Shame? Rush Shouldn't Be Alone In This

There is much being said about Rush Limbaugh proclaiming he is  ashamed of his country.  I don't agree with Rush on a lot but I do understand where he is coming from here.  I'd have slightly different terminology - like angry, incensed, disgusted for starters.

I'd also have said something more than my country. One by one. I'll start with the President for lying to us time and time again, not caring if the proof is on tape or not.  For putting his own agenda before that of the country.  For the contempt he has for us. And for making it blatantly obvious one of his goals is to destroy the opposition party.  What kind of man is he?  He is not what a leader should be when he ignores all advice other than his own to himself.

Next let's take Congress.  I've done enough on them, but for reminders, the Republicans for not growing beyond their own internal pettiness and for the Democrats marching in lockstep with their leadership knowing full well what it's doing to the country.

The media.  I've done a lot on them too.  They have not served the people well for years.  They've become as nasty and trivial as commenters on social media.  In fact they more resemble social media than journalists.  There is no media outlet on the air that is all news; they are all at least half tabloid.

Finally there is the rest of us.  We've re-elected a man because of what? He played to our weaknesses,  fears and self indulgences and we bought into it. As for our attitudes toward Congress, we're as divided as they are.  We remind me of the ancient Romans watching gladiators do battle with a blood lust that permeates the very fabric of our society.  Thumbs up or thumbs down?  The more able predators win.

It amazes me how we can get so upset over the exaggerated and ridiculous struggle over the second amendment we are now suffering through yet are impervious to everything else being done to us.  Does it have to be so elementary as the threat of having a material object taken from us or denied us to get our attention?

As for the media, why do we give them a pass?  We should be demanding the truth from them, not  a protection agency for liberal agendas. We should be expecting, no, demanding the truth from the President too, not the misrepresentations of claiming police, fire and first responders are going to be laid off en masse when they aren't even Federal employees among other acts of political theater.

I'm with Rush.  I'm just so tired of the same hand being played over and over, the same contentious attitudes prevailing over truth and reason and the numbers of citizens who are either unaware of what's happening or just don't care.

I've tried not caring.  It hasn't worked because I do.  I know what's missing today because I was around before that life disappeared.  We've had bad times before - the depression, too many wars and we've always fought our way back to the top.  But then we never had leadership who wanted us to be less than we can be and less than the world wants us to be.  We have it now though and I can only guess it's because it's because we no longer believe in ourselves and find it easier to buy into what others tell us we should be.

Now that's something of which to be ashamed.

Spare Me From Stupid Men!

The debate goes on as to whether guns and campuses are compatible.  I'm a little surprised that Colorado is taking the stance that they are not.  This is macho outdoorsy rugged individual country. Maybe the macho part of it is the problem.  You know, the women as property, barefoot and pregnant, etc. I'd not expect so much of that on a campus and certainly not in the legislature, but here we are.

That being the case I shouldn't have been surprised to learn that  one Joe Salazar, a state representative feels rape is due to gender inequity and that women really needn't be permitted to carry a gun for protection. In essence because they are too flighty and emotional making them prone to shoot prematurely if they feel threatened. You know, like being followed in a dark and deserted area  when that's all it is - being followed.  Explain prematurely to me. When is the defining moment and prove to me that a woman would be any more likely to shoot than a man if feeling threatened.  I'd guess less likely.

But then campuses have call boxes and safe zones if you can get to one and the person in question cares. Or blow a whistle.  Someone might be within earshot. And authorities might get there in time to save you - or not.

Where do these men come from and how do they get into office?

The University of Colorado - Colorado Springs has a tip list to keep women safe.  Some do make sense, others are ludicrous like telling your attacker you have a disease or that you're menstruating. Oh, okay.  Nice chatting with you. Or to vomit or urinate.  Well, you might vomit afterwards, and urinate out of sheer terror before and during but I'd bet there are no statistics  as to how effective these bright ideas are to scaring off an attacker. Another charmer is passive resistance.  Right. Just relax.  It will soon be over.  Somehow that goes against instinct.

