The Great Distraction

There are times in every man's life when he realizes that the place that he loves and calls home is not what he thought it was. And though it may alienate him from the rest of the community around him, he knows in his heart of hearts that he must take a stand against something. There is a bill that was passed by the Indiana State Legislature, HJR-6, that will define marriage in Indiana as only between a man and a woman. And while there are many emotional and moral reasons why I am opposed to this, I will stick to the fundamental beliefs that government regulating behavior never ends with what people intended.

As someone who has held a belief in a limited form of government, I find it a bit ridiculous that some people who claim the same train of though advocate for this law. The government was originally designed to serve the basic needs of the people that they couldn't provide for themselves, as well as to help oversee issues between the states. In modern terms, the government should only provide defense services as well as making sure that the states are running smoothly. That is the role that the Federal Government was originally designed to have and no where in there is the room for the regulation of the behavior of people. The state governments are designed much in the same way. The states are intended to provide services like education, safety, transportation (roads, highways, bridges), and some very basic social programs (if they have to be enacted they should be at the state level). Again, no where in that description is there room for a regulation of someone's behavior. The government has no role telling people what they can and cannot do. They exist to serve us, not regulate us.

Another reason is the fact that this goes against what Gov. Mitch Daniels has said on the national stage. While the governor has been starting to lay the foundation for a possible run for the White House, he has called for "a truce on social issues" until the national debt is under control. Meanwhile, the state that he controls is busy enacting laws against homosexuals while slashing billions of dollars from every form of education. And the problem is, most people won't realize that they are being distracted from what really needs to be taken care of. While people's children are facing larger class sizes, less after school programs, cuts in athletics and music, and higher tuition costs, they are going to be engaged in a emotion-filled debate over a topic that has no Constitutional standing in government. They are being distracted by something that doesn't need to be addressed and all the while, letting the government get away with not actually accomplishing what really needs to get done.

Finally, there will be people that make the claim that America was formed on Biblical principles, and therefore should enact laws based on those principles. However, that is a very selective reading of the document, as they obviously miss the Establishment Clause. The Establishment Clause states that government will not endorse or establish an official religion for the nation. That means that despite whatever religion the Founding Fathers may or may not have had, the government cannot base laws off of any religion. You will see the same people make the case for anti-Shari'a laws in various states across the country. Yet, they feel that the Bible can be used instead? The Constitution does not say that Christian beliefs and texts can be used, but Muslim ones cannot. It states that the government shall not establish ANY religion or have ANY religious test. Therefore, using the argument that America is a Christian nation is unconstitutional and cannot be made.

Ultimately, it is up to the people to decide whether or not they are going to allow their representatives to make this decision in their name. We can make sure that our representatives actually tackle the problems that face us, while not being distracted by the petty laws that have no business even being discussed. It is time that we stand up against our representatives using the passion of people's convictions against them. They need to take care of the people that need it and actually deal with the problems that we face. Rather than masking budget cuts and the difficult choices that we need to face together by bringing up unnecessary and divisive laws, they need to tackle the real issues head-on while letting the people they "represent" have a voice. And if they cannot do this, maybe it is time to give someone else an opportunity at the Statehouse.

The Healthcare Puzzle

A court in Florida, as well as in Virginia, has declared that the mandate clause in the healthcare overhaul bill is unconstitutional. The judge said that Congress does not have the power to force people to purchase a product, while the White House claims activism in the judiciary (as does all people that are on the losing end a judgement). And while the debate is far from over, there are other things at work that need to be addressed.

First, this is a good day for people that continue to hold the government accountable for sticking to the Constitution. While the document is inconvenient and causes problems for a government that wants to get things done quickly, that should not be looked down upon as a problem, but a success. The Constitution was designed to get in the way of the government and make legislation and projects take time to get things right. In that sense, the blocking of a healthcare bill is the right thing to do. Too many times the Constitutionality of a bill is overlooked "for the good of the nation" (cough, cough, the USA PATRIOT ACT, cough, cough), and this was an instance in which that wasn't allowed to happen.

And while that is a very good result to come out of the decision, there comes a backside to this. While John Boehner, the new Speaker of the House, claimed that the foremost expert on the financial impact of legislation, the CBO, was wrong, the fact still remains that repealing the bill will have significant financial consequences. The bill lowers healthcare spending overall, through a variety of measures, and that allows the deficit to be lowered by billions of dollars. However, the Republicans have been so insistent on repealing the measure that they refuse to look at the positives. Like any group that does not get the news it wants, the Republicans in power have essentially called the CBO unreliable, and then used a out of context quote by that very panel to make another point for their side of the healthcare debate. The fact remains that repealing a bill simply because your political opponents passed it is not a good enough reason to do it, especially when it causes significant financial damage to the country.

Now we could get into the many problems facing America, but I prefer to be an optimist. While we argue and debate topics like healthcare and the overhaul bill, it is important to remember that there are many different angles that need consideration. And while this bill has run into some grey areas with the Constitution, and therefore will be subject to further Judicial Review, it also does a lot of good. So, putting all my history of Republican bashing aside, I am willing to issue them a challenge instead. For all of the American public and the good of the Constitution, repeal the bill. But, you need to put something else into place that either matches or increases the positive financial and health benefits of the bill that the Democrats passed. If it can be done, than I will sing your praises. However, if it can't, than there needs to be a serious conversation about whether or not repeal is the best option right now. Because while America is a land whose laws need to be enforced, that won't do any good if she collapses under the weight of her own debt. A flawed America is always better than a dead America.

