I’m not sure, but take a look:
What is written on Sarah’s hand? Why is she looking at the hand to answer a simple question about the three things that tea party people will do once they “take back” their country.
I don’t know that she was acting like an 8th grader in that clip, but it sure looks like she was.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=1d11026c-913f-4aa3-8b39-33f42a4251d6)
From Barack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize speech today:
So let us reach for the world that ought to be – that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees he’s outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.
Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of deprivation, and still strive for dignity. We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that – for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.
I love the practical idealism of Obama’s speech in Oslo.
It was a good reminder of why I volunteered for the guy and am proud to have him as my President.
He’s not perfect, but that view of the world and humanity he displayed in the speech is exactly the kind of leadership that the United States needs to project to the world at this point in our history.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=234d6604-2e58-4c68-8719-91d506ce73e5)
Do the math:
Typical.
I sometimes worry that our national obsession with cleanliness and need to avoid germs at all costs is one of the things that makes us more susceptible to colds, coughs, and other maladies.
Those who are the most germ-phobic seem to be ill more often than those who aren’t.
And maybe it’s that people are germ-phobic because they get sick often. Or maybe it’s because germ0phobes get sick often because they do their best to avoid germs.
But it’s nice to have my theory validated:
Parents who let their kids romp in the mud and eat food that has fallen on the floor could be helping to protect them against maladies like heart disease later in life, a US study showed Wednesday.”Our research suggests that ultra-clean, ultra-hygienic environments early in life may contribute to higher levels of inflammation as an adult, which in turn increases risks for a wide range of diseases,” including cardiovascular disease, Thomas McDade, lead author of the study, said.
Snip:
the message to take home from the study is the importance of being exposed early in life to common microbes and bacteria.
Parents, please let your kids have some fun even if it might expose them to bacteria.
Your kids and I will thank you.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=09248f3f-774c-456c-857e-77f316ae4cfa)
North Carolina’s constitution is clear: politicians who deny the existence of God are barred from holding office.Opponents of Cecil Bothwell are seizing on that law to argue he should not be seated as a City Council member today, even though federal courts have ruled religious tests for public office are unlawful under the U.S. Constitution.
You gotta wonder why that law is still on the books in NC, since courts have decided that religious tests for public office have been deemed as unconstitutional. But in a country where child molesters are only slightly less popular than atheists, I guess it’s not much of a surprise.
Rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution trump the restriction in the state constitution, said Bob Orr, executive director of the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law.
“I think there’s any number of federal cases that would view this as an imposition of a religious qualification and violate separation of church and state,” said Orr, a former state Supreme Court justice.
In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Maryland’s requirement for officials to declare belief in God violated the freedom of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment.
But, I guess if you’re a Christianist, your religious views trump everything, including the Constitution of the United States and human decency.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=1c602e4a-4529-47f3-b7a0-5db3a92eb218)
Right-wing radio jock Rush Limbaugh used (Tiger) Woods’ scandal to bash President Obama on his syndicated show.
Declaring that Obama had let African-Americans down and that “the black frame of mind is terrible,” Limbaugh added: “I’m sure Tiger Woods’ choice of females is not helping ‘em out.” All of Woods’ alleged mistresses are white.
So, according to Limbaugh, African Americans have terrible frames of mind and that frame of mind is made worse because Tiger Woods has white mistresses.
No, not at all racist.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=1702166f-2b14-41cb-a642-6dc983d4e3a0)
Wow. They really are more stupid than I feared:
Apparently, some people think that the President is a racist or fear that they might be called racist if they oppose Obama on anything. .
Why?
I don’t know.
Insecurity? Philosophy? Idiocy?
But really. Opposing the President on health care reform does not make someone a racist.
Throwing a hissy-fit because the President’s agenda doesn’t yours match doesn’t make you a racist, either.
