Editors gone wild

Have you all heard about the big vote coming up in Texas? It's with the State Board of Education, and they're voting on some revisions in textbooks. Nothing major, really...just a few changes here and there, tidying up a few messy historical matters, editing a few troublesome details and oh yeah...totally rewriting history in order to further these fundamentalist yahoos' own religious and political agendas! Think I'm joking?

Among the recommendations facing a final vote: adding language saying the country's Founding Fathers were guided by Christian principles and including positive references to the Moral Majority, the National Rifle Association and the GOP’s Contract with America.

Other amendments to the state's curriculum standards for kindergarten through 12th grade would minimize Thomas Jefferson's role in world and U.S. history because he advocated the separation of church and state; require that students learn about "the unintended consequences" of affirmative action; assert that "the right to keep and bear arms" is an important element of a democratic society; and rename the slave trade to the "Atlantic triangular trade.”

This is, of course, alongside the usual "teach the controversy" crap in which evolution is taught as a theory and intelligent design as a viable option.

All of these revisions are ridiculous—I find the new name for the slave trade especially appalling, as should anyone who has bothered to learn even the most fundamental things about the practice and the war that resulted from it—but you know which one really gets to me? The ousting of Thomas Jefferson from his rightful place as one of the major players in the framing of the government of our country.

Jefferson had his flaws (see slavery comments above), but there is no denying that he was a towering intellect and one of the greatest statesmen and philosophers the world has ever experienced. I truly believe that, and don't feel that it is an exaggeration at all. According to the Texas Board of Education, Jerry Falwell, Newt Gingrich, Charlton Heston, and Phyllis fuckin' Schlafly have more significance to our country than Thomas Jefferson.

Of all the memorials to various figures that I've seen in our nation's capitol, the Jefferson Memorial is my favorite. It is a lovely structure, and although grand, it is also beautiful in its simplicity. A large rotunda, with a 19 foot tall statue of Jefferson in the center, the surrounding walls inscribed with Jefferson's words. I remember walking the interior of the memorial, looking up as I read Jefferson's words, and I was struck by his intellect, his eloquence, and most importantly, his vision. He didn't just see how things should be in his moment in time; he saw the need to frame our documents so that we could change as we grew and matured as a country. This is my favorite inscription in the memorial:

I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

That's right. Jefferson fully intended that the Constitution would change over time. The basic tenets concerning human rights must remain the same, but as we become more enlightened, we adapt by adding (or repealing...I love you, 21st Amendment! <sip>) amendments. (The "all men are created equal" part was finally expanded to include other than white male Christians, for example.) But I digress. I am dismayed that the Texas BOE would think that it is perfectly reasonable to exclude Jefferson from a place of importance in history textbooks. He's only the main architect of our republic and our Constitution, the same Constitution that they claim to love so dearly. I guess their love for the Constitution's primary author stops when he advocates the separation of church and state.

Why does the Texas Board of Education matter to me? Well, beyond the fact that we should all be concerned about what kids in Texas are being taught in our schools—some of these kids will be the national leaders of tomorrow, and I think we should expect that they will be taught, not indoctrinated—the Texas school system is so large that they are the second biggest buyer of textbooks after California, so many of the revisions they specify are used in textbooks around the country. Texas's revisionist history could very well make it to the textbooks of your children. Do you really want your kids learning more about the NRA and Phyllis Schlafly rather than Thomas Jefferson? If so, what is wrong with you?

How many times do we have to quote Moynihan: You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Excluding Thomas Jefferson, one of our greatest thinkers and one of the world's most amazing intellectuals, from history books because he understood the importance of the separation of government from religion is not just crazy. It is dangerous.

Anybody here seen my old friend John?

One of Tuesday's big stories (besides a few state primaries, but I'm not all fired up about those) was of the Alabama geometry teacher who used a lesson on tangents to mention the assassination of the President of the United States.

Oh, I know, I know...don't be so hard on him. After all, it was a student who brought it up first, saying, "Well, if you shoot the President..." and then geometry teacher Gregory Harrison went along with it and said:

OK, if you shoot off his ear, that is a point of tangency.

Sure thing, Mr. Harrison, so it is.

It is also completely irresponsible for you to condone, in any way, shape, or form, such a horrid remark about shooting the President of the United States of America, let alone continue the joke. The proper response would have been, "No, Joey, we don't shoot the President of the United States, because that is wrong, remember? That is an act of treason, and it is murder. Assassination is bad, mmmkay?"

