The new "Little Fockers" movie trailer follows. With the reshoots (adding Dustin Hoffman and more Barbra) it may now be worth going to the theater to see. It is being released December 22nd.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
THIS FUNNY GIRL IS SMART......
STOP. THINK. BREATHE
It's not news…many people in our country are suffering. Uncertainty over our economy continues with high unemployment, which in turn has triggered many more home foreclosures. The lack of jobs has left a lot of people understandably angry, fearful and cynical about what they will face in the days ahead.
It’s natural to want to stop the pain, to find a fast solution or look for a quick fix to end the agony of the last twenty months. But it took many years (eight) to unravel the policies and regulations that both protected our economy and kept it strong, and it is going to take time to rebuild and restore it.
The patience of the American people has worn thin. However, as we head into a mid-term election, we must not make decisions based on frustration or anger, and revert back to the party and the leaders that turned a $236 billion budget surplus left by President Clinton into a $1.2 trillion deficit left by President Bush. We cannot, out of fear, go back to the same party and policies that created this economic meltdown, abused the system, and did little to help those who were left victimized by the greed of Wall Street and the special interests from K Street.
Republicans spent eight years creating and supporting the destructive policies of the Bush Administration, which systematically debilitated the economy as well as weakened our regulatory system. They created the biggest disparity between the ultra rich and the poor, while working to relax and eliminate rules governing banks, corporations, and financial institutions. Now, as we near Election Day, they are again asking hardworking Americans to trust them with their vote. Why should we trust them? They spent twenty months stonewalling the President’s efforts to recharge our economy and put Americans back to work.
My question to the Republican Party is: What actions would you take that would differ from the actions that originally got us into this mess? Would you extend the Bush tax cuts that primarily benefit the top 1% of our country? Continue to block energy policies that will create millions of new green jobs? Keep policies in place that reward corporations that ship American jobs overseas? Oppose strong financial reform that insures that transactions, loans and credit cards are fair and transparent? Oppose a jobs bill that helps small businesses get the loans and the tax cuts that they need to prosper? Those are not the decisions that will lift America out of its difficulties and make our country stronger.
Week after week, on the 24 hour cable news cycle, Republican officials and prominent GOP leaders twist, distort and misrepresent the facts in order to place blame on others, while they continue to obstruct progress. It’s like the old saying that if you tell a lie big enough and you keep repeating it often enough, people will eventually come to believe that it is true. Whether they are discussing financial regulation, health care, jobs, the economy, energy policy…virtually every important issue our country is grappling with today, the Republican Party that once stood for something, now refuses to engage in constructive conversation about anything, all the while, offering virtually no new policy alternatives in return.
Since President Obama took office, the Republican narrative has been to serve their party over serving the people. They have been committed to blocking progress at all costs in order to insure the failure of this President. But now is the time to give President Obama a chance to fulfill his promise of reviving the spirit of hope and possibility that has always allowed our country to dream and to make the impossible possible. The only way he will be successful is if he has a Congress that dreams with him and an American electorate that gives him the chance!
I believe that Americans truly want a government that represents the middle class and working families of this nation, not the extremely rich, the bankers, and the CEOs. We have experienced a difficult recession, but due to the President’s policies, the country has avoided a total depression. What matters as we move forward is that consumers are protected, Wall Street is regulated, children have health care, and our representatives in Washington are committed to working for the people, not the private interests. I only hope that we can all take a deep breath and show the patience that is required to give our smart, committed and hopeful young leader the time he needs and the elected allies in Congress he requires to lift us all into a new time of innovation and prosperity.
The above was posted today by a very smart woman.... Hope she doesn't want to have me killed for reposting it here....
Originally posted as http://www.barbrastreisand.com/us/statement
It's not news…many people in our country are suffering. Uncertainty over our economy continues with high unemployment, which in turn has triggered many more home foreclosures. The lack of jobs has left a lot of people understandably angry, fearful and cynical about what they will face in the days ahead.
It’s natural to want to stop the pain, to find a fast solution or look for a quick fix to end the agony of the last twenty months. But it took many years (eight) to unravel the policies and regulations that both protected our economy and kept it strong, and it is going to take time to rebuild and restore it.
The patience of the American people has worn thin. However, as we head into a mid-term election, we must not make decisions based on frustration or anger, and revert back to the party and the leaders that turned a $236 billion budget surplus left by President Clinton into a $1.2 trillion deficit left by President Bush. We cannot, out of fear, go back to the same party and policies that created this economic meltdown, abused the system, and did little to help those who were left victimized by the greed of Wall Street and the special interests from K Street.
Republicans spent eight years creating and supporting the destructive policies of the Bush Administration, which systematically debilitated the economy as well as weakened our regulatory system. They created the biggest disparity between the ultra rich and the poor, while working to relax and eliminate rules governing banks, corporations, and financial institutions. Now, as we near Election Day, they are again asking hardworking Americans to trust them with their vote. Why should we trust them? They spent twenty months stonewalling the President’s efforts to recharge our economy and put Americans back to work.
My question to the Republican Party is: What actions would you take that would differ from the actions that originally got us into this mess? Would you extend the Bush tax cuts that primarily benefit the top 1% of our country? Continue to block energy policies that will create millions of new green jobs? Keep policies in place that reward corporations that ship American jobs overseas? Oppose strong financial reform that insures that transactions, loans and credit cards are fair and transparent? Oppose a jobs bill that helps small businesses get the loans and the tax cuts that they need to prosper? Those are not the decisions that will lift America out of its difficulties and make our country stronger.
Week after week, on the 24 hour cable news cycle, Republican officials and prominent GOP leaders twist, distort and misrepresent the facts in order to place blame on others, while they continue to obstruct progress. It’s like the old saying that if you tell a lie big enough and you keep repeating it often enough, people will eventually come to believe that it is true. Whether they are discussing financial regulation, health care, jobs, the economy, energy policy…virtually every important issue our country is grappling with today, the Republican Party that once stood for something, now refuses to engage in constructive conversation about anything, all the while, offering virtually no new policy alternatives in return.
Since President Obama took office, the Republican narrative has been to serve their party over serving the people. They have been committed to blocking progress at all costs in order to insure the failure of this President. But now is the time to give President Obama a chance to fulfill his promise of reviving the spirit of hope and possibility that has always allowed our country to dream and to make the impossible possible. The only way he will be successful is if he has a Congress that dreams with him and an American electorate that gives him the chance!
I believe that Americans truly want a government that represents the middle class and working families of this nation, not the extremely rich, the bankers, and the CEOs. We have experienced a difficult recession, but due to the President’s policies, the country has avoided a total depression. What matters as we move forward is that consumers are protected, Wall Street is regulated, children have health care, and our representatives in Washington are committed to working for the people, not the private interests. I only hope that we can all take a deep breath and show the patience that is required to give our smart, committed and hopeful young leader the time he needs and the elected allies in Congress he requires to lift us all into a new time of innovation and prosperity.
The above was posted today by a very smart woman.... Hope she doesn't want to have me killed for reposting it here....
Originally posted as http://www.barbrastreisand.com/us/statement
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
FORMER RNC CHAIRMAN KEN MEHLMAN GAY
Another Republican comes out of the closet - surprise surprise.
Ken Mehlman, a man who formerLY held the highest (non-elected) office within the Republican party has come out as gay.
For at least four or five years of his involvement with George W. Bush and the Republican party, he was the mouthpiece for a group of rich, bigoted, white men and had to demonize and criticize his own community in order to get his boss re-elected.
I cannot imagine the self-hatred this man must have internalized - just to make a living!
To him I say congratulations for finding peace and honesty, but also shame on you for not standing up for yourself and for allowing Karl Rove and other puppet masters to pull your strings.
Interestingly enough, Bill Mahr outed him on CNN's Larry King Live back in 2006. See below:
Ken Mehlman, a man who formerLY held the highest (non-elected) office within the Republican party has come out as gay.
