Syria

I find it interesting that many, MANY, people who were all for the Iraq War all of a sudden have a moral compass and think it's unfair to send troops into a fight they claim the troops don't believe in.

DO THEY NOT SEE THE IRONY?

It would be laughable, if it wasn't so obvious...

Just Saying...

I just gotta say, and because I respect my friends too much to put this on a platform other than a political one,

Mitt Romney sure came across as a jass-ass tonight.

OK, there. It is out there.

Where To Begin?

Well...this last weekend has been pretty rough where I live.

You see, I live right in between Columbine High School and Century 21 Theatres in Aurora. Both are just a few miles from my house.

I have several friends who were at Columbine when the massacre occurred. All who were there still have emotional issues stemming from that day.

And now we have another mass shooting to deal with.

Our Governor, who I have a deep admiration for, said, "We will come together and be made stronger."

I am certain we will. But at what point will be asked to be so strong that we finally break? How many shootings and other calamities will be asked to be strong for? We have been on the front page of too many newspapers for too many horrible events.

Of course, when a shooting of this magnitude occurs, the inevitable debate of whether or not guns are good or bad occurs. I will get to that.

But first I'll mention something slightly less controversial. Regardless of what side of the gun issue you are on, there is another issue that also deserves some serious discussion. That is the issue of mental illness. We have a history in this country of ignoring mental illnesses. Some groups even preach that mental illness does not exist. Perhaps as a society we should stop cutting programs that affect the mentally ill and open more treatment centers. Perhaps as a society we should take care of those who are mentally ill, look for symptoms of those who are mentally ill, and stop pretending like it isn't a factor to many problems we face today. Perhaps that would help stop some of these senseless murders.

Now onto guns. You can't have 12 innocent people sitting in a movie theater and then randomly slaughtered without at least bringing it up.

My emotions are a little raw right now as I try to process what happened. My emotions are raw when I think of my three little girls who are growing up in an area where every few years a psychotic murderer goes on a rampage and shoots down anyone in sight.

There have been several arguments in favor of guns:

1. If somebody else had had a gun, they could have shot him and there would have been fewer innocent people killed

2. Taking guns away from all really only takes guns away from law abiding citizens

3. Guns don't kill people, people kill people

4. More guns will keep us safer.

Let me address each of these issues.

1. What if somebody else did have a gun? This was a dark theater with tear gas everywhere. It was complete chaos with people running around in every direction trying to escape. The murderer was dressed in heavy body armor. If somebody else had a gun, they most certainly would NOT have shot the murderer in a fatal way. They would have been much more likely to shoot an innocent victim.

A trained policeman will deliver a fatal blow 1 in 7 times to a moving target. What would an untrained civilian do in a dark theater with a hundred people running all around?

I am very grateful that nobody else had a gun that night.

2. This guy WAS, indeed, a law abiding citizen. Until he decided not to be. Everything he did was perfectly legal- until he decided to go and kill a room full of people.

When people are allowed to buy guns (even military grade assault rifles) they are also buying the choice to kill people. Even if they are "law abiding."

3. This argument just makes me sick. It is so absurd I don't even know where to begin. Let's say this man was armed with pencils. Let's say that's the only weapon he could get a hold of. Would he have murdered 12 people and injured 70? Of course not. I would much rather that he had gone into the theater with pencils instead of military grade artillery.

4. Colorado has some of the most relaxed gun laws in the country. It is incredibly easy to get a gun here. And look what is has gotten us- 3 mass attacks where 33 innocent people have been murdered in the past 15 years (in addition to Columbine and Friday's attacks, there was an attack at a church where 7 people were killed in 2007).

I am ready to try a different approach. It is apparent that relaxed gun laws have not made us safer in this state. Why not try something different? Remember the definition of insanity? Well, how many people do we have to have die while attending innocent public events before we try something different? If you want to arm every person in your state with a gun, fine. But not in MY state. Not in Colorado. I am tired of guns in this state.

Will drug dispensaries in elementary schools stop drug abuse? Will open borders stop illegal immigration? Will having more abortion doctors stop abortions? If you answer "no" to these questions, then how can you possibly believe that more guns will stop violence?

