Why abortion will not be made illegal.

Because Republicans need it. It's how they get elected. That and gay marriage, of course. But if they lost these two very important issues, people would have to consider other reasons to vote for them, and frankly, they are dying on every other issue.
The democrats are killing them on Social Security. The Republicans killed themselves over the Terry Schiavo dibacle. They're having major ethics issues. (not that people notice because they're still whining over Clinton lying about getting a BJ) They're just losing ground. Unfortunately people will keep voting for them because they think they'll help get abortion made illegal.
Now, I've already stated my opinion on what good making abortions illegal will do. But, unfortunately most people are unable to think about this issue rationally.
I know there will be other social issues to come about to force people to vote republican. Right now I can't think of anything as big as these two. We can't go back to hating minorities so I'm not sure who we'll hate next. (And don't try to tell me the gay marriage thing isn't about hate, because that's exactly what it is. Can we say 4/5 of a person?)

He voted against it so he could vote for it.

That sounds awefully familiar. But am I talking about John Kerry? No! I'm talking about the Republican Majority Leader, Mr. Bill "Cat Killer" Frist.

Seems that Bill Frist voted agaisnt the cloture vote on Bolton. See the way this works is that the issue can only be brought up again by someone on the WINNING side. So that means someone who voted "nay". So anyway, the point is he voted against it so he could vote for it.

Now I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this. It's standard procedure in the senate. (Although I'm quite sure if it was a democrat, you would think the world was falling and the republicans would be screaming) But anyway, my point is. That sometimes there are perfectly valid reasons for people to switch their vote. But the general American public is incapable of looking into those reasons. If only the democrats would stand up and scream "FLIP-FLOPPER!!!!" Then the world would be truely fair. But unfortunately, the democrats don't do crap like that. Why? Because they don't play as dirty as the republicans. *sigh* I wish they did, though. It's the only way they're ever going to win. It's most unfortunate. But the American public listens to and believes the soundbytes they hear. I was amazed at how many people told me Kerry was a flip-flopper but when I asked them a very simple question... "Why?" They had no answer. They couldn't even make anything up. They had NO idea why they were calling him a flip-flopper. I wish that people would stop watching the conservative media and make up their minds on their own. I'm quite sure that if people started thinking for themselves, the outcomes would be quite different.

Reid Statement

Harry Reid laid out the Democratic agenda to the National Press Club. Read on, I think you'll be impressed. I know I was. It's rather long, but I've posted the whole thing, because I think it's good. For those of you skimmers, I've bolded my favorite parts. I don't even have anything to add to this.

This has been an important week for America. The defeat of the nuclear option was not a victory for any party, but a victory for our Constitution and our country.

As we said from the beginning of this struggle, our fight wasn’t over some obscure rule of the Senate. It was a fight for Americans’ fundamental rights and against the abuse of power.

And I'm here today to say that fight has not ended. It is only beginning.

This week threatened to be one that would undermine our democratic traditions. Instead, it marks a moment when we can finally turn away from government by polarization…and build a government for the people.

Time and again, the American people have seen George Bush and the Republican leadership choose between their partisan interests and the people’s interest. And every time, they have chosen an ideological agenda over an American agenda.

When George Bush and the Republican leadership make their decisions, the whispered wishes of a few right wing activists drown out the pleas of America’s families.

But if the Washington Republicans stopped to listen to the American people, this is what they’d hear:

Americans are sick and tired of getting caught in the crossfire of partisan sniping.

Americans want us to put the common sense center ahead of nonsense .

Americans want us to bring people together, to focus on what we owe to one another, and the responsibilities we share.

And Americans want their agenda – their jobs, their health care, their security – to get back on the front burners of the nation’s agenda.

Americans are coming to realize this Republican Congress is out of touch with the real problems of working families and that the agenda the Republicans are advancing is at odds with what people in this country really care about.

We Democrats have something better to offer. A reform agenda that will cleanse Washington…give power to the people – not special interests…and make sure that everyday Americans and their concerns get back on the Congressional calendar.

Strengthening our national defense. Rebuilding our economy. Providing families with affordable health care. Making America energy independent. Securing our retirement. That’s our agenda. That’s America’s agenda. But the Republican Congress has put all this and more on hold. I hope that now we can finally turn to the people's business.

Six moths have passed since this Republican Congress began and here’s their record:

They spent precious days trying to overturn constitutional principles.

They tried to overturn the decisions of courts and duly elected legislatures in order to insert themselves into one family’s tragedy in Florida.

They all-but disbanded the House Ethics Committee in order to protect the Republican leader from scrutiny – but then were forced to reverse themselves under public pressure.

But perhaps the greatest abuse of power is to have the ability to help but choose to do nothing.

While gas prices have shot past $2 a gallon, this Republican Congress did nothing to lower prices and give families some relief.

