glennlittrell.com

Thought Of The Week: Bad Decisions Make Good Stories

2010-08-12T10:57:00.001-07:00

1. Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you
realize you're wrong.
2. Why is it that during an ice-breaker, when the whole room has to go
around and say their name and where they are from, I get so incredibly
nervous? Like I know my name, I know where I'm from, this shouldn't be a
problem....
3. The only time I look forward to a red light is when I'm trying to
finish a text.
4. MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I
know how to get out of my neighborhood.
5. There is a great need for sarcasm font.
6. Lol has gone from meaning, "laugh out loud" to "I have nothing else
to say".
7. How the hell are you supposed to fold a fitted sheet?
8. I would rather try to carry 10 plastic grocery bags in each hand than
take 2 trips to bring my groceries in.
9. I totally take back all those times I didn't want to nap when I was
younger.
10. Was learning cursive really necessary?
11. How many times is it appropriate to say "What?" before you just nod
and smile because you still didn't hear what they said?
12. I love the sense of camaraderie when an entire line of cars teams up
to prevent a jerk from cutting in at the front. Stay strong, brothers!
13. While driving yesterday I saw a banana peel in the road and
instinctively swerved to avoid it...thanks Mario Kart.
14. Obituaries would be a lot more interesting if they told you how the
person died.
15. Bad decisions make good stories
16. "Do not machine wash or tumble dry" means I will never wash this
ever.
17. As a driver I hate pedestrians, and as a pedestrian I hate drivers,
but no matter what the mode of transportation, I always hate cyclists.
18. Why do people like garden gnomes? I mean come on, a statue of a
creepy little person, you guys are sick!

courtesy of Kelly

Another Tired Chain E-Mail: Missouri Law On Illegal's

2010-08-11T12:28:00.000-07:00

While I have not researched the Missouri Law or the references in the article mentioned I will point out that, as the information is presented in this email, there are several differences in the two laws that might explain why one was acceptable and one not. I am sure there are more differences but two primary differences are:

the Arizona Law puts police officers in in the position of having to enforce provisions of the law that could lead to 'profiling'. In spite of the claims that the law specifically states profiling is not allowed there is language and instructions that does not clarify how the law is to be carried out without profiling. The Arizona produced training video for law enforcement, available online, is even more ambiguous in its instructions.
The Missouri law instructs the verification of immigration status for "any person arrested" the Arizona law says any person suspected, but does not explain 'suspected' in a unambiguous manner. To check the status of someone arrested and someone walking down the street is two significantly different things. One makes since but the other belongs in Russia when it was communist, or the south during slavery.

In the case of the Arizona law the end result will be that more legal immigrants, native born citizens, and African-Americans in Arizona will be profiled than illegal immigrants.

GlennDL see more

The above was in response to the following e-mail:

----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 8:22 PM
Subject: FW: Missoui law on illegals

Missouri set the bar!
SO WHY IS EVERYBODY SO UPSET ABOUT ARIZONA???
Simple solutions to not so complex problems!
The "Show Me" state has once again showed us how it should be done.
They need more publication and exposure on this. Let's pass it around.

In 2007, Missouri placed on the ballot a proposed constitutional amendment designating English as the Official language of Missouri. Nearly 90% voted in favor! English became the official language for ALL governmental proceeding in Missouri. It also means no individual has the right to demand government services in a language OTHER than English. We need to take a lesson from that!
In 2008 a measure was passed that requires our Highway Patrol and other law enforcement officials to verify the immigration status of any person arrested, and inform federal authorities if the person is found to be here illegally. It allows Missouri law enforcement offices to receive training to enforce federal immigration laws. (Laws that the federal government is NOT enforcing!!)
The bill makes it clear that illegal immigrants will NOT have access to taxpayer benefits such as food stamps and health care through Missouri HealthNET. In 2009 a measure was passed that ensures Missouri's public institutions of higher education do NOT award financial aid to individuals who are here illegally. The law also requires all post-secondary institutions of higher education to annually certify to the Missouri Dept. of Higher Education that they have NOT knowingly
awarded financial aid to students who are unlawfully present in the United States.
So while Arizona has made national news for its new law, it is important to remember Missouri has been proactive in addressing this growing problem. Missouri has sent a clear message that illegal immigrants are NOT welcome in our state and they are certainly NOT welcome to receive public benefits at the cost of
Missouri taxpayers! Article in "The Ozarks Sentinel" Editorial Opinion - Nita Jane Ayres, May 13, 2010.

Missouri Ahead of the Game in Dealing with Illegal Immigrants
PLEASE PASS THIS AROUND - MISSOURI DID NOT GET "BASHED" FOR THEIR LAW, SO WHY IS ARIZONA????

Another Tired Chain E-Mail: Shock To NBC

2010-08-08T11:58:00.001-07:00

The reference to an NBC poll is inconclusive. There have been over time, and in 2004 when this chain e-mail first appeared several polls taken by not just NBC but several media outlets. This particular chain mail has morphed from its original form which was in reference to the daughter of a murder victim and progressed to being about ‘In God We Trust’, ‘…under God’, ‘Do you believe in Christ’, ‘…are you religious’ etc. The reference to NBC appears to imply something that is since irrelevant and seems to imply some nefarious plot by NBC, since the ‘poll’ numbers and questions cited are not from the NBC polls in particular. As usual the information in the email, while claiming to be in favor of Christianity actually presents an inaccurate premise and conclusion that is deceptive in nature, to prove a point in an unchristian manner.

The issue of whether the word God should remain in American culture by remaining on our money is ludicrous. Culture is not defined by government. American culture is a mixture of many definable and unfathomable things. God could only be removed from our culture by us. The issue here appears to be more about separation of church and state. That is an issue that goes beyond this chain mail’s capabilities. It is also an issue better covered in a separate argument, but in the limited reference to this chain mail I would point out the the founding fathers words, beliefs and deeds point to the separation of religion from the state as being a Christian concept.

What interest me is if 86% of Americans are Christian then why is it necessary to put 'In God We Trust' on our money? Does that validate what is in our heart? Does that prove we are a Christian nation? How is that not idolatry? Isn’t that just beating our chest and gnashing our teeth in a show of piety? When Christ was asked about paying taxes to the Romans Christ inquired to the likeness and inscription on the coin. The likeness of Caesar was on the coin and Christ response wasn't that his own likeness should be on the coin. [“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21).]

In this country it isn't supposed to be about 'majority rules' if it was then the minority would have no rights. Rights are available to everyone whether in the majority or not. Many of these rights were identified by the founding fathers as inalienable rights which mean among other things that they are NOT defined by man or governments. One of these inalienable rights protects those who wish to worship as well as those who do not want to. It isn't about catering to the wishes of the minority, its about recognizing the rights of everyone.

As for the instructions not to respond because '...I don't want to know one way or the other. By me forwarding it you know how I feel..." let me just say by me replying you know how I feel.

p.s. I realize that this is a chain mail that has been forwarded and that this quoted statement is not necessarily the sentiments of the sender directed at me, but my point is that I am always open to the ideals, thoughts, jokes etc. that are sent to me, but I always retain the right to respond. In this case this particular chain mail has been around for many years in many forms and I have many times in the past just deleted it but these chain mails go on forever and at some point you start feeling that you have to respond if you disagree with some or all of it. Thank you, GlennDL

The above was in response to the following e-mail:

----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 7:22 PM
Subject: FW: Shock to NBC

Shock to NBC

This is not sent for discussion.
If you agree, forward it. If you don't, delete it. I don't want to know one way or the other. By me forwarding it, you know how I feel.
I'll bet this was a surprise to NBC.

NBC POLL
Do you believe that the word God should stay in American culture?
NBC this morning had a poll on this question.. They had the highest Number of responses that they have ever had for one of their polls, and the Percentage was the same as this:
86% to keep the words, IN God We Trust and God in the Pledge of Allegiance
14% against
That is a pretty 'commanding' public response.
I was asked to send this on if I agreed or delete if I didn't .....
Now it is your turn. It is said that 86% of Americans believe the word God should stay.
Therefore, I have a very hard time understanding why there is such a mess about having 'In God We Trust' on our money and having God in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Why is the world catering to this 14%? The majority should rule and understand that the media is biased to sell print and video.
AMEN!
If you agree, pass this on , if not, simply delete.
In God We Trust

"The Nation Which Forgets Its Defenders Will Itself Be Forgotten"
President Calvin Coolidge

Oil Spill Video:

2010-08-07T10:38:00.001-07:00

in response to a video post and comments on FaceBook comparing the BP Oil Spill to Katrina:

The timeline in the video is a ‘little’ misleading.
Leadership from Day 1/3am phone call:

“The fire occurred at 10pm, the NEXT day: Day 1, after overnight explosion: April 21: Deputy Secretary of Interior, Coast Guard dispatched to region… following a briefing with President Obama, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Thad Allen*, Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe, and FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate, "Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes was dispatched to the region yesterday to assist with coordination and response."

Adm. Thad Allen is the man it took Bush 8 days to put in place because of the appointment of “Brownie”, the horse judge. Brownie’s appointment was probably the single most contributing factor in Katrina becoming Bush’s Katrina.

The references to the offer of the Dutch ship on day 3 was refused supposedly because of the Jones Act?
At that time the Jones Act waiver was not as crucial as it became later because on day 3 it was still believed that the well was not leaking. The only oil in the water was believed to be that directly related to the fire and the sinking of the rig. The Dutch ship and others probably would not have arrived in time for what was erroneously believed or being portrayed by BP as manageable spill.

Day 3: April 23: Coast Guard "focused on mitigating the impact of the product currently in the water." The Coast Guard stated:

“The Department of the Interior, MMS [the U.S. Minerals Management Service], and the Coast Guard continue to support the efforts of the responsible parties to secure all potential sources of pollution. Both federal agencies have technical teams in place overseeing the proposals by BP and Transocean to completely secure the well. Until that has occurred and all parties are confident the risk of additional spill is removed, a high readiness posture to respond will remain in place.

Although the oil appears to have stopped flowing from the well head, Coast Guard, BP, Transocean, and MMS remain focused on mitigating the impact of the product currently in the water and preparing for a worst-case scenario in the event the seal does not hold…”

Day 5:April 25: Response team implements plan to contain oil spilling from source, weather delays cleanup.
“The unified command is implementing intervention efforts in an attempt to contain the source of oil emanating from the wellhead at the Deepwater Horizon incident site Sunday.