But if you think the President is a secret Muslim sent by Al Qaida to destroy our country. And if you’re still looking for our President’s Birth Certificate (Indonesian, Kenyan, Hawaiian), you are an asshat.
No one is calling the President a racist except for those looking to foment civil unrest. Glenn Beck much?
What is wring with people?
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=cc8b9434-75b6-4ec6-99cf-70eb7936f3ad)
Sorry, my inner adolescent couldn’t resist that headline. 
But it looks like Rick Santorum, America’s favorite ex-Senator, is seriously mulling a White House bid in 2012:
Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) gave his clearest words to date that he is seriously mulling a 2012 presidential bid.
“Absolutely — absolutely taking a look,” he told ABC’s “Top Line” webcast Monday afternoon.
If you’re not familiar with Rick, he’s the extremist, homophobic, Christianist, and dumb ex Senator from Pennsylvania who lost his re-election campaign in 2006 for being extremist, homophobic, and dumb.
The man is an extremist moron. And though we know that the US is capable of putting an extremist moron in the White House, I think news of a possible Santorum run is extremely good news for President Obama.
I’m praying for a Palin/Santorum ticket in 2012.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=03e54c62-a8af-4f53-8e90-6d3079f8ffc0)
I think of myself as someone with solid liberal credentials. In terms of presidential races, I ran for delegate for Jerry Brown in DC in 1992, supported Bill Bradley in 2000, knocked on doors in a snowy and unfriendly Iowa town for Howard Dean in 2004. In 2008, Obama was my candidate and I donated and worked hard for him in the Indiana primary and helped him win my state in the general election.
I also have a nice background of attendance at anti-war rallies, work in the nonprofit sector (dealing with issues of housing, homelessness, and domestic violence), and authoring a liberal blog.
I’m a liberal’s liberal.
When I signed up for Obama, I knew that he was no far-left liberal. I believed that he would do his best to deliver sensible, incremental change. I knew there would be no single-payer health care system, and I thought we’d be lucky to get a public option (I still have my fingers crossed on that one). I thought he’d be better on civil liberties than he is. But as they say, politics is the art of the possible.
I also remember that during his campaign, Obama stated that he wasn’t against all wars, just dumb ones, and that’s why he was against the war in Iraq and supported the effort in Afghanistan. He even said that he would focus American resources on Afghanistan. I agreed with him on that issue then, and I still do.
So that’s why after last night’s speech on Afghanistan, I’m a bit puzzled by the reaction of many of my fellow liberals who are in full-out hissy-fit mode upon learning that Obama is proposing to do exactly what he said he was going to do about the war in Afghanistan:
“I heard a woman say ‘Obama can go to hell’. That was from someone who had campaigned for him.”
Martin, political director of Peace Action, added: “I am hearing a visceral reaction among the grassroots who are very disappointed. People are feeling disillusioned. People did want to give Obama a chance but that honeymoon period is clearly ending.”
The reaction Martin found today mirrors a wider liberal backlash against Obama that has been growing for the last few months over the watering down of the health bill, the failure to make a significant move on climate change and, above all else, the deployment of more US troops to Afghanistan, firstly 21,000 in March and now a further 30,000.
Liberals don’t have to agree with Obama’s decision on Afghanistan, and if they oppose it, I encourage them to do so vociferously. They can march on Washington or hold peace rallies in their own cities, call the White House, and write to their Representatives and Senators. They should do whatever it takes to try to change the President’s mind.
But can we please just stop all of this faux disillusionment because on this issue, the President is following through on his campaign promise and because on other issues, he’s offering very slow incremental change? For God’s sake, Obama is a politician, not a magical Easter Bunny kind of a figure. He’s doing what he said he was going to do.
I’ve been disappointed with Obama on some issues and quite pleased with him on others, but I understand that he’s human.
