Tag Archives: Politics

by

And Then Comes Marriage

Rumor has it, the Supreme Court will rule on gay marriage today. I wanted to get ahead of this with a reiteration of my prediction in hopes that I’m correct. This will be a 2 parter, if the decision does come in after I post this for a reaction piece. All eyes of people that care will be watching for this ruling, that either way will upset a mass ton of people.

I believe in people who love each other should be able to get married. Back when marriage was just a conversation between myself and my husband, I didn’t understand why we should get married. What makes me so special that I can marry whomever I want, but other people can’t. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that “I won’t get married until everyone can get married”, because I think that’s a cop-out people use so they don’t have to get married. I didn’t understand why it’s necessary for me to get married. I’ve been married for nearly 2 years, and I still don’t really understand. Nothing has changed between us in our relationship, except that now we’re legally bound together until we pay a large price to divorce and I had to change my last name. (Why is divorce so expensive? Because it’s worth it.) That doesn’t take away from people who idealize a process like marriage as something in their dreams.

417711_10150588848513107_1129203482_nBut on that token, shouldn’t every American be allowed that dream? This picture is hilarious, but it’s true. Last time I spoke about this, I pointed out that just a few decades ago I wouldn’t have been allowed to marry my husband since he isn’t a White male. Now today, it’s essentially the same fight. Legally, what’s the big deal? I accept that people have moral oppositions to this as a result of religious beliefs. But I recall that religion shouldn’t  have a bearing on legal matters. We live in a land of law with religion, not religious law. No one is asking you to get married to a partner of the same gender, we’re simply asking that you leave people’s bedroom alone.

My theory is that the Supreme Court will legalize it, using the grounds of the Supreme Court legalized interracial marriage in 1967 stating that “anti-miscegenation” laws were unconstitutional. Telling someone they couldn’t marry another person was unconstitutional, and marriage is a right we have as humans. I end with this quote on interracial marriage and slyly point out that the justice never specified “man” or “woman” in the decision, he simply said “person”. Granted he was only speaking about race, but I can hope. From Wikipedia:

Chief Justice Earl Warren‘s opinion for the unanimous court held that:

“ Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
by

Go Get Your Special Vote On.

Tomorrow in Massachusetts, we have a special election on who to replace the “Turd”. Wait, or was he the “D”? I’m not sure, South Park never really specified so I get confused. Either way, John Kerry has the highly coveted and non-controversial title of “Secretary of State”, leaving us with another special election. Last time this happened, Republican Scott Brown upset the favorite Democrat Martha Coakley. Will there be a repeat upset of Gomez over Markey? The excitement is brewing, I can’t wait to see that hockey game. Wait, I’m confused again. It’s an election, not a sporting event. Or… is it?

I kid. But who do we vote for? I watch the commercials and pegged Markey as an early winner, only based on the fact that the majority of people are easily swayed by television and I’ve only really seen Markey on TV. But his hair bothers me, he reminds me of Donald Trump. I don’t think I want to vote for him because of his hair. Then… then I saw a Gabriel Gomez commercial mocking Markey and I admit I laughed pretty hard at it. After seeing that commercial, the answer seems so simple. Go Gomez!

But seriously, I do go to Wikipedia to spell out the stances people have on issues because no one else seems to want to tell me what’s going on. I know, politicians flip-flop all the time but I want a basis here. So I look at Gomez’s positions, and he seems very similar to Scott Brown. Okay, I voted for Scott Brown so that might not be a bad place to start. Then, I look at Markey. Nothing.  What does he stand for? His ads just tell me he is a guy who’s served in Washington, D.C for way too many years where nothing got done and that Gabriel Gomez is a terrible person by using half soundbites for his purpose. Okay, I’m a Democrat and according to the rules of today I should stand behind Markey because “he’s my peeps”. I’m not sure I can. I’m not sure of anything political really.

