Xordelia (dot) COM

Looking at some absurd protest signs put together by the Tea Party Movement, I was inspired to write about the absurdities of the movement thus far.

To begin with, the original Boston Tea Party in December 1773 was a form of protest against the British government and one of the turning points in American history leading to the American Revolution and eventual independence from Britain. The American colonists were upset about being taxed by a foreign government rather than their own elected officials. In fact, despite the level of autonomy and all of the financial support the British Crown gave Americans, the colonists were constantly unhappy about “taxation without representation” even though most of the taxes were minimal. Since the British East Indian Trading Company had a monopoly on the trade of tea to and from the colonies and many colonists were heavy consumers of tea, they eventually revolted against the perceived “unjust” law, destroying all of the tea brought into Boston harbor rather than allowing it to be sold.

Personally, I’m a critic of the American Revolution because I think the colonists were better off in many ways as a British colony. Imagine how much farther we would be as a nation today if our government followed the British system rather than our broken system where “States rights” are constantly in competition with the central government.

The British took care of defense, government, currency and largely left the colonists alone. As an independent nation, despite the best intentions of the founders, it took us until the 1960s to become a modern nation. In a lot of ways we’re still very backward compared to the rest of the world whereas the British commonwealth nations (the UK, Canada and even India) are centuries ahead of us in terms of social welfare and civil liberties.

Ironically, the anti-Obama Tea Party Movement in America has none of the grievances of their namesake. They are not taxed heavily, they do not lack legislative representation and they are not being denied rights. In many cases, as I will discuss later, they stand to benefit the most from Obama’s evil “Socialist” agenda.

According to Wikipedia:

The Tea Party movement is a fiscally-conservative socio-political movement that emerged in the United States in 2009 through a series of locally and nationally coordinated protests.^[1][2][3] The protests were partially in response to several Federal laws: theEmergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008,^[4] the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,^[5][6] and a series of health care reform bills.^[7]

The Wikipedia article goes on to list a Tea Party Manifesto:

1. Identify constitutionality of every new law: Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does.
2. Reject emissions trading: Stop the “cap and trade” administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants.
3. Demand a balanced federal budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax modification.
4. Simplify the tax system: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words – the length of the original Constitution.
5. Audit federal government agencies for constitutionality: Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce^{[clarification needed]} that engages in an audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities.
6. Limit annual growth in federal spending: Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth.
7. Repeal the health care legislation passed on March 23, 2010: Defund, repeal and replace the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
8. Pass an ‘All-of-the-Above’ Energy Policy: Authorize the exploration of additional energy reserves to reduce American dependence on foreign energy sources and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation.
9. Reduce Earmarks: Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark.
10. Reduce Taxes: Permanently repeal all recent tax increases, and extend permanently the George W. Bush temporary reductions in income tax, capital gains tax and estate taxes, currently scheduled to end in 2011.

Most of these things are completely absurd. The only part that I can really agree on is balancing the federal budget and limiting annual growth to federal spending to match inflation. We have a huge deficit that we’re passing onto future generations – but we can’t balance the budget at the expense of social welfare either.

Restoring the George W. Bush tax cuts for the wealthy , reducing earmarks, limiting environmental action or repealing Obamacare before it even takes effect are just ridiculous though.

Under the Obama tax policies as recently addressed in Congress and the Senate, things aren’t much different from the Bush tax policies. People who make less than $1 million annually actually save slightly more under Obama than under Bush. They save dramatically more than under Clinton. Why should people making more than $1 million have huge tax cuts versus the middle class?

And all of the references to constitutionality are an absurd waste of time and a waste of rhetoric. All laws are already scrutinized for constitutionality. That is why we have three branches of government and separation of powers. If someone deems a law to be unconstitutional they are free to take their case to the Supreme Court whose JOB it is determine constitutionalist and scrutinize laws against the constitution.