Normally, I wouldn't get my panties in a wad about something in a far off land like Alabama. But the more I thought about it, I realized that this is my country, too, and Alabama is part of it. If they are saying things like that in front of kids that might be a part of my national government one day (although I have to express skepticism about that, she said with an arched eyebrow), I feel the need to speak up. I found an email address for Corner High School of Jefferson County in Alabama: rcooper@jefcoed.com. I don't know if it's a valid address, but I sent the email a while ago and haven't received a failure notification yet.

Why did this bother me so much? I think it was because although I was too young to remember the assassinations in the 60's, I have actually made the effort to read about that turbulent time and try to understand the impact that it had on our country. My Dad was in the National Guard and was called out for local riots; my sister was a member of the SDS and protested the war (although not the soldiers); my friend Dan Edwards assisted with a sculpture commemorating Robert Kennedy's speech in Indianapolis after Martin Luther King, Jr.'s assassination, a speech that was credited with staving off the rioting that occurred in other large cities at the time. So many people I know speak of that time with sadness, horror, and regret. I have taken the time to try to learn about it and understand what an impact it had upon our country and upon the world.

For this student to make such a hateful, ignorant remark, and for the geometry teacher to go with it rather than pointedly saying that it was completely inappropriate, completely appalls me. It is this sort of rhetoric that hurts me deeply and makes me wonder what is wrong with some people in my country. Whether it's a Facebook group praying for the death of the President (oh, but it was only a joke, they say!) or a teacher in Alabama joking about shooting off the President's ear, you know what? It is not one fucking bit funny.

I was looking for pictures for this entry, and I came across President Kennedy's autopsy photo, as well as a closeup of his wife reaching for his exploded head. I chose not to use those, because I still found them horribly upsetting, and I was only a year old when that happened. However, I am intelligent enough to read and learn and understand what a horrible time that was for our country, and why we never want to experience anything like that again. It doesn't just affect us, it affects the entire world. And on a more personal level, it would certainly affect a wife who calls our President husband, and two young girls who call him Daddy.

Teachers play a part in kids' lives. Not just formal education, but also in the foundation for being a good citizen and responsible member of society, someone who realizes that change comes not from chaos and murder, but from working towards making things better for all. The tacit approval of this teacher with his joking comments made me feel that he has no place in guiding those children who will soon be taking their place in our society.

The deaths of President Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King, Jr. have left a lasting mark on our country and a deep sadness in our psyches. These were men cut down in the prime of their lives, and who knows what they might have done as they grew older? They have already left a profound legacy...what might they have done if they had been allowed to continue their lives in peace and prosperity, rather than have their heads blown off by lunatics swayed by propaganda? This is the danger that many of us sense, and many of us are speaking out about. The rhetoric of the far right who continue to ratchet up the anger in the name of ratings, those who advocate the violent overthrow of our government, the ridiculous hyperbole of those who call Obama a socialist/communist/fascist, what have you...this is the sort of thing that gave rise to the tumult of the 60's, and led to the death of three good men who were trying to make a difference in our country.

Make no mistake about it: people like Beck and Limbaugh do not worry about who might act upon their words. They want ratings. Beck's ratings are dropping, and Limbaugh is making ridiculous statements about how the Sierra Club should be paying for the BP oil spill cleanup. Even the 'rightiest' of the right have to realize how insane that sounds, so I hope that people are starting to figure out that it's not a good idea to get all of their Instructions for Life from these fucktards.

I'm sure that some will say that they advocate change through the ballot box, not violence. Well, you might want to tell your teabaggin' friends about that, because they don't seem to be getting the message. People might take you a little more seriously if you put down the fucking guns and stopped threatening to blow people's heads off. Okay, not really. Most of us still won't take you seriously. But yeah...the blowing people's heads off stuff doesn't help matters one iota.

I would ask these people to remember...or at least to do some research. This is not something we want to revisit. It was a divisive, horrible, upsetting time that lingers with us over forty years later. Look at the picture of a President shot in the head with his wife next to him; look at the picture of his brother, a presidential candidate, shot in the head and dying in the arms of a busboy whose hand he was shaking when the bullet entered his brain; look at the picture of a man who advocated peaceful protest and equality for all, shot in the head and dying on the balcony of a Memphis hotel. Look at these men dying and ask yourselves if that is what you really want. Ask yourselves if you think that killing good men is the way to achieve the change YOU want.