Good intentions, Bad results

There was a post on Yahoo! News asking the question: Has Obama kept all of his campaign promises? In the article it discusses various things that the Obama Administration has accomplished and what it hasn't. While candidates should be held accountable for what they promise on the campaign trail, this is also a perfect opportunity to change the tone of the entire debate.

Ever since FDR passed the New Deal in the 1930's, Americans have expected their politicians to do everything from getting them a job to helping them keep their homes. And while some of the expectations of the American public are reasonable (safe streets, competent schools, passable roads), the Obama Administration has taught us that putting all of your faith in the government often leads to disappointment.

Government is limited by political pressures from all angles. Everyone from senior citizens in Florida, to multi-billion dollar corporations want a piece of the government pie. And while politicians of both stripes continue to promise more and more to their constituents, we have found that government is capable of accomplishing less and less. With the exception of the Lame Duck session, Congress could hardly agree on any solid legislative goals, with Democrats in the House passing whatever they wanted, and Republicans in the Senate keeping anything that didn't have an (R) by the author's name from even being considered for a vote. Meanwhile, the American public grew more and more frustrated with the way that Congress was conducting business and decided to elect a new party into power in the House and even the score in the Senate. This, of course, came after they did the same thing in 2008. And in 2006. And in 2004.

See the pattern starting to develop? It is the same story every year. Democrats and Republicans both promise to do amazing things to their constituents, who are so burdened by debt, foreclosures, and feeding their families that they believe that government can help make their lives better. And when that party comes to power in Washington, it does start to accomplish some goals, only to have those accomplishments reversed when the other party comes to power on a wave of fear-mongering and doomsday language. So, the party that was just ousted decides that if the other party can win by doing that, then they will too. Pretty soon, both parties are hell-bent on reversing each-other's agenda, without any clear motive of helping the American Public.

The moral of the story? It is quite simple, government does not solve problems. Especially when you have a free and open democracy/republic. As more and more people ask whether Obama has kept all of his promises or not, they should really be asking whether continued faith in the government is worth it or not. And hopefully they realize that the time to shrink government and open up free markets is here. When solutions are finally able to escape the vicious cycle that has engulfed Washington politics, the American Public will finally have the relief that they have looked for the entire time.

Two Sides of the Same Coin

Someone commented on my posts and said that for a Libertarian, I seem to only target Republicans and not Democrats. They are partially correct, in that I target Republicans more often than Democrats, but this is the reason why. Democrats are the party of Big Government. They say so in their platform and don't shy away from it in their campaigns or literature. They believe in Big Government principles, and while I definitely do not share those principles with them, I respect the Democrats for at least honestly representing what they stand for to the American public.

The Republicans, however, are not that forward with what they actually stand for. If someone was to actually read their platform, or the infamous "Pledge to America", it would sound quite similar to Libertarian ideals. They claim to stand for smaller government, lower laxes, lower spending, less regulation, etc..... However, their actions do not match their words. In the new legislative rules that govern the House, the Republican majority passed regulations that essentially equaled to stricter Pay-As-You-Go rules, which force new House bills to secure funding before they are legally allowed to be passed. The new rules require that major entitlement bills can only be established with cuts or elimination of other entitlements. It also forbids a bill being passed that increases federal spending in one, five, or ten year windows. While that may sound like a good Small Government bill to pass, the exceptions listed in the bill make it a whole new ball game.

They allowed extending the Bush tax cuts, repealing the Health Care bill, cutting estate, small business, alternative minimum taxes, and trade agreements to be exempted from the new rules. Essentially, they have successfully exempted their entire legislative agenda from being tied down, while at the same time trying to gain political points for "battling the deficit and debt". They are telling the American people that they can sneak by them without any fear of consequence or repercussion.

What is even worse is that they have completely ignored the group that is qualified to accurately predict the financial impact of a bill, the CBO. The CBO, or Congressional Budget Office, is a non-partisan organization that reads legislation passed or considered in Congress and determines the financial implications of enacting that bill into law. They sent Speaker Boehner a letter that told him repealing the health care bill would add billions of dollars to the deficit over the next ten years. His response: "I don't think it will". Completely disregarding the most qualified experts in budget analysis by any member of any party is irresponsible. He refuses to acknowledge, or simply doesn't care about, the potential consequences to repealing that bill. Boehner honestly feels as though he knows better than the people who make it their career to accurately predict these things without bias or opinion drawn in.

The Republican Party is my main target of attack for this reason: they are a wolf in sheep's clothing. They have said time and again that they stand for reducing the deficit and battling the debt, all while recklessly increasing military spending and cutting taxes (which is how the government/military gets its money) and exempting themselves from rules that would otherwise battle a serious problem facing America today. Big Government policies are not the way to achieve stability and growth over the long term. And while Democrats push for these policies, they do so out of conviction and do not hide from that fact. It is time for Republicans to finally man-up and do the same. From the USA PATRIOT ACT, to the Cut-As-You-Go rules, the Republican Party doesn't stand for smaller government and more freedom. It is just the other side of the Big Government coin, and it is time that it is taken out of circulation.

All I Want for Christmas Is A Financial Collapse

Well, Christmas is behind us and it is back to work for Congress and the political community. While everyone is gearing up for what looks like one of the most explosive sessions in Congressional history, I feel a need to take a look back into what has transpired in the Lame-Duck session.