For at least four or five years of his involvement with George W. Bush and the Republican party, he was the mouthpiece for a group of rich, bigoted, white men and had to demonize and criticize his own community in order to get his boss re-elected.
I cannot imagine the self-hatred this man must have internalized - just to make a living!
To him I say congratulations for finding peace and honesty, but also shame on you for not standing up for yourself and for allowing Karl Rove and other puppet masters to pull your strings.
Interestingly enough, Bill Mahr outed him on CNN's Larry King Live back in 2006. See below:
TWINKLE TWINE (OF MY EYE)
Papa Fettit taught Noelle how to play Twinkle Twinkle Little Star, or at least the first couple of notes and next thing I know she is play the entire song - much to my amazement.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Arizona immigration law: Arizona's immigration law should be overturned, says Rev. Josh Pawelek - Courant.com
Arizona immigration law: Arizona's immigration law should be overturned, says Rev. Josh Pawelek - Courant.com
This article first appeared in the Hartford Courant. My response: AMEN
After praying long and hard, I have decided to go to Phoenix to add my voice to the growing chorus of protest against Arizona's tough new immigration law. Barring an injunction from the U.S. District Court, the law goes into effect next Thursday.
Dubbing this Arizona's "freedom summer," civil rights organizations and faith groups have vowed to resist the law's implementation and are calling on all those concerned about the humane treatment of immigrants to lend their voices and bodies to the struggle. The law's most controversial provision is known as Article 8 B. It requires police to make a "reasonable attempt" to determine the immigration status of a person if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that "the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States."
Unfortunately, Article 8.B does not define "reasonable." It is so vague that even my untrained legal eye can see that police officers, on a whim, will be able to stop, question and detain anyone they choose. This opens the floodgates for racial profiling, which has been cause for dismay among civil rights activists across the nation.
With Article 8. B at its core, Arizona's law has the strong potential to result in separation of families, unnecessary incarcerations, erroneous deportations of legal citizens and lost productivity. It has struck fear and terror into the heart of Arizona's Hispanic communities. This law is an affront to the moral sensibilities of our nation.
I am not in favor of open borders. Given the reality of drug smuggling, human trafficking and the potential movement of international terrorists, I recognize the need for tough, consistent and well-resourced border control. I also recognize that the Arizona legislature and Gov. Jan Brewer were frustrated by the lack of federal progress on immigration reform and felt compelled to act. But, in the end, the new law doesn't "get tough" on immigration.
It gets tough on people already living in the United States. That is its moral failing.
Some estimates put the number of undocumented people in the United States at 20 million. The vast majority of them have come here out of economic desperation.
There is considerable evidence that in most cases, they take jobs most citizens don't want. There is clearly a robust market for their labor, otherwise they wouldn't come. We cannot intimidate, arrest and deport our way out of this situation as if such activities can somehow contain the larger economic forces at work. Undocumented immigrants work extremely hard, for long hours, with very little recognition and few rights. Like so many previous generations of immigrants, they provide the unseen backbone of our economy. The Arizona law completely ignores this reality.
I am moved by the words of Moses who said "when an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be as a citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself." I don't turn to this scripture for legal advice, but I do seek moral inspiration from it.
Our nation needs immigration reform desperately, but let us achieve it in a manner that respects the integrity of undocumented people and honors their contributions to our society. Let us achieve it in a way that doesn't tear parents from their children in the dead of night. Let us achieve it in a way that doesn't criminalize whole communities based on skin color, language and accent. Let us achieve it in a way that doesn't return us to our white supremacist past. Let us achieve it in a way that is grounded in the same love toward the alien of which Moses spoke.
Arizona is better than its new immigration law. So is our nation. That is why, when the call went out for clergy and others to come to Phoenix, I could not refuse.
The Rev. Josh Pawelek is minister of the Unitarian Universalist Society: East in Manchester and president of the Greater Hartford Interfaith Coalition for Equity and Justice.
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford Courant
This article first appeared in the Hartford Courant. My response: AMEN
After praying long and hard, I have decided to go to Phoenix to add my voice to the growing chorus of protest against Arizona's tough new immigration law. Barring an injunction from the U.S. District Court, the law goes into effect next Thursday.
Dubbing this Arizona's "freedom summer," civil rights organizations and faith groups have vowed to resist the law's implementation and are calling on all those concerned about the humane treatment of immigrants to lend their voices and bodies to the struggle. The law's most controversial provision is known as Article 8 B. It requires police to make a "reasonable attempt" to determine the immigration status of a person if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that "the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States."
Unfortunately, Article 8.B does not define "reasonable." It is so vague that even my untrained legal eye can see that police officers, on a whim, will be able to stop, question and detain anyone they choose. This opens the floodgates for racial profiling, which has been cause for dismay among civil rights activists across the nation.
With Article 8. B at its core, Arizona's law has the strong potential to result in separation of families, unnecessary incarcerations, erroneous deportations of legal citizens and lost productivity. It has struck fear and terror into the heart of Arizona's Hispanic communities. This law is an affront to the moral sensibilities of our nation.
I am not in favor of open borders. Given the reality of drug smuggling, human trafficking and the potential movement of international terrorists, I recognize the need for tough, consistent and well-resourced border control. I also recognize that the Arizona legislature and Gov. Jan Brewer were frustrated by the lack of federal progress on immigration reform and felt compelled to act. But, in the end, the new law doesn't "get tough" on immigration.
It gets tough on people already living in the United States. That is its moral failing.
Some estimates put the number of undocumented people in the United States at 20 million. The vast majority of them have come here out of economic desperation.
There is considerable evidence that in most cases, they take jobs most citizens don't want. There is clearly a robust market for their labor, otherwise they wouldn't come. We cannot intimidate, arrest and deport our way out of this situation as if such activities can somehow contain the larger economic forces at work. Undocumented immigrants work extremely hard, for long hours, with very little recognition and few rights. Like so many previous generations of immigrants, they provide the unseen backbone of our economy. The Arizona law completely ignores this reality.
I am moved by the words of Moses who said "when an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be as a citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself." I don't turn to this scripture for legal advice, but I do seek moral inspiration from it.
Our nation needs immigration reform desperately, but let us achieve it in a manner that respects the integrity of undocumented people and honors their contributions to our society. Let us achieve it in a way that doesn't tear parents from their children in the dead of night. Let us achieve it in a way that doesn't criminalize whole communities based on skin color, language and accent. Let us achieve it in a way that doesn't return us to our white supremacist past. Let us achieve it in a way that is grounded in the same love toward the alien of which Moses spoke.
Arizona is better than its new immigration law. So is our nation. That is why, when the call went out for clergy and others to come to Phoenix, I could not refuse.
The Rev. Josh Pawelek is minister of the Unitarian Universalist Society: East in Manchester and president of the Greater Hartford Interfaith Coalition for Equity and Justice.
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford Courant
Monday, May 31, 2010
THE COOLEST YOU'LL LOOK POOPING YOUR PANTS
Fettit and I stopped by the Conforti-Wiley's earlier today on our way home from lunch and while there this commercial came on the television.
A toddler is all swagger and charm as he struts his chic down the sidewalk, capturing the attention of two beautiful sidewalk cafe diners and the nodding appreciation of a motor scooter rider. A slack-jawed pedophile (in a gray Pee Wee Herman suit) is so taken by the denim diaper wearing stud that he releases his balloons. (Okay, what the hell was JWT thinking - that part is beyond creepy.)
Other then that last part, I love this advertisement. It made me want to run out and buy jean diapers for my kids - then I remembered they are nearly 28 years old. They can buy their own!
My diaper is full
Full of Chic
When it's a number two
I look like number one
I poo in blue
A toddler is all swagger and charm as he struts his chic down the sidewalk, capturing the attention of two beautiful sidewalk cafe diners and the nodding appreciation of a motor scooter rider. A slack-jawed pedophile (in a gray Pee Wee Herman suit) is so taken by the denim diaper wearing stud that he releases his balloons. (Okay, what the hell was JWT thinking - that part is beyond creepy.)