The unified command has approved a plan that utilizes submersible remote operated vehicles in an effort to activate the blowout preventer on the sea floor and to stop the flow of oil that has been estimated at leaking up to 1,000 barrels/42,000 gallons a day.”

Day 6: April 26: Response crews "to resume skimming operations." On April 26, the response team stated, ”…Following adverse weather that went through the area, response crews are anticipated to resume skimming operations today," including 1,000 personnel, 10 offshore vessels, 7 skimming boats and more than 14,000 gallons of dispersant. At that point 48,384 gallons of oily water had been collected.

Day 8 April 28: Federal officials realize spill was far more severe than BP led them to believe. An April 28 New York Times article reported, "Government officials said late Wednesday night that oil might be leaking from a well in the Gulf of Mexico at a rate five times that suggested by initial estimates."

The video cites Obama being on vacation, and of course golf, but lets remember Bush’s flyover was on his way back from vacation. So is that a wash? I hope so because The whole whose on vacation, who golfed the most is getting tiresome. We’re even attacking the family for going on vacation? Same situation has occurred before, so lets all get over it.

As far as statements on the campaign trail let’s remember that his opponent, and all the nominees from that party proclaimed the safety of off shore drilling, including deep water drilling. Remember “Drill, Baby, Drill”. Unfortunately Obama decided to drink some of that cool-aid shortly before the explosion. So if we’re going to dump everybody on the campaign trail for those promises I’ll go along with that.

If you want to paint this as Obama’s Katrina go ahead. He muffed some things. There were mistakes, both technical and political. But I would like to point out two things:

No one saw this coming, not even the ‘Drill, baby, drill” proponents. It was an isolated incident that barely made the news at first. We were all banking on the so called ‘safe’ and secure industry to handle it. Personally I was a little surprised it made the briefing list the next day. It happened without warning, the deaths occurred immediately, the damage was impending but unlike Katrina people were not in immediate and ongoing danger of more deaths and injuries. This is why the young lady in the video was careful not to compare this to Katrina. The makers of the video seem to miss that point, but it is a political video, and apparently an implication of accuracy is not required in politics In the long run though, absent of any other information, the waiver of the Jones Act should have come sooner.
The Obama bashing is just so perfuse, so saturating and in many cases so trivial that it is becoming so irrelevant. Can anybody in this country debate an issue anymore without it degrading to a shouting match of talking points without substantial arguments, or heaven forbid someone should have to defend against a counter argument, because they aren’t allowed. With Clinton we spent 4 years and $40 million dollars to prove a man would lie about having an affair. And to what end? Now for political points we deny employment benefits during the worse [and yes inherited] recession ever. We create fear with cries of imaginary ‘death panels’ and socialism! In a country where we claim to be a Christian nation we criminalize hard working people, blame the poor for being poor, condemn an acquisition of racism while ignoring acts of racism, and deny benefits to 9/11 first responders to protect off shore investors. All to score political points. I’m tiring of the whole thing, I should of shutdown and become a hermit when the guy I backed turned out to be a total sleazebag. It scares me that we are becoming a nation where only one side can be right, that disagreeing and dissent are no longer considered part of a republic.

NOW let’s look at the opposition’s response to the oil spill:

FYI: Chain Mail Hoaxes~Update

2010-08-04T13:05:00.001-07:00

For years I’ve been telling Internet users to stop forwarding ‘chain’ emails, finally an endorsement of this advice from SNOPES [courtesy of Mary C. Cook]:

Advice From Snopes

By now, I suspect everyone is familiar with www.snopes.com and/or www.truthorfiction.com for determining whether information received via email is just that: true/false or fact/fiction. Both are excellent sites**. Below is their advice for us.

1) Any time you see an E-Mail that says forward this on to '10' of your friends, sign this petition, or you'll get bad luck, good luck, or whatever, it almost always has an E-Mail tracker program attached that tracks the cookies and E-Mails of those folks you forward to. The host sender is getting a copy each time it gets forwarded and then is able to get lists of 'active' E-Mails addresses to use in SPAM E-Mails, or sell to other spammers.
2) Almost all E-Mails that ask you to add your name and forward on to others are similar to that mass letter years ago that asked people to send business cards to the little kid in Florida who wanted to break the Guinness Book of Records for the most cards. All it was, and all any of this type of E-Mail is, a way to get names and ' cookie' tracking information for telemarketers and spammers - - to validate active E-Mail accounts for their own profitable purposes.
You can do your friends and family members a GREAT favor by sending this information to them; you will be providing a service to your friends, and will be rewarded by not getting thousands of spam E-Mails in the future!
If you have been sending out (FORWARDING) the above kinds of E-Mail, now you know why you get so much SPAM!
Do yourself a favor and STOP adding your name(s) to those types of listings regardless how inviting they might sound!
You may think you are supporting a GREAT cause, but you are NOT in the long run. Instead, you will be getting tons of junk mail later! Plus, we are helping the spammers get rich! Let's stop making it easy for them!

Also: E-Mail petitions are NOT acceptable to Congress or any other organization. To be acceptable, petitions must have a signed signature and full address of the person signing the petition.

What to do if you do want to send information to others: how to send information to your mailing list without exposing yourself or your mailing list.

So what do we do? If you receive something forwarded to you it is my suggestion that you don't open it, don't forward it and you tell everyone on your mailing list to do the same.

If you want to pass something along then:

create a new message
copy the text of what you want to pass along, not the addresses or "To" and "From" info.
paste it into the new message
put your address in the "To" field
put everyone else's address in the 'bcc' field, not the 'cc' field.

This way the only address you share with your mailing list and the world is yours, the 'bcc' field hides everyone else's address. Putting your email list in the bcc: field when forwarding doesn’t hide your email list because the tracker program is still in the ‘forwarded’ copy.

**additional fact checking sites are:

http://factcheck.org/
http://www.breakthechain.org/index.html
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/
http://politifact.com/
http://www.about.com/

Visit my article on Chain Mail Hoaxes for more. gdl

Another Tired Chain E-Mail: Pictures From London, Shocking

2010-08-03T11:31:00.001-07:00

This one I will not brand as a hoax, because in regards to the pictures, the signs and the protest they are true [one picture may actually be from another protest but that's of little consequence here], but I would point out some relevant information even though it might not seem to be relevant by some.

I do not have a population number for Muslims in Britain but I would suggest that the five or six hundred that were reported at this protest where not representative of the much larger Muslim population in general. To be sure most Muslims were likely just as upset by the event that led to this protest but the overwhelming majority did not participate and did not approve of the demonstration. A protest by 500 idiots in another country is only newsworthy here on a slow news day.

I point this out for two reasons:

To say these 500 protestors are representative of all Muslims, as the article states, is like saying that the members of the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas is representative of Christian's in America. Who is the WBC? They’re the group that pickets at the funerals of fallen soldiers, hurling epitaphs at the families and condemning their sons and daughters for fighting for their nation. Two upcoming events they have scheduled are: This Saturday [tomorrow] in Iowa, "St. Patrick's Catholic Church 4330 St. Patrick Drive WBC to picket the funeral of Capt. [name removed], cut off in his youth fighting a losing battle against the Lord his God. We will remind this nation and those yet still alive that the Lord is killing these soldiers for serving a sinful and rebellious sodomite nation..." and also Saturday in Liberty, Missouri, "Pleasant Valley Baptist Church 1600 North 291 Highway WBC to picket the funeral of Sgt. [name removed]. God hates america and is sending her troops home in body bags. We will stand outside his funeral to warn the living that there is a hell, there is a day of judgement, and the destruction of this nation is imminent. Every person going into that funeral should be on their knees thanking God that they are yet alive and have yet a little space to repent. Instead, they go worship the dead body and the limp idol that lays over the casket..." now do these people at WBC represent all Christians in America, are they any less dangerous than those Muslims? There are idiots and morons everywhere.
Now having said that I am well aware of the arguments that are put forth that if most Muslims are peaceful and not in agreement with these protestors why don't they condemn their actions? Well they do, but unfortunately when these condemnations are reported we tend to ignore them because we are so outraged at the protestors, but the sad truth is they are seldom reported. I would also point out that there is no major outcry from prominent Christian leaders in America in regards to WBC's actions, and when there is it too gets little coverage. Here is the link for some of the responses from Muslims in regards to the "Religion of Peace" demonstration in England:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp scroll to the bottom portion of the article.

I'm sure that some will point out that the WBC is nothing like these Muslim protestors. That they would never resort to violence against America, but they are just one group of homegrown nuts. There are plenty more and to that I would say:

Timothy McVeigh [Oklahoma City bomber]
visit there website: http://www.godhatesfags.com/schedule.html and http://www.godhatesfags.com/written/wbcinfo/godhatesfags.html to see the extent of their hate.
Eric Robert Rudolph [Olympic Park Bomber]: Rudolph …also confessed to the bombings of an abortion clinic in the Atlanta suburb of Sandy Springs on January 16, 1997; the Otherside Lounge of Atlanta lesbian bar in Atlanta on February 21, 1997, injuring five; and an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama on January 29, 1998, killing Birmingham Police Officer and part-time clinic security guard Robert Sanderson, and critically injuring nurse Emily Lyons. Rudolph's bombs were made of dynamite surrounded by nails which acted as shrapnel.

Hate is a terrible thing, lets oppose it not embrace it.

It’s The War On Terrorism, Not The War On Muslims.

Does anyone stop to think that our troops are fighting alongside Muslims everyday in Iraq and Afghanistan? How does widespread condemnation of the religion of the people we are supposed to be liberating affect their attitude towards our troops and our efforts in their country? All it does is raise the level of distrust. By lumping all Muslims together with the religious fanatics we just encourage the long established fears, not just in Muslim nations, that we only want to exploit, convert and rule them.

The above was written in response to the following chain e-mail [pictures have been removed because of their offensive nature]:

----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 7:24 PM
Subject: FW: Pictures from London - shocking

Pray for them.

Just don't let those lamebrain idiots build that mosque near Ground Zero,,,,,it cannot happen....that would be an overt slap in the face to America,,,,,,
Darn scary stuff!

Wake Up Call!

Peaceful as long as you obey.

Pictures from London ~ this is beyond scary...

