The home stretch

We are down to the wire for this election and I keep seeing predictions that Obama may win. I really hope that doesn't make people stay home and believe it's all a done deal. It never is, especially when the polls show the election is "neck and neck."

It's clear to anyone paying attention that I am for Obama. I am not saying he is perfect. I'm not saying he has all the solutions. I'm not even saying I like all that he has done. However, what I am saying is that I would pick Obama over anyone like Romney, and for very specific reasons. Romney does not represent enough of what I either agree with or support.

I have been a Democrat my entire life and I don't see that fact changing, ever. The Democrats are far from perfect but Republicans who tell me to take care of myself, then make things harder for me while lining their own pockets with my tax money really annoy me. I just don't understand how anyone with limited financial assets thinks a Republican cares. Of course, I know many support Republican agendas because of the abortion debate.

I am Pro-Choice and have been for a long time. When I hear Todd Akin talk about "legitimate rape" or Paul Ryan comment that rape is another form of conception, I find that disturbing. I think it's easy for some men to disregard the damage caused by rape. To say that woman should carry and raise a child from her rapist is just horrible. I understand that these candidates claim to care for the unborn child but honestly, why aren't they doing something to help unwanted children in this world instead of forcing women to have more?

Summing this election season up is simple...I'm sick to death of the attack ads here in Missouri...ALL attack ads. I guess because we have been "painted red" for this election, this is probably why there are precious few ads from Obama here. Why throw good money into a red pit when you are blue. I guess the really amazing this is how much people here seem to really hate Obama. Uh...really?

The last politician I honestly hated was Ronald Reagan. Yes...I really hated him. The disclaimer on that one is I was about 18 and pissed off because my veteran's benefits were eliminated. I had been told much of my teen years that as long as I stayed in school, I could get a government check because my father had served in the military. He died in his early 30s and therefore could not collect his own benefits so they were passed to his children...as long as we stayed in school I would receive checks until the age of 24. I was cut off at 18 and Ronny made a comment that the benefits were for the vets, NOT their children. It sounds good in a sound bite or commercial but in reality, they just cut off a bunch of children like myself. That set me on a firm path of being "blue."

So...very soon the election will be resolved and frankly, I'll be happy normal television will be back on the air. I hope Obama wins, that's no secret, but I must add this...Obama won 2 out of the 3 debates. If he loses the election, I really have to wonder what people are thinking. As I write this, an Obama ad aired. I just realized, his ad is the ONLY political ad I've seen that was not an attack ad. That should be a great reason to vote for him but alas, I know the people of Muzzarah love their attack ads. People here easily swallow that spoon-fed bile and love it...truly sad!

The Missouri race for the Senate

Claire McCaskill

Todd Akin

I haven't posted here much lately, mostly because I'm avoiding writing nothing but negative things. Still, I am about to do a bit of venting just to vent about the Missouri Senate race.

Anyone paying attention (and that's a questionable number) knows that Claire McCaskill is in a race against Todd Akin for the Missouri Senate seat. McCaskill is the incumbent and Akin is trying to take her seat. My disgust with this race began with comments from Akin. In an interview, Akin made a comment about rape. According to him, if it's a "legitimate rape," the female body can "shut down" pregnancy. He made this comment in an effort to support his opinions on denying women the commonly called "morning after pill." Akin is profoundly pro-life to the point of supporting denying abortion even in the case of rape or incest. Easy for him since he would not be the one carrying this child.

Akin, of course, "apologized" for the legitimate rape comment after getting harsh criticism. Members of his own party asked him to drop out of the race...he did not. The apology was bogus too since the man only claimed to has "misspoken." Uh...really? He totally opposes abortion in every case so it's not a far cry to believe he honestly believes a woman who gets pregnant from rape was not actually raped and therefore should have the child that was conceived.

Now, here come the attack ads...a common, typical and disgustingly natural part of Missouri politics. Neither candidate really touts their own achievements and instead the ads fixate on the flaws of the opponent. I've seen this practice ever since I moved to Missouri and I'm more profoundly disgusted that it works so well. The ad could be full of lies but if it hits a nerve, that candidate will win. Voters are left to make political choices based on how nasty the ads are. I have witnessed candidates who do not go negative get not just defeated but squashed in elections here. Did I mention that this is disgusting?

Akin may win by saying McCaskill is in Obama's back pocket. McCaskill may win by saying Akin really believes women won't get pregnant from rape. Will either ever say -I- did this or that to make this state a better place? I think that gets thrown in as an afterthought once in a while but the primary focus is to point a finger at the opponent and say, "That person SUCKS!" The saddest bit about this is...the candidate who screams "you SUCK!" the loudest is usually the winner.

McCaskill isn't perfect but I could never support a man who refuses to believe a raped woman who gets pregnant was not actually raped.