Other then that last part, I love this advertisement. It made me want to run out and buy jean diapers for my kids - then I remembered they are nearly 28 years old. They can buy their own!
My diaper is full
Full of Chic
When it's a number two
I look like number one
I poo in blue
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
PRAY FOR OBAMA
Today I returned from work and found an email in my inbox. The subject line read "PLEASE DO NOT BUY THIS." As I scrolled down the above picture was displayed and the text of the email read:
The scripture on the T-Shirt reads: Psalms 109:8 - If you look in your Bible it reads: "Let his days be few and let another take his office (or place of leadership)."
Please Black people - show them that you just don't buy and wear ANYTHING!
It was signed by Dr. Leslie Agard-Jones, Historic Paterson, NJ. This prompted me to look up the passage, as well as the supposed author (Dr. Agard-Jones), and that is what it says and Dr. Agard-Jones is the former Dean, College of Education, William Paterson University.
I initially found it a bit humorous that Dr Agard-Jones, a black man himself, addressed his statement to "black people." Perhaps he felt it necessary, but what disturbed me (yet didn't surprised me), was that a white sheet wearin red neck would be making such t-shirts. Is nothing beneath these cowardly racists. Perhaps it was the brain child of one of the neanderthal low-lifes that pass as Arizona state senators, you know, the ones that still want President Obama to hand them his birth certificate in order for him to be allowed on the ballot in 2012.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
CHRISTOPHER'S FIRST HAIRCUT
Yesterday my 21 month old grandson, Christopher, had his first haircut. I wasn't there but I am told he handled like a trouper.
BARBRA STREISAND - ONE NIGHT ONLY
Yesterday, fours days after its release, I purchased "One Night Only Only - Barbra Streisand and Quartet at the Village Vanguard." I typically purchase her music and videos on the day they are released, but this week I procrastinated.
While Fettit was away playing his organ for the masses, I snuck off to Target and bought the DVD/CD combination, came home and cued it up for viewing later that evening, and once the sun went down, and it was apparent our Arizona Diamondbacks were going to lose against Milwaukee, I switched over to the concert.
At 67 years old, Barbra Streisand's voice is still as captivating as ever and she continues her reign as the preeminent interpreter of the great American songbook. In the case of this concert, the 123 lucky people in attendance (and now everyone else,) were able to experience her in an intimate setting, reminiscent of her beginnings in the small clubs of New York's Greenwich Village.
This private concert was to kick off the release of her last CD "Love is the Answer" - the jazz inspired work of art that surprisingly debuted at number 1 on the charts, making her the only artist to have a number one album in five decades (breaking her own record).
Barbra puts her stamp on several standards: In The Wee Small Hours Of The Morning, Nobody’s Heart (Belongs To Me), Make Someone Happy, My Funny Valentine
Bewitched, Bothered And Bewildered, and stripped down versions of two of her most well known songs, Evergreen and The Way We Were.
One of my favorite moments in the concert came near the end, after finishing her classic "Evergreen," she leaves the stage and when she returns she realizes that she walked off a song too early. Known for her perfection to detail and production, and releasing carefully controlled product, her realization (however brief) is priceless - a brief glimpse into a human Streisand.
Sarah Jessica Parker sits at the front table with Barbra's husband, James Brolin, and is clearly mesmerised throughout. As Babs finishes her final song, "The Way We Were," she is visibly moved and is seen wiping tears from her face - a reaction I can relate to from the four times I have seen her, whether from the rafters in Detroit's Palace in 1994 or 30 feet from the stage here in Phoenix in November 2006.
Nearly 50 years after becoming an international sensation, Barbra Streisand's connection to the lyrics and emotions of a song remain unequalled. She still touches a special place in my heart and getting to experience this exclusive, unplugged performance was a pleasure to watch from beginning to end.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
DOBSON'S SUCCESOR GIVES MEGA-MINISTRY NEW FOCUS
I stumbled upon the following article this morning featuring Focus on the Family's new leader Jim Daly. Is there a softening of the evangelical right? Are they starting to see the light?
COLORADO SPRINGS (April 24) -- Jim Daly is certain there is "a right way and a wrong way" to live one's life, and it's all about Jesus Christ and a literal reading of the Bible. But the new leader of the evangelical ministry Focus on the Family isn't going to get in your face if you disagree.
At a time when the conservative movement is dominated by raucous tea party demonstrations for lower taxes and smaller government, Daly seems oddly disconnected. "Don't know much about it, to be honest with you," he said, even though a recent poll showed that many tea party supporters are social conservatives like himself.
Instead, he spends more time worrying about so-called "Christian militias" plotting against the government. "The 'Christian' label means a lot to me," he said. "We don't want a theocracy. We want a government informed in moral principle.”
Focus on the Family "will weigh in on the big social issues before us and provide an opinion, but in all of that I want to express respect for everyone, for all human beings," he said. "It's not about being highly confrontational. It's about results."
Daly may be getting them. On a wall in the organization's offices here is a framed editorial from The New York Times, a publication not known for its sympathy toward religious conservatives. It defends Focus on the Family's right to air a TV ad during the Super Bowl featuring Denver Broncos draft pick Tim Tebow and his mother, who ignored doctors' advice that she should abort her fifth child, the future Heisman Trophy winner himself. The Times editorial attacked "would-be censors" and called protests by abortion rights groups against the then-unseen spot "lame."
When the actual commercial turned out to be an understated, feel-good message about motherhood, in fact, it was the group's most ardent supporters on the right who had a problem. "Some on our side criticized us for being too soft," Daly said in an interview with AOL News. "CBS wasn't going to allow, you know, 'DO NOT ABORT YOUR CHILD!' It's ridiculous."
In any event, traffic to the group's website surged after the Super Bowl, and Daly cited surveys saying it prompted millions to reconsider their position on abortion. "That's a game changer," he said.
Don't Say 'Unlike Dobson'
The biggest game changer for Focus on the Family, though, was the departure of its fiery founder, James Dobson. The child psychologist-turned-radio minister started the group in 1977 to help strengthen traditional marriage and give advice on parenting. But in recent years Dobson, 74, had become more involved in politics, and before the 2008 election he gave Sarah Palin a sympathetic platform and published a letter predicting that in "Obama's America" gays would get bonuses for joining the military and pornography would be televised in prime time.
In an era of kinder, gentler evangelical leaders like Rick Warren and Timothy Keller, who appeal to a younger generation of believers, Dobson may already have been an anachronism.
"The hard-edged politics of the original Christian-right leaders is increasingly out of style, partly due to generational change, and partly because evangelicals have been involved in politics for a long time and many have adopted a more pragmatic approach," said John Green, a University of Akron political scientist who studies religion.
Daly certainly has. He joined the ministry in 1989 and ran its international division -- which broadcasts to 130 countries, including Muslim Indonesia -- before becoming president in 2005. In February, he took over the organization after Dobson left to host his own radio show. (Dobson declined to be interviewed for this article.)
Dobson's departure angered some Christian conservatives even as liberal bloggers rejoiced. But Daly, who hates when journalists describe him as "unlike Dobson," says on matters of principle there is no daylight between him and his mentor. In tone and style, though, they are like night and day.
Speaking of the heyday of the religious right in the 1980s, Daly, 48, suggested that the influence of social conservatives like Jerry Falwell and of Dobson himself may have been illusory.
"When you look back from a pro-life perspective, what were the gains there?" he asked, noting President Ronald Reagan's judicial choices. A generation later, "we see a bit of fatigue. We don't see the results for the energy, the money, everything else that's been poured into the political sphere," said Daly, who keeps a desk plate reading "Laugh" in his office overlooking Pike's Peak.
"We as a Christian community need to refocus a bit on what's important in the culture. For us, it's family. That's our mission."