While Republicans in Congress threatened not to allow any work to be accomplished unless their agenda was passed, that attitude quickly changed as they worked toward comprehensive changes to American policy. Don't Ask Don't Tell, the controversial policy that banned Gay and Lesbian individuals from serving in the military, was repealed with sweeping Bi-Partisan support. Also enjoying Bi-Partisan support was the START Treaty, which created a new weapons deal with Russia, despite the continual objections by Republican Senator John Kyl of Arizona. Jobless benefits were extended for the long-term unemployed, giving people much needed cash during the Christmas season. Finally, 9-11 rescue workers will finally feel no need to worry about healthcare benefits, after Jon Stewart helped to fan anger over the bill's blockage by Republicans in Congress.

While all of these things were moves in a positive direction, there was one thing in particular that was a move in the other way. The Republicans in Congress threatened to block two key pieces of legislation, the 9-11 worker's bill and the Jobless benefits extension, because they would add to the deficit. The Republicans claimed that though they felt bad for both those groups, they could not justify passing those benefits until the National Debt and Budget Deficit is brought under control. That excuse would be understandable if they did not threaten to shut down the legislative process for extension of the Bush-era Tax Cuts.

Now for those that do not know, President George W. Bush, in an effort to spark the economy after the dot-com crash, cut the tax rates for all tax brackets. While they had temporary economic and political benefits, the worth of the tax cuts was negated by the upcoming wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those two wars boosted government spending to heights not seen since World War II. With the government's income being reduced by the tax cuts just put into place, the deficit ballooned to levels not thought possible. Republicans that are serious about deficit reduction should shutter at any mention of putting these irresponsible tax cuts back into place. It is wrong for the country and wrong for its citizens.

Republicans in Congress used the guise of cutting taxes to gain cheap political points. They claim to want to fight the Debt and Deficit, the two poisons that are killing America's future. However, they seem to pick and choose which projects they want to fight and let pass. What they don't tell the public is that those tax cuts that sound so good to the people actually counter what the Republicans claim to stand for. While the cuts put more money into the pockets of Americans, they also cut the government's income without significantly cutting the government's spending. These cuts are irresponsible and will add to the significant budget deficit that continues to grow.

Ultimately, if the Republicans are going to continue to claim that they are fighting for fiscal responsibility, it is time for their actions to match their words.

Behind the Numbers

There have been numerous reports recording an "enthusiasm gap" between liberals and conservatives. And while it is documented that a layer of complacency exists between the people in power and those out of power, the evidence used for this argument is....... ridiculous.

In an article on Politico, a source I frequent, the argument made for the existence of the enthusiasm gap is the registration of new voters. The argument was that when compared to '08, there have been significantly less new voters registered at college campuses, a place where liberals tend to congregate. However, they failed to recognize exactly what that meant.

While there were less new registered voters at college campuses this election cycle, there was such a significant increase in the number of new voters in '08 that there has not been enough time to get more people registered. College campuses have lost students due to the economy and more importantly, the ones that were newly registered in '08 are probably still in college today. That means that they would no longer qualify for new voter status, thus creating a drop in the number of new voters registered at college campuses.

Now, I am not blind to the current political climate. And even though I feel that anger directed at only one of the major parties is misguided, I also recognize that the current state of affairs has the Republicans poised to make gains in Congress. However, before they rejoice over less "liberal, elite, educated masses at college" in the voting pool (which by the way, when the @#$! did it become a bad or elitist thing to be educated???), they should start to look into the factors behind the numbers and not just the numbers' existence. While college students may not be enthused about voting for Democrats this November, it is not an indictment to that party but the two-party system as a whole. Both parties should be shaking in their boots, because no matter who takes over, nothing will change. And we're not going to take it anymore.

The Shoe Story

I once had an argument with a good friend of mine over education cuts. It was after Gov. Mitch Daniels had announced that due to budget shortfalls, he was going to cut education spending for a second time in a span of a month. My argument was that education cuts do not affect poor schools the same way that they affect schools in affluent districts. My friend didn't buy it. Then, I told him about my shoe buying experience.

I know that shoes and education policy may not seem to correlate but stick with me on this. My little sister had a choir competition at Ben Davis High School. It was in the middle of the school year, so I was in need of some new shoes. Conveniently, the school is across the street from a Foot Locker Outlet Store, so I went inside. I browsed and browsed and found a couple pairs for about $10 a piece and went up to the counter to pay for them. While he rung my shoes up, the friendly clerk asked my what my shirt said. I didn't even think about it and stretched out the printing so he could read it clearly. That was, if he could read at all.

You see, the clerk behind the counter preceded to tell me that he couldn't read at all, but that he made due by recognizing symbols that he saw everyday. An American citizen around the age of 20 was illiterate. It was unthinkable to me. And that is when I realized that things like that don't happen in the Carmel or Fishers areas. There isn't illiterate store clerks that live and work in Hamilton County. This was a man who lived, and will probably die, in one of the poorest areas of Marion County and will most likely never be able to read a book, magazine, newspaper, or website.

This is my point. Education cuts do not affect Carmel and HSE the same as they affect Gary Public Schools and IPS. When Carmel has to redistrict or consolidate an elementary school, it is a minor inconvenience for over-scheduled soccer moms driving their kids into class. When IPS has to shut down an elementary school, it means that single moms working two jobs now have to choose between making it to work on time and paying the bills, or getting their kids to school. The sad part is that many mothers pick the job over their kids schooling.