At a time that parents are having to tell their children that the family can’t afford to send them to college, this Republican Congress rejected a proposal to make college more affordable.

And even though we have gone eight years without an increase in the minimum wage – the second longest period ever – this Republican Congress rejected an increase that would give the hardest working Americans the chance to provide for their families.

Whether it is rejecting Democratic initiatives to provide medical care to veterans or to return to fiscal responsibility, this Republican Congress’s record is clear: when it comes to answering the call of the far right, it’s “I’ll do it ASAP.” When it comes to doing the people’s business, it’s “take a message.”

Americans deserve a Congress that will use its power to advance American values not a Congress that abuses its power to advance the agenda of a radical few.

We need a common sense reform agenda for the common good. And that starts with defending our nation and making it more secure. As of this month, more time has passed since 9-11 than the time between Pearl Harbor and the defeat of Japan. During those three years and eight months – sixty years ago – we invaded North Africa and Normandy. We freed people from the Philippines to France. Hitler lay dead and Tojo was in chains. We had defeated fascism around the world and had begun to build the new United Nations.

But today Osama bin Laden is still on the loose, our homeland is still not secure, we’re still not energy independent, and – in many ways – Americans are less safe than we were before 9-11.

Democrats are the party of national security. And we have an agenda to defend America from danger. We stand for increasing our military strength by 40,000 troops so we can wage the War on Terror on every front. We stand for securing our borders and bridges, our seaports and airports, our nuclear and chemical plants. We stand for tracking down and securing the loose nuclear weapons that threaten our people. And we will honor our troops and their families by making sure they get the benefits they have earned.

Our common sense reform agenda will take our economy from sluggishness to prosperity. A prosperity where a rising tide lifts the boat of every American who is willing to work hard.

When it comes to the economy, the Washington Republicans offer the same old answers and then try to change the subject. But the growing trade deficit and a runaway national debt that puts us into hock to China and Japan show that this Administration and this Congress have lost control over America’s economic destiny.

Democrats stand ready to win back America’s prosperity. We’ll end the tax breaks that encourage companies to take jobs overseas. Restore fiscal responsibility. Spur innovation. Open the doors to college. And make work pay more than welfare.

And if we want our companies to be ready to compete in the world economy, we have to hold down health care costs. Today, Starbucks spends more on health care than on coffee. Today, GM spends more on health care than on steel. Today, we can’t ask our companies to go head to head with foreign competitors with this burden on their backs.

Our families will never get ahead while they are getting battered down by health care costs that total $10,000 a year.

And our country will never be what it should be as long as the color of your skin or the size of your bank account determines whether your children can see a doctor. We can do better for them. And they are expecting nothing less from us.

Many of the jobs of the future will be jobs that come from new energy saving industries. Today, Japan’s and South Korea’s head start on innovation means they are running away with those jobs. We have to get back in that race.

Americans are getting fed-up every time they go for a fill-up. They know that our reliance on Mideast oil is making America less safe. They want us to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and make this nation energy independent. We can get there – but only if we start putting America’s security and prosperity first.

And Democrats will continue to stop George Bush from privatizing Social Security while we say “yes” to shoring up Americans’ pensions and making our retirement system more secure.

This is our agenda – an agenda for reform, an agenda to do the people’s business. And for them we will continue to fight.

The lines that divide Congress should be between right and wrong, not right and left.

Our enemies should not be those in the other party, but the common threats that face the American community.

Our goal should not be winning the news cycle, but breaking the vicious cycle of political battle and winning a future where all Americans can live out their dreams.

The defeat of the nuclear option shows what is possible when people of good faith – Republicans and Democrats – join hands and put principles ahead of partisanship.

This doesn’t have to be an isolated incident – a momentary ceasefire before Washington’s trench warfare starts up again. Rather it can be a new beginning. Because on issue after issue, there is a common sense center in America that knows what it believes and can’t understand why this Republican Congress won’t get the job done.

Just as there was a bipartisan majority that could not stomach the nuclear option, there is a bipartisan consensus for action on many fronts. And all we need for progress is for President Bush and the Republican leadership to let America’s agenda get its day.

The American people are demanding it. And Democrats are going to be standing in the common sense center to make sure that we get there.

In this Congress, there is a bipartisan consensus for raising the minimum wage – but the White House and the Republican leadership stand in the way.

There is a bipartisan consensus for allowing the prescription drugs to be safely reimported – but the White House and the Republican leadership stand in the way.

And there is a bipartisan consensus for stem cell research that has the potential to help cure diseases such as diabetes and help save American lives. From Nancy Reagan to Orrin Hatch, Republicans have broken ranks to join the common sense center on this important issue.