If you don't want that—and I believe that the majority of you don't want that—then speak up and tell your like-minded friends to lower the level a bit. Tell them that it's not funny to joke about assassinating the President. Tell your kids' teachers to be true leaders rather than spewing their own ideologies. Make the changes you want by pulling the lever at the voting booth...not by pulling the trigger of a gun, or by advocating it, or by giving implied approval by not speaking out against it.

A bullet in the brain is not funny. Ever.

Lost in the Supermarket

I've been having some unpleasant dreams lately, most of which I believe are about anxiety. Some have been downright terrifying, but most are just general, free-form weirdness with an underlying feeling of dread.

The other night was particularly bad. Things began innocently enough, with talking to my friend Aubrey (we recently had lunch, so that's where that came from), and nothing seemed amiss. Then I was talking to my friend Greg, also from the lab. Nothing weird about the conversation, which took place in the lab, but he was wearing shorts and a tank top, and that's when things started going wrong. You don't wear shorts and a tank top in the lab. It was a jarring enough inconsistency that in my dream, I sat on the floor with my legs splayed out, hung my head, and said, "This has to be a dream."

It morphed into the setting of a house I didn't know. My Mom was there, and we were sleeping in the same bed. She asked me, "Do you want to say that prayer now?" I said, "No," and she said, "Okay," rolled over and went to sleep. I was making a cat toy of feathers and tossing it up into the air, although I don't recall a cat being there. There was a woman in the house, and she was wearing an evening gown. She stood out on the balcony with the sliding glass door open, and I said, "I'm sorry, but you're going to have to close that door. It's very cold in here." She smiled and did so.

It all sounds innocent enough as I type it, but I can't begin to convey the feeling of dread, dismay, and wrongness that overlaid everything. There were several times that I thought as I did early on: "I know I'm dreaming," but it all felt so vivid and completely real that I was sure it was happening. So you can imagine my terror when my dream culminated with me lying in bed, opening my eyes, and seeing someone or something leaning over me with bared teeth and dead eyes, snarling and ready to chew my face off. As is often the case in dreams, I was paralyzed with fear, and could only moan, "Noooooo oh god nooooooo," which finally, thankfully, woke me up for real. There was a moment of heart-pounding panic, as I tried to figure out where I was, and whether or not I was awake or still dreaming. Whew.

I had another one tonight when I napped on the loveseat, but at least this one wasn't as terrifying. I was at the grocery store, and I recall being horribly unfocused and unable to complete my task. I was trying to find a 12-pack of Diet Dr. Pepper, and I could only find cases. At one point, I had a case of 7-Up in my hand, and sat it down with disgust, as in, "That's not what I want! Why am I carrying this around?" I can laugh about it now, because it sounds silly, but in my dream, I was walking endlessly back and forth in the aisle, trying to find that goddamn 12-pack of Diet Dr. Pepper. I recall wondering if they were seeing me on the security cameras and wondering what was wrong with me. I felt incapable, stupid, and incompetent. For me, that IS a nightmare! I eventually ran into my friend Jay (also from the lab), and he gave me a big hug, so that was nice. That one had a decent ending rather than the terrifying one earlier in the week.

I know it's all a reflection of the generalized anxiety I'm feeling about things in general, and I'll just ride it out as my psyche dumps all the detritus into my dreams. I can handle the vaguely unpleasant, but that one the other night is lingering. I find dreams fascinating, and I'm wondering if writing such things down will help me wrest a little control over them? Usually my dreams are fairly pleasant, if nonsensical, easily forgotten. If I continue to have these anxiety dreams, I think writing them down might help me get a handle on them.

The supermarket dream tonight had an unexpected and happy benefit, as it reminded me of one of my favorite Clash songs, "Lost in the Supermarket." Although known for their anger and outrage at the inequities of the haves vs. the have-nots, this song is almost wistful in its search for meaning in the banality of life, our society's promise of happiness through consumerism, and our increasing isolation. If you think I'm reading too much into the song, go right ahead. Songs speak to people in different ways, and this song speaks to me.

