If the President of the United States would like to speak to the nation's students about the importance of education, personal responsibility and the need to work hard because it is necessary to the country's future, why is this even a question? Broadcast the address in your schools. If your school does not have the resources to fulfill such a request, write letters to your state and local politicians as well as your senators and representatives in Washington and finally one last letter to the president about why you were unable to broadcast the speech.

While I haven't loved all of our presidents, I am honored that one thinks highly enough of our students to take the time to relate to them and encourage each and every student to succeed no matter what failures and hardships they must overcome to do so. Would I have wanted George W. Bush to talk to my preschooler and the rest of the country's youth about the importance of finishing school. The guy is not my favorite, but absolutely, I would. Clinton? No question. First Bush? Yep. And he did speak to the students and so did Reagan. If Obama was pushing some sort of liberal agenda, or referring to controversial topics, I would certainly understand all of the opinions and refusing to broadcast in some schools, but that is not the case.

The right wing has an agenda with only one message: anti-Obama. What they are failing to see is that the retaliation from the left will be to do the same thing to their president... and that is not right either. We have a responsibility in this country to respect the office of the president, no matter who he or she is; no matter where they came from; no matter how they got there. Dissent is acceptable and welcome, but when it comes to a message as non-partisan as "Stay in School," there is no dissent. Those who didn't get their way this time around aren't interested in playing fair and it's hurting all of us.

Tolerance & Education

I just stumbled onto this... On November 4, the people of California have an important decision to make about Same-Sex Marriage. I think that no matter how they vote, they should seriously consider that their children will meet people with all types of families and backgrounds. It is our moral obligation as parents to teach our children to respect how people live their lives.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1815825713

Notice that Mr. Parker in the video refers to the school's education as having "no tolerance" when they won't give him parental notification about sending home the book.

Teaching children that there are all kinds of families in the world is not wrong and it is not crossing any lines. Any book that educates people- no matter what age- about how different people live their lives needs to be welcome. What if a child has a friend who has two dads or two Moms? By example, do we teach our child to ostracize that friend? Do we teach our children to hate that friend? No. This is a matter of human rights. We have to teach our children to respect all types of people, no matter if we agree with them or not. If we don't, we teach hate- plain and simple.

Is this Socialism?

I am not that convinced that this bailout (or any of the others for that matter) is the right move. The government/taxpayers have a responsibility to help those in need, but we cannot be enablers of poor behavior. That just makes a disfunctional financial system- and isn't that what we have already? The government is charged with the responsibility to protect the people. Instead, what they will be doing in a few short days is protecting the wealth of the ridiculously wealthy. It is imperative that congress think long and hard before passing this proposal. Serious consideration and much deliberation must take place before passing a proposal that uses the following verbiage:

(b) Necessary Actions.--The Secretary is authorized to take such actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities in this Act, including, without limitation: "without limitation???"

This is giving power to the secretary of the treasury appointed by George W. Bush to appoint employees (i.e. more cronies) to handle this bailout, enter into contracts of their choosing, designating financial institutions as financial agents of the Government (which sounds a little like socialism), buy up mortgage-related assets, and finally, verbatim: (5) issuing such regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to define terms or carry out the authorities of this Act.- "without limitations."

Members of our congress are expected to quickly and "without playing games" (House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, CNN)1 to make this our policy for dealing with this subprime mortgage crisis that threatens the country and the world. Is there no room for debate, or provisions for the very people who are paying for this? I want to know what is going to happen to those whose homes have foreclosed, and I want to know how this will protect those who are on the brink of foreclosure. What about their bailout? I distinctly remember a time when the White House was asking for "no limitations." It wasn't long before the words, "Mission Accomplished." and the realization that we had, in fact, only accomplished the task of making a somewhat stable nation a complete disaster that is now a breeding ground for terrorism. The democrats folded then. I certainly hope they stand up this week. This is taken from the following link which is the proposal as it was sent to lawmakers overnight.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/20/news/economy/treasury_proposal/index.htm

1. http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/21/news/economy/bailout_proposal_Sunday/index.htm?postversion=2008092110

Let's Get the Jobs Back!

