What if there's a tie?

In past presidential elections, I do not recall so much emphasis being placed on the possibility of a tie in the Electoral College on election day. Over the past two weeks, it seems as if that's what 75% of news sources mention, in passing or directly. I'm beginning to wonder why.

If I go to Gallup or 270towin and read their front page, in a matter of seconds, I'm going to come across talk of a tie. Should there be a tie, the reality is, the House picks the winner. Right now, the House is controlled by Republicans. That means Romney wins.

So do these people know something we don't? According to 270towin, there are 32 combinations in which a tie might occur as of today with about eleven states up in the air.

It's almost as if they are giving us a preview for the news coverage we will receive on election night and the morning following the election. It's almost as if the election is going to be rigged and then stolen. Imagine the hubbub should the House pick Romney. It will be no different than the events which transpired in 2000 when George W. Bush was handed the big win by the Supreme Court. The people didn't make this decision. The Electoral College didn't even make that decision. It went to the Supreme Court. In this year's scenario, it would be left up to the House, not the people.

It would further discredit the validity of the Electoral College and invigorate the push for our elections to rely solely upon the popular vote instead. I don't know about you, but I don't like the way the tie scenario is being fed to us. It's very suspicious that this possible outcome is so common a topic this year.

I mean, according to 270towin, Obama has a 74% chance of getting to 270 and Romney only has a 24% shot at the same goal. Why, then, does it even come to mind that the election would end in a tie?

Is this just media hype? Imagine the division in this country should the House be given the choice. Imagine just how much finger pointing and complaining we will have to endure over the next four years. Imagine all the doubt and distrust something like this would create.

A tie? That'd put us in some deep doo doo. Let's hope there is a clear winner on election night. I do not want to put up with a partisan decision. I would rather see the Electoral College play out as intended.

Divided we stand...Wait. What?

Politics in America remains a touchy subject, but for many Americans, the word "touchy" barely even touches on the problems facing us. We are a nation divided. Our politicians are a direct reflection of our own inability to compromise with one another. One side is pitted against the other. Compromise is not a possibility anymore. One side attempts to compromise to the middle and ends up losing, while at the same time, gets framed as uncompromising and so far Left in ideology, the other side has no idea where the middle even begins or ends because they are too far Right in ideology. In the end, nothing gets done and the American people suffer for legislation that has been made ineffectual through backdoor deals and retroactive policies specifically designed to cripple such legislation. Let's face it. We are a mess.

After reading about the horrible event today in Arizona involving Representative Gabrielle Giffords, I went on to read the comments. Depending on the site you chose as your source of information, you were either greeted with comments in line with your political leaning or you were soon enveloped by a sea of vitriol, condemnation, and the rhetoric we have come to know over the past ten years. At that point, whether or not the young man who committed this atrocity was a Democrat or a Republican became moot. Let me repeat that point. This post is not about this young man. It is about our response to the events which transpired.

After reading one comment in particular, it dawned on me. We are likely doomed. We are too divided. We cannot turn back. A major confrontation is inevitable. A war is looming. The comment itself suggested we go ahead and divide our country and be done with it. Let's skip killing off thousands, if not millions of Americans and draw the necessary line. You go where you belong and I'll go where I belong. Let's skip the fighting, the collapse of our economy, and the scuffle over natural resources.

Ah, but that begs the obvious question. Where should this line be? If you follow politics, you might suggest that we go back to the old North and South we knew at the time of the Civil War. I know many Americans in the South want the map to look like that (and if you think I'm exaggerating, you need to spend more time living down here). Unfortunately, the political spectrum of our country has created more of a speckled map of the United States. Republicans and Democrats are neighbors. Individual states are represented by both Republican and Democratic districts. A line dividing us into North and South like that would not go over well. Millions would be left scrambling for their lives just as if there had been an actual war.

What if we allow individual states to actually secede? Secessionists roam the two lane roads just west of here in East Texas. I personally have no problem seeing Texas leave us. Several other states, likely the same ones who have brought cases against the Federal Government over Health Care Reform, would be on this list. Let's set aside the question of whether or not they can sustain themselves on their own. A state with sovereign rights separate from the Union will provide a place for those unhappy with the US Government to go. Let them worry about the anarchy inside their walls.

