Borneo: Can't See the Forest for the Trees

After reading an article in National Geographic called "Borneo's Moment of Truth" by Mel White, I was so moved that I wrote the below commentary.

I recently read an article in National Geographic concerning the rainforests of Borneo and the drastic deforestation that is going on there. I think that this issue is one of those issues that almost no one in the general population has heard of and when they do hear it, they think to themselves “how does the rainforest in Borneo affect me?” The answer is it affects us all, a lot, in ways which we cannot imagine, or possibly do not want to imagine.

The island of Borneo is split into sections governed by different countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei. Unfortunately two of the three countries have experienced years of corrupt government who have allowed illegal logging to take place. Not only that, but these governments have used these forests as their own personal playgrounds in order to make themselves and their friends and family wealthy from proceeds of logging, mining (gold and coal), and palm oil production. The small area which Brunei governs is the exception, as the government of Brunei has largely left the forests alone as a result of revenues they receive from the production of petroleum products. The governments of Malaysia and Indonesia have squandered these forests, which, like all rainforests, release high levels of oxygen into our atmosphere. In addition to the production of oxygen, rainforests are a gold mine of animals, plants, birds, insects, and reptiles who have untold value, in ways yet undiscovered, which may never be discovered, as they are made endangered by this deforestation.

Ironically, as these forests are being taken from us, plantations of oil palms are planted in order to harvest palm oil. Palm oil is used in many different industries, but one major industry that uses palm oil is the biodiesel industry. The growing of these palms for this purpose not only encourages the deforestation of these rainforests, but also the process of making the land ready for planting of the palms releases large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere, contributing to the very climate change problem for which biodiesel is being produced as a solution. Borneo’s soil contains large amounts of peat moss which, when burned, releases large amounts of carbon, contributing to the problem of carbon levels in the atmosphere, thus making it seem that the production of biodiesel using this palm oil is counterproductive to its intent. The problem is palm oil is big money, and money is something the people of Borneo need. While the palm oil fields, strip mines, and burning forests cause humanitarian problems and environmental problems, it brings in some of the only revenue Borneo sees, making it hard for its residents to see the bigger picture or even care about the bigger picture.

It is hard for the US to preach to Borneo about saving its lands and forests when government officials are pushing for us to drill in our own national parks and our preserve land. Also, the US is a nation who has depleted large amounts of its own natural resources, torn down its trees, and polluted its water. We can hope that because of our own realizations of what depletion and destruction of resources can mean to the bigger picture that we may be able to help Borneo to learn from our mistakes. We can also hope that our upcoming administration will not only be an advocate for places like Borneo, but for our own remaining parks and preserve land as well. It is my hope that we, as a country, will all become educated on this situation and others like it so that we may all contribute to the solution rather than continue being part of the problem. It would also be a very big step towards the solution if President Obama, and other world leaders, will support REDD and help the world find a way to balance the needs of the people of Borneo with the world’s need of their forests.

*photos from: Destination 360 ; Mongabay.com ; and Rainforests @ Mongabay.com

Hope Personified

posted on all progressives
Tuesday night Barack Obama was elected as the next President of the United States. I could and still can hardly believe it. It was a surreal moment that I will never forget. I had just walked through the door after having been at school when he was projected as the winner on the major networks. At that moment, as I sat, tears rolling down my face, I felt pride, and then something else I haven't felt in some time: Hope. Real, honest to goodness hope. As I watched him speak, the emotion on his face and written all over the crowd, I wept some more. It was an unforgettable speech, for an unforgettable night.

The thing about President-Elect Obama is that he makes us all feel as though we are a part of something bigger than ourselves, and for once, I truly believe we are. We are a part of history. We are a part of a movement of change that has the potential to not only change our country, but the world: a world that now shares our hope and our celebration. A man will be in the White House who knows pain and suffering, yet knows that it can be overcome. He is a man who by the very nature of his character has risen above adversity that has gone on longer than the United States of America has existed as a country. Barack Obama is an extraordinary man with a vision of hope and change that Americans have been hungry for. He is a man who I believe can make that vision come to life. I have never believed so strongly in any politician as I do in Barack Obama. He is the personification of Hope. Hope that will live in the White House and will prove to all that this generation is finished with politics as usual. We are finished with the idea that only some deserve greatness. And now as Barack goes on to face the challenges and the adversity facing our country now, we know that there is no easy fix. Yet, I do not doubt Barack Obama and his ability to inspire change and make it happen. After all, look at what he has already done. Here's to you President Obama and to Hope.

Kindness Does Still Exist

In a world where often times the only stories we here involve heartbreak, despair, and death, it makes a person feel extreme satisfaction to see reporting on the other side of life. We hear how people are rushing to buy foreclosed homes to get a good deal for investment or for their own. We see how the loss of a person's home devastates their life. They find themselves homeless after struggling to pay the bills. I think that often people like to think that these individuals are simply lazy, or that they purchased more home than they could afford, but the reality is that the majority of the individuals losing their homes have come upon hard times of rising prices or loss of jobs, or they simply were given a mortgage that they did not understand.

Yet, today I see that there is still someone out there who believes in kindness. A woman, out of the kindness of her heart, bought another woman's home at a foreclosure auction and gave it back to her. The woman did not ask questions about why she lost the home, or judge her for having lost it. Rather she bid until she won to give this woman back her home. If only those people who have money who choose to sit back and do nothing but judge those who are less fortunate during this time will take an example from this woman's act of kindness.

The video clip can be seen by clicking this link.

The Sound of One Campaign Crashing

Yes, folks, THIS is the sound of one campaign crashing.  The McCain campaign is now fighting within itself.  They are pointing the finger and placing blame.  Interestingly, most of it seems to revolve around Palin.  It is interesting now that aides to the McCain campaign are willing to admit Palin was not prepared for the role she agreed to take and that she was guarded and kept from speaking for that reason.  Even after all the preparation they did with her, she still managed to botch the only interviews she gave.  She continues making statements that the above article determines to be statements to preserve her own future should she wish to run in 2012, but if that's so it doesn't seem a smart choice seeing as how there's still a whole lot of stupid coming out of her mouth on a regular basis.  The race is not yet won, but this is a clear sign of the end for McCain's campaign. 

As a side note, I voted today!!

You Don't Know Joe And Other Tales From John's Crypt

So last night was the third and final Presidential debate of this election. We all heard plenty about the so-called "Joe Plumber" and we will probably continue to do so for the next 500 years thanks to the media and their need to sensationalize everything. I did come across an interesting article today in my browsing that gave a little more insight into the Obama tax plan and whether or not the so-called Joe the Plumber will really have anything to worry about from Obama's tax plan. The article goes on to say that it will not and confirms that in fact only 2% of small business would actually see any increased taxes and furthermore, because of the way the tax plan works, those who are affected would only see a small increase, as the tax would only apply to a portion of earnings. The bottom line is that they would help more people who need a break than anything McCain has come up with. It is unrealistic to think that no tax increases will be needed.

