheat all the time. I'm just saying . . .

Seriously, though, I think it's unfair that men were given such a hard time without recognizing the fact that women cheat on their boyfriends/husbands as well. The fact is, both men and women cheat on their significant others. Perhaps men cheat more than men. Perhaps only men get caught at cheating more. Perhaps women, possibly more clever than men, cheat more often, but only get caught cheating less. Now, there's a thought for the day.

Other topics on The View - Blackberries (the PDA) and speechwriters.

Here's my brief opinion . . .

Blackberries - don't have one, don't want one, and am perfectly content without one. I don't need to be in touch with the world 24/7. I don't want to be in touch with the world 24/7. When I come home a the end of the day, pour my glass of wine, and pick up my book, the last thing I want is an interruption, whether phone call, text message or email. The same thing applies if I am watching Project Runway. I want the solitude and the disconnect from the world. If I'm out to dinner with somebody - turn off your phone, turn off your Blackberry, and focus on me. I think it is the height of rudeness to text, email, or answer a phone when out to dinner with friends. If you can't focus on the people you are with, then perhaps you shouldn't have come out to dinner in the first place.

Speechwriting - the point raised was that the politicians hire speechwriters, so that we are not actually hearing what the speaker truly believes. Sarah Palin's RNC speech is the perfect example. It was a cleverly staged speech to present the views of the Republican Party, and not necessarily the views of Sarah Palin. Unfortunately, this dilemma plays across the board of politics and is not limited to a single party. Whoopi - like me - wants to hear what the person actually believes and feels they can do for the country, not what some highly paid speech writer feels the candidate should believe and do for the country. For the most part the other ladies of The View agreed with Whoopi. Hopefully, in the debates, the true personas of the candidates will emerge since the speech writers - should - have the night off.

S

The Honeymoon is Over!!

For those who even care . . .

• Sarah Palin's favorable rating drops, unfavorable rating rises
• Barack Obama regains lead in national polls
• Obama has been aggressively attacking John McCain's economic policies
• Neither candidate has shown expertise on economy, David Gergen says

The above bullet points come from this article.

As you'll find out if you're not lazy and actually click on the linked article, the honeymoon with Palin is over. Her favorable rating has dropped and her unfavorable rating has increased. I guess more and more people are checking out the fact websites and realizing that there is more - not necessarily better - to Sarah Palin than the Republican hype first seemed to indicate. I could have told you that much - please see earlier posts about Palin and the links to anti-Palin sites and well as political fact checker sites. In all honesty, Sarah Palin's emergence into this election was cleverly staged by the Republican Party. Her speech was written for her, and I'm she she had hours of rehearsals and couching to make her appear invincible. Obviously, the people behind her presentation failed to consider the fact that the majority of the American public is NOT stupid, and has the capability of googling Sarah Palin and learning the actual facts that she, and the Republican party, don't want them to know.

The election is far from over. Anything can, and probably will, still happen. What we, the American public, need to do is stay informed, stay involved, and keep checking those facts. The political ads are slanted and very biased. The political ads take things out of context and paint a very inaccurate picture. The only way to learn the truth is to research the facts and make an informed decision on Election Day.

Okay, I'm done with this rant . . . and very little snark was involved.

S

Credibility Takes a Nosedive

Sorry for the title of this blog, but I really couldn't think of anything better . . . or more snarky.

By now everybody knows about, and has probably seen via YouTube or someother site, Tina Fey as Sarah Palin. As far as I know, everybody knows that Saturday Night Live is all about satire and making fun of people. Well, obviously - see below article - I was wrong: everbody does not know. Carly Fioriona (former CEO of Hewlett Packard) . . . well just read the article.

I mean, really, somebody obviously needs to get a life and is taking things a little bit too seriously . . . kind of like Cindy McCain attacking the ladies of The View for asking tough questions. Uh, isn't that what running for office is all about?? I'm just saying . . .

