Van Jones, Truthers, Birthers, and an Ugly Reality

We need to talk about Van Jones. We need to talk about his past, we need to talk about his resignation as the White House’s environmental advisor- and we really need to talk about whether or not he’s been victimized by the GOP.

Van Jones was made a household name by right-wing Fox News talk show host Glenn Beck. I’m not a regular Glenn Beck watcher- he’s way too emotionally unstable for me to be able to take seriously. Listening to him induces extreme anxiety, and I’m always afraid he’s this close to having a colossal meltdown. The net result is something akin to a child, trying to bravely sneak a horror movie that she has no business watching. She’s sitting in front of the TV, hands covering her face, peaking through her fingers at the screen…

… Should she watch?

But oh!

What if something happens!

Blah!

That’s me when Beck is on the air. He’s a trainwreck, and I find myself waiting for the whole show with him in tow to derail in front of my very eyes.

Quite stressful.

It’s for this reason I wish I could say Glenn Beck has finally lost his marbles, and is oh-so-wrong about all things Van Jones. Unfortunately, in some ways, the guy (Beck, that is), nutty as he may be, actually made some good points about Mr. Jones.

Van Jones, as no one in their right (err… correct, that is) mind would argue, is a polarizing character. To say he’s controversial would be an understatement. His radical views have been well-documented in the past- he is a bona-fide Truther, among other things (I don’t care what he claims, people- evidence is evidence). He feels that the Bush Administration, along with other high-level government officials either knowingly instigated 9/11, or through purposeful gross negligence allowed it to happen, all to give Bush and cronies an excuse to start an oil war in Iraq.

Now please don’t misunderstand me. I think the current downturn this country is experiencing can be traced back to that cluster-fuck we like to call the Iraq War. Do I blame the Bush Administration? Yes I do. I also, however, blame Bush Sr.’s Administration for not toppling Saddam Hussein during Desert Storm, when he was all but handed to us on a silver platter… I blame the Clinton Administration as well, for not taking down Bin Laden when a similar opportunity presented itself… and above all, I blame each and every member of Congress- both Democrat and Republican- who voted to send our men and women into that country to begin with.

Need I remind any of you that we have lost more soldiers in the War on Terror than we lost on 9/11? For what? The answer, sadly, is that we lost them for nothing, other than the need of some politicians to settle a score that they, themselves, were responsible for creating at the start.

There is plenty of blame to go around. None of it, however, centers on a vast conspiracy, but instead was created by a bunch of short-sighted people who at the end of the day couldn’t tell their asses from a hole in the ground.

It is common knowledge today that Van Jones signed a petition in 2004 that asked for hearings to determine whether politicians had knowingly allowed the events on 9/11 to occur. Personally, I think politicians did allow the terror attacks to occur, but realize that they didn’t knowingly do so. They ignored a whole lot of signs that pointed to a colossal attack, instead preferring to believe that as the Good Ol’ U.S. of A, we were invincible.

Costly mistake, but an honest one nonetheless.

Van Jones has tried to back pedal on this petition he signed… claiming that while he allowed his name to be placed on the form, he does not subscribe to any conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 or our subsequent invasion of Iraq.

It was at this point that Jones became a liar.

You see, he didn’t just sign a Truther petition in 2004. A full two years prior to that,  in 2002 he organized a march for the Truther Movement.

Yet this college educated lawyer wants us to believe he had no idea what the hell he was signing when it came to this particular petition?

Doubtful.

With regards to the actual truth, here’s what we really know about Van Jones:

Jones was born in 1968. He is an environmental activist, a civil rights advocate, author and lawyer.

After graduating from Law School, rather than take an offered job in Washington, DC, Jones instead moved to San Fransisco. He joined a controversial organization called STORM (Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement). This organization was decidedly Marxist, sympathizing with Mao-ist peasants, and was in part created to combat the issue of police brutality.

