4,000

March 24, 2008 at 5:15 pm (Iraq War)

Today it has been reported that another four US soldiers were killed last night (Sunday) in a roadside bomb, which brings the number of US casualties in Iraq to 4,000. These are 4,000 children who will never come home to their parents, and many of them had children of their own they won’t get to watch grow up. 4,000 people we will never see walking down the street, or even doing something as simple as making a trip to the grocery store. 4,000 people who made the ultimate sacrifice, and 4,000 families whose lives will never be the same again.

Let us not push these men and women to the backs of our minds, as war casualties often are. If the news outlets are tomorrow reporting on celebrity gossip - turn it off, and instead, take a moment to remember the brave people who have given their lives, and the brave people who are still in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As for now, I’d like to give the floor to some of you: What do you think about war casualties? Can they ever be worth it? I look forward to reading your thoughts.

Laura

Permalink 30 Comments

Probably the shortest post you will ever see on this blog

March 22, 2008 at 8:36 pm (Uncategorized)

Permalink 13 Comments

The immigration debate

March 19, 2008 at 5:45 am (Immigration)

This is a topic that has been on my mind for quite some time, and I’ve been mulling it over quite a bit over the last few days. I’m sure most people are sick of hearing about this issue - it seems like all we hear is “Candidate X wants to give illegal immigrants amnesty!” or, as an episode of South Park aptly observed: “They took our jobs!!!” (For a clip from this hilarious and scarily accurate episode, click here.) Most of us are familiar with the obvious arguments on both sides, such as the famous “taking our jobs” vs. “working jobs we don’t want” discussion most people have, but there are other things aside from the argument that have been on my mind lately (though, I won’t promise not to make an argument here).So, moving onto one of the things that pisses me off the most: social stigma against Mexicans. First of all: since WHEN did “Mexican” become an insult? Living in the south, I can’t recount the amount of times I’ve heard someone use “Mexican” as some sort of slur, and it’s funny considering these people are so willing to convert a nationality into an insult, but the second someone uses “American” in the same way, they’re up in arms about people who hold prejudices and promote stereotypes. However, it should be noted that the terms are used differently - those who use “American” as a slur use it to generalize stupidity, whereas those who use “Mexican” as an insult use it to generalize filthiness, thievery, and exploitation of America. After all, there’s no such thing as a dirty American who steals from stores and exploits things like welfare.

Continuing along that train of thought, I’m wondering how many of those who are so willing to generalize others have access to a world map. Perhaps Miss South Carolina can help them out, but in the meantime, let’s have a little review about the Americas:

Mexico is not part of Latin America or South America - it is part of North America, which *gasp* makes Mexicans Americans! Now, some people find it incredibly easy to misconstrue this little tidbit of information - this doesn’t make them citizens of the United States of America (I emphasize this because people have become prone to thinking that America is only the states) but it does make them Americans - North Americans, to be precise - just like us.

Countries like Guatemala, El Salvador, Spain, Venezuela, Chile, Argentina, etc. are not in Mexico. Sounds simple, no? Then why is it that people who speak Spanish, or even vaguely look like they come from south of the border get called Mexican? This often gets justified by people who don’t know any better that, “they all look the same”. Oh, okay, well I guess if that’s the case, then people can just start calling Americans “French” and vise versa if they feel like it - I mean, we look the same, right? Point blank: “Mexican” should not be an insult, and unless you’re geographically challenged, you’ll know that Puerto Ricans, for instance, aren’t Mexican (as if the 2,000 mile difference didn’t make if obvious enough).

Then we move onto the subject of immigrants abusing systems like welfare and social security. There is no denial that this does indeed happen. Where you have a system, you will have people who exploit it. However, seeing as there are a pretty good number of US citizens who abuse both of these systems, perhaps we should focus more on, you know, FIXING them. No, they will never be perfect - but it is a completely unfair standard to hold all immigrants to, by saying that because a few of them might not work for the life they want here, that they should all get out. If this kind of attitude holds true, I wonder when we’re going to start kicking our own citizens out for doing the same thing - the idea is simply laughable. In order to justify that an immigrant exploiting welfare is any more wrong than an American doing the same thing, we’d have to prove that being a citizen of the US gives us the right to do so!

Furthermore, what people neglect to mention about social security is that most people who are here illegally have fake SSN’s. This means they’re paying taxes that they don’t get back. You’d have to be a pretty big douche to say that people who are paying money into a system that benefits you (however flawed it may be) are taking away from you, or exploiting the social security system. Instead of bitching a blue streak about that, why don’t we take issue with the people who get larger benefits from the system than they ever paid into it during their working years?