For four years, President Bush has not vetoed a single piece of legislation. Even when this Republican Congress sent him bill after bill weighed down with pork or special interest subsidies or runaway spending, he chose to keep his veto pen in the drawer.

But now, he is threatening to veto stem cell research. Not because most Americans oppose it. They support it across party lines. President Bush is threatening to veto it because the far right is demanding he do so.

I ask President Bush to step away from the far right and join us in this common sense center, to show he will be part of this new spirit of national consensus by letting stem cell research go forward.

This week’s events mark our chance to forge a common sense center that embraces an American agenda for reform. As Democratic Leader, I will be working aggressively to advance the work the American people sent us to do. And I hope that Republicans of good faith will join with us to get this job done: To strengthen our national security. To make America energy independent. To restore economic prosperity and opportunity. To help our families and business afford their health care. To boost Americans’ retirement security and protect their Social Security.

In the coming weeks and months, I’ll have more to say on all these fronts. But I pledge today, that in everything we do, the lesson of this week – that we can build on the common sense center – will remain front and center.

The nuclear option could have been another long, sad stride down an ever more slippery slope toward partisan crossfire and abuse of power.

Instead, its defeat marks the moment we turned around and began to climb the hill toward a common politics of national purpose and a rebuilding of America's promise.

This journey is our cause – and reaching the top of that hill will mark our real victory.

Thank you.

Refreshing

I must say. This is quite possibly the most refreshing thing I've read in a long time. I promise to support Kraft foods and any other company I hear about that stands up to the evil machine that is Focus on the Family and Co. (Of course Kraft's parent company still contributes most of their money to the Republican party. So are they really for equality, or is it a publicity stunt? Who knows...)

From: Marc Firestone, Executive Vice President, Corporate Counsel and Corporate Secretary, Kraft Foods Inc.

Subject: Kraft's Contribution to 2006 Gay Games

The true test of any commitment is how you respond when challenged. Kraft is experiencing this to a degree right now, as a result of our decision to be one of several contributors to the 2006 Gay Games in Chicago. The games will bring together thousands of athletes in a competition that will take place in our corporate hometown.

In recent days, the company has received many e-mails, the majority of them generated through the America Family Association, which objects to our sponsorship. We also have received calls and e-mails - - not as many, but equally passionate - - thanking us for supporting this event. A member of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley's team said, "We applaud the businesses that are sponsors of the Gay Games, including Kraft Foods."
You may have questions or might have had questions from friends and family about our contribution to this event. While Kraft certainly doesn't go looking for controversy, we have long been dedicated to support the concept and the reality of diversity. It's the right thing to do and it's good for our business and our work environment.

Diversity makes us a stronger company and connects us with the diversity that exists among the consumers who buy our products.

Diversity is more than a word many people like to say. At Kraft we truly respect all kinds of differences. And diversity is not a selective concept. By definition, it's nothing if not inclusive. We respect diversity of ethnicity, gender, experience, background, personal style and yes, sexual orientation and gender identity. Recognizing, respecting and valuing these differences helps us be a more successful business and a workplace where all employees can realize their full potential.

For more than a decade, we have had employee councils that promote our awareness of diversity. The newest of our nine diversity councils is the Rainbow Council, which strives to provide a forum for support and networking among gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender employees; raise awareness within Kraft and promote involvement in the community. Each council has an executive sponsor and I have been the Rainbow Council's sponsor since last year.

Through all of our councils, we support various initiatives that demonstrate how strongly we believe in diversity, through involvement in the community. Our sponsorship of the 2006 Gay Games is one of almost 1,700 cash and in-kind grants we make annually.

It can be difficult when we are criticized. It's easy to say you support a concept or a principle when nobody objects. The real test of commitment is how one reacts when there are those who disagree. I hope you share my view that our company has taken the right stand on diversity, including its contribution to the 2006 Gay Games in Chicago.

Invitro - good, stem cell research - bad

Okay, so I REALLY need someone to explain to me how this isn't hypocritical. PLEASE.

Seems that this Houston couple, J.J. and Tracy Jones traveled to Washington to protest the embryonic stem cell bill. Seems that they are of the opinon that embryos are "human beings from conception." That is a fine argument. Thing is, they just had a child that was from an embryo they adopted. Here's what gets me:

The couple was matched with and adopted 10 unused embryos from a family in Michigan. Three survived the thawing process (the survival rate is about 50 percent), and were implanted in Tracy's womb. One took hold. The whole process cost them about $7,500.

So basically they just destroyed 9 lives to create 1. How is this any different than stem cell research?

So anyway, if someone could explain to me how invitro fertilization is okay but stem cell research isn't I would really appreciate it.

Part of what I do is try to understand why someone else thinks something different. Times like these I just can't even come up with a single reason.

Couple Questions

Okay, so I have some questions for people who are against stem cell research and gay marriage.