I'm all lost in the supermarket
I can no longer shop happily
I came in here for the special offer
A guaranteed personality

I wasn't born so much as I fell out
Nobody seemed to notice me
We had a hedge back home in the suburbs
Over which I never could see

I heard the people who lived on the ceiling
Scream and fight most scarily
Hearing that noise was my first ever feeling
That's how it's been all around me

I'm all tuned in I see all the programmes
I save coupons from packets of tea
I've got my giants hit discotheque album
I empty a bottle I feel a bit free

Kids in the halls and the pipes in the walls
Making noises for company
Long distance callers make long distance calls
And the silence makes me lonely

I'm all lost in the supermarket
I can no longer shop happily
I came in here for the special offer
A guaranteed personality

It's not here, it disappeared.

Busta myth!

First of all, I want to thank everyone for the words of encouragement on my previous entry. Sometimes it really does get to me, but mostly I remain insatiably curious about politics and committed to calling people out on their lies. It made me feel good to know that some of you enjoy my rantings, and as I told a friend, if even one person stops to look at an issue in a different light because of something I wrote, it would make me very happy. I also liked Nance's idea of following a 2:1 ratio on serious vs not-so-serious posts. That's not a bad idea, and I'm going to think on that a bit. In the meantime, I want to write today about a non-controversial topic, one that shouldn't ruffle anyone's feathers: the National Day of Prayer.

I'm a little bit evil, I know.

Okay, most of you have probably seen that there was quite the hullabaloo, a veritable mêlée, and one might even call it a brouhaha, over the National Day of Prayer last week. Forwarded emails abounded, and several Facebook updates denigrated President Obama for abolishing the NDP. That wasn't true; he merely called off the celebration at the White House. The NDP went ahead as planned. However, US District judge Barbara Crabb of Wisconsin issued a ruling declaring that the NDP was unconstitutional, but allowing current plans to go ahead for this year. In her ruling, Crabb stated:

No one can doubt the important role that prayer plays in the spiritual life of a believer. In the best of times, people may pray as a way of expressing joy and thanks; during times of grief, many find that prayer provides comfort. Others may pray to give praise, seek forgiveness, ask for guidance or find the truth. ... However, recognizing the importance of prayer to many people does not mean that the government may enact a statute in support of it, any more than the government may encourage citizens to fast during the month of Ramadan, attend a synagogue, purify themselves in a sweat lodge or practice rune magic.

The Department of Justice has said that they will appeal her ruling, which shows you that I don't agree with everything that President Obama does.

I think her ruling is a good one, a constitutional one. Not everyone agrees, of course. Cue the video.

The mind-numbing level of delusion here is astounding. O'Reilly and Palin engage in mutual masturbation in declaring that oh yes indeed, our country was founded on Christian principles, our Constitution was based on Christian beliefs, and that our laws follow the ten commandments and the God of the Bible. This is simply not true, and if either of these nimrods would learn a little about history and do the tiniest bit of research they'd find out that in fact, the exact opposite is true. Our founding fathers (Palin likes "all of 'em," dontcha know?) purposefully and pointedly excluded God from our Constitution, and made sure that it was clear that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

I am bothered and bewildered (but definitely not bewitched) by the current thinking that our country was founded on the Christian religion, and the assertion that our founding fathers were worshippers. This is far from the truth. Most of the shapers of our country and government were deists, believing that while there might be a supreme being, after he got everything going, he stepped back and let us take over completely. They did not see the divine hand of God in anything, and did their best to ensure that our republic was founded upon reason, logic, and good governance rather than religious beliefs.

If you have some time, if you are curious at all about whether what I write here is true, I urge you to take a little time to read a few entries on another blog. It is not merely opinion; there are many references provided. (A big thanks to Darren for posting this on Facebook. It was fascinating reading, and I feel it lays out the argument beautifully. I owe you one!)

Part I - mainly a discussion of Thomas Jefferson

Part II - deism and the thoughts of some of Jefferson's contemporaries

Part III - Washington and his rejection of communion; John Adams

Part IV - discussion of the religious affiliation of early colonists; after escaping persecution in England, they were quite unwilling to revisit such behavior; only about 1 in 15 were affiliated with a church

So why the objection to a National Day of Prayer? (And no, it does not date back to the Constitutional Convention; no prayers were said at that gathering.) Those who are staunch defenders of the Constitution should get this one. The writers of the Constitution and the framers of our republic expressly forbade any government promotion of a religion. No, the NDP is not a mandate in that it does not force anyone to pray upon the threat that they will be prosecuted for not doing so. However, the NDP was pushed through in the 50s by evangelical Christians, and today is actively promoted by Focus on the Family, an organization founded by evangelical Christian James Dobson. The chairman of the NDP Task Force is Shirley Dobson, wife of James. Franklin Graham was pissed off because he was uninvited from the Pentagon prayer session because of his statements that Islam is a wicked and evil religion. The NDP is most certainly an evangelical Christian endeavor; do they also promote prayers to Allah? Buddha? Perhaps a prayer (and maybe a sacrifice) to an Aztec god? Of course not. This day actively promotes one particular type of religion, and our government has no constitutional right to do so. None.

