My Political Observations

WARNING! Political stuff ahead – skip this post if this stuff drives you nuts. I have no wish to upset people, but I also refuse to stick my head in the sand and not voice my opinion about the crap that’s going on in our country right now, either.

Saw, or rather “heard” this (it’s an audio of a very disturbing meeting) on The Blaze this morning:

Here’s a favorite comment on this story on The Blaze:

Without banks, I would love to see someone that is ready to start a business without backing. Or buy a home without the loan, or get a car, or go to college. These are not the banks fault for providing the money for the people that can’t afford something right now without saving for it, it is the people that buy crap on credit. SNL skit that was awesome with Steve Martin, “If you don’t have the money, Don’t buy sh!t.”

It is sad that people blame those that have a business as being the problem and not the people that are irresponsible for taking the terms in contracts.

I honestly don’t understand how the left can think that money from the private industry somehow belongs to them. It belongs to the private industry. It comes from people who took out loans to buy cars, houses, etc. It comes from people who took out loans to go to school, to do something with their lives, to learn a trade they could make money in and support their families with. People don’t have to take out loans. People could save up money and pay cash for everything. But if people take out loans, they are expected to pay them back. That’s why it’s called a LOAN. And once they pay off their debts, their credit scores go up. And once their credit scores go up, then the banks see them as a safe investment and are more apt to loan them more money at better interest rates because they have proven to be trustworthy and responsible. That’s how the system works AARGH.

People. If you don’t like the banks and interest rates and so forth, then save up your cash and pay cash for the things that you want. DON’T TAKE OUT LOANS. It’s simple, it’s called choice. It floors me that there are some people out there that think other people’s money is THEIR money. How would you feel if I DEMANDED that you give me everything that you’ve worked your ass off for – I didn’t work for it, I don’t know you very well, it’s not mine to take, but WHO CARES! I’m an American citizen, I haven’t worked as hard as you, I haven’t taken advantage of the NUMEROUS programs out there designed to help people like me, I WANT YOUR MONEY SO GIVE IT TO ME.

It’s truly unbelievable.

And I have to ask a question, just WHO is bankrolling these lunatics and their “community organizations?” I think that definitely warrants an investigation, don’t you?

And did you note the bit about stirring up chaos and confusion? That’s how the left work, folks. The more chaos, anger and violence, the better to get what they want because they don’t have a leg to stand on, otherwise. It’s sick.

Now HERE’S a strong African-American leader! I wish this man was our president instead!

This man wouldn’t be afraid to make decisions for the good of our country. I hope he stays in politics long enough to make a serious run for the presidency someday because I’d vote for him.

Democratic Senator Reveals Nearly $300,000 in Unpaid Property Taxes

Any way you slice it, $287, 273 is a lot of money, especially in this economy. For one-term Senator Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., up for re-election in 2012, that’s the amount of personal property taxes she failed to pay since 2007 on a plane she and her husband, a millionaire businessman, partially owned.

“I have discovered that the…personal property taxes on the plane have not been paid,” McCaskill told a small number of reporters on a conference call Monday. “There should have been a reporting to the county of the existence of this airplane…There are people I could blame for this, but I know better. As (a former) auditor, I know I should have checked for myself. I take full responsibility for the mistake.” Audio of the call was sent to Fox by a McCaskill aide and can be found here.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee quickly pounced releasing a video after the senator’s admission showing McCaskill in 2006 telling voters, “If my walk doesn’t match my talk, then shame on me and don’t ever vote for me again.”

I am so sick of this crap!! Politicians are supposed to be leading by example and yet how many stories do we hear, from BOTH parties, of politicians breaking the rules and doing whatever the hell they please? This has GOT to stop, folks. These people need to be held accountable and voted OUT (if not prosecuted!!) the moment they knowingly do something dishonest.

Missouri, if you vote this woman into another term, I’m going to be SERIOUSLY disappointed in you.

Claire McCaskill has GOT to go.

Bill Maher Calls Sarah Palin a Female Vulgarism, NOW Stays Mum

Bill Maher uttered a female vulgarism when referring to former Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin on his HBO show Friday night.