1. Embryonic Stem Cell Research
- H.R. 810 passed the house yesterday which amends the Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research (thanks for the heads up, Dena). Now I think that's good. Unfortunately, Bush has already said that if it passes the Senate he will veto it. (I don't find anything in the world more frustrating than the blockage of science that has happened since Bush has been in office)
- Okay, so here's my question. In this bill, there are three limitations on the embryos used. (1) the stem cells were derived from human embryos donated from in vitro fertilization clinics for the purpose of fertility treatment and were in excess of the needs of the individuals seeking such treatment; (2) the embryos would never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded; and (3) such individuals donate the embryos with written informed consent and receive no financial or other inducements.
Why shouldn't we do research on them that could potentially help people with Alzheimers and Parkinsons, and potentially many other illnesses. Now if you've never known someone with one of these illnesses, I MIGHT understand. But let me tell you, it sucks. I think it ridiculous that researchers should be kept from finding potential cures simply because someone would prefer the embryo just be destroyed instead of letting some good come out of it.
Anyway, I want to know what people think. And please don't give me the "slippery slope" argument. I've taken logic, and I don't want any fallacies here, please.

2. Gay Marriage
- What is your opinion on a man, say, who's had gender reassignment and is now a woman marrying a man? Technically this is still a man marrying a man. But this man is now a woman, so it's a woman marrying a man. Does this "distroy the institution of marriage"?

Okay, so I know nobody reads this so I won't get any response, so I guess these questions are just for myself. *sigh*

Oh, I have a suggestion. How about if scientific advances are made with stem cell research and cures for some of these problems are found. Anyone on record as being against it isn't allowed to use the benefits.
I really think that we should start a system of accountability in this country. If you are for the war, you go fight the war. You are agaisnt science, you don't get to use science. I think it would really make people think twice before supporting/not supporting issues. (no, i'm not joking, yes, I'm being 100% serious)

Tax Cuts

I'm always amused by middle class folks who boast about their tax cuts. They have no idea what is really happening to them.
The Bush tax cuts were really a tax cut for the wealthy and a backdoor tax increase for the middle class, and here's why:

The average tax cut for the middle 20% of Americans was $289. (Source)

College tuition has increased %38 since Bush took office. (Source)

Bush has decreased the amount of student financial aid available. This doesn't affect the lower-class, but directly affects the middle class. (Source)

Aside from college costs, cuts in funding for education have left states desperate for money, thereby being forced to raise taxes.

Bush's tax cuts are bad for everyone except the upper class. I just wish people would realize this.

I get so frustrated about people living in their bubble that are unable to examine the big picture. All they hear is "tax cut" GREAT! That means I pay less taxes, right? WRONG!!!

Some interesting statistics: (CNN/Gallup/USAT poll)
A question asked in October:
"Do you think the country would be better off if the Republicans controlled Congress, or if the Democrats controlled Congress?"
Republicans 36% (41%)
Democrats 47% (45%)

A question asked in May
"Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?"

Approve 46% (50%)
Disapprove 50% (45%)

"... the economy?"
Approve 40% (43%)
Disapprove 58% (53%)

"... the situation in Iraq?"
Approve 40% (42%)
Disapprove 56% (55%)

"... Social Security?"
Approve 33% (35%)
Disapprove 59% (58%)

McCain

McCain is one of the few Republicans I respect. There's only a few real conservatives left in the Republican party. The rest have been hijacked by Dobson and his gang. Anyway, McCain is a realist and understands that the republican party won't be in the majority forever, especially with the direction they're heading. He also understands that this fillibuster business is bad for everyone. Even with baited questions from Fox News he refused to blame it on the Democrats and he actually gave real answers. Here's his interview.

WALLACE: I want to get to some of those issues in just a second, but let me just ask you sort of the next question, which is if you don't reach agreement, does the majority leader, Bill Frist, have the 50 Republican votes he needs, plus the tiebreaker from Vice President Cheney to, in fact, impose the nuclear option?

MCCAIN: I don't know the answer to that because there's several Senators who have not indicated exactly how they're going to vote.

So I don't know.

. . . WALLACE: But in other words, there would be a provision that would allow the defeat of at least several of these nominees?

MCCAIN: No, it would mean that there would be a commitment to let most of them go under any circumstances, and then there would only be a couple of others that would then be a decision made as to whether they would continue to filibuster those or not.

It's very possible that there would be a vote on all of them. It's also possible that one or more of them would not reach the Senate floor because of other difficulties that their nomination faces.

Look, we're talking about changing the rules of the Senate with 51 votes, which has never happened in the history of the United States Senate. The Democrats have tried to change the rules when they were in the majority. They tried to get a two-thirds vote.

If you have 51 votes, changing the rules of the Senate, nominations of the president is next, and then legislation follows that. And we will now become an institution exactly like the House of Representatives. That's not what our founding fathers envisioned when they created a bicameral legislature.