Todd Akin...another reason to dislike Missouri

Republican Congressman from Missouri Todd Akin said that women rarely get pregnant from "legitimate rape." While everyone is screaming and yelling about this comment, why hasn't anyone officially defined the words so we know where we all stand on the outrage.

According to the online American Heritage Dictionary, the word "legitimate" means "authentic or genuine," as in, a legitimate complaint. The word "rape" means, "the crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse" Definitions wipe away assumptions. So Akin is saying if the rape is really rape, a woman won't get pregnant. Keep in mind this discussion was about legal abortion for women impregnated through rape.

I wish the reporter had asked Akin a harder question like, what evidence does he know of that causes a woman to "shut down" her body to prevent pregnancy? I, thankfully, have never been raped but I did go through 7 years of fertility treatments. If there were a switch to turn on the ability to become pregnant, my fertility specialists didn't know about it.

Some politicians disagree with abortion under any circumstances but most are smart enough to NOT refer to rape as being legitimate or not. Most will not say something so stupid as a woman can prevent pregnancy if the sperm is delivered into her body by force. Uh...really? How? In the end, Akin is blaming the woman for the pregnancy through rape...oh...but it wasn't a real rape because women don't get pregnant unless they enjoy the act that got them pregnant. This is how I interpreted Akin's comments and the comments are disgusting. What is more disturbing is he is leading the race in Missouri. That just makes me want to hurl.

Commercials in Missouri have said that Akin thinks student loans are like a cancer. That isn't getting much press time but we have a short list of two things he thinks that make me never want to vote for him. As much as I hate paying my loans back (they never seem to go away), I would never have gotten a degree without the loans. Many share this boat with me.

Unfortunately, if he wins, I will not be surprised. Akin knows this state and I would bet money many agree with him. It's an old, ugly belief that he just voiced. It's completely incorrect but being wrong isn't a factor here. People who believe this will believe it, although quietly, no matter what evidence is presented.

Romney/Ryan...when did I join the GOP?

I must admit that I have not followed the Presidential Race closely. I have already cast my lot, so to speak, I am an Obama supporter. However, somehow, the GOP seems to think either I can be swayed or that I am really a Republican in disguise. I have been getting emails from the GOP, quite regularly, talking about the horrors of Obama. Interesting...the only thing I ponder is how the GOP ever got my email address in the first place.

I have been a member of the Democratic Party for more than a decade. I take pride in the items I receive from the Party. I have gotten autographed photos from the President and his family. Items from the First Lady and all sorts of requests for money. I expect the money requests, am surprises and happy to get everything else. I would love to attend a convention one day and yet...the GOP keeps sending me emails. My SPAM filter is just not very good.

When I think of the Republican ticket, I am profoundly not impressed. Romney bothers me and Ryan gives me great pause.

It seems that Romney loves living the life of a rich man but wants to hide details of that wealth...like his tax returns.

Ryan on the other hand, seems to believe this country is actually a theocracy and not a democracy. That is super troubling. The pair together look good on a ticket but as someone once said to me, "Details baby, details!"

Barney Frank married? What about the age difference?

Maybe I am weird...OK...many think I am weird but my first thought when I read that Barney Frank had married his longtime partner was, "I thought Barney Frank was dead." A bit more reading and I realized I was thinking of the wrong person completely. Then I thought about their age difference, Frank is 72 and his partner is 42. That can be a stretch for many but apparently, these two look happy and now Frank gets to be a real part of history...a first...the first Congressman to enter a same-sex marriage. OK...good for them both and congratulations. This is kind of a big deal and I'm sure many see it as one of the signs of the coming apocolypse. I think that's a bit over blown and a bigger worry may be how they deal with such a large age difference. Still, what matters to most people is the fact that they are both male.

My personal truth is, I have neglected this blog for very specific reasons. When I think of how different politically Missouri is from California is is very depressing. Tolerance is not a common feeling here and judgment runs rampant, especially about homosexuality. I think that's just sad. I am profoundly tired of hearing "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." So this marriage automatically becomes a first step towards impending doom. Maybe they are right, maybe they are wrong but my opinion is, it's not my problem so why worry?

Don't you want to be rich?

I was talking with a co-worker about the Presidential election and she decidedly said she supports Mitt Romney in the upcoming election. I was not completely surprised by the support but I was surprised by her reasoning...she believes he will share with us all the secrets for how to become rich like him. WOW! She honestly feels that having a rich president will create an environment in our nation where we all will become rich. People who think like this are allowed to vote? Where was her logic in thinking this? Almost every president we have had has been wealthy. That wealth has not trickled down to me and my bank account proves that fact.

Another co-worker made a profound comment that this lady disregarded...Romney made much of his money by hurting poor people, not by helping pull them up to his level. My comment support this other co-worker's opinions and I added that I have never experienced a wealthy person working to help poor people become wealthy. Neither argument mattered to this lady because her focus was/is that Romney would help us all become rich. Again...I say WOW!