McCain Advisor Calls Tina Fey 'Sexist'
Viewers liked Tina Fey as Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live, and so did Sarah Palin. But another member of Team McCain says Fey's portrayal was sexist. "Well, I think she looked a bit like her," former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina said on MSNBC. "I think, of course, the portrait was very dismissive of the substance of Sarah Palin, and so in that sense, they were defining Hillary Clinton as very substantive, and Sarah Palin as totally superficial."I think that continues the line of argument that is disrespectful in the extreme, and yes, I would say, sexist in the sense that just because Sarah Palin has different views than Hillary Clinton does not mean she lacks substance. She has a lot of substance."The 30 Rock creator may be weirded-out to be accused of sexism. As SNL's first female head writer, she's helped women move ahead in entertainment — just as Fiorina did for women in technology.Were you offended by Fey's portrayal? Watch it again below and tell us what you think. — Tim Molloy (tvguide.com 09/16/08)

One broken pledge . . .

If Sarah Palin cannot do what she pledged to do for her state, how can anyone believe she will do what she pledges to do for the entire country?

According to this article on cnn.com, in regards to a legislative probe regarding the firing of an Alaska state official, "Palin originally pledged to cooperate with the investigation and disclosed that members of her administration had contacted state police officials nearly two dozen times to discuss Wooten. But last week, she asked the state personnel board to conduct its own probe, and a string of witnesses has failed to show up at scheduled depositions with the investigator hired by the Legislature."

First - if she made a pledge, she should stick to that pledge. Second - so, now that Palin has backed off her pledge, all these witnesses are failing to show up. Well, isn't that odd? I wonder why the witnesses aren't showing up. Could it be that they have close ties to Palin and don't want to mar her political chances???? Excuse me while I go and look for a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Oh, silly me, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

Okay, while I'm at it, let's talk about her "thanks, but no thanks" fairy tale she keeps telling about the bridge to no where. The facts - easily checkable on http://www.factcheck.org/ or http://www.truthout.org/ are quite different. Initially, Sarah was all for the bridge, especially with all the earmark money - something McCain is allegedly against - she could pull in for the state. The fact is, she didn't say "thanks, but no thanks" until wait late in the game after the whole bridge idea was basically dead.

Lastly, check out this blog. There are some very interesting facts. Please note, I italicized the word because the site is obviously not run by pro-Palin people. Even biased blogs contain kernels of the truth. You just have to really look at the kernels, go to the other sites already mentioned, and spend a little time googling to discover the truth. In the end, it's really worth the effort to figure out the truth.

Okay, now really last - the thing everyone has to consider is: do you want Sarah Palin as president of this country. The fact is, John McCain is not a spring chicken. The fact is, nobody knows when their time is up. My brother-in-law died at age 24. A friend of mine passed away a couple of years ago at age 59. Death happens. As a manager I used to work with once said, "you just never know when you're going to be hit by a doughnut truck on the way to work". If John McCain is - by some cruel chance of Fate - elected President and hit by a doughnut truck on the way to work . . . the woman unable to keep a pledge might just be running this country. I'm just saying . . .

S

Elvira Sat Alone

Elivra sat alone.

Elivira is a 90+ year old woman who lives at the same retirement center as my mother. I recently had dinner at the retirement home with my mother and noticed this woman sitting by herself at a table for two. I finally asked my mother about the woman. Mom’s response: Oh, that’s Elvira, she has Parkinson’s disease. I asked why she was sitting alone. Again, mother made the comment about Parkinson’s disease and that it was hard to understand Elvira when she talked. She also mentioned that she’d heard that Elvira’s family requested that she sit alone.
In counterpoint, there were tables – large and small – filled with people throughout the dining room. My mother, on a normal night, sits at a table with six other women. My mother never eats dinner alone. In fact – flashback to high school – she seems to sit at the popular table where all the other people want to sit as well. That night alone, two different women came up to mother before dinner and asked if there was space at her regular table. Go figure. Mom – 83 now – has become one of the popular girls.

Elvira, however, sits alone.