Legislation like No Child Left Behind is an example of schools held hostage. While schools that are already under-funded and written off fight to keep their students literate, the government gives a majority of the money to schools that are already achieving a 99% graduation rate and think of literacy as a preschool issue. The way things are going is backwards. And the more we allow, the worse it is going to get.

The time is now. We cannot continue to allow our schools to be held hostage. I am not saying that schools in affluent areas have done anything wrong, or should be stripped of any Federal or State assistance. Rather, they need to take less, since their constituents have the means to take on more of the funding responsibilities. The more money that is placed into inner-city school systems, like GPS and IPS, the more students, faculty, and staff that they will be able to retain. When more students graduate, more of them are literate and able to function as a productive member of society. The crime rate goes down, college attendance and graduation goes up, and entire neighborhoods and cities can be turned around.

It doesn't take much, but what it does take is determination from the government to finally correct their mistakes on this. Let's start funding the schools that actually need it. Let's start giving students in urban areas a fighting chance. Rather than punishing them for being born there, let's give them the best education in the world, and not force them into the cyclical world of poverty.

Let's eradicate illiterate store clerks once and for all.

Pledge to America

Remember the days when people used to say that you could trust a man by his word? I know that my father always told me to live my life in a way that allowed people to trust me by what I said, without having to prove it. I think the Republicans should listen to my father.

Back in the day, around this time in 1994, the Republican Party released "A Contract to America", their pledge to fix what they saw as the problems facing Americans. They claimed that they were going to change the way that politics were being run. And then......they didn't. They got their positions of power and rather than helping the people that needed it most, they exploded the deficit, ran two illegal wars, and violated the Constitution in a way that in mind-blowing.

Now, they have the "Pledge to America" and claim that they are going to fix what problems have occurred under Democratic rule. Forget that they ran the government for 8 years and committed crimes against the American people, but they are going to apparently do things differently after two years of saying "no" to everything.

For example, they claim that they are going to repeal the health care bill. Putting aside the fact that they have done nothing but mislead the American public about what is inside the bill, the idea that they could repeal it is ludicrous. If they regain the House, Senate, or both, it won't be by huge margins. Rather, they will have slim leads, if any at all.

Let's say that they get a bill passed that repeals the health care bill, do they expect that they will convince President Obama to go back on his greatest policy achievement yet?

They also plan on keeping Guantanamo Bay open and full of "enemy combatants". They plan on keeping people deemed a terrorist without a trial, without due process, without access to lawyers, for however long they deem necessary. How can they justify standing up for "freedom from government oppression" while they lock people away like the police state they claim Democrats want to establish.

Ultimately, nothing has changed. While it is clear that there needs to be significant change from what has been happening, it is not the other axis of evil that will get it done. The same old act is being played by the Republicans. And if they win one or both of the houses, be prepared for significant nothingness. Absolutely nothing. Because if history has proven anything, keeping the status quo in place pays better.

The Pope is on the Run!!!!!

As I scan the news networks online (because who really watches TV news anymore), I have noticed a lot of coverage about the Pope's visit to the UK. As someone who likes to follow events coming out of the Vatican, I was very intrigued to notice the response that he got when arriving. 

Six men were arrested, people rioted, families and college students were out in force speaking against his coming to their country. My only question is: why?

Here is a man who has taken the sexual abuse scandal head-on. He hasn't ran from responsibility as the leader of the church. And while there has been evidence of a cover-up in come cases, the important thing is that he is addressing the problem. He isn't hiding from criticism, nor is he denying the existence of cases. He is meeting with families, dealing with clergy who committed the acts and making decisive choices that will help repair the church and it's image.

I understand that people are mad. I whole hearted agree that the Catholic church has a long way to go before the public can ever consider giving them the benefit of the doubt again. However, protests that turn into riots are not a response that will help anybody. No answers are going to be given and no satisfaction will be reached through decisions made out of that anger. Rather, the people that are so upset with the church should ask questions of the Pope, rather than trying to lynch him. I understand the frustration and I know that there is a limit to the patience people have with this church. However, this is a man that can be worked with, reasoned with and who is willing to take responsibility and change the way that things are done. 

Now is the time for action, but not by us. We should be watchdogs, hounding the church until it makes the needed change. We need to ask questions, not take no for an answer and require proof before trust is restored. This is the action we should take, not rioting. Because, though it may give us satisfaction now, history proves that angry mobs only set things back for years to come.

The good old days

Primary season is over. The candidates have been selected and the mud-slinging is about to begin. One thing that can be easily observed about this election cycle is the monumental shift in one side's politics. I know that it has been said over and over by candidates and their party but let's look at election history.

Republicans won back control of congress by convincing people that the Democrats were extreme and out of touch. They painted the American public with the brush of moderation in politics and swept things up because of it. The Democrats used the same tactic in their conquering of congress in 2002, '06, and '08.

So it would make perfect sense for Republicans in this election season to simply use the same old tactics that every out of power party has used. After all, once they get in they will use the same old policies that have failed America time and time again. However, they are going farther and farther to the Right, alienating the American public and appeasing only their Republican electorate.

See, they have shifted extremely to the right. The "Tea Party" has seized the party and has put candidates on the ballot that normally would have been laughed off the stage. Some make racially questionable remarks, others can't even get the spelling on their website right and there are still others that want to eliminate entire departments overnight.