My point is, I think the only way America can remain standing is if we divide it. United, we are not. We have crossed the line. There is no turning back. You may find my post apathetic and worrisome, but it is the new reality on the horizon. I do not like it and I certainly wish we were not faced with such a scary future. I just don't see how we can recover from the division which has erupted over the course of these past ten years. The threat is very real and while we can stand here hoping it is not true, I do not think hope will carry us for much longer. We need a leader who can simmer down the rhetoric and not only speak the truth, but convince the American people he or she is actually telling the truth without the media spinning the language and feeding the wave of misinformation. Even the strongest and most honest leader I do not think is remotely capable of fighting against such a wave of ignorance and hate.

I do not want anarchy. There is a loud voice in this country which wants out. They do not see that what they are suggesting will create anarchy. Much like their perception of evolution, they believe secession and huge leaps can come overnight. To their dismay, I must be the voice of reason here and remind them that evolution took millions of years. No. Secession and division comes at a price and it will lead to a very long road of recovery.

Some of this post should be read in jest, I admit. At this point in time, I do not see any viable solutions to our problem. Congress needs to be reformed. Our system of elected government needs reform. Election campaign finance needs reform. People like me are not happy, but we are out of ideas. We are just as apathetic about our future as the day Al Gore conceded to George W. Bush. Many of us saw all of this coming. We were unable to stop them.

Typical Winter Global Warming Misinformation

Go anywhere on the internet and in light of the cold weather in the South and the heavy snow hitting the Midwest, you will find people joking about Global Warming, but not in a polite way.

It doesn't matter if you browse Twitter, Facebook, or a forum. People still do not understand what it is that constitutes Climate Change. Even worse is when people take literal components of Climate Change and twist them to disprove Global Warming in 140 characters or less. We as a people are no longer thinking. We are no longer taking the information given to us and processing it effectively.

So here are some points to keep in mind this winter.

Climate Change dictates that colder seasons will shorten and warmer seasons will lengthen. Growing seasons will become longer. Winter will not last quite as long. Snow generally aids in reflecting the radiation from the sun during the winter months. A shorter winter means that snow will not be on the ground come February and March. Shorten this time period and the Earth absorbs more of that radiation, perpetuating the problem even further.

Ocean temperatures are warmer. That results in more precipitation coming on land. Precipitation just does not magically appear over the mainland. Anyone who lives around the Great Lakes knows this all too well.

Because of temperatures and more energy feeding storms, the severity of such storms will be enhanced. This goes for hurricanes and your run of the mill thunderstorm.

What one person experiences in Minnesota will not be as pronounced as someone living in a coastal city where ocean levels are rising. The impact of Climate Change is felt more apparent in areas where subtle changes have profound effects. As Climate Change worsens, those of us living on the United States mainland will feel the full brunt of these effects. Americans tend to only think in terms of their own little world and disregard all that happens beyond our shores. This is one reason why the notion of Global Warming has been ridiculed.

So...

Individual weather events do not speak to the problem of Climate Change as a whole, but aspects of these individual events speak to the effects Climate Change is having on our planet. When you live in Iowa and Mother Nature dumps a lot of snow on you, first, you must remind yourself this is winter. Climate Change has not rid us of all four seasons yet. We still get cold in the winter time. The amount of snow depends on the moisture that has traveled across from the West Coast. That moisture, for the most part, came from the ocean.

Keep a sane perspective and you will continue to receive sane answers to your questions. Learn that the "warming" part of Global Warming is not as simple as saying it's going to be warm. Just because it's cold does not mean Global Warming is not real. It's winter. It's supposed to be cold. Just realize that winter may not last as long as it previously did. Anyone who confuses "Warming" with expecting December to feel like Florida in Minnesota is posing an idiotic view.

A curious, humorous, and rather entertaining link:
Darryl Cunningham Investigates: Climate Change
(Link added 1-9-2011)

To the "Small Towners"

Lately in the debate over President Obama's approval numbers, people on the Right, the Tea Party ilk especially, are trying to use their insulated and isolated groups of friends to justify widespread disapproval of anything Obama proposes. While I know attempting to explain the interactions involved in this dynamic may be a matter of futility, I will try nonetheless.

The logic follows as such. If all the people I know dislike what Obama is doing, then it stands to reason the rest of the country feels the same. Let me fill you in on some extra aspects of the interaction going on.