'Not Fearful of Change'
Earlier this month, hundreds turned out for a community discussion on homosexuality in a strip mall movie theater-turned-church in this city known as "the Evangelical Vatican" for its dozens of Christian ministries. Among the six panel members were those comfortable with their homosexual orientation and others who were less so. One of the latter was Focus employee Jeff Johnston, who told of "my journey out of homosexuality."
Daly was out of town but taped a welcome message. "We're not always going to agree," he said on the video, but added, "I'm not here to tell you what to do."
Bill Oliver, a local gay rights activist who has protested outside the 81-acre Focus campus, said Dobson disparaged gay families, but under Daly, "the rhetoric has definitely been lowered."
One sign: the group's recent decision to stop offering "reparative therapy" for gays and lesbians. Focus officials say the transfer of its Love Won Out program to Exodus International -- which has been attacked by gay rights groups and criticized by mental health professionals -- has to do with getting back to "bread-and-butter" issues and doesn't signal a change in policy.
Yet it's clear Daly, who has met with gay activists, sees diminishing returns in continuing the culture wars.
"I'm not fearful that change will happen in America. It will happen. ... I don't know what will happen with same-sex marriage, but I'm not going to be discouraged if we lose some of those battles," he said, noting that for "98 percent" of people, traditional marriage will remain relevant.
"It's going to be difficult in this culture and the way the demographics are going right now," he went on. "You look at the under-35 age group. I think it's splitting 60-40 support for same-sex marriage. There's a lot of people in the U.S. [who] basically come to the conclusion that this is something between two adults. I will continue to defend traditional marriage, but I'm not going to demean human beings for the process."
As with the Tebow ad, the new approach hasn't always pleased the Focus faithful. Daly sparked an uproar last year after he attended a White House conference on fatherhood and said the president was a good role model for African-American men.
"It caught me by surprise," Daly said of the criticism from conservatives. Like them, Daly finds little political common ground with Barack Obama, but, considering the president is married to his "first wife" and is raising his own biological children, "does anybody doubt that if we had more families like that in America, we wouldn't be better off?" he asked.
Daly told Obama that both know what it's like not to have a father around. In his autobiography, "Finding Home," Daly writes of being abandoned by his alcoholic father, then orphaned at 9 when his mother died and sent to a nightmarish foster home before finding God in high school.
That dysfunctional childhood, in fact, informs Daly's priorities at Focus: Since he took over, Focus has started a program to reduce the number of legal orphans in foster care by recruiting families to adopt hard-to-place children. Wait No More is in five states and has already halved the number of children in foster care in Colorado. The Denver Post called it "a perfect example of how faith-based organizations can partner with government to best utilize the strengths of both."
Faithful to Its Mission
Amid the recent economic decline and falling donations, Focus on the Family has had to scale its ambitions back a bit. The organization's budget has fallen from $151 million in 2008 to $136 million this year. In 2004, there were 1,400 employees; today, there are 830 (many of them working in modern buildings incongruously adorned with seven miles of oak trim donated by a wealthy supporter).
But the group hasn't abandoned its more traditional activities. For instance, it still buys ultrasound machines for pregnancy centers, boasting that has "saved" 80,000 babies whose mothers had considered abortion. And it still rates popular entertainment for its suitability for Christian families -- Daly recently devoted his radio show to an interview with the executive producer of a wholesome made-for-TV movie sponsored by Wal-Mart.
Indeed, despite media stories emphasizing the differences between Dobson's Focus and Daly's, much remains the same. The campus bookstore sells such titles as "The Feminist Mistake: The Radical Impact of Feminism on Church and Culture" and "What Darwin Didn't Know: A Doctor Dissects the Theory of Evolution." And the latest print edition of the group's Citizen magazine features articles on the "unprecedented wave of anti-life legislation and executive orders" under Obama and, under the headline "What We're Really After Is Cultural Change," how state-level activists can get like-minded candidates elected to public office.
Tom Minnery edits the magazine, and as head of government and public policy for Focus, he lobbies against same-sex marriage and abortion rights. He notes that just 45 Focus employees are involved in policy issues, even if they do get most of the media attention.
That doesn't include the Family Research Council, a separate but closely aligned advocacy group Dobson helped found. Earlier this month, it was almost alone in speaking out against a White House order extending hospital visitation rights to the partners of gay men and lesbians.
Daly may be dialing back his public image, but Minnery's shop is more active than ever. Last year, Focus opened its first Washington office. In February, the group took part for the first time in the annual meeting of CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference. Minnery said the group's lobbying arm, which may soon change its name from Focus Action to something less identified with Dobson, plans to speak out soon on immigration. He called current laws "terribly wrong" because they often lead to family separations.
"Whether we're big players or small players or quiet players," Minnery said, "we'll keep playing."
Jesus First, Policy Second
Yet it's clear his boss may be playing by new rules.
"Policy is important, but Jesus is more important," Daly has said. Which may explain his hesitancy to talk about one of the biggest policy issues of the day.
"Now you're going to get me in hot water," he said when asked his views about health care reform. No, he didn't like the language about abortion and would have preferred a go-slow approach. Mandating health insurance "doesn't come out of our free will," he noted. "Tax collection is not an act of love."
But he also noted that early Christians opened the first hospitals and hospices and that after "gladly" ceding responsibility to the government during the 1960s Great Society era, the church was "muddled" on its role.
"Many people would put their hand up, Christians, and say, 'Well, that's something the church should do.' But the church has failed to step up. That's a big task, to try to insure 30 million people. I don't know that anybody but the government could do something for those people," he said. "As we've focused a lot more on the political issues and trying to defend those things we believe in that arena, I'm concerned we may be forgetting the social issues that we need to be engaged in."
The above article is from AOLNews' Senior Washington Editor Andrea Stone.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Friday, April 23, 2010
FIRST THEY CAME
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
By Pastor Martin Niemöller
BOYCOTT ARIZONA NOW
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
By Pastor Martin Niemöller
BOYCOTT ARIZONA NOW
BOYCOTT ARIZONA NOW
Today Republican Governor Jan Brewer signed the Republican legislature backed Senate Bill 1070 which makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally. It requires local law enforcement to determine an individuals immigration status if an officer suspects that person is in the country illegally. In other words, they have just passed a law to that allows racial profiling.
Playing to the fears of many, Brewer stated, "I've decided to sign Senate Bill 1070 into law because, though many people disagree, I firmly believe it represents what's best for Arizona. Border-related violence and crime due to illegal immigration are critically important issues to the people of our state, to my Administration and to me, as your Governor and as a citizen."
The police of this state have more important things to do then check the immigration papers of every dark skinned person they encounter.
How many more legal, brown skinned U.S. citizens will be unnecessarily stopped and harassed - simply because of the color of their skin, and how will they prove their legal right to be here? I have not been issued my United States ID card.
Today I am ashamed to say I am an Arizonan and believe it is time to call for a boycott of my state. Spend your money in New Mexico or California. Do not support this racist state!
BOYCOTT ARIZONA NOW
Saturday, April 10, 2010
SNACK FOOD PERSONALITY TEST
Along with the horoscope, four temperaments, personality types and psychological tests, those who seek the gnosis of the world can take a very simple test that will reveal secret knowledge about their personalities. This is a very brief, simple test that does not require psychological interpretation. As soon as you take the test, you can turn to the profiles and find out the essence of your personality. Furthermore, you can keep an eye on which snacks your friends choose and thereby have secret knowledge about them, which will naturally help you socialize more effectively.
Furthermore, this test might save Christians lots of time and money, because it may be about as reliable and valid as most other personality tests that mission agencies and other Christian organizations use in evaluating candidates. In fact, this test was administered to 800 volunteers along with other personality tests and the results were comparable.
The only prerequisite for the test is that you must answer the question as if you are not on a diet and as if all the choices are equally beneficial to your body. Now, just pick your favorite snack from the following list:
(1) Potato chips
(2) Tortilla chips
(3) Snack crackers
(4) Pretzels
(5) Cheese curls
(6) Meat snacks
Discover your own Snack Food Personality Profile.
