Yesterday evening the democratically led senate voted on the much controversial Obama Buffett Rule. Sadly, and stupidly the bill didn’t pass. It had fifty-one votes in favor of it with only forty-five votes opposing it. So while the Buffett Rule is important and there should have been more votes in favor of it the real travesty is how our U.S. senate works. See in order for a bill to be passed in the Senate the bill needs sixty in favor votes. So technically majority rules but the majority can not simply be a simple majority.
Every bill has a long a journey before it even becomes voted on in the Senate. First it’s thought up and then it’s drafted into bill form. Then it reaches some place where they look over the bill and see if the bill is actually worth spending time and money voting on it. Then it reaches the U.S. House of Representatives where a simple majority is all a bill needs to be passed on over to the mighty powerful U.S. Senate where a bills fate is finally decided. In the Senate people have the possibility of obstructing the voting on a bill, which is called a filibuster, and that’s perfectly. In fact in the past two years we have seen the most filibusters ever. So just because a bill makes it to the senate that doesn’t mean it will get voted on. So, with the legal obstruction of progress and the lack of a simple majority needed it’s surprising that any bill gets passed.
But, in a country where majority rules a majority of the time why is there a special rule for the U.S. Senate only. I mean I could understand the lack of a simple majority if it were like that in the House Of Representatives or in the Electoral College but it’s not like that. The Senate is special and there is no reason why. Maybe the congress should fix the way they operate and then maybe we’d be able to get more done as a nation.
Lou Dobbs, a Fox Business Analyst, doesn’t seem to like children’s movies. Or rather children’s movies that encourage children to borrow things or speak their mind. Lou Dobbs earlier this week claimed that two new children’s movies, the movie adaptation of Dr. Suess’s The Lorax and Japanes adapted film The Secret World of Arrietty, are indoctrinating children and are “demonizing the 1 percent and espousing the virtue of green energy policy.” Now, to you and I know these movies aren’t indoctrinating children and these movies aren’t teaching kids to demonize the 1 percent. Even if that were the objective kids wouldn’t notice it because while watching these movies they’d be distracted by the furry orange talking peanut or they would be amazed by the tiny girl climbing curtains with earrings she found.
It’s absolutely silly to claim “Liberal Hollywood” is trying to indoctrinate young kids who have no idea what politics are even about. Actually, by bringing it up Lou Dobbs does more damage and might actually sway those right leaning parents to speak to their kids about these “evil” movies. So, with these parents forcing their ideologies upon their children two things could possibly happen. One, those parents could create far right radical ideologues. Two, the kids of those parents, who are right ideologues, in an attempt to rebell may become far left wing ideologues. With the creation of these two sets radical ideologues there a turmoil ulike ever before.
Lou Dobbs and the cronies that discussed these films and talked about their indoctrination forgot to talk about the indoctrination of young kids on the part of the Right wing. Yes, the Right wing does indoctrinate people and they have published works to verify my claims. If you haven’t read it you should check out Angel In the Waters, a book that was created solely to help young children hear a word of pro-life before even hearing a word of pro-choice; that was how it was described by a Right wing blogger. Let’s not forget the inoctrination of kids to believe that being gay is wrong and a person should be punished for being gay, that’s messed up.
I am not naive, I understand that some people on the left are out there trying to indoctrinate children into leaning left politically. But let’s call these movies what they really are, children’s movies. There are hundreds even thousands of things that prove that the Left wing and the Right wing are guilty of trying to indoctrinate children. So, let’s leave the false allegations of indoctrinations alone and let’s allow the people or actual political reporters to decide what is indoctrination and what isn’t. Because the longer people like Lou Dobbs continue to claim indoctrination on the account of the children’s movies the longer people like Lou Dobbs will continue to come off as belligrently ignorant.
I am a huge country music fan. When you listen to country music there are few artists you can’t ignore, no matter how long ago these artist began their careers. Those artist are of course Johnny Cash, Conway Twitty, Patsy Cline, and Loretta Lynn. These four artists are the epitome of what country music was and they are a perfect example of the greatness a country musician should try to obtain through out their careers. Johnny Cash was “The Man in Black”, Conway Twitty had the most number one singles of any act until 2006, Patsy Cline is the Queen of Country Music, and Loretta Lynn the Coal Miners Daughter exemplifies a true rags to riches story.