So what if Elvira is hard to understand. Companionship does not need words. Companionship needs nothing more than a smile or a nod of the head. Words, too often, are misunderstood or misinterpreted. What’s to misinterpret about a smile? A nod? A light touch on the hand to say, hey, I’m here for you? Elvira has none of that. She only has an empty chair across from her dinner after dinner, day after day, week after week, into the months and years of her golden years. How golden are the years when you have to eat alone – allegedly at the insistence of her family – at dinner when all around you are groups of people eating together?
Now, in the absence of truth, when only rumor abounds, is the alleged tale of Elvira’s family insisting she eat alone! Try as I might, three days after first seeing Elvira eating alone, I cannot understand what reason could exist for a family to be so inhumane! Was Elvira a horrible mother and this is their way of punishing her? Did/does – in their ultimate wisdom – family think she is better off eating alone, isolated from the companionship of others? What crime – real or imagined by her family – is so great that they would deny their mother friendship in her final years?

I don’t have the answers to these questions, or the many other questions that run through my mind every time I think of Elivra eating alone. All I see is a woman, alone in a room full of people. All I see is a family devoid of humanity forcing this upon their mother. I see no rhyme or reason to Elivira sitting alone night after night. I cannot – not even within the great scope of my imagination – understand the situation. I can only feel a deep sorrow that a woman – 90+ years of age – eats alone every night. I can feel anger – perhaps misplaced – at her family for insisting she eat alone.

I can feel shame at myself for not walking over and saying hi to Elvira that night once I heard the tale my mother had to tell. What harm is a smile, a nod, a hey, how’s it going, even from a stranger? Perhaps any of those things would not have made a difference in Elvira’s life. Then again, perhaps any of those things would have made the greatest difference in Elvira’s life.

Now, please understand that it is not like everybody in the retirement center ignores Elvira. I’m she sure has friends and people speak to her on a daily basis, smile at her, and ask her about her day. She does not live in complete isolation. But, at dinner, night after night, Elivra sits alone.

Careful how you filter!!

From the current issue of The Advocate (Issue 1013 - August 26, 2008):

AFA Keeps Gay at Bay - By filtering "gay" from its news site, the conservative group becomes a laughingstock.

The American Family Association hates the word gay. The organization's distaste is so strong that it's online news site, OneNewsNow.com, filters gay out of all Associated Press articles and replaces it with the anachronistic descriptor homosexual. On June 29, Tyson Gay won the 100-meter trials for a shot at the Beijing Olympics, but because of the filter, conservative Christians everywhere read that "Tyson Homosexual" clocked in at 9.68 seconds in the premier sprinting event. The story's filtered version read: "Wearing a royal blue uniform with red and white diagonal stripes across the front, along with matching shoes . . . Homosexual dominated the competition. He started well and pulled out to a comfortable lead by the 40-meter mark." While blogs had a field day with OneNewsNow's error, the site quickly fixed the gaffe, and AFA spokeswoman Cindy Roberts told The Washington Post, "It was just a fluke." Maybe so, but it could cause OneNewsNow.com bigger problems than embarrassment - AP stipulates that it stories not be rewritten upon publication, and it has been going after websites for even small attempts at re-purposing original work. - Michelle Garcia.

Okay, don't you just love irony at work. I can just see some of the other flukes caused by the AFAs dislike of the word gay.

BenGay is the perfect cure for your aches and pains becomes . . . Ben Homosexual is the perfect cure for your aches and pain.

Marcia Gay Hardin becomes Marcia Homosexual - who knew? - Hardin.

The possibilities are endless in the whole scenario set up by the AFA. I mean, can we just put these people on an island somewhere? Then again, without such conservatives going to such extremes, there would be less people to laugh at in this world. Laughter is, after all, the best medicine. While the AFAs attempts to eliminate the word gay are kind of frightening; they seem to have gotten bit in the nether regions by their own homophobia. Again, irony at it's best.

I wish everyone a gay - homosexual if your part of the AFA - old time.

Scott

Random Thoughts

Dunkin' Donuts is going to offer a healthier menu. Isn't that an oxy-moron?? Donut Shop and healthy menu??? I'm sorry, but if I'm going to a donut shop, I'm going full force for food that's bad for me. I'm just saying . . .

Irony at it's ABSOLUTE best!!!

From cnn.com:

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- A measure seeking to commemorate President Bush's years in office by slapping his name on a San Francisco sewage plant has qualified for the November ballot.