1. I have to ask about the specifics regarding "everyone you know."
2. I have to ask whether or not you have any liberal friends to begin with.

Have these liberal friends questioned you? Have you wondered why?

They are tired of repeating themselves when confronted with outright lies and misinformation. Repeating oneself is not a fun thing to do. Ever sit around with a group of friends? How often to disagreements arise? You are a group of friends for a reason. Those outside your circle never participate in your get togethers. You seldom hear from opposing views.

I can sit around at the barber shop and never once hear anyone agree with Obama. Why? I'm in the South at a white barber shop. I'm not going to hear anything other than dissent, justified or not. That should raise a red flag. I can proudly say that I no longer waste my money on such nonsense and get my hair cut elsewhere.

It is this sort of social dynamic that perpetuates the idea that those who surround themselves with people of the same ilk refuse to see what is right in front of them. It is why FOX News is a single entity and other news organizations are labeled as "liberal media." While the Right continues to claim the "liberal media" controls what you hear, it is more true that FOX News and the talking heads on the Right follow the pattern which exemplifies controlled information and parroting of ideas because the information being passed around is often done in a circular fashion among themselves. They are an insulated entity. Everyone else is scrambling for a story and a career in journalism.

Take where I live, for example. None of my local news outlets are fair and balanced. They all stink. They use Rasmussen polls. Anchors have their own Right-leaning web sites and columns. Reports only report what the viewership around here wants to hear. Polls in local news broadcasts often perpetuate misinformation by using said misinformation as the premise for the poll, thereby legitimizing something that never was true to begin with. They get numbers in favor of something that does not exist. None are FOX stations. Well, one is, but I never watch it. My local NBC, CBS, and ABC affiliates are all Right-leaning.

Two perfect examples:

A poll I posted on here at the blog asked whether or not we approved of the Obama health care bill. At the time, no Obama health care bill existed. There were multiple bills in the works and no one bill stood out as the leading piece of legislation. When asked the question, the ideal response is not yes or no, but rather "Which bill are you referring to?"

The second example is a recent one. The poll had to do with whether or not voting out career politicians would bring about repeal of the health care bill. It has already been pointed out by many, including Republicans, that it would take a miraculous number of wins in the midterm elections and even then, the chances of repealing the health care bill simply don't exist. The news disregarded this point, instead, choosing to fire up the Right wing base over anger related to the passage of the health care legislation to justify voting out elected officials.

But this is to be expected. You see, quite often, political differences are different because of a discrepancy with one premise. Often is the case that the premise on the Right is severely flawed, covered up with more animosity than real critical thinking. When one side of a debate operates from a very different premise, it is next to impossible to make your point shine through without drawing unnecessary and unrelated fire from the opposition.

Example:
I will never be able to point out the irony in - a Texan who feels abortion is a selfish arrogant act - to an actual Texan. Why? They will ask what Texas pride has to do with abortion. They are completely oblivious to the irony I see. The epitome of a Texan is that of an arrogant and selfish ass and in turn, I would not expect someone so selfish to have a problem with another so-called selfish act. An additional ironic point to make is that this is the new platform of the Religious Right component of the Republican party. Do as I say, not as I do. David Vitter exemplifies this utter hypocrisy in Christian Conservative thinking. But I digress. Hopefully you get the point of the example. The problem is premise.

You will never understand the broader picture until you step outside of the small town way of thinking. While Mayberry can be an enjoyable place, it operates under a very strict system of control. Those with power in small towns are able to manipulate anyone and everyone in the town. Those who question the power structure are chastised and cast out into the cold. There is nothing wrong with having pride for living in a flyover state, but you cannot suggest that you are any more American than someone living on the coast. It happens in coal mining towns. It happens in farming towns. It even happens in somewhat larger cities.

By limiting your argument to the opinions of only your friends, you have just introduced a hell of a lot of bias. I have very few friends where I live, but that is largely because they would prefer to have nothing to do with me as I'm not a church going, Right-leaning redneck. No, I'm not stereotyping. I'm simply telling you that the population of this town is largely comprised of this group and they are very selective about who they choose to surround themselves with. I highly doubt they are getting additional perspectives from anyone like me seeing as how I, myself, have very few friends as a northern transplant in the South. I've seen the outside world with my own two eyes living among the natives, not stationed on an army base.