So come tomorrow, what do I do? Do I vote for Gomez? Do I vote for Markey? Do I even bother voting and stay home and eat junk food while watching Criminal Minds I have DVR’ed on every channel that plays it? Does it even really matter who I vote for? Which one is less likely to be bought off to the highest bidder? I’m not entirely sure, I might suck it up and vote for Gomez because I like someone who says “just because I don’t believe it in, doesn’t mean it should be illegal”. Maybe I should pass, because who says he’ll keep that stand when actually put into office. What this comes down to is “which one of these people has my interests and the interests of Massachusetts in mind” when we vote tomorrow. Do we give a guy a chance, or do we allow a guy that’s failed us before stay there to fail us? (I’m basing this solely on the fact that neither party has done anything in our benefit.) I’m not sure, but I might say “screw it” and see if some new blood changes things. Then watch him lose re-election because he didn’t vote the way the party wanted him to so no one funded his re-election campaign because heaven forbid someone was actually watching out for the people they promised to help.

by

Politics and Hypocrisy: A Joint Proposition?

I can’t understand politicians sometimes. Okay, it’s not just sometimes. Maybe it’s not the politicians’ fault. Maybe the blame falls entirely with the political process and ideals. Are they really flip-floppers or is it just that the stances they stand up for just contradict each other? This isn’t going to be a debate about whether or not certain topics are right or wrong, this isn’t about political parties or propaganda telling you that one set of beliefs are better than another. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever as long as they respect that in you. And having some factual evidence other than “because it’s a Democrat/Republican” view, because that really pisses me off. Nothing is right just because it goes with the party you register for, the whole “Party” system is a sham and shouldn’t exist because people don’t want to educate themselves on issues and not the letter next to a person’s name. (I still stand by what I said at election time too: get rid of the (R/D) next to the person’s name on the ballot and make people either chose on merit, or go in blind and kick themselves for “voting wrong” later. If you can’t be bothered to educate yourself before stepping into that poll box, you had it coming. This also isn’t a Sarah Palin bashing post, she just happens to be the example I used because I saw her in the news over the weekend give a speech.

Back to the main point. Over the weekend, they gave a snippet of her speech saying “the government is getting way too big and intruding into parts of our lives they shouldn’t be. I agree, the government is involved in our lives more than it should be. Turns out, that’s all we agree on. (I’ll get to that in a minute.) Who decides what line is “too intrusive”? What we eat? Who we love? What control do we have over our bodies and which does the government have right to? It’s all a bit confusing.

She believes abortion and gay marriage should not be legal. Wouldn’t those be intrusive and personal decisions that the government is overreaching into? What makes those intrusions less important than Mayor Bloomberg say, banning a Big Gulp? What’s that line? Because you can’t have it both ways. There’s no harm in letting people marry the person they love. And abortion is wrong because you’re playing God and murdering a living being? Then why is the death penalty acceptable? You’re playing God with that living being.

The moral of the story is political positions lack complete logical thought to me. Maybe it’s just me and I don’t fully understand the positions these political parties take. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and consider that I’m missing an important link here. But I think that the problem with politics is that these contradictory ideals makes them seem hypocritical.

by

Why Do We Even Bother?

Every time I read the news or watch a news program, I’m guaranteed to have more questions than answers. Usually not always questions like “oh why does that even matter?” or “I don’t get what they are trying to say”. Usually they involve more of “seriously?” or “why?”. Is it a result of inadequate reporting on every news outlet? (I specify every because I want no misconceptions of what I mean, because I always point out that I think that they are all shams.) No wonder satirical news websites and television shows do so well: because we figure if we’re going to laugh at the regular news, might as well have one that is purposely trying to be funny. Or… is it that we live in a world that is so “shot to hell” that the news really is that terrible all the time.