From here, we move into the various laws that are being put in place to target immigrants. We have the SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification and Enforcement): essentially, under this, employers would have to use the electronic verification system on everyone. Is someone really trying to make me shit a brick? The e-verify system is riddled with error, and has a 10% false/positive rate. Aside from the obvious idea that the system can encourage discrimination amongst employers, can you imagine 10% of people living in the US being flagged in that system? Furthermore, if it’s got problems now, imagine what will happen when it becomes more widely used. Then of course, comes education: how the hell can states even think about getting rid of ESOL programs? Let’s just put this in perspective: 88% of Latinos under the age of 18 living in the US are citizens, with another 1% of them becoming citizens through naturalization. This leads us to another ridiculous idea: that we should get rid of a program that benefits citizens. Don’t get me wrong - if you’re going to live somewhere, you should speak the predominant language, whether it is an official or national one, of the country. If I were going to live in Germany, for instance, it would be ridiculous of me not to learn German. But how on earth is this going to happen if we take the necessary tools away?

So what should we do about immigrants? There is no doubt in my mind that we have to do something, but kicking every person who is here illegally out of this country isn’t the solution. It would be horrendous for our economy, for starters (unless US citizens decide to start picking up the jobs they currently don’t want to work), and it simply goes against the basic idea of our country being the land of dreams, corny as that may seem. It’s a rare person who can say with confidence that every last relative of theirs arrived here legally and without question. It’s also a rare person who can actually pass the citizenship tests immigrants have to take in order to become naturalized. Frankly, I’ve never heard of anyone who had time to spare waiting to be admitted anywhere when their family depended on it - perhaps so many people might not be here illegally if it didn’t take so damn long to complete the process.

I can’t give anyone a step-by-step process on how to deal with the so-called “illegal problem”, but I can say this: the racial slurs, the abusive police officers who take it upon themselves to harass immigrants, and the blame placed for our own failures is not helping. We call ourselves “the land of the free, and the home of the brave”, but sometimes I think we forget what this means. Perhaps if we didn’t view our freedom as an exclusive privilege, and owned up to the shortcomings our country does have rather than pawning them off on the most recent immigrant group, we might remember.

Laura

Permalink 26 Comments

Some Catch-Up

March 17, 2008 at 1:44 am (Bush, Election 2008)

We interrupt our normal programming to bring you all a game of catch-up here at Political Bitches. Unfortunately, do to outside forces (*cough*midterms*cough*) this hasn’t been as kept up to date as we would like it to be, so let’s have a little news medley, shall we?

1. NY Governor Spitzer is caught in a prostitution scandal. These are always the types of stories I hate getting out about politicians, and it’s for the exact reason everyone else loves them getting out: people have an odd fascination with knowing what their public officials are doing with their private lives. Here’s an idea for those people who only care that he had *gasp* sex out of wedlock: he’s put his wife and children into an absolutely TERRIBLE position, and not only does this make him a jackass, it makes him a hypocrite. Generally, it’s not a good idea to buy sex and then go after prostitutes, Governor. I don’t give a damn that he risked his own health and career - the real problem here is he has exposed his family and the young woman (’Kristin’ as she is known) to a great deal of public scrutiny. So let’s actually try focusing on that issue, as opposed to just being shell-shocked by the act, kay?

2. Obama: “I don’t know how somebody who is in second place is offering the vice presidency to the person who is first place.” I know a few people seem to feel this provides necessary reason to call Obama out for “arrogance”, but I don’t think that’s the case at all. No one is perfect in this race, but the Clinton camp just keeps on trying to use more and more tactics in order to bring about a benefit, when in reality, it’s just adding to the separation of the Democratic party. Sure, Obama is confident in his current lead, but at least when he was behind in delegates, he wasn’t offering lesser positions to Clinton.

3. Wright and Ferraro: Not helping. Guess what? This isn’t a color race. STFU. You’re only giving stupid people ridiculous things to say about these candidates because you can’t stop flapping your mouths for two seconds.

4. Sending Dick Cheney to the Middle East to lower oil prices. Riiiiight, let’s send Mr. Halliburton to convince OPEC to boost output. Furthermore, according to this merry band of shrubs, our tanking economy is to be blamed on the increase in oil prices! But never mind that war we spend millions of dollars on every day - no, that couldn’t possibly have anything to do with our economy or the high oil prices.