To this accusation of corruption and arrogance, I expect anyone on the Right to respond with the well scripted "Liberals do it too." While I agree several on the Left insulate themselves, they do not follow the same pattern of limited information flow that occurs on the Right. The information being passed around outside of your circle is much more varied and open to interpretation whereas the information inside of your select group is limited by your own townsy lifestyle. This is why the "regular guy" has been pitted against the "elite" so as to prevent open interpretation of information from being accepted as legitimate. Your modus operandi should not be to screw over liberals every chance you get. I do not wake up every morning plotting to make life a living hell for conservatives. That is what has become of our political system. No longer is the statement "It's not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game" true. Nowadays, it's more about whether you win or lose. Much of the anger circulating among the Tea Party has more to do with being a sore loser than being a true conservative.

Prior to Columbus, the notion that the world was flat seemed almost painfully obvious. Look how that turned out. Things are not always that simple and seldom follow what Billy Bob considers common sense.

To steal a line from Pulp Fiction, move out of the sticks.

"And the South shall rise again"

The morning George W. Bush was announced as the winner of the 2000 election, the first words out of my mouth were "We're going to have hard times ahead of us." In addition, I said we were going to have a war and that it would not be pretty. After eight years, I can honestly say we were put on the path towards hard times and we are now in wars that have not been ideal, not that any war is, but that things were done half-assed. Somewhere in between his first term and his reelection, I was someone who said a civil war was coming. Along the same lines, I was also hinting at the saying those below the Mason Dixon line know all too well.

"The South will rise again."

Only in the last few years have we seen a glimpse of this trend on the national stage with any regularity. Now we are seeing a large movement with principles coming from the old ways of the South. I'm speaking, of course, of the current Republican Party, but the Tea Party movement has benefited from these sentiments more than any other faction of the Conservative base.

A few of these signs rest in plain sight. The voting pattern in the 2008 election which put Barack Obama in office clearly had a slant towards McCain in southern states. The overwhelming caucasian demographic of the Republican party is another trend hiding in plain sight.

Let me toss out a few more.

The Tea Party movement specifically refers to their organized approach as a revolution. In recent history, there have never been more threatening words towards our own government by a group of people this large. They feel that as a party and as a people, they are at war.

Along the same lines, members of this particular flavor of the Conservative base feel as though it is their duty to take "their" country back. Let's set aside the fact that the 2008 election was democratic in nature and Obama ended up in the White House as a result of this democratic system. Let's set aside the fact that Americans are Americans, whether they sit Left, Right, or Center. Let's even set aside the possibility that many want to "take their country back" from a black man (who isn't completely black, but a mixed-race individual). There exists the same sort of southern "us against them" mentality which was around at the time of the Civil War. This North vs South thing is evident in the language chosen by the Tea Party movement.

These people are clinging to old ways. Whether it's a religious thing pertaining to gay marriage or a cultural thing related to race, people in the Tea Party movement are clamoring to return to the 50's. Suggesting that the notion is ridiculous by way of a question is simply asking the wrong question. I'll give you the answer. Yes, they do want the 50's. Why? "Simpler times." To a small town local yokel, that kind of life resonates.

As discussed by Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, a speaker at the Tea Party convention suggested having to pass a civil literacy test in order to be able to vote. Instead of granting the rights of all citizens in this great country to vote, a test of this nature has been used specifically to prohibit any black person from having a voice in any election. The test wasn't designed so that the uninformed were not allowed to vote, a notion admittedly present in the minds of many Liberals after W was elected when dumb shits were clearly to blame. While I understand the sentiment, that is not the nation of ideals we were founded on. The literacy test was designed as a form of selection, allowing certain people (white) to vote and others (black) denied. The suggestion to use a literacy test in any form is simply wrong.

The Secessionist movement, or perhaps simply the sentiment, is rooted in the same mentality of southern pride. Even the notion of "Big Government" is related to this idea that the South has this unspoken sovereign power to withstand the northern influence.

Even gun ownership has its own flavor of southern spice. There is a very apparent preparedness of gun toting rednecks to take up arms in some grand stand against the government. The only way you'd know about this sentiment is if you spend any time living in the South or take some time out of your day reading posts online by rednecks who own guns. They are under the impression that since Liberals are for gun control, it would be a quick battle since they, as rednecks, have all the guns. I'd hate to be the bearer of bad news, but gun owners come from many different backgrounds. I can shoot. Rachel Maddow can shoot. If you come shooting, rest assured, there will be people ready to shoot back.