The measure certified Thursday would rename the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant the George W. Bush Sewage Plant.

Supporters say the idea is to commemorate the mess they claim Bush has left behind by actions such as the war in Iraq.

Hedviga Golik is dead!!!

Hedviga Golik is dead. In fact, she died 35 years ago. The problem: no one realized she was dead until just recently - see this article.

How is it, that a woman's body remained undiscovered for 35 years? How is it that neighbors did not become curious? As a small part of the article stated: The discovery of Golik's body on Tuesday prompted media debates on how it is possible for a woman to die so long ago without anyone noticing. One local journalist said it showed people were becoming more alienated - cnn.com 05/16/08. Is this true? Have we become so alienated as a society that we no longer pay attention to the world around us? Have you seen your neighbor lately? If not, have you bothered to ask someone when was the last time they saw your neighbor? Would you - the reader of this blog - even care enough to ask that question?

I guess I'm just disconcerted about how a woman could die and no one noticed. Do we, as individuals, as parts of a larger society, make such little impact on each other that a death can go unnoticed for 35 years? Well, this article obviously provides the answer to that question. Yes, we obviously make such little impact on each other that a death can go unnoticed for 35 years. The sad fact is, this is not the first such story - though probably the first 3 decade not noticing - about a death going unnoticed. Are we - the United States, the world, the population that is society - becoming too alienated, too content to live in a cyber (online banking, automated gas pumps, amazon.com, groceries online, etc.) world so that human interaction is no longer necessary? Are we - again, larger society - content to have less and less interaction with each other? Can society, as a whole, survive when interaction becomes extinct, people die and no one notices for 35 years?

I do not think society can survive such isolation. I think - as Merita Arslani wrote about the situation - that society needs to do the following: My dear neighbors! Please keep on being curious and a bit tiresome, as you have been so far" - cnn.com 05/16/08.

Curiosity might have killed the cat, but lack of curiosity let Hedviga Golik's death go unnoticed for 35 years. I think curiosity is the better option.

Scott

Neanderthal Views

It was mentioned today, by a dear friend, that I had not ranted lately. It's not that I haven't had plenty of reason - current election, Hillary Clinton, etc. - to rant; just, that I have not felt an overwhelming urge. Well, this article definitely gave me the urge. Basically, the California Supreme Court has overturned the same-sex marriage ban. Of course, the opponents have much to say about same-sex marriage:

• "The California Supreme Court has engaged in the worst kind of judicial activism today, abandoning its role as an objective interpreter of the law and instead legislating from the bench," said Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues for the group Concerned Women for America, in a written statement.
  "So-called 'same-sex' marriage is counterfeit marriage. Marriage is, and has always been, between a man and a woman. We know that it's in the best interest of children to be raised with a mother and a father. To use children as guinea pigs in radical San Francisco-style social experimentation is deplorable."

Where do I begin to rant with such a bountiful source of material??

• "So-called 'same-sex' marriage is counterfeit marriage"
• "Marriage is, and has always been, between a man and a woman."
• "We know that it's in the best interest of children to be raised with a mother and father."
• "To use children as guinea pigs in radical San Francisco-style social experimentation is deplorable."

Okay, let me start with the last one. It's just too easy! Mr. Barber's alleged ignorance is deplorable. It is amazing the man can walk upright with his alleged neanderthal views.

Now, since I'm working backwards (it must be a gay thing), the next item from the bottom (that's a gay thing too, but I'm not going to explain) up: I have never understood why people think it is in the best interest of children to be raised with a mother and father. My sister - for the most part - raised her children by herself after her husband left. Both her boys turned out fine and one of them is currently in Iraq serving our country. My siblings and I were basically raised by our mother. The four of us turned out fine as well. Oh, wait, I'm gay, so maybe that's what - insert heavy dose of sarcasm for the uninformed here - happened to me. Single parents, whether male or female, can be the best interest for a child. The mistaken belief that two parents are in the best interest of the child, in my lofty opinion, is . . . well . . . neanderthal. Go figure!