In the video I posted, when asked why Judge Crabb ruled against the NDP, Sarah Palin says:

It...it is that world view that I think...uh...involves some...um...uh...some people being afraid of...of being able to discuss our foundation, being able to discuss God in the public square...some fear of some people.

As always, it's a little difficult to understand what Sarah is trying to say, but I think she means that some of us don't want to discuss religion. That couldn't be further from the truth. Many of us have had many discussions of religion over the years, and many of us have done our research rather than bleating like a sheep about how America is a Christian nation. Many of us DO respect the Constitution rather than just giving it lip service, and many of us understand that our founding fathers were not religious individuals, much less religious bigots. They were visionaries who understood that just as religion needs to be protected from the government, our government needs to be protected from religion.

Dan Barker recently appeared on Fox News. Barker is the co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. Along with his total pwnage of the interviewer, he had a line that sums this issue up perfectly. "It is the evangelicals who are confusing neutrality with hostility." The Constitution specifies neutrality in matters of religion. The government can neither force us to worship a certain deity or follow a certain religion; neither can they stop anyone from worshipping who they want. No one is saying that people can't worship the way they choose, follow the god they choose. You can pray to your heart's desire, if that is what you choose to do. However, my government--and it is mine every bit as much as yours--cannot dictate to me or anyone else what religion is best, promote prayer, or even suggest any sort of worship.

For those who would continue to believe that we are a Christian nation, or founded upon Christian principles, I suggest you do a little more research. I am not saying that you cannot practice your religion. No one is saying that. I'm simply saying that you cannot force my government to suggest your religion to me.

Finding a balance

I'm trying.

I find myself getting a little too caught up in the constant daily flow of political and other news information emanating from various news sources, both on TV and online. I enjoy being informed, and I think it's important that all of us try to do so. I think that is part of being a good citizen. I'm still stunned when I hear someone say, "Oh, I don't pay attention to all that stuff. It's boring/stupid/unimportant/too upsetting." The only one I'll agree with on occasion is the latter. I find myself getting so angry and agitated about things lately that it's coloring my entire world. I maintain a little more balance over on Facebook, because I find amusing and fun things to intersperse with the political and religious, and my friends keep me laughing with a lot of fun posts and comments. I've been more heavy-handed here, and that's part of the reason I haven't been posting as much lately. I can only handle so much.

Amazingly enough, it's not so much the politicians themselves, although I do get disgusted with some of the antics I see (and we're seeing plenty these days). What I'm more frustrated with is a lot of my fellow citizens who seem to embrace the endless contradictions of their anti-Obama movement. Their mantra is "defend the Constitution!" But they're the first to cheer the scuttling of it by the Arizona legislature, who decided it's perfectly okay to stop someone and check their papers merely because of the way they look. They champion the stripping of the rights of an American citizen who has been accused of a crime but not yet convicted, all the while defending every American citizen's right to buy a gun, regardless of possible history of mental illness, and sometimes with no background check at all. (Something is wrong when people can buy guns at garage sales.)

They accept blatant lies and conspiracy theories spilling from the mouths of those on a certain "fair and balanced" network and on the radio, without bothering to check the facts themselves. They forward me emails about Obama being a secret Muslim, about Michelle racking up a huge bill at a New York City hotel by ordering lobster and caviar, about how a birth certificate isn't the same as a certificate of live birth...and when I debunk all these claims using Snopes or PolitiFact or FactCheck and send that back to them, they send me another forwarded email about how the people who run Snopes are mysterious liberals who don't really check things at all, so I send them an email back containing the link to the PolitiFact or FactCheck article that debunks that. It's mind-boggling.