Another scary story is McCain and his obsession with the hatchet. I feel like we are all stuck in a bad Friday the 13th movie watching some axe-wielding maniac stalk his prey. The problem is that it is real and the prey is all of us. His need to cut anything that might be beneficial to anyone but the military is astounding. It obviously makes more sense to look at everything closely and make it run smarter rather than just making blanket cuts with no real aim. But we should not be surprised that this sort of talk comes from a man who would cut the Departments of Energy and Education if he had his way. Two agencies we need now more than ever to solve two of our biggest problems.

McCain managed yet again to look like a grumpy old man. Ranting and raving about how no one should say anything bad about his supporters at his rallies (yes, the same people who called to Palin to "kill him" in reference to Obama). Then McCain's "I'm not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush you should've ran 4 years ago," the line that some are calling the best line McCain had (which in itself is sad) which failed to address any real issue or to distance himself from the policies of Bush.

So "my friends" could McCain possibly have blinked any more often? I thought I was going to get motion sickenss. :)

Senator Pee Pants & the Attack of the Wandering McCain

Yes, my friends (he he), I'm referring to the recent Presidential debate and the ensuing SNL skit.  The parallels between the debate and the mock debate are hilarious.  Tom Brockaw really was quite the time nazi and it was just very bizzare how McCain did wander around the stage aimlessly often in front of camera and teleprompter no matter who was speaking or if anyone was speaking.  Okay, so I know no one actually called anyone "pee pants" in the actual debate, but that was a priceless joke on SNL.  I laughed so hard I almost became Jennifer Pee Pants. 

Unfortunately it appears that McCain's supporters are doing what they do best, turning to anger rather than reason, much like McCain himself.  They are down in the polls, so his rallies, whether he or Palin are at the helm, have become increasingly angry in tone.  There have been several articles printed about it.  It seems that Palin and McCain have been mostly silent, almost encouraging, to that sort of behavior, which include comments such as "kill him," whoever "he" may be.  I did read where McCain finally made a statement at one rally about being respectful (yeah, like "that one" was respectful, nice leading by example), but I have yet to hear anything from Palin other than her own ridiculous rhetoric.  Of course Governor Abuse of Power believes in going above and beyond ethics when it suits her own purpose as evidenced by her actions including the recent scandal, her religious fundamentalism, and her involvement in the Alaskan Independence Party which promotes the succession of Alaska from the US.  I find it ironic that she is now accusing Obama of putting his ambition above the country when in actuality it is John McCain who has done that his entire life.   

All the real mavericks in this country with a spirit for true change and reform will vote for Senator Pee Pants aka That One aka Barack Obama and stop the insanity that has taken over our government and destroyed our economy and security for the past 8 years. 

The Real Meaning of Maverick & the Real McCain

I came across a couple of articles that I found extremely interesting. This article is somewhat humorous, but it describes where the term maverick got its wings in Texas with one very Liberal family. I really enjoyed it and most of you probably will as well.

On a more serious note, I came across this article that gives a very detailed history of McCain, starting with his military career. It is to be published in Rolling Stone which seems to be one of the few magazines left not afraid to publish the truth, no matter how unpleasant it may be. My favorite is Matt Taibbi *swoon*, though this one was written by Tim Dickinson. There were sources used, which include individuals he served with in the military who were also POWs with him in Hanoi. It makes it even more clear that he has done very well his entire life of making himself appear to be more than he is. What he is is a small, angry man with a Napoleon complex who will never live up to what he believes are his father's expectations of him. It is too bad the the majority of Americans do not know the content of this article and probably never will, nor have they any knowledge of the Keating issue.

Oh....and what's up with the "my friends" crap?

Keating Video

Pretty powerful........

http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo

It's a Debate Darn It, So I Hope All You Mavericks Saw It!

I watched the Veeps debate last night and while it was not as big of a train wreck as anticipated, it was darn funny.  Early on in the debate, Palin showed her lack of knowledge on any topic that doesn't involve the state of Alaska by continuously talking about energy, primarily in her own state, and ignoring all other topics, including any discussion about the current mortgage situation.  Governor Palin even made clear that she had no intention of answering the questions asked if she didn't want to answer, though she said it in such a way as to try to make herself seem like the victim.  She told them she would not be answering the questions the way the moderator or Senator Biden might want, but in her own way.  Basically her own way is avoidance.  Her answers were obviously rehearsed and clearly lacked substance.  Biden; however, was able to show how knowledgable he was on any topic thrown his way.  Palin's biggest strength was her ability to talk down to Americans, assuming that they only way they might understand what she had to say was if she through a few darns and references to six packs into her responses.  She also winked several times at the camera and used the word maverick more times than I could count. 

I was thrilled to hear Biden point out the numerous reasons why McCain was not, in fact, a "maverick," and there was nothing Palin could say to dispute it, mainly because she has no clue.  It was also interesting that she had no idea where and how the duties of the VP are described in the Constitution.  She continuously tried to accuse Senator Biden of pointing fingers and dwelling on the past; however, she failed to show how the policies of McCain would differ from the past, which has lead to our disasterous present.  Palin is a likeable person, but completely un-informed not only on matters around the world, but on matters in our own country as well.

2 more debates to go for Obama and McCain...stay tuned....

Country First? NObama? Is That the Best You've Got? The Sequel!!

I posted this blog after becoming annoyed by a woman at my daughter's school.  Well, today it happened again.  Same scenario, different woman!  Every other car behind and ahead of her was allowing one car out of the parking lot to help with traffic flow, but not her.  No she parked her big old Chevy truck right in front of the exit not allowing anyone in or out until she was able to pull forward.  The irony is that this individual still had a Bush/Cheney 04 sticker on her truck!  Yes, selfish Repub strikes again.  Why would I be the least bit surprised that again this happens and again it is a Republican supporter?  I am sure they are not the only ones who do jerk-assed things to other people; however, it is interesting that in the entire month and a half that my daughter has been in school the two times this has occurred have involved Repub supporters.  This is not a valid political commentary I suppose, so much as a rant, but it's my blog, I'll rant if I want to.:)  

I have some other things to comment on as well, but I will wait until after the debate, possibly tomorrow, because I know that then I will have material to add. 

A Busy Day in Politics

First, a bit of humor. And Bill Maher has a movie!!!

Now for some good news. Obama appears to be gaining in some of the so-called "battleground states." This is good news. It shows that some people are actually paying attention now. It is sad that it takes people losing their money and their jobs and their homes to realize what damage the Repubs have done the past 8 years. They couldn't see the problems until they hit close to home. While it was somewhere else, another country, another city, another state, just the very very poor, they couldn't see it, but I think now they are starting to realize. A key sign is the gain Obama has had in Virginia. I am so glad to see that there are people not falling for the train wreck that is the McCain/Palin ticket.