I love the state of Colorado. It is beautiful and the people here are wonderful- except, of course, the psychotic ones.

But right now I want to leave. I want to go to a place that is safe. I want to go to a place where people don't think that more violence will solve the problem of violence. I want to go to a place where I don't have to worry about my children being shot while trying to have fun.

Canada is starting to look really good right now.

SERIOUSLY?!?

Is anybody else SICK of hearing about the stay-at-home-mom-non- issue brought on by one comment from a political analyst that was completely taken out of context and has somehow morphed into a made up war on moms?

I am. That's all anyone on Facebook wants to talk about, so I am having to remove friends from my updates left and right because I can not stand such contrived made-up fights.

Come on. It's not like Rosen said Ann Romney was a lazy bum who is a massive drain on society.

She said Romney never worked a day in her life. And when it comes to a paying job, that is absolutely, 100% true (as far as my research can tell). Does she work as a stay at home mom? Of course. I'm a stay at home mom and I work way harder than most people I know. But do you want to know what was even harder work than being a mom?

Cleaning toilets for 4 years to pay for college.

Or teaching 150 high school students and constantly being ridiculed by parents who didn't think I was doing "right" by their kids 100% of the time.

Or watching a dear friend who is now single raising 3 kids- 2 of them with autism- on her own- working a full time job AND being a mom.

Rosen was in NO WAY saying that being a mom in "unworthy." That's where this fake made-up ridiculous fight comes from that is SOOOO annoying.

What she was saying is that the privileged life that Ann Romney lives means that she can not relate to the average, common woman.

And that is TRUE! Nobody can dispute that.

Ann Romney comes from wealth. She was born into it. So was her husband. They do not understand what it is like for a mother (or father) to have to choose between taking their sick child to the doctor or feeding their other children for the rest of the week. They CAN NOT relate because they have simply never been there.

That does not make them bad people. I am sure they are very nice in real life. It just means that they do not understand the plight of the working class.

The Romney's have a disconnect problem. With Mr. Romney making comments like,

"Ann drives a couple of Cadillacs"

or

"I like being able to fire people"

or

"I'll bet you $10,000"

it is very hard to relate to him.

There's entire websites completely dedicated to the comments Romney has made that show he just doesn't get it.

Again, that's not being mean. It is simply stating a fact.

I have never in my life used illegal drugs. I would be a horrible drug counselor. The best drug counselors are those who have been there and have overcome. I'm not advocating doing drugs so you can be a drug counselor, I'm just saying that if you have never been there then you can never understand- and perhaps you should choose a profession of something you do understand.

If the Romney's want to connect to the working and middle class, they should focus on their personal issues that middle class people DO deal with. They should not discuss their nannies, their housekeepers, their private schools or personal chefs (geeze, if I was a SAHM and had all of that, then my job would be easy).

Ann Romney has MS. That is a horrible, debilitating disease but she has fought hard and found ways to help her pain. She should talk about that and use that as a platform. I'm sure she does use it to some extent, but THAT is what makes her approachable- not her Cadillacs.

Let's STOP talking about this ridiculous non-issue and start talking about things that actually matter.

Hold On Moms

I was reading some Tina Brown (the editor in chief of Newsweek) today and she was thinking about how she missed Michelle Bachmann and her comments about mothers bearing the brunt of this recession by trying to keep their families sane as well as intact with band aids and duct tape. Even thinking about this makes me tired. Er, I'm sorry, I mean, tireder.

I love to read about politics and lately the political testosterone-filled reality show has been unsurpassed, but I forget that it wears. me. out. Too much man stuff is going on, so much so that the stuff (testosterone) is flinging from their pores. I don't want anymore of that crap on my skin.

It's making me break out.

I want the sweet smells of women who get me. Me, meaning 50 percent of the voting block. No one running for office seems to give a damn that we, women, are bearing the brunt of the recession just as much if not more than men. So many jobs descriptions, so little time. Worker, doctor, psychologist, cook, maid, accountant, shoulder to cry on, support, chauffeur, life coach, and sex slave (Ok, that one's not that bad). Give me another minute and I'll think of ten more.