“Widespread sexism in the media is one of the top problems facing women, and seriously affects women in politics. A highly toxic media environment persists for women candidates, and discourages all women – irrespective of political persuasion – from running for public office,” Yana Walton, Vice President of Communications at Women’s Media Center told FOXNews.com. “Despite the fact that women make up half of the population, we’re only 17 percent of congress. Bill Maher’s misogynistic comment about Sarah Palin hurts all women, not just Palin, and not just conservative women. By insulting her gender, rather than her platform or stance on issues, he insults women as a group.”

So if a prominent media figure had made such a disparaging remark towards a leading female Democrat, like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, would the mainstream media have reacted with outrage?

Damn straight, dude, leave the personal insults out of it. Stick to the issues.

Wait. You DO know what the issues are, right?

May I ask you a question?

I’m honestly confused by something … WHY is it America’s responsibility to be the Global police? I honest to God don’t understand why our country feels like it has to get involved in other countries’ disputes.

I can understand our involvement if say, other countries have the capability of hurting our country in some way and we go over there and kick butt to let them know that we aren’t going to tolerate any sort of attacks on our country, so don’t even think about it. (The whole Iraq weapons of mass destruction thing).

I can understand our country helping another country out during a disaster (like poor Japan, for example).

I can understand our country helping another allied country that ASKS for our help. (Israel)

But I CAN NOT understand why we feel compelled to get involved in another country’s civil war.

Like Libya.

Look. I get it that we’re concerned about who might take over Libya after Qaddafi leaves. We can only hope whoever that might be is 100 times better than that mad man.

But really, why is it any of our business?

I can understand our compassion for the rebel troops that are being slaughtered by Qaddafi’s troops and our willingness to step in and save the day.

But really, WHY is this our fight? I’m sorry these people are being killed, it’s a terrible tragedy, but not to sound heartless or crass – Why is it America’s problem?

Why are we sending troops over there, putting American soldiers at risk, spending money we don’t have … if Libya wants to have a civil war, then let them fight it out.

It doesn’t have anything to do with us.

I was watching talk news last night, and everyone was in an uproar over the fact that Obama bypassed Congress entirely and just made the decision to start the no-fly zone without going through proper channels (Seriously. You can’t be that surprised by this – Obama thinks he single-handedly owns/runs America). I thought the real issue was being swept under the rug – WHY are we even there to begin with?

Democracy is great. But not every country wants it, or is ready for it. Why do we feel compelled to push our beliefs on everyone else? This drives me nuts. This is probably one of the few (if only) thing I agree with the left on. I’m all for helping people. I’m all for protecting people from radical terrorists groups. I’m all for helping a country pick up the pieces and try and build a new, better, stronger country.

But I have a problem with us sticking our noses where it doesn’t belong. And I don’t think we belong in Libya.

Unless they directly threaten, or attack us, America needs to stay out of it.

Book Corner

Book Review: One True Thing

One True Thing
Publisher: Random House Trade Paperbacks (August 8, 2006)
ISBN -10: 9780812976182
320 pages
Author Website

My Grade: B-

Plot / Premise:

I’ve decided to copy and paste the plot summary from the below source. I always feel like I don’t do plot summaries justice and I’m only regurgitating what other people have said and … okay, fine. I’m lazy. I’d rather concentrate on character development and writing style.

From Barnes and Noble:

The novel begins with a deceptively hubristic prologue in which our narrator, 24-year-old Ellen Gulden, describes what it’s like to be in jail charged with killing her dying mother. Then we get the real story, every painful, ironic bit of it. Fresh out of Harvard and eager to prove herself as a journalist, Ellen is completely unprepared for her rather elusive and dismissive father’s request that she move back home and nurse her mother, who, at age 46, has suddenly become terribly ill. Ellen has always been a daddy’s girl, dismissing her homespun mother as an anachronism. Now, as she enters her mother’s world just as her mother is about to exit it, everything she’s ever assumed about her family and, indeed, life itself is challenged.

Overall Thoughts:

Dense. Beautiful prose. That’s how I would sum this book up front. This is an author that likes to take you on her character’s journey through the senses. I admire this type of writing because writing this way is HARD. It requires the writer to draw on his/her sensory experiences and I just haven’t paid that much attention to how things sound/smell/taste/feel in my lifetime so that I can regurgitate those sensory details in my own writing. When I’ve been forced to do so (creative writing classes in college), it was like pulling teeth and I remember spending HOURS, sitting at the dining room table, hunched over my laptop and agonizing over first what to write and then how to write it.

Put simply, it was hell for me.

So I can fully appreciate this kind of writing.

