Blog #7: The Lesser of Two Weevils

*SIGH*
When in the Course of [Online US Government 2305], it becomes necessary for one people to [blog about] the political bands which have connected them with another [we know it’s the end of the semester].
(tortured sentence from the Declaration of Independence, double-checked on ushistory.org)
This time, I am to write about who I would vote for to be our next President of the USA; President Obama or one of the challenging Republicans.
At the time of the last presidential primary I was a Republican, and I voted for Allan Keys, who had already dropped out of the race.  I voted for him because I didn’t like the way the Republicans locked him out of any publicity or debate, and I just like the way he sticks to his guns.  Plus, I couldn’t in good conscience vote for any of the others.  In the presidential election itself, I voted for McCain, because he was Republican.  I know, I know, but so did 48% of the other voters, so there.
I am no longer a Republican, because most of them are horrible. Same with the Democrats.  Deciding this question before me was hard, as I expected to decide on a Republican challenger. Romney is entitled and pretty, and though he talks about helping the middle class financially, he also speaks about how they don’t really matter.  Not the kind of guy I respect.  Ron Paul is actually more my style, sharing my opinion that abortion is not a constitutional issue (Abortion is a privacy right? Really? Then why can’t I have chickens in my backyard?), currency should be backed by something other than wishes, and the federal government should not bail out corporations, especially those that abuse their workers.  He also started opposing forms of immigration in 1990, saying “We're in worse shape now because we subsidize immigration. We give food stamps, Social Security, free medical care, free education and amnesty. So you subsidize it, and you have a mess. Conditions have changed. And I think this means that we should look at immigration differently. It's an economic issue more than anything. If our economy was in good health, I don't think there'd be an immigration problem. We'd be looking for workers and we would be very generous." (2012.candidate-comparison.org)

Shockingly to me, however, President Obama is the one with whom I agree on the most issues.  Beyond issues, Paul is 76 years old, served in the military (drafted), grew up working for everything he got, is a doctor, and lives in Texas. Obama is 50 years old, hasn’t served, grew up in different states/countries and schools, got a law degree and worked in mainly law and politics, and lived in Chicago.  Both fit my rules for not being entitled tits, but Paul fits better, as he’s had to get his hands dirty.  Paul is all about reduction of federal power, which I believe in moderately but not to that degree.  He also wants to be friends with Cuba, which seems a bit radical.  He wants to stay out of other countries conflicts, but I think Obama understands international policy better, having traveled in his youth as well as throughout his career.

I feel the best for our country will be President Obama. According to my textbook he’s been very prolific in taking unilateral actions-things that affect policy without waiting for Congress etc. (Losco/Baker, 2011, p.310). Looking to the candidate-comparison.org website again, he’s made large strides in turning our economy right-side-up again, he supports quality education and making higher education available to more people, he supports leniency in not deporting illegal aliens who have no criminal record, he wants to ease up on taxes for the poor and raise taxes for the rich proportionally, he has a great health care plan that got a little messed up in congress but that will bring relief to a lot of people who need it and he supports clean energy, opportunity to unionize, clean energy, and getting rid of wasteful spending. Plus, when he gets pissed at someone he just turns and walks away, which I bet he started doing in school when the other kids would make fun of the new guy since he traveled so much (and didn’t have a dad a lot of the time).  Beats punching the guy in the face and getting in trouble. And as for him being a Commie, I’d rather have a Marxist in office (which theory has great stuff in it) than a National Socialist (or Nazis, for those of you who don’t read).  And these days, a lot of politicians look to me as if they should be wearing a tiny black mustache.  The best advantage to re-electing President Obama is that there won’t be the period of turmoil that a “changing of the guard” could have, thus allowing him to continue his work unabated. Except for the wee problem that congress has their heads permanently up their own tailpipes, and won't do anything that's good for this country without bribes that are known as campaign contributions.

Darn my teacher, now that I’ve written this, I actually feel inspired to vote for the first time since 2009.  My right to privacy at the polls has been totally invaded! I’m okay with that though, this time.