Makes you wonder doesn't it....can you imagine having a Christian, Jewish, or for that matter any other religious demonstration against Islam in downtown Baghdad !

These pictures are of Muslims marching through the STREETS OF LONDON during their recent ' Religion of Peace Demonstration. '

[pictures removed]

Why would anyone think that we should be at war with such nice, peaceful Muslims?!
You need to forward this one to everyone! These pictures tell it all!
Muslims have stated that England will be the first country they take over!

These are pictures not shown on American TV or in American Newspapers, but were forwarded by a Canadian friend who thought all Americans ought to know!

Thought of The Week: Will Rogers

2010-08-01T16:00:00.001-07:00

Will Rogers, who died in a 1935 plane crash with his best friend, Wylie Post, was probably the greatest political sage this country ever has known. **

1. Never slap a man who's chewing tobacco.

2. Never kick a cow chip on a hot day.

3.. There are two theories to arguing with a woman . .. Neither works.

4. Never miss a good chance to shut up.

5. Always drink upstream from the herd.

6. If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

7. The quickest way to double your money is to fold it and put it back into your pocket.

8. There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.

9. Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.

10. If you're riding' ahead of the herd, take a look back every now and then to make sure it's still there.

11. Lettin' the cat outta the bag is a whole lot easier'n puttin' it back.

12. After eating an entire bull, a mountain lion felt so good he started roaring. He kept it up until a hunter came along and shot him. The moral: When you're full of bull, keep your mouth shut.

courtesy of Ann Baker

**The credit to Will Rogers is unconfirmed.

Thought Of The Week: Friendship’s Differences

2010-07-28T12:36:00.001-07:00

Friendship among Women:

A woman didn't come home one night. The next morning she told her husband that she had slept over at a friend's house. The man called his wife's 10 best friends. None of them knew anything about it.

Friendship among Men:

A man didn't come home one night. The next morning he told his wife that he had slept over at a friend's house. The woman called her husband's 10 best friends. Eight confirmed that he had slept over, and two said he was still there.

Male or Female?

FREEZER BAGS: They are male, because they hold everything in, but you can see right through them.
PHOTOCOPIERS: These are female, because once turned off; it takes a while to warm them up again. They are an effective reproductive device if the right buttons are pushed, but can also wreak havoc if you push the wrong Buttons.
TIRES: Tires are male, because they go bald easily and are often over inflated
HOT AIR BALLOONS: Also a male object, because to get them to go anywhere, you have to light a fire under their butt.
SPONGES: These are female, because they are soft, squeezable and retain water.
WEB PAGES: Female, because they're constantly being looked at and frequently getting hit on.
TRAINS: Definitely male, because they always use the same old lines for picking up people.
EGG TIMERS: Egg timers are female because, over time, all the weight shifts to the bottom.
HAMMERS: Male, because in the last 5000 years, they've hardly changed at all, and are occasionally handy to have around.
THE REMOTE CONTROL: Female. Ha! You probably thought it would be male, but consider this: It easily gives a man pleasure, he'd be lost without it, and while he doesn't always know which buttons to push, he just keeps trying

courtesy of A. Baker

Another Tired Chain-E-Mail: Born and Raised…this is so wrong!!!

2010-07-27T01:37:00.000-07:00

Once again this one is a hoax. It is a variation on a chain mail hoax that originated in Canada in 2004. Referring to Canadian pensioners and immigrants/refugees. The chain mail has appeared with Australia substituted for Canada and now with America substituted for Canada/Australia. It is meant to do one thing, stir up anti immigrant fear and hatred.

Refuges are different from immigrants in that they are legal and are allowed to stay on the basis of fleeing some form of persecution or oppression. They might receive a short term stipend but it is not just a matter of raising their hand and saying I'm a refugee. They eventually have to prove their status or be deported. The so-called monthly income of $2,470 for a refugee comes from [in Canada] a ONE TIME payment of $1,890 and a $580 a month stipend until they find work. A pensioner in Canada receives $1,012 a month, long term, so as you can see the refugee doesn't make more a month than the Canadian Pensioner

"Aid to needy refugees in the U.S. is much less and is generally limited to eight months. Unlike Canada, the U.S. government doesn't pay aid directly, but instead gives grants to states for refugee resettlement. In California, for example, the maximum cash payment to a single refugee is $359 per month, according to the state Refugee Programs Bureau. Refugee families with children can qualify for welfare under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and maximum levels vary widely by state. In California, one of the more generous states, the maximum for a family of three is currently $723 per month."
-Brooks Jackson

As far as the 'anchor mom' and other claims these are usually based in little fact, or exaggerated fact that tend to rely on and further fan already stereotyped notions about immigrants of color, legal and illegal.

In regards to the Vets remarks about his financial problems I cannot comment as he doesn't provide any real details, all his references to amounts are based on comparisons he makes to figures related to anchor moms and refugee payments. Most Vets will relate their disabilities in terms of being 20%, or 40% etc., but he doesn't. I am sure however that there are many valid issues related to disabled Veterans and the rules they have to follow, but the fact that his complaints are being tied to the disinformation about immigrants and refugees makes me question whether the plight of disabled veterans is just being used as a ploy here, to further our hostilities toward immigrants and refugees. Mixing the two issues will only stir up emotions, any attempt to deal with the two problems as they relate to each other would be unproductive because they are unrelated. [Another point to, if he is part of the original Canadian version I don't believe Canada was in Vietnam? Need to check with Sarah Palin on this?]

There is an immigration problem, it needs to be fixed, but injecting fear, hatred, stereotypes, half truths and lies into the debate only pushes us further from a solution. Trying to push each others buttons with these tactics does not get us closer to a solution it pushes us further apart as for each person we convince with a lie we lose another person who recognizes that it is a lie.

Here is the reference link for more on this at TruthOrFiction.com : http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/r/refugees.htm

and Snopes.com : http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/refugees.asp

Here are links to three related articles at FactCheck.org :

The above was written in response to the following chain e-mail:

----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 2:28 PM
Subject: FW: ALMOST DIDN'T READ THIS. GLAD I DID

Please read the whole thing

Born and Raised…this is so wrong!!!

My name is d'Lynn. I'm a disabled Vietnam vet. [Picture removed] I don't look too bad for a beat-up old fart, do I? And that's my ride.   She's looking pretty good also, especially when you consider that she'll turn twenty this summer. That's right, it's a 1990 with a 1990 sidecar. I can't ride a solo bike, ergo the sidecar rig. It's my sole means of transportation - rain or shine, snow or wind, and this summer also marks a milestone in both of our lives, as I will finally be able to pay her off. Twenty years old? What?   Why did it take so long? You weren't paying attention, were you? It's right at the beginning of this paragraph.
I am a disabled vet, which means I receive a veterans administration disability pension, which also means "I'm broke!" Just one step ahead of being homeless every month, and that's not an idle statement or an "Oh, woe is me" dire complaint. There’s a point to this, so hang in there a minute or two and read on.
There's a 25-year-old illegal immigrant woman living in Florida , with eight kids. Yes, eight "anchor babies" and she receives just shy of $1,500 per month per kid, plus medical, plus food stamps.
Oh, wait. I've been informed that I shouldn't call them Food Stamps anymore. That's not PC. It's all called “Social Assistance” now. You do the math on that yourself.   I'd say that she was schooled early in how to make it in the system. Twenty-five years old, eight kids . . . . . yep, she started early.
You can whip out the calculator if you want, but this woman, who never has paid a dime in taxes of any kind, (and still doesn't – she's 'illegal,' remember?) is here in this country illegally. She hasn’t paid out one cent in medical for all the “anchor babies,” makes more in one month, legally, than I receive in over a year and a half in disability payments and I can't even get food stamps! Oops, I mean “Social Assistance.”
Technically I am eligible for “Social Assistance.” I was told it would be a walk through – a gimme – being disabled. No problem, and in the very next breath I was also informed that under the law the amount I received in “Social Assistance” would be deducted from my disability pension.
Let's say I take a great photograph. It was just luck, a one of a kind accident, in the right place at the right time shot. My local newspaper offers me fifty bucks to use the photo in a featured story. (I live in a small town and fifty bucks is all they could afford.)   I have to report that fifty dollars to the VA as earned income, which will immediately be deducted from my next month’s disability check. If I don't report it I’m in violation of federal law and technically they can stop my disability pension and prosecute me under a federal felony. Pretty cool, eh? For fifty bucks.
I see no point in dealing with two federal bureaucracies, so I don't bother. What's the point?
She's here illegally and with just one kid would make over twice what I receive per month. She has eight and she’s not a stand-out case.   She’s not alone. That's the way the system works. Millions of illegal immigrants know this, know how the system works and know how to use it. (Haven't you seen the pamphlet? It's handed out all along our borders, "The Illegal Immigrants' Guide to Keeping America Just The Way It Is.") and that's just the way it works.
Did you know that the federal government provides a “refugee” in this country with a monthly “stipend” of $1,890, plus $580 a month in “Social Assistance?” That’s $2,470 a month, tax-free. That's two and a half times what I’m allowed to receive as a disabled vet. And just what did they do to earn this? All you have to do is show up on our collective doorstep, raise your right hand and swear that you're a refugee and, bingo, receive $30,000 a year, tax-free. That's more than someone making $15 an hour, and they have to pay taxes to boot!
Now, in defense of the Veterans Administration, they are doing what they can with what they've got. This is precious little compared to what they should have to get the job done. At least this country has a VA.
It's the Senate that keeps passing laws, rules and guidelines, cutting their budget, denying requests for more staff and computer systems to handle the massive work flow. Their hands are tied by the very government that's supposed to give them what they need to get the job done, by the government you voted into office.   Don't scream at the VA. I have.   It's misguided anger.
The point to this “story?” Just why are you paying such high taxes to support this incredibly screwed-up government? Why?   And I’m not proposing you stop paying your taxes. That's wrong. There are good programs and reasons to pay your taxes and support our government.
What am I proposing? It's quite simple.   Vote.
The government, our government, is broken and we as the voters serve as the maintenance crew.   We fix it . . . . . by voting. If your state Senator has been in office more than two terms, vote 'em out at the next election.   If your state representative has been in office more than two terms, vote 'em out of office. We put term limits on just about every publicly-elected official in the country except the House and Senate.
Why?   Believe me, they know this and love it!   Ahhh - the power!
I don't care how much you believe your Senator or Representative is doing a good job.   They're not! Look at the government you have....that we have. How can you state they are doing what you want as the voter that put them there? How?
Vote them out of office. Do it.
Change the course of this country's history by what you are granted and guaranteed under the law.   Vote! And if you have the guts, the anger, the outrage, start a petition in your state for a state-wide initiative to be placed on your next state ballot. Limiting the terms of office for your state senators and state representatives to your federal government to two terms.
The federal government will never pass such a law, but you can. You can get it done.   You can force it. You can make it a law.
This is the first step in “getting it right.” Just vote. It's simple.   It's easy, dammit!
This first step will send a very clear message. It’ll work.   It’ill put “us” back in control of “them.”   As it should be. As it was intended in the first place.
Are you an American?   Born and raised? Then vote!
Side note: I sent this e-mail to a little over one hundred on my e-mail list.   If you believe I’m wrong or misguided or you simply don't agree, that's fine. Go right ahead and delete this e-mail. No problem. Sorry to have bothered you.   But if you think I just might have a worthwhile idea, something we can easily accomplish, something that could be a small part at getting this country back under “our” control, then please pass this along.