According to Alan Hirsch, MD, a researcher at the Smell and Taste Treatment and Research Foundation in Chicago, the following are snack food personality profiles:
(1) Potato chips: "Potato chip lovers are successful, high achievers who enjoy the rewards and trimmings of their success—both in business and in family life."
(2) Tortilla chips: "Perfectionists in regards to their own actions and to the community at large, people who crave tortilla chips are humanitarians who are often distressed by the inequities and injustices of society."
(3) Snack crackers: "Contemplative and thoughtful, people who prefer snack crackers base their decisions on logic rather than emotions."
(4) Pretzels: "Lively and energetic, pretzel fans seek novelty and thrive in the world of abstract concepts. They often lose interest in mundane, day-to-day routines."
(5) Cheese curls: "Formal, conscientious and always proper, the cheese curl lover can be described with one word—integrity. They will always maintain moral high ground with their family, work and romantic partners."
(6) Meat snacks: "Gregarious and social, those who reach for a savory bag of pork rinds or crave beef jerky and other meat snacks are often the life of the party. They are loyal and true friends who can always be trusted."
Wow! Did you notice that with this test everyone is a winner? That’s because the research for this personality test was "conducted on behalf of the Snack Food Association and the National Potato Promotion Board." To learn about some of the negative aspects of these personality profiles, just take some of the key words of each profile and compare them with some of the more detailed lists given with other descriptions of personality types, such as the four temperaments, the DISC, or the MBTI.
The question remains, however, as to whether "You are what you eat" or "You eat what you are." Can a person change personality types by choosing the snack with the most appealing personality? If this all sounds like nonsense, you are getting the point. However, we must end this nonsense with one more typology: there are two types of people: those who believe this nonsense and those who don’t.
I am a tortilla chip person (for those who wondered).
Furthermore, this test might save Christians lots of time and money, because it may be about as reliable and valid as most other personality tests that mission agencies and other Christian organizations use in evaluating candidates. In fact, this test was administered to 800 volunteers along with other personality tests and the results were comparable.
The only prerequisite for the test is that you must answer the question as if you are not on a diet and as if all the choices are equally beneficial to your body. Now, just pick your favorite snack from the following list:
(1) Potato chips
(2) Tortilla chips
(3) Snack crackers
(4) Pretzels
(5) Cheese curls
(6) Meat snacks
Discover your own Snack Food Personality Profile.
According to Alan Hirsch, MD, a researcher at the Smell and Taste Treatment and Research Foundation in Chicago, the following are snack food personality profiles:
(1) Potato chips: "Potato chip lovers are successful, high achievers who enjoy the rewards and trimmings of their success—both in business and in family life."
(2) Tortilla chips: "Perfectionists in regards to their own actions and to the community at large, people who crave tortilla chips are humanitarians who are often distressed by the inequities and injustices of society."
(3) Snack crackers: "Contemplative and thoughtful, people who prefer snack crackers base their decisions on logic rather than emotions."
(4) Pretzels: "Lively and energetic, pretzel fans seek novelty and thrive in the world of abstract concepts. They often lose interest in mundane, day-to-day routines."
(5) Cheese curls: "Formal, conscientious and always proper, the cheese curl lover can be described with one word—integrity. They will always maintain moral high ground with their family, work and romantic partners."
(6) Meat snacks: "Gregarious and social, those who reach for a savory bag of pork rinds or crave beef jerky and other meat snacks are often the life of the party. They are loyal and true friends who can always be trusted."
Wow! Did you notice that with this test everyone is a winner? That’s because the research for this personality test was "conducted on behalf of the Snack Food Association and the National Potato Promotion Board." To learn about some of the negative aspects of these personality profiles, just take some of the key words of each profile and compare them with some of the more detailed lists given with other descriptions of personality types, such as the four temperaments, the DISC, or the MBTI.
The question remains, however, as to whether "You are what you eat" or "You eat what you are." Can a person change personality types by choosing the snack with the most appealing personality? If this all sounds like nonsense, you are getting the point. However, we must end this nonsense with one more typology: there are two types of people: those who believe this nonsense and those who don’t.
I am a tortilla chip person (for those who wondered).
Friday, April 9, 2010
ONE NIGHT ONLY - BARBRA STREISAND AT THE VILLAGE VANGUARD
Below is a preview of Barbra Streisand's September 26, 2009 performance at the Village Vanguard - out on DVD May 4th.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
MYTH OF THE 'GAY LIFESTYLE' JUSTIFIES BIAS
I read the following article on CNN this morning and found I had to post it (as I agree completely). I only took offense to his preferring Madonna to Streisand - but he is like many of my friends.....
(CNN) -- On most mornings, my better half wakes up around 5:30, throws on some sweats and heads to the gym before work.
About a half hour later, I wake up my 13-year-old son, go downstairs to the kitchen to make his breakfast and pack his lunch. Once he's out the door, I brew some coffee and get to work.
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you the "gay lifestyle" -- run for your heterosexual lives.
I understand opponents of gay rights must highlight differences in order to maintain the "us against them" tension that's paramount to their arguments. But this notion that sexual orientation comes with a different and pre-ordained way of life -- as if we're all ordering the No. 3 at a drive thru -- only highlights how irrational groups such as Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, the American Family Association and others like them are in this whole debate.
Pro-marriage organizations try to stop two consenting adults from marrying. Pro-family groups try to stop stable couples wanting children from adopting unloved orphans.
And somehow, me doing something like going to the grocery store threatens the very fabric of society, as Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern spewed. She says "the homosexual agenda is destroying this nation" and "homosexuality is more of a threat than terrorism." I'm not sure what her idea of a gay lifestyle might be, but with a growing teenager, buying and cooking food dominates my day-to-day.
I don't worship Barbra Streisand, I don't watch any TV show with the word "Housewives" in its title and I love fishing, beer and Madonna. But more importantly, I'm just a father trying to keep my son away from drugs, get him into college and have a little money left over for retirement. I'm no sociologist but I'm pretty sure those concerns are not exclusive to gay people.
In one of the most pivotal scenes in the biopic "Milk," Harvey Milk, played by Sean Penn, gathers a group of community organizers and activists to come up with strategies to combat a 1978 ballot initiative that sought to ban LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) teachers and their supporters from working in public schools in California. As the small crowd settles down, Milk quickly glances around the room and says ..
"If we're going to convince the 90 percent to give a ---- about us 10 percent, we have to let them know who we are ..."
"What" we are -- be it gay, straight, black, white -- is simply window dressing. "Who" we are is where the substance is, where the person is, where our humanity is.
Too often, discussions about gay people and gay rights focus on sex, as if a person's entire being is defined by his or her Hollywood crush.
This fixation has been the crux behind attempts to link gay men to pedophilia -- from John Briggs, a state legislator from Orange County who introduced the proposed ban on gay teachers in California, to the Catholic League's Bill Donohue, whose recent attempts to excuse the church for its global scandal coverup by seemingly blaming homosexuality, is evil incarnate.
"The vast majority of the victims are post-pubescent," Donohue recently said on "Larry King Live." "That's not pedophilia, buddy. That's homosexuality."
Actually, Bill, sexual predators whose victims are 13- to 17-years-old are called hebephiles -- a la Joey Buttafuoco, Madeleine Martin and Heather Kennedy -- not homosexuals. And that still doesn't explain why the church opted to save face as opposed to, in the words of the infamous anti-gay figurehead Anita Bryant, "Save our children."
Being gay doesn't dictate how people live their lives any more than being straight does. There are gay people who go to church every Sunday and straight people who do not believe in God. There are single gay men who believe in the sanctity of marriage and married straight men who apparently do not -- such as Gov. Mark Sanford, ex-Sen. John Edwards and Sen. John Ensign, to name a few.