Before continuing on the Tea Party, lets consider some of President Obama’s major achievements (so far) as President:

President Obama:

1. Passed the “largest” economic stimulus bill in American history.
2. Ordered the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolished “enhanced interrogation techniques” (ie: water boarding).
3. Set a fixed timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat forces from Iraq (currently in motion).
4. Ordered 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and enlisted European allies in a new multi-layered strategy in the Middle East and in Pakistan setting a timetable for a drawdown of our troops.
5. “Returned science to its rightful place” by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.
6. Signed laws to expand children’s health insurance (financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in the federal cigarette tax).
7. Signed a law meant to improve the ability of women who allege pay discrimination to sue their employer.
8. Lifted travel and remittance restrictions for Cuban Americans who seek to travel more frequently to the island and send more US currency to their immediate family.
9. Appointed the first Latina to the US Supreme Court
10. Signed a law supporting increased financial aid to severely injured war veterans, and their caretakers.
11. Banned offshore drilling until parameters for deep well safety procedures are clarified.
12. Put a hold on Arctic oil exploratory digging until environmental impacts are clear.
13. Passed health care reform.
14. Signed a hate crime bill.

The sad reality is that, despite all of the good he has done, President Obama is getting hit from every side. The Democrats accuse him of being too centrist and conceding to both the Right and special interests, the LGBTQ community accuses him of not acting fast enough with passing ENDA and repealing DADT and the Conservatives just hate him for existing.

Despite being dramatically opposed to the Economic Stimulus and Obamacare, conservative states are some of the first with their hands out for federal funds resulting from the “bailout” and Obamacare (examples being Louisiana, New Jersey and Florida).

Back to the Tea Party, the majority of the movement is made up of the white working middle class who, arguably, have the most to gain from what Obama has accomplished. They are the largest population that is unemployed, the largest population that stands to benefit from the healthcare legislation (ie: uninsured, uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions) and the largest population that ultimately stands to benefit from the stimulus.

Everyone – white, black, asian, male, female, adult, child, gay, straight – stands to benefit from the stimulus, the ending of the wars in the middle east, Stem Cell Research, health insurance, a more diverse Supreme Court and the suspension of off-shore drilling.

Yet we, metaphorically, “bite the hand that feeds us”. My guess is that Tea Partiers resent the fact that Obama has worked so hard for civil rights and minority protection – but none of them have the balls to attack him on those issues because they know it would be culturally unfounded. This isn’t the 1950s in the American South, this is 2010.

In the end, if we don’t start standing together, nothing will get done. President Obama, as he said when campaigning, is one man. He cannot snap his fingers and magically fix the country. He has worked hard, he has repeated successful strategies of past leaders such as Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson but unlike FDR and LBJ he does not have popular support. If the political schism continues, we’re going to alternate like a sine wave between conservative and liberal politicians and ultimately get nothing done.

So far the stimulus package has been successful; healthcare reform is something that we direly need. Why not work together to ensure our continued success as a nation rather than writing ridiculous grammatically incorrect protest signs and taping teabags to our hats screaming about issues that we don’t understand?

I read three great political editorials this morning:

An editorial in the New York Times – Addicted to Bush

An editorial in The Daily Kos – Why Liberals Should Love the 2nd Amendment

For those of you in San Diego, CA – Southwestern College’s Proper Snack Bar (addressing the corruption at Southwestern College)

I was a bit shocked and surprised when I heard of President Obama being nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize and then winning it. As an American I am very wrapped up in our culture and our politics and not as aware of international affairs as I should be.

At first I found it a bit shocking and analogous to spitting in the face of other Noble laureates such as Martin Luther King Jr, Nelson Mandella, Mother Theresa, Kofi Annan, Elie Wiesel, etc. My response was “what has Obama done other than talk?” Obama did not snap his fingers and pull us out of Iraq during his first 6 months in office, he did not magically resolve the problem in Afghanistan and he wasted time in Europe trying to get the Olympic games to be held in Chicago.

What I failed to realize is that these are all American issues and the Noble foundation is not concerned with American politics. They are concerned about issues on a global scale and Obama has certainly climbed a lot of mountains when it comes to international problems.

We as Americans need to unite together, let our political affiliations go and support our leader so we can make the world a better place. Obama is a great leader and a dynamic speaker, but he is still one man. He cannot magically solve problems, it falls us to citizens of this globalized world to make a difference.