Whether it's elite vs middle of the country, white vs minority (a statistic that will change soon given the growing hispanic population), redneck vs city folk, or Liberal vs Conservative, all show signs of the South rising again.

Anyone who lives outside of the South who enjoys their way of life should be afraid of this movement. Anyone supporting the Tea Party movement should make themselves aware of the language they choose to use among its followers. Such a violent sentiment will rip our nation apart and leave both our economy and infrastructure in ruins. While the Right has a very paranoid element to it, I admit that this post has a paranoid quality to it as well. I'm sad to say that the language on the Right is more pronounced than what you might think and the reality of a revolution in a violent form is a distinct possibility.

Thoughts on Legalizing Pot

Although I'm a big fan of Bill Maher, there is one issue I am in opposition with him on. That issue is the legalization of marijuana. Whenever he starts discussing anything medical, well, let's just say Bill gets a little ranty and extreme. In light of the present economic downturn, many have been suggesting we should legalize marijuana as a source of monetary gain. Let's explore that idea, shall we?

In my view, there are two schools of thought in favor of legalizing this substance. The first, and more legitimate proposal in my opinion, involves using marijuana for medicinal purposes. The second and more troubling proposal is legalizing marijuana for recreational use. Unfortunately, one group uses the other to advance their cause. I think you know which one.

Although marijuana when thought of as a pharmaceutical product has shown benefits in medical practice, smoking the drug does not come without its pitfalls. Some of the unwanted effects include short-term memory loss, impaired lung function comparable to that of cigarette smokers, cancer, decreased sperm count and motility, interference with ovulation and prenatal development, altered immune response, and may cause detrimental effects on heart function. The well known amotivational syndrome has become the source of humor and represents the common image of the run of the mill stoner. This syndrome is a rather serious consequence of substance abuse and is not entirely desirable, nor funny. Let's not forget the association this drug has with schizophrenia.

So given that background information, smoking this particular product does not appear to be the ideal method of administration. These effects alone are enough to convince physicians that its use as a recreational drug is simply not a good idea. In the world of medicine, physicians will be geared towards getting you to quit whether the drug is legal or not.

Let's look at marijuana as a cash crop at this point in time. It is grown in foreign countries and smuggled across borders. Anyone with seeds can start up their own crop. The number of varieties out there resemble coffee and tea selections.

Now let's legalize it and examine the market as a recreational drug.

What are the proposed benefits?
Monetary gain
Stimulation of the economy
Decriminalization and reduced strain on the judicial system
Reduced border security issues
Reduced funding of criminals abroad

Let's look at the problems from a business perspective.

It will have to become centralized through a company here in the US. Why? A better infrastructure for growing and handling this crop is already in place in other countries. Smuggling will turn into importing and that money will go abroad, not stay at home. Remind me again where the "good stuff" comes from. Why wouldn't a centralized company work? Anyone can grow the stuff. A licensing system will have to be put into place. Consider it similar to having a liquor license. What company would want to grow a crop easily grown by regular people?
There's just no money in it once you legalize the stuff, unless of course, you're the government taxing it.

Ah taxes. That is your proposal, isn't it? The current proposal for economic growth does stem from government taxation. Proponents preach how pot will help reduce the national debt, etc, etc. Yep. Let's tax the substance. You already know how well taxes have gone with tobacco smokers. How much are you paying for a carton these days because of taxes? Do you really want to start paying more for your pot? I didn't think so. Dealers won't like the idea either. They'll have to start paying the IRS for the money they make. Keep it illegal, and all that money stays under the table.

The proposal to legalize marijuana as a recreational drug is nothing more than a notion that if major drug companies are allowed to push their substances, we ought to be able to have our pot too. The problem is, it's not a viable business proposal.

You think it will result in decriminalization? If you do anything under the influence, you will still be treated as a criminal. Possessing it will not be criminal, but daily activities performed under the influence most certainly will. I doubt you'll be able to have the stuff out in the open in your car. Underage possession will still be criminal as well. Places of employment are still going to piss test you. They still don't have to hire you if you test positive. Could be a bigger bureaucratic nightmare than it already is.