Mr. Barber's other two comments really are not worth responding to or ranting about. Marriage, in present day society, is nothing short of a sham. The vows spoken are easily broken. I've never been, nor will I probably ever be, a huge proponent of marriage, whether opposite or same sex. A golden band about a finger does not stop a man/woman from cheating on their spouse. A golden band about a finger, vows in a church, does not stop a marriage from imploding. Whether marriage is between opposite/same sex members is not the point. Commitment is (should be) the point. The fact is, when things go bad in a marriage, more people simply walk away than trying to fix whatever problems exist.

Now, since I'm basically forced to confront the issue. Counterfeit marriage. Give me a break! I'm at the top (another gay thing I'm not going to explain) now, just in case anybody is keeping track. Hetero marriage, in many instances, is counterfeit - see above paragraph.

Lastly, there is Mr. Barber's comment about judicial activism. I think it's awfully odd (perhaps he's thinking of running for office one day, because he sounds a lot like Hillary Clinton) that Mr. Barber considers the court's legal opinion activism, rather than following the law. I can guarantee you that if the court had agreed with him, he would be praising the justices, the court, and the allegedly hallowed ground he walks upon.

In the end, the only thing Mr. Barber is tasting is sour grapes. Hate it when that happens.

S

The High Price of Postage

Ever wonder why postage keeps increasing year after year, even though many people no longer use the postal service? Well, perhaps this little tidbit will explain why . . .

. . . In another case, USPS spent $13,500 on a dinner at Ruth Chris Steakhouse for employees who were attending a national postal forum in Orlando, Florida. The dinner included more than 200 appetizers and the agency paid for about $3,000 of alcoholic drinks, including more than 40 bottles of wine and top-shelf liquor, the study said. It deemed the dinner as an "excessive cost." - cnn.com (04/09/08)

The above is only one example of highly excessive government spending. See this article for more info.

If you've now read the linked article, is it any wonder the deficit keeps increasing?

Just my thoughts for the day and one of those WTF!!! moments in life.

S

The Death of a - future - Political Career

Does Secretary of State Condeleeze Rice not want a political future? Has she decided that she'll leave politics after she is no longer Secretary of State?

In my opinion, the answer is a resounding YES!

At what point, does selling your soul become commonplace? I understand, it is her job to agree with President Bush. He pays her the alleged big bucks; therefore, it is in her best interest to agree with him. BUT . . . in agreeing with him, it seems she sacrifices more and more of herself, and whatever political future she may (or may not) want beyond Secretary of State. If she were to run for any political office at a later date, her opponents would have more than enough material to destroy whatever hopes she had of being elected.

The time for blindly (blithely) agreeing with the policies of a dying regime need to end. The time for standing up for what is best for this country, needs to begin. No job, no amount of money, is worth the blind devotion - required - given to the current Administration. Free thought should still exist in this country. Congress should not be forced to act on something by a duck with two broken legs.

What brought about this latest post? Why, our dear President who is forcing Congress to vote on a trade pact with Columbia.

What was Condeleeza's response? Well . . . Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice praised the agreement in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal Monday. She said the free trade bill "could strengthen the competitiveness of U.S. workers; support a democratic ally on the cusp of achieving lasting national success; weaken those who would sow instability and autocracy in our hemisphere; and send an unequivocal signal to the entire world that the United States is a confident, capable global leader that acts not only in its own interest, but in the interest of its friends. (cnn.com)"

Does she actually believe what she wrote? Has her free-will been totally decimated by her tenure as Secretary of State? Where has the greater good for our country gone?

I'm just not sure that any job is worth the alleged sacrificing of a person's soul.

S

Truth, Lies, or Convenience

As most people probably know by now (unless they're living in a remote area without access to cable or Internet), Hillary was caught in another . . . lie. It seems, poor old Hillary just can't remember the truth of her life. Suddenly, a peaceful visit to Bosnia, became a sniper laden event where she had to run for cover. The linked article is very thought provoking.

The facts are (in my humble opinion), everybody embellishes. It is a part of life. How often have people said, I've told you that a hundred times???? Of course, that's an embellishment (unless you were talking to my partner after his colonoscopy and the administration of the amnesia drug - at that point, a hundred times is not an embellishment - trust me on that one). Hillary's statement about sniper fire is a tad bit more than an embellishment.