He was famously arrested for his role in the Rodney King protests, though charges were later dropped. It was during this same time period, in 1995, that Jones began actively identifying himself as a Communist.

Jones is also responsible, after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, for starting Color of Change, a non-profit organization dedicated to giving a larger political voice to Black America. That year he also began actively advocating for a Green America, becoming an environmentalist, and starting an organization called “Green for All”. Green for All promotes environmentally-friendly jobs in poor communities.

In 2008 he found moderate success when his book, “The Green Collar Economy” hit the New York Times top 12 list.

In March of 2009, Van Jones joined the Obama Administration as the environmental czar.

I would argue that Mr. Jones has done some wonderful things in his life. He has advocated for a greener world, and has worked tirelessly to help minorities succeed in this country. The problem is that he does not have the gift of words. While doing great things for millions of people worldwide, he simultaneously suffers from a terminal case of foot in mouth disease, which has proven to be his downfall.

Honestly, I don’t even care that the man once identified himself as a communist. I wish my biggest college-era transgession was to pick the wrong political party to align myself with. People change, and with age, we mature. That’s the general idea, anyway. I don’t even have a huge problem with the fact that Jones once famously claimed that white people and white corporations were purposely dumping their waste and polluting communities that predominantly consisted of people of color. Personally, given some of our nation’s history, that isn’t difficult for me to believe.

I applaud the fact that at some point, realizing that his more extreme views were not affecting the change he desired within the U.S., he decided to work within the system as it’s designed… no longer calling for revolution, no longer trying to make waves on the outer fringes of society.

It doesn’t even bother me that he recently referred to Republicans as assholes.

I live in a country where it isn’t supposed to phase me that people are calling my President a terrorist, a communist, a Marxist, a socialist… and are bringing guns to townhall meetings in hopes of shooting our Commander in Cheif like he’s a wild animal, and it’s deer season. I live in a nation where outright calls for our leader’s death, and pastoral prayers hoping he’ll keel over from brain cancer are the norm. Someone calling the GOP a bunch of assholes honestly doesn’t get me too excited.

What I cannot reconcile are the similarities between The Truthers and The Birthers. Van Jones’ affiliation with the Truther movement is exactly why he needed to resign. And every jerk Birther needs to do the same.

These two groups- they are both extreme, they are both radical, they both promote dangerously false claims, and they have no place in our government.

The problem in Van Jones’ case is that he did not convincingly leave radicalism, nor did he wholeheartedly embrace a more follow-the-rules, mainstream approach to getting the job done.

If he was honestly appalled that his name was attached to a petition espousing nonsensical conspiracy theories about our nation’s largest tragedy, he should have made those views known before he got caught by the likes of Glenn Beck.

Unfortunately for us, Jones certainly isn’t the only whacko we have our hands full dealing with.

There are Republicans in Congress (Representative Bill Posey, Florida) today that subscribe to the dangerous vitriol being spewed by the Birthers… and there are (former) Democrats in Congress (Cynthia McKinney) who subscribe to the nastiness being put forth by the Truthers.

For every lame-brained Truther petition out there, an equally ridiculous Birther petition, claiming Barack Obama is really the son of Al Qaeda, in cahoots with every terrorist known to man is in existence as well.

Prominent people are buying into both brands of idiocy.

Every last one of them needs to go.

If they won’t go willingly, we need to boot them- all of them- out the door.

We are living in terrifying times… polarizing times… where political discord is no longer an opportunity for open, honest, intelligent conversation, but is instead giving rise to left-and-right-wing maniacal idiots. It is only a matter of time before real violence erupts, and the regular people of America… you and I… need to be getting pissed off about it.

Van Jones is nobody’s victim… the only regret I have is that we aren’t kicking more radicals just like him- on both sides of the political spectrum- to the curb.

Obama, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and Lame Excuses

Oh, Obama, you’re breakin’ my heart!

To say the least, I am extremely disappointed in Obama’s recent flip-flop on gay rights- most specifically, the military’s discriminatory Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy.