Works Cited

"The Declaration of Independence." Ushistory.org. Ushistory.org, 4 July 1995. Web. 09 May 2012. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/>.

Losco, Joseph, and Ralph Baker. "Obama at Midterm: Unilateral Actions." Am Gov 2011. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2011. 310. Print.

"Paul vs Obama on The Issues." Candidate-comparison.org. Candidate-comparison.org. Web. 09 May 2012. <http://2012.candidate-comparison.org/?compare=Paul>.

Blog #6: PAC Up Your Troubles In Your Old Mailbag…

I am making a concerted effort to make this “free blog” as on-topic and applicable to class as possible.  It will be hard, but my grades will thank me. Today's subject is the Political Action Committee, and how they can influence policy beyond elections for their special interest group.
Yesterday I received my first letter from a Political Action Committee, or PAC.  I was hired by the United States Postal Service in September of last year, and have recently joined the National Rural Letter Carriers' Association (NRLCA), the union that supports rural letter carriers (I am a rural carrier associate-a substitute carrier).  The union supports all rural carriers regardless of whether they are union members.  The letter was from the NRLCA special interest group PAC asking me to donate money in order for them to further protect my interests and my job.  I am skeptical, because of long-held views that regard PACs as flawed and generally sneaky in getting people to give them money and then not doing exactly as promised.  Also, I don’t like the idea of giving money above and beyond my union dues so that the union will do what it was designed to do, that is, look out for my interests as a USPS employee.  Unions are supposed to intercede with the employer on the employees behalf, but though the United States Government controls the USPS a PAC is probably necessary in order to influence policy outside of the purvey of the USPS organization itself. Interest group PACs are able to influence government policy by promising/giving campaign contributions, contacting government officials directly or through lobbyists, influencing the public directly through internet/tv/print campaigns, and letter writing (appropriate in this situation). (panaomni.tripod.com)
I now have the added perspective of wanting the help of the NRLCA PAC.  I will explain:

The United States Postal Service is an independent government agency which has not been supported financially by the government since the early 1980s.  The last year it made a profit was in 2006.  The government regulates it, and it is headed by the Postmaster General, who gets paid slightly less than the president does.  Benjamin Franklin was our first Postmaster General.  (Victorville Post Office website)

The current problem is that the USPS is in financial trouble, and wants permission to overhaul the organization.  It is in trouble due to a lot of things, not the least of which is that they are the last government agency required to pre-pay their employee’s pensions!  I just found out from The New York Times website that a bill has passed in the Senate that allows the USPS to stop so much pre-payment, examine closing post offices and distribution centers and look into canceling Saturday delivery if they are still in trouble after two years.  No bailouts for the Post Office, they have to fix themselves.  

The big problem for me is still pending votes in the House.  The issue is Saturday delivery.  I am a substitute carrier, so I work on the regular carrier’s day off and vacations.  If the carrier only works 5 days a week, and we deliver 6 days a week, I work one day.  If she 5 days out of a 5 day work week, I have no day.  Conversely, if we go down to 5-day delivery, the rest of the mail will have to be delivered some time, and since the distribution centers run 7 days a week we will have mail stacked up on Monday.  Since the union only allows the carriers to work a certain number of hours a week without getting overtime, the routes will have to be cut, new routes made, more subs going regular (becoming a full-time carrier), and more chance for me to go full time and WIN!  You know what I mean. 

So there are two sides to the issue, but I don’t think deleting Saturday delivery is convenient for anyone, and will cut down on the number of businesses open on Saturdays, which will suck for the economy.  I think.  So in conclusion, I believe my union’s PAC is useful, and I hope they stop the Saturday delivery cut, but I don’t really have any spare cash to give them, and it’s likely that if I did I would donate it to the animal shelter.  My brain doesn’t really have a say in my actions most of the time.  Thank you for listening to KDADHD 808.9fm, and have a nice night!