These musicians are probably some of the most notable musicians in American History. One thing sets Loretta Lynn apart, though. She was an outspoken advocate for women’s rights and equality for women and she also spoke out against the Vietnam War. She has more banned songs than any other country artist. Among those songs are, “Rated X” which talks about the stigma of divorced women, the song was more controversial because it’s frank language rather than it’s message. Another was “Wings Upon Your Horns”, which discussed the loss of teenage virginity, which to Loretta Lynn who was married at fourteen and had four children before leaving her teenage years may not seem that controversial. Then the one song that is catching a lot of attention because of the contraception issue going on right now is “The Pill”, which speaks of the liberation of women via the pill.
That song was released in 1972. In 1972 Loretta Lynn rejoiced in the fact that there was a pill that a woman could take that would prevent her from having more children and prevent that woman from being tethered any further to a man. To say this song was controversial back then is an understatement, in some places now that song is still very controversial. The thing I’m trying to convey by talking about this song is why is a woman born in Kentucky in 1935 more progressive on hormonal contraception forty years ago than a person born in 1978 in legislature today.
It doesn’t make sense, really, I am perplexed by how little sense it makes to be anti-contraception. Contraception isn’t an evil thing and women who use contraception aren’t more likely to be more sexually active. Contraception is a safety net for that time when a woman does go out and things do get a little hot and heavy or God forbid when a woman is attacked and raped. Contraception also has many uses away from it’s sexual aspects. Contraception is used when women have a thyroid problem or an ovarian cyst but many contraception opponents claim contraception is only used so women can go out and perform acts of bumping nasty’s, I’m eighteen bumping nasty’s is hilarious to me I apologize for using it if any one is offended by my use of it.
Contraception was invented and better forms of contraception will continue to be introduced into society. It is a necessary thing nowadays and to prevent a woman from using it is not only illogical but also immoral. Hormonal contraception should given a different name because it’s current name is doing more harm than good and could be putting many women in danger especially in states where the Personhood Amendment may be put into law. It seems we have been regressing recently and until we as a society learn how to stop being dumb we will continue to regress further in to the ubiquitous darkness that was the individually repressive Dark Ages.
Virginia state lawmaker , Janet Howell, introduced a somewhat controversial yet extremely funny amendment to a bill into the Virginia senate. This amendment would have made it mandatory for any male getting treated for erectile dysfunction to get a rectal exam and heart test before being prescribed an erectile dysfunction medicine. Ms. Howell introduced this amendment in protest of the bill forcing women to get an unnecessary ultrasound before going through with an abortion.
Ms. Howell stated “We should just have a little gender equity here,”. I easily and understandably agree with her. It’s ridiculous to force a woman to pay for an ultrasound when they don’t need it. You may say “But a rectal exam is far more intrusive than an ultrasound,”. I respond to that by saying an ultrasound is an extremely intrusive thing only physically but, mentally and emotionally. In most cases when women see the unborn child living within them they become more attached to the fetus. I believe this is why the Virginia senate included the forced ultrasound into the bill.
The forced ultrasound bill passed. The forced rectal exam amendment almost made it into law but missed the mark by a narrow two votes, 21-19. This Virginia bill is by far one of the most intrusive laws in the reproductive rights field. There are the “fetal pain” laws, which say fetuses can feel pain so a woman can’t abort after 20 weeks, in Nebraska, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Alaska, South Dakota, and Texas. But even those states don’t force women to get an ultrasound before an abortion.
As reproductive rights continue to come to the forefront of politics, women continue to be misrepresented. They often don’t get their voices heard, being that there are only seventeen women in the U.S. Senate and ninety-two women in the U.S. House of Representatives. Majority of those women are democrats so there’s only aspect of the woman point of view being told and when that point of view being isn’t being there’s some old guy telling women what they can and can’t do with their body. In fact of all the people that support anti-abortion laws seventy-seven percent of them are men. That is a little backwards.
While I consider the gift of life a blessing. It is not my place to tell a woman the child that is growing with in her is a blessing. There are so many instances where an abortion is justifiable and for me to tell a woman that her reasons to abort are wrong is the slap in the face of every women to have ever lived. Then you have the cases where a woman is raped. To force that woman to carry the child of her attacker is like telling a man to donate sperm to the woman who cut his genitalia off. That puts that situation into perspective now doesn’t it?