If he keeps this up, he’s gonna become nothing more than just a regular ol’ politician in my eyes.

That’s a heartbreaking thought.

Back in January Obama’s Communications Chief, Robert Gibbs, held a question and answer sessionon YouTube. One of the questions asked was whether or not the President intended to repeal the current policy regarding gays in the military.

Gibbs’ response?

A resounding yes.

Yes, yes and hell yes.

Now, however, we’re hearing something a li’l different, and it’s coming straight from the horse’s mouth.

Obama, it seems, doesn’t think the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is something he can do on his own… he says the legislative branch really needs to tackle this one, not him.

Sigh.

I believe I’m both getting whiplash and smelling some really rank B.S. all at once.

Yuck.

This guy can introduce a health care bill, a huge climate control bill, stimulus packages and everything else…

… But Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is too big a challenge?

Sorry, Mr. Prez.

I’m not buying it.

In fairness to Obama, he makes no bones about the fact that he still supports a change in the law- and that he’d like to see the change sooner, rather than later- but one kinda’ gets the impression that this isn’t the type of hot-button issue he wants to get behind right now…

… And is therefore deciding, not so gracefully, to pass the buck.

I wonder specifically, what “change” he’d like to see take place?

Beyond that, the whole thing just sounds disingenuous.

He certainly didn’t just wait for congress to decide it was time to act when he’s wanted to address other things that have been important to him during his short time in office.

He’s much more of a go-getter than that.

At least when the issue at hand is an important one- to him, at least.

I don’t know…

… Just doesn’t sit right.

The Death of Affirmative Action?

We are getting news today that the Supreme Court has ruled on the infamous New Haven Firefighter reverse discrimination case.

Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, in a strange coincidence, was one of the presiding judges during this case’s original appeal.

The High Court has ruled in favor of white firefighter Frank Ricci, reversing Judge Sotomayor’s ruling.

As most of us are aware, the New Haven firefighter case was about whether or not Mr. Ricci was unfairly discriminated against when he passed (with flying colors, I might add), the city of New Haven’s standard test, the results of which determined one’s eligibility for promotion within the department.

Ricci, unfortunately, did not get the promotion, because just after taking the test, the city threw out all test results because no eligible black firefighters (and only one Latino) had passed it.

The city’s defense was that they were following applicable federal law- Title VII, if you want the name for it- that prohibits an employer’s discriminating against any race in its hiring or promotion practices. Even if the discrimination is not purposeful, it is still illegal, according to the law.

When Ricci initially brought suit against New Haven, he lost, and the trial judge ruled in favor of the city.

Not to be deterred, he appealed the ruling at the federal level, where it fell into the lap of Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s federal appellate court. Sotomayor (in a unanimous decision, reached along with the two other judges on the panel), upheld the trial court’s decision, ruling in a depressingly brief statement, that the applicable law- love it or hate it- had been appropriately applied.

Ricci then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. The High Court has spoken, and Frank Ricci is likely a very happy man.

I have had feelings that were difficult for me to reconcile about this case from the start.

I do not fault Judge Sotomayor in her decision, as she was merely charged with determining whether or not New Haven had been on the right side of the law when the city decided to throw out the test. Simply looking at legal precedent, New Haven’s officials acted the way the Title VII statute requires them to.

This case is a true eye-opener, and is a symptom of the challenges that can develop as a result of changing times.

In the not too distant past, reverse discrimination was a myth. It was an excuse used by lazy white people who did not have the education or the drive to get a real job and go to work. This country, at that time, was so terribly stacked against minorities that the notion that white people could possibly be victims of discrimination was absolutely ludicrous.

Now, however, things are different.

We have multiple laws- both state and federal- protecting workers from discrimination. These laws cover everything from gender to sexual orientation, from race to religious background. Not only are these laws on the books, they are actively in use. We have affirmative action- require some organizations to hire certain percentages of minority workers; we have colleges and universities that give preferential treatment to qualified minority applicants over equally qualified white candidates who apply for admission.