In the end, Hillary's truth seems more a convenience to advance her political career and tout her alleged experience, which, btw, now seems less experience and more convenient embellishment. What do you think?

S

In defense of Sarah Jessica Parker

Okay, odd title for this blog. Recently Maxim magazine named Sarah Jessica Parker (Sex and the City) the 'unsexiest' star. By rights, Ms. Parker was hurt by this label. I would be too. In my opinion, what qualifications do the people at Maxim have to make this distinction? In a larger scope, what right/qualifications does/do any one on this planet have to make that distinction?

In my honest opion: no right at all. The fact is, generation by generation (for the most part) society is becoming . . . well . . . MEAN! Why? At one point did humans begin to drift away from humanity? From compassion? So, Sarah Jessica Parky is unsexy to the editors at Maxim. She's obviously sexy to her husband. Other men find her sexy. So, why should Maxim's opinion be granted a greater weight/authority? Why should - forget Freedom of Speech, for one minute - they be allowed to demean someone without thought/regard for that person's freedom? In my opinion, they shouldn't be allowed.

Free Speech is great, but there comes a time in place when people should just think about what they are saying or writing. The fact (sad but true) is: most people don't give a damn whether they hurt someone's feelings or not. Society (for the most part) is not becoming MEAN, but has become MEAN!

Just my thoughts . . .

Scott

How can you disagree with perfect logic?

When in doubt - copy and paste. If you want the prettier version, click here.

I happen to agree, more than I would like too, with much of what Glenn Beck has to say. He's forthright, direct, and gets straight to the point. I don't agree with 100% of what he has to say, but the below post is brilliance in motion.

NEW YORK (CNN) --

Glenn Beck: Florida and Michigan leaders have only themselves to blame if their delegates aren't seated.

What do these stories all have in common?

• A woman who says she lost more $1 million gambling in Atlantic City sues some casinos for $20 million, claiming they should've stopped her compulsive gambling.
• People who bought houses they couldn't afford with loans they didn't understand want their lenders to change the terms.
• Congress authorizes a war and then tries everything it can think of to get out of it.
• Our country gets addicted to oil and then blames OPEC when it doesn't like the price.
  

These stories prove how personal responsibility has all but vanished in America, and our government is leading the way.

Remember the kid from that interminable 1980s commercial whose father caught him using drugs? The father incredulously asked, "Who taught you how to do this stuff?" and the kid responded, "You, alright? I learned it by watching you."

Well, we are that kid and our government is that drug-using father who doesn't think that anyone notices his bad habits.

Our government is leading us by example, and I don't mean that in a good way. For years, it has spent us into oblivion, mortgaging our future for programs we can't afford, and Americans have happily followed suit, running up credit card bills and home equity loans for things they never should've bought.

Unfortunately, we're also learning something else from our government: how to avoid taking responsibility for our actions.

From Eliot Spitzer's alleged hooker craze to the revelation that Arnold Schwarzenegger commutes to work in a large private jet even as he preaches the dangers of carbon dioxide emissions, there's never been a shortage of "do what I say, not what I do" hypocrites in politics.

But that same attitude has seemingly spread from individual politicians to an entire party.
Democrats aren't happy that delegates from Florida and Michigan won't be seated at the national convention because those states broke clear party rules. Well you know what? Too bad. We don't say that enough anymore. Too bad. You agreed to the rules; you broke them. Now you've got to deal with the consequences.

"But Glenn. ... Neither Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama will have enough delegates to win the nomination. We don't want this to be decided in some backroom by superdelegates."

Too bad.

"But Glenn. ... You don't understand. If we don't seat delegates from those states now, then we might lose their votes in the general election."

Too bad.

"But Glenn. .... The voters in these states are going to be disenfranchised if we don't let their voices be heard."

Too bad.

If you want to talk about disenfranchised voters, then let's talk about why just 17 percent of Americans have a positive view of Congress. Let's talk about why we still have wide open borders despite most Americans wanting them sealed. Let's talk about why we keep selling out our sovereignty and our security by borrowing billions of dollars from-less-than friendly countries, such as China.