I am very amused by the Palin interviews. It is painfully clear why McCain and his advisers have tried hard to keep her from speaking. Understand that I do NOT say this because she a woman. I believe there are many intelligent, competent women in this country and around the world, but Palin is not one of them! I think this is where putting any woman McCain and his campaign could find on his ticket to try to appeal to Hillary supporters is backfiring, big time.

And the bad news. People like this guy are out there in the world. Not only can this guy not spell, but he has no idea what he is talking about and he is a bigot. Sure, I support the guy's right to have the sign in his yard and to have whatever opinion he wants to have, but I also support my right to recognize him as an idiot. This guy seriously takes home the Moron of the Week award, possibly Moron of the year. Not only is he wrong, but he's willing to allow it to be spotlighted to the entire world all over the news and the internet that he is a moron.

For the Love of Money!

Leave it to our politicians to fight over who fucked up the most while our economy goes down in flames.  I have my own opinions on who fucked up the most.  I think it's fairly obvious from my other posts who I point the finger at the most.  The fact is that no one who has been part of Congress or the White House for any extensive length of time is free of blame.  Obviously since the Republicans have been the majority in Congress since prior to Bush and there has been a Republican president for 8 years, it would seem they have been making most of the policies that led up to this cluster.  I realize that as the minority party the Democrats wouldn't have been able to do a heck of a lot to stop it, but to borrow from Bill Maher, they need/needed to show some balls.  Tell America what goes on.  Don't use political-speak.  Say it in a way that the average Joe or Jane can understand.  Don't hold back.  Don't let them off easy.  Let everyone know what voting for 4 more years of Republicans in charge will do to the country.  This little freak show is just the beginning of what lies ahead with more Republican incompetence at the helm.

Debate Night

I'm watching the debate right now between McCain and Obama.  It is interesting to me that McCain believes that sitting down and speaking to someone somehow ligitimizes their opinions.  I also it find it laughable that he talks about the fact that Obama didn't go to Afghanistan because somehow that means he is incapable of knowing and caring about what is going on.  There are lots of other opinions I have about things said in the debate but I don't have time to write about them all at this time.  I think Obama has held is own very well.  I enjoy how patiently and smoothly he gets his point across.  I sure would like to take a look at McCain's record as he keeps bringing his own record up because then it would be pointed out how often he has voted for the very things our people are unhappy with.  Bring it on. 

Country First? NObama? Is That the Best You've Got?

Today as I left the elementary school after dropping off my 5 year old daughter for school, I was waiting in line to exit the parking lot. All the cars coming down the street I was turning onto were stopping, letting one car out and then going, until it got to a silver Ford Edge with a woman driving. She stopped, blocking the exit to the parking lot, which also blocked people from turning into the parking lot, staring inattentively out her windshield while fluffing her already big, fake blond hair. It's not that she didn't know what the flow of traffic was or that people were waiting or that she was blocking traffic; it was simply that she didn't care. I thought to myself "what a self-absorbed bitch." What does this have to do with politics you ask? Well, I noticed as the woman finally pulled her car out of the way that she had a sticker on her car that said "NObama." It was hard at first to see the "N" as it was red and not easy to make out, while the background of the sticker was white and the rest of the lettering was black. And so of course I immediately thought how Republican it was to be selfish and self-absorbed. Which also led me to think: "NObama"? Is that the best they've got?

I later read an article about John McCain with his big "Country First" signs trying to detach himself from his years in Congress wherein he pushed deregulation. For years he's been an advocate of deregulating big moneymaking industries, helping to line the pockets of the "fat cats" he keeps spouting nonsensically about in television interviews and speeches. Now suddenly he's talking about the "greed" and "power" and rather than talk about the financial fundamentals of the economy that have gone down the toilet, he bypasses the questions by stating that the American worker is the fundamental piece of the economy and they are strong! Sure that sounds good on a soundbite, but it has no substance. It's all meant to sound good in short 2 second clips to entice people who don't pay close enough attention to the rest of the interview and/or speech to understand that there is no substance to it and no plan to help them. He is a GOP shark in populist clothing. "Country First" they say. That sounds good until you realize that the country they are talking about is different than the one you and I live in. It's the country of 13 cars and 8 houses. It's the country where McCain considers deregulation of the healthcare industry. It's the country where the financial industry was deregulated to the point of meltdown by years of GOP Congress. Sure, we all live in the United States of America, but the country isn't the same for McCain as it is for the mother who works two jobs to feed her children and still needs food stamps and still has no health insurance. It's not the same for McCain as it is for the people who have lost their jobs and their house.

Let's get real. The only thing John McCain and Sara Palin stand for is money. And the only thing they put first is greed. So, go ahead, make your NObama bumper stickers and your Country First signs. None of that will save you in November when voters realize the McCain/Palin platform is nothing but smoke and mirrors.

"Be the Change"

I could analyze this and I could write something that would serve to summarize it, but it speaks for itself. There is nothing I can say. I love what she wrote. I particularly loved the quote that she used from Ghandi "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." Beautiful. Read the blog here. There is only one candidate who can truly be the change: Barack Obama. Well said Jaime Lee Curtis. I applaud you.

Vote McCain for Change!....NOT!

While reading a blog written by Scott Hopkins on Taylor Marsh's website, I came across this story.  The story talks about Senator Obama's visit today to Terre Haute, Indiana.  The race is on now.  It is great how he points out the holes in the theories of the McCain camp.

I particularly enjoyed this quote, as Obama reiterates McCain having voted with Bush 90% of the time, "And suddenly he's the change agent? Ha. He says, 'I'm going to tell those lobbyists that their days of running Washington are over.' Who is he going to tell? Is he going to tell his campaign chairman, who's one of the biggest corporate lobbyists in Washington? Is he going to tell his campaign manager, who was one of the biggest corporate lobbyists in Washington?  I mean, come on, they must think you're stupid." 

Of course the Republicans think Americans are stupid, in fact they are counting on it.  They can't get elected without making American's feel unsafe and insisting they are the ones who can make them safe.  They can't win by pointing out what it is that they would actually do that will benefit the every day American (because they have nothing!).  They use "values," fear, and lies to win.  Oh, and let's not forget, if they don't actually win the election, they use the Supreme Court to get into office. 

McCain's Speech

I caught most of McCain's speech at the RNC last night. I think he was trying to bring the McCain of years past back to the present, but I don't think he succeeded.  Yes, once upon a time I would have said McCain was an independent minded person.  There was once upon a time dare I say I might have considered voting for McCain.  But that time has long since past.  As I listened to McCain drone on about how Obama was the devil in a nice package, I heard him say that he was going to curb government spending.  This coming from the man who supports the surge?  I guess what he means is to cut spending on programs that actually mean something to the American people while dumping whatever money he can into "the surge."  I heard him talk about his time as a POW.  I'm sure it was a very hard, life-shaping experience for him.  I know that he was doing what America asked of him.  However, it struck me to hear him say that America "saved" him.  But he failed to mention that it was an American President that put him in that position in the first place in another war that meant endless death and violence with no real winner.  It is ironic that he is now willing to put others in that same position and have the nerve to stand up and say that he's the true voice of change.  Now, if you'll excuse me while I try not to vomit....