The truth is the only thing all gay people have in common -- you know, besides being gay -- is that we face continuous rhetorical, social and legal attacks for simply existing, thus potentially making something as mundane as bringing a date to a work function a fight-or-flee situation.
And yet, even in the face of that discrimination, LGBT people all handle it differently.
Some of us live in the closet, some of us do drag every Wednesday night, some of us are Republicans hoping to be change agents within a conservative sect and some of us are apathetic Democrats too dumb to carry on a conversation about anything other than Lady Gaga.
In other words, we're just as diverse, intolerant, upstanding and tragic as our straight counterparts and unless there is an annual meeting I don't know about, the only item on the much talked-about gay agenda is an abbreviated passage from the Declaration of Independence -- "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."
In 29 states, people can be fired simply for being gay regardless of their education, experience or job performance; servicemen and women can be dismissed from the military regardless of their qualifications, dedication and courage; and partners are unable to see their better halves in the hospital regardless of the love, commitment and life they share.
Wanting to be judged by the content of one's character isn't a special right, it's a constitutional one guaranteed by the 14th and 15th amendments.
And yet, 145 years since the abolition of slavery, 90 years since women were allowed to vote and 20 years since the Americans with Disabilities Act, we're still involved in McCarthy-like investigations, holding Briggs-like elections and taking opinion polls based solely upon "what" someone is as opposed to "who" they are.
It's sad. We're such a great nation, still full of great hope and promise and yet we keep being tripped up by ignorance, which leads to fear and then eventually hate. Being gay isn't a choice, but being a bigot certainly is.
Editor's note: LZ Granderson is a senior writer and columnist for ESPN The Magazine and ESPN.com, and has contributed to ESPN's Sports Center, Outside the Lines and First Take. He is a 2010 nominee and the 2009 winner of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) award for online journalism as well as the 2008 National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA) winner for column writing.
(CNN) -- On most mornings, my better half wakes up around 5:30, throws on some sweats and heads to the gym before work.
About a half hour later, I wake up my 13-year-old son, go downstairs to the kitchen to make his breakfast and pack his lunch. Once he's out the door, I brew some coffee and get to work.
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you the "gay lifestyle" -- run for your heterosexual lives.
I understand opponents of gay rights must highlight differences in order to maintain the "us against them" tension that's paramount to their arguments. But this notion that sexual orientation comes with a different and pre-ordained way of life -- as if we're all ordering the No. 3 at a drive thru -- only highlights how irrational groups such as Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, the American Family Association and others like them are in this whole debate.
Pro-marriage organizations try to stop two consenting adults from marrying. Pro-family groups try to stop stable couples wanting children from adopting unloved orphans.
And somehow, me doing something like going to the grocery store threatens the very fabric of society, as Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern spewed. She says "the homosexual agenda is destroying this nation" and "homosexuality is more of a threat than terrorism." I'm not sure what her idea of a gay lifestyle might be, but with a growing teenager, buying and cooking food dominates my day-to-day.
I don't worship Barbra Streisand, I don't watch any TV show with the word "Housewives" in its title and I love fishing, beer and Madonna. But more importantly, I'm just a father trying to keep my son away from drugs, get him into college and have a little money left over for retirement. I'm no sociologist but I'm pretty sure those concerns are not exclusive to gay people.
In one of the most pivotal scenes in the biopic "Milk," Harvey Milk, played by Sean Penn, gathers a group of community organizers and activists to come up with strategies to combat a 1978 ballot initiative that sought to ban LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) teachers and their supporters from working in public schools in California. As the small crowd settles down, Milk quickly glances around the room and says ..
"If we're going to convince the 90 percent to give a ---- about us 10 percent, we have to let them know who we are ..."
"What" we are -- be it gay, straight, black, white -- is simply window dressing. "Who" we are is where the substance is, where the person is, where our humanity is.
Too often, discussions about gay people and gay rights focus on sex, as if a person's entire being is defined by his or her Hollywood crush.
This fixation has been the crux behind attempts to link gay men to pedophilia -- from John Briggs, a state legislator from Orange County who introduced the proposed ban on gay teachers in California, to the Catholic League's Bill Donohue, whose recent attempts to excuse the church for its global scandal coverup by seemingly blaming homosexuality, is evil incarnate.
"The vast majority of the victims are post-pubescent," Donohue recently said on "Larry King Live." "That's not pedophilia, buddy. That's homosexuality."
Actually, Bill, sexual predators whose victims are 13- to 17-years-old are called hebephiles -- a la Joey Buttafuoco, Madeleine Martin and Heather Kennedy -- not homosexuals. And that still doesn't explain why the church opted to save face as opposed to, in the words of the infamous anti-gay figurehead Anita Bryant, "Save our children."
Being gay doesn't dictate how people live their lives any more than being straight does. There are gay people who go to church every Sunday and straight people who do not believe in God. There are single gay men who believe in the sanctity of marriage and married straight men who apparently do not -- such as Gov. Mark Sanford, ex-Sen. John Edwards and Sen. John Ensign, to name a few.
The truth is the only thing all gay people have in common -- you know, besides being gay -- is that we face continuous rhetorical, social and legal attacks for simply existing, thus potentially making something as mundane as bringing a date to a work function a fight-or-flee situation.
And yet, even in the face of that discrimination, LGBT people all handle it differently.
Some of us live in the closet, some of us do drag every Wednesday night, some of us are Republicans hoping to be change agents within a conservative sect and some of us are apathetic Democrats too dumb to carry on a conversation about anything other than Lady Gaga.
In other words, we're just as diverse, intolerant, upstanding and tragic as our straight counterparts and unless there is an annual meeting I don't know about, the only item on the much talked-about gay agenda is an abbreviated passage from the Declaration of Independence -- "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."
In 29 states, people can be fired simply for being gay regardless of their education, experience or job performance; servicemen and women can be dismissed from the military regardless of their qualifications, dedication and courage; and partners are unable to see their better halves in the hospital regardless of the love, commitment and life they share.
Wanting to be judged by the content of one's character isn't a special right, it's a constitutional one guaranteed by the 14th and 15th amendments.
And yet, 145 years since the abolition of slavery, 90 years since women were allowed to vote and 20 years since the Americans with Disabilities Act, we're still involved in McCarthy-like investigations, holding Briggs-like elections and taking opinion polls based solely upon "what" someone is as opposed to "who" they are.
It's sad. We're such a great nation, still full of great hope and promise and yet we keep being tripped up by ignorance, which leads to fear and then eventually hate. Being gay isn't a choice, but being a bigot certainly is.
Editor's note: LZ Granderson is a senior writer and columnist for ESPN The Magazine and ESPN.com, and has contributed to ESPN's Sports Center, Outside the Lines and First Take. He is a 2010 nominee and the 2009 winner of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) award for online journalism as well as the 2008 National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA) winner for column writing.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
EASTER 2010
For the past three weeks Fettit has taken the time to grow real grass in Noelle and Christopher's Easter baskets. Last year he wanted to do this for the kids but time slipped through his fingers and before he knew it, it was too late; however, this year he has gone out and tended to their Easter baskets like a mother hen to an un-hatched egg.
After 26 years, few things Fettit does surprise me, but occasionaly (actually rarely) his love for the traditional, in this case our grandchildren's Easter baskets, stuns me!
After 26 years, few things Fettit does surprise me, but occasionaly (actually rarely) his love for the traditional, in this case our grandchildren's Easter baskets, stuns me!
REPUBLICANS ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY
The following article appeared on "The Huffington Post" this past week:
Last week, the Republicans took a big gamble and lost by lining up on the wrong side of history with their battle against health care reform. After the bill passed in Congress, all we heard from Republicans on the 24 hour news channels was, how can Congress pass a bill without even one Republican vote? The answer is...the same way President Clinton passed his Budget Reconciliation Act in 1993. He had to rely solely on Democrats to win passage after not one Republican voted for either his stimulus plan or his budget. Clinton's economic initiatives ultimately brought us the greatest period of prosperity for our country in modern times by creating 23 million new jobs and projecting a federal budget surplus for the first time since 1969.