Now, I am in support of fiscal responsibility. We should reform the welfare system to have people go to college while receiving government support, not eliminate it entirely hoping that the "push kids into the water to help them swim" works. There are plenty of rational decisions that would put America back onto the right track without leaving it's citizens out in the cold. However, Tea Party candidates aren't interested in such proposals. They simply want to say whatever will get them elected by a Republican electorate that is still upset about the presidential election.

The problem is not the Tea Party, because they are not bad in and of themselves. They stand for the principles of fiscal responsibility, smaller government and appropriate delegation of powers to the states. However, they are not supporting or nominating the candidates that want common sense brought back to Washington, but rather having a foot race to see who can come up with the most extreme ideas. It is time that the Tea Party take responsibility for the people that they nominate and support. They need to realize that intelligent, workable solutions are available to the American public without much effort. The only thing we need to do is step up and remember that we have tried both sides of the coin and now is the time for an entirely different coin.

It's the end of the world as we know it..............

Ahh election season. The pundits lick their lips while candidates bring an extra pair of pants. And though the rhetoric has yet to change, one group of people will probably never hear it. You see, I am a unique figure in my generation. My opinions and views are not merely what is convenient but what I am convicted to believe. I am not phased by the disenfranchising talk of people older than me that have had time to get bitter and cynical. Unfortunately, that puts me into the minority.

For years, my generation has had to battle through stereotype after stereotype. We are called the laziest, most privileged, apathetic, lethargic, least inspired, least likely to achieve, least likely to succeed, least likely to accomplish something greater than ourselves, and that is just the appropriate ones. We are consistently told that our opinions don't matter because we don't understand the gravity of the situation we find ourselves. They are telling a generation of youth that has had to deal with earlier rates of drug use, sexual activity, depression, suicide, and loss that they don't understand the gravity of life. Huh.

It doesn't stop there. We are reminded of our shortcomings. The generation of people that protested in the streets against Vietnam, burned bras on college campuses, lived through the Free Love and Hippie movements are now calling what mistakes and adventures we have unforgivable. The generation that fought to have a voice on college campuses, to give blacks and gays the status of human in America now don't want to extend those privileges to us. It is not enough to simply guide us into having productive, solid lives. They also have to kill our spirit as well.

That is why this election day, things can end up the same. My generation continues to avoid the system that doesn't want any part of us, meanwhile the generation above us puts in people that promise to cut taxes and increase the scope of wars and spending. Or.....................

We can change things. We can hijack the system. The best way to shut people up is to prove them wrong. You see, all it takes is one election in which we are the largest group participating. We dictate the order of things. We decide who is in, and who is out. We don't put up with the same old things that have gotten America to the place it is in today. We have an opportunity to shock the world and change everything that has pushed us in a corner. The question is not whether or not we will step up to the plate. The question, rather, is when.

The New-Life Movement

Over the years, I have probably heard every possible opinion in the abortion debate. I have heard the Pro-Life and the Pro-Choice side, including every possible extreme and middle position in both. Some are flexible, some are set in stone, and others are open minded to hear how wrong the other side is. And while the current state of affairs favors the Pro-Choice side (see Roe V. Wade), the Pro-Choice side swears up and down that it won't be that way for too much longer. My opinion? The debate is pointless.

Right about now, you fall in one of three categories: 1. You are pissed and will either stop reading or send some bitter comment on my Facebook page, 2. You couldn't agree more because the courts have already decided the debate in your mind, or 3. You are intrigued as to why I would make such a statement. For those of you in groups 1-3, this is what I mean.

The current debate focuses entirely around whether or not to keep a medical procedure legal. One side wants women to have the right to decide what they are going to do with their pregnancy (guess which side they are), while the others are convinced that the medical procedure equates to murder and should be eliminated. As you can see, both sides are arguing completely different things about the same topic. Therefore, the debate does nothing but polarize the populace and gain some ratings for conservative talk show hosts.

This is what should be done instead. If the Pro-Life movement is really interested in preserving children and helping women keep their babies, they should do just that. So many times, I have seen and heard people in the Right to Life crowd talk about the new shock ad or the new truck driving around with aborted fetuses on the side. For some reason, they do not want the practice to occur because it is sick, grotesque, and disgusting. Yet, they feel no shame, in fact they feel pride, over putting the result of that practice for all to see. This would be the same group of people that would sue war protesters for displaying the remains of a victim/soldier involved in a war, however, they see no contradiction in what they are doing.

I know it seems like I am bashing the Pro-Life movement, mostly because I am bashing the Pro-Life movement. Their time, money, and resources all go toward lobbying and advertisement campaigns such as the billboards. Meanwhile, there are countless women placed in the dire consequence of having to choose whether or not to abort. The debate is pointless because there has been nothing but menial gains by either side. One side gets a law passed, and the other gets it overturned in court. Vice versa, vice versa, and vice versa. Nothing ever gets done.

Rather than being stuck in an endless legal battle, the Pro-Life movement should work toward actually helping lives, born and unborn. They should put up clinics, housing, and resource centers that allows the most at risk women to have the things they need in order to provide for their coming family. They should operate to serve and protect the women that need help, rather than judging and protesting them. They should be warm and welcome them rather than hate and despise them.

There is an opportunity to change the way that the world works. Do not worry about Roe V Wade, make it irrelevant. By helping those that need it most, we would be helping those that cannot help themselves as well.

