Dear America,

WHITE, STRAIGHT,

REPUBLICAN, MALE.

how else can I piss you off today?

two for two.  yes I did -- I'm on a fender bender. just because it cracks me up.

and you know who fits this today, for real?  retired Governator of Caleeforneeyah; how many ways of wrong can this man go?  Honestly.  Not to mention, how on God's great earth did it take Maria so long?

And don't you just love the idea that when it comes to life, especially in politics, everything eventually becomes known; secrets last about fifteen minutes.

But continuing along the same vein of white, straight, republican males -- because the subject is so topical these days -- this girl is loving how the contest is shaping up.  If for no other reason, the amusement factor seems to be carrying me; anticipation probably coming in a close second.

It's not so much the hysterics back behind those who come out announcing 'I'm in' and when and taking a painful amount of time just to spit it out (giving a respectable nod to Ron Paul) -- or even the sudden, 'I'm out...even though I could have won' guy (showing the disrespectful middle finger to Donald Trump).  Those are the things begging to be irrelevant when all things are said and done.

It's more like the battle hymn of the new republic being played out under the guise of the mainstream liberal media --  the juxtaposing the remaining field up against their Savior -- the extended critical eye hanging over the field of contenders, as if they really care -- the 'oh no, not Huckabee; he really had something going on there..that's gotta hurt'  --  and basically, making a continuous mockery and laughing stock of anyone who would dare step up to the challenge OR, falling back on yesterday's theme, simply calling them all 'racist' at every chance they get.... 

and the first one that comes to mind:

"First of all, you gave a speech in Georgia with language a lot of people think could be coded racially-tinged language, calling the president, the first black president, a food stamp president," just throwing it out for kicks and giggles, David Gregory, of NBC's Meet the Press.

"oh c'mon David," said Newt

"what did you mean? what was the point?" as Gregory digs a couple of nails in further...

"That's, that's bizarre. That--this kind of automatic reference to racism, this is the president of the United States. The president of the United States has to be held accountable. Now, the idea that--and what I said is factually true. Forty-seven million Americans are on food stamps. One out of every six Americans is on food stamps. And to hide behind the charge of racism? I have--I have never said anything about President Obama which is racist."

"Never," he said -- as Gregory responds with a gesture..making a big fat W with his hands...what ever...

and really, what Newt said is all true, as sad and unbelievable as it sounds; the use of Food Stamps has increased by nearly 20% over the last year alone. It is about the highest it's ever been in almost thirty years.  Go ahead....just punch in food stamps into your browser and see what happens.

So what, can we not talk about food stamps, government subsidies to needy families, welfare and the like with a president who happens to be black?  really?  how reverse racist and perverse is that?  Do we not all want a president to be able to address and speak and answer to the very things our nation and our people struggle with on a daily basis, no matter what the color of his/her skin?  doesn't Gregory find the reality of one in six Americans living on food stamps, having increased exponentially under Obama's watch, a concern?

Oh that's right: it's the 'white, straight, republican male' syndrome at it again.  Gosh, this is going to be a fun election cycle.

Now, if we are going to be honest here...Newt is following in the Governator's footsteps all too easily.  Please, Newt, bow out right now before somebody gets hurt.  We, the constituency, care more for Paul Ryan than we do for you, just sayin'; throwing him under the proverbial campaign bus was so wrong -- equating the Ryan plan to some form of extremism?  seriously?  ...ho hum, just another radical, right wing, social engineering scheme that won't work -- left or right -- these plans don't work...or something like that...(appearing in costume as the wise old ghost of budget's past)

But hey, let's not get in the way of Ryan's own response: "with allies like that who needs the left?" 

ha ha ha ha  (this is where we pal around and burst into laughter, like the bunch of guys on the new Weight Watcher's ad for men)

Hey Newt, don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Anyway, the thing is -- our media is having  a field day with second guessing, drop kicking, crash and burning, every potential candidate coming on down the pike.  They have been waiting for this -- open season -- for quite some time now.

For myself, I am enjoying the slow burn of who's in and who's not; for in the end, I KNOW, along with half of the American population, anyone who finally meets up with the challenges, gets over the hurdles, and manages to outperform the mainstream media long enough, will ultimately be the best future presidential candidate for the job; and more than that, they will become 'the one'; the one who has all the right stuff, so that all the rest of us can rally behind, and fully support, with all our heart, and with all our might.

As marvelous as the man is, Huckabee isn't really what we want, now is he?  And he felt it; and he responded to it appropriately when he said it just wasn't in his heart.  Mara Liasson was funny; on Special Report yesterday, she considers Huck bowing out to be a loss for the party (ah hello, little miss NPR liasson, it's a non-starter, move along now).