Conversely, during the time when Republicans held control of the House, Senate and Presidency, they used their power to pass economic policies that led to the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. Despite this fact, Republicans continue to revise history, accuse Democrats of fiscal irresponsibility and vote in lockstep against President Obama's most important policy initiatives, in their effort to have him fail.
Just this last week, the Senate Banking Committee moved to approve financial reform legislation. Not surprisingly, the panel passed the overhaul bill on a 13-10 vote, without support from one member of the Republican Party. Given that the world economy nearly caved to its knees under Republican stewardship and millions of Americans are still suffering, one would think that at least on this issue, partisanship would not trump good policy.
Health care reform, financial regulation, the economic stimulus, energy policy....the GOP has continually stonewalled legislation to move our country forward. The only victory the GOP can claim after the successful passage of health care legislation is that they stuck together in solidarity to do nothing. The GOP's obsession with seeing the President fail and their refusal to work with the Democrats to better the lives of the American people will come back to haunt them.
The American people are starting to resent the "politics of no" and the Republicans are quickly devolving into the "party of no tolerance." Recently, leading intellectual and former Bush White House aide, David Frum, was fired from his fellowship at the conservative-leaning think tank, American Enterprise Institute, after he was critical of the Republican strategy against President Obama's health-care overhaul. Bruce Bartlett, who was also fired by a right wing think tank in 2005 for writing a book critical of George W. Bush's policies, commented that "rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed."
Republicans need to understand that elections matter -- even when they don't win them. America voted overwhelming for Barack Obama because they wanted big change, and now they are getting it. The President deserves a chance to realize his agenda, and I hope that by the November mid-term election, Americans will see that Democrats are the only ones working to put forth policy initiatives to move our country forward.
Author: Barbra Streisand
Last week, the Republicans took a big gamble and lost by lining up on the wrong side of history with their battle against health care reform. After the bill passed in Congress, all we heard from Republicans on the 24 hour news channels was, how can Congress pass a bill without even one Republican vote? The answer is...the same way President Clinton passed his Budget Reconciliation Act in 1993. He had to rely solely on Democrats to win passage after not one Republican voted for either his stimulus plan or his budget. Clinton's economic initiatives ultimately brought us the greatest period of prosperity for our country in modern times by creating 23 million new jobs and projecting a federal budget surplus for the first time since 1969.
Conversely, during the time when Republicans held control of the House, Senate and Presidency, they used their power to pass economic policies that led to the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. Despite this fact, Republicans continue to revise history, accuse Democrats of fiscal irresponsibility and vote in lockstep against President Obama's most important policy initiatives, in their effort to have him fail.
Just this last week, the Senate Banking Committee moved to approve financial reform legislation. Not surprisingly, the panel passed the overhaul bill on a 13-10 vote, without support from one member of the Republican Party. Given that the world economy nearly caved to its knees under Republican stewardship and millions of Americans are still suffering, one would think that at least on this issue, partisanship would not trump good policy.
Health care reform, financial regulation, the economic stimulus, energy policy....the GOP has continually stonewalled legislation to move our country forward. The only victory the GOP can claim after the successful passage of health care legislation is that they stuck together in solidarity to do nothing. The GOP's obsession with seeing the President fail and their refusal to work with the Democrats to better the lives of the American people will come back to haunt them.
The American people are starting to resent the "politics of no" and the Republicans are quickly devolving into the "party of no tolerance." Recently, leading intellectual and former Bush White House aide, David Frum, was fired from his fellowship at the conservative-leaning think tank, American Enterprise Institute, after he was critical of the Republican strategy against President Obama's health-care overhaul. Bruce Bartlett, who was also fired by a right wing think tank in 2005 for writing a book critical of George W. Bush's policies, commented that "rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed."
Republicans need to understand that elections matter -- even when they don't win them. America voted overwhelming for Barack Obama because they wanted big change, and now they are getting it. The President deserves a chance to realize his agenda, and I hope that by the November mid-term election, Americans will see that Democrats are the only ones working to put forth policy initiatives to move our country forward.
Author: Barbra Streisand
Sunday, March 28, 2010
RECESS APPOINTMENTS - BUSINESS AS USUAL
Before the crazy Republicans and "Tea-baggers" start donning their white sheets, throwing bricks, spitting on black folks, and lighting the White House on fire over yesterday’s announcement of the 15 “recess appointments” made by President Barack Obama, I feel compelled to point out a few things.
The first being that President Obama did not invent "recess appointments." The authority to do so comes directly from the U.S. Constitution. Secondly, this power has been used by every president since George Washington, and lastly, those arguing against President Obama's recent use of this constitutional power are hypocrites and only doing so keep the noise level elevated to incite the right wing nut jobs and hate-filled talking heads (Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck etc., etc).
Recess appointments are authorized by Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution: "The President shall have Power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."
George Washington was the first president to use recess appointment when he seated John Rutledge as the Chief Justice of the United States.
The most recent, and controversial recess appoint, was that of John Bolton as US representative to the United Nation. George W. Bush exercised his constitutional power when Bolton’s appointment was stalled in the Senate.
Recess appointments are rather common and during the past four presidencies have been used over 600 times: George W. Bush 171 times, Bill Clinton 139, George Bush 77 and Ronald Reagan 243.
As usual the Republicans are trying to use these appointments as another form of Obama’s bullying, but as long as it suits them, and it is a president from their party, it is business as usual.
Nico Pitney points out this hypocrisy today in "The Huffington Post:
Obama's Recess Appointments: GOPers Raging Now, Welcomed Process Under Bush
President Obama's decision to bypass the vacationing Senate and directly appoint 15 nominees has produced some expected cries of outrage from Republicans.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) pronounced himself "very disappointed" with the move, charging that it showed "once again" that the Obama administration has "little respect for the time honored constitutional roles and procedures of Congress." The president's team had "forced their will on the American people," McCain fumed in a written statement.
Were these the words of a principled opponent of presidential recess appointments, or of a politician in a tough primary jumping at an opportunity to bash President Obama?
Well, here's how McCain reacted in 2005 when President Bush was considering a recess appointment for John Bolton, the controversial nominee to be United Nations ambassador: "I would support it. It's the president's prerogative."
Indeed, just a few years earlier, McCain had succeeded in a one-man crusade to persuade President Bush to install a favored nominee using a recess appointment. Here's how UPI described it in 2002:
Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain prevailed in his fight with the White House to have Ellen Weintraub, a former Capitol Hill attorney, named to a Democratic seat on the Federal Election Commission as a recess appointment. McCain must now be overjoyed that her colleagues have elected her chairman of the commission for the coming year. In her new role, Weintraub, the wife of Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold's legislative director, will have a lot to say about how the regulations governing the McCain-Feingold campaign legislation will be written an implemented.
Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell also joined in the protests of Obama's recess appointments on Saturday, calling them "stunning" and "yet another episode of choosing a partisan path despite bipartisan opposition."
But back in 2005, under President Bush, McConnell spoke what is probably far closer to the truth. When asked by a Fox News host if a recess appointment of Bolton would make the atmosphere in the Senate more poisonous, McConnell replied "no" and pointed out, "typically senators who are not of the party of the president don't like recess appointments."
There is a key difference, however, between 2005 and 2010: the amount of Senate obstruction. As White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki noted today:
[A]t this time in 2002, President Bush had only 5 nominees pending on the floor. By contrast, President Obama has 77 nominees currently pending on the floor, 58 of whom have been waiting for over two weeks and 44 of those have been waiting more than a month. And cloture has been filed 16 times on Obama nominees, nine of whom were subsequently confirmed with 60 or more votes or by voice vote. Cloture was not filed on a single Bush nominee in his first year. And despite facing significantly less opposition, President Bush had already made 10 recess appointments by this point in his presidency and he made another five over the spring recess.