I have never been against affirmative action, as in my lifetime I have seen a real need for it. These laws, these practices, in my liberal mind, have always been my definition of reperations, the much-needed apology of a nation who has done dastardly deeds to minorities for centuries.

Today, however, I am conflicted.

Make no mistake- I am not so naive as to believe racism or (and perhaps especially) discrimination is dead. No, I still see evidence of it in my day-to-day life, and I am as appalled by it today as I ever was…

… But something has changed in this country.

The change is called progress.

No longer do we, as minorities, live in a nation where reverse discrimination is a ridiculous figment of certain people’s imaginations. On the contrary, we have made enough progress, moved far enough forward that reverse discrimination has become a real problem.

This case never could have happened had we not successfully begun to level the playing field.

For that fact alone, I am quite proud of my country today.

Make no mistake- we aren’t there yet.

There are still companies that will find silly and illegal reasons to keep from hiring a black man. 

Or a woman.

Or a Muslim.

Or a homosexual. 

… And apparently, in some cases, even a white person.

It is important to remember this fact, and to continue to fight against discrimination in all its forms. Companies still need to be held accountable for their hiring and promotion tactics, ensuring that they are not excluding anyone from realizing their true potential and achieving greatness.

The enemy here is, and always has been, discrimination.

We must be careful that we are not missing the forest for the trees. As Americans, we are the best- perhaps in the world- at doing just that.

It is discrimination we fight, and we fight it in all its forms.

Frank Ricci, while yes,  a white guy, is a man with dyslexia and other learning disabilities.

He dedicated himself most thoroughly to passing the test administered by the New Haven fire department; a man who worked harder than probably anyone else to earn this promotion… quitting his second job so that he would have more time to devote to studying, spending large amounts (approximately $1,800) of his own hard-earned money on study materials and even hiring a tutor to come and read the materials to him, as his learning disabilities were so great, he could not have gotten through all of it on his own.

Some say the fact that Ricci had the resources to take such extraordinary measures to pass the test constitutes a bias. Simply put, not everyone has the luxury of quitting their second job, buying extra study materials, and hiring tutors to help prepare them for an upcoming test.

I agree, to an extent.

However, what I have not seen mentioned, at least not as point of fact, is that most people do not suffer from the learning disabilities Ricci has either.

How many of the other candidates had the unique challenge of overcoming dyslexia in order to prepare for and take this test?

Ricci went the extra mile, and in doing so, I believe he merely leveled the playing field.

He did not have an unfair advantage- in fact, he had a significant disadvantage- but rather than fall victim to the fact that he came to the starting line handicapped, he found away to overcome his disabilities.

This man was dedicated, he refused to let his shortcomings deter him. He found a way around his own handicap, and he knocked it out of the ballpark.

Since when is hardwork, creativity and digging up helpful resources not worthy of reward in this country?

He deserves his promotion.

Discrimination, in all its forms, is ugly.

Whether the victim is black or white, gay or straight, man or woman, Christian or Buddhist, learning disabled or not.

The goal is to create a level playing field, not to give minorities a free pass over all else.

It is because we are charged with fighting discrimination in all its forms that we should not be in support of hiring or promoting practices that tip the scales in the opposite direction either, causing a new group of people- fellow humans- to miss out on hard earned- and deserved- opportunities.

Regardless of race.

Past injustice does not constitute an excuse to inflict future injustice.

So…

… Today the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the white guy in a discrimination case, and strangely…

I’m ok with that.

Dick Cheney, Irony and The Mortally Wounded GOP

Dick Cheney thinks it would be a mistake for the Republican Party to ‘moderate’ itself in an attempt to save itself from slowly dying.

This is about fundamental beliefs and values and ideas … what the role of government should be in our society, and our commitment to the Constitution and constitutional principles,” Cheney said in an interview with North Dakota radio host Scott Hennen Thursday, according to a transcript.