While as the world turns, it turns out that Ryan has decided not to run for the seat in the Senate;  where is the media on this one, you know, projecting the guy wants a run for what Newt wants?  Now that would be fun to watch.  Run Ryan Run!

In the meantime, if you happen to be a 'white, straight, republican, male' duck and cover -- or plan on having the race bombs, the cheap shots, the low blows, the punch lines right at the gut for.... oooh... for about another eighteen months or so, give or take your own move to jump in or jump out....and we do the hokey pokey and we turn ourselves around, that's what it's all about, clap clap.

Of course, something to think about is a race pitting Herman Cain against the Chosen One.  Back in Black -- mono y mono -- that would shut the media up.  No.  How about we genetically engineer our next dynamic duo to be Herman Cain and Marco Rubio?   

You wanna piece of me?  You wanna piece of me?

You wanna call me some bug-eyed, dumb@$$, ignorant, bigoted, astroturf, nazi, extremist, tea party right wing radical, racist now?  Bring it.  Let's hope it all gets on tape so we can play it over and over and over again.

So Media-BUYER BEWARE:  Clearly, it is open season on right wing dodobirds according to all Media Research Outlets.  Things to look out for -- for easy pickings -- being WHITE, straight, republican and male; however, about half are known to be of the female persuasion, from either creation or evolution, and are equally protected under the new landmark authority expressly given to Mother Earth by the U.N.-- see also the latest 'endangered' listings -- so consider yourself forewarned (they get awfully nasty when teased, poked, and prodded).

While not so uncommon anymore and worth noting, many are not white at all -- some are half white, half black -- some are brown -- some are very light brown with just a hint of black -- and some are solid black through and through.  And one thing to consider may be to stay away from the Albino, all I can say is, they are sort of different if you know what I mean, dare I say, they're kind of on the fringe. something to look out for. but the good news is, we can normally see them coming from a mile away.

You should also be aware, Right Wing Dodobirds normally do not associate by color alone -- many, actually, are color blind; don't be surprised if you find a gathering of various birds of a feather.  What is important, is not so much the color of the feather, but the content of the character found deep down inside, especially in times that try avian souls.  Naturally, they gravitate together, like birds of a certain feather, seeking the like-minded -- seeking others aligned with founding principles and values -- seeking those fully accepting of their inherent duty and delight to participate with a certain level of responsibility to the whole bunch of birds...

Yes.  I could hurt you some more and just keep right on winging it; but let's just say I woke up on the right side of the bed featuring a deep seated compassion for mankind, especially those I venture to entertain.  I will stop myself right here.

As the narrative moves in and around the political birdcage, let us be enlightened, encourage open dialog, and treat each other with respect.  Will this be nearly impossible for the biased left wing media to pull off?  Will it be amusing to watch?  you betcha. and you betcha. it's gonna be fun.


Make it a Good Day, G

Dear America,

happy 1-11-11 day


so, in the beginning, our founders gathered together to make a republic, not a democracy, and follow the path of Nature's Law invoked and prescribed by the leading thinkers of the day, past and present, to create a more perfect union based entirely upon the Rule of Law, not man.

Why was "man" out of the equation, we wonder?  Because "man" was, and is, and forever more, imperfect; man is sometimes-- dare I say, many times -- wrong.


Or worse, sometimes man is evil.


Then again, sometimes man is just plum stupid... greedy, inconsiderate, self-serving, and rude...or man can be just plain bad...while we're at it, man is, quite often I might add, simply thoughtless,  soul-less and heartless... and if we go down that road, let's just narrow it down to Dante's Seven Deadly Sins, or is it God's -- either way, we all know what they are, right ...

And if man doesn't ever fall in the "really bad" category,  he is certainly deceptive, manipulative, and egotistical whenever it serves him best, and especially when it is a matter of gaining and controlling the general public opinion, persuasion, or sway.

From The 5000 Year Leap:

According to W. Cleon Skousen, as an individual, John Adams was not very popular -- but what the people saw in Adams, was a man they could trust, without any further thought, doubt, or concern.  It was Adams who wrote this little tidbit, some time following his presidency:

"I do not curse the day when I engaged in public affairs...I cannot repent any thing I ever did conscientiously and from a sense of duty.  I never engaged in public affairs for my own interest, pleasure, envy, jealousy, avarice, or ambition, or even the desire of fame.  IF any of these had been my motive, my conduct would have been very different.  In every considerable transaction of my public life, I have invariably acted according to my best judgment, and I can look up to God for the sincerity of my intentions."