So if you want to legalize marijuana for recreational use, show me a business model that works. If anyone can grow it, I'm not sure how profitable marijuana will be as a crop. I just don't see it guys.

Cell Phone Spam

Are you one of the many cell phone users getting spam phone calls?

Did you do a Google search for the number that called you and discovered many others had been hit by the same scam?

I found one common link between the onset of the phone calls and my own life after someone else I know started getting similar calls.

We had both recently rented cars with Enterprise and left our cell phone numbers as the second contact number. Is Enterprise selling our numbers? What can we do about it? I assume calling Enterprise won't result in a change in behavior on their part. Better Business Bureau maybe? I doubt my provider, T-Mobile, will do anything about it either. As I understand it, the National Do Not Call List covers both land lines and cell phones. That may be your best course of action at this point.

Here are the numbers I've been hit with so far.
800-168-4861
800-219-7425
817-896-7714
908-226-0448
847-232-3321
866-209-7845
601-346-6104
402-982-0526

Most seem to pitch some warranty scam. I stopped answering after finding out what the first call was all about. I'm trying to establish a pattern here, so if you've also rented from Enterprise or other car rental company, I'd like to hear about it.

Gas Prices: Something to watch for

Gas prices are dropping to under $3 all across the country. I have yet to hear a clear reason as to why the prices are really dropping. Not long ago, we were faced with a supply issue related to hurricanes in the Gulf. Many stations were bone dry after a brief panic. Now that the economy is tanking, what is up with gas prices?

[conspiracy theory]
Since Bush & Co. caters to big oil, I would not be surprised if he nudged a few of his buddies to stop gouging so much. Pick a reason that makes sense for you. Explanations are endless.
[/conspiracy theory]

Big Oil has always fallen back on the supply & demand defense when confronted with accusations of price gouging in light of record breaking profits. Many said that because high prices would reduce usage, eventually demand would drop and in turn, prices would follow. Is that what we are seeing? The cycle, according to Big Oil, will continue because when prices drop, demand will suddenly spike and drive prices up again. If supply & demand really is behind all of this, I would expect to see this trend. If this trend does not play out, I will be left scratching my head and back on the price gouging bandwagon.

How Do We Combat The Handout Myth?

How do we, as Liberals, combat what I am now calling the "Handout Myth" that Conservatives spew out on forums all across the net? Not familiar with it? Let me explain.

The post will usually start out calling Liberals a bunch of socialists and move into discussing why social programs are a financial drain on our society. At some point, they will try to make the case that millions of Americans are mooching off of the government instead of getting off their butts and getting jobs. They make the case that millions are lazy and we are giving them handouts. They try to make it seem like millions are not willing to work.

Let me shed some light on this subject by giving you a sample of my own personal experiences. I work in medicine. I get to see patients day in and day out who are struggling to make ends meet. Doctors are twisting and turning in search of options for these patients, especially with regard to affordable medications. I assume you cannot object to this reality and you are following along with me so far. Most of them, regardless of race or gender, are generally apathetic about their options. They don't see a way out. They feel stuck and they are stuck.

The next thing that I notice is that these same people are very often receiving some sort of government benefit or "handout" if you will. Pick any "handout" you like and these people are getting it. Now let me introduce you to an interesting twist. Quite often, these same people vote Republican. Before you accuse me of making a sweeping broad statement, let me explain why I know how they vote. These people openly volunteer this sort of information to us in the midst of taking a history as some form of casual conversation. Sometimes they are rather rude in presenting themselves as staunch Republicans. Where does that put them in this grand scheme of handouts and laziness? Spend any amount of time in the inpatient Psych department and you will see numerous examples. These particular psych patients are very often obese white males and females with disheveled appearances. Are these the lazy folks the handouts are given to? It seems to me, they have very legitimate reasons for needing assistance. It seems to me the men and women I meet in Family Practice clinics across this country often have trouble making ends meet and have no options for upward mobility at this stage in their lives. Without assistance, they would be doomed.