We need a voice. A human connection that brings the points that matter to women into focus. Bachmann went back to crazy so currently we have none. Sarah Palin? Hillary Clinton? Elizabeth Warren? Anyone? I'm ready to be courted. I'm ready to hear someone, man or woman, ANYONE who will speak in a rallying cry that isn't that steady sugar-free diet of tax reform and vulture capitalism. I'm not only hungry for something of substance. Something that really affects me and my everyday life. Something that actually matters.

I'm starving for it.

Occupy Wall Street

I originally wasn't going to post about this, because well: Who on earth could be against Occupy Wall Street?

But then, much to my complete inability to understand, some people actually are against it.

I can not, for the life of me, understand how this can be. I mean, seriously, peaceful people gathering to protest greed.

Not corporations. Greed. There is a BIG difference, and I think that is why people are supposedly against it- because they don't understand it. (Or, they only watch FauxNews and for some reason believe what is said on that so-called station).

Liberals and democrats are all for businesses. We're all for hard work. What we are NOT for is CEO's getting a 27% pay increase while middle-class workers get a 2% pay raise. What we are NOT for is CEO's pocketing millions of dollars while they ship jobs overseas. What we are NOT for is CEO's taking billions of dollars of bail-out money, and holding on to it: refusing to lend so that thousands of small businesses go under.

What is to like about those CEO's?

Let me give you a personal example.

My mom lost every penny of her retirement- retirement she had dilligently saved for over 30 years of dedicated service at Washington Mutual. When it went under (in very shady circumstances if there ever was one), she lost EVERY. SINGLE. PENNY.

What did Washington Mutual's CEO get? He got paid 21 MILLION dollars for 17 DAYS of work.

Yup, TWENTY ONE MILLION for 17 DAYS.

What hard-working middle-class citizen thinks that is just great? Fair? Reasonable? Right? What true, hard-working American is not furious that we live in a society where that is not only OK, it's acceptable?

That's what Occupy Wall Street is about. It's about this top 1% who DID NOT work hard to get where they are. They simply screwed the most people.

And, I'm so incredibly SICK of people saying that the poor are lazy. I grew up so poor the stories I could tell you would make your head spin. But my dad was, and still is, the absolute hardest worker I know. He worked three jobs to make ends meet. Those bastards on Wall Street who stole my entire mom's retirement have no clue what hard work is- they have never done what my Dad did. They have never sacrificed and worked like I watched my dad.

The janitors, mechanics, and factory workers are the TRUE hard workers in America. Screw you Republicans who think if you have money it's because you "worked harder." Screw you Herman Cain for treating the poor like trash, saying they just need to work. Screw every person who honestly thinks that "working hard" automatically equates to making money.

I have, unfortunately, seen how the "real world" works. I saw my mom cry for weeks while some Wall Street hypocrite took everything from her.

So, yeah, I'm pretty pissed at Wall Street. Not businesses and corporations in general. At these selfish, greedy, despicable men (who I am absolutely certain will rot in Hell someday) who are stealing from the working class, and then blaming the working class for being in such a plight.

And if you're not angry, you don't get it. Start researching, and you'll be angry.

UPDATE: I will note, that I do NOT think the violence in Rome is OK. The protests in the USA have been incredibly peaceful. In Denver, the leaders of Occupy Denver actually went around the park and collected and got rid of anything that could be used as a weapon (large rocks, sticks, etc.) and held several meetings discouraging violence. Even though the police came, it was incredibly peaceful with no violence from either side. Peaceful protests should always be encouraged in a country that claims democracy.

Something Everyone Can Cheer About

You thought I was going to mention Gadhafi based on the title of this post, but no, it's a Jon Stewart clip that I think everyone will enjoy (unless you are really sensitive to bleeped out cuss words...there's a bit of cussing, but they are bleeped). Enjoy!

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

For America's future, parties must find political common ground

Unfortunately, we now live in a world where compromise has become a dirty word.
--Michael Fitts

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- As Americans come together to celebrate Independence Day with parades, backyard barbeques, and fireworks, we should also look back on our history and reflect on what has made us the great republic we are today: political compromise.