Then there are the charges that the Obama administration is either socialist, communist, or fascist. (Maybe one day they'll pick one.) The "regime" is compared to that of Hitler, which I think means that the accusers have no concept of history or scale. The administration is soft on terror—and remember, no terrorist attacks occurred on American soil during President Bush's administration...Rudy Giuliani said so!—they deliberately caused the massive BP oil spill in order to stop offshore drilling (despite having authorized it just a few weeks before), they want to force women to have abortions, Obama wants to create a dictatorship (never mind the fact that he was democratically elected), the administration wants to stop people from being Christians, and they want to kill Grandma by forcing her to appear before a death panel and make her case for why she should be allowed to live.

I'm so fucking sick of it. It's all bullshit, and anyone who buys all of this hook, line, and sinker is a fucking retard. Are there problems that need to be addressed? Of course. Do I agree with everything the President has done? No, I do not. However, he is our duly and democratically elected Commander in Chief, and if you don't like it, by all means cast your vote against him in the next election, and voice your disagreements with his policies. I will even defend your right to pray for his death if that's the way you get your jollies, and if your god is so psychotic that you think he just might kill the President of the United States for you because of your prayer, then you two have a ball together. But if all you've got is lies, contradictions, and bullshit, I'm really sick of hearing it.

So yeah, I'm not in a good place right now, and although I'll keep writing about a lot of this stuff—it’s my bag, baby—I think I'll just leave the loonies to their fun. Enjoy your constant hand-wringing and mental anguish about your country being taken over by godless liberals and people who don't look exactly like you. The rest of us will just go methodically and efficiently about our business.

Sabotage!

In the latest round of right wingnuttery so astounding that I'm left shaking my head as I attempt to plunge two freshly sharpened Number 2 pencils into my eardrums, a couple of people address the massive oil spew going on in the Gulf.

First is former Bush press secretary Dana Perino, who said on "Fox and Friends" that she was "not trying to introduce a conspiracy theory," then went on to ask "But was this deliberate?" She finished, "...if there was sabotage involved."

Then there is Limbocontin:

Now, lest we forget, ladies and gentlemen, the carbon tax bill, cap and trade that was scheduled to be announced on Earth Day. I remember that. And then it was postponed for a couple of days later after Earth Day, and then of course immigration has now moved in front of it. But this bill, the cap-and-trade bill, was strongly criticized by hardcore environmentalist wackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants, nuclear plant investment. So, since they're sending SWAT teams down there, folks, since they're sending SWAT teams to inspect the other rigs, what better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig? I'm just noting the timing here.

People, people, people...anyone who thinks either of these two scenarios are reasonable or possible is just as retarded as Limbaugh, and apparently as Perino...although she always seemed somewhat reasonable and not at all as idiotic as she sounded in these latest statements.

This is insane. I continue to be amazed at the lunacy of such remarks. Anyone who thinks that either the Obama administration or environmentalists are responsible for this oil well going kablooey is...hm, let me think on how to word this delicately...fucking stupid. And let me make my apologies to regular stupid people—I’m not disrespecting you, because this is a special kind of stupid beyond what you could ever achieve.

If you're so desperate in your hatred of Obama that you think he would order the destruction of an oil well in order to...well, what exactly do you think that would accomplish? I don't get the logic there. Same goes for environmentalists. If you think any environmentalist would deliberately destroy an entire coastline, ecosystem, and fishing industry in order to make some sort of a point about off-shore drilling, then you are an IDIOT.

I'm so dismayed by the current tenor of debate that I am in tears right now. Even those of us who pretty much agree on issues are contentious and ready to brawl, and I include myself in that. I've always tried to debate using reason, facts, and persuasion, but I'm finding that that is out the fucking window these days. How do you deal with someone who, when presented with hard facts, numbers, and logic simply says, "I don't believe you" or "You're wrong"? How do you deal with someone who thinks it's amusing to join a group that prays for the death of our President, apparently forgetting what our country went through in the 60s when our President got his head blown off, and then a peaceful man trying to effect change and gain equal rights for all Americans got his head blown off, and then another guy who was trying to prosecute bad guys (and who also happened to be the brother of the first guy) got HIS head blown off?

I've lost my sense of humor about this. I don't find this funny, and I don't find an atmosphere of hateful rhetoric funny. I see it as the possibility that some mentally unbalanced loon will decide that it is his duty to put a stop to it all by blowing another head off. At the very least, it has all of us bickering rather than finding solutions, and that is really a crying shame.

I am going to pick myself up, dust myself off…and listen to some Beasties. They’re good for what ails ya.

When will they come for you?

I join many of my friends in roundly condemning Arizona's recently passed law that will allow the police to stop anyone they think might be an illegal alien.