Sen. Harry Reid echoed this sentiment in a statement: "Nominees under President Obama have fared worse than others in recent memory. Regrettably, Senate Republicans have dedicated themselves to a failed strategy to cripple President Obama's economic initiatives by stalling key Administration nominees at every turn. With the recess appointments of these highly-qualified individuals, President Obama has shown that he is serious about getting the right team in place to create jobs and protect the American workforce, and I support his decision."
The first being that President Obama did not invent "recess appointments." The authority to do so comes directly from the U.S. Constitution. Secondly, this power has been used by every president since George Washington, and lastly, those arguing against President Obama's recent use of this constitutional power are hypocrites and only doing so keep the noise level elevated to incite the right wing nut jobs and hate-filled talking heads (Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck etc., etc).
Recess appointments are authorized by Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution: "The President shall have Power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."
George Washington was the first president to use recess appointment when he seated John Rutledge as the Chief Justice of the United States.
The most recent, and controversial recess appoint, was that of John Bolton as US representative to the United Nation. George W. Bush exercised his constitutional power when Bolton’s appointment was stalled in the Senate.
Recess appointments are rather common and during the past four presidencies have been used over 600 times: George W. Bush 171 times, Bill Clinton 139, George Bush 77 and Ronald Reagan 243.
As usual the Republicans are trying to use these appointments as another form of Obama’s bullying, but as long as it suits them, and it is a president from their party, it is business as usual.
Nico Pitney points out this hypocrisy today in "The Huffington Post:
Obama's Recess Appointments: GOPers Raging Now, Welcomed Process Under Bush
President Obama's decision to bypass the vacationing Senate and directly appoint 15 nominees has produced some expected cries of outrage from Republicans.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) pronounced himself "very disappointed" with the move, charging that it showed "once again" that the Obama administration has "little respect for the time honored constitutional roles and procedures of Congress." The president's team had "forced their will on the American people," McCain fumed in a written statement.
Were these the words of a principled opponent of presidential recess appointments, or of a politician in a tough primary jumping at an opportunity to bash President Obama?
Well, here's how McCain reacted in 2005 when President Bush was considering a recess appointment for John Bolton, the controversial nominee to be United Nations ambassador: "I would support it. It's the president's prerogative."
Indeed, just a few years earlier, McCain had succeeded in a one-man crusade to persuade President Bush to install a favored nominee using a recess appointment. Here's how UPI described it in 2002:
Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain prevailed in his fight with the White House to have Ellen Weintraub, a former Capitol Hill attorney, named to a Democratic seat on the Federal Election Commission as a recess appointment. McCain must now be overjoyed that her colleagues have elected her chairman of the commission for the coming year. In her new role, Weintraub, the wife of Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold's legislative director, will have a lot to say about how the regulations governing the McCain-Feingold campaign legislation will be written an implemented.
Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell also joined in the protests of Obama's recess appointments on Saturday, calling them "stunning" and "yet another episode of choosing a partisan path despite bipartisan opposition."
But back in 2005, under President Bush, McConnell spoke what is probably far closer to the truth. When asked by a Fox News host if a recess appointment of Bolton would make the atmosphere in the Senate more poisonous, McConnell replied "no" and pointed out, "typically senators who are not of the party of the president don't like recess appointments."
There is a key difference, however, between 2005 and 2010: the amount of Senate obstruction. As White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki noted today:
[A]t this time in 2002, President Bush had only 5 nominees pending on the floor. By contrast, President Obama has 77 nominees currently pending on the floor, 58 of whom have been waiting for over two weeks and 44 of those have been waiting more than a month. And cloture has been filed 16 times on Obama nominees, nine of whom were subsequently confirmed with 60 or more votes or by voice vote. Cloture was not filed on a single Bush nominee in his first year. And despite facing significantly less opposition, President Bush had already made 10 recess appointments by this point in his presidency and he made another five over the spring recess.
Sen. Harry Reid echoed this sentiment in a statement: "Nominees under President Obama have fared worse than others in recent memory. Regrettably, Senate Republicans have dedicated themselves to a failed strategy to cripple President Obama's economic initiatives by stalling key Administration nominees at every turn. With the recess appointments of these highly-qualified individuals, President Obama has shown that he is serious about getting the right team in place to create jobs and protect the American workforce, and I support his decision."
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Saturday, February 6, 2010
THE NEW IPAD FROM APPLE
Long before Apple unvieled it's IPad, Mad TV introduced the country to the idea.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
PINK WOWS FROM HIGH ABOVE
Pink wowed Grammy watchers from the Staples Center this past Sunday night with the above performance.
Drenched in water and spinning high above the Grammy crowd, she sang the song "Glitter in the Air" from her five time platinum CD "Funhouse."
Simply spectacular!!!
Another reason I appreciated her performance is that she was not lip-syncing as so many other talentless performers do. As many of you know, this is one of my biggest pet peeves.
Striking a blow against the pretenders, after her performance Pink joked, "I would say that no one ever has another excuse to lip sync."
Sunday, January 31, 2010
A FAMILY IS A FAMILY IS A FAMILY
My son got married last night at The Four Seasons Resort in Scottsdale - one of the top rated resorts in the world. It was an intimate and beautiful outdoor ceremony at sunset followed by a lovely reception.
In addition to being the union of two individuals and families, it served as a reunion and possible detente and reunification.
It may not be perfect and the situation may be unorthodox and confusing, but it's my family and last night I was especially happy and proud to be a part of it and them!
Below are some rather surprising photos from last night...
In addition to being the union of two individuals and families, it served as a reunion and possible detente and reunification.
It may not be perfect and the situation may be unorthodox and confusing, but it's my family and last night I was especially happy and proud to be a part of it and them!
Below are some rather surprising photos from last night...
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
INTERNATIONAL HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE DAY
Today is International Holocaust Remembrance Day. Sixty-five years ago today the 7,000 or so prisoners not well enough to join the "Death Marches" were freed from Auschwitz, the Nazi Death Camp located in Poland, by the Russian "red" Army.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
THE NEW TONIGHT SHOW WITH JAY LENO
Gotta love David Letterman!!!
Is anyone rooting for Jay Leno in this mess he and NBC created, and put upon Conan? I have not heard one person come to Jay's defense. Why is that? Is it because he is a putz and has been been funny?
This is also the third time I have heard different celebrities speak of Jay's stealing from other comedians - specifically Howard Stern.
This is funny!
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
CHRISTNE EBERSOLE NAMED BEST MUSICAL ACTRESS OF THE DECADE
This morning I was perusing the internet and found an article on Theatermania.com written by Peter Filichia rating several "best" theater categories of the past decade and he named a personal favorite of mine, Christine Ebersole, as Best Musical Actress of the past decade.
You can read the full article here:(http://www.theatermania.com/peterfilichia/index.cfm?mode=viewentry&id=E5DAD578-2219-54E7-B9D9D1D1DAFE44C2)
I was first introduced to Christine years ago when she was on the Rosie O'Donnell show. I loved he humor, wit, heart, and pure and beautiful voice, and I have plans to see her, along with my friend Ray, when she visits the Scottsdale Center for the Performing Arts on February 26th. I have been excited!
Several years ago when Christine was playing both Big and Little Edie Beale on Broadway in "Grey Gardens" I had tickets to see her (and the show). Unfortunately, she decided to take a few days off, including my performance, and although I was disappointed, I was able to return my tickets because her name was above the title (a little known rule).
This morning, after reading Peter Felichia's article I wrote to Rosie letting her know of Christine's new accomplishment and for the first time since early August, she answered me.
Hell, I thought Ro had blocked me or something as it has been so long she she has answered one of my questions. The last time was early August - just before I was kicked out of her Atlantic City concert.
Now I have to work on finagling backstage passes to meet Christine after her performance.... hmmmmm!
Congratulations Christine!!
(Oh.. and I apologize for not being around lately. I have written a few articles over the past few weeks, but afterwards haven't felt they were good enough to post.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)