Works Cited

Nixon, Ron. "Senate Passes Plan to Give Postal Service Fiscal Relief." NYTimes.com. The New York Times, 25 Apr. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/us/politics/senate-passes-bill-to-overhaul-postal-service.html>.
Ratliff, John D. "Interest Groups." Panaomni.tripod.com. Panaomni, 1999. Web. 25 Apr. 2012. <http://panaomni.tripod.com/interest-groups/index.html>.
Victorville Post Office. "History of the United States Post Office." Victorville Post Office. Web. 25 Apr. 2012. <http://www.ceol.com/vvpo/history.html>.

Blog #5 "You Gotta Fight for Your Right to Third Party"

Alrighty…third parties! Awww, look at the cute little things, they try so hard and get nowhere! If I was going to write about my favorite third party, it would be the “Monster Raving Loony party” in the UK. For obvious reasons. However, seeing as how this is an American Government class, I shall have to constrain myself to the US of A. Hmmm, let’s see… “Rent Is Too Damn High Party”… “United States Pirate Party”… “Citizens Party of the United States”…hmmm, I actually like that one. Boring name, but they just changed it from “New American Independent Party” which is worse, so they are moving in the right direction.


According to their official website (http://www.votecitizens.org/) the Citizens Party of the United States goes for the gut when they say: “Do you think that both major parties are excessively dominated by money and overly influenced by lobbyists and single-issue groups? Are you concerned about the continued assault on the American middle class by the failed policies of both major parties? Do you feel that neither of the two major parties truly reflect the aspirations or will of most Americans? Do the two party career politicians appear unwilling or unable to address the many issues and challenges facing our nation? Have you grown tired of the polarization and alienation created by the two major parties?”


Hell yes! Why do you think I haven’t voted in three years?! Well okay, that’s because I can’t figure out how it works here in TX, and I’m too busy to ask. “Do I know who won the election? What election?” I don’t have time to watch TV or read the paper, so I’m out of luck. Back to the party though.


The Citizens Party of the United States claims to avoid party lines, and instead focus on “pragmatic solutions” to the problems that plague our country. They lobby for (to name a few) small business, American jobs, small farmers, using our military primarily to protect our country, auditing the treasury and eliminating “pork” spending, supporting organic foods, being environmentally responsible and stopping cruelty to animals. I like all these things. “The Citizens Party does NOT accept contributions from Corporations, PAC's, Super PAC's, Labor Unions or Registered Lobbyists.” This is also awesome! Although it reduces their visibility- they currently hold no seats in house or senate, and really haven’t gotten much of the vote in the past.


Also in their “Main Street Platform” are some things I disagree with. Legalizing marijuana for instance, as if the health problems from cigarettes weren’t already readily available. And their support of “freedom of choice” i.e. abortion and assisted suicide. Not the solution I would have suggested for the overpopulation problem.


They kind of give me the impression of older wiser hippies. They have this plan of getting all the pissed off people together to make a change and throw out all the rich crap-slingers to get real humans in office. I really admire their attitude.


I would probably vote in their favor in the next election if I could figure out who’s running, when to vote, and where to vote. Hey, if I email these guys and they can help me out, it’ll be a no-brainer! Kind of like people on marijuana. Huh.

Sources Cited





2012 Citizens Party. "Main Street Platform." Citizens Party. 2012 Citizens Party, 2012. Web. 11 Apr. 2012. <http://www.votecitizens.org/citizens-party-platform>.


Citizens Party. Web. 11 Apr. 2012. <http://www.votecitizens.org/>.

Blog #4: An Immodest Proposal

[Pharmacy, interior, truck day. Me, kneeling on floor putting cosmetics on hooks.  Two young women appear, walk past three uniformed employees, and get to me. One approaches.]

“Um, uh, do you, ah, work here?”

No, I just like wearing shirts that say “get your flu shot!” “Yes m’am, what can I do for you?”

“Um, where are the Dutches?”

In Denmark? “I’m sorry, I’m not sure what that is.  If you tell me what it’s for, I can tell you what isle it’s in.”