Three Republicans and a Baby

I heard today that McCain's VP pick, Sarah Palin, has a 17 year old daughter that is pregnant.  I am 100% in agreement with Senator Obama that we should not base any of our thoughts about Palin on her family, nor should we attack her family in any way.  I have never felt that those personal type issues should be our determinant on who should and should not hold office.  However, I was disturbed to hear the GOP very quick to announce that her daughter was having the baby and getting married to the 18 year old father.  Many teenagers younger than Palin's daughter have babies and keep them, so that really isn't the part that disturbs me.  I know that's a hard choice to make for anyone, especially when that person is so young.  The part that I took issue with is the marriage.  It has to make one wonder if she was urged to get married because it meets with Republican "values" and thus would look better for the McCain/Palin ticket.  Perhaps I'm wrong.  I don't know the girl and I don't know any of the intimate details of the situation, but I do remember being 17.  When I was 17, I viewed marriage in kind of an unrrealistic fairytale type way.  At the same time, I also broke up with my long time high school boyfriend because I thought we were too young to be so involved.  We hadn't seen anything other than our small town or experienced anyone other than each other and that scared the hell out of me.  I also don't think that a pregnancy is a good reason to commit yourself to another person in such a way.  Having a child together automatically commits you to one another forever in a way, but not in the way that marriage does.  Hopefully they will take some time before getting married to really figure out of that is what they want before rushing into it. 

I see a bigger issue also.  It is further proof that abstinence only teaching is not working.  I realize that even teaching safe sex methods won't guarantee prevention of teen pregnancies, nor will it guarantee the end of STDs among teenagers.  However, it is not realistic to believe that the majority of teenagers and young adults will wait for marriage to have sex.  Some of them may wait because of religious beliefs, but then often they end up married at a very young age, and often times, those are the marriages that do not last since they are married to another person before they even know who they really are.  In the small town in which I was born and lived for 18 years, I knew many girls who got married young like that; some with babies and some without.  Most of those marriages did not last two years, others lasted a little longer, but the majority of them are no more at this time. 

I truly hope that Governor Palin's daughter is happy and that it is not something she is being pushed into.  An unhappy marriage can be a prison for those in it. 

Why is This Any of Our Business?

You guessed it. I was browsing again and of course I found something to write about. Throughout the past few weeks there have been a lot of reports about the affair John Edwards had back in 2006. I realize that most people think it is wrong to cheat on a spouse and I realize that the affair coming to public attention in the heat of an election would have been quite a problem for the Democrats had John Edwards won the nomination. While I understand all of these things, there is a question that still looms in my mind. Why is his affair any of our business? It is not because I like John Edwards that I say this (and I do like him), but rather this is how I feel about any politician that has an affair or smoked pot in college or whatever stupid reason people may choose to demonize someone in the public spotlight. I don't think we can ever judge what someone does in their personal relationships. None of us were there and we don't know what was going on in their minds and in their hearts. I realize that some things done in the personal lives of these people reflects the kind of person they are (i.e. illegal acts, cruelty, etc.); however, in matters of the heart, what makes us so ready to judge? John Edwards has many great ideas that would benefit a lot of people. Even if he didn't love the woman and it was just sex, he's only human and makes mistakes just like you and I. His ideas and his ability should not be dismissed based on this incident.


It goes back to something I have said before. We expect politicians to be without flaw and then act shocked and disappointed when they don't live up to impossible standards. I'm not giving them a free ticket to just do whatever it is they feel like doing without consequence; however, we have to realize that the push to make these people into demigods only makes us vulnerable. We need to realize that these are men and women just like the rest of us. They don't have super powers and they aren't perfect. What they should have is a desire to help this country and it's people and a strong will to stand up for what is afforded to us all by the Constitution. There is nothing wrong with them being "elite." I don't mean in monetary terms, but in intellect and drive.


I think it is a shame that this situation with John Edwards occurred. It's not good that he had an affair. It isn't good that he kept it from everyone. However, the point in all my rambling is that we should not judge since we have no real way to know what he was thinking or feeling when he started the affair. Now on top of it all there are those who would chastise Elizabeth Edwards for not letting the public know of the affair. Why would she want to invite the public into the personal pain of the situation? How can anyone blame her for trying to keep it a secret so as not to have to live it day in and day out playing on television and in print and pictures in the newspaper and Web? I think that people have developed much too much of a holier than thou attitude.

All Hail King Jon

There are many reasons to love Jon Stewart.  His sharp wit, obvious intellect, devious smile; but today I've found yet another reason to love him.  In my browsing today, I came across this story in which Jon Stewart takes to task the many reporters out there who, rather than investigate and report facts, end up spouting talking points that have been placed into the vernacular by the political parties.  He compares 24-hour news channels to "gerbil wheels" (priceless!).  He also indicated that perhaps these news channels are somewhat adding to the sense of panic that always seems to covering our country like a cloak and suffocating us all.  Everything becomes urgent and breaking news, just like the terror alert will never go below yellow.  It is refreshing for someone with such notoriety as Jon Stewart would say this in such a public setting.  It seems these days that anyone who speaks frankly about anything suddenly becomes the enemy.  What, you don't like Bush?  Traitor!  You don't agree with the war?  You hate the troops!  You aren't with us?  Then you are against us!  It's this mentality that spills over into the media.  It happens in both parties.  It happens in all situations.  I applaud you Jon Stewart for your ability to tell it like it is.  It is no wonder you are the voice for the up and coming generation.

Disappointment

In my daily browsing of news, I came across this story, which describes how both Obama and McCain are being interviewed by a pastor, Rick Warren. There is nothing wrong with both individuals being interviewed by a particular group of people in order to try to inform their members on the views of both candidates so that they may make a decision as to who they will vote for. In fact, I applaud them for actually interviewing both candidates. My disappointment then resides with the candidates. Both candidates in varying degree are catering to fundamentalist Christians in this country. While a good portion of people in the US consider themselves to be Christians, the number of fundamentalist Christians is not the majority, but they tend to be the ones who scream the loudest and thus get the most attention. I do not have a problem with Christians. I don't share their views, but I believe they have as much right as I do to believe in what they choose. The problem is that fundamentalists do not respect my right to believe something contrary to their beliefs. Not only do they not respect my right, they expect for legislation to be made that serves no real purpose other than to write their beliefs into law (i.e. gay marriage). Our mainstream candidates, rather than stand up and look at the situation and look at the Constitution and take religion out of the equation, tend to find a way to either stand firm with the fundamentalists and/or find some way to make it sound like they sympathize with the fundamentalist nut jobs that want to write prejudice into law in this country (again). They don't just want to write into law; they want to write it into the Constitution, which in my eyes is beyond just law. I want to see the candidate that says "hey, it doesn't matter what my personal view on gay marriage is because there are gay people who deserve to have the same rights as everyone else in this country and the Constitution guarantees them the same rights as straight people." But no one is ever going to say that because they'll upset the homophobes and the fundamentalists who are a loud minority.

