Dr. Suess on the election

I do not like this Uncle Sam,

I do not like his health care scam.

I do not like these dirty crooks,

or how they lie and cook the books.

I do not like when Congress steals,

I do not like their secret deals.

I do not like this speaker Nan ,

I do not like this ‘YES, WE CAN’.

I do not like this spending spree—

I’m smart, I know that nothing’s free.

I do not like your smug replies,

when I complain about your lies.

I do not like this kind of hope.

I do not like it. nope, nope, nope!

Go green – recycle Congress in 2010!

*unabashidly stolen from *lookingforlisa

The other side

I have been reading a lot about the immigration bill that's recently been signed by the govorner of Arizona. There have been a lot of protests about the bill, stating profiling and how wrong it is.

I have a very strong stand of my beliefs on illegal immigration and have always thought that to fix the problem it will take some 'harsh' realities and actions. On the same note I have also often said to the Man how I wished I could understand the other side, the people who protest and say "hey, just because I immigrated illegally..." bla bla.

I wasn't going to say anything here in my blog about it but today I came across a CNN article that made me pause. I read the article, about a soldier who is no longer proud to say he grew up in Arizona... because he came here illegally at the age of two (now has his papers obviously) but oh gosh when he comes back from his deployment some of his friends or family 'could' be gone because not all of them are legal.

I think the purpose of the story was to be a heart breaker, and make you feel sorry for him and his family. To make us feel that the new Law is mean and not just. For me, it did the exact opposite. I wonder sometimes what our country is deteriorating into... and THAT is what makes me sad.

One thing..

You have GOT to be kidding me!!! Since when do people win these things on the PROMISE of doing something vs the actual DOING.

Flabbergasted

I'm not really sure what to think... aside from the fact that it may be a slightly disturbing trend.

The other night I was watching the news and saw a story about an "I Pledge" video shown at one of the local elementary schools. The Principal apologized later and said she hadn't pre-screened the video prior to the kids being shown it. I did not attach the actual video (just linked to it) because while most of the video is okay the political undertones are so annoying to ME that I wanted to give you the option of viewing it or not. BTW just so we are clear, I do NOT pledge to serve the president, I could be wrong but um wasn't he elected by the people FOR the people... isn't his job to serve us?

Now today I read an article about how on September 8th the President is going to give a speach via the White House web site. In point of fact: "Secretary of Education Arne Duncan sent a letter to the nation's principals, inviting schools to watch the speech and included suggested classroom activities." ... ... ... "The plan for grades 7-12 includes a "guided discussion," with suggested topics: "What resonated with you from President Obama's speech? What is President Obama inspiring you to do?""

I haven't heard the speech (obviously since it isn't Sept. 8th yet) but I'm pretty sure I'd be keeping the Kiddo home from school that day (IF he was old enough to be in school). I feel like there is an appropriate age for kids to get exposed to political brainwashing and 11 isn't it. I know previous presidents have aired speeches directed towards school aged children, the key difference being, I believe, those speeches were televised so if the kids watched them they did it at home with their parents.

Of course that could just be me... thoughts?

Redistribute "wealth"?

Via Michelle Malkin, we get this transcribed quote from 2001:

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency [sic] to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

I'm not surprised. One of the reasons I'm so unhappy with the thought of obama is his socialist attitude. The other big one lately is the treatment of "Joe the Plumber" but that's a post for another time.

At any rate Fox News did a story on that little foot in mouth moment of obama's this past weekend sometime. Of course the nobama camp jumped to the defensive and called Fox news liers oh and in McCains pocket to boot. Because gosh heaven forbid a news outlet (be in tv, radio, or print) actually report anything that's negative towards the One.

The giggle moment for me came when watching Megyn Kelly and Bill Burton go at it over the issue.

following the paper trail

I'm definitely not the most economically educated person out there and even I could have told you the bail out wouldn't do a whole lot of anything for awhile. I'm not saying it was or was not a good idea (I would have voted no, but that's because I'm a cynical gal and it torks me that I'm paying for that type of thing).

Any rate, via Fatale Abstraction, I followed a link to yet another article (this one from across the pond no less) ... as I read the thing one paragraph jumped out at me as I'd read something similar in several different places. (I dutifully highlighted the pertinent sentence for you if you don't feel like going to read the entire article. I'm just saying... ... ...

"It's true that the improvident lending was not initiated by Fannie and Freddie: their role in this was to buy these loans and sell them on – but then the music stopped. Cynical students of the American political system will note that the biggest recipient of campaign contributions from the munificent duo of Fannie and Freddie over the past 20 years was one Christopher Dodd, Democrat Chairman of the Senate's Banking Committee.

Rather surprisingly, given that he has only been in the Senate for four of those years, the second biggest beneficiary was Barack Obama. In August the Washington Post reported that Obama's presidential campaign team had sought the advice of Franklin Raines "on mortgage and housing policy matters". Perhaps Mr Obama's team just wanted to know where all the bodies are buried – there are rather a lot of them. "

it's debatable

I must admit I only watched about half of the debate last Friday. My head started to hurt from all the circles the two candidates were running around the actual answers of the questions. I'm not a big fan of either so ultimately I ended up far to annoyed to bother finishing. I was very disappointed in how McCain did though, I thought sure he might have a chance of sounding like he knew what he was talking about and yet...


Tomorrow is the vice president candidates turn and that should be interesting. I'm hoping to watch at least a bit of it. I'm a little leery but hopeful that Palin will make a good showing. I'm also interested to see if all the hoopla about the moderator will actually affect anything. I'm not surprised in the least that the person they chose to moderate just 'might' have a bias towards the obama camp.


Of course, as fate would have it... The Utes are playing tomorrow night and that's a big game... I might just have to switch channels back and forth. Or watch the debate on the laptop while watching the game on tv. It's a good thing I know how to multi task.

GO UTES!!

spinning around

I wonder how this will be spun... considering this was supposed to be the debate McCain "won" how can his asking to delay it be looked at as him being chicken. Then again, how can Obama insisting on doing it anyway be spun to make him look like the better person... it will be interesting to see.