Even though I have the situation into perspective some men will still continue to use the same old excuses to force their patriarchal ideals on women. Some women still use the same old excuses to follow those same prehistoric patriarchal ideals. However, until all women come out of the dark ages we will see intrusive and idiotic reproductive rights laws being introduced into law.
A lot of right wing ideologues oppose tax increases on Americas most wealthy by stating one thing but, that one thing doesn’t hold much truth. What is the right wing ideologues statement? That statement is “You can’t raise taxes on the rich because they are the ‘job creators’.” Excuse my language for a minute but, that statement is total and utter bull shit. Where did they get the idea that these people are the job creators? If you know any one who says wealthy people are job creators tell them to email me and explain to me how the wealthy are job creators.
See in America there is a thing called a free market economy. While Americas free market is not a totally pure free market, it is a free market none the less. Being that our economy is based upon a free market, there is one thing we absolutely cannot escape. That thing that we absolutely cannot escape is supply and demand. Supply and demand isn’t a black and white thing. There are many variables that play into a free market economy and supply and demand so the explanations I will give will be the simple basic ideas of supply and demand.
Supply is dependent on demand and it also goes the other way around. The equilibrium is the perfect balance of supply and demand. If demand is high then supply will most likely be high, thus creating a higher equilibrium. If supply is high and demand is down their will be a lower equilibrium. With that information being stated, I am now going to tell you who and what creates jobs.
If demand is high there will be more need of supply. If supply is high then we will need more people to create the products that are being demanded. If more people are making a product the action of making that product is a persons job. That being said, some people will still wonder who are the job creators. Well in a free market economy, that is based on supply and demand, people like you and I are the real job creators. Don’t believe me, look at what happens every year during Christmas and Summer time.
While wealthy business owners do play their part in creating jobs initially, after free enterprise takes action, business owners play no part in job creation. The fact that some conservative and liberal politicians are lying to us and telling us business owners need to be protected from taxes is upsetting. These politicians are pretty much calling the American people stupid and are expecting that we haven’t taken a simple economics class, which is a requirement to graduate from high school. The politicians need to stop representing big businesses and wealthy business owners and get back to representing the average American. I just turned eighteen not even a year ago and I am already sick and tired of the games politicians play. I know those of you who are older than me must be ready to ditch the whole idea of democracy after seeing it be corrupted by people like the Koch brothers. Hopefully, politicians will smarten up and get the Koch out of our government.
Today Obama rejected the Keystone Pipeline. I am glad the pipeline was rejected. I believe in the long hall the pipeline would have done more harm than good. People on yahoo said “Obama wanted to create jobs. He just killed hundreds of jobs.” People don’t realize that the Keystone Pipeline has environmental ramifications. The pipeline may create jobs but it may also destroy the surrounding environment.
The pipeline would have gone through one of the most untouched and beautiful plots of land left in America. The pipeline would destroy part of Americas beautiful land. I am all for creating jobs but not at the cost of destroying the beautiful country I live in. If there were a way to get the oil with out destroying this part of America I would be all for it unfortunately there isn’t and there are less jobs because of it.
I was lucky growing up. I had two parents who cared for me and looked after me as well as two older siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins, and grandparents who did the same. I was also lucky because my family allowed me to develop my own political views and views on social issues. On election days when I got home from school my family would receive a barrage of questions about who they voted for from me but, they never quite gave me a straight answer. They would say they voted for the white guy, or the guy with brown hair. I would think to myself “okay” and at the time those answers sufficed. As I look back though, I feel hoodwinked, bamboozled, and cheated out of a straight forward answer. I am also grateful for those answers. I am grateful because those answers never swayed what I thought about certain candidates or a certain party.
Some of my friends didn’t have the same privilege as me though. One of my friends political views are so skewed by his fathers that when ever Obama appears on t.v. he screams, so he doesn’t have to hear Obama speak. Or in one case he called me a liberal scum when I proved to him and his father that their views on a certain topic were backwards and would actually hinder society. My friend also said Donald Trump would make a good president so he added some weirdness to his fathers political views.