I am using the issue of gay marriage as an example here, but that is not the only issue on which candidates do this sort of posturing. The sad thing is that there are much bigger issues out there that no one really wants to address that need to be addressed immediately, but instead we keep letting people like this control what we put out there and discuss and what we take action on. Instead of worrying about excluding gays from a ceremony that every other person in the country has access too, we should be concerned about poverty. We should be concerned about our country's dependence on fossil fuel. We should be concerned about the rising costs of goods and falling salaries, as well as the disappearing middle class. We should be concerned about everyone in the country having access to affordable and GOOD health care (I emphasize good because everyone has access to the ER and while ERs are not bad, they are not intended to be a primary care facility, thus their being called EMERGENCY room). But why don't we instead keep pandering to the wants of a small group of people concerned with recruiting others into their cult until this country is just like any other country in the world that has state run religion, where the law will tell us what we have to believe in and how we have to practice it. I pose this question those who think religion should play such a large role in the government: How does this make us any different than a country like China who outlaws religion? State sanctioned Christianity or state sanctioned atheism, it's all the same. No choice. You are told what to believe.

When Does Coincidence Become Too Coincidental?

I was browsing the news today (as I do everyday) and I found this story and this story.  They are related stories and both equally as disturbing.  In fact, the very fact that there are two stories like these stories is a large part of the thing that makes them so disturbing.

The stories discuss two separate occasions where individual's names were placed on the terrorist watch list, which includes the no-fly list.  These individuals did not find out they were on the list until they tried to get on a plane.  These individuals were not in fact terrorists and are having a lot of trouble trying to get their names cleared.  This is not the unusual part of the story; however.  It starts to get a little suspicious when it turns out that both individuals are individuals who had written criticism of the government and/or Bush Administration immediately prior to their names appearing on the list.  One of the men is a reporter for CNN who had written a piece based on an investigation of the TSA he had done.  The other man is a political author who had written a book shortly before the 2004 elections which, among other things, raised some of the questions about Bush's National Guard service.  The government claims that these are both purely coincidental and refused to comment on the suspected terrorists that supposedly go by the same names as these men.  Interestingly the men's names are James Moore and Drew Griffin.  This has also happened to some of our members of Congress, including Ted Kennedy. 

So when does a coincidence become too coincidental?  Now I fully understand there are many people who don't like Bush and who have openly criticized him and/or wrote books about his administration and there are the numerous expose type articles about the things he and his group have done.  Of course it would be extremely suspicious if they all showed up on the terror watch list (besides, it has been noted that the list is so long it is almost ineffective and adding all those opposed to Bush would make the list almost as large as the country).  So what would the criteria be to determine who goes on the list?  Maybe it is proportionate to the amount of annoyance the person caused them.  Maybe they draw from a hat.  I don't know.  Maybe it is truly a coincidence, but at what point does it start to merit an investigation?  Of the many things in the Bush administration that need investigating, is this really the one to start with? 

I guess only time will tell; however, it cannot be discounted that it is truly suspicious. 

A Set Back for Women?

I often browse headlines and read articles that interest me or are important.  I came across this story when I was browsing CNN.com the other day.  I've been thinking about it a bit and what it means for women and for society in general.  The article discusses a trend for women, most of whom are highly educated, to stay home and be housewives.  These women do not have children.  It is a situation where they stay home and let the husband take care of them.  Of course in most cases, these are women whose husbands make a substantial amount of money.  I am generally not someone who cares what other people do, especially when it really doesn't hurt anyone.  However, I see this as a setback for women.  These aren't women who have their own money who are staying home because they don't need to work or who are going to school full time, or even who have some sort of health issue that prevents them from working (all of those scenarios have been going on for as long as women have been in the workforce).  These are women who have simply said they were stressed in their jobs and decided that they wanted to stay at home and do housework and let their husband support them.

 I think a couple of things when I read something like this.  First, I think about how this affects women and the cause for women as a whole.  While I'm sure every person, man or woman, has fantasized about being able to drop out of the workforce, the fact is that relationships can end.  No one plans for them to end, but they can and do.  What happens to that woman, then, who has been out of the workforce for years who suddenly finds herself single and jobless?  On the same thought of the effects this can have on the cause for women, we have to think how much of a struggle it has been for women to try to be treated fairly in the workplace.  It was common in the past for women to work only until they married and then they would quit working.  Because of this societal expectation, women were paid less.  A woman with the same education level would be paid far less than a man.  There is still an income gap today and I am not sure something like this will help that gap.  It will leave groups of highly educated women at some point possibly looking for jobs, and with gaps in their resume, it will likely affect their pay, furthering the gap in incomes.  I think companies may see this as an opportunity to revert back.  Why wouldn't they?  If the mindset of society is reverting, why would companies not fall in suit? 

Secondly, I can't imagine this sort of arrangement to be healthy over the longterm in a marriage.  I think it puts a large amount of pressure on one partner.  Think of the husband in this scenario.  His wife not working and his being entirely responsible for the survival of both people would put a lot of pressure on him to make more and more money.  Let's face it, in today's economy incomes are not rising so much, especially adjusting for inflation.  In the article, the woman being interviewed makes a statement that it was less stressful for her to not have to work and to not be in a job she wasn't happy with.  What about the man?  People are rarely happy in their jobs.  They may not be miserable in their job, but rarely does a person have a job they are bursting to get to every day.  Why is it that he should be expected to go to a job every day that he may be stressed about and/or dislike to support the woman's decision to stay home?  Longterm, this could cause resentment in the relationship.  Also, every woman who has ever been in a relationship with a controlling man knows they are out there and that you never truly know who they are until your living it.  This gives one person in the relationship an awful lot of control over the other.  I am sure that there are men out there who won't take advantage of this situation, but for every one out there that won't, there are two that will.  Even if initially the relationship isn't like that, longterm I could foresee the man in the relationship starting to get a sense of authority over the woman, if not because of resentment being built up over time, but simply because most people can't handle having that much power over others without feeling a sense of power, which eventually corrupts their nature.  It is a rare thing to find people who can have power and not be corrupted. 

Not everything about this trend is negative.  As the article states, one could see where the woman feeling less tension could make less tension in the relationship overall.  The man may feel less stress knowing that when he gets home, things will be in order.  Perhaps it could be not specific to just women doing it.  There may at some point be men who stay at home as househusbands while the wife works, thus making it more of a gender equal situation, preventing society from creating further stereotypes about the role of a woman.  Not everyone who does this is going to have a negative experience, so for some, it will work in their relationship (that doesn't mean the societal negatives aren't still in play). 