Our need for compromise is as great as ever. But as the 2012 election cycle heats up the prospects for bipartisan action to address our country's most serious problems decrease with each passing day. The United States is engaged in two wars (at least) overseas, faces an ever-increasing deficit, high unemployment, and soaring health care costs -- all during a sustained economic crisis.

While the recent golf summit between President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner was a rare show of bipartisanship, compromise on real issues remains elusive.

The White House and Congressional Republicans risk defaulting on the country's debt as they continue to squabble over raising the debt ceiling. Many in Congress question whether Obama is flouting the War Powers Resolution with continued American military "support" in Libya. And so far the current crop of Republican presidential contenders are speaking to just one side of the electorate when offering their prescriptions for what ails America.

The reality is that Americans elect leaders to solve problems. A basic truth many of our elected officials in Washington fail to grasp is that to confront major problems and reach some level of viable agreement, effective political leadership requires compromise.

When our leaders refuse or are unable to compromise, the results can be catastrophic. In an equally uncertain time immediately following World War I, President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, saw hopes for lasting peace in the League of Nations, stating prophetically in 1919, "I can predict with absolute certainty that within another generation there will be another world war if the nations of the world do not concert the method by which to prevent it." But he and Senate Republicans refused to compromise and as a result Wilson's dream for American involvement in helping lead a peace-preserving world body was shattered.

More recently, in 1993, then-newly elected President Bill Clinton devised a plan to "to fix a health care system that is badly broken," and provide all Americans with basic health care. Several factors led to the plan's failure a year later, from closed-door White House task force proceedings to Republican intransigence. The net effect was that for the next 15 years, "health care reform" was the third rail of politics and debate was stifled.

Alternatively, compromise makes progress -- even incremental progress -- possible. Yet moving toward the middle has frequently proved hazardous to one's political reputation.

Business considered President Franklin Roosevelt a traitor to his class for enacting New Deal legislation, while his left-leaning supporters felt the legislation was too accommodating to business. President Ronald Reagan twice angered his conservative base: first by agreeing to payroll tax increases with then-House Speaker Tip O'Neill in order to save Social Security; second, by negotiating nuclear arms reduction agreements with the "evil empire," the Soviet Union.

Today, many debate what our Founding Fathers intended. The fact is, our founders intended our three co-equal branches of government to lead figures like Reagan and O'Neill to think through their differences and compromise with one another. Our Constitution was born in compromise after Benjamin Franklin helped break the deadlock in 1787 over the divisive issue of proportional representation. Then, the center of our young, fragile republic managed to hold because political adversaries looked to Congress and the courts as mediating institutions.

Early in the 20th century, the aptly named U.S. Supreme Court Justice Learned Hand observed, "The solution to any problem will almost always be compromise based on experience." He added, to underscore the point, that no court could save "a society so riven that the spirit of moderation is gone."

Unfortunately, we now live in a world where compromise has become a dirty word. The reasons are complicated. One is simply the social stratification in our country -- we tend to work, live, and vote with people who think as we do. Another is the splintering of our media outlets. Liberals have MSNBC and the Huffington Post. Conservatives have FOX News and the Weekly Standard.

Adding to the polarization of American politics is the absence of big tent political parties that are inclusive of moderates as well as staunch partisans -- and which as recently as 25 years ago mediated many of these divisions out of the spotlight. At the end of the day, this leaves decision-making to occur in the media glare with public leaders subject to charges of inconsistency and hypocrisy.

While unilateral disarmament by either Democrats or Republicans is not an option leading into 2012, I do see some ways forward. The first is simply for each of us to recognize the degree to which we are complicit in the bloodsport of politics. Too often we see disputes over hot-button issues as battles to the death between the forces of right and wrong.

Second, we should identify and support leaders who have a genuine record of promoting real solutions and forging thoughtful compromises. History is replete with examples. In the wake of World War II President Eisenhower, a Republican, left the New Deal intact. Fervent anti-communist Richard Nixon created the opening with China. Bill Clinton backed welfare reform.

Finally, we must make special efforts toward educating future leaders to bridge and heal our societal fissures. With the increasing segmentation in our society, our universities are one of the last bastions where people from diverse economic and political backgrounds come together on a sustained basis. They are, and must continue to be, institutions that instill an ethic of respect and teach people across the political spectrum how to engage with one another in the spirit of open and respectful dialogue.