I understand not wanting a bunch of students drunk as skunks after an all night kegger fighting over the dregs at gun point or worse, but as with most of our gun issues, it isn't that simple.  What the heck is a safe zone?  When does it become not so safe?  When an attack takes place?  Call boxes. Covered that.

Have a gun?  Use it.  Rape is a crime that often has deadly consequences.

I listen to these men and cringe.  It's political but it has no party bias.  Jerks are jerks no matter their affiliation.  One thing they ought to bear in mind.  We women do.  Rape, in the majority of circumstances is committed by men against women.

It's time for we women to band together against these insulting, demeaning pronouncements.  As Helen Reddy sang,  "I am woman, hear me roar, in numbers too big to ignore."

As for shooters in general, when have you heard about a woman grabbing an assault rifle, or any other type of gun, and going to the mall or the school class room or for that matter the campus and opening fire on untold innocents?  Nope.  It's men.  Stupid men.  Don't put any more of them in office.  Please!

Obama And The Invisible Golf Game!

Is there anyone in the country that hasn't heard that President Obama played golf with Tiger Woods this weekend? Do we know what he shot?  Or what Tiger shot?  How many bogeys?  Holes in one? Birdies?  Nary a word.

And oh, how the White House Press Association is whining.  At least according to FOX correspondent Ed Henry.  They had to go a whole weekend without access to the President of the United States! What if something would have happened?  The people would want to know!  There's a lot we've wanted to know but the press is the last place we're going to learn it from.  Twitter may actually be more reliable as to breaking news if not accuracy!

When I first heard the news I thought it was a joke - about how this was supposed to be such a transparent administration yet they were denied access to the golf game.  I especially thought it was a joke because Ed Henry was the spokesperson for the association.  It needed to come from some place other than FOX to have any credibility.

I caught a short segment with Megan Kelly, also of FOX, wondering if it was because the President was playing with Woods, a man of tarnished character.  All his womanizing with porn stars and such.

Somehow I doubt that entered into consideration.  I'd be more likely to think it was because of Woods' prowess as one of the best golfers in the world bar none and a little privacy was desirable. How transparent does this guy have to be?  Are they worried someone might photo shop a picture of Obama getting a hole in one or Tiger whacking a real pigeon rather than clay with an errant ball and them not being there to reliably report the truth of it?

Well, it gave me a good laugh with which to start the week.  All I can do is ask where they've been when the hate spewing rappers preform at the White House or when Obama was a known friend of Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers.  That was a long time ago.

How about more recently with the questions about Benghazi still lingering unanswered? For years the press has studiously been protecting this President by cherry picking what they report. Now all of a sudden they get upset over this?  And they allow FOX to front it?  Well, that's a sure way to protect themselves from unfavorable fall out such as this. I doubt you'll ever hear it on MSNBC.

There are many things I'd like to have the President sit down and explain but I'll give him a pass on this.   I hope you had a good game Mr. President.  I'm glad you came through unscathed.

I'm still shaking my head as I write this.  Has the press corp really diminished themselves to this degree of irrelevance? Yep, I believe the answer is pretty transparent - they have.  

Politics -Time For Some Acceptance?

I'm feeling kind of sad today.  Maybe it's seasonal affective disorder.  Maybe it's just plain defeat. It's time to realize that the country is leaving me and my kind behind.

I've just finished listening to the umpteenth discussion on sequestration with each panelist blaming those of the opposing party. It has gotten so tiresome I wonder why I even bother listening what's more commenting on them.

Maybe we have too many independent contractors in Congress these days.  Especially in the Republican Party.  You'd think among all those men and women in the House there would be a core group who could get together on a policy and convince the rest to, in essence, lead follow or get out of the way. But they don't get out of the way.  They dig in their heels and prevent any chance of a cohesive agreement.

The Democrats love to bully and intimidate.  That's because winning is the only way and they are the least fractured of the two parties at this particular time.