Additional Notes:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Maligning What Should Have Been An Inspirational Story:

2010-07-25T21:32:00.001-07:00

In relating a story of personal awakening and realization Shirley Sherrod was targeted and maligned by the right-wing in there never-ending quest to incite fear and hatred to further their ideological agenda.

Faced with continued criticism of racist elements in their loose coalition of ‘Tea Parties’ the right-wingers and Tea Partiers sought to defend themselves from those criticisms, not by dealing with those criticism or the elements mentioned, but by repeated attempts to paint their critics as even more racist. In these attacks the right-wing propaganda machine known as FOXNews and the right-wing bloggers and conservative radio host continue to prove that they’ve never met a smear, unchecked fact or deceptively edited video they couldn’t use.

The Tea Party itself is currently a very diverse and broad-based group*. There is little doubt that it pulls much of its support from disenchanted conservatives but it also contains a fair share of disenchanted Democrats, moderates and even African-Americans, so to call the Tea Party as a whole racist is at the least, debatable. On the other hand there is little doubt that racist behavior has been observed and it is in response to these observation that the NAACP and others have demanded that the Tea Party purge themselves of these elements or openly denounce them. It never ceases to amaze me that the hardest thing for some organizations to do is to acknowledge the possibility of extremist in their ranks and denounce them.

In response to the NAACP’s demand instead of denouncing racist behavior Mark Williams of the Tea Party Express posted a vile and racist letter, supposedly as satire, in which he denounced the NAACP as racist. Almost immediately Mark Williams and the Tea Party Express were no longer considered part of the Tea Party movement. Since this was not the first questionable event by Mark Williams wouldn’t the Tea Party have been better served to denounce his previous activities and save themselves this embarrassment? In the wake of Mark Williams obviously racist letter where was the instantaneous condemnation by FOXNews?

note: For the Tea Party the irony is that it is presently experiencing a problem common to the Democratic Party in that their wide ranging diversity has opened the door for the fringe element to move willy nilly amongst the more sane but equally impassioned element of the party. This is complicated by the fact that it is governed by the tactics and laser focus of the Republican Party which relies on the use of fear tactics to rally their base by arousing the more extreme elements of the right-wing. In other words the racist elements are there and will continue to embarrass the movement. This embarrassment, along with the inevitable narrowing of the Tea Party’s platform, will soon cause it to loose its broad base and become just another element of the right-wing. The question is when? This November? Before 2012?

All words, names and phrases highlighted and in bold are links to background, evidence or related articles and information. just click them.

Mark Williams demonstrated the moronic tactic of answering an accusation of racism with the childish and repetitive chant of ‘no I’m not, you are’. Accusing the accuser to divert attention from the original accusations. It appears that it isn’t important whether or not they’re racist as long as they can find someone who is more racist. This may explain why FOXNews has never met a case of ‘reverse racism’ it didn’t like. This is why they get more upset over an accusation of racism than they do an act of racism. It isn’t that they are upset over being called a racist as much as they are being the only ones called a racist.

This debacle was then followed by another right-wing blogger who, instead of defending the Tea Party, sought to issue the same childish chant of ‘no I’m not, you are’. Andrew Breitbart, of BigGovernment [a blog] announced and posted an edited video of Shirley Sherrod’s speech to demonstrate the presence of racism in the NAACP. This is the same Andrew Breitbart, who posted edited video to support attacks on ACORN. The difference this time is that Andrew Breitbart did not have access or control of the unedited version of the event and as a result he and FOXNews ended up with egg on their face when the full version of the video came out. Also facing embarrassment from there own knee-jerk reactions were the NAACP, the USDA (Sherrod’s employer), Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack,(her boss) and by connection the White House.

While I sometimes consider MSNBC nearly as extreme as FOXNews [in the opposite direction] I believe these two videos will better explain the nature of FOXNews and its brand of ‘News’.

The hatefulness, fear mongering and demonizing that passes for journalism and conversation on FOXNews and conservative radio has to stop. This is not the first time FOXNews has promoted a story that, along with the facts that where used to distort it, was later revealed to be untrue. The irony is that because of the knee jerk reaction of the USDA it then becomes OK for FOXNews to criticize the Whitehouse for Mrs. Sherrod's quick dismissal, even though we all know that if they didn’t respond quickly, if there had been any hesitation, FOXNews would be criticizing them for moving to slowly as they have done in the past.

And don’t think it stops here. After repeatedly slamming Sherrod before the truth came-out the right-wing/FOXNews propaganda machine has already forgotten about their deceit and gone after Mrs. Sherrod again for… well… not disappearing fast enough after they slandered her.

When faced with an accusation of Racism there are only two kinds of people that would defend themselves by trying to accuse others of racism.

One is a fool and the other is a racist.

To view the full, unedited video of Shirley Sherrod click here.

Exposing The UPC Barcode Myth:

2010-07-24T01:35:00.000-07:00

Recently an article has surfaced in several locations stating that you can tell where an item was manufactured by examining the consumer UPC barcode on the package. This article is almost verbatim from a ‘spam’ email that has been circulated for some time now.

The ‘gist’ of the article/email is that by examining the barcode you can use the information to avoid purchasing items ‘Made In China’.

The problem with the article is the misplacing of the emphasis on China and the fact that it is not true.

First, the misplaced emphasis: While I will agree that China is the worst offender and dominate entity in terms of the importation of goods and materials formally manufactured in the US they do not stand alone in the negative impact of outsourcing American manufacturing jobs. I wouldn’t even award them first place in the rush to move good paying manufacturing jobs out of the US. First place would go to Wal-Mart with China in second place or no better than a tie with Wal-Mart.
The emphasis should not be on don’t buy Chinese but rather it should be first and foremost on ‘Buy American’!
A big part of our immigration problem is a direct result of the outsourcing of American jobs outside of our borders. So while China has a big chunk of the manufactured products that we import many countries with a smaller percentage of those products are contributing to our immigration problem because of their role in exploiting their own workforce to the extent that they seek sub-par wages in America because of insufficient wages and protection in their own country. First and foremost “BUY AMERICAN” and if you can’t then look for the lesser of two evils.

Second, the barcodes do not identify where products are manufactured. At one time this may have been true, or may have been an intent at some point, but it is not the case anymore. The urban myth/fact or fiction website Snopes exposes the myth as containing a mixture of true and false information. The TruthOrFiction website labels it as FALSE.
To verify these assertions I googled and visited several sites on the topic and found out several facts from those sites:

GS1 Barcode: “GS1 Prefixes do not provide identification of country of origin for a given product. They simply provide number capacity to different countries for assignment from that location to companies who apply. Those companies in turn may manufacture products anywhere in the world.”
Simply Barcodes: “…Yes, we can supply barcodes to companies located outside of the USA. Our barcodes are valid worldwide.”
Barcode 1: “…Remember, it indicates the country that issued the code, NOT THE COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF THE PRODUCT. …The meaning of the prefixes ""020-029", "040-049" and "200-299" are set by the GS1 administration in a given country. GS1-US has defined these prefixes as for internal use in, for example, warehouses. The authoritative list is here.”
also at Barcode 1: ”Does the barcode number indicate the country of origin of a product? No it doesn't. The 3-digit prefix code indicates which GS1 numbering organization has allocated the block of numbers to the company. Once the company has been assigned the block of numbers, they self assign each individual number in the block to a given product. For example, a company may have it's headquarters in South Africa. The GS1 organization in South Africa has the code "600", but all the products of the company may be manufactured in England. The English-made products would still have the "600" prefix code. The prefix code is a way to have 70-plus GS1 member organizations issuing numbers without having to worry about duplicate numbers. The 3-digit prefix indicates the country of the GS1 organization that issued the block of numbers, not the country of origin of the product. GS1 (the international organization that administers UPC and EAN) has a clear statement that the prefix DOES NOT indicate the country of origin of the product. A list of country codes can be found on the UPC & EAN Page.”
Wikipedia: “EAN-13 barcodes also indicate the country in which the company that sells the product is based (which may or may not be the same as the country in which the good is manufactured). The leading digits of the code determine this, according to this code list. The EAN-13 encoding rules encode the leading 13th digit by modifying the encoding of the left-hand half of the barcode: the original rules for UPC are treated as a '0' if read as EAN-13. A UPC barcode XXXXXXXXXXXX therefore is the EAN-13 barcode 0XXXXXXXXXXXX.”

As you can see from these sites not only do the codes not represent the country of origin but because codes can be recycled and sold they can be used to disguise the country of origin. So ignore the codes and until we can get more accurate identification research your purchases and look for the Made In America labels. On this website and my other websites I have a “Buy American Resources” tab [at the top] or link that you can bookmark/favorite and reference.

Glenn Littrell

Thought Of The Week: The Life Cycle

2010-07-20T12:50:00.001-07:00

The Life Cycle:

Thought Of The Week: Great Truths Of Growing Up

2010-07-18T10:32:00.001-07:00

Great Truths Of Growing Up:

Success IS:

courtesy of Kelly & Gary

Who Gets US Out of the Hole We Are In?

2010-07-15T01:16:00.001-07:00

Robert L. Borosage: President, Institute for America’s Future

…This election, the president said, will offer a choice: "It's a choice between the policies that led us into this mess and the policies that are leading us out of this mess. It's a choice between falling backwards or moving forward."