In these days of overheated partisan rhetoric, a call for moderation is unlikely to rally the party faithful. But as Walter Isaacson wrote in his biography of Benjamin Franklin, "Compromisers may not make great heroes, but they do make great democracies." That should remain our common and ultimate objective.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/07/01/fitts.compromise/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Such a JOKE!

"(Reuters) - U.S. budget talks collapsed on Thursday after Republican negotiators walked out, throwing doubt on Washington's ability to reach a deal that would allow the government to keep borrowing and avoid a debt default.

Representative Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, said participants had identified trillions of dollars in potential spending cuts but were deadlocked over tax increases sought by Democrats. Republican Senator Jon Kyl also pulled out, according to an aide.

"Regardless of the progress that has been made, the tax issue must be resolved before discussions can continue," Cantor said in a statement.
"House Speaker John Boehner, the top Republican in Washington, said Democrats must take tax hikes off the table.

"These conversations could continue if they take the tax hikes out of the conversation," Boehner said.

Negotiators had hoped to reach a budget deal by next week that would give lawmakers political cover to raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling before the Treasury Department runs out of money to pay the country's bills."
 
This is such a joke!!! Republicans are willing to negotiate as long as they get EVERYTHING they want, and their precious rich cronies are not affected. As long as all that is cut are Democrat programs, they are all about cutting the deficit. But as soon as their precious tax breaks are mentioned (tax breaks that have NOT created jobs or made for a better America, they have merely produced richer CEO's and the dissolving of the middle class), they just storm out- they can't even sit and have a civil discussion.
 
Apparently Reps. have forgotten what a democracy is all about- working together and compromising to determine what is best for the country. Apparently they have no human decency left in them, and all they can do is whine and pout until they get their way (oh, but of course they will blame the Dems for doing nothing about the deficit, even though THEY are the ones who are throwing tantrums louder and more annoying than my 2-year-old. All to protect their spoiled, rich, rotten, billionare financiers. And we wonder why nothing productive can get done in Washington!)

So Sad!

I have two thoughts about this break-up:

1. I am truly very, very sad about this. They have four kids, and they seemed like such a great couple. Different backgrounds, yes, but they both seemed grounded and real. When I heard the news, I almost started crying I was so upset- for them as well as their children. I guess it just goes to show that even seemingly great marriages still have problems.


And,
2. Republicans can get off their high horse about thinking they are so morally superior to Democrats- they have officially lost their self-righteous and self-given title of "moral gods and goddesses" of America. Granted, they lost it a  long time ago, but now they can really shut up about having higher standards than everybody else, because they don't.

Whew, felt good to get that off my chest!

CNN Presents- A Shout Out

Last night my husband and I watched CNN Presents: The Hunt For Bin Laden (I'm not sure if that is the exact title, but it is something like that). If you have CNN, you should definitely watch this!

This special feature goes into detail of what occurred for the preparation and the mission of getting Bin Laden. It is fascinating- and caused me to have a much greater appreciation for our intelligence community (dang, they are smart people!) and for what our special opps forces can accomplish (real life is WAY better than the movies!).

It is a great piece of journalism- I'm sure you will not be disappointed! Definitely a 5 star piece!

The Irresistible Revolution

"When people begin moving beyond charity and toward justice and solidarity with the poor and oppressed, as Jesus did, they get in trouble. Once we are actually friends with folks who struggle, we start to ask WHY people are poor, which is never as popular as giving to chairty. One of my friends has a shirt marked with the words of late Caholic Bishop Dom Helder Camara:

'When I fed the hungry, they called me a saint.

When I asked why people are hungry, they called me a communist.'

Charity wins awards and applause, but joining the poor gets you killed. People do not get crucified for charity. People are crucified for living out a love that disrupts the social order, that calls forth a new world.

People are not crucified for helping poor people.

People are crucified for joining them."

-From The Irresistible Revolution: Living As An Ordinary Radical by Shane Claiborn

The Human Predicament Cycle

I am fascinated by what is going in Egypt right now. I can hardly take my eyes off the television. It is awesome to know that we are truly watching history being made. But, it begs the question: What's next?