“Uh, it’s for like, female cleaning? It’s like a little bottle with a tube that you-“

“OH! Yes, yes, I know what you’re talking about, that’s isle 9.” Good gracious, not only does she not know how to say “douche,” but she was about to tell me how it’s used!

“Uhh, we already looked there, but we didn’t see it.”

[Her friend remains silent the whole time. I think she’s highly embarrassed.]

“Okay, no problem, let me show you.”

[I lead her to the isle labeled “feminine health” in very large lettering.]

“Yeah, um, we looked here-“

“Ah, here we go. [gesturing to the fully stocked shelf of douches] I know things are a little hard to find in here sometimes. Is there anything else you’re looking for?”

“Um, yeah, uh, where are the pregnancy tests?”

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

I have discussed with my husband many times the idea that morons not be allowed to reproduce.  “There should be a test for potential parents!” people sometimes say jokingly.  It makes sense really.  It goes along with the survival of the fittest, if you’re too dumb to remove the wrapper from the dishwasher soap packet before putting it in the dishwasher, then perhaps you shouldn’t be trusted with the care and raising of a child.  Even violent  criminals are allowed to have children. That seems more like handing a baby a loaded gun to play with.  So, let’s see. Criminals, mentally inept… I personally think it would be wrong for me to have children myself because of all the hereditary problems I have, such as ADHD, high cholesterol, anxiety/depression, etc.  Perhaps other potential breeders should have the decency to think of the crud they are passing down to their kids before reproducing. Perhaps the government should encourage them with laws … Wait, let’s check the interwebs and see if anyone else has had these amazing ideas yet…

Well, there were the Nazis of course, but I’m not talking about eradicating whole races of people, just preventing imperfect people from littering the planet.

Here we go, a website called “Eugenics Archive.” Apparently Indiana passed the first law allowing mandatory sterilization on the basis of defective genes. The first Supreme Court case in regards to it was the case of Buck v. Bell in 1927. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. supported the cause of mandatory sterilization, and had this to say on the matter: “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind…Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

Smart guy! It’s a shame that the defendant, Carrie Bell, was set up to lose and wasn’t actually abnormal. It turns out that many of the 60,000 people who were involuntarily sterilized in the US between then and the mid-1970s were not genetically defective, but were Native Americans and other minorities, orphans, physically disabled, poor, etc. 

Okay, so perhaps my plan isn’t perfect, but it’s better than eating babies, right? …right?

(in case you did not get the reference to “A Modest Proposal” you should know that this is intended as a satire. Or a satire-like rant. And if you did not get that, then you should go think about how humorless you are!)

Works Cited
Lombardo, Paul. "Social Origins of Eugenics." Eugenicsarchive.org. Eugenics Archive. Web. 28 Mar. 2012. <http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay8text.html>.

Works Eluded To:
Swift, Jonathan. A Modest Proposal. New York: Grossman, 1969. Print.

Blog Assignment #3: The Bill of Oh-So-Rights

So, according to the AM GOV textbook I see before me, civil liberties consist of “The personal freedoms of individuals that are protected from government intrusion.” (Losco/Baker, 2011, p.67) Obviously they mean that the freedoms are protected, not the people per say… But wait! Isn’t that what this Bill of Rights thing is all about? The Bill of Rights, being a list of our civil liberties, has some great stuff in it. The right to unabridged freedom of speech, the right not to have soldiers stationed in one’s living room, the right to wear tank tops… what? Ohhhh, BEAR arms, not bare arms, sorry about that.  Anyway, after learning that we have the right to speak freely, we also learn that we are protected from being arrested and sentenced without a trial, from having to testify against ourselves, and we get to have a lawyer if we do go to trial! How very awesome.

We go now to my very favorite civil liberty, number ix. As in nine (9).