Here is my problem with the country as it is today, and I think Obama (God willing) has his work cut out for him. We don't make anything in this country anymore. We lease cars and we sell cars but we don't make the cars here. We sell toys (at about $10/hour) here, but we don't make the toys. Our banks push money and debt and loans around, but we don't have any concrete products to show for it. The american financial market has been a balloon that has been ready to pop since the large companies moved their manufacturing overseas. And that's not all that's moved. The customer service call centers have moved. Some of the information technology jobs have moved, too. There is a plethora of positions that have been moved, and it's only a matter of time before those employees- just like China- will begin to demand better wages and thus higher prices for goods. My prediction is that we will pay the same price to overseas factories for worse products that we would have paid if the factories had stayed here. We just would have paid our neighbors and our friends and our families (in some cases ourselves) for better products. So, I ask you, what are we left with, and why isn't anyone talking about this?



We have very wealthy people moving around stocks and bonds and getting bailed out while people lose their homes. And here is the kicker. People can't get credit for a loan to buy a house anymore and that was the only industry that couldn't be shipped overseas.

Sexual Predators

This is not my usual political rant that I'm sure you've become so fondly of... This is a serious call to contact your senator about a bill that is out there that needs to be passed. Heinous crimes are happening right under our noses to our most innocent children. They are happening inside our neighbor's homes, and could happen to our own children. These criminals are going undetected and unpunished because we as a country don't have the necessary funding to get the intellegence that we need to catch these degenerates. Of course we do have the funding to wage unnecessary wars in foreign lands, but I digress. My friend sent me an email because Oprah did a show on this very subject. I will warn you that it is extremely graphic. Here is a link to see some of the show and some talking points on the subject. This is a bipartisan bill cosponsored by two republicans and two democrats. Please copy and paste the letter in the comments section on the senate website. The Oprah site will give you explicit instructions. If you have a hard time completing this, please send a comment and I will certainly spell it out for you. This has to be passed by September 26, so don't wait to send the letter.

It is called the protect the Children Act (S. 1738, Biden-Hatch). It has already passed in the house by a landslide. If the Senate doesn't pass this bill, I have serious doubts about whether they are doing their jobs, and will have to re-evaluate who I have been voting for.

http://www.oprah.com/slideshow/oprahshow/20080911_tows_predators/1- this is talking points

http://www.oprah.com/article/oprahshow/20080911_tows_predators- this is where you go to get instructions about how to contact your senator.

I'm not exactly an Oprah fanatic, but I am pleased to see her tackle this issue.

McCain and the Economy

During the darkest day on Wall Street since September 17, 2001, John McCain stated that the fundamentals of our economy are strong… in the morning. Later in the day, he stated that the same “strong” fundamentals are at risk. Was it the criticism from the media that changed his tune (wait, Sarah Palin is not going to Washington to “seek their good opinion”)? Or had he been briefed finally on the biggest story of the day… and for some people, the biggest and worst story of their lives? A projected 50,000 workers who will lose their jobs, a “restructuring” of Wall Street, as the media calls it (it would more appropriately be called a “crash”), and a bank (that survived the Great Depression) will close. John McCain is troubled about how to describe it all… is it strong? Could it be at risk? Oh well, when in doubt, just mention that you picked Sarah Palin- that should work.

Lipstick on a Pig

I turned on the television and they are dissecting this analogy over and over again. CNN had two women bloggers on- one conservative and the other a liberal, and both are saying that this is not a sexist statement. Then, in an attempt to rescue myself from this mundane ridiculousness, I change the channel to MSNBC only to find out more about the four words that are clearly taken out of context. I need the media to cover something other than misleading sound bytes. McCain can paint his own misleading picture- and he already has an ad to do it- not that he needs it- the media, today, is doing his campaigning for him.

I don't mean to beat a dead moose here, but the Republican Party must stop illustrating Sarah Palin as a victim- she is anything but. Obama's lipstick comment was not referring to, talking about or taking a jab at Sarah Palin- he hadn't even mentioned her. He was referring to McCain's platform and the fact that "change" takes on a very different meaning within the Republican's campaign.

Barack Obama is anything but a sexist, so please lay off the lipstick rhetoric. Women aren't about lipstick, and we're not so sensitive (and need I say stupid) to think that every mention of cosmetics is aimed at our gender. I think someone who is campaigning to be our second in command would recognize that.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=74856