The answer, of course, is anybody's guess.

But I am reminded of what I learned in college- in BYU's American Heritage class. The BYU professors came up with what they call, "The human predicament cycle." It is a cycle that centuries of civilizations have gone through that goes like this:

1. Tyrannical leader/dictator
2. Revolution to get rid of said leader
3. Leader is ousted, anarchy ensues
4. A new tyrannical leader is put into power to establish order

Wash, rinse, repeat.

The United States of America is the country that was able to break from this cycle. Watching Egypt, I am reminded once again of how great our founding fathers really were. After the Revolutionary War, the people wanted to crown George Washington King of America- but he refused, knowing they had just fought a war to be rid of a king. Instead, he worked with other great men to form our Constitution and establish the United States of America. We are certainly blessed to be a part of that legacy!

Now, we wait and see what Egypt will do. Will they fall victim to the Human Predicament Cycle and have anarchy that will lead to yet another dictator? Or, will they break free and establish a government of the people, by the people, and for the people?

Only time will tell, and I am anxious to see how this all plays out!

2011 Economic Collapse?

HERE is one of hundreds of articles talking about how our economy might collapse- sooner, rather than later.

I am sure that by now all of us agree we are in a crisis situation in regards to the economy and the national deficit.

I, however, have lost faith in both political parties to do anything about it.

Both parties caused this. One party did not do more damage than the other- and I will not argue about that. BOTH sides are responsible.

The worst part, though, is that NEITHER side is doing anything about it.

They both promise to.

They both say they will.

But nothing gets done.

Even the beloved (HA!) Tea-Partiers have vowed to reduce the budget by only 30 billion. That's 1.67% of the deficit. That's the same amount the Fed prints every MONTH. Meaning: Even the tea partiers are completely unwilling to do anything that will actually reduce the deficit.

I have completely lost faith in both parties to make the hard choices and actually do something meaningful to reduce the deficit. Why? Because it is political suicide to be the one to push the austerity measures that must be done to get our budget anywhere within reason. Remember what happened in Greece? Spain? London? It's not pretty for the ones who actually do the hard things.

So neither party is doing it.

Honestly, I don't understand all the numbers and how it all works and I don't get everything that is happening. But, I know it's not good- and it's not going to get any better anytime soon, regardless of who is in power.

What do I think will happen?

I think China will call our debt and leave us begging for mercy as the dollar becomes worthless. I think there will be massive riots in America as food becomes the most precious commodity. I think we will have to create a new currency and start over- which will most certainly be painful for all of us.

Yes, I think it's that bad.

How bad do you think it is?

The Mormon Ethic of Civility

It seems now the timing is perfect for this wonderful article I read today. It was put out by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints newsroom in 2009. A very timely article for what is going on right now!

The Mormon Ethic of Civility

The political world is astir. Economies are faltering. Public trust is waning. Individuals feel vulnerable. And social cohesion wears thin. Meanwhile, stories of rage and agitation fill our airwaves, streets and town halls. Where are the voices of balance and moderation in these extreme times? During a recent address given in an interfaith setting, Church President Thomas S. Monson declared: "When a spirit of goodwill prompts our thinking and when united effort goes to work on a common problem, the results can be most gratifying." Further, former Church President Gordon B. Hinckley once said that living “together in communities with respect and concern one for another” is “the hallmark of civilization.” That hallmark is under increasing threat.




So many of the habits and conventions of modern culture — ubiquitous media, anonymous and unsourced online participation, politicization of the routine, fractured community and family life — undermine the virtues and manners that make peaceful coexistence in a pluralist society possible. The fabric of civil society tears when stretched thin by its extremities. Civility, then, becomes the measure of our collective and individual character as citizens of a democracy.