I was never promised a unicorn and rainbows and neither was anyone else, but I am disheartened by fellow liberals who are willing to throw Obama under the bus because he’s not perfect. It is possible to not support a president’s decision on one issue, but still support him in general.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=cb526155-0cdd-4b2c-a961-9c5a334911fc)
Every year, I eagerly await the holiday season so I can get my share of wassail, give some gifts, listen to some old songs, and spend time with my family and friends. But in the last few years, there’s been something even better to look forward to: The War on Christmas. You see, according to Bill O’Reilly, the American Family Association and others, stores allowing its staff members to say “Happy Holidays” is:
all part of the secular progressive agenda … to get Christianity and spirituality and Judaism out of the public square.”
“[B]ecause if you look at what happened in Western Europe and Canada, if you can get religion out, then you can pass secular progressive programs, like legalization of narcotics, euthanasia, abortion at will, gay marriage, because the objection to those things is religious-based, usually.
Apparently, stores are using the word “holiday” because they’re pushing for the legalization of meth and crack, forced abortions, death panels, and whatever else might horrify Sarah Palin. It’s a completely logical position they’re taking, compared to the hippie bullshit excuses that stores might give, like the desire to accommodate all of their customers who might celebrate different holidays (or the fact that American Christians celebrate at least three holidays between the end of November and the first of January).
But this year, I had heard little about the War on Christmas, beyond some kind of a kerfuffle because actors in a Gap commercial dared utter the word “solstice.” I was saddened that my favorite holiday tradition may have lost some of the popularity it had earlier this decade.
That’s why I was relieved to find the Focus On Family’s “Stand Up for Christmas“ site. Shoppers are asked to report how Christmas-friendly certain chain store might be. You know, whether they say “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays” and what kind of Christmas policies those stores might have. The comments on the bulletin boards are so hilarious that I’m not sure whether the posters are real or hippie liberals trying to mess with James Dobson’s friends or if they are earnest fundies.
Let’s take a look at the postings about the Gap, the store at the center of this year’s WoC controversy:
I just watched the commercial for GAP, I was truly repulsed when they mentioned that we should liberate and how they put Christmas next to solstice. Pretty much what they said was we need to break free and do what we feel is right which goes against everything for this Christmas season. Please go to youtube and watch the commercial if you haven’t already seen it. I will NEVER step foot into one of their stores or any store affiliated with them. They have completely lost my business and my families too.
Doing what you feel is right goes against everything that has to do with Christmas? So instead of doing what you feel is right, you’re supposed to not do what’s right? And um, Christmas and solstice kinda rhyme. And don’t forget that the early Christians put Christmas around the time of the winter solstice so that the new Christmas holiday would be able to take the place of the old Pagan feasts to celebrate the solstice.
I went into the store and asked a manager about their Christmas policy. The manager was very polite,but didn’t know anything about their Christmas policy. She took my number and promised to call me when she had more information. I never heard from her. I will not shop at Gap. There are plenty of other stores out there to take my money. Merry Christmas!!!!!!
Um, maybe the manager didn’t call you back because the store doesn’t have a Christmas policy? May she thought you were a bitter and angry fundie with whom it’s always best to avoid contact.
Very offended by the recent advertisement. How dare they suggest we celebrate what we want? This is a Christian nation.
At first, I was sure that post was satirical, but upon reflection, I decided that it’s mostly likely not, as that kind of thinking seems to perfectly express what Palinism is all about.
The new TV commercial by the GAP still refuses to mention Christmas and finishes with Happy Holidays. I do not find this acceptable anymore. Only Merry Christmas is an acceptable response this time of year.
That’s true, except that Christmas is the first holiday mentioned in the commercial. Besides that and the fact that people have the right to not wish you a merry Christmas, your statement is correct.
It seems to me that the fear-mongering about the WoC is about intolerance of good business practices and loathing people with different religious views driven by people who seem to spend their time looking for fake controversies to fuel their addiction to adrenaline.
Merry Christmas!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=56acd89b-3f9a-4769-ba3c-b02f56936cd3)