And it was Adams, who often reminded his fellow statesmen, this:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

And coming from another man and founder, Samuel Adams, he wrote:

"The sum of all is, if we would most truly  enjoy the gift of Heaven, let us become a virtuous people; then shall we both deserve and enjoy it.  While, on the other hand, if we are universally vicious and debauched in our manners, though the form of our Constitution carries the face of the most exalted freedom, we shall in reality be the most abject slaves..."

"But neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.  He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries the most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man."

And here's one more, from James Madison:

"If man were angels, no government would be necessary.  If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary."

Creating a nation that would encourage and develop civic virtue, in hopes of continually bestowing upon the public a flood of  upstanding political leaders, began with the moral and civic duty to create a good people from the start; sound principles, values, and virtues was not political lip-service, it was true blue American public service, from the heart, from the right place, beginning with man's first intention.

Our problems of the day, 

streaming live and in a chorus of continuous, voracious debate, 

centering upon the political discourse of the moment, 

throwing barbs and jabs at individuals 

(people like Palin, Bachman, Limbaugh, Beck...) -- 

even entire groups of people (republicans, tea party, conservatives..) -- 

through outright character assassination and  rabid vitriol  -- 

taking turns taking pot shots --

pow, pow, pow pow pow

and simply showering the mainstream media with untruths 

and linking something so unthinkable 

to the entire right side of the political spectrum 

is reprehensible,

disgusting

and 

wrong.

That is man, acting at his worst, all the way around.

And now, to have politicians, wondering how they will continue to serve the public safely, heighten the debate on gun control, or even have the audacity, at a time when we are broke, to give a second thought to increasing the budget for congressional security -- and to top it off, act as if the rhetoric has always been one-sided, as if the Pelosi's, Reid's, Weiner's or Grayson's are angels...even Obama himself has been hopped up on using rhetoric for political gains.  Are you kidding me?

And I guess MSNBC only spins a weave of proverbs and grace.

Please don't misconstrue -- it is essential, for everyone's well being, to feel free to live and work and interact in a safe, secure environment.  No question.  Congress is no exception to the rule, no doubt about it.

The thing is, if you really think about it, what happened last Saturday could happen again tomorrow; there is nothing keeping something like that from happening every day of the week actually from here on out, from here to kingdom come.

The only thing that truly keeps that from happening, is living in a country that not only encourages our people to be of kind heart, to take care of one another, to honor our mother and father, and treat our neighbors as ourselves, but one that TEACHES it, RESPECTS it, and above all, EMBODIES it through and through;  the founders gave us principles and values to follow for a reason, for they recognized the first truth about man and built an entire nation from it, respective of the very imperfect nature of the beast that we are.

Guns don't kill people; people kill people.

A civil, compassionate, honorable society is made in America only by creating, and teaching, to be of good nature, to be good people; the duty begins at first breath, and ends at our last, for each and every one of us who share this nation, let alone the entire world.

Given that "the shooter" was a registered Independent, I am most certain, his horrific actions, do not speak of the nature of the entire body of independents.

But wonder how one person can make a difference no more -- for isn't  it painfully obvious, and tragically true, in this moment; how an unconscionable act, by one person no less, can not only wreak havoc and destroy the lives of 20 innocent people, but also trigger an endless supply of careless, knee-jerk responses that in turn discredit friends, neighbors, countrymen and women of  good heart -- all of us who lean just right of center who can feel it, one by one.  throw a little more salt on our wounds why don't you.

All Americans --  feel real emotional pain -- and hold a heavy, heavy heart -- with what happened last Saturday; what happened does not usually happen, for by and large, we try to be of sound mind and body and act accordingly.

Tragically, the only person we can point to, is to the one crazy person who did it, Jared; who, for all intents and purposes, hindsight being what it is, showed all the signs he needed a little help; at twenty-two, Jared he is a man, who knowingly set out, in public, with a semi-automatic weapon to do harm -- and as we know now, he intended to do harm upon the life of Gabrielle Giffords and anyone else who got in his way -- and believed, he, himself, would not live to deal with the aftermath.  He said his good-byes.

Look, one bad apple should not spoil it for the whole bunch, that's all I'm saying right now; this kind of regulation and continuous taking away of the freedoms and civil liberties of a good people is not the answer; for then, Sam Adams would be absolutely right on target in a people becoming 'abject slaves.'

Talk about a moving target, we seem to be missing the point; good people in, good people out.  wax on, wax off.  it is a tedious drill, but over time, it truly works.