My friend sent me this on Facebook, which changed my mind about Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

By the number of adamantly negative responses out there, I was almost convinced that Obama has not done one productive thing since having been inaugurated. Then, I actually checked up on his presidential act…ions since being in office, and was reminded that he indeed has done quite a bit of good since going into office. It’s so bemusing to me that when someone simply lists facts (not vague opinions on issues, but indeed solid facts) in support of the “wrong” cause, one is immediately deemed a hater. So, please spare me the childish sarcasm and cynical-minded comments. The following is simply a list of facts for those who would like to find out more about what Obama has actually done since his inauguration.

Check out: http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing_room/PresidentialActions/
for a more detailed list,
And for my die-hard republican friends, go ahead and check fox news too. Apparently, Fox News also reported that during his first 100 days in office alone, President Obama was responsible for:

Ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolishing “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Setting a fixed timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat forces from Iraq.

Ordering 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and enlisting, with modest new assistance, European allies in a new multi-layered strategy there and in Pakistan.

“Returning science to its rightful place” by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.

Signing laws to expand children’s health insurance.

Signing a law meant to improve the ability of women who allege pay discrimination to sue their employer.

Diminishing the role of lobbyists in the White House.

“Forge a meaningful statement from the United Nations” criticizing North Korea’s launch of a ballistic missile.

Lifting travel and remittance restrictions for Cuban Americans who seek to travel more frequently to the island and send more US currency to their immediate family.

Engaging world leaders in Europe, Turkey, Latin American and the Caribbean with “strength and humility.”

(http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/21/adviser-says-obamas-days-productive-fdr/)

Before, I start listing facts, please be reminded that each of the following does not simply require signing a piece of paper. Anyone who has actually been in an administrative leadership position will understand all the difficulties, politics, and follow-through headaches that go with setting agendas and orders on a small scale… now imagine doing it for the nation.

Also, considering the number of the issues that need to be fixed in our system of government, without delegating and establishing committees, how can the best and most thorough resolution be reached? How can we possibly reach congruity in our policies and more comprehensively aware solutions to our societal problems, without the aid of a leader (like Obama), who has made many successful efforts at coordinating communication between various departments in order to make sure that policies do not infringe upon the rights of otherwise neglected members of the population (i.e., The White House Office of Urban Affairs and the White House Council on Women and Girls).

Further, nearly all if not all of Obama’s policies and strategies have come with specific and immediate timetables. Not only has he established this on the domestic level, but also on a global level as he has successfully opened discourse with countries that we previously neglected to engage.

Some people say that all he does is talk, but if to progress on issues of “peace-making, trade, war, economics and culture,” we need diplomacy… and diplomacy is defined as “the art and practice of conducting negotiations between representatives of groups or states” and “[finding] mutually acceptable solutions to a common challenge,” then the G-20 Summit, the 60th Anniversary NATO Summit, and the U.S-E.U. Summit (plus all the other talks with various other leaders) are blaring evidence that Obama is doing his job successfully (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy and http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign_policy/).
Is diplomatically and successfully changing the world-perspective of America not in itself a great accomplishment?
How can we expect to have a roof (i.e., the end-all solution to world peace, hunger, and our horrible economic situation) without a proper building foundation (i.e., talking with world leaders, talking through with other policy-makers about the best method to achieve such goals, etc.)? And after several years of detrimental national policies, the cleaning up done so far is laudable in and of itself.

As our President, Obama has also had to spend quite a bit of time appointing the best people to fill numerous offices. Further, setting the foundation for future actions always takes longer than simply issuing laws, because there is also the accompanying pressure of determining the best policy, while taking into consideration its long-term effects.

In response to the outcry over Obama’s winning the Nobel Peace Prize, here is what he has done for foreign policy:

As far as foreign policy is concerned, President Obama:

Appointed Special Envoys for Climate Change, Southwest Asia, the Middle East, Sudan, and a Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Announced a plan to responsibly end the War in Iraq.

Announced a new strategy for Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Announced a strategy to address the international nuclear threat.

Agreed to negotiation of a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia.

Established a new “U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue”.

Announced new policy steps towards Cuba.

(copied directly from http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign_policy/. See this link also for very specific links and more information on each.)