First point, arming “rebels” or the “other guys” in Syria. (As always, I preface this commentary with I’m not a political or war genius, but these are questions the everyman/everywoman should be asking.) If there’s something we probably should have learned by now, it’s that training and arming “rebels” anywhere is a terrible idea. Why? I point out about Osama and the Soviet War in Afghanistan. Sure, we didn’t train them but we sent money and weapons to help them. And we all know that worked out well in our advantage 30 years later… oh, wait. It didn’t. It’s a hard position to be in, because there are innocent people caught in the middle of this but what would happen if we went in and fought a war? Those innocent people are really going to be harmed no matter which way this table turns. And how do we even know who the good guys are? Are there even any good guys to help? Or are we just going to flip a coin to decide which side is “less bad”.

And then there’s the IRS thing. As if there’s not enough actual problems with them, now they need to make more scandals up? I saw a news report about how the IRS are getting semi-automatic guns and being trained how to use them. “That’s a terrible idea” it was said. “Why do we want an organization that’s targeting the conservatives to have weapons? Oh, they keep having accidents with those weapons. I don’t get it.” I don’t get it either. It’s okay an everyday person to have any gun they want without training, but let’s not give a gun to a Federal Employee and train them so they don’t do something stupid with it. Have you seen how some people react when they get their taxes done? I’d want a gun if I were an accountant or IRS agent. Let’s stick to what they actually did wrong and get them on that. You really don’t need to make something up to make it known they did a terrible thing. Maybe next we shouldn’t allow a President to have a gun because “why does he need one?” Though, I suppose with there still being people out there who thing Obama is a sleeper terrorist, they probably don’t want him to have a gun either. Welcome to America, where they will fight for Gun Rights for everyone because it’s a constitutional right,  but not the IRS.

On a final note, I would like to thank the Supreme Court for announcing that a big company cannot patent my highly sought after ginger/alcoholic genes. I know, it’s a heartbreak to everyone that wanted access to my awesomeness. It’s really more of a surprise that the Supreme Court had to rule on whether or not my genetic makeup could be used by a big company to profit from while I get nothing but “stabby stabbies” by doctors for an obscene amount of money. Really? What next, they can take my eggs and patent them. Oh, I know… they can make me take an ultrasound on my own dime for a medical procedure they have no business being involved in to begin with… oh.. wait.

Happy Friday Readers, and enjoy your weekend. And make sure you get the men in your life a videogame or some other gadget to make them happy for Father’s Day, they really hate ties.

by

The Generation of Apathy

The Generation of Apathy, those are the now twenty-somethings and increasingly getting older. We’re the ones who don’t believe in our politicians or political process enough to vote, and the ones that believe that the only real news reporters on television are Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. We’re the generation in between the ones that believe in partisanship… wait, I meant bi-partisanship. Now people are growing into a world where different news channels only focus on whatever political agenda they want, completely disregarding that so many people are fed up with being told what to think that they don’t trust anyone in politics or news.

All I ever hear are talking points. During the election, all I had to hear was how Ronald Reagan was the greatest president who had ever lived, and Romney was going to be our nation’s next Ronald Reagan. I don’t dispute whether or not he was a great president, though I believe he was as good as presidents can be. What I wonder is, if he was so great how come he wasn’t mentioned at all during the previous administrations during their crises. I didn’t hear about how he was Clinton’s moral opposite, or how he would’ve handled the start of the downfall of the economy at the end of Bush’s terms when bailouts started happening. I didn’t even hear about how awesome he was during Obama’s first term, until the election time came and it was “Reagan Time”. I wonder how many of those Hollywood Communists he nabbed we actually Communists. Do I mean this? Not really sure I don’t have the proper information on the validity of this point.

Now, it’s all about Nixon. Richard Nixon was a horrible person with scandals up the wazoo and Obama is the new Nixon. Every time they bring up any of the scandals, all you hear is Nixon. It’s now “Nixon Time”. Nixon was a smart man, but a corrupt and paranoid one. He is the Republican Obama. Or is Obama the Democratic Nixon? I don’t quite think they have that part of it worked out, but I’ll be sure to pay attention to see.  Obama is almost as bad as Nixon, they say. Worse then, Nixon never let people die. Nixon… Reagan… Nixon. They need to slow down, the way that people don’t know the difference between Chenya and the Czech Republic, I’d be concerned they’d mix up the two.