. . . WALLACE: But I guess what I'm asking is: What is the impact do you think it would be on the institution if while you're involved in this food fight up here on Capitol Hill, an awful lot of the people's business isn't getting done?

MCCAIN: I think it would be, again, very bad. I note that polling numbers and approval for Congress is down to where it was in 1994.

I think we have, unfortunately, a tendency to forget that we're in a war. Young Americans are dying every day. We have the threat of Al Qaeda and the war on terrorism. We have an unprotected border. We have Social Security, not to mention a burgeoning deficit.

Understandably, to me, the American people's priorities are not those being displayed by the Congress today, particularly in the United States Senate.

The level of rhetoric has reached a point that's really not helpful to the institution or to the individuals who are part of it.

(Emphasis mine)

Hopefully McCain won't cave and he'll vote his concience. He doesn't have the greatest voting history, so we'll see.

Walk Away

So I hate it when people post lyrics in their blogs. It's like "who cares" But I feel like this song speaks to me...in more ways than one.

Walk Away - Goldfinger

They say people have their ways
And people stay the same
Accept the way it is
Accept that things don't change
Some people make it worse
Some people don't want to listen
In the end it all works out
In the end, they learn their lesson

But I don't believe this shit
I know I can make things better
I know it will take some work
But I'm not afraid of the dirt

What if I do nothing?
What if I just turn my back on you?
If I say nothing
What if I just walk away from you?

Walk away
I could never walk away from you

I want to give you life
I want to give you shelter
I want to take away your pain
I want to give you freedom
I want to educate the world
I want to educate my parents
I want to turn all the wrongs right
And save the lives I can

They say people have their ways
And people stay the same
Accept the way it is
I know that I can change

Walk away
I could never walk away from you

Blog vs. thesis

I have spent WAY to much time on my blog today and not nearly enough time on my thesis. *sigh*

Downing Street Memo

Most people who aren't active political bloggers probably don't know anything about this because the "liberal" media is too conservative to report anything negative about the administration. This actually confirms everything I was saying back in 2003. That Bush was set on going to war way before he ever started talking about it to the public. It's still my opinion that Bush was set on going to war from the minute he entered the oval office. This memo certainly helps that belief.

The worst quote I've ever heard in my life was in 2003, someone I know said "I think Sadaam has weapons of mass destruction and I hope he uses them to prove all these anti-war people wrong." At the time I was shocked to hear this statement actually come out of this person mouth, and I'm still shocked to this day. But I guess that's the lengths people will go to. I'm still amazed at people's ability to believe that Bush was 100% honest in getting us to war with Iraq. I just don't understand how people can live in a world of such delusion.

Anyway, back to the memo. The memo is actually meeting minutes taken from the British Prime Ministers meeting on July 23, 2002. A full 8 months prior to the US invasion of Iraq. I'm not going to post the whole thing here because it's too long. But I definately encourage you to go read it all here.

Here's the most relevant paragraphs:

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.

The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action.

So yeah, basically what this is saying is that Bush wanted a regime change and he was fixing intellegence to fit this policy decision. This memo proves that Bush lied to the country in the weeks leading to war with Iraq.

Fillibuster

This is just too good to pass up. Aparently Mr. "Cat Killer" Frist thinks that the Fillibuster IS constitutional. But only when it's for his party's advantage.

This is what's going on in the Senate today (from Think Progress):

This morning on the floor of the Senate, Sen. Chuck Schumer asked Majority Leader Bill Frist a simple question:

SEN. SCHUMER: Isn’t it correct that on March 8, 2000, my colleague [Sen. Frist] voted to uphold the filibuster of Judge Richard Paez?

Here was Frist’s response:

The president, the um, in response, uh, the Paez nomination - we’ll come back and discuss this further. … Actually I’d like to, and it really brings to what I believe - a point - and it really brings to, oddly, a point, what is the issue. The issue is we have leadership-led partisan filibusters that have, um, obstructed, not one nominee, but two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, in a routine way.

So, Frist is arguing that one filibuster is OK. His problem is that several Bush nominees have been filibustered. This position completely undercuts Frist’s argument that judicial filibusters are unconstitutional. (Which is, in turn, the justification for the nuclear option.) If judicial filibusters are unconstitutional there is no freebee. But Frist digs his hole even deeper:

The issue is not cloture votes per se, it’s the partisan, leadership-led use of cloture votes to kill - to defeat - to assassinate these nominees. That’s the difference. Cloture has been used in the past on this floor to postpone, to get more info, to ask further questions.

When Frist voted to filibuster Paez’s nomination it had been pending for four years. It’s hard to believe he couldn’t get all the info he needed or ask all the questions he had during that time. Make no mistake about it: Bill Frist was trying to kill the Paez nomination.