Let me now read between the lines. The ones bitching about government handouts are typically hard working conservative white people. They are often simply blue collar workers, but the sentiment extends into the upper income brackets as well. What they won't openly say online is that the so called lazy impoverished moochers they speak of are blacks and hispanics and that their comments are racially motivated. Their frame of reference is rooted in stereotypes passed on by their friends and coworkers around the water cooler. I would wager large sums of money that they are not close friends with anyone who even could be mooching off of government handouts. Their evidence only goes as far as a story a buddy told them or maybe even as far as something they have seen on television. Where do you meet these handout seekers? Do you even understand the concept of upward mobility?

So how do we combat this myth? How is it that so many people can say the government is giving handouts to lazy people unwilling to work hard without any form of rebuke? Their concept of goverment handouts is often justification for their entire take on society and in turn motivates them to vote a certain way.

I'm not going to sit here and say there are not lots of bad apples scamming the welfare system, but to use the few to justify the condemnation of many is deplorable. What is equally deplorable is using examples of people not on welfare to support your argument against welfare recipients. Your argument is that people don't need or deserve handouts. If I can present the case that they do in fact need assistance, would you change your tune? Let's try, shall we? You'll probably come up with something like this. People are living beyond their means and mooching off of your hard earned money. They are living on welfare, but at the same time somehow miraculously also have cable television, cell phones, and internet access. No, as a matter of fact, they do not. People living in the vast middle class live that way. People who are not on welfare live that way. If you live below them and on welfare, the money is usually spent on children, food, and other necessities. Again, there are a few bad eggs and some welfare checks go towards substance abuse, alcoholism, and other vices. Then again, you don't know anyone on welfare, do you? You might know lazy white rednecks or lazy (apathetic & lacking upward mobility mind you) blacks and hispanics, but they are middle class and blue collar. Yep. Employed. Just like you as a matter of fact. You are criticizing your own kind and not the down and out who may or may not hold not one, but two or even three jobs. The fact still remains. You are talking about the wrong people to justify your take on taxes and Liberal policy decisions.

Let's talk about your hard earned money for a moment. I assume you mean the money that you feel was taken from you, "redistributed," and wasted in your opinion. Your first mistake is assuming a Democrat will raise your taxes. What tax bracket are you in again? If you are making less than $200k roughly speaking, you will get a tax cut under a Liberal administration, Federally speaking. State level taxes are confounded by a mess of multiple administrations battling it out. Hold your state officials responsible for state taxes, not Washington. If you vote in a Republican, the wealthy folks get tax cuts and you will not. Your hard earned money is going to people who need it. Period. Your hard earned money does not go to a lower middle class bum living beyond their means. They aren't drawing off of welfare or unemployment. Your money goes towards paying cops, education, and maintaining infrastructure. Heaven forbid we privatize those agencies. People who are on welfare need a leg up. It is not a handout, but a quick shot in the arm.

I would extend this argument to ask if because you are so hard working, does that grant you permission to be lazy? Are you exempt from the same level of criticism? Isn't laziness a growing problem in American culture at every level of socioeconomic status? Yes. Lazy behavior spans across all social levels.

Upward mobility is a concept you should research. It depends heavily on education, race, and gender. The ones that make it out of poverty are rare exceptions, but they are rewarded for their perseverance through adversity. Please understand that we are not generations away from slavery. The African Americans struggling in this world have parents and grandparents who lived during inequality. It will take decades before their offspring acquire the education and financial upward mobility to succeed in a world where racism is all but dead. Understanding the social aspects of upward mobility will open your mind to the reality we face in this nation.

Upward Mobility & Opportunity
The Claim: Everyone has an opportunity
-Had you received an education in the inner city at a school with substandard facilities, teachers, books, and other supplies, the doors of success would have been slammed in your face.
-Had you been born into poverty, at some point, you would have been faced with a decision to drop out of school to help support the family. This is true regardless of race.

-Hand me down educational inequality
Blacks living during the Civil Rights movement did not receive the same quality of education as whites. They could not sit down with their children and help with homework for subjects they themselves were never taught. Financially speaking, their starting point is well below any white child of the same age. Only now do we see young black college graduates in any significant numbers. Only until recently have we started to shift the balance of educational equality. The effects of slavery are far reaching and still have an impact on the lives of Americans today.

-Non-white immigrants did not endure racial inequality in their home country. They came to this country with a little bit of a head start. The dynamic is much different. The argument that Asians and other immigrants were able to succeed after coming to this country has no place in the debate over welfare because they have a different starting point.