“You know, when you add all those things up, the idea that we ought to moderate basically means we ought to fundamentally change our philosophy,” Cheney also said. “I for one am not prepared to do that, and I think most of us aren’t. Most Republicans have a pretty good idea of values, and aren’t eager to have someone come along and say, ‘Well, the only way you can win is if you start to act more like a Democrat.'” –CNN Political Ticker, May 7, 2009

How ironic that Cheney today finds himself arguing for, claiming to support people’s constitutional rights when he fought so desperately during eight years of the Bush Administration to  single handedly destroy them.

This isn’t the Party that protects rights… it has made a name for itself by destroying them.

To list a few…

• Human rights- by torturing people who do not share “American” beliefs
• Women’s rights- by attempting to do away with a woman’s right to choose her own reproductive path, and giving a cluster of cells inside her body more consideration than the living, breathing woman whose body they reside in
• Religious rights- by attempting to silence non-right leaning Christians, by perpetuating hatred for Muslims and others, by shoving a narrow doctrine down the throats of people the world over
• Gay rights- by actively shaming homosexuals and seeing to it that they do not enjoy the same treatment or benefits of their heterosexual counterparts
• Minority rights- by fighting against progress, and actively seeking to do away with the very protections (such as affirmative action) that can help our nation achieve racial parity…

The list is endless, really.

I wonder if Dick even realizes that it is his party’s philosophies, ideals and “fundamental beliefs” that are causing the problems- causing their recent and overwhelming defeat-  to begin with.

People, with little exception, do not inherently subscribe to the GOP belief system- a system that systematically destroys the freedoms of so millions… and yet, this is exactly what the Republican Party is fighting to maintain.

Protection for the few, persecution of the many.

If Dick Cheney has his way, that is.

This party, for so long, has been the one to set the narrow standard of what it means to be an American.

You’re either with them or you’re against them.

Not too long ago, to be against them was a dangerous thing.

It was not ok to simply have philosophical differences… to do so was un-American, it was traiterous, it was downright dangerous.

Our country, at long last, is changing.

I’m happy for it.

I hope Dick Cheney eventually grasps the fact that in large part due to his actions, his philosophies- his ideals- and his very Party are an endangered species.

It begs the question…

… Is he with us, or against us?

He has drawn his line in the sand.

Sessions, Specter and the Supreme Court

Things are getting really exciting on Capitol Hill.

Supreme Court Justice David Souter has recently announced his retirement, paving the way for Obama’s first Supreme Court nomination.

In a coincidental turn of events- a side plot, perhaps- Representative Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) will be taking Arlen Specter’s place as the top Republican in the Senate Judiciary committee.

All of this becomes interesting when we take a look at some of the stuff Representative Sessions is best known for.

Most political junkies recognize Sessions from way back in the day, when the Democrats were dukin’ it out with President George W. Bush over his Supreme Court pick, Justice Samuel Alito.

The Dems, hating this choice of nominee, fought tooth and nail to keep him from being appointed… ultimately prolonging the process of confirming the Justice’s nomination.

Jeff Sessions was the ultra-vocal senator that felt judges needed to be appointed by a simple up-or-down vote.

Simple majority, people.

No arguing, no filibuster…

… In short, no muss, no fuss.

Just Yea or Nay.

Since the founding of the Republic, we have understood that there was a two-thirds supermajority for ratification and advice and consent on treaties and a majority vote for judges. That is what we have done. That is what we have always done. But there was a conscious decision on behalf of the leadership, unfortunately, of the Democratic Party in the last Congress to systematically filibuster some of the best nominees ever submitted to the Senate. It has been very painful. -Senate Floor Speech, Rep. Jeff Sessions, 2005

I wonder, now that President Obama is holding the reigns, if Representative Sessions still feels the same way.