The thing about this is that if he's saying the fillibuster is in fact constitutional, then that blows his nuclear option out of the water. To just change the senate rules it take 2/3 majority vote. Hopefully there will be some smart Republicans who will stand up to Mr. Dobson...ahem...I mean Mr. Frist.

More Time

I really wish I had more time to blog. Ideally, I would take one issue of the day and blog about it. Unfortunately, I never feel like I have enough time to read the news, pick a story, and write a thoughtful commentary on it. Maybe after my defense I'll make that my goal. Until then, we'll have to deal with things I've read on the DailyKos.

New Rule

Leave it to Bill Mahr to sum up exactly what I've been saying, but to be funny.

The people in America who are most in favor of the Iraq war must now go there and fight it. The Army missed its recruiting goal by 42% last month. More people joined the Michael Jackson Fan Club. "We've done picked all the low-lying Lynndie England fruit." And now we need warm bodies. We need warm bodies like Paula Abdul needs...warm bodies!

Now, last week, a Baptist minister in North Carolina told nine members of his congregation that unless they renounced their 2004 vote for John Kerry, they had to leave his church. Well, if we're that certain these days that George Bush is always that right about everything, then going to Iraq to fulfill the glorious leader's vision would seem the least one could do. And, hey, if it makes it any easier for you, just think of it as a reality show: "Fear Factor: Shitting Your Pants Edition." "Survivor: Sunni Triangle." Or maybe it's a video game, "Grand Theft Allah."

Now, I know you're thinking, but, Bill, I already do my part with the "Support Our Troops" magnet I have on my Chevy Tahoe. How much more can one man give? Well, here's an intriguing economic indicator. It's been over a year since they graduated, but neither of the Bush twins has been able to find work. Why don't they sign up? Do they hate America or just freedom in general?

And that goes for everybody who helped sell this war. You've got to go first. Brooks and Dunn, drop your cocks and grab your socks! Ann Coulter, darling, trust me, you will love the Army. You think you make up shit!

Curt Schilling, b-bye! You ended the curse on Boston. Good. Let's try your luck in Fallouja. Oh, and that Republican Baldwin brother, he's got to go so that Ted Nugent has someone to frag.

But mostly, we have to send Mr. And Mrs. Britney Spears. Because Britney once said, "We should trust our president in every decision that he makes, and we should just support that and be faithful in what happens." Okay, somebody has to die for that. Or at least go. Hey, maybe she'll like it. Hell, she's already knocked up. That'll save the MP unit about ten minutes.

And think of the spiritual lift it will provide to troops and civilians alike when actual combat smacks the smirk off of Kevin Federline's face and fills his low-hanging trousers with dootie.

In summation, you cannot advocate for something you wouldn't do yourself. For example, I'm for fuel efficiency, which is why I drive a hybrid car and always take an electric private plane. I'm for legalizing marijuana, and so I smoke a ton of it.

Puppy pic!

I haven't posted a picture of my puppy recently, so here's one! She went to her first day of puppy kindergarten today. She was very good, and is learning very fast. She gets to go visit our new house for the first time this weekend. I'm very very excited. What a big week for my puppy!  

Defense

I just scheduled my defense. I almost started crying in Pat's office. I don't think I've ever been so scared to do something in my life.
I have writers block. I don't know what to write about my results or how to organize them. I need to get my act together.
My results for the tropics and polar regions aren't working at all.

My defense is exactly 4 weeks from today.

Onion

My favorite quote from the onion this week.

"If we outlawed everything some people find offensive, there wouldn't even be a Texas in the first place."

Military

There is a recruiting crisis in our military, and I would challenge anybody who supports this war to support our troops...by enlisting.

Our troops are simply unable to do what they need to when they don't have the manpower. There are so many people in this country that sit there and talk about how the war in Iraq is important and we should be over there. Well these people are a whole lot of talk and zero action. We can't fight a war without a strong military.

There is at least one conservative who agrees. Unfortunately that is a few thousand too few.

Don't want to listen to me? Read what this conservative blogger has to say:
"Where do I come down on this? I think there are reasonable arguments on both sides of this issue. But ultimately I think the burden of proof is on those who are vocal supporters of this war and this President. If I counted myself among them, I'd certainly think long and hard about joining. During World War II, men and women rushed to enlist regardless of money, career, family, or draft. People are needed right now, and if you think Iraq is an important part of the war on terror and thus vital to our national security, anything else is just conversation. Period."

I just hate to see our military stretched to the breaking point all because of an unecessary war. So please, if you support this war, consider enlisting.


I also wanted to note that 23 US soldiers have died in Iraq this month. 1610 total. Frankly, I think that's 1610 too many. 1461 of those deaths have occured since Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" over 2 years ago.
You can go here for a complete list of every person killed in Iraq. US or otherwise.