We know from the State of the Union speech, if not before, where the President is coming from.  There is no question.  I'm on the losing side.  I do think we have a spending problem.  Not only do we spend too much we also spend on projects that had better have been left to the states or to the private sector.

The President has no interest in friend or foe outside our borders so the world will go it's own way without any form of guidance what-so-ever.  I believe we will pay for abdicating our position as leader of the free world and so will others who have depended on us. It saddens me that it's no longer deemed important.

I watch the parties scrap like junk yard dogs, snarling and gnashing their teeth at one another with the only concern being winning their point.  It doesn't matter what is best for the country.  It has become no more than a patch of dirt on which to do battle.  Unlike me, fewer and fewer are paying enough attention.  Who can blame them?  As I said, it gets so tiresome and it never changes. Then to add insult to injury, under-informed voters come to the fore during the silly season and vote for the most ludicrous of reasons, usually self-indulgent ones.

When I was born FDR was President.  The first I was aware of was Truman.  I remember seeing the headlines about Dewey beating him. Wrong. I've seen many since. Some have been better than others to be sure but I don't believe there was ever one as detached from the people as our current one.  Whether you agreed with their ways or not, they were for God and country, not self. What has happened to that?  I ask the same of Congress.  I ask the same of our own local politicians.

Self used to be paired with reliance.  No more.  Basically I'm doing no more than preaching to a one person choir.  Why?  I keep waiting for the pendulum to swing back but I don't see that it has reached the end of the arc it is now following.  Heck, I'm even too old for my own mood swings!  Oh well, maybe the sun will come out tomorrow.

Oscar Pistorius - Another Gun Tragedy

With the news that paraolympic hero Oscar Pistorius shot and killed his girl friend, I immediately wondered if the tragedy would have occurred with our current gun laws and those proposed.

My conclusion is a resounding yes.  Why?  Because no one would be looking at him as unfit to won a gun.  What makes him so very different than Chris Dorner?  No one was paying him much mind either because until the madness began no one was expecting it.

By all accounts Mr. Pistorius was a wonderful young man.  He had certainly overcome tremendous odds.  He liked guns.  He was a hunter.  He spent time at a local shooting range.  Just like so many others.

He had a temper too and neighbors talked of a domestic disturbance the night of the shooting.  How many people would fit his profile and how many of them own guns?  More than I can count on one hand.  The question is what made him so angry that he pumped four bullets through a bathroom door and into his lady?

He claims it was a tragic accident.  The police are charging him with murder.  Chris Dorner said he was  unjustly dismissed from the police department.  The police said it was justified.  Something inside was asunder, however, with both men.  Something acquaintances, even close ones, did not see.

Granted, Mr. Pistorius was in South Africa and Mr. Dorner here.  If nothing more it shows gun violence has no borders.  It also shows that registration and background checks may do no more good than searching every living soul passing through our airports.

The problem it seems is that a potential killer may be an everyman until an unknown stress point is passed.  How is that to be detected?  There is no way.  Had either man not had access to guns would their inner rage have manifested itself in some other way?  Probably.  Unless one is just plain evil, something triggers the rage beyond control.

I don't know that kind of anger and hope I never do.  I've know men who have abused their spouses yet had been nothing but warm and friendly with me.  Had I not known the spouse I'd have never known or even imagined.  Is it so much different with a shooter?

It's just confounding.  I don't know that universal carry permits are a grand idea.  It just puts weapons more readily in the hands of anyone likely to snap. Should I too have a weapon, would my reflexes be fast enough to protect myself against an unsuspected attack?  I doubt it. Even with training. And Mr. Pistorius didn't need but four bullets to do unmitigated damage to his friend, purposely or not.

After the rhetoric dies down, I don't expect much to happen in the way of meaningful new legislation.  Congress may legislate something, but it won't be meaningful because we don't know what that would be.

The guns are out there.  The people who own there are out there.  Those who have yet to snap are also out there.  It's no wonder I don't particularly like crowds and watch my back at the ATM when someone comes up behind me. It's not a comfortable way to live, but the circumstances causing it have long been in place.