I will admit that I am fairly extreme in being independent.  I've been the woman who has had a relationship go sour in which I was being supported almost entirely by my ex.  I remember having to find a way to get out of my expensive apartment I couldn't afford on my own and try to find a box somewhere to live in that I could afford.  I remember having to forfeit on some of my bills.  I remember eating out of cans and Ramen Noodles and sometimes not eating but one meal a day.  I had a job, but not a high paying one.  Imagine if I had not had a job?  Sure, I survived and what didn't kill me made me stronger; however, I would never put myself through it again.  I am a mother and I would not be a stay at home mother.  I don't begrudge women who are stay at home moms, though I think children benefit from interaction with other children and don't think that daycare is the devil.  I think children benefit from time with their families as well; however, there are other ways to spend time with them.  I may be an extreme case of the independent woman, but that doesn't make my points any less valid to others who aren't the same as me.  

I guess only time will tell what, if any, effect this may have on the gender-bias already in play in society. 

Ron Suskind: Friend or Foe?

Ron Suskind has been thrown into the spotlight over his new book The Way of The World. In his book, he asserts, among other things, that the CIA was ordered by the Bush administration to forge a letter dated prior to 9/11 from Habbush (at the time an Iraqi Intelligence Chief) stating that Atta, the lead hijacker in the 9/11 attacks, had trained in Iraq, as well as allegations regarding Saddam's attempt to obtain yellow cake from Niger with the aid of Al Qaeda. Habbush had previously told not only US intelligence officials, but British officials as well, that Iraq in fact did not have any WMDs. Of course he was a member of Saddam's regime, so I'm sure it wouldn't be wrong for those intelligence officials to not be certain of his trustworthiness. British officials stopped contact with him because they did not think he was credible; however, no one had any real evidence that Saddam had the weapons either. It is fact that the letter exists. It has long been suspected that there were large amounts of misinformation fed to the public leading up to the war, but as of yet no solid proof, other than the fact that no WMDs have been found despite the drum beat that they would most certainly be found.

It is not a stretch for me to believe Suskind. First, Suskind is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist. He has never been shown to be dishonest. If a person does any amount of research on him it becomes clear that his sources haven't ever been truly discredited and that the "gutter" journalism he is being accused of by the Bush administration has no fact to back up the assertion. This is; however, just the latest in a string of explosive books regarding the past 8 years, several of whom have been written by people who were right in the core of the administration. It is also no surprise that the administration has gone after these people.

It is no surprise that the sources to whom Suskind spoke in order to write this latest book would try to distance themselves from it. Unlike the other books and articles that Suskind has written, this book contains actual impeachable, punishable by law, offenses. I can imagine the backlash from the Bush administration would be considerable. It is; however, surprising that people would be so quick to dismiss the book as fable. I have not read the entire book. I also cannot say for certain whether the allegations posed in the book are factual not having been in the interviews with the sources, or heard the tapes, or seen any other evidence to support the assertions made by Suskind. The main reason, then, to not dismiss this as fable so quickly is that it is nothing new to see these types of claims. The people making these claims aren't all liberals, or Democrats either. As mentioned they are made by people who were close to Bush and who have worked in the government during the ordeal.

I think that the main reason people would rather try to discredit Suskind than try to get to the bottom of the whole thing is because they can't wrap their minds around it. A good portion of people still believe their government is mostly there for the good of the people and that the President of the United States should be respected, regardless of whether or not he actually deserves it. Then there are the people that actually believe 9/11 was carried out by Saddam because they were led to believe that was the case and have never read past the headlines that turned out not to be true. There are people who just don't WANT to believe because believing would mean that the country they have so much pride in is actually the bad guy in this situation and that their government acted illegally. It would mean that service men and women died for no reason other than Bush's vanity and greed (this is in NO way saying that the troops are to blame for this, the full blame is on those who sent them to die). People don't want to believe those things. Some are die hards who still believe Bush is a decent, honest, Christian man who sticks by his ideals because he believes them to be right and good. There are still others who believe every part of everything is a conspiracy waiting to engulf us all. Then there are those, such as myself, who are simply looking for the truth. People who see the toilet the country is being flushed down and hoping it can be saved before it hits the cesspool. People who know something isn't right and are just waiting for the door to be blown wide open on the whole deal.

We are the people who have to have the guts to stand up and say that these types of things cannot continue. We are the people who have to stand up and demand that these serious allegations be taken seriously and investigated. We have to say that we are no longer willing to watch our fathers, sons, brothers, mothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins die for a lie. We are no longer willing to watch the United States' name being dragged through the mud throughout the world.

Ron Suskind, friend or foe? Only time will truly tell, but we owe it to ourselves, our country, our future to find out.

The Wisdom of a Child

Last night my daughter decided to be a detective. She got out her pen and her paper and looked at my husband and I and said "Ok, what seems to be the problem here?" After we laughed for a minute, we told her there was no problem. So she says "Well I'm going to get to the bottom of this!" At this point we are laughing pretty heavily, as she has such a serious look on her face. The more we laugh the more she began to smirk. Then she says to us "OK, ask me questions." I raise my hand, "OK, here's a question for you. What is it that you are doing?" She doesn't answer my question, but rather begins to write down my question. "Ask another question!" she tells us. So I'm thinking as long as she's answering questions, I might as well ask the big ones! I ask her "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" She answers "Yes, next question!" I am laughing hysterically. She doesn't even think about the answer, just answers. I can't ask another question at that point so my husband asks her "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" Without hesitation, she says "The egg! Next question, please." I regain myself enough to then ask her "What is the meaning of life?" What came out of her mouth actually shocked us a bit as we kind of found it fairly insightful for a 5 year old. She said "Recycle!" Of all the words in her vocabulary why she would say recycle is beyond me. But since I am Buddhist, I found it quite insightful. Living and dying and being reborn. Even without Buddhism you have to think, well we die, we become the soil, the soil grows plants, animals eat plants, we eat the animals. In nature there is a lot of recycling. After I regain myself, I ask her "Who created the Earth?" she says "God." Now, apparently she learned this from her cousin because I am Buddhist and my husband is Agnostic so we don't ascribe to God creating the Earth. It's all well and good because I wanted to expose her to all different religions, but it took me aback a little for a 5 year old. I was thinking to myself, now how did it happen between two 5 year olds that a conversation was had about how the Earth was created. I chuckled. Finally, Paul asks her "OK, then what happens when you die?" This was the funniest response yet. She says "Rolly Pollies eat you." Apparently after that, her question and answer session was over, as she handed us each a piece of paper that she had been writing on as our copy of the conversation and went on to do something else. Our daughter the Deist detective.

