Political Stench

I rarely dedicate a post to another blogger, but this is for Betty who pens A Piece of My Mind . She is about as devout a Democrat as I am not. I know she will never see things as I do and I dare say the same about her.  I like her anyway; she writes a great blog!

In one area, however, I think we might agree. Neither party seems as concerned with the country as they are of party.

I took Lawrence O'Donnell to task for his commentary on Ann Romney and her horseback riding therapy.  Betty came from an entirely different point of view.  Viva la difference!

I wonder if she will agree with me today.  First, I will say the reporter  from The Daily Caller who insisted on interrupting the President's statement on his new immigration policy was way out of line.  There is a protocol for reporters just like everyone else and he broke it.  No excuse excuses his behavior.  Like him or not, the President deserves respect.

A story out of Montana is even worse. Dana Milbank reported on it in this morning's column. It seems the Montana Republicans held their convention this past weekend. Someone, or ones, with bad taste beyond description had placed an outhouse outside the convention signed "Obama Presidential Library." It was painted to look like it was shot full of holes and inside there were fake phone numbers "For a good time" call Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and Michelle. There was also a fake birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama.

The culprits obviously spent a fair amount of time planning, constructing and placing this monument to stupidity.  Too bad the effort couldn't have gone toward something constructive!

What makes it worse is the attitude of the state party chairman.  While finding the outhouse in "not real good taste", he also dismissed it as a "sideshow" and something he was "not going to agonize over".

Well, he should.  It reflects badly on politics in general and in this case the Republicans in particular.  When  "management" , the state chairman or Tucker Carlson  among others,  give a thumbs up or a pass to sophomoric, distasteful behavior,  it's no wonder the voting public turns a deaf ear to politics.

I love following politics but sometimes I get so sick of the outright boorishness and nastiness that comes with it I just want to turn it off.  The trouble with that is the nastiness continues whether I listen to it or not.  There are times when it just makes me feel better to call them on it rather than letting it eat at me.  No matter the party. It's a tone all too familiar from both.

Lawrence O'Donnell - Wrong On So Many Levels

One reason I watch so little of MSNBC any more is because of the mean spiritedness of their commentators. Lawrence O'Donnell is a good example like when he chose to twist the fact that Ann Romney, along with some partners, has a horse that has qualified for the Olympics in dressage. A beautiful sport enjoyed by many; not just the rich.

The ever diligent reporter, and I use the term loosely, found that Romney has the horse listed as a business expense while he told Bob Schieffer that dressage was therapy for Ann's Multiple Sclerosis.

Let's look at the horse first.  A dressage horse is very highly trained, often more so than its rider.  If you own a dressage horse for professional  competition then it would qualify as a business expense, would it not?  The horse was not purchased specifically for Ann to ride for therapy.

However, riding for therapy is indeed used to help those who suffer from MS, be it in the dressage ring or elsewhere.  It helps maintain flexibility along with hip, pelvic and trunk motion.  It certainly  helps with balance.  There are so many things riding therapy helps with beyond the physical too.  A sense of accomplishment, relief of stress, relaxation and the sheer joy of being in fresh air and sunshine.

That Mrs. Romney's MS is at a point where she can partake in such activity is wonderful.  That she is enthused about the sport to the  point of investing in a horse and being able to participate in it's training is even more so.

But no.  O'Donnell has to try to make something sneaky, underhanded and ugly about it.  Insinuate it's not Ann's horse and the business deduction is fake because she doesn't ride it is so off base I'd like to smack the sneer off his face.

Actually we don't know if she rides it or not.  Obviously she doesn't in competition any more than most show dog owners show their own dogs or race horse owners ride their own horses.

Mr. O'Donnell should do his homework before castigating the intentions of some one's ownership of something that is none of his business in the first place nor presume to know what is best for treating what can be a debilitating disease when he obviously doesn't.

They say never believe anything you read on the web.  I understand that.  Truth gets skewed.  Sometimes intentionally, sometimes not.  What Mr. O'Donnell did is more than skew the truth.  He showed himself to be uninformed, spiteful and mean spirited.  Maybe I shouldn't, but I'm inclined to believe that is the truth.

Appeasement Impossible

Watching the happenings in the middle east is like watching a game of whack-a-mole.  One monster gets beaten down only to have another pop up.  Actually, maybe it's because of the poppies!  It certainly must be the official crop of Islamic terrorists.  What else could explain their attitude toward women and children other than ample consumption of the mind bending drugs derived from the poppies?

Of course, they could also be insecure bullies who find women and children the easiest to target in order to satisfy some inner blood lust.

The latest mole raising it's ugly head is the Taliban again.  This time they plan to withhold polio vaccines in North Waziristan (Pakistan) as payback for our drone attacks.  Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nigeria are the only three countries where polio is still endemic.  So hit where it hurts.  The kids!