A healthy democracy maintains equilibrium through diverse means, including a patchwork of competing interests and an effective system of governmental checks. Nevertheless, this order ultimately relies on the integrity of the people. Speaking at general conference, a semiannual worldwide gathering of the Church, Elder D. Todd Christofferson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles asserted: “In the end, it is only an internal moral compass in each individual that can effectively deal with the root causes as well as the symptoms of societal decay.” Likewise, Presiding Bishop H. David Burton emphasized that the virtues of fidelity, charity, generosity, humility and responsibility “form the foundation of a Christian life and are the outward manifestation of the inner man.” Thus, moral virtues blend into civic virtues. The seriousness of our common challenges calls for an equally serious engagement with reasonable ideas and solutions. What we need is rigorous debate, not rancorous altercations.



Civility is not only a matter of discourse. It is primarily a mode of engagement. The technological interconnectedness of society has made isolation impossible. Of all the institutions in the modern world, religion has had perhaps the greatest difficulty adjusting to the reality of give and take with the public. Today, and throughout its history, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints continuously encounters the legitimate interests of various stakeholders in its interaction with the public. Rather than exempting itself from the rules of law and civility, the Church has sought the path of cooperative engagement and avoided the perils of acrimonious confrontation.



Echoing this mode of civil engagement, President Monson declared: “As a church we reach out not only to our own people but also to those people of goodwill throughout the world in that spirit of brotherhood which comes from the Lord Jesus Christ.” Speaking of civility on a personal level, Elder Robert D. Hales of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles taught Latter-day Saints how to respond to criticism: “Some people mistakenly think responses such as silence, meekness, forgiveness, and bearing humble testimony are passive or weak. But, to ‘love [our] enemies, bless them that curse [us], do good to them that hate [us], and pray for them which despitefully use [us], and persecute [us]’ (Matthew 5:44) takes faith, strength, and, most of all, Christian courage.”



The moral basis of civility is the Golden Rule, taught by a broad range of cultures and individuals, perhaps most popularly by Jesus Christ: “And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise” (Luke 6:31). This ethic of reciprocity reminds us all of our responsibility toward one another and reinforces the communal nature of human life.



Similarly, the Book of Mormon tells a sober story of civilizational decline in which various peoples repeat the cycle of prosperity, pride and fall. In almost every case, the seeds of decay begin with the violation of the simple rules of civility. Cooperation, humility and empathy gradually give way to contention, strife and malice.



The need for civility is perhaps most relevant in the realm of partisan politics. As the Church operates in countries around the world, it embraces the richness of pluralism. Thus, the political diversity of Latter-day Saints spans the ideological spectrum. Individual members are free to choose their own political philosophy and affiliation. Moreover, the Church itself is not aligned with any particular political ideology or movement. It defies category. Its moral values may be expressed in a number of parties and ideologies.



Furthermore, the Church views with concern the politics of fear and rhetorical extremism that render civil discussion impossible. As the Church begins to rise in prominence and its members achieve a higher public profile, a diversity of voices and opinions naturally follows. Some may even mistake these voices as being authoritative or representative of the Church. However, individual members think and speak for themselves. Only the First Presidency and the Twelve Apostles speak for the whole Church.



Latter-day Saint ethical life requires members to treat their neighbors with respect, regardless of the situation. Behavior in a religious setting should be consistent with behavior in a secular setting. The Church hopes that our democratic system will facilitate kinder and more reasoned exchanges among fellow Americans than we are now seeing. In his inaugural press conference President Monson emphasized the importance of cooperation in civic endeavors: “We have a responsibility to be active in the communities where we live, all Latter-day Saints, and to work cooperatively with other churches and organizations. My objective there is ... that we eliminate the weakness of one standing alone and substitute for it the strength of people working together.”


HERE is a direct link. I hope you guys enjoyed it!

Was Jesus a liberal Democrat? Well, duh.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Jesus Is a Liberal Democrat
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog March to Keep Fear Alive

Insanity Point #4: North Korea

I was going to write about the new Tax Deal, but to be honest it truly just upsets me and there is SO MUCH there to discuss I wasn't ready to tackle it. If somebody else wants to, though, please give it a go, as like I said- there is a lot to discuss there!

Instead, however, today I will discuss North Korea.

Yahoo! posted THIS article today.

It quotes a North Korean website that says:

"Because of the South Koreans' reckless war policies, it is not about war or peace on the Korean peninsula but when the war will break out."