Searching the Shoreline

Apparently the latest and greatest idea the Republicans have come up with to deal with the energy problem is to open more of our shore for drilling. I'm sure that people with an IQ of 50 truly believe that will solve the problem; however, for the rest of us we are going to need something better than that.

To better understand why this won't be affecting your energy and gas bills, one first must understand how the process works for drilling oil. I do not claim to be an expert by any means. I couldn't be an engineer on a rig, nor could I work on a rig, but I do understand the basic process. Before any drilling can even start, there first has to be exploration to determine if any oil is actually there. If it is determined that there is in fact oil in the area, it has to be determined if it is feasible to extract it, i.e. is there enough to make it worth their while, after all, it can be costly to set up a rig in water. After all that, it can still be years before any actual oil from that venture can be introduced into our market. We all know that oil and gas are limited resources with a limited future. Shouldn't we be concentrating our long-term efforts on something that will get our kids and grandkids and great grandkids through the future? This is where our efforts should be, not scraping the bottom of the barrel for more of the black heroin that we keep pumping into our veins.

So what then is the solution in the short term? Any alternative energy sources are unfortunately years in the future, thanks to years of finding ways to put it on the back burner. I don't really think there is a simple answer to this. I am not even sure there IS an answer. Gas tax holidays won't save us either. If we tax the oil companies more as the Democrats suggest (actually it is just asking them to pay what they should be paying and stop giving them extra special treatment), they would probably pass the price down to us. We could create legislation that would regulate the oil industry to allow them only a certain amount of profit, but let's face it, too many of our "leaders" are in their pockets so that's not likely to happen.

I don't know what the answer is. I think the problem is that neither do our "leaders." Rather than tell the public that they don't have a short-term solution, they make up these bullshit solutions. Next thing they will be telling us that if we all put an egg on our head and hop on one foot without letting the egg fall, then, and only then, will our electric bills top out. OK, I admit, that one is far out there even for the Republicans, but it would be nearly as effective as opening up more shoreline for the oil companies. The difference is that when the egg falls off your head and splatters all over the kitchen floor, the only harm done is that you have one less egg and a floor to clean. When oil and byproducts leak into the ocean, it kills sea life, makes water unsafe, and destroys our Earth.

Jaywalking

Last night I watched Jay Leno's "Jaywalking" and I was horrified. There is a reason I don't watch that regularly. It is depressing. These people couldn't name the Vice President, the current Presidential candidates, even the current President.

There was at one point a girl who I had some hope for. I thought, surely after all these people who can't name who the VP is, she will be able to get it right? I was sorely mistaken. It turns out she was the worst one. When asked who the current President of the United States is, she could not answer!!! Her defense? She's not that political. Not that political?! You don't have to be "political" to know who the President is!! You know, he's the one that got us into the blood bath quagmire that is Iraq and helped drag the economy in the shitter and so on and so forth. How can you not know who the least popular President EVER is? It's not as if he's an unremarkable President like Garfield or something (and I don't mean remarkable in a favorable way). It's just sad. I had kind of blanked this out of my mind until a moment ago I saw Jay Leno coming on and suddenly it all came rushing back like the nightmare that it is. I can only hope these people aren't truly that uninformed and that they were putting on an act to be on TV. For once I am hoping they are attention hungry media whores rather than complete dumb assess!!

I LOVE Matt Taibbi!

I don't know if I've ever mentioned that, but I think he is about the greatest, most painfully honest political writer out there. Plus he is funny and his writing is excellent. Today I decided to subscribe to his blog because as I said...I think he is wonderful. There is a recent post that caught my interest, which you can read at the below link:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/15955

and this is the comment I posted:

The Unfortunate Rise of the Blissfully Ignorant

The sad thing is that all of this goes on right in front of us. It isn't a secret. It really isn't that hard to see it if we are paying attention, but the majority of the public tends to take the "ignorance is bliss" approach to life. The problem with this (other than the obvious) is that while the majority of us are blissfully ignorant, the very people who are supposedly elected to run the country on our behalf take our money and tell us they know better than the rest of us what to do with it, and then they line the pockets of their interests with it. Then the blissful ignorants turn on Fox News and believe everything they are told because why would Fox lie to them? The worst killers are often the most silent and it is done for a reason. The masses can be brainwashed into believing that they too can rise above their "class" and it will keep them blissfully and ignorantly dreaming while their money is funneled into the hands of those who have more than they need. I live in Austin Texas (I could not live in any other city in Texas...seriously) and I have family members that live in more rural areas of Texas. It is always surprising to me to see how well the misinformation machine works. There are honestly people in the town in which my parents live who still believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11. They believe that Obama is a muslim with ties to terrorists and somehow at the same time does not believe in god (that would not bother me, but we are talking about a tiny conservative Texas town where they likely still have revivals...). If they will believe that, they will believe anything. These are the same people that believe gay marriage is a threat to them in some way and that natural disasters target areas because of their "sins." It is no wonder that these same people believe that politicians are using their money to protect them from the terrorists who "hate us for our freedoms," the gays, and well French fries, and gladly give their money to them despite whether or not they can afford their next meal or their medications for the month.

The Road Goes on Forever

So...I'm taking a break from my research paper for a bit. I've been writing. We are at 4 pages, need 7 pages, and I haven't gone back and included quotes, etc. to back up my statements, so I think it will be all good...

I have to say this and then I'll move on to another subject (most likely). I'm so sick and tired of hearing the republican disinformation machine talk about Obama being inexperienced. It makes me sick. So far "experience" has done nothing for us. To me "experience" in politics means career politician which means corrupt. I actually believe it is a positive that we have a candidate that is in serious running that hasn't been involved in Washington politics or even state politics for years and years. Someone who is somewhat of an outsider can give more outside perspective on the issues and is less likely to have had an opportunity to build those lobbyist relationships. To me equating Obama's experience in Washington to his qualifications to be president is similar to saying that the office staff at the doctor's office is qualified to be a doctor simply because he or she has for years seen how things work in the office and the diagnosis that the doctors make and how to do the procedures. He/She has never been a doctor, but hey let's assume they can perform brain surgery just because they've been in the proximity of a brain surgeon, and hey they know how it's done! John McCain has never been president. He is no more qualified and/or experienced than Obama. So let's all just get off the experience train and move on to things that matter, shall we?

On to the next topic....

I've been thinking a lot lately about taking time for the people and things that matter in my life. I've thought about the word "love" and how many times people say it and don't mean it. I don't think a person can mean the words if they don't back it up with action. I was thinking how many times in my life I've been told "i love you" just to later figure out that it was never true, or at least I perceived it to not have been true based on the person's actions. As I was thinking about this, I realized that I don't want anyone that I love to feel that way. I don't want to tell someone that I love them only to have them doubt it because of my lack of action. I mentioned this in an earlier post, but it's something I haven't been able to shake. I think we should all remember that if we need to back up our loving words with action. Our lives are too short to have the ones we love pass on thinking that we didn't really love them....or for us to pass leaving behind people who didn't know how much we really cared.