With that said, it’s not an easy read. Again, it’s dense. Which means the plot sort of stalls so the reader can get inside Ellen’s head and FEEL what she’s feeling before the story can move forward. This kind of writing doesn’t appeal to everyone and I confess, I have to be in the mood to read it. In fact, it took me six weeks to read the darn thing. (But to be fair, I wasn’t really trying to read it it, either. Life got in the way).

The subject matter is sensitive. It’s about a woman who, in essence, is guilted into coming home to take care of her dying mother. It’s also about her complicated relationship with her parents. I could relate to a lot of this character’s issues. And though I wouldn’t be resentful of having to put my career on hold to help my mother, I can imagine it would be hard to juggle all of those complicated feelings.

Ellen’s character was a bit too hard for me. She came off as brassy and a bit bitchy, if you want the truth. Even when she was accused of assisted suicide, she didn’t quite take it seriously. It was almost as if she wasn’t a participant in her own life. I tend to create the same kind of characters, so this was a good lesson for me to be careful when I write “tough” characters – I don’t want them to come off as brassy and bitchy.

Responding to Negative Reviews:

The follow-up of the book as expressed in Part Two was only the rambling self-importance of a narcissistic feminist campaigning strongly in favor of today’s evils-as-rights. Katherine Gulden, for all Ellen’s (or Anna’s) wishing it, would not have been the woman that Ellen (Anna) described, either in her relationship to Brian, or to her husband, or to Ellen, or to herself. Ellen (or Anna), in spite of her self-righteous avowals would not have protected her father. At least not in the father-daughter combination she had portrayed in the rest of the book.

The book, in short, did not ring true.

I disagree. I think this book was a pretty accurate portrayal of a self-centered woman who is desperate to retain her individuality while at the same time try and please her parents. I think that’s a pretty common desire – to want to please one’s parents. And I totally bought the whole father asking her to come home and take care of her mother bit because Ellen is desperate to make her father proud of her. She’s never felt smart enough to compete with her father so she uses this opportunity to show him that she’s a strong, intelligent and capable woman. Though she does resent him for asking. And while we’re talking about the father – UGH. Talk about an arrogant, clueless, poor excuse for a man.

The feminist comment is interesting. I never really tagged Ellen as a feminist but now that I think about it, I think this reviewer might be right. She had a very self-important attitude about her accomplishments and intelligence and though this might be an unfair assessment, I sort of categorize feminists into an arrogant and self-important box. Perhaps that’s why I disliked Ellen’s character so much, because of these “feminists” traits.

Ms. Quindlen doesn’t attempt to write about things she doesn’t understand, but she understands so little of the mother/daughter relationship that the book is rather empty. The mother, Kate, is so wonderful, so nurturing, so accepting. She spent her life creating a beautiful home and loving her family. She bears her illness with grace and courage. The daughter, Ellen, has only to watch, learn, and forgive. With Kate for a teacher, she could hardly do otherwise.

Ellen is not jealous or resentful of her mother. She is merely dismissive of the way her mother chose to live. As the novel progresses, Ellen realizes that there’s a lot more to her mom and less to her dad than she had previously thought. Welcome to adulthood, Ellen.

‘One True Thing’ wraps an inherently messy experience up in a very neat package. The novel rings true only to those of us fortunate enough to have wonderful mothers, only to those of us whose lives have never been touched by terminal illness. At its core, it is Anna Quindlen’s elegy for her mother and her childhood: touching and personal, deeply felt, but without the resonance that would have come had she explored the less attractive aspects of the relationship at its core

I completely agree with the second and third paragraph, but I have to disagree with the first paragraph. I thought Quindlen did a great job portraying Ellen’s dismissive attitude toward her mother. She took her mother for granted and it was only after she had passed away did she really learn to appreciate her for who she was, not for what she did. Just because someone has a wonderful and nurturing nature doesn’t mean that they are appreciated, especially by their children.

Ellen is immature and selfish and learns, by taking care of her mother, by being FORCED to be compassionate and understanding to someone else’s plight, that people shouldn’t be put into nice, neat categories. Though it was sad that it took her mother dying for her to get to know her, the fact is that she had the opportunity, and the experience taught her about reality and forced her to grow up and accept people for who they are, not for who one wants them to be.

By the way, I have this book for sale in my book store if you would like to purchase it and check it out for yourself.