5. House supports revision the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act. And of course, Bush isn’t happy about this, but what else would we expect? As a point of interest, this is the first time the House has held a secret meeting since 1983. Under these revisions, telecommunications companies can be sued for surveillance without warrant, which of course, would be getting rid of another ‘essential tool on terror’. Maybe one day we can wiretap and water board at the same time - double wammies, take that terrorists!!!!!

Laura

Permalink 8 Comments

Controlled Drowning… what a great idea!

March 9, 2008 at 9:21 pm (Bush)

…or not. As I’m sure many of you have heard, President Bush vetoed an anti-waterboarding bill, which would prohibit the CIA from using widely disputed torture tactic in order to extract information from prisoners.

This is no shock… but it’s still WTF worthy. In his weekly broadcast, Bush said that, “The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror…So today I vetoed it.”

But hey, I mean, the only way we can keep violence at the merely ridiculous level is by sending over more troops, Iraqi people in Basra are protesting because of the lack of security, and terrorist groups are reforming in the region… But don’t worry! Strapping individuals down to a plank of wood and filling their lungs with water is working!

Even if you do think waterboarding is a proper tactic for extorting information from prisoners (though, it blows my mind that people recognize John McCain was tortured by his captives in Vietnam, yet have no moral or ethical concerns for the idea of resorting to such crude and primitive methods), it should be a great concern that less than 10% of Guantanamo detainees are affiliated with Al Queda.

Torture is a moral issue, folks. Because the Bush administration tries to avoid that fact by saying waterboarding is not a form of torture, it again shows their utter disregard for the sanctity of life they go on about (don’t get an abortion, but nearly drowning someone is okay?) and ultimately, their incompetence in the political arena, and anywhere else, really - I wouldn’t trust that bunch running a fast food restaurant.

Laura

Permalink 23 Comments

3/4/08: Ohio, Texas, Vermont, Rhode Island

March 5, 2008 at 4:51 am (Election 2008)

As of the moment I type this post, here are the current reports on tonights primaries and caucus:

Ohio: Clinton/McCain projected winners.

Texas: Clinton/McCain projected winner.

Vermont: Obama/McCain projected winners.

Rhode Island: Clinton/McCain projected winners.

At this point, here’s the standing on delegates:

Clinton: 1,324

Obama: 1,411

McCain: 1,205

As an outspoken Obama supporter, I’m not extremely shocked at this turn of events, but I’m not happy with it either. I know the point of this blog isn’t to pout and whine that our favorite candidates don’t get the big win all the time, but hear me out: part of my problem with the way this has turned out actually has nothing to do with my admiration of Obama. Once again, the Republicans have shown the Democrats up by lining up behind one candidate early in the game - instead, liberals are still split fairly even down the middle, and it’s this kind of division that could seriously lose us this election.

I know the general word of mouth now is that no GOP is going to get into office because everyone has become so disenfranchised by the Republicans because of Bush. There is definitely truth to that statement, however, there was a lot of this same sentiment in 2004, and who has been in office the last four years? Oh right, the guy everyone hated on then too.

If I truly thought Clinton could snag an election against McCain, I also wouldn’t be half as bothered - but I truly don’t. The problem with the caucus and primary system is it allows for a lot of trickery on both sides of the aisle, and a significant amount of people can’t even take part in them. Closed primary state? Independents are about as important as minors. Open primary state? People can cross over party lines to vote in swarms for the “weaker candidate” in order to secure a win for their preferred one. And the caucus system? Since when does it make any sense to let so much ride on states like Iowa, which don’t even come close to representing a majority of the American people? This is not to say that people don’t get to vote for candidates they’re passionate about, but there is certainly room to call it a flawed system. There’s also just the fact that a lot of people only vote in the general election because it’s the only “important” one.

You can expect updates on this post as more news rolls in… Unfortunately for Obama supporters, it doesn’t look like it’s going to be good news.

UPDATE: As we all know, Clinton made a comeback last night, however, it’s very important to remember that this race is still up in the air. The big problem with that? It will go to the convention floor in August barring some miraculous happening in Pennsylvania. But why does this matter right now, you may ask? I’ve detected some confusion in the comments about delegates and why this matters because Obama is still “ahead” with 1,520 to Clinton’s 1,424. Besides the fact that this difference is considered neck-and-neck in Washington, there’s no guarantee that the super delegates they currently have won’t jump ship should there be no clear “winner” after all the primaries and caucuses are finished. This means they choose the nominee based on their own principals.

Laura

Permalink 22 Comments