The True Cost of Freedom

The more I study the political system of America, the more I realize that our democracy is not really run by the people put into charge in the beginning, us. The average people. There were founding fathers that had great educations, great intellect, and wrote some of the greatest political theory and commentary still used to date. However, the intent of these men was clearly demonstrated when they declared America to be by the people, of the people, and for the people. Yet, in every political debate, it is not the average Americans that are looked upon but instead corporations, coalitions, and PACs. Campaigns are judged by how much money they draw in, as seen by the amount of press given to the financial reports filed every quarter. In essence, it when from common folk holding the key to corporations holding the key and charging for even walking into the building.

I know, I know. Every political commentator likes to bash the big corporations and blame them for being the big shots on Capitol Hill. However, I would like to point out that the people, that's right, average people, are to blame for this much more than the corporations are. Corporations are in business to make money. That is their goal, intention, and motivation. People, however, are supposed to be in charge of things, especially things that keep corporations from getting out of control. It comes back to us. We became apathetic. The generation in charge has kept us completely irrelevant, and in fact, most of their peers irrelevant as well. We are less interested in being part of the system because we cannot see the system doing any good. Health care legislation is watered down to help stave off pressure from providers. Food additives are allowed to be put into our food supply that make us more hungry, more obese, more everything except our lifespans, in order to keep food/snack corporations' money flowing. Electric cars are killed every time they start to present a viable alternative to internal combustion engines.

The point is this. All of these things have happened because we allowed it. Being in charge is a responsibility that we have passed around and around until the corporations have offered to take it off of our hands, hearts, and minds. It is time that we take back our country. We need to recognize the need for us to lead once more. The corporations are only going to look after themselves because that is their objective. It is time that we make ourselves relevant again and become the leaders we should have always been.

The Blueprint for Democracy

As election season heats up and the steaming piles of crap are thrown from one side of the isle to the other, I for once am going to sit back and enjoy this season of give and take. I know that most people reading this would expect me to highlight an issue or candidate that is foremost in my head. However, the time has come to relax and let the political system work out its own demise. You see, in this, the year of our Lord 2010, one party will gain power while the other loses it. The American people are fuming with anger over deficits, social issues, the scope of Federal power, and other nice table conversation. So, trained as they are, those same people are going to go to the polls and vote for the guy without the incumbent sticker next to his name. Chances are he/she will be a Republican and they will probably pull off gaining back one house of Congress, making the next two years irrelevant.

That is when the party really gets started. The American public will look at the Republicans and ask why they didn't accomplish anything. No deficits were solved, no crisis adverted, nothing really got done at all. The Democrats will blame the Republicans in the Senate, the Republicans will blame the Democrats in the House. And that is when things will get fun. The American people will finally realize that having two massive party systems, neither of which listen to constituents, give voice to the public, and both of which scare potential voters into votes, is not the way things need to be run. They will wonder why they only have two options on the ballot and will demand open and democratic elections. And out of all this dust and debris will rise the age of the Third Party. It used to be a joke. Every now and then a state legislature in the Northeast would have one or two members of a third party in its ranks but the two major parties never thought they would amount to much. But now, after the American public realizes that the party in power never listens and the one not in power just sits around assuming that they will be re-elected next cycle, the joke is over.

I don't know how it is going to go down, nor do I care. What I do know is that the two party system in America is numbered. It is time to shock the world, America. It is time for all people to have a voice. It is time to have an option that does more than force an agenda one second, violate the Constitution the next, and bring it full circle with two years of doing absolutely nothing for the American people. They may not see it, but we do. And it is only a matter of time before their party comes to a crashing halt.

Things that make me go huh?

Well, I apologize for my long absence but I have been doing a lot of thinking recently. It has occurred that there are some serious holes in today's political system. I was browsing the internet when I discovered an interesting nugget of information, Senator Lindsay Graham (R, S.C.) apparently wants to cut out part of the Constitution. The member of the party that decries when gun control and health care are brought up now want to eliminate a part of the Constitution that is inconvenient to their needs.

Senator Graham wishes to eliminate the 14th amendment of the Constitution, giving children born in the United States automatic citizenship. The reasoning behind such a suggestion? The 14th amendment is irrelevant and does not serve it's intended purpose. This is the Senator that claimed the government was taking rights away from people and shredding the Constitution, yet he wants to take away a cornerstone of American society. His position reminds me of another position that he battles against fiercely, gun control. The argument for stricter gun control is that the 2nd amendment served it's purpose and now is misinterpreted and is no longer relevant, yet Senator Graham and the rest of the GOP would never hear of such blasphemy.

I am not asking for strict gun control or a reversal of over a century of the cornerstone of American immigration policy. What I am asking for is simple Constitutional consistency. If one part of the Constitution is irrelevant because of modern events, then let's update the entire document. However, if the Constitution is a rock solid backbone to American society, then leave all parts of it alone. The Constitution shouldn't be torn apart from Democrats for gun control, then defended to the death for immigration policy, just as opposite from the Republicans shouldn't be allowed to happen. It is as simple as picking a path and sticking to it. Not appeasing independents, not obeying lobbyists and special interest groups. Constitutional consistency. Because if part of it goes, it all should go.

Corporate Responsibility

It is a serene day on the Gulf Coast. Early in the morning, entire towns say goodbye to brothers, fathers, and friends as they board their fishing vessels for another long day out at sea. Meanwhile, a dangerous and unsafe oil rig finally does the unthinkable and explodes. 11 people lose their lives while the rig sinks to the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico and tens of thousands of barrels of oil start gushing into the sea. The unsuspecting fisherman and communities along the coast have no idea what is about to happen to them.