Before I close, a few noteworthy individuals seem to stand out, reacting with eloquence and grace and compassion is Governor Jan Brewer; if you were able to catch her State of the State address you know what I am talking about -- of course, it wasn't a S of S address at all...understandably, that will be saved for another day.  Her remarks were beautiful, thoughtful, unwavering in her commitment to hold the candle of fearless leader, even after being thrust into a state of utter devastation and loss.

Upon Gov. Brewer's lead, the entire legislative body gave a standing ovation to Daniel Hernandez, an intern of only one week for Giffords local congressional offices, who selflessly acted without thinking, and quickly came to her aid in the seconds after being struck by gunfire; he held her up, applied pressure to her wound, and spoke to her,  calmly encouraging her to hold on while awaiting paramedics; as Gov. Brewer pointed out, he probably saved her life, without thinking of his own...perhaps another Adams in our midst.

America, in actions and in our words, let us do no harm -- today and always.


Make it a Good Day, G

Dear America,

Happy Thursday.

I'm thinking this morning how easy it is for things to be taken out of context; sometimes deliberately to break a person's strength; sometimes over time, slowly eroding the original conviction or message; sometimes simply to make a dramatic point, as in divide and conquer.

I would never make a good feminist.

Go ahead quote me, use me for taking pot shots, and have your way with that, whatever you please.

I looked up the lambasted thesis by Bob McDonnell from May of 1989, written for the College of Law and Government, The Republican Party's Vision for the Family: The Compelling Issue for the Decade.  My only wish now is that he could pull a Jerry McGuire and place a copy of it in every body's in-box in Washington.

I have only taken a fair amount of time this morning skimming it's pages, and I'm not exactly sure what drew me to finding it in the first place, but I find myself awestruck by it's content, it's projections, and it's ability to be a thing of prophetic beauty.

Having been written in 1989, in the very first month after I got married, it intrigues me on a personal level.  The eighties was a decade marked with society taking all kinds of liberties, marked with change in attitudes from our dating practices, to how we made our wealth first and foremost, to immediate gratification and yuppie-dom, to how we delayed the call to marriage -- raising a family and the responsibility thereof was just not part of the plan -- that is until we were ready  -- it was our prerogative.

What fascinates me in this moment is how the media latched onto this one thing about his thesis -- this one thing that from all appearances was centerfold to the thesis itself -- the sentiment and belief that all of society's woes today ('89) was entirely due to women working outside the home.  McDonnell, his argument, and his so-called backwards prognosis was blasted by the left, feminists, the democratic party all in a united effort to obliterate any chance of him succeeding in the race for the Virginia Governorship. 

I wonder, in the spirit of current Health Care legislation, did anyone actually read it?

Interesting enough that the tactics of the left to vilify Bob -- turning him into the poster boy against every women's lib right known to man -- didn't work;  but more important, how can something so ahead of it's time not be considered spot on and welcomed into the conversation to this day?

In his introduction, McDonnell quotes a sociologist from the University of North Carolina, Professor Peter Uhlenberg, "increasingly, Americans are pursuing a selfish individualism which is inconsistent with strong families and strong communities."

My conclusion is that those who criticized his work based upon this one element -- the working and fully liberated woman -- have no idea what they are talking about, and miss the point he was making entirely.

The piece is masterful setting up the real argument -- that being the deterioration of traditional family and the reasonable responsibility of government to defend and uphold the traditional family, and it's affects on society if we fail.  Quickly turning to support from The White House Working Group on the Family, dating back to 1986, he states this observation from the council:

"Everywhere the equation holds true:  Where there are strong families, the freedom of the individual expands and the reach of the state contracts.  Where family life weakens and fails, government advances, intrudes and ultimately compels."

While McDonnell adds this finding from the group as well,

"historical reality that every totalitarian movement of the twentieth century has tried to destroy the family.  The modern American experience can be seen as an ideological battle between the forces of democratic capitalism and socialism, with the latter's attempt to 'substitute the power of the state for the rights, responsibilities, and authority of the family.' "

No kidding.

Adding this, he states the condition

"goes beyond basic arguments of conservatism versus progressivism...Whereas faith and family had provided the roots of culture in the past, the rise of modernity and liberalism have given America a legacy of relativistic hollowness, homelessness, selfish heartlessness, and the death of God and heroes."

As an example of only one factor -- besides the pervading issue of women working outside the home sabotaging McDonnell's well collaborated thesis -- he looks upon the Department of education for support, noting that despite increases from "5.2 billion to 25.3 billion from 1966 through 1981, scores on the benchmark Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) dropped about 6% in math and 10% in verbal during the period."   Today, are D.O.E. budget is slated to spend 46.7 billion -- while just looking at dropout rates of 20 - 30%, and some neighborhoods as high as 50%, throwing more money at something isn't always the best answer.