Life

I was listening to "Chasing Cars" by Snow Patrol and I was thinking about these lyrics:

"I don't quite know
How to say
How I feel

Those three words
Are said too much
They're not enough

If I lay here
If I just lay here
Would you lie with me and just forget the world?

Forget what we're told
Before we get too old
Show me a garden that's bursting into life "

The lyrics to this song always invoke some thought for me.

It made me think about the way we seem to rush through life with little thought about actually living it. We say we love people but we don't really do enough to show them that we love them. I think we need to say it and act on it before it is too late. Sometimes perhaps we need to stop and focus on those we love and let everything else go by for awhile. We are taught from a young age that we shouldn't waste time and that we need to hurry, hurry, hurry, but we never realize that when we do that we are letting life and love pass us by.

I hope to try to change this some in myself before it's too late.

Death and not Much Life in a Small Town

I don't often think of home, home being the small town of Hobbs, New Mexico, where I lived for 18 years. I have been away from there for 10 years and occasionally I think about what might have become of the town and people that I knew, but I think of it in more of a detached sense.

There was a family that lived not too far from my house; the Rogers family. The mother was Kathy, the father was Jim and they had two children: Jason and Kristy. Kristy was about my age and Jason was slightly older. Since we lived outside of the city limits in a sparsely populated area, there weren't many people around and I didn't have a lot of children to play with. Kristy was one of the few. She used to ride her bike over or I would ride mine to her house. She was the kind of girl who always seemed drawn to trouble. I know that she always liked the boys that were the "bad" boys and she was one of the first people I ever had a conversation about sex with.

One day, there was a horrible accident. We could hear the crash from our house down the road. We got in the car and drove up the road to discover that Jim had backed out in front of a car that was traveling about 55 MPH on the highway (The car was not speeding. That was the speed limit on the road). Kristy and Jason had been sitting in the back of the pickup and were thrown out. Kristy was thrown into a ditch, landing in the grass, managing to sustain only a broken arm. Jason, on the other hand, had been thrown out onto the roadway. It was a very graphic scene for a girl of around 10 to take in. There was brain matter on the road and Jason was neither moving nor breathing. They managed to bring him back from the brinks of death and shockingly he survived the ordeal, but was permanently brain damaged. He required the use of a wheel chair or a walker in order to move and his speech was severely impaired. He would require constant care for the rest of his life.

A few years back I was told that Kristy had gotten involved with drugs and gangs. She had two children and was living at home because she was not very stable. She had been in jail and did not have a job. Kathy had been diagnosed with cancer and would die soon thereafter, leaving Jim to take care of Jason, Kristy and Kristy's children. Jim was very heavy, had always been a smoker and was in failing health. We all assumed it was only a matter of time before he would pass as well. Kristy said she was going to get sober and take care of her kids. She was dating a much older man. He was around 50 years old and she was in her late 20s. What happened next wasn't entirely unpredictable; however, it was both shocking and tragic. The 50 year old man that she was dating beat her to death with his fists. I do not know what made him do such a thing. What ever makes a person do such a thing?

The children were left with Jim and Jason. The boyfriend was only charged with manslaughter and didn't serve much time in prison. Jim's health only worsened. He died this year leaving Jason and the children. The state actually gave the children to the boyfriend who killed Kristy. Jason lives alone in the family home. A service comes and checks on him and takes him to get groceries and such, since he is unable to take care of himself. I find it ironic that no one expected Jason to live through the accident and now he has survived when the rest of his family has passed.

The reason this story comes to mind is mainly because I only learned today from my mother of Kristy's tragic death and the events that pursued. I do not know when she was killed. I do not know how it is that the man only served a short term for manslaughter and then was awarded custody of her children. I do not think he was their natural father. However, hearing of these tragic events made me think of home and how most of those who have remained there have not prospered. I hear occasionally of a divorce here, a drug addiction there, a car accident that kills entire families and leaves any survivors rendered handicapped for the rest of their lives, but I think that I displace myself from it as if I don't even recognize that life. I wonder how such a small town can befall so much tragedy so often. Is it because it is a small town that perhaps we just hear about it more because word travels so fast or is it a deeper problem?

I think of all the poverty in the town. In Hobbs, there are not many jobs that pay very well. There are very few people with much money to speak of. Most of those that do have money are from old ranching families and/or the oil industry. There are some doctors and lawyers of course as well. You can see; however, the sharp line in that small city of rich and poor. Generally there are well off individuals and very poor individuals and very little in between. I start to think that poverty, while not the lone cause of tragedy, seems to breed tragedy. It is the catalyst which gives momentum to tragedy.

I am humbled by the story of the Rogers family. I know that things like these happen every day, but not to people that you know and grew up with. I remember my childhood and I remember smiling faces of children that I knew. Then I see those same children in my mind as adults and realize how many of them are gone or whose lives have taken a dark turn of some sort. They are all under the age of 30. I am happy that I have made another life for myself, but I will always occasionally think of home and wish there was something that I could have done to save it.

To School And Beyond

To School:

I was recently accepted into Texas State University as a transfer student, so today I went to talk to an Academic Advisor. I, being the ubber geek that I am, was already following the degree transfer plan for my degree and so I already had all my classes planned out and already knew what I had and what I needed. The advisor seemed surprised that I was so organized. I guess she just doesn't know me well enough to know the depths of my geekdom.

And now...Beyond...

I read today that Karl Rove has decided to ignore a subpoena and refuse to testify concerning the firings of U.S. attorneys based on the political affiliations that these attorneys had, or were perceived to have. He claims that executive privilege makes him immune to testimony.

I have a huge problem with so-called "executive privilege" and the way it is seemingly freely given to individuals who have no right to have it. There are in fact legal precedents that have been set establishing the rules of so called "executive privilege." Karl Rove is a snake for hire by the highest bidder with no real loyalty other than to money and power. There are far too many individuals associated with our government who are the same, whether they be aids, lawmakers, vice presidents, or presidents. Does anyone really stand for anything these days other than money and power? Is there anyone left who is willing to stand up for other people without expecting some form of payment in exchange?

John McCain is someone that I once had respect for. He seemed to be a man who truly believed what he said and often he did not vote with his own party to vote instead for what he believed was right. He was a man who had been through torture and didn't feel that anyone should ever have to endure what he had endured. He was a man who believed in the Rules of Engagement and the various agreements that this country had made with the other countries of the world. Now he is a man who sells his soul to the religious right to get votes. Now he is a man who sells out his beliefs that torture is wrong to appease Bush and the GOP. He is a man who feels that there is nothing wrong with attacking a country who hasn't attacked us just because their leader is a "bad man."

Is this what Washington D.C. does to people? Does it turn them into mindless drones without souls who spout the talking points they are fed and forget what they once believed? Have we bred this type of behavior by expecting politicians to be something that none of us is...perfect?