Further, according to the Norwegian Nobel Committee (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html), Obama won the prize for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” A huge feat that the American people seem eager to disregard.

“The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.” Apparently, coming to agreement on the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia (18 years after the last one was signed) was a task any one could have accomplished and is not good enough to win a prize either.

“Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.”

The Norwegian Nobel Committee recognized the tremendous work Obama has already put forth into the realizations of anyone’s dreams for a better society, but apparently, we can’t.

“Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.”

The world has his attention, but we can’t give him a moment of ours. We are not eager to work with him or to do our part for a more peaceful world, while the rest of the world is grateful that America is finally getting off its high horse and recognizing it needs the rest of the world to help improve humanity.

“The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that ‘Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.’

The sad part is that we’d rather tear his appeals apart and remain bitter cynics.

Ok, so the rest of the world appreciates what he’s done for global progress. Here’s what he’s done for America:

As far as energy and the environment is concerned:

$11 billion for a bigger, better, and smarter grid that will move renewable energy from the rural places it is produced to the cities where it is mostly used, as well as for 40 million smart meters to be deployed in American homes.

$5 billion for low-income home weatherization projects.

$4.5 billion to green federal buildings and cut our energy bill, saving taxpayers billions of dollars.

$6.3 billion for state and local renewable energy and energy efficiency efforts.

$600 million in green job training programs – $100 million to expand line worker training programs and $500 million for green workforce training.
$2 billion in competitive grants to develop the next generation of batteries to store energy.

Increasing, for the first time in more than a decade, the fuel economy standards for Model Year 2011 for cars and trucks so they will get better mileage, saving drivers money and spurring companies to develop more innovative products.

The President issued a memorandum to the Department of Energy to implement more aggressive efficiency standards for common household appliances, like dishwashers and refrigerators. Through this step, over the next three decades, we’ll save twice the amount of energy produced by all the coal-fired power plants in America in any given year.
Supporting the first steps of a legally-binding treaty to reduce mercury emissions worldwide.

On Earth Day 2009, the President unveiled a program to develop the renewable energy projects on the waters of our Outer Continental Shelf that produce electricity from wind, wave, and ocean currents. These regulations will enable, for the first time ever, the nation to tap into our ocean’s vast sustainable resources to generate clean energy in an environmentally sound and safe manner.

(copied directly from http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/energy_and_environment/; look here for specific links and more information)

That, was only for energy and the environment, the list goes on if you continue to peruse through the very accessible whitehouse.gov.

If the above wasn’t specific enough for you, I’ve also included a very few of the many specific executive orders and presidential determinations that Obama has passed, also directly from the White House website:
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing_room/PresidentialActions/)

September 14: Set a policy regarding human trafficking, by stopping certain funding to several nations for the fiscal year 2010, including but not limited to Zimbabwe and Burma, until their governments decide to comply with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000.
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Presidential-Determiniation-regarding-major-illicit-drug-transit/)

October 5: President Obama signed an Executive Order that set “sustainability goals for Federal agencies and focuses on making improvements in their environmental, energy and economic performance. The Executive Order requires Federal agencies to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target within 90 days; increase energy efficiency; reduce fleet petroleum consumption; conserve water; reduce waste; support sustainable communities; and leverage Federal purchasing power to promote environmentally-responsible products and technologies.”
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/President-Obama-signs-an-Executive-Order-Focused-on-Federal-Leadership-in-Environmental-Energy-and-Economic-Performance/)

October 1: President Obama signs an Executive Order for “Federal Government-wide prohibition on the use of text messaging while driving on official business or while using Government-supplied equipment” to “demonstrate Federal leadership in improving safety on our roads and highways and to enhance the efficiency of Federal contracting.”
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Executive-Order-Federal-Leadership-on-Reducing-Text-Messaging-while-Driving/)

June 12: Set up a national policy that ensures the protection, maintenance, and restoration of the health of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems and resources, that enhances the sustainability of ocean and coastal economies, preserves our maritime heritage, provides for adaptive management to enhance our understanding of and capacity to respond to climate change, and is coordinated with our national security and foreign policy interests.”
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Presidential-Proclamation-National-Oceans-Month-and-Memorandum-regarding-national-policy-for-the-oceans/)