His critique of Republicans has the advantage of being true. With unparalleled discipline, Republicans voted with virtual unanimity to obstruct every major reform offered by the president, breaking all records on filibusters along the way. To the extent that they offer any program, it is a retread of the very policies that drove us off the cliff -- top end tax cuts, deregulation, drill, baby drill, ardent defense of corporate subsidies and multinational trade accords. Their solution to health care, as Rep. Alan Grayson gibed, is don't get sick. Their solution to unemployment, as Republican Sen. Kyl and others have argued, is starve or work. (Kyl opposes extending unemployment benefits, so people will be desperate enough to take jobs that pay far less, assuming they exist.)

No You Can't (Featuring John Boehner) - Watch more Politics Videos at Vodpod.

Will voters vote for party of no -- or as John Boehner ranted, in a health care
screed immortalized in a YouTube video, the party of "hell no, you can't?"

Well polls suggest that they just might. Off-year, low-turnout elections are the occasion to cast a protest vote. Voters aren't really voting for an opposition candidate or her or his policies, they are voting against. And that clearly is what Republicans are counting on.

Can a compelling choice be posed in midterm elections held in a bad economy?

The president would really like to campaign for credit for one of the most productive congressional sessions in decades. Against Republican obstruction, the White House and Democrats in Congress have passed the largest recovery act in history, the largest increase in student aid since the GI Bill, the most significant health care reform since Medicare, the greatest expansion of community service since Civilian Conservation Corps in the 1930s, the biggest investment in renewable energy ever. This week the Congress will pass, again, over virtually unified Republican opposition, the largest reform of finance since the 1930s. The White House will roll out studies on the benefits of the health care bill, the millions of jobs created by the stimulus, the consumer protections in financial reform. They'd like a little credit. If only people understood what we've done, they strongly believe, they'd reward us at the polls.

These statements are true but largely irrelevant... As dramatic as the reforms have been, they have not been sufficient to the crisis. And, at the end of the day, what matters is jobs and the economy. House Minority leader John Boehner's response to Obama's argument is simply "Where are the jobs?" Many Americans may think the real choice is between those advocating the policies that got us into the mess and those advocating policies that have failed to get us out.

George W. Bush survived a jobless midterm, but only because of 9/11. In 1994, the economy was actually beginning to generate jobs, but Clinton and Democrats were punished, and the Gingrich Congress was elected. The last president to survive a bad economy in an off-year, first term election was Ronald Reagan. He cut taxes, ran up military spending and exploded the deficit. Despite a deep recession, Reagan got Republicans to unite on a message of "stay the course." He pounded relentlessly from the first day of his administration on the failure of liberalism, on government as the "problem, not the solution," blaming Democrats constantly for the downturn. Democrats made gains, but Reagan survived to go on to re-election.

Obama's message parallels Reagan's. We've begun to create jobs, stay with the policies that "are getting us out of the mess," rather than going back to those "that got us into the mess..."

From the Huffington Post: view the entire article.

Links:

Get Your Free Checks Here!

Get Your Free Checks Here!

2010-07-14T11:44:00.001-07:00

Let’s see:

a paycheck or an Unemployment benefits check?
security or an Unemployment benefits check?
the ability to pay bills or an Unemployment benefits check?
the possibility to sustain or return to their normal standard of living or an Unemployment benefits check?
living above the poverty level or an Unemployment benefits check?
All the above or an Unemployment benefits check?

How can it be so easy to characterize people who have been working for a living as so lazy and lacking of a work ethic that they [and family] would be willing to exchange all of the above for a paltry unemployment check which, even with extensions, is still a short term existence.

It just doesn’t make since to so often portray people who need help as lazy slackers. Does the pitiful UI check make poverty attractive?

5 unemployed workers for every job.

Links:

Republicans To Unemployed: Why Won't You All Just Get Some Jobs Already?

Does Unemployment Money Help or Hurt?
Some Real Questions for Chamber’s ‘Jobs Summit’
Lack of Jobs, Not ‘Generous’ UI Benefits, Keep Unemployed Jobless
Progressive Breakfast: Address Unemployment Pain, Or Make It Worse
Who Gets Us Out Of The Hole We Are In?

Another Tired Chain E-Mail: I’m a Legal Citizen and I must Show My ID When…

2010-07-12T14:23:00.001-07:00

All of these examples are OPTIONAL! In other words you show the Police officer your ID as part of the agreement you made when you obtained your drivers license. A drivers license is a privilege, not a right. But even in that case you only have to show it when you are pulled over for an infraction, not because of your color, nationality or the way you look, hopefully.

With the exception of the signing for drugs all the other examples are things you choose to do and the requirements are not law, they are established by those businesses. If you don't want to show your ID to your doctor then don't, change doctors. You can't be arrested for it. And surely you won't be detained because you left your ID at home.

In the case of the pharmaceuticals it is because you are obtaining a controlled substance, not just walking down the street.

There is a difference between these examples and the Arizona law, more legal immigrants and citizens will be stopped because of this law than illegal's.This law does nothing [new] to control our borders or stop illegal immigration. It is meant to, or at least will result in, the targeting of non-whites in general.

The above is in response to the following e-mail:

----- Original Message -----
I'm a legal American citizen and I must show my ID when:

1. Pulled over by the police.
2. Making purchases on my department store credit card.
3. When I show up for a doctor's appointment.
4. When filling out a credit card or loan application.
5. When applying for or renewing a driver's license or passport.
   6. When applying for any kind of insurance.
   7. When filling out college applications.
8. When donating blood.
9. When obtaining certain prescription drugs.
10. When making some debit purchases, especially
        if I'm out of state.
11. When collecting a boarding pass for airline or train travel.

I'm sure there are more instances, but the point is that we citizens of the USA are required to prove who we are nearly every day!
Why should people in this country illegally, be exempt!!!!!
Why shouldn't we guard our borders as closely as every other country in the world does?
                               Go ARIZONA !!!

P.S.

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Latino 911!

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor

Tea Party

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

The Whole Hand Over His Heart Debacle:

2010-07-12T05:00:00.001-07:00

In response to a comment on a FaceBook post:

In regards to President Obama putting his hand over his heart ‘all the time’, I too wish he would. Everyone should do so for a variety of reasons, but to not do so on occasion is neither criminal or proof of a lack of respect for this country. If it is then there is a lot of disrespect going around all over this country at sporting events, public meetings and assemblies. Out of the majority of people who do put their hand over their heart how many of them are doing it, as you put it, in reference to ‘public opinion’ around them? As members of military families you and I probably look at this from a more intense perspective than many, but what bothers me is the increasing level of Americans who make patriotism into a series of chest beating and loud-shouting clichés and rituals. How many chain emails and talking head pundits do I have to hear criticize people for exercising the rights that others have sacrificed and fought for. Those who fought for those rights were fighting for everyone's rights, not just yours and not just mine. Along with rights comes a responsibility to exercise them. To suppress someone's rights is more injurious to those who sacrificed than to exercise those rights in opposition to something some of us may approve of.

Personally when I consider what might constitute or define patriotism the anthem, the flag and the pledge are not at the top of the list as these are just symbols and rituals that are used to demonstrate ones outward claims. What comes to the top of my list are things such as sacrifice, commitment, service, support of justice and equality, the willingness to defend your neighbors rights as much as your own, especially when they are in conflict, etc. The presidents reaction to the first few notes of the National Anthem may not be to automatically raise his hand to his heart, but is the automatic response anymore reverent?

You say if this wasn’t an isolated incident it would be no big deal. Come on now! This is probably one of the most circulated political videos around and it is always accompanied by statements that it is unequivocal proof of his disrespect! Its usually titled “Barack Hussein Obama refuses to salute US flag” which is obviously a biased conclusion. You then state that further proof is that

“…he has went around the world and apologized for us to other countries when he should be proud of our country and not be apologizing. He says we are often arrogant as a country, etc,”.

What is the correlation between an apology and patriotism? I can understand that you may not agree with the apology. I can understand that you don’t think he should be apologizing, but what you see as unpatriotic others see as humility, and if your saying our country should not show humility when it has done wrong, or that this country has never done wrong, then aren’t you proving his statement that we are often arrogant? You correctly point out many of the fine attributes and accomplishments of this great country but you ignore the darker and often hidden side of our history. I would point to slavery, genocide of native Americans, Jim Crow, segregation, etc. When you say we have “…overthrown the treacherous dictators, freed the people…” you overlook the fact that we have also supported dictators and corrupt regimes, as well as undercut or removed governments [some elected] that we have had the ‘arrogance’ to deem ‘not in our best interest’. The attitude that other peoples hate us only out of jealousy is also arrogant as it isolates all of those people we have differences with as not having valid grievances or the ability to reason and formulate actions. There are some whose dislike for us is rooted in unrealistic or unfounded perceptions but many have real or imagined grievances that could be addressed. I too am proud of this country. In spite of our transgressions I recognize the many great accomplishments, but pride without humility IS arrogance.

Is it that an apology is seen as a criticism of our country? I can see the logic of that, but is criticism of our country unpatriotic? I remember when criticism of our President was portrayed as unpatriotic and unsupportive of our troops [Bush and Iraq]. I remember when criticism of invading Iraq was portrayed as unpatriotic. But if criticism of our government and/or President is unpatriotic then where is the indignation over the criticism of this President? Where is the indignation of the Tea Parties portrayal of this country and government? I’m being sarcastic here because criticism is not unpatriotic, its as American as apple pie. That is, unless you are located on the wrong side of the political map.

As far as your statement that Obama ridicules America, I don’t see it, you have to show me what you mean.

In regards to:

“…yet to hear Obama tell it and to watch his actions, we are all heathens who need forgiveness for being so evil…”

this is your assessment and opinion. I disagree with it but your welcome to it. Also:

“…I don’t understand where this mentality comes from and it is shared by the liberal crowd…”,

again that is your assessment. I’m perceived as a liberal and I don’t believe that, but then as a liberal I am always subjected to right-wing explanations of what I’m supposed to believe.

The statement:

“I sure wish these same people would have been so quick to make excuses for Bush when he was president and Bush didn’t do anything that this president does yet he was called an imbecile and a racist and a monkey and the list goes on and on.”