I've often thought we need to learn to think like the enemy in order to defeat them, but how, other than becoming freaked out addicts ourselves?  I have no idea.  Even if stoned I doubt their thinking would make sense to us.

Oh, I know, they're trying to intimidate us by threatening defenseless children.  The article suggests that it won't; the attacks will continue.  Just as they will in Afghanistan.  We won't suffer.  The Taliban won't suffer.  What do the kids matter?

The reasoning is that the drone attacks are turning the population into mental cases and that's worse than polio.  Gee,  I wonder if the kids with polio will buy into that theory.  Or will they be plied with opium until they quiet down.

It goes to show that the millions of dollars we've put toward eradicating polio world wide isn't nearly as important as the millions that go into their pockets.  It makes little sense to me for them to allow the endemic to continue for it will surely cut into the population of their children from where they would normally be recruiting future support.  Then again, I haven't even had a glass of wine today so I haven't a clue as to how their logic works.

The consequences of ill thought out wars never ceases to amaze me.  I see no way of appeasing people who think the way these people do.  Most societies look at their children as their future.  These people look only to themselves.  How do you combat that?

UN Observers: Do They See No Evil?

Have you ever wondered what the purpose of UN observers is?  Headlines today announce they are suspending their activities in Syria. They can't fulfill their mission with conditions such as they are.  Just what exactly is their mission?  All I've seen is their entering war zones during lulls in the fighting and giving casualty reports.

I don't understand it.  Here are representatives of an organization of which two members have consistently vetoed any plan for aid to the civilians caught in the middle of the civil war.  We know from the news government forces have been slaughtering civilians for over a year now.  Do we need little blue helmets running around telling us what they cannot do?  They cannot raise arms against either side.  They merely - observe.

There seems something ludicrous about  this observing and reporting of a war.  They are not the media whose job it is to report the action.  It costs a great deal to have them there and puts those who try to protect them at great risk - as well as themselves.

 If these observations were to find a way to end the fighting I could understand.  If these observations were to find a way to protect the women and children I could understand.  We're told it is a supervision mission .  Just what exactly is that?  Are they supposed to referee and take points away when one oversteps the rules?   Tsk tsk.  It's insane!

Would the Syrians be better served if the UN observers would spend their time trying to end the war or at least level the playing field rather than adding to the chaos by just being there?  Of course, but they are powerless to do so. Would we all be better served if the UN would spend it's time restructuring itself so Russia and China don't have the veto power they now enjoy?  Or disband altogether since they are beyond usefulness unless posturing is considered useful.

 A war can't be supervised by a third party. Especially one with no voice, no authority.  To do something, observe, for the sake of looking like you're doing something when you really aren't is an insult to those who could really use some help.

Big Brother's Bigger Brother

Awhile ago I had a reader warn me that I was probably being watched because of the things I write.  If so it is a monumental waste of time for those watching for I'm just stating opinions of an elderly woman who has issues with the direction in which the country is being taken.  There are a lot of us doing the same thing.  Watching me would indicate paranoia of the highest degree.  Not that I don't think the government is paranoid!

While I don't know if or how often I'm being observed, the Brits have a whole different problem.   They have unveiled a plan to log details  of every web site you visit, every text you send, every e-mail and every letter you send and every call you make.  Wow!  What can the return on such an effort possibly be?

It was also stated that if you're worried about it you are probably a criminal or a conspiracy theorist.  Conspiracy theorist?  Just because every single aspect of my personal life is being logged and kept for a year and it's being done by the government?  How could anyone possibly think that?

The promise not to read content means that someone, authorized or not, probably will.  Talk about an entire population of paranoids!  The only question is who is paranoid about what.

I'm thinking about cost now.  Do they really have this technology and if not how much will it cost to develop?  How many people will it take to run it?  And again, how much will the country benefit?  Especially if they're not going to look at content?  What key words are they are going to use to search the data base when they deem necessary?  I would think any computer whiz worth his or her salt would figure out that one.

Here my last several posts have been complaining about drones and cattle and their effect on our water supply.  This makes that effort look like child's play.  I was worried about my privacy one time when I read about efforts to monitor the well being of the elderly in their own homes.  Cameras everywhere including the bathroom.  But this.  This takes away the last visage of privacy known to man.  You can't go outside for the drones may see you.  If you play computer games, snicker at the handicapped or bully the kid next door, Big Brother will have it on file.  Everything no matter how seemingly inconsequential to us.  Will it be to them?

I think the spontaneity of life, that which makes it worth living, is about to be snuffed out for surely if the Brits do this we will soon follow.   What's next?  They'll be reading our thoughts before we even have them.  But until then, oh yeah,  will I be thinking thoughts!