My point is I’m tired of it. I’m tired of being told what to think, and there should be more people upset by this. It isn’t a Republican or Democratic issue, it’s an American one. We need to actually be informed by our journalists, not made a part of a grand agenda saying one party is more corrupt than another. We need to be able to trust our politicians to do what’s right for us, their constituents, the ones who voted for them not filled their pockets with an obscene amount of money to push through whatever the highest bidder wants. They are the reason the Apathy Generation exists.

by

All About Politics, and the People Who Discuss Them (Rejected Blog Post)

I watch the news daily, I read about current events. I cry a little when I read the top headlines, because rather than any news of substance I see things like “_____ celebrities ate tacos”. I don’t care if some celebrity was walking around with a Cheeto bag, and when I do care I will read “Celebrity” news, not the top headlines of the day. Actual news should be separate from useless nonsense. It’s not hard to wonder why American’s need to be told “Chechnya is an entirely different nation than the Czech Republic”. All foreigners are the same and celebrities are more important than current events. Amurica. (Purposeful and sarcastic misspelling.) So this brings me to an Election Day post I rejected. I agree with the main point of “celebrities need to worry about being celebrities”, but I felt the post felt flat otherwise. Happy Friday!

I watch the news to see the pundits argue out their points. I watch entertainment to be entertained. I watch the Daily Show and Colbert Report to be entertained by comedians mocking the news. I don’t watch an interview with a celebrity to hear their political views, I want to hear about their new movie or something funny that happened while filming said movie. Likewise, I don’t want to hear a politician giving a review about a movie. I don’t care what they think. It’s great that they want to indulge themselves in whatever philanthropic pursuits they wish or is the “in” cause. It’s good that they incite the masses to donate whatever time, money and resources we have to help others and some of them actually put their money where their mouths are. That’s using their celebrity for good.

However, I don’t care who you vote for or what your political views are. You’re actors/singers/models, there to entertain. I will listen to your songs, political or not, because I like them and not because I want to vote for whomever you’re voting for. I don’t want to listen to an actor telling me what to do in elections, I pay you to at least decently act in whatever movie I’m choosing to see. I’m glad you’re voting. But I don’t care if you tell me to vote for Obama or Romney, because your opinion doesn’t matter to me and I’ll take whatever you see with the same grain of salt I’ll take the major news channels on their election information.

So my lovely celebrities, save your money from those commercials you make to try to sway our vote. I don’t care how many Academy Awards you have, reasonable people won’t vote for people because you tell them to. Everyone (whether they admit it or not) has pretty much decided how they are voting. Most of them are just going to vote along party lines like good little ducklings following along. And those that aren’t voting “the way they should” are probably too smart to care what an overpaid privileged celebrity says about elections or really just don’t care about voting. Maybe you should put that money someplace useful, like the open pantry or soup kitchens or battered women shelters.

by

Guns Kill Immigrants? No Wait… Immigrants Kill Guns?

How I feel personally about immigration and gun control are irrelevant here. This isn’t a debated of “why I think guns should be legal/illegal/assault rifles banned” because I honestly think the politicians rooting for gun control are just appeasing masses that are traumatized by events like the Aurora movie theater shooting or the Newtown school shooting. Maybe they think “trying” to pass reform will make people feel better. News flash: it doesn’t. If politicians really wanted to make a change, they would do it and not spend 10 years talking about doing it.

Maybe I’m cynical. No, I take that back. I know I’m cynical. I don’t trust politicians, I repeat that every time I bring up politics but it never becomes less true. They sit and talk about a topic of relevance until they are blue in the face, and share how they are going to wave a magical wand and fix everything. They’re not fixing anything, unless by fixing it  you mean “further ruining”. Then, when the smoke clears away from that topic of relevance they move onto another “we need to fix this” discussion. With that said, a lot of talk about gun control and immigration confuse me. Maybe you can help explain this to me logically? (Not really, I already know the answer.)