The Cost of a life

I must apologize for mooching this, but I think it's a great story, and an eye opener. The link to the diary is found here.

This is a story I found about a mom and how much a trip to the ER costs.

"Last night, I spent the night next to my daughter's bed in the emergency room. And as usual, because I cannot see the forest without noticing the trees, today I reflect on her health crisis last night and how this might have all been different if I was like the 45 million Americans (including my parents) who have no health insurance.

The Center for American Progress puts the number 45,000,000 in perspective:

45 million uninsured Americans is more than...

* All Americans age 65 and older (35.9 million)
* All African Americans (37.1 million)
* All Hispanic or Latino Americans (39.9 million)

Last night, Saoirse [my daughter] came home from softball practice and told me that her side was hurting. When Saoirse, who regularly takes hits in soccer, or tears all the skin off her legs sliding into a stolen base--all without uttering a word of complaint--says that something hurts, chances are it really hurts. By 9:45, she was nearly immobile, and finally confessed just how much she was hurting. A friend who is a doctor told me she had all the classic signs of appendicitis. Off to the ER we went.

Stepping through the door of the ER: $275

Saoirse was examined by an ER doctor who agreed that yes, she had many of the symptoms of appendicitis, but he wasn't quite convinced.

Having the ER doctor walk through an exam room door to look at you: $184

He ordered full blood work, a CT scan, and the insertion of an IV in anticipation of surgery. He also gave her a narcotic painkiller so she could get some relief.

The ER was full. Luckily for Saoirse, the dilaudid knocked her out, and she was able to sleep. We were in line for the CT machine, and she needed to drink chemicals that would light up her insides on the scan.

Estimated costs (based on past experiences) of these tests:
CT scan with contrast $700
Blood work $200
Radiologist's fee $200
Misc. $200
I'm also assuming that since the ER doc gave her a more complete exam, his fees will be significantly higher.

At the end of a very long night, the CT scan revealed a lot of fluid in my daughter's lower pelvis. The poor baby had a ruptured ovarian cyst. No surgery was required, and she will be sore for days and will not be allowed to play sports until she recuperates.

I'm estimating that when all the bills have been gathered, this 7-hour stint in the ER will cost close to $2000. Costs to me? If my ex has the same structured insurance policy that I do, probably a $50 deductible.

Am I lucky? Damn straight. Am I grateful? Of course.

But I think about a single mother without insurance faced with a similar situation. Would I have taken my daughter to the emergency room at 9:45? Or would I have waited for hours, hoping and praying that the pain she was in would pass? And if I had taken her, would I have listened to the doctor explain all the tests he needed to run and spent the hours next to my daughter's bed wondering what my family would do without for the next year while I paid off the hospital bill? If I had been an uninsured parent, would I have sat there and wondered why, despite the fact that I worked 40 hours a week, my employer didn't offer health care?

As I watched my daughter writhe in pain, and watched the relief drip into her IV bottle, would I have done the devil's calculus of trying to figure out how much my child's pain was worth?

As I sit here today, I reflect on how lucky I am. But I rail that I live in a country where we do not consider health care to be a right. Health care is still a privilege. Relief of excruciating pain is a privilege. Making sure that you're not going to suffer septic shock from a ruptured appendix because a trip to the ER was too expensive, is a privilege.

We consider education to be a right, and we pay for it. We consider traveling on superhighways to be a right, and we pay for it. We consider the military to be a national priority to protect our rights, and we pay for it. But we do not consider life to be a right. We do not consider the health of the human body to be a right, and we do not pay for it.

And as the number of uninsured grows every year, eventually, we will all pay for it. "

K9 Advantix

Okay, so I love the K9 Advantix commercial. That lab puppy is just so very cute. :)
Anywho, you can go here to see it so whenever you're sad you can watch it and it'll make you happy.

Hello Mother, Hello Father,
Fleas, ticks, mosquitoes, really bother!
Thanks for the package that's why I'm writing.
K9 Advantix quickly stopped all the biting.
Swimming, hiking, and tent pitching .
They're not biting, I'm not itching.
Can't wait to show you all my new tricks
Thanks again for sending me K9 Advantix!

Great Quotes

From Real Time with Bill Mahr

"`The culture of life,' I might say, is a phrase invented by the last pope. And what it meant was, you're opposed to death in the death penalty, in war, in euthanasia and abortion. The Republicans decide, 'Oh, we're a cafeteria [style]. We'll take the abortion and euthanasia but we will launch wars' and we will...I mean, George Bush has signed more death warrants than any other human being in this country."
--Andrew Sullivan

"If I were Kim Jong Il, I would read the message of Iraq to be, if you don't have nuclear weapons, you get invaded, and if you do have nuclear weapons, you don't get invaded. Because we didn't invade the Soviet Union and China. So I think we're sending the wrong messages and doing nothing to really prevent a very, very dangerous situation."
--Madeleine Albright

Wow

In 54 countries (61% of the worlds population) abortions are legal
In 97 countries (39% of the world population) abortions are illegal

There are approximately 46 million abortions conducted each year, 20 million of them obtained illegally.