Unless you have been personally exposed to the hardships these people face, you really have no idea what good a welfare check can provide. Understanding disparities in education, race, gender, and family support systems will open your eyes to the reality that justifies welfare. Until you attempt to understand that dynamic, consider yourself out of touch.

Mythbusters 747 vs Taxi Cab

I only watch Mythbusters when I have time, so I haven't seen every single episode. They showed Episode 1 of their supersized special tonight. One of the stories confirmed in this episode brought back memories of trying something similar.

The Myth (Confirmed)
Jet wash can toss a vehicle through the air when behind the plane

It reminded me of my experiences in the Caribbean driving a death trap of a car called a Hyundai Atos behind jets as they prepared to take off from the airport. We'd drive behind giant KLM's and Air France jets as well as the smaller American Airlines jets. Sand would blow everywhere and the car would rock. Obviously, we never went airborne. Tourists actually have fun getting sandblasted at the beach located at the end of the runway when they're hanging out at a bar called Sunset Beach Bar. Granted you're not as close as the taxi was in this Mythbusters episode.

If you ever go to St. Maarten, I highly recommend trying this out.

By the way, I still can't get over watching them blow up that cement mixer. Wow. They blew that thing all to hell. That was fun to watch over and over again.

• NutriSystem Commercial

By now you have probably seen the NutriSystem commercial with Dan Marino and Larry the Cable Guy. Let's look at the marketing plan here. Who is the audience? No brainer. Fat redneck men who may or may not have the typical invincible male ego appear to be their target audience. The one with bowling balls even features a twangy country tune in the background.

Go after 'em with the same marketing angle for smoking too while you're at it.

If I hear Git R Done one more time, I might have to raid Ted Nugent's military grade arsenal and take out a few of these people. I sure hope this phrase is a fad that will fade away like "Where's The Beef?"

• Hillary Campaign a Distraction?

It crossed my mind a while back that Hillary could be running as a distraction for the right wingers so that Obama can move up without getting hit by the Republicans smear machine. We all know how much people hate the Clintons. The right wing media figures and their followers are chomping at the bit to get their chance at attacking Hillary and Bill.

Recent events in the race might flat out debunk my idea.

The bickering and competitiveness between the two in South Carolina makes it look like Hillary really is in it to go all the way. Bill's involvement in the middle of all of that stuff means he's also on the march back to the White House. With the recent endorsements for Obama, a Hillary campaign still could be a put up deal. I know it sounds a little far fetched, but it's a good idea. Several media figures have actually commented on how ill-prepared the conservative candidates would be if the election were fast approaching and Obama was the Democratic nominee. They've been so busy busting Hillary's balls that Obama has slipped right past them.

On a side note, this also speaks to the preparedness of the Democrats to handle Romney because in South Carolina, all three voiced how well they would fare against McCain as if he was automatically the nominated Republican candidate, not the Mormon dude.

• On Obama

Honestly, I'm scared somebody might off the poor guy. Sure lots of folks hate Bush and I'm sure the same idea has crossed the minds of many, but we obviously wouldn't act on it. I mean, he's the President and any discussion on the topic gets the attention of the authorities pretty quick. Right now, Obama is just a black guy running for the office. The reality is I know far too many gun toting rednecks that fly the confederate flag on their pick up truck and make racially controversial comments at the bars amongst like minded individuals. They would never come out and say these things in public, but as Americans, we are well aware that racism is alive and well in this country. The hubbub in Jena, Louisiana says it all. Obama ended up getting protection early on, but they were a little hush hush about why he needed it. No specific threats were made according to the press release. 

Now, aside from the racially motivated threat, I want you to take note of the Kennedy-esque comparisons being made. Kennedy? Eerie if you ask me. He's also an advocate of change in a government run by a bunch of cronies who don't want things to change. He's a viable threat to their way of life. They could easily orchestrate something.

Now I pray it doesn't happen, but I also prayed Bush wouldn't get a second term and look how that turned out. I'm someone that gloomily said "That's it, we're going to war and it's going to be very bad in this country for a while" just minutes after hearing of his first "win" back in 2000. Assassination is not something the media likes tossing out there for their viewers because it's such a scary and disheartening topic. I think it's a legitimate fear no matter how ready we think we are for a black man in the Oval Office.