What I have noticed about the anti-Obama people is the fact that they refuse to accept that Obama did anything well...including that bit about Obama getting Osama. As much as I did not like Bush, I acknowledge that following 9/11 he did rise to the occasion of presenting a positive American image. Bush made mistakes and I don't agree with his political stance but I also acknowledge that he did do some things well. The anti-Obama crowd seem to be really angry that he won...legitimately...and that he may win again. I say get over it!

Obama won the last election legitimately. There was no re-count or halting of a re-count. There was no error in counting and the people wanted him to be president. Some may feel he sucks now but I would disagree. I think President Obama did what he could with the mess he inherited. Saying he just blames Bush is short-sighted. All presidents inherit the good and bad from the previous president. I would say Bush inherited some pretty good stuff from Clinton, yet, it seems Republicans don't want to slap him with any blame for the mess he passed on to Obama.

Another troubling thing is the decidedly racist twist to many anti-Obama people. If Obama is really that awful, why resort to racist comments to criticize him. Shouldn't his "bad record" be enough, or do anti-Obama people have to remind everyone that Obama is a black guy and generally speaking good white folk in our country don't like black people. Racism is the last resort of uneducated and desperate people...they may also just be racists too.

I am in no way saying Obama is perfect but I DO approve of his job, for the most part. I didn't approve of everything Clinton did and the running joke in the African American community is Clinton was actually the first "black" president. Still, I have to wonder if Obama were a white guy, I bet the only thing he would have to say to win the next election is, "I got Osama."

Is justice for Trayvon blind?

I have been casually watching the Trayvon Martin case and what bits and pieces I know, I find it troubling. While I am automatically drawn to the side of Trayvon, I do want to be impartial in viewing the facts of the case. However, those facts seem murky in some areas, crystal clear in others.

The clear fact is a 17-year-old African American male walking on a public street was shot dead while going home. He was "armed" with Skittles and an iced tea. Trayvon wore a hoodie that obscured his face. Another fact is George Zimmerman is the shooter and claimed self-defense in this matter. He called 9-1-1 before pursuing Trayvon. Zimmerman confronted Trayvon and I believe that's where the story gets murky. What happened after Trayvon turned and said, "Why are you following me?"

As an African American female and mother to an African American son, I have a lot of sympathy for the mother of Trayvon. I think I have so much sympathy that I am certain I could not serve on a jury if Zimmerman went to trial. However, the bottom line is...there would be no self-defense claim if Zimmerman had stayed in his home. Why is it self-defense for a person who pursued another and not self-defense for a person to confront a pursuer? If we put race, physical size, etc., aside and just ask ourselves the question, "Would I feel threatened walking on a dark street and a man began following me?" I know I would. Turning to confront that person may be the only option to some, running may be the option for others but my gut tells me Zimmerman would have chased. After all, the 9-1-1 operator told Zimmerman not to follow Trayvon and he did that anyway. If Trayvon ran, I am sure Zimmerman would have chased. Honestly, I don't know if running actually happened or not but the fact is...Trayvon is dead and Zimmerman is NOT facing charges of murder.

I have heard stories that there is proof that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. Again, Zimmerman was following him and I bet Trayvon felt threatened. If Trayvon attacked Zimmerman and knocked him to the ground, again, Trayvon most likely felt threatened and last time I heard a few punches and getting knocked down does not merit the death penalty. Add the twist of race to this and it takes me back to something personal I experienced in the past few weeks...justice is anything BUT blind.

Looking at the photos of both Trayvon and George, many assumptions have been made. African American males are scary and dangerous...especially when you can't see that person's face. People who appear to be white get automatic trust and many other benefits simply from race. It is not fair, it is obviously wrong but it is a fact of life in this world. We may never know what really happened that night but right now I think Trayvon is not getting justice. If George were black and Trayvon were white, I suspect George would be in jail right now...but I'm just making a guess.

Are Republicans seriously going to nominate Newt for the presidency? I just had to ask that question. Isn't the same person who touted family values but has cheated on 2 of his 3 wives? He has regularly had extramarital affairs but wanted Clinton impeached for doing the same. This man for president? I guess this is a long way for me to say I don't like Newt so I'm not inclined to itemize why. Instead, I tend to wonder why people who like him want me to itemize my reasons for not liking him. There is no need...hypocrisy is enough.

I do, however, like Pres. Obama and feel his State of the Union address was quite good. Not simply because it was him delivering a message but because his assessment that he inherited a mess is just truthful. Expecting him to fix everything while simultaneously various factions work diligently to prevent his success is just silly. I think Obama did a lot of good, could have done more if Congress had worked with him. No one is perfect but with someone like Newt as an alternative, I know who will get my vote in the coming election.