There is more in the article about how if they go to war it will be a nucleur war and not limited just to the Korean Peninsula.

Personally, I think North Korea is just looking for an excuse to go to war! Their actions the past year seem to show they are anxious to fight.

Very good friends of ours just returned from living in South Korea for two years, and they said North Korea is always making vain threats and they think all of this is show. In fact, they said they would move back- they aren't scared at all.

But I think the North is looking for a fight, and it could erupt at any moment. Then we would get involved, Russia and China would get involved, the EU would have to get involved, etc. etc.

Any thoughts?

Insanity Point #3

I took the girls swimming today at the local pool, and as I was headed out I overheard this conversation:

Man #1: Soon we are going to be a second rate county.

Man #2: That's what Obama wants.

I almost walked over there and asked him if that was seriously what he believed.

Really??? The man who fought to give all citizens the right to health care wants to destroy America? The man who talks constantly of an America full of opportunity for all wants us all to suffer? The man who puts billions into improving our education and into fighting the correct war wants America dismantled?

I could not believe my ears.

This is exactly what John Stewart was talking about.

You may not agree with Obama. You may not like his policis. You may not think his decisions will solve all of the problems we currently face. But to go around saying Obama- the President of the United States- wants us to become a second rate country is ignorant at best and detrimental to our society at worst.

We are ALL Americans. We are ALL on the same team. Including Obama.

Let's stop name calling and accusing each other and instead find common ground to work together to fix the things that are wrong with this country, instead of destroying it from within.

And Man #2- find something more useful to do with your time than spread hate and lies.

THE Article

I posted this article on Facebook:
-
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_16569466?utm_medium=facebook
-
The main purpose I posted the article is due to the overall premise that blaming health insurance premium hikes on the new Health Care Bill is untrue. Please feel free to read the article- it is not too long.
-
I believe there are a million lies/untruths/misinformation out there about the health care bill.
-
First and foremost, people should STOP calling it "Obamacare." It is not Obamacare. A much more accurate term is "Health Care For All." Not Health Care for Obama. So please stop using the term. It is absolutely, completely, 100% FALSE.
-
Second, we need to stop calling it socialized medicine. It is NOT socialized medicine. The government does not own the hospitals. The government does not own the doctors. The government does not make any decisions about your health care. Compare these reforms to Europe, and there are little to no comparisons to be made. That is yet another falsehood. (In fact, if you are a Republican, compare this bill to your beloved voucher program that uses government money to pay for private schools and you should immediately fall in love with this bill- the two concepts are quite similar)
-
Another falsehood is what this article stipulates, hence the reason I posted the article. The idea that the Health Care bill is causing premiums to skyrocket.
-
The fact of the matter is that premiums were skyrocketing every year well before health care reform was passed.
-
My dad owns a small company. He spends about $1500.00/month per employee on health care for his employess. For years he has been saying he would either go under or have to stop offering health care to his employees.
-
Now that health care reform has passed, he continues to say the same thing. However, from what I understand, now if he opts to not offer insurance, they will be able to still get insurance and still be covered, for the small fee of 900.00/year. That is WAY cheaper than what he is currently paying, so he will be able to stay in business.
-
I am not saying the Health Care Reform bill is perfect. It is a work in progress. But I am saying let's stop using scare tactics and lies to convince people it is a bad bill. This is a bill that affects everyone, and virtually every American agrees something has to be done to fix the health care crisis in America. Let's take this bill and tweak it, fix it, and give it a chance to succeed. For ALL Americans.
-
Can't both sides at least agree on that?

Insanity Point #2

Before children, falling back was fun.

-

The falling back I mean is the falling back where you got an extra hour of sleep once a year when you change your clocks.

-

With children, unfortunately, the glory of the extra hour of sleep is non-existent. Instead of snuggling with my comforter an extra hour, my kids woke me up 5:45 am. Oh, joy.

-

Which leads me to my insanity point.

-

Why do we change clocks?

-

Apparently it is to save energy. But I am not sure, because now it is dark at 5:30 instead of 6:30 and so that leaves us turning on our lights an extra hour earlier.

-

So I am not sure.

-

But I think we should forgo this wild tradition of ours so that I can get some sleep.