First of all, to be sure. I didn’t call Bush a racist, never heard him called a monkey, and never questioned his intelligence. I just didn’t always see evidence of it. To say that Bush didn’t do anything this President does implies either this President didn’t do anything right or Bush didn’t do anything wrong. During Bush’s pre-911 months he was also making world stops like Obama, the difference was where Obama was apologizing Bush was offending. Not the same thing, but not really different either. Both could be seen as embarrassing. As far as wishing ‘these people’ would make excuses for Bush why is that necessary? He had and still has FOX news and conservative radio constantly doing that. If you want followers of Obama to make excuses for Bush then how about the reverse? If what you are saying is you wish we were more tolerant and less partisan then I can agree with that, but the video that started this conversation does not fit with that wish. It is meant to be divisive and inflammatory.

I tell you what… I’ll make a deal with you along these lines. I’ll defend Bush on something he was criticized for and you defend something that Obama was criticized for. You can choose what I defend and I’ll give you a heads up on what I would like you to defend, Obama’s Memorial Day agenda this year [2010]. It should be easy since the original portrayal of the FOX coverage of that agenda was totally rebuked before Memorial Day arrived. Once the facts as laid out by FOX concerning the agenda’s of past presidents was found to be false and misleading there shouldn’t be to much work in defending his agenda. People may find your defense unbelievable though if all they watch is FOX since they never, as usual, retracted their misrepresentations.

In terms of people saying we should support the current President, shouldn’t we? Weren’t we supposed to support the previous one and the ones before that? I remember on numerous times when criticism of Bush was categorized as unpatriotic, against the troops, or traitorous there were some less inflammatory defenders of Bush saying support the office, if not the man. Support doesn’t mean we have to agree or vote for his ideals, but it should at least mean we don’t hope he fails or pray for his assassination.

In reference to the items expressed in your “This is just the tip of the iceberg” statement I won’t try to defend them for two reasons:

I’m not familiar with all of them and if true I would probably have problems with some of them myself.
To address them all I would have to research them all and that would mean before I could address them I would have to wade through the endless layers of right-wing accusations that would result in the discovery that most of them are falsifications or misleading in nature. In other words they strike me as all too similar with the right-wing tactic of throwing out arguments or accusations in the vacuum of FOX News or talk radio where they are never contested leading them to being accepted as unequivocal facts. Similar to the whole Memorial Day agenda lie. I have no problem addressing a specific issue [time permitting] but do have a problem chasing false issues.

I will address one of them however. I looked at the tax rate tables for 08,09 and 2010 and my tax rate for 2010 actually was lower. I did pay more in taxes but that was because I made more not because my taxes went up.

In Anticipation of a Future Chain E-Mail:

2010-07-11T02:12:00.001-07:00

A chart has begun popping up all over the place and will probably be showing up in emails soon, you know the ones, chain mail which will make some assinine unfounded political claims implying the chart proves some anti-lib or anti-Obama point. It’s frustrating because in a country with such an open and free press there are enough facts floating around at any one time to provide valid criticism and debate without making stuff up. In this case the original chart only draws attention to limited facts [which party controlled congress] leaving people to draw a view based on limited data and no explanations.

Fine, but here's a version of the chart with a little more info.

So does our new version of the chart support or dispute the suggestions of the original chart?

The original excluded information on who was in the Presidency at the time as if their was no relative impact. It also doesn’t reflect any events that may of had a short or long term effect on the economy. The original figures presented in the Bureu of Labor Statidtics, which were credited as the source of the original chart, are raw figures. Does overlaying one timeline [who controlled congress] prove a corelation by itself? Its like those election year comaparison between who wins the world series and the which party wins the presidency. If there is a visual corelation does that mean there is a real connection between the world series and the presidency? Its not my suggestion here that who controls congress is not relevant. My point is that by itself it is suggestive more than it is conclusive. The original and this updated chart do not go back before 95, the obvious intent being to 'cherry pick' the info, so if you extend the chart back to before 1995 you will probably see that during all presidencies and shifts in congress, the most conclusive pattern is that no term has resulted in a graph line that is one directional. Even the Obama/Democratic line is starting to curve, so why don’t we give it a minute before we draw our doomsday conclusions.

You can go to the BLS website [ http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet ] and enter your own parameters and then draw your own conclusions.

Additional point: If I were to point out that the origin of the current high unemployment rates were the result of a excessive spending and deregulation under Bush we would find ourselves being chastised for continuing to "BIOB" [Blame It On Bush]. So even though Republicans blamed [and still do] Clinton for everything throughout the Bush administration we'll leave it up to others to decide whose recession it is.

Another Tired Chain-E-Mail: Liberal vs. Conservative

2010-07-07T12:05:00.001-07:00

Sorry, I'm considered a liberal and:

I don't want all guns outlawed, but I would like to see responsible gun ownership and production?
I'm not a vegetarian, but I don't know any that want all meat banned.
I don't know many openly gay people, liberal or conservative, but the ones I do know don't want legislated respect they just want the same initial respect we all do, mutual. It is oppression and discrimination that leads to the need for legislation.
On the occasions that I have been down and out I've never wondered who was going to take care of me. I've worked for a paycheck since I was 15 years old. But I have seen many conservatives, who when they have been down-and-out, quickly turn to the systems that they routinely condemn when things are going their way.
As far as conservatives 'just turning the channel'. All I've heard from them for years is complaints and attempts to shut down the so-called 'bias liberal media' even when it included such stalwarts as Cronkite, Morrow, Brinkley and Pyle. If a bias media was condemned for so long by them then why do they now promote the equally bias conservative media such as Fox? To change your tune based on the slant of the 'bias' is making either the current or past argument hypocritical.
If a conservative is a non-believer he doesn't go to church, but he surely condemns anyone else who doesn't.
A conservatives view of health care is poor people either don’t need it, otherwise they could afford it or they could always just ‘change jobs’ in this robust economy.

Offended or not, I might not forward it, but I will happily respond.

Related Post

The above is in response to the following always reappearing and always tired Chain Mail:

Subject: Liberal vs Conservative

If you ever wondered what side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!

If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn`t eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands Legislated respect.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
(Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping
for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us should pay for his.
If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because he's "offended".

Well I forwarded it to you, so you know where I stand!

BP Investigation Blocked By Senate

2010-07-06T08:02:00.000-07:00

Thought Of The Week: The Wheels Of Life

2010-07-05T10:20:00.001-07:00

Union Values: Made In America

2010-07-04T11:57:00.000-07:00

From the AFL-CIO NOW Blog

Dave Johnson writes for the Campaign for America’s Future and adapted this post for us.

Our country was born out of a fight to cast off colonial rule by a wealthy elite and govern ourselves as We, the People. This fight continues, and nothing more clearly represents this American effort to lift each other up than organized labor. On July 4, as we celebrate our independence I encourage people to recognize our ongoing battle by buying Made in USA goods, and by working for democracy and the rights of workers everywhere.

I recently bought a hat with “AFL-CIO” written on it. Inside the hat there is a label that reads, “Union Made in the USA.” I was thinking about how unions wouldn’t buy cheap hats made in China or by some nonunion sweatshop, even if it was in the United States. They stick with their values.

There are many examples of unions sticking with their values. Union locals don’t use nonunion print shops—and you might notice that many candidates for office recognize this and use union printers to print their own campaign materials because they know that union members look for this. Union members stick together when other workers are trying to bargain for wages, benefits, rights and respect. People who work directly for unions get good wages and benefits. And union members generally show up and vote for candidates who support broad American values that say “we’re in this together,” rather than the conservative “you’re on your own” philosophy.

This got me thinking about where we are with the economy, following the decrease of union membership and many years of corporate/conservative domination of the “marketplace of ideas.” Decades of this “market” stuff has been driven into our heads, the media is entirely corporate and the corporate media rarely shows someone from labor talking about how joining a union benefits workers or how labor values are good for us. Everything we hear is entirely the conservative/corporate/Wall Street perspective now that we are protected from having to hear other opinions. How has that worked out for all of us?

Let’s look at some of the core values of America’s labor movement, and see how these are standing up to the “stress test” our economy is undergoing.

First, the law. According to the National Labor Relations Board:

Congress enacted the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) in 1935 to protect the rights of employees and employers, to encourage collective bargaining, and to curtail certain private sector labor and management practices, which can harm the general welfare of workers, businesses and the U.S. economy.

This statement reflects American values: Employees and employers, together. Protecting rights. Encouraging collective action: democracy. Promoting the general welfare of workers, businesses and the economy. This is a statement that says promoting democracy, justice and equality boosts all of us, helping us to prosper together.

Please take a moment to read Section 1 of the NLRA. In summary, it says that lack of bargaining power by workers against corporations leads to Depressions (we call them recessions now) because of depressed purchasing power. And it leads to strikes, which disrupt commerce. Therefore, it is the policy of the United States to encourage collective bargaining. If you have more time, read through some of the things this law says because you will be shocked at the extent to which our government now ignores its own laws, acting in a one-sided way allowing businesses to fire organizers and intimidate workers but doing so little for working people. How has that worked out for us?

Take a look at the AFL-CIO mission statement:

The mission of the AFL-CIO is to improve the lives of working families—to bring economic justice to the workplace and social justice to our nation.

This doesn’t say they do this for AFL-CIO members only, it says they do this for all of us. How would sticking with values like these be working out for us?

Union values: To improve lives. Social justice. Dignity. Just and humane. Security. People in unions believe things like: Solidarity: Stick together. Protect jobs. We’re in this together. Good wages and good benefits for any of us help all of us. And this means workers and businesses together. Seriously, working people take pride in what they do, and like everyone else they want the organizations they are part of to succeed. In the case of businesses, of course, the interests of working people are that their companies do well because then they do well. Everyone is happiest when there is harmony and good times are shared.

These are values that so many of us agree with. When these values were more widespread, our economy functioned better. The middle class was strong, and made gains year after year. But in recent decades, we have seen a Wall Street/Big Business/conservative campaign of propaganda against these values. We hear praise for the wealthy CEO cult and the largest monopolistic corporations and are confronted by an attitude that all of us should serve the interests of the entitled wealthiest, as if we exist at their behest. For them it is about getting as much money and power as they can—for themselves and only for themselves. We hear about how a few “top performers” deserve vast fortunes. We hear, “Greed is good,” “The market should decide.” We hear divisive class-warfare, like “Rich people create jobs” and “Did you ever get a job from a poor person?” We hear that if we dare tax them to pay for the infrastructure that enables their prosperity they will pack up their companies and take their jobs with them. These slogans come from a different kind of business interest—the Wall Streeters and monopolistic giant corporations who want everything for themselves and to leave the mess behind for the rest of us.