May 12: Furthered the efforts of the Clean Water Act of 1972 by issuing a timed strategy for the protection and restoration of the Chesapeake Bay, working towards ending pollution of “the largest estuary in the United States and one of the largest and most biologically productive estuaries in the world.”
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Executive-Order-Chesapeake-Bay-Protection-and-Restoration/)

April 8: “Established the White House Office of Health Reform”
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Executive-Order-Establishing-The-White-House-Office-Of-Health-Reform/)

March 9: Issued an order to remove limitations to “fund and conduct human embryonic stem cell research, to expand NIH support for the exploration of human stem cell research, and in so doing to enhance the contribution of America’s scientists to important new discoveries and new therapies for the benefit of humankind.”
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Removing-Barriers-to-Responsible-Scientific-Research-Involving-Human-Stem-Cells/)

I hope this assists in clearing up some of the confusion out there about Obama’s time in office. And I sincerely hope that, at some point, we too will realize the importance of the values that Obama has held himself and his staff to since being in office.

(http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/ethics/) The world recognizes these values as integral to the causes of human rights, environmental protection and sustainability, and international peace efforts. What we do with regards to our domestic and foreign policies affects not only our future but also our future world standing and the future of other countries. It’s about time that America’s leader embraces the help of fellow peacemakers and leaders worldwide to endorse humanity’s progress and not simply be satisfied with self-centered, sectarian interests.

All of that said, I think he really does deserve the prize and I wholeheartedly regret doubting his ability as my President.

It is weird to use a phrase that Bill O’Reilly coined, but it is very true. Racial Witchhunter (noun) – one who tries to find racism and discrimination in the most petty things.

I saw the following comment on Facebook today and couldn’t help reply. I admit, I did not know how they meant their statement, so I did jump the gun a bit on assumptions, but I still stand to my comments.

Racial Witchhunter: “Cali is most def. not the place for me…it’s more racist folks here than it is in the backwoods of Mississippi! At least down south you already know wat the deal is…people are just so damn IGNORANT”

Me: “I hate to be devil’s advocate here, but everyone is racist in some way. I know a lot more black people who hate white people than the other way around. And yes I know that my ancestors enslaved them, but I didn’t personally so for them to hate me is pretty silly. But overall I think CA is a lot more accepting than anywhere else. Except for the idiots in like Lakeside and Santee I don’t know of too many overly racist people here.”

Racial Witchhunter: “michael first off you really do not know wat the hell you are talking about! i did not say anything about YOU or YOUR ancestors, or anybody hating you or white people for that matter and you have know idea wat i experienced or went thru o make any comment on the matter… I am the last one to blame the entire white race for wat happened in the past. your comments are without merit and furthermore not everyone is racist, period. And you also made an assumption that I was talking about white people, so the next time you decide to coment on an issue you know absoutely little to nothing about, DON’T!”

Me: “I did not accuse you of having any of those sentiments, I was generalizing racism as I see it in California and in the US. IE: my opinion, not a fact. I am sorry you are so angry but people disagree on things it is part of life. It’s pretty childish to explode on them.”

Racial Witchhunter: “Actually its pretty ignorant to go in or comment on any situation in which you have zero to little knowledge. I do not disagree with you because you have no grounds to stand on. I could say that I know plenty of white people who hate black than you know black people who hate white people, but THAT would be childish of me. And f.y.i, just because the observations you partake in within California does not negate the experiences other peole go thru let alone negate the fact that it exists. Obviously your world is much more sheltered than me and for that you must feel O SO LUCKY!“

Me: “It does exist and it sucks. I felt it every day at CPH being the huge ethnic minority. But you’re right, I don’t know the background on your comments and making assumptions is obviously bad, so I apologize if my musings offended you.”

I should have known better than to comment on something about racism coming from 1) an African-American female and 2) someone with the political views “if it ain’t Obama, it ain’t no good” but I couldn’t help myself. I’m used to educated people who can listen to other people’s opinions even if they disagree.

The facts as I see them: everyone is prejudiced in some way be it sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, weight, age etc. Society programs us to favor straight 20-something fair skinned upper-middle-class males.