Obviously, it won’t be difficult for Obama’s Supreme Court nominee to win a simple majority vote, considering the Dems control both houses.

Will Sessions put his money where his mouth is and support a straight vote…

… Or not?

Just when things begin to get interesting, the plot thickens.

You see, Representative Sessions was nominated 20 years ago to be a U.S. District Judge.

The Senate rejected his nomination.

The reason?

Sessions’ was alleged to have made racially insensitive remarks. A U.S. attorney, in fact, testified that he’d heard Sessions claim that he used to respect and admire the Ku Klux Klan-

Until he learned many of its members were pot smokers.

The deciding vote that doomed his confirmation in the Senate?

Arlen Spector.

This is gettin’ good.

Bye Bye Bybee…

I just signed a petition calling for Judge Jay Bybee’s impeachment.

Judge Bybee, for those who aren’t aware, is currently under federal investigation by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility.

The investigation centers around a legal memo Bybee wrote during the Bush Administration, authorizing “enhanced” interrogation techniques- techniques that the Justice Department considers to be torture.

Mr. Bybee isn’t just in trouble in the good ol’ US of A either- he’s also being investigated in Spain for war crimes.

Currently, this not-so-nice guy enjoys a cushy gig as a federal judge in the 9th district.

Nice.

 Anyway, if you’re interested, the petition is being sponsored by Moveon.org.

If you aren’t interested, shame on you.

This is a morally bankrupt man.

A man that believes that torturing fellow humans is not only an appropriate action- but an action that makes us safer in our own beds at night.

He’s wrong, he’s criminal, and he needs to be held accountable for his actions.

Specter, Spectacles and Death Scenes

People really are buzzin’ about representative Arlen Specter’s switch from the GOP to the Democratic Party.

I find the whole thing exciting… though hardly surprising.

I do wonder if this most recent blow to the fledgling Republic Party will be the much needed wake-up call for hardcore Conservatives, or if they will continue to bury their heads in the sand… business as usual… while their very ideals and ideologies die.

True, the death has been slow and painful…

… but appears imminent, nonetheless.

Unless, of course, Specter’s party jump is taken for the big, loud, eye-opening jolt that it should be taken for.

Fox News’ Michael Goodwin even goes so far as to call Specter’s switch a nail in the clueless GOP’s coffin.

Ouch.

I expect GOP talking heads, as Michael Steele has done, to publicly complain, crying foul at Specter’s “flip of the bird” at the Republican Party…

… But if they’re smart, they’re searching their souls behind closed doors.

Michael Steele is 100% correct after all.

Specter’s flippin’ y’all the hell off.

We are 100 days into Obama’s presidency, and while critics have certainly had a lot of fun in the past 3+ months, it seems the Democratic Party is getting increasingly stronger.

Already dangerously close to that magical number of 60, the Dems have now gained Arlen Spector… and likely Al Franken from Minnesota (heck, he’s already hired a chief of staff!).

If it works out… and it looks like it will… the magic number will be met.

This means the Repubs will officially be screwed.

Err… worse than they already are, that is.

I’m not so naive as to think Specter is a “real” Democrat… he’s still Conservative, and has all but admitted to switching parties solely to keep his seat.

He hasn’t had any great epiphanies, and his ideals remain unchanged.

His motivation is to win, and he knows his own party, the GOP, is not currently the winning ticket.

Regardless, for the time being, he is more likely to vote with the Dems… Personally I don’t care what his motivation is, provided we get the job done.

All I can do now is grab my popcorn, sit back and enjoy the show, and knowing how predictable this ending will be- doesn’t lessen the fun I’m having at all.

Not even a li’l bit.

The question is, underneath all the spewing and sputtering, does the GOP recognize what they are doing to themselves?

Are they now beginning to see that their long-held ideals are being unraveled by their own hands?

… And even if they do finally see it, will it be too late to make a difference?

Regardless, it’s all quite entertaining.