British Petroleum, the company that owned the rig, has failed America and the world. They operated an unsafe rig and then failed to have any plan in place for if or when the unthinkable were to happen. They have consistently tried to downplay the amount of oil in the water and the ecological and economic damage caused by their recklessness. They have not paid the fisherman, whose livelihoods are probably ruined for at least a decade, and the process for receiving any funds from them is set up as a complicated process that will prevent people that need it most from receiving it. Every clean up effort they have attempted to establish has been hastily thrown together and lacks any credibility. Ultimately, it is another example of a corporation that has placed an entire region of America at risk.

Sarah Palin had a post on her infamous Facebook page that asked the American people to overlook this "isolated incident" and still trust the oil companies with our energy needs. Sorry Sarah, but this is the final straw. If nothing else can be gleaned from this tragic event, we should at least realize our need for alternative fuels and energy sources. One oil rig has successfully taken down an entire region of America and it is not done yet. From Exxon Valdez to the Gulf Disaster, it has been proven that we need another form of power to lead America into the future. It is time to put the money and resources that we would be using to prevent another disaster and instead start putting those into developing clean, reliable, and safe fuels that can be used by everyday Americans in everyday situations. We can do it. It is not decades away anymore. If we buckle down, fight the propaganda, and finally decide to lead again, we can never again be afraid of being punished for a corporation's mistakes.

The Two Party Game of Charades

Rewind. No, not the dvd you are watching but rather in your mind. Rewind to the year 2001. The Republican Party had won the Presidential Election, had control in Congress, and looked toward moving the country forward after the Clinton era. September 11, 2001. The most tragic day in American history. Thousands of people died in planes, skyscrapers, and a field in Pennsylvania. Everything changed. Democrats seemed crazy, blaming President Bush and his business partners. Republicans, however, kept a cool head. I wasn't very old then. In fact, I was in the 4th grade when the greatest legislative disaster in American history happened, The USA Patriot Act. I did not know it then, but the rule of law had been trampled upon. The Constitution is not a list of suggestions as to how the nation should be run. Rather, it is a stiff, inconvenient, unchanging list of rules that severely restricts what the government can or cannot do. And that is because that is what it was designed to be. The Republican Party did not care, as Senator Jeff Sessions put it on the Senate floor, "Some people love the Constitution more than the security of this nation.". When I came of age and realized the travesty that had occurred, I could no longer call myself a Republican.

So after that fiasco, I decided that I would look for a new party affiliation. I couldn't find a legitimate third party to side with, so I settled in as a Democrat. 2006 and 2008 were both really good years. Democrats finally took back control of both houses of Congress and the White House. Everybody was feeling optimistic and encouraged about the healing that was supposed to take place. The illegal, undeclared wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were going to be brought to a much needed end. Guantanamo Bay was going to be closed. The abomination known as the Patriot Act would finally be allowed to expire. Executive power was supposed to be brought back to appropriate levels. And then...President Obama decided to renew the Act, closing Guantanamo has been stalled from the start, and Afghanistan continues without an end in sight. Healthcare reform was passed. But the final package was only a watered down version of what the country truly needs and even that is under threat of repeal. Any way you look at it, I was let down yet again and therefore can no longer be called a Democrat.

When it comes down to it, both Parties are the same Party. We are convinced that all third party candidates are crazy, extremists, or unqualified. We have been trained to believe that we either choose between the Democrats or the Republicans. Anything else is just a wasted vote. NEWSFLASH: All votes cast in every election dominated by the two major parties has been a wasted vote! Either party is not interested in representing your voice, opinion, belief, or stance. Rather, they are interested in saying or doing whatever it takes to get elected. Republicans use fear of the unknown and creeping "socialism" to make you feel unpatriotic for not electing them. Democrats use lofty promises, unattainable goals, and "change" to get put into office. Both use you. Both use me. Both manipulate and deceive in order to get power. They are in control of Presidential debates. (See Ralph Nader Presidential Debate 2000). They are in control of ballot access. They control every aspect of democracy, which makes this nation a farce of a democracy.

What can we do? Let's waste our vote. Let's rally behind a Libertarian, Green Party, Constitutionalist, or even a Socialist Party candidate. Let's show the Republicans and Democrats where they can stick their control, manipulation, and deceit. Chances are that if you look into those candidates, you will find passionate, patriotic, devoted, and honest men and women who want to lead by common sense and principle. It is possible to change the landscape in the election of 2010. It only takes one. Whether it is a governor, congressman, or senator, one third party candidate winning can open the floodgates. I am tired, you are tired, we are all tired. Now, let's do something about it.

Made in the USA

Imagine a serene coastal town. Imagine life in said town being relatively calm for centuries, avoiding the ravages of war, disease, famine, and weather disasters. People and society are both complex and concrete, being passed from generation to generation. Now imagine a ship filled with disease carrying, woman violating, violent people landing on the coast near this town and claiming the land for their far-away nation. I give you America's first immigrants.

Some may wonder why I tell the tale of these intrepid men of adventure. Well, it seems our good friends in Arizona have decided that our nation's history of immigration does not matter and all immigrants should be treated as criminals. In one of the greatest pieces of racial profiling ever committed by government, the state legislature has given Arizona authorities the right to detain anyone "suspected of being an illegal immigrant". That's right. Suspected. Not convicted of a crime. Not having their immigration status checked at a workplace or when arrested for a crime. Nope. Just by looking the part, United States citizens will now have to prove to skeptical law enforcement that they belong in this nation.