“AMENDMENT IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

(Since I didn’t have this memorized, I will cite where I copy/pasted from: www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights)

Hey, what a concept! The first congress was obligated to create a bill of rights in exchange for the ratification of the constitution by the states. I guess in those days politicians kept their promises, because they and the states approved and ratified ten of the seventeen rights that were written by James Madison.  I picture Madison’s thoughts: “Well, we don’t really need these since the states all have their own bill of rights anyway.  Hmmm, let’s write down all the stuff that the English Crown did to take away OUR rights, and that way at least we can make sure that the American government can never do that… okay, now what… well, since we didn’t really realize that they were rights until they were taken away from us, why don’t we have one that says don’t worry about the future because we’ve got your back and we will never let a government make you feel inhuman again!”

Unfortunately, he was writing to white landowners, but the concept is a good one. We know our rights! They are written into our DNA as Americans! Or something like that. Let’s look at this AM GOV text again… Ah, here’s a poll asking people what their constitutional rights are. The inclusion of a small percentage of people answering that they are assured by the constitution the right to “own pets” and “drive car[s]” proves to me that number nine is the most forward-thinking of the ten amendments in the bill of rights (Losco/Baker, 2011, p.69). Americans aren’t bound by the bill of rights, they are freed by it! After all, like everyone says “It’s a free country!”

Works Cited

Losco, Joseph, and Ralph Baker. "The Constitution and Rights." Am Gov 2011. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2011. 67-69. Print.

Madison, James. "Bill of Rights." Cornell.edu. Cornell University Law School. Web. 08 Mar. 2012. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights>.

Blog #1, Perry: The little Governor who cried coyote

When I moved to the Lone Star State in 2008 I got busy looking for a job. When I got a job I was still busy.  I never really get a chance to watch the local news, and apparently when you register to vote in Texas they don't send you sample ballots and political propaganda like they do in California.  Therefore, when someone said to me one day a couple of years ago, "Hey, you hear Perry shot a coyote while jogging with his dog?"
I said, "Who's Perry?"
Not being up on events in my new state of Texas,  I had no idea that Rick Perry was Governor. I didn't know how long he had been Governor, but I did guess that he'd be Governor for a good long while with a story like that on his side.  Especially when I learned that the gun was a laser-sighted pistol loaded with hollow-point bullets.  My husband ventures that he was probably wearing cowboy boots at the time.  Gotta love Texas!  Rather than be impressed with his firepower, I thought it was ridiculous.  I know coyotes, and though a pack of them might attempt to take down something as big as a calf, a lone coyote wouldn't dare go near a Labrador, much less an adult male human.  It sounded to me that a big boy was out playing with his toy, with a coyote being the unlucky target. What a brave little Governor.
When I heard that Gov. Perry was running for President I was a little embarrassed to think that the rest of the nation was going to think Texas was full of rednecks swaggering around with guns. Until I realized that a lot of the nation already thinks that about Texas. After all, the last Governor of Texas was George W. Bush, the President who had more missteps in his speeches than Gerald Ford had walking down stairs. I like Texas, I like living here, and I think it has just as many but not more idiot rednecks than does California, where I had spent the rest of my life prior to becoming a naturalized Texan.  Based solely on Gov. Perry shooting a coyote in questionable circumstances, I had decided that he was an embarrassment to my adopted state and that he would be a bad president.
Then came the scandal about Gov. Perry's relative owning a ranch that used to have a racial slur written on a rock ... what the heck?  Are you kidding?  How could this in any way effect Gov. Perry's ratings?  Ah, but it did, and soon Gov. Perry dropped out of the race to resume his governmental life. It did make me wonder if I had judged him too soon.  After all, I was reacting to a news story, possibly out of context, just like the silly people who think that if this southern guy has six degrees of separation from a painted-over racial slur on a rock, he must be a racist.
In future, I'm going to try not to be so quick to judge.  I will try to get all the facts and keep an open mind, especially when researching candidates to vote for. After all, we're appointing someone to do a job, not to be our best friend.
I would like to add that George W. Bush was born in Connecticut, while Rick Perry was born in Paint Creek, Texas.