Americans aren't disenfranchised because our leaders won't count votes in a couple of states. They're disenfranchised because our leaders aren't doing their jobs. They're disenfranchised because after working hard to support their families and to raise kids who understand the difference between right and wrong, their leaders do exactly the opposite.

In the cases of Florida and Michigan, I've patiently listened to all the moving arguments about why there should be a "do-over," but quite honestly, they're not arguments at all. They're excuses. If this race wasn't so close, or if these states offered a combined 36 delegates instead of 366, do you really think anyone would care? Of course not.

But no matter what you think should happen, you have to admit that Clinton's idea that we should simply count her "wins" in Florida and Michigan is completely ridiculous.

In fact, if you played a rimshot and a laugh track behind her every time she recited that line, people might actually agree to a two-drink minimum to see her speak. How could you possibly count the results from an election when your main opponent wasn't even on the ballot (at least in Michigan)? You can't -- unless you think the rules are simply there for your own amusement.

Last year, when the punishment against Florida was first approved, Donna Brazile, a member of the Democratic National Committee rules panel, said she hoped that the harsh consequences would "send a message to everybody in Florida that we are going to follow the rules." And Brazile knows a little something about that ... she ran Vice President Al Gore's presidential campaign in 2000.

Voters in Florida and Michigan should ask themselves one important question before they blindly follow their party: Why did no one seem to care about "alienating" them last year when the rules were intentionally broken? It's only now, when their vote really matters, that everyone is suddenly so concerned about "enfranchising" them.

Florida and Michigan have a golden opportunity to stand up and say enough is enough, to send a message that it's time to not only take responsibility for their actions but for those of our leaders as well.

After all, what would it say about personal responsibility in this country if we allow the two states that broke all the rules to end up having the biggest say of all?

FL/MI Don't Deserve Revote

Okay, I stole the above title from this story; but I'm glad to see people finally agreeing with me on the whole FL/MI debacle: they knew the rules. Roland Martin, who wrote this article makes a strong point that FL/MI do not deserve a chance to re-vote, and that the people crying fowl now, are the same ones who did nothing when FL/MI were penalized in the first place.

So, at the end of the day, as I've previously mentioned, the votes either shouldn't count at all, or the delegates should be split 50/50. Our country - no matter what the ostriches running our government with their heads buried in the sand say - is in a recession. We're spending billions of dollars on a war that should have ended/never begun years ago. People are cashing out their 401Ks with alarming frequency, and suffering the taxes/penalties, to pay off their mortgages and somehow save their homes. Gas costs more than a Grande Mocha at Starbucks (at least here in TN). With all that, plus more not listed, taken into account, FL/MI want someone to come up with $20 - $30 Million to pay for another election. Boy, sounds like a perfectly logical solution to me. That's sarcasm, folks, just in case you were wondering.

In the end, the votes from FL/MI (much to Hillary's dismay) do not currently count, and should never count. She - along with all the other politicals whining right now - did not oppose the sanctions in the first place. She/they do not get a 'do-over'. We're not in preschool. Sometimes, life is just tough, and people need to learn to deal with the consequences of their actions.

Have a nice day!

S

What the . . .

You have to read this to believe it!

My comments: Get a life!

Enough said!

S

Another Day in Politics

I was hoping for a day off from politics. I refrained from watching politics on television this weekend, and resisted the urge yesterday to view stories on the Internet. I obviously failed in that endeavor.

Two stories from cnn.com - Obama advisors says . . . and Obama camp hammers . . . are the two posts in question.

First Story: Former New York Rep. Geraldine Ferraro, the Democratic Party’s vice presidential nominee in 1984, told the (Torrance, California) Daily Breeze that "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." - cnn.com, political ticker - 03/11/08.

Obama's campaign - justifiably - wants Hillary to repudiate Ms. Ferraro's comments. After all, Obama recently had an advisor resign because of her monster comment about Hillary. The question is: will Hillary comply, when in fact, Ms. Ferraro is one of her topfundraisers? Money talks! Hillary needs money to keep her campaign going. Will another Hillary double standard (i.e., MI/FL delegate debacle) ensue? Will Hillary not expect the same standards of her campaign staff that she allegedly demands of Barack's campaign staff? Only time will tell.

Second Story: Barack Obama's presidential campaign took some of its most pointed jabs to date at Hillary Clinton's claim of experience, circulating a memo to reporters Tuesday morning from former Clinton State Department official Greg Craig that suggests the New York senator uses "false charges and exaggerated claims to play politics with national security." - cnn.com, political ticker - 03/11/08.

Basically, Hillary believes she has the experience to be President. Obama believes she is exaggerating those claims. Hillary thinks she has passed the 'Commander-in-Chief' test. Obama does not believe she has passed that test. It is a classic case of he/she said without a clear winner in sight. Personally, I don't think anyone is truly qualified/experience enought to be President. It is a job that basically sucks the soul out of a person and ages them quickly. It is not an easy job to do.

Is Obama unjustified in attacking Hillary like this? No. Hillary is basing her campaign on her experience and constantly attacking Barack's alleged lack of experience. If she does not have the experience she claims to have . . . well, I don't think I need to draw a picture to point out what that makes her.

In the end, I count the months until the end of election so sanity can prevail again. I'm not sure what the media will do once all is said and done, I guess go back to making Brittney and Paris the top stories of the day. Gee, something to look forward to . . .

S

FL/MI - What to do with the delegates?

I have so many responses to the title question, all brought about by this article. In the end, the FL/MI voters should - unfortunate for them - have to vote again. Case in point: Obama was not on the ballot in MI. The decision was made for the delegates not to count in those States well in advance of the primary. Many voters - again see linked article - did not vote because they knew their votes did not count. Shouldn't they get the chance to have their votes count? The only fair way for this to happen is for both States to re-hold a primary, have both candidates names on the ballot, and allow everyone a fair solution to the problem at hand.

S

No Cussing

First, you need to follow the link and read the article.

Second - I admire the principal behind what the town is attempting. Basically - for the first week in March from this point forward, no cussing is allowed in this town. Again, great principal.

Here's my thoughts on the matter:

• If you say fudge in place of f&%#, doesn't it mean the same thing?
• If you say shoot in place of sh*&, doesn't it mean the same thing?

The answer: Yes!!!

So, if everybody in this town starts saying shoot, fudge, gosh darn, heck and whatever other sugar-coated word they can think of, aren't they still cussing? Of course they are still cussing. The only reason f&%# or sh*& are nasty words, is because someone, at some point in history, decided that those words - and many like them - were nasty. Maybe it was because of how they sounded or some other inane reason; but whatever the reason, the negative connotation on the word is society driven. Sooner or later, if everybody starts saying shoot, fudge, gosh darn, etc., those words too will have negative connotations associated with them as well.

So, the whole no-cussing thing - again, admirable - is seemingly pointless in the long run since society will, eventually, negatively connotate those words. Just my theory.

S

The morning after primary wins in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island, Hillary Clinton said she would consider being part of a Democratic “dream ticket” that would include both her and presidential rival Barack Obama. "That may be where this is headed,” she told the CBS Early Show during a marathon set of appearances on the network morning news shows. “But of course we have to decide who is on the top of ticket. I think the people of Ohio very clearly said that it should be me."

First, let me point out the problems with Hillary's statements:

1. Technically, Obama has more delegates at this point in the game; so, he should get the presidential nod, and Hillary - if Obama choses - would get the vice president option, not the other way around.
2. What in the heck do the people of OH have to do with who is President?

Okay, I know the whole theory that who OH chooses is normally President, but there's a first time for everything, so OH might just be wrong. OH does not choose my vote. I believe Hillary is suffering from the same delusion as current President Bush when he announced after the 2004 election that "America has chosen!" No, America did not choose, only 51% of American's chose. The logic of politicians is scary!

In another article Hillary makes the claim that she would be President. Again, definite problems with her line of thinking. Personally, right now, the country has chosen Barack Obama, not Hillary. Go figure.

S