The result of the conservative-values approach is that a very few at the top do better and better while the rest of us—including most of the businesses in the country—find it harder and harder to just get by. Jobs and factories are shifted out of the country—beyond the protections of our business, labor and environmental laws and regulatory protections. Local and regional businesses are knocked out or swallowed up. As a result of this shift toward Wall Street values, today’s workplace is characterized by increasing working hours or just workload, high stress, fear of layoffs, low or reduced wages, jobs sent overseas, loss of health care, loss of pensions and a general loss of dignity and security.

BP Oil Spill: The facts, the explanation and the huh?

2010-06-27T14:54:00.001-07:00

-pause other videos before starting-
-click the arrow to start/restart the video-

courtesy of Rachelle

Thought Of The Week: Retired People

2010-06-25T00:17:00.001-07:00

Retired People

Working people frequently ask us retired people what we do to make our days interesting.
Well, for example, the other day my wife and I went into town and went into a shop.
We were only in there for about 5 minutes.
When we came out, there was a cop writing out a parking ticket.
We went up to him and said, 'Come on man, how about giving a senior citizen a break?'
He ignored us and continued writing the ticket. I called him a Nazi turd.
He glared at me and started writing another ticket for having worn tires.
So my wife called him a s**t-head.
He finished the second ticket and put it on the windshield with the first.
Then he started writing a third ticket. This went on for about 20 minutes.
The more we abused him, the more tickets he wrote.
Personally, we didn't care.
We came into town by bus and the car had a Sarah Palin sticker.
We try to have a little fun each day now that we're retired. It's important at our age.

courtesy of Felicia Thompson

2010 Fathers Day:

2010-06-20T13:23:00.000-07:00

Thought For The Week: Rule #1

2010-06-18T10:17:00.001-07:00

Thought Of The Week: Growing Old Is A Beach:

2010-06-13T11:29:00.000-07:00

BP Coffee Spill

2010-06-12T00:25:00.001-07:00

warning: funny but some language
-click arrow to start/restart video-

-Pause other video before starting, ie., “Mary Did You Know” below.-

You think English is easy???

2010-06-05T11:20:00.000-07:00

Read to the end...a new twist.

1) The bandage was wound around the wound.
2) The farm was used to produce produce .
3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse .
4) We must polish the Polish furniture.
5) He could lead if he would get the lead out.
6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.
7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.
8) A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.
9) When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.
10) I did not object to the object.
11) The insurance was invalid for the invalid.
12) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.
13) They were too close to the door to close it.
14) The buck does funny things when the does are present.
15) A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.
16) To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.
17) The wind was too strong to wind the sail.
18) Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.
19) I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.
20) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?

Let's face it - English is a crazy language. There is no egg in eggplant, nor ham in hamburger, neither apple nor pine in pineapple. English muffins weren't invented in England or French fries in France .. Sweetmeats are candies while sweetbreads, which aren't sweet, are meat. We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes, we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square, and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.
And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers don't groce, and hammers don't ham? If the plural of tooth is teeth, why isn't the plural of booth, beeth? One goose, 2 geese. So one moose, 2 meese? One index, 2 indices? Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend? If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of them, what do you call it?
If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught? If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat? Sometimes I think all the English speakers should be committed to an asylum for the verbally insane. In what language do people recite at a play and play at a recital? Ship by truck and send cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell?
How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man and a wise guy are opposites? You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which your house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form by filling it out and in which, an alarm goes off by going on.
English was invented by people, not computers, and it reflects the creativity of the human race, which, of course, is not a race at all. That is why, when the stars are out, they are visible, but when the lights are out, they are invisible.
PS. - Why doesn't 'Buick' rhyme with 'quick' ?
You lovers of the English language might enjoy this .

There is a two-letter word that perhaps has more meanings than any other two-letter word, and that is 'UP.'

It's easy to understand UP, meaning toward the sky or at the top of the list, but when we awaken in the morning, why do we wake UP ? At a meeting, why does a topic come UP ? Why do we speak UP and why are the officers UP for election and why is it UP to the secretary to write UP a report ?
We call UP our friends. And we use it to brighten UP a room, polish UP the silver; we warm UP the leftovers and clean UP the kitchen. We lockUP the house and some guys fix UP the old car. At other times the little word has real special meaning. People stir UP trouble, line UP for tickets, work UP an appetite, and think UP excuses To be dressed is one thing, but to be dressed UP is special .
And this UP is confusing: A drain must be opened UP because it is stopped UP . We open UP a store in the morning but we close it UP at night.
We seem to be pretty mixed UP about UP! To be knowledgeable about the proper uses of UP, look the word UP in the dictionary. In a desk-sized dictionary, it takes UP almost 1/4th of the page and can add UP to about thirty definitions. If you are UP to it, you might try building UP a list of the many ways UP is used It will take UP a lot of your time, but if you don't give UP, you may wind UP with a hundred or more. When it threatens to rain, we say it is clouding UP . When the sun comes out we say it is clearing UP ..
When it rains, it wets the earth and often messes things UP.
When it doesn't rain for awhile, things dry UP.
One could go on and on, but I'll wrap it UP, for now my time is UP , so...it is time to shut UP !
Oh ..... one more thing:
What is the first thing you do in the morning & the last thing you do at night? U P.

courtesy of A. Baker

Mary Did You Know

2010-06-02T00:19:00.001-07:00

-click the arrow to start the video-

Jesus would be in Haiti, and not on Wall Street:

2010-06-01T11:18:00.000-07:00

By Tom Ehrich: Episcopal Priest

Indianapolis Star: 1-23-2010

Is The Solution For Outsourcing And The Exportation Of Jobs More Incentives For Corporations?

2010-05-27T11:18:00.001-07:00

NO! How much incentive does an American plant need? What about responsibility, civic commitment, and community? Why is it that when the oil companies where reaping record profits they were gouging us at the pumps? Then when people complained they pointed to their inability to drill off shore as 'unfair', even though they weren't exploring the permits they had. Yet, since then the proven cause of the high gas prices wasn't a shortage, but speculation and profiteering. At the beginning of the mortgage crisis all the blame was laid at the feet of those individuals who were losing their homes because they had taken out mortgages they couldn't afford on homes with inflated value. But who sold them those homes without concern for the buyers ability to pay? Who packaged those loans with the intent to sell them to reap inflated profits before the true nature of the loans were exposed? And the tail end of this predatory package is the purchasers of those bad loans who harass and harangue people at all hours of the day and night trying to get them to pony up even as they are going through hard times?

With 4 out of 5 Americans believing it is immoral to default on a mortgage where is the shame on the other side? Why don't corporations have any shame about defaulting on their commitments? And what's even more concerning is why do we hold the individual accountable for responsibility, patriotism and the welfare of this nation but then allow groups of individuals to hide behind their corporate shields to abuse the benefits that the working family struggles to obtain.
What more incentives could we give them? Less regulation? That's what got us into this mess [recession] Enron, Tycom, the banking crisis, the mortgage crisis etc. All [in a large part] results of deregulation over the last ten years. Lower taxes? Compare the top tax bracket for the last hundred years and you will see that current taxes are relatively low and what makes anyone think that lowering taxes for the wealthy will result in plants being built here? The lower taxes that we give to the rich and corporations are financing plants in other countries! And more and more of the rich are investing in foreign assets and hiding money offshore. Where's their since of responsibility to their nation?

How many of these companies and corporations only exist because of incentives given to them by us, this country? Billions of dollars in government funded and backed business loans, government grants, incentives etc., Years of sweat from their employees. Then they bail on us. Yeah they need more incentives.
How many companies are moving their plants because they're losing money [long term] and how many of them are doing it just to increase profits? What's the real incentive they want? Lower wages? Less employee benefits? Well there you go, now we have it. Lower taxes for the wealthy so that people who don't have to work for a living can better enjoy not working [when poor people do it we condemn it as welfare]. Less regulation so that corporations can continue to take greater risk and speculation with less public detection [when working families do it and loose their homes or worse its condemned as irresponsible if not criminal]. Less regulations by building plants in third world countries that have no environmental regulations, thus allowing the dumping of toxic waste directly into the air and water that is used by the workers they employ. Lower wages by employing third world or indigent poor to work for pennies an hour with no benefits. Could we possibly compete with that? So what possible incentive could we offer these companies to stay that they haven't already received. Lower wages and no benefits. None of us could afford the pay cut that would take. Which is ironic because none of us who would still have a decent wage would want to pay the cost [ever increasing] that would result from an ever growing lower class that comes from the exporting of these jobs.

We all want to condemn excessive bonuses for executives and the greed of Wall Street but we never want to criticize the greed and irresponsibility of excessive profits [not profits, excessive profits] and greed by corporations. THEY ARE ONE AND THE SAME!

Those executives work for the corporations! The corporations are what Wall Street is all about. Who do we think the lobbyist we all complain about work for? Insurance companies [corporations] spent millions of dollars to fight health care and are now raising premiums to pay for it. 'Poor' Oil companies with record profits, 'poor' mortgage companies who got ripped off by hard working people, 'poor' insurance companies who couldn't compete with a government option.
Don't want to eventually pay for health care, higher unemployment benefits, a resurgence of welfare, a crumbling infrastructure, more entitlements? Then we need to rethink our attitudes on whether the solution is to protect the working man and build our economy from there or cow tow to the greed and avarice of Wall Street, its executives and yes the corporations that run it and our country.