If not prejudiced or “racist” in some way, this racial witchhunter is at least very hostile with a lot of bitterness toward people who disagree with her. But I would go as far as to say has some kind of hard feelings toward white middle-class males since she reacted in the way she did. Perhaps males in general. She reminds me in so many ways of Chima from Season 11 of Big Brother on CBS.

She accuses me of making assumptions about her but then turns around and makes assumptions about me that I am 1) accusing her individually of being racist and 2) accusing her of thinking all white people are evil for enslaving her ancestors. I said no such thing, I was speaking in a generalization of racism in California and America as I see it.

Next is her comment that I know nothing about “racism”. I went to a predominately hispanic high school where I was discriminated against every single day. Walking down the halls I would be called things like “pinche guero” (fucking whitey) every day. On top of that I am gay, so I know a lot more about being discriminated against than she does. She can at least get married and have children legally.

Next is a personal attack on me. She assumes I am sheltered because I have different opinions than she does. Honestly, I did have a sheltered life, but I’m a pretty cultured person as well. I have traveled a lot, I have friends from all different walks of life, many of them African-American friends. I worked with a friend on an African-American clothing line and I voted for Obama. I was raised to be color blind and I still am. I judge people on ignorance and rudeness, not color or any other factor out of their control.

In the end I was the bigger man and apologized if I offended her. Life is too short to get so upset over something so insignificant. It would have been fruitless to continue the virtual argument because it would have only got me deleted from her Facebook account.

Based on this huge overreaction I would say her “racism” is more due to ignorance than her race. If she blows up on people for disagreeing with her and hates other groups (which she obviously does) then who can blame people for being rude to her?

It is ignorant to call California a racist place; it is more accepting than anywhere else in the United States that I have been. It has more opportunity than anywhere else I have been. But the sad reality is that no matter where you go, not everyone will like you. People will always find something wrong. Such is life, get over it, accept reality, move on and enjoy life for what it is: an awesome adventure.

As an atheist raised in a Judeo-Christian household, I find this topic to be particularly interesting. As someone who watched all of the Dr. Dino videos in church as a kid, I am very familiar with a lot of the far-right “intelligent” design arguments (see http://www.drdino.com/). Without getting too political, I was horrified that so many schools in the bible belt (Southern US) were trying to get “intelligent” design put into schools, presenting religious dogma as science, especially during the presidency of George W. Bush. Creationism is NOT science and has no place in a science classroom; if presented in public schools, it should only be presented in a comparative religions class giving other religions equal emphasis. Creationism and Intelligent Design are not scientific theories because they do not follow the scientific method. They do not analyze data proving or disproving a hypothesis and they are not open to peer review. They must either be accepted or rejected. Intelligent Design is figuratively black or white whereas science has a lot of grey area and is constantly changing and correcting itself. To be objective, Intelligent Design in its most recent manifestation is finally at least making an effort to be loosely scientific. Creationists are now trying to disprove science, citing religious dogma as evidence, instead of using a completely faith-based approach. For instance at http://www.intelligentdesign.org/ they actually say that Intelligent Design has nothing to do with the bible and is common sense regardless of what one’s religious beliefs are. When asked if creationist theory is the same as intelligent design, they reply “No. Intelligent design theory is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the “apparent design” in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism is focused on defending a literal reading of the Genesis account, usually including the creation of the earth by the Biblical God a few thousand years ago. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design is agnostic regarding the source of design and has no commitment to defending Genesis, the Bible or any other sacred text. (http://www.intelligentdesign.org/faq.php)” One would have to question the truthfulness of this statement however, noting that “god”, “bible” and various pronouns for “god” are capitalized, implying that his site has a Judeo-Christian affiliation. Regardless, it is downright untrue for this website to call Intelligent Design a scientific theory.

A very interesting article validating my opinions is http://is.gd/2pBMP (link has been shortened), which was written by Glenn Branch, the deputy director of the National Center for Science Education. His ultimate conclusion is “Creationism is not just a legal failure. It is a scientific failure as well. Scan the scientific research literature: There are no signs that anyone is using creationism, whether as creation science or its newfangled form of intelligent design, to explain the natural world. In contrast, not a year passes without the appearance of thousands of scientific publications that apply, refine, and extend evolution (http://is.gd/2pBMP). “ Ultimately, thank your deity of choice that we have a supreme court that enforces the separation of church and state clause in our constitution. Otherwise the American education system would be even more flawed. Hopefully during his presidency, President Obama will make a difference in the science education throughout the US, especially in the Southern states, enforcing our laws requiring educators to acknowledge only evolution in the classroom.

The far-right in America continues to amaze me in their slamming of President Obama. I admit that I’m still a little doubtful about his economic stimulus, but I am keeping an open mind. But otherwise I have 100% approval of him. He is doing a very good job with foreign policy and rebuilding the bridges that George Bush burnt down.

It pains me when I receive bullshit e-mails like this. But this time I sent a heated reply.

E-mail

Obama Audacity, Obama Arrogance & Obama Ignorance

Arrogant Americans, Mr. President? Arrogant Americans, Mr. President?

Peter Heck – Guest Columnist – 4/14/2009

As I was sitting in church waiting for the start of the service, my grandpa came walking towards me pointing his finger. No matter how old I get, and no matter how long he’s been out of the U.S. Navy, that’s still an intimidating sight.

As he approached me, his voice quivered as he said, “We saved that continent twice…how dare my president apologize for this country’s arrogance.” My grandpa is right.

Americans need not apologize to the world for their arrogance; rather, Americans should apologize to their forefathers for the arrogance of their president. Barack Obama’s first foreign trip as President of the United States has confirmed the naiveté so many of us feared during the election cycle.
But worse than that, it has also demonstrated that our president suffers from either a complete misunderstanding of our heritage and history, or an utter contempt for it. Neither is excusable.

Garnering cheers from the French of all people, President Obama declared, “In America, there is a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” Consider that Obama spoke these words just 500 miles from the beaches of Normandy, where the sand is still stained with 65-year-old blood of “arrogant Americans.”

Indeed, columnist Mark Whittington observes, “One should remind Mr. Obama and the Europeans how America has ‘shown arrogance’ by saving Europe from itself innumerable times in the 20th Century. World War I, World War II, the Cold War, and the wars in the Balkans were largely resolved by American blood, treasure, and leadership.” But all that appears lost on the president’s seemingly insatiable quest to mend fences he imagines have been tarnished by the bullish George W. Bush. If Obama wishes to continue trampling the presidential tradition of showing class to former office holders and publicly trash Bush for his own personal gain, so be it. But all Americans should make clear that no man – even if he is the president – will tarnish the legacy of those Americans who have gone before us. Ours is not a history of arrogance. It is a history of courage, self-sacrifice, and honor.

When abusive monarchs repressed the masses, Americans resisted and overthrew them. When misguided policies led to the unjust oppression of fellow citizens, Americans rebelled and overturned them.

When millions of impoverished and destitute wretches sought a new beginning, Americans threw open the door and welcomed them. When imperial dictators were on the march, Americans surrendered their lives to stop them.

When communist thugs threatened world peace, Americans bled to defeat them. When an entire continent was overwhelmed with famine and hunger, Americans gave of themselves to sustain it. When terrorist madmen killed the innocent and subjugated millions, Americans led the fight to topple them.

This is the legacy that generations of Americans have left. If President Obama seeks stronger relations with the world community, perhaps he should begin by reminding them of these very truths, rather than condemning his own countrymen on foreign shores.

This “obsessive need to put down his own country,” has caused blogger James Lewis to call President Obama a “stunningly ignorant man” who has evidently never spoken to a concentration camp survivor, a Cuban refugee, a boat person from Vietnam, a Soviet dissident, or a survivor of Mao’s purges.

Unfortunately, I can no longer bring myself to give Mr. Obama that benefit of the doubt. Not after looking at the pain in my grandpa’s eyes…a man who still carries shrapnel in his body from his service to this country.

As a student and teacher of history, I recognize that America has made mistakes…plenty of them, in fact. But one of the great things about our people has been their courage and humility in admitting and correcting those mistakes.

God willing, they will prove that willingness again in four years and correct the mistake that is the presidency of Barack Obama.