Steve Harvey, Standards and Dating

I have been a fan of Steve Harvey’s for years.

I loved the original Kings of Comedy, and faithfully watched the Steve Harvey Show for years.

Nowadays I listen to his radio program every morning on my way to work, and his book “Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man” is definitely on my list of must-reads.

Recently Mr. Harvey was on Oprah promoting the book.

One of the things he talked about really struck me as a single woman.

Steve believes women have set the dating bar way too low.

I agree.

We have no standards anymore.

Harvey tells Oprah, “Women talk about [how] chivalry’s dead. Chivalry’s not dead– it’s just not required anymore”.

Again, he’s right.

Dating is tricky- it’s exhausting, and really isn’t that much fun- not for me, at least.

I hate those first few initial dates… everything is all formal and uncomfortable…

… Nervewracking.

Inevitably, just as I’m starting to feel ok around Mr. Wonderful, as I’m getting to know him better, I begin to realize…

He really isn’t all that wonderful.

Great.

Back to the drawing board.

It gets exhausting, and at times it’s hard to keep my chin up.

I find myself wondering if the problem is me… am I asking too much?

Steve Harvey believes that women need to have strict standards… and that we need to stick to them.

Personally speaking, I have 3 iron-clad requirements:

1. He must have his own transportation
2. He must have a job- and currently be supporting himself
3. He must have his own place

I think my 3 criteria are pretty basic…

… But you’d be amazed.

Seems that looking for someone who has a car, a job and his own place puts me into the “picky” category.

I don’t want to date a man who lives with his parents- this inevitably means we have to spend all our time, when not out, at my house. Some days I don’t feel like cleaning. Sometimes I don’t feel like being the host. It’s nice to have options every once in a while.

I don’t want to date a man who does not have his own method of transportation. I am not willing to do all the driving anytime we go out or just want to see each other.

I don’t want to date a man who cannot support himself.

I am a single mother- I have to take care of myself and my 2 daughters.

I simply do not have the means or the energy- let alone the inclination- to take care of a grown ass man.

I have too many responsibilities of my own.

None of my requirements seem unreasonable to me… afterall, I am not asking anything of anyone that I, myself, do not have.

I have my own place.

I have my own car.

I have a job, and I support myself.

Yet, when I try and explain to people that these three requirements are non-negotiable with me, I am called a gold-digger.

Seriously.

After a while, I find myself making excuses…

“Well, we are in a recession… times are tough… it’s not so bad that he lives with his parents…”

“The job market sucks… unemployment is really high… it’s not so bad that he doesn’t have a job…”

The problem is that while lowering my standards I am  increasing my odds of actually landing a date- I am also drastically decreasing my chances of finding someone I can respect… someone whose company I can truly enjoy… someone I feel is worth getting to know.

So many of us need to remind ourselves that a relationship is not the end-all-be-all in this world.

It’s not necessary to our survival.

Let’s stop lowering our standards… let’s stop being afraid of being alone…

… And let’s show the men out there that we are women worth working hard for.

Thanks to Steve Harvey for reminding me that if chivalry’s dead, it’s only because I have killed it.

New Mexico Governor Repeals Capital Punishment

Today I was happy to read that Governor Bill Richardson has signed a bill aboloshing the death penalty in New Mexico.

I realize that this was a very tough decision for him to make… Richardson does believe that the death penalty- in rare cases- is just punishment for especially heinous crimes.

His statement reads, in part:

Regardless of my personal opinion about the death penalty, I do not have the confidence in the criminal justice system as it currently operates to be the final arbiter when it comes to who lives and who dies for their crime.

The governor’s signing of the bill, as one would expect, was met with some criticism.

The New Mexico Sheriffs’ and Police Association (among others), opposes the bill.

They have issued a statement claiming that the state’s law enforcement officers are now in more danger as a result of the repeal.

The Association would have a point if there was any data whatsoever to show that the death penalty actually serves as a deterrent to crime.