Another factor is just pure uncensored tax growth.  At the time this thesis was prepared, McDonnell sited findings that the average "two-parent family with four children saw its federal income tax liability increase 224% while the social security tax increased 600%, to 7.15% of gross income" and subsequently obligating many families to consider having both parents work outside the home.

The thing is, as a girl lucky enough to have been raised with a mom home after school, I know from first hand experience how important both parents are to the growth and welfare and stability of a family. When it came time to raise a daughter of my own, I was lucky enough again -- as running an upstart family business allowed for me to stay home when she was a baby until the age of three.

Then as luck should have it, a failed marriage and loss of business preempted the best laid plans.

I became one of those moms who had to work outside the home; leaving my daughter's after school care not to an aunt, or a grandmother, or neighbor, or friend, but to a system -- the institutions in place to care for our children when obligations to earn a living give you no other choice.  I dragged my feet to the call of duty because I had to.  I didn't want to, I had to. 

You see, I really would never make a good feminist...there it is.. the big ugly truth.

I just wanted to give my girl the same opportunity I had -- to have her mama home baking cookies, helping with homework, taking her to lessons, leisurely making dinner...giving both of us the foundation to build a solid relationship,  protecting her from unnecessary worries or fears or insecurities or doubts. It's what we are suppose to do as parents; to be sure, once we have children it's not about us anymore.

Oh and before you all jump all over me and tell me to grow up and stop complaining, I am not whining -- even if it sounds like it.  I am just proclaiming my priorities for myself and my family. And to be even more clear, I have loved working outside the home too -- having the identity and independence away from just being a mom, making money, and having the liberty to come home at the end of the day with take-out or cooking dinner with my girl on the counter talking about our day... 

The point is, it's always a condition of a trade-off, isn't it?

For the last forty years, America has been in this massive experiment with making trade-offs -- some have profited wildly, while other things have rapidly gone into decay.  For some people pulling off meeting the requirements of the Jones' looks easy; while others get plastered over the newspapers and tabloids showing every dysfunctional nook and cranny; while still many perpetuate generations of issues that cry out to the community for help.

But it most certainly doesn't just come down to the one thing that we did wrong like women working outside the home; even McDonnell with all his good intentions and expertise and foresight understands this -- you would know that too if you would only take the time to read what he actually said.

Perhaps we might even recognize that money doesn't always replace just good old fashioned attention to detail.

Details like simply respecting our parents and authority, going to school and graduating, going to church and having moral courage, getting a job and doing our best, saving our money and living within our means, getting married and being committed, and raising our own children well -- raising them to be the conscientious, responsible, engaging and productive part of the community in which we live so that we have half a chance of continuing the greatest society the world has ever known.

No amount of money will really fix the issues we have going on right now.  The only thing that has this kind of earth shattering power starts with a single detail -- a good family.

No matter how it looks, no matter how much money we make, no matter where we live -- a family should be the one and only thing that we do well and with our utmost attention and highest priority.  Whether it be a family of one or Jon and Kate plus eight minus one.  Whatever it is, we must do it right with due diligence to be our very best, and produce the very best, right from the start.

"Strong families are the foundation of society.  Through them we pass on  our traditions, rituals, and values.  From them we receive the love, encouragement, and education needed to meet human challenges.  Family life provides opportunities and time for the spiritual growth that fosters generosity of spirit and responsible citizenship.


Family experience shape our response to the larger community in which we live.  The best American traditions echo family values that call on us to nurture and guide the young, to help enrich the lives of the handicapped, to assist less fortunate neighbors, and to cherish the elderly.  Let us summon our individual and community resources to promote healthy families capable of carrying on those traditions and providing strength to our society."

Ronald Reagan

Proclamation of Family Week, November 15, 1984  

(Introduction of McDonnell's Thesis)

Having failed miserably in all areas of my life at one time or another -- most assuredly pointing to marriage and finances -- the one thing I must do well is about to come home from school and is counting on it.

The ability to be here to watch her come through the door, priceless.

The trade-off is worth every minute of it; while even the staunch feminist must recognize and appreciate that there are consequences and benefits to every choice we make.  Working outside the home is not evil, but perhaps more existential; it's merely a product of society --  an innovation that which we might learn from and perhaps even be so bold to build a republican platform on -- so that the American family and it's culture lives on to see another day.

Don't hate...that's really all that Bob was trying to say, and as a matter of fact, says it all.

Make it a Good Day, G

And lucky for Virginia, Bob's in charge.