My Reply

They forget to mention that America did not join WWII to help Europe, America waited until they saw Hitler as a threat to their own interests and only joined to protect American interests.

They had full knowledge of what was happening to the Jews and did NOTHING to help them because they thought they might have to emigrate them here. Obviously we learned nothing because look at Darfur and Rwanda.

America is hardly the noble country that this is making it out to be. I think Obama is doing a good job, I’m very impressed with him.

Further, America was minimally involved in WWI and the whole idea of the cold war was America vs. USSR. If anything the non-Communist parts of Europe helped US. Not the other way around. The Far-Right needs to stop being so emotional and read up on their history. I hated history and I know more than the person who wrote this forward.

I should clarify that none of my words are aimed at the American soldiers who fought and died for our corrupt government, they are aimed at the government and it’s poor decisions.

Another interesting economic blog I found looking around. Our economy really is looking dire these days. This one is short and sweet, but what do you think about it?

I agree with the Social Darwinism/Self Regulating economy idea. Let the American auto industry fail. Toyota is better anyway. Perhaps Toyota will buy up the old GM/Chrysler assets and continue doing a better job. Toyota is already better for the American economy than the big 4 have been since the 1950s.

Our government needs to stop bailing everyone out. This is not Sweden – the US is too big to be a “nanny” State. I voted for Obama and I’m generally pleased with what he did, but I agree with the vast majority of economists (including the Nobel Laureates) – more spending is not going to help our budget deficit.

Cafferty File: Tell Jack how you really feel Blog Archive – What if GM or Chrysler go bankrupt? « – Blogs from CNN.com.

Interesting article about politics in the United States (and Internationally) during our current economic crisis.

Obama at G-20 summit: Popular president, unpopular plan – Los Angeles Times.

This made me laugh – I got it in one of those chain e-mails – it goes along with my favorite American saying – “If you want it, buy it; if you can’t afford it, charge it”.

Heidi is the proprietor of a bar in Detroit. In order to increase sales, she
decides to allow her loyal customers – most of whom are unemployed
alcoholics – to drink now but pay later. She keeps track of the drinks
consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers loans).

Word gets around about Heidi’s drink now pay later marketing strategy
and as a result, increasing numbers of customers flood into Heidi’s bar
and soon she has the largest sale volume for any bar in Detroit.

By providing her customers’ freedom from immediate payment demands,
Heidi gets no resistance when she substantially increases her prices for
wine and beer, the most consumed beverages. Her sales volume increases
massively.

A young and dynamic vice-president at the local bank recognizes these
customer debts as valuable future assets and increases Heidi’s borrowing
limit.

He sees no reason for undue concern since he has the debts of the
alcoholics as collateral. At the bank’s corporate headquarters, expert
traders transform these customer loans into DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS
and PUKEBONDS.

These securities are then traded on security markets
worldwide. Naive investors don’t really understand the securities being sold
to them as AAA secured bonds are really the debts of unemployed alcoholics.

Nevertheless, their prices continuously climb, and the securities become
the top-selling items for some of the nation’s leading brokerage houses.

One day, although the bond prices are still climbing, a risk manager at the
bank (subsequently fired due his negativity), decides that the time has come
to demand payment on the debts incurred by the drinkers at Heidi’s bar.

Heidi demands payment from her alcoholic patrons, but being unemployed
they cannot pay back their drinking debts. Therefore, Heidi cannot
fulfill her loan obligations and claims bankruptcy.

DRINKBOND and ALKIBOND drop in price by 90 %. PUKEBOND performs
better, stabilizing in price after dropping by 80 %. The decreased bond
asset value destroys the banks liquidity and prevents it from issuing new loans.

The suppliers of Heidi’s bar, having granted her generous payment extensions
and having invested in the securities are faced with writing off her debt
and losing over 80% on her bonds. Her wine supplier claims bankruptcy, her beer
supplier is taken over by a competitor, who immediately closes the local
plant and lays off 50 workers.

The bank and brokerage houses are saved by the Government following
dramatic round-the-clock negotiations by leaders from both political
parties.

The funds required for this bailout are obtained by a tax levied on employed
middle-class non-drinkers.