I don't think I can begin to adequately express my disgust about this, but I'm going to try.

Do we have an immigration problem? Absolutely. Do we need to address it? Of course. But this draconian law is not the way to go about it. I am appalled that any of my fellow citizens would think that this is in any way acceptable in a civilized society. Giving the right to the police to stop anyone for anything, merely because they think they fit the profile of an illegal alien, is completely unconstitutional and is shortsighted, ignorant, and intolerant. This is yet another instance of white, religious conservatives feeling threatened by someone "other" than them. Feeling that "their" country is being taken away from them. Beginning to feel that their dominance is coming to an end, as more and more people around them don't speak English as a first language, as they see more brown faces than white in their stores and neighborhoods.

They're probably feeling a little like the Native Americans felt when their country was taken away from them by the whites who came here, claimed it as their own, and systematically eliminated all Native American claims to the land. Good. Just simmer in that for a while, why don't you?

I don't have an easy answer. I don't necessarily believe that complete amnesty is the way to go. Our President (and like it or not, he is YOUR President, too) has proposed that we secure our borders, that any illegals will be held accountable for back taxes, need to learn English, and will be penalized by having to wait in line for citizenship behind those who are here legally. That makes sense to me; I want these folks to become law-abiding citizens who pay taxes, but if they have come here illegally, there need to be some consequences to that.

Stopping anyone who looks a little more brown than others is not the way to go about this. I cannot even believe that this is happening, and as someone who has studied quite a bit about Nazi Germany, I can tell you that this smacks of the Geheime Staatspolizei a lot more than I'm comfortable with. I hate to Godwin myself, but since the teabaggers have been bleating for a while now about how Obama is a Nazi, I feel perfectly justified in comparing them to the Nazis. As others have stated, it's way too reminiscent of those black and white post-WWII movies in which a coal-helmeted soldier angrily and coldly demands to "see your papers."

What is next? Are you going to applaud if a Hispanic person is stopped, runs from the police, and is gunned down like a dog in the street? Would that make you happy? Would you applaud our fine police officers for upholding the law?

Some of those who disagree with what I'm saying may think that I don't know what I'm talking about because I don't have to deal with immigrants. Not to the extent that border states do, no. But for at least a couple of decades now, there has been a large influx in my area because of good manufacturing jobs, and in Michigan because of jobs associated with fruit crops. There are the usual problems when those from another country try to assimilate, but it hasn't been anything horrible. The vast majority are hardworking people who just want to have a better life than they did in their home country. The extreme violence in border states needs to be dealt with, and I hope that our federal government starts working on this problem soon, so that other states don't fuck it up royally like Arizona did.

Honestly, people...this is America. We are a nation of immigrants. Each and every one of us, unless you're full-blooded Native American. Have we all forgotten that? Anyone who thinks this is a capital idea needs to think about how their ancestors felt when they came over from Ireland or Germany or Italy or Eastern Europe and were looked down upon as poor white trash by the ruling class at the time...who in turn had immigrated here several decades before.

Well, I can take some consolation in that the Department of Justice is going to look into the constitutionality of Arizona's law. From everything I've read, the law will not stand. Something about that search and seizure thing...something about the Fourth Amendment...something about that pesky Constitution. Again, for all the teabaggers' clamoring about how the Constitution is being perverted, I'd say that this law pretty much bends the Constitution over and fucks it right up the ass. If I sound pissed off, believe me...I AM.

What is wrong with people? I am astounded that anyone would think this is a good idea. Astounded and appalled. If you're in apoplectic joy about this, if you're grinning like a happy asshole, I think you'd best stop and think about what it is about YOU that might be the next target. Your ethnicity? Your heritage? Your religion? Your political affiliation? Your hair or eye color? Speaking of happy assholes, Glenn Beck seems to get off on talking about the concentration camps that President Obama is secretly building. You have the nerve to believe that and bitch about that and then support this bill that allows the police to stop anyone who looks a certain way, without provocation, and demand their papers?! Do you not see the lunacy of that, the complete disconnect from reality?

Gaaaahhhhh! This is insanity! Canada is looking better all the time, but I can assure you that I will keep my American citizenship so that I can continue to VOTE.

This would be an appropriate time for Martin Niemöller's quote, as translated from the original German. Hard to believe that it is pertinent to the United States of America in 2010, but it sure as hell is.

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.