Okay, so I was going to write this post about abortion. About abortion statistics and everything, but in my research I came across this site. I couldn't have said it better myself.
Pretty much everything this person argues is what I've been arguing for a really long time.

This is what bothers me the most about so many people who are pro-life. They want abortion to be illegal, but they don't want to do anything to help out the mother once they are forced to have this child. They also don't want to do anything about educating people about how to avoid unwanted pregnancies.
I think compramise is a must in this situation. I think the most important thing here should be reducing the number of abortions. That is just not going to happen by simply making abortion illegal. People like to pretend that there is a simple solution to this problem. There just isn't.

"It seems so often the Pro-Lifers only care about the fetus until it is born, then suddenly lose interest in his or her welfare. Two thirds of women who have an abortion cite the reason — the inability to afford a child. Women can't raise kids without jobs or income. If you are seriously pro-life, you have to see to it mothers have access to the resources to raise kids. Yet usually pro-lifers are Republican who actively campaign to let the jobless starve to death and to let industry lay off at will."

I am so tired of people using abortion as an excuse to vote Republican. I think it is a cop out and I think that people who do it are avoiding the real issues with abortion and simply looking for an easy way out. The Republican party is using these people, exploiting them to get into and stay in power. The Republican party has no idea what a "culture of life" is. They just use it as a catch phrase to get more votes.

I am blessed.

Hehehe...I'm sorry. I just had to say it. It's been an ongoing joke around here for a few weeks and I just couldn't resist.

But really, I feel extremely fortunate for my life right now. I'm dreading every minute of the next 6 weeks, but overall I have a great life.
I do well in school, and will (hopefully) continue to do so.
I have friends and family that love me.

But mostly, I feel like writing about Danny. I don't ever really write about him, but he has had the biggest impact on my life of anyone I know. He is this awesome fiance who has opened my eyes to so many things. He refuses to ever tell me how I should think about anything, but he never holds back on asking me to justify why I think something. Sometimes this drives me batty, but it's been really great for shaping my ideals about the world. I have turned from a pretty conservative person into a roaring liberal. It's not his fault, there's lots of stuff we disagree on, but he has made me consider why I think what I think. He's taught me not to be satisfied with thinking something because I think that's how I "should" think.
He is one of the most moral, least judgemental men I know. I can't wait to be his wife. I believe we'll have many great years together. I hope we don't get bogged down with life and that we can do all the things we hope for.

Okay, that's enough of the mushy stuff...time to get back to work.

Choice?

I personally believe that a person doesn't choose to be gay. I think it's a silly position to think that. It just isn't logical for a person to choose a lifestyle that subjects them to critisizm and discrimination.

There's a couple new studies that are being released that support my position. It turns out that "Gay men's brains respond differently from those of heterosexual males when exposed to a sexual stimulus, researchers have found. The homosexual men's brains responded more like those of women when the men sniffed a chemical from the male hormone testosterone."

There's also been a study done in Philidelphia that examined peoples reactions to body odor. "They found that gay men differed from heterosexual men and women and from lesbian women, both in terms of which body odors gay men preferred and how their own body odors were regarded by the other groups."

I'll be interested to see the results as more of these studies take place. I'll also be excited to see if this has any influence on public perception of homosexuality. Of course we know many people prefer to ignore science and stick with their own ideas, but this will at least be some real ammo.

Go Mavs!

Just one more reason Dallas is better than Houston.

Go Mavericks!!! :-)

Can we say 116-76...that's an ass-kicking.

Beat Phoenix!!!

Cheerio

I am soo enthralled with these British elections. I'm enjoying watching Tony Blair get the ass-whooping he deserves. Interesting stuff.

House

Well, getting our house was an ordeal up until the last minute, but...we finally got it. We got the keys, and Danny has started moving stuff in. I'm very excited and I can't wait until I'm done with my thesis so that I can start focusing on the house. :)
Danny leaves for New York today. So sad. We're not going to see eachother again until early July. *sigh* We'll make it though, and in 3 1/2 months we'll be married and life will be swell.

Yahoo!

Okay, so I never thought I'd say this, but Yahoo! has seriously outdone Google. Check out their news page. Yahoo! News totally rocks. They list a ton of headlines with no synopsis, and several different news sources. You simply scroll over the title to see the synopsis and usually a picture. Go Yahoo! I'm so proud.
I wonder what Google's retaliation will be. Hmmmm....