We have gone a long way from taking other nation's sick, poor, and oppressed. I guess the generosity of America cannot extend to everybody. Let alone Constitutional rights. Asking American citizens to prove who they are based on outward appearance is a grave step toward a police state. How are police officers not supposed to racially profile against Latino people when they are told that anyone of them could be here illegally. Forget where you stand on the immigration front. It should not matter whether you support deportation or paths to citizenship. The heart of the matter is that an entire state legislature has now told an entire race of people that they will be subject to search and seizure for looking the way that they do. They do not have to commit a crime or violate state law in any way. Police now have the authority to detain whoever they determine to have "suspect" immigration status. "I am sorry that you are a fourth generation American, Mrs. Sanchez, but you look an awful like the people that come through here. We have no other alternative. But, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." There is nothing to fear, except the extreme violation of Constitutional protection, racial profiling, and unwarranted confrontations with law enforcement...

When will we wake up? When will we finally realize what we are allowing people to do? There should have been protests outside that capitol building loud enough to keep the officials from hearing themselves think. There should have been people yelling and screaming outside to keep this insane law from happening. Where were the TEA Party Protesters then? Where were the people that claimed the violation of Constitutional rights when the health care bill passed? Where was Sara Palin? Glenn Beck? Michelle Bachmann? Where were the people on this issue? It is time that someone stand up for those that are being disenfranchised by our politicians. It is time that we yell and scream when something so bluntly racist and rights-destroying becomes law. It is time that all of those who have ranted and raved about losing rights to health care to not conveniently lose their voices when people are losing their basic rights to privacy and protection from unlawful searches and seizures. It is time. But the question, as always, remains: Will they step up?

Repeal, Repeal, Repeal!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is the time of year when televisions across America are flooded with campaign commercials. One candidate is running for office, and the other one is trying to stay in office. The guy trying to defeat the incumbent is always trying to point out how different they are from the person already in office. What amazes me, though, is the central theme in all the Republican candidates' commercials and websites. They all seem to be pushing for one thing, repeal. According to them, we need to completely repeal the health care bill that was passed and start over. We need to put, "common sense reforms", in place that the "American people want". My question is this, what are those plans?

It seems to me that they aren't working toward reform, as much as they are working toward being put into office. The Republican candidates, especially those endorsed by the Tea Party Movement, do not have a definite plan for what they would replace the bill with. What do you replace banning Pre-existing conditions with? What do you replace banning removing coverage from a sick person with? What do you replace establishing Insurance Exchanges, a simpler way of comparing and purchasing insurance, with? There was no bill from a single Republican in office outlining their plans for after Repeal. It seems as if the members of the Right have gotten all caught up in their fiery rhetoric and their doomsday predictions. Rather than establishing a clear, concise alternative to the plan being implemented, they have made people so angry and afraid that they don't need said plan. The candidates in the "Tea Party Express III" do not need clear, logical ideas that counter the ones put into place. They do not need a legitimate plan to be put into action once they would get elected. The reason that the Tea Party will stop being a legitimate force in any election after 2010 is that there is no substance. They will either lose a majority of races and be seen as a barking dog without teeth, or their candidates will get into office, repeal the health care plan, and try to come up with something that will never amount to anything because they did not have a plan put into place. Americans are a funny people: they get excited/zealous about their politics to the point of being blinded, but they are also very fast in pointing out when they have been duped. People that support and sustain the Tea Party may feel victorious in November, but they will feel betrayed from that point forward. Because rhetoric is nothing, if nothing is holding it up.

Homeland Security

My radio is frequently filled with angry conservative show hosts who rant and rave about how bad the country is under the "Obama Regime". They claim he is taking America back before Ronald Reagan with a new nuclear arms treaty, a topic I will tackle later, and with new energy taxes. It really is a head-scratcher to hear conservatives from coast to coast rail against funding for new, alternative energy forms, then turn around and say that liberals are anti-national security. It would seem like the opposite argument would be made by the party that is bent on keeping all of America safe and secure from the scary mass that seems to be creeping into our perfect land of opportunity. While new energy taxes would raise the cost of motor oil, gasoline, heating oil, and other petroleum products, it would also allow new energy options to be fast-tracked with increased funding. While we cannot ignore the benefits of off-shore drilling, it is not a long-term fix. It is like giving a person with a concussion a bottle of Tylenol. While the pills would relieve the headache for a little bit, the underlying condition would only get worse.
The energy provisions in this bill would finally accomplish what every president from Nixon to Obama has claimed to work toward, ending our dependence on foreign oil. Why is that so important? One nugget of information is that with every dollar increase in the price of oil, before the climate/energy bill passes, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and the other extremely friendly OPEC nations receive an extra cool billion dollars in profits. So when the price of gas rises to the projected $4 a gallon from the average $3 a gallon it is now, all of our friends in the Middle East will be $1 billion richer. I do not claim to be an expert in the oil business, but for a party that passed the USA PATRIOT ACT for our security, opposition to giving OPEC nations more money just seems wrong. Maybe it is something they overlooked when they started their multi-million dollar advertising campaign, or maybe it is just a contradiction they are willing to overlook so long as they get elected into office. Whatever the reason, I guess I will never understand the minds behind conservative radio.