In fact, statistics show states that do not have the death penalty actually have lower murder rates than states that do. In 2007, non-death penalty states had murder rates that were 42% lower than states that carry out the punishment.

42%.

That ain’t a small number…  and certainly not an insignificant one.

People who commit horrific crimes are typically not thinking about the potential consequences of their actions.

Generally speaking, would-be criminals do not walk around saying to themselves…

Gee, I’d really like to rape and murder that kid over there… and I sure would do it too… if it weren’t for that stupid lethal injection I’d probably get.

It just doesn’t happen that way… and available data pretty much proves it.

The death penalty is not a punishment that serves the interest of justice.

On the contrary, it serves the interest of revenge. 

It’s not difficult to understand why families of victims would prefer blood… death… an eye for an eye…

Who wouldn’t?

Human emotion, however, especially in such highly-charged circumstances, does not equate to justice served.

Our justice system- or court system, as I like to call it (in my opinion, it is sickeningly short on justice)- is imperfect, just like the humans who run it.

As long as there is a chance that even one single person could be killed for a crime he or she did not commit… as long as there is classism and racism running rampant in our society…

The only responsible action, in the interest of justice- true justice– is to repeal the death penalty.

New Mexico, while just one state, has done a great thing.

Let’s hope other states follow suit.

AIDS, Andino, and The Diva

There’s been a lot of talk lately about the AIDS epidemic- both in the U.S. and abroad.

I’ve blogged about it myself on more than one occassion.

It’s been my stance, since day one, that one of the keys to curbing what is fast becoming a plague is education.

The abstinence-only approach isn’t just unrealistic- it is dangerous.

It simply isn’t enough.

Some people may take well to a lesson on abstinence, but many others will ignore it entirely.

Too often, parents use abstinence as a cop-out. It’s an excuse not to have to talk about things we do not feel comfortable discussing.

As parents, we need to get over it.

We must educate our children. We must remove the stigma that is currently attached to having open, candid conversations with them.

AIDS will kill our babies if we don’t.

My oldest daughter, The Diva (she’s 10), was trying to make some money by doing extra chores the other day.

She decided to clean out The Hippie Andino’s car- he’s my 25 year-old baby brother.

I thought this was a wonderful idea.

When she was done with the job, she came back inside, and I immediately noticed the look of horror on her face. She was holding something in her hand, though I couldn’t tell what it was.

“What’s wrong?” I ask.

She answers, in an accusing tone, “Look what I found in The Hippie Andino’s trunk…”, and shoves the contents of her hand in my face.

When I saw what she was holding, I could immediately feel the heat in my cheeks. Though I really had no reason to be, I found myself embarrassed for her.

She was holding a tattered box of condoms.

Oops.

I was confused by her tone… why is she being accusatory? Why is she acting as my brother is doing something wrong by having safe sex?

I decided to take this opportunity to speak candidly with my child- and hopefully turn this into a teaching moment.

So I asked her, “Why would you be upset?”

She responded, “Because- they’re condoms. Gross.”

I said to her, “He is being responsible. He’s having safe sex. He isn’t getting anyone pregnant, and he is protecting himself and his partner from sexually transmitted diseases.”

I explained that while condoms may seem “gross” to her right now, they are important.

They save lives.

The Diva’s world opened up just a little at that moment.

She didn’t view those condoms in disgust or contempt any longer, and with great relief I realized, she gets it.

It isn’t necessary to constantly harp on our children, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week about the horrors of sex and AIDS.

This particular exchange took less than five minutes, from start to finish.

We can educate our babies a step at a time- provided we start the process early enough. By the time they find themselves old enough to be faced with these grave decisions, they will have already had all the information they need to make the right choices.

Hopefully, by then, it will be second nature.

With absolutely no bombarding whatsoever- by taking advantage of the little teaching moments life throws our way- we can raise our kids to be responsible adults…

… One educational opportunity at a time.