I’m not saying that families shouldn’t discuss politics with their children but, older family members should be weary of talking ill of a certain politician or political party. Children are very impressionable and a person whom they look up to saying “democrats are dumb asses” resonates with children long after that person has forgotten they’ve said it. Since those children have heard their father or grandfather say “republicans are dumb asses” they hold those words to be fact rather than opinion. And their belief of our statements to be true usually ends up with them being more radical, more far left or far right without any real understanding of why they believe these things. So if your a parent, a grandparent, an aunt, an uncle, or just somebody able to vote with another person looking up to you, be weary of what you say around the youngsters. If you don’t this country may be ran by radicals of the far left or far right and this country may see more turmoil than ever before.
When you look through right wing political blogs you might see people say the founding fathers were conservative republicans but the founding fathers and Thomas Jefferson, in particular, were very liberal in the true sense of the word. Nowadays the words conservative and liberal have become muddled by modern day politics and politicians. If you look at what a liberal or conservative now, there is no true liberal or true conservative. Many liberals are socially liberal but economically they are conservative. And the same goes for conservatives, they are socially conservative but economically they’re liberal. If you want to see a true liberal you’ll have to look at a libertarian.
I am going off what I have looked up, if I am wrong fill free to correct me, but think about what the definition of liberal is. Liberal defined by dictionary.com is “1.favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.2.( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.3.of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.4.favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by lawand secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.5.favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression“. Now really look at the fourth definition. Study it, remember it, and compare that definition to libertarians stand for. Now I’m not calling libertarians liberals in the sense of liberals in politics today but, I am calling them liberal in the true sense of the word.
People will use what ever they can to justify what they do or believe in. In some cases people will use religion to be homophobic. In other cases people will use fear to get what they want. In the case I am talking about, people use Thomas Jefferson, one of the most brilliant persons to ever live, to say the conservative party is better than the liberal party. I am strongly against this method and I am strongly opposed to how the definitions of liberal and conservative have changed. And why do we label a political party on their social beliefs rather than their economic beliefs or the parties economic and social beliefs? Why?
I was talking to my friend and she told me politics are boring and that the focus of my blog should be focused on more 18 year old friendly topics. I told her straight out, politics aren’t boring and what could be more 18 year old friendly than politics, in the first year I’m able to vote. She was like “no you should be talking about music and regular teenage stuff. It’s weird that you talk about politics.” Well call me weird and strap a weirdo sign to my back.
Politics are important to me and should be important to every person in the world. Sadly, that’s not how it is. In fact, the average American thinks about politics an average of FIVE long minutes per month. Yep, that’s an average of a few seconds a day. And the average is even fewer among young adults. That fact is reflected when I ask my friends what they think about how well the Obama Administration has done so far. Or it’s reflected when my friend tells me even though this is the first year she’s able to vote, she’s not going to because she doesn’t know anything about the people running.
There’s definitely a disconnect between politics and young people. Recently you’ve seen politicians trying to reach out to young people but it doesn’t work. Why? I don’t know. Maybe because young people don’t feel represented politics or political media. Maybe because there’s more interesting stuff to talk about like 90210 or gossip girl. Maybe it’s because teenagers feel they have more important things to worry about, like love, lust, break ups, tests, papers, and just trying to learn how to get by in America.
Politicians need to make a better attempt to connect with young voters. Now I’m not saying promise foolish things but give us a reason to follow politics other than the already important things. Get more relatable people. Do whatever you think will get young voters to pay attention.
During my daily political fill I am constantly hearing people ask questions like ” Will the 99% win?” from MSNBC and from FOX I hear ” Has the ‘so called’ 99% loss yet?” And I ask myself when did Americans politics become about winning or losing, other than in elections and trying to get bills passed. In my opinion people are going about it all wrong.
People are name calling and saying “MY PARTY IS BETTER THAN YOURS!!!” Everything going on in congress and surrounding congress should not be like fans rooting against a rival team during rivalry week. There should be a camaraderie and a willingness not to necessarily work together but a willingness to work together without any grudges. People like Jon Huntsman should be leading in polls and people like Newt Gingrich or jokes like Herman Cain shouldn’t even be considered.
We, the American people, are missing our foundation. We’ve been overcome by greed, selfishness, stupidity, and a disregard of our neighbors and fellow Americans. We need to put our differences aside. Whether it be politics, sports, or whatever. We need to retake control of our government and tell those people on Capitol Hill they work for us not big corporations. And finally let’s not allow our differences divide but, let them bring us together so we can shape a better America for future Americans.