Right As Usual

The term "scandalous" has lost much of its panache; in a time when big-name politicians can, without a blush, blatantly lie about matters related to their office, does the word have any meaning for the public? Apparently so.  At least, when the scandals pile up upon each other, and the president is so gauche as to threaten one of the Holy Media. The interesting thing about looking at the record is that it's hard to cage the examination.  Once started, the press has begun to fall over themselves to be the first to point out THE SAME OUTRAGES THE CONSERVATIVES HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT FOR OVER 4 YEARS! Sorry for the caps; I just lose it, sometimes. In no specific order: The AP government snooping scandal. The drone war - when Rand Paul (that's the son, who appears both rational and electable) filibustered, asking for answers about apparently unconstitutional killing of American citizens without due process, for the media, it was all a big yawn.   He's still a...

This year, I have 2 vets to remember. The first, my dad, was in WWII.  He served in the artillery, which likely contributed to the major hearing loss he suffered from in his senior years.  Even when younger, he consistently turned the TV to a fairly loud setting. I've spent some time looking into his service - apparently, his unit was moved around a bit, and the command changed several times.  He did serve in the Battle of the Bulge.  He told my mother (she later told me) that he had seen some of the survivors of the concentration camps; it so haunted him that he buried the memory for years. He mostly told funny stories of his time in the war: Cutting across a minefield to avoid being late for dinner Coming across a barn with SS uniforms left behind.  He and his buddy tried them on, and admired their panache.  He almost got shot by another soldier who saw the uniform - fortunately, the other soldier fooling around was his buddy, Red, and the hair made the soldier hesitate in pu...

...walk a mile in his shoes. Have you ever talked about someone you KNOW is EVIL - a RACIST, a GAY-HATER, a HATE-THE-POOR person? Someone, like, perhaps, Rush Limbaugh? In other words, you've judged them. Fair enough. You actually listened to what they had to say, and made your decision. Oh, you didn't? You never listened to them (for more than a few seconds), read their writings, or interacted with them in any way? Then, how do you know all that about them? From other people? Who, maybe, made their decision on the basis of NO information? Gee, sounds like pre-judgement to me. Which, you may realize, is the same as prejudice. Folks, I don't like Obama's policies, character, or actions. But, before I made a decision about him, I learned about him. I read Dreams From My Father AND The Audacity of Hope. I listened to what he had to say. Only after that, did I make a judgement. In other words, I EARNED the right to decide about his character, his actions, his philosophy. Wh...

It's been a long year. I've been watching the employment figures, which make no sense compared to the people I know. According to the stats on unemployment, we are improving steadily. But, when I compare that "improvement" with people I know to be looking for work - the numbers just don't match. Certainly, SOME people are improving their situation. I've gotten a job in the last year, my husband has likewise moved from unsteady part-time jobs to full-time. Even my son, a young man in the middle of the Guess-what-just-fell-in-on-me group of White, skilled semi-unemployed males, has FINALLY moved to a full-time job. They liked him at work - they just couldn't afford to pay him more, or give him more hours, until their business improved. Which, finally, it has. But, we're the exceptions. Most long-term unemployed or underemployed are NOT finding full-time work. For Conservatives, the answer is self-evidently Obamacare. Liberals dispute this. Perhaps...