In arguments about gun control, people anti-gun control argue about “what good is background checks? Bad guys are going to do bad things anyways. Why check out good guys?” I would have argued back “do you really need a gun that exact second you go into the store that you can’t wait until they make sure you’re not a psychopath?” I agree, if people want guns enough they are going to get them. But people are still going to get their hands on bombs, so should we legalize that? (That line came from something I watched, don’t ask what because I forgot. Point is, that wasn’t an original idea.) Now, follow me for a minute. In the immigration bill coming out, they are asking for people to have background checks before entering into this country. Because people won’t just come here anyways without people knowing because that’s never happened before. Right? So… why background check immigrants and not people with guns? Are you trying to tell me that an immigrant needs a background check to come here, but can get a gun no problem?

Logically, it doesn’t make sense to me. To me, if you background check one maybe you should check the other. That makes sense to me. I don’t think you can take guns off the street, I also don’t think you can keep people from illegally coming here. People are going to get guns and murder other people. People are going to still do drugs, so shouldn’t we just legalize them too? Actually, if you tax them maybe that wouldn’t be a bad idea. The point is simple though, what makes background checks amazingly intelligent in one scenario, but an incredibly stupid one in another. Maybe registries aren’t a bad idea in both cases. Maybe you can think about this topic and let me know.

by

When Facebook Campaigns

It seemed like most people I knew changed their profile picture on Facebook to the red and pink equal sign. This made Facebook gaming difficult since some games only give you a profile picture, not a name, to send scores and such too. A minor inconvenience for the greater good of a cause, I’m sure. I don’t follow into these sort of things. When I think “man there’s a cause I need to support”, my first thought isn’t to change my profile picture on Facebook like everyone else to stand for a cause. I’m more of a doer, not a sit back and change my picture for a cause to show I’m involved. I don’t like to be a follower. I also don’t like Facebook trends like that. People think it matters and seem to pressure you into doing it by either bully (“do this or you have no soul.”) or by the simple psychological warfare that is “peer pressure”. No, I don’t support bullying or think cancer is awesome. But I don’t need to repost something every day to prove it.

I promise, that long-winded rant isn’t the point of this blog. I just really needed to say that. The real point was that these people were banding together in support of equal rights. I’ve posted many times on this blog about gay marriage, and I really don’t hide my support for this. This current trend of support has its reasons though: this week gay marriage is on the docket at the Supreme Court. Will they ban Proposition 8? Is the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional? Everyone is wondering which way they’re going to go with the decisions, and I flip-flopped on my opinion of what the court was going to decide. At first, I felt that the courts would just leave the issue up to the states and washing their hands of this controversial topic. After hearing some soundbites, I decided I was wrong. I believe the courts will legalize gay marriage. They will decide that what happens in the bedroom isn’t anyone’s business.

I changed my theory when I realized that at some point, interracial marriage wasn’t allowed. As someone who is happily married in an interracial marriage, I realize that my life would be completely different if it was still illegal. Thankfully, people fought for me to have the right to marry anyone I want of any race I want in and in 1967 they said that preventing this was unconstitutional. On that same idea, gay rights today is what the civil rights movement was back in the 60’s. With that precedent, it makes sense that the courts would come back saying banning gay marriage is unconstitutional. Let’s hope common sense pulls through.

I’m a firm believer that we all deserve the pursuit of happiness. The constitution promises this. There’s really no religious reason not to allow it, when you consider that religion tells you to love your fellow people. I hate to think that religion tries to teach us love, but preaches so much hate. You say the government should stay out of our lives, that the government is too intrusive in personal liberties by not allowing people to not have health insurance or guns, but telling people who they can marry is apparently perfectly fine? Then you should take a hard look at your reasoning. I hope they make a fair decision and stay out of the business of telling people who they can love and marry.

by

I’d Like to Thank the Academy…

I admit it, I watched the Oscars last night. Albeit on DVR so I could fast forward through everything but Seth MacFarlane and the few categories I cared to see. (And as much as I love Jennifer Lawrence, that fall needed to be seen.) The benefit is when MacFarlane stops being funny, as he often can, you can just skip him. DVR is great, it really is great. I enjoyed it though, as much as one can enjoy one of those things.

Like everything else, politics end up the main discussion of the event. Rather than Jennifer Lawrence’s fall or Seth MacFarlane’s hosting job, all I hear is how Zero Dark Thirty lost as part of a grand conspiracy against Republicans to solidify the “Evil Liberals” as the most powerful people in the world. I’ll have to see the movies, but I’ve heard from people I know that love movies that Argo just was more entertaining. Maybe I’m a dumb Liberal, but I want to see movies that entertain me. I must be naïve to think that there’s a reason it’s called “the entertainment industry”. Silly me.

I don’t like it when a celebrity tries to tell me who to vote for. I want the to entertain me, not boss me around in the field of politics. They should be separated, and I’m tired of people not separating certain things from politics. I don’t choose to watch a movie because a Democrat wrote it/directed/starred in it (though they tell me odds are there are more in Hollywood than Republicans), nor would I refuse to watch one because a Republican does. Why? Because I’m a free thinking adult that just likes to see movies and television shows that entertain me.

There’s too much focus on politics where there shouldn’t be. I said this at election time and it’s still true today: just because someone doesn’t agree politically with you, doesn’t mean they are bad people. Life would be boring if we were all the same. Not every thing is a grand conspiracy to brainwash the masses, though the jury is still out on that topic in terms of all news organizations. Entertainment is entertainment. If Paul Ryan can like Rage Against the Machine, I think Liberals can like Zero Dark Thirty.

by

I’m Not Proud To Be An American

The sad part of my title is that some radical people will read this because they will think I mean this because of who won our election. I can assure you that you should stop reading now if that’s what you think. This post will have nothing to do with who won the election, but more the attitudes that came about afterwards. It’s what happened afterwards that frankly sickened me, and made me lose faith in our country’s people and made me think about how I’m not proud of what I saw.

For example, I voted for Scott Brown despite the fact that people think because I’m a Democrat I should only vote that way. Most of my friends that admitted their vote voted for Elizabeth Warren. It never once crossed my mind that their vote should affect my friendship with them. They were still my friends, and I still love them dearly. I didn’t immediately insult them for disagreeing with me, I didn’t automatically defriend them on Facebook because they didn’t believe as I did. I acknowledge that as an American, it was our right to vote how we did without fear of how people will treat us after.

Elections seem to bring out the worst in people. I even wonder if the election didn’t just allow us to see people for who they truly were. It sickened me reading the social media and seeing the hate that both sides spewed. This intolerance for people exercising their rights was disgusting. I wondered where America went so wrong that because you checked off the wrong person’s name on the ballot, people were able to call you appalling things. You are not an idiot for whoever you voted for as long as you made an informed decision based on your beliefs. You are an idiot, the kinder of words I have for you, if you feel that your vote was better than another persons because you didn’t agree with them.

I’m not sure if there’s anyone to blame for this. All the major new channels obviously backed candidates and I think are the main cause of this. They spewed nothing but hate for either side of the alley. MSNBC never once mentioned that Romney could be a great president and why he would be. Fox News never once said anything positive about Obama and some even shunned Republicans who had. I don’t think politicians are entirely to blame for this; it’s hard to work across the aisle when you have people watching you to hate you if you do. The downward spiral is this.

This makes me think there’s a new sort of hatred in America that might even be worse than racism or homophobia. It scares me that we might be coming to a point where you won’t get hired for a job, not because of your race, gender or sexual orientation but for the way you’re registered to vote. It makes me sick to think that people might disown their family members because they voted for Romney/Obama. I think more people need to be outraged about how we’re treating each other than who won the election, because we should be ashamed of ourselves for behaving this way. This isn’t what America is, this is what those countries we look down on because they don’t have a democracy.