Glenn Littrell

Notes From Other Sources:

“ Today, 1.2 million jobless workers lose their extended unemployment insurance (UI) because some Senate millionaires think a $300 a week unemployment check will make people too lazy to look for a job. This group also is pushing to reduce the nation’s budget deficit rather than use short-term spending to create desperately needed jobs for the nation’s 26 million unemployed or underemployed workers…
…While more than 15 million U.S. workers can’t find work because there’s five workers for every one job opening, the rich are getting massively richer. The ranks of the nation’s millionaires rose 16.5 percent, to 2.87 million, last year. Their total wealth in North America rose 17.8 percent, to $10.7 trillion…
…A new poll shows the majority of the U.S. public wants government to take a larger and stronger role in making the economy work for America’s workers. Nine out of 10 agree that government and corporations should join with individuals to place the common good above greed….
…So, in short: Republicans in Congress are out of touch with the American people and are working with the growing group of millionaires—like coal mine owner Don Blankenship of Massey Energy Co. and BP CEO Tony Hayward—to ride roughshod over those whose sweat and hard work built this nation.
Some say the United States is now a corporatocracy.”
Millionaires Killing Jobs by Tula Connell, Jun 25, 2010 @ AFL-CIO Now Blog

Profiling Is Not A Benign Event:

2010-05-24T15:12:00.001-07:00

From A discussion On FaceBook

Kelly posted on her wall:

I'm baffled & need to vent. Of course we need immigration reform, but why do so many people support Arizona's new law? It legalizes racial profiling! Do people not understand that or do they just not care? I got home from AZ just before this law passed. I could have very well been a victim of such racial profiling as I have been mistaken many times as being hispanic - even by those who are! Ok. I'm done

A posted comment:

"Have you really READ it? Mexico has harsher laws than us. Why should we allow illegals to continue to live off of us?"

In response to this comment Kelly said:

"Sure did. For anyone else who wants to read it: http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf
We need to harshly punish those greedy American employers that exploit them - not those trying to survive and put food on the table. Not someone that might…. look like they are illegal. What does an illegal immigrant look like? There's no excuse for racial profiling and it should never be okay for someone to be questioned by police because that officer thought they looked illegal. There's nothing that makes it okay.
California and the southwest were built in large part by undocumented Mexican immigrants. Of course back then I guess Americans didn't mind letting them to cross back and forth over the border as long as they gave us cheap labor?
From the Dept of Homeland Security: Around 75% of today's immigrants have legal permanent (immigrant) visas; of the 25% that are undocumented, 40% overstayed temporary (non-immigrant) visas. Undocumented immigrants estimated to be less than 2% of the US population.
We close factories here and ship American jobs overseas to Mexico (WalMart is great at forcing suppliers to move factories/jobs overseas). We then pay Mexicans subpar wages. Their country does not have the same safety & environmental standards as the U.S. so they are forced to work in unsafe and unhealthy conditions on a wage that they can't live on in their own country. So they do what our ancestors did - come to America looking for an opportunity. An opportunity to survive.
We contribute to their problems in their own country, make it more difficult for them to come here legally, yet illegally pay them under the table to do hard work for low wages, and then criminalize them for doing what we made possible? And in the process stereotype them and anyone that looks like they might 'fit the profile'?
I see a lot of people joining the FaceBook group "If you hurt my daughter I'll make your death look like an accident" and other similar groups. I hear statements from parents like that all the time. I thought that meant parents would do what they had to in order to keep their families alive and safe? Parent or not - I think a lot of us might think differently if roles were reversed...if we had to choose between barely surviving at home or trying to make a better life for ourselves elsewhere. It's easy to say "I would still follow the law" when we sit in cozy houses, eat 3 meals a day, take our vacations and enjoy the 'better life'.
Yes, there is a problem with the way things are currently. Yes, immigration reform is needed. Yes, illegal immigration needs to end. But racial profiling does not solve the problem, but rather feeds hatred and creates new problems. I may have gotten out of Arizona before they legalized racial profiling, but I still might just get the chance to be victimized since an Indiana senator thinks we need such laws here.
Who are the victims? American and Immigrant workers. Who profits and created this system/problem - American corporations. We are attacking the wrong group."

I added:

"...villianizing hard working people for trying to support their family is just so un-Christian and un-American, especially when this law does more to promote profiling and animosity than it does to stop illegal immigration.
You stop illegal immigration at the border first and then you do something to break the cycle of exporting American jobs to third world nations and enticing illegal immigrants to come north for under the table wages. Focusing enforcement on the immigrants while ignoring the over-riding factors is like prosecuting the drug user but ignoring the drug pushers and suppliers. In this case the drug pusher and supplier being corporations, business men and individuals who exploit the immigrant [legal and illegal] to save a buck and avoid paying decent wages to American workers.
Ever notice how we don't have a major illegal immigration problem with our neighbors to the north? That's because when they come here looking for jobs they expect to make the same wages as us. They also aren't tempted to come here illegally because their wages, benefits, environmental laws, and safety regulations at home are similar to ours. Unlike in Mexico and other third world economies. Yet in most of our treaties with these countries they are supposed to establish such standards and enforce them, but American and Global corporations ship their manufacturing operations there specifically because we don't enforce those treaties."

Kelly added, in response to another comment:

I would have to add though, because I wasn't in AZ for pleasure the mental, emotional and physical state I was in (so stressed, disheveled, red teary eyes from constant crying - and I'll admit no shower or change of clothes for a couple of days) could have made me an easier target for 'suspicion'. If stopped I might have lashed out in anger or even just broken down in tears unable to speak clearly if at all. They would have made things worse. But it's the mere fact of being stopped and suspected that begins the victimization - just because you are let go doesn't take that sting away.
I remember vividly an incident as a child that still bothers me to this day. My dad and I were walking around downtown at some festival together. We were laughing and joking and having a good time. But the police stopped us because they wanted to make sure I was supposed to be with him. Why? Obviously because he's Caucasian and I'm not. Sure they asked me if I knew him and they took my word for it and let us go.....but it still hurt and I still remember it. The mere difference in the color of our skin was enough in their minds to stop us. Never mind the happy mood we were in. I wasn't crying, scared or sending out vibes for help. If I were Caucasian would they have stopped us - absolutely not. It's no different than the watchful eyes that are on me when I sometimes go into stores that don't get many 'minorities'. I actually experienced that in AZ (and that was when I was leaving and was more put together). It is sad that once I speak and/or pull out the wallet that seems to fade.
My frustration of course comes from the fact that the real root cause of the problems aren't addressed. That all the major players aren't held accountable. Why? Because for corporate America the current situation is ideal for them - they created it. So the 'answer' is to give the American workers a little something to make them feel better and think we are being looked out for. Give them a little cookie to hold them over. While we dodge the real problems and solutions that could really benefit the actual victims - those same American workers AND the immigrants workers."
"A new class we should all have to take in school "Walk a day in someone less fortunate shoes - a lesson in compassion and gratitude". It could take the place of Gym. :)"

In response to another comment pointing out that because Kelly spoke perfect English, if stopped, she would have immediately been allowed to proceed I wrote:

"If Kelly had been profiled and stopped in AZ and had broken down and lashed out at the police officer I don't believe that her speaking fluent English would have guaranteed anything. Having been to several South American countries and Caribbean islands there is no shortage of English speaking inhabitants. The whole argument about 'speak English' is part of the stereotype that makes profiling guesswork. Kelly's grandmother is German and has lived in America for over 40 years and spoke English when she came here, but many people still have trouble understanding her. [Did you know that along with this law in AZ the state has decreed that Spanish/English teachers with a heavy accent are being targeted for removal as teachers even though the main reason they were hired was because there was a shortage of non-Hispanic teachers who could speak Spanish?]
The people who wrote this law defend the profiling language as not really profiling and says that it doesn't allow profiling. If you take out the profiling aspect just what does the law do? By there own explanation its a tough law that does nothing? It certainly does nothing to address the problem of illegal immigration. The law at the very least encourages and allows racial profiling and at the most, and this is the most important, it institutionalizes racial profiling.
Most police departments are reluctant to get involved in immigration enforcement because it eats up the time, resources and budgets and takes them away from actually fighting crime and enforcing the law. Most police experts denounce racial profiling as less than a science because it is ineffective and tends to discourage effective police work. And last but not least it causes problems.
What if on that day Kelly and I were downtown I had become irate or upset with the police? They said they had received a call and had to investigate and I gave them the benefit of the doubt and cooperated. I figured some resentful person probably did make the call and the demeanor of the officers was such that as long as Kelly was in site I felt the best thing to do was cooperate. I didn't like it at all though. But what if I wasn't in such a good mood, what if Kelly wasn't having fun but was hot, tired and irritable? What if the officers were two butt heads with an attitude and yes there are cops who range from being unpleasant to downright arrogant and short fused. The problem with profiling and random stops is that many of the arrest and conflicts that arise are not related to the original intent of the stop, it is the stop itself or a secondary, resulting, event that leads to arrest or conflict. Kelly was tearing up during the encounter but if her crying had gotten worse, if they had put her in the squad car or tried to remove her from my site would I have just stood there? If any of those things happened I would probably ended up in handcuffs and an upsetting incident would have ended up a traumatic incident. Even though charges MIGHT have been dropped I would have been arrested on a charge unrelated to the stop. In the absence of any suspicious behavior, a father or daughter downtown having fun on a sunny day is not suspicious, we were stopped because of our 'racial' relationship and a great day was tarnished. Racial profiling is not a benign event. It creates and fosters animosity, conflict and tensions between the police, the profiled community and the community as a whole. The racial profiling of suspected illegals will result in more legal immigrants and born Americans being targeted than it will in apprehension of illegals."

Kelly McKinney & Glenn Littrell

Even law enforcement officials in Arizona are speaking out against SB 1070, also known as the “papers please” law. from AP

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Latino 911!

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor

Tea Party

Resources:

The Better Angels of Our Nature Arizona's immigration law offers us a choice between two longstanding traditions in U.S. history: fighting for human rights or looking away while they're eroded. Which side will you be on?
Fact Check: Undocumented Immigrants Don't Take Jobs From American Workers
Does Immigration Cost Jobs? Economists say immigration, legal or illegal, doesn't hurt American workers.
Q&A: Illegal Immigrants and the U.S. Economy
Mayoral Candidate: Indianapolis Should Boycott Arizona: Jose Evans: Arizona Law Discriminatory
The Labor Movement’s Framework for Comprehensive Immigration Reform: “…immigration reform must fully protect U.S. workers, reduce the exploitation of immigrant workers and reduce employers’ incentive to hire undocumented workers rather than U.S. workers…”
Trumka: Immigration Reform Crucial For New Economy: The United States needs a new economic strategy to replace the failed model of the past 30 years–
Fact Sheet: Setting the Record Straight on Border Crime: Border States Are Safe Today and Only Getting Safer

Additional Notes: