I already know that I seem to think differently than, what, 90 percent of the population or something, and I guess that's fine. I usually don't care to be the odd one out with my ideas or thoughts. But last night I was thinking about how annoyed I get over certain things. I realize, we all have to choose our battles and we can't get worked up over everything, nor can we be involved in every good cause or fight for every worthy issue. I understand that, and that's fine. But what I don't understand, or rather what annoys me, is that complacent attitude a lot of people have. Ya know, kind of like I've got my big fat TV, and my job, and my fridge is full so leave me alone. Bleh! I hate how little people often times seems to care about just anything. And what makes me even more upset is not just people not caring - if you just don't care, and keep quiet so be it. But I really get annoyed when those who don't do anything, then start giving those who try to promote change for the things they believe in a hard time. Or those who make fun of those who care about something a lot. What's wrong with people???? Ok, just to tamper my words here a bit, I know that we need balance in the world. Some people go overboard. But I still think it's the people who care and then get involved, rather than the silent onlookers, or careless consumers, who can influence and change our world for the better. Nothing really awesome has ever come from people doing nothing, or just talking without action. Therefore, it just annoys the crap out of me when people simply couldn't care less about the world and the people around them and how our actions and lives impact others. Seriously. I just don't get that mindset.
Anyway, I just had to vent. Why? Because recently I've been really concerned and upset about the recent security changes at airports from the TSA. And I've gotten some lame comments on my efforts to try to let people know what's going on as well as trying to change this by writing to our representatives. Grrrr...So, since I really really care about the whole TSA stuff, I'll mention it on here as well, and tell you why you, too should be concerned/upset. I'll even try to keep it "to the point".
Terrorism threats on airplanes are statistically insignificant. If we take all the known bomb threats/terrorism threats we had on airplanes in the US in the last 9 years (since 9/11, and 9/11 included), we get 8 threats, 4 of which were successfully averted but not by the TSA. Considering that the US has about 500,000 flights a year, that puts your risk of a bomb threat on your airplane at less than 1 in 500,000. I certainly don't want to be blown up in an airplane, but I think it's also smart to think about how real the risk really is. It's easy to get worked up over sensational threats that are, however, unlikely to really happen. To give you an idea, 1 out of 100,000 women die using an epidural during childbirth - and the government certainly isn't promoting this as a huge risk. 11 out of 100,000 die in a car accident. I could go on with the list. You're statistically speaking more likely to die in your car, be murdered, raped, struck by lightening, drown, die of various obesity related deseases etc. than through a bomb on an airplane and yet, we need all kinds of invasive government action to protect us from that one threat????? How about we prohibit cell phone driving? That should save about a couple of thousand lives each year, right away????
TSA has no record of having successfully averted any threats. They have collected many pocket knifes and the like, but they have no record for successfully having found/detected any explosive materials or other real risks. However, they do have a track record of many instances of failure. So, if they keep beefing up security, but still fail at finding stuff, what makes people think they know what they're doing?
Terrorism threats keep changing. No matter what single procedure will be made standard, terrorist will find a way around it, until we're targeting the real problem: terrorists. The average traveler is not the problem. Key is finding those who are a problem. Isreal has successfully secured their airport by using behavioral profiling, as well as bomb safe luggage areas. Bomb sniffing dogs are also very effective. Random selection for screening by very unqualified TSA officials, who don't have the brains to assess a person properly, has proven to be pointless, and statistically it also doesn't make sense. If you randomly select people, your chance of catching a terrorist are at best average. If you are trained, and smart enough to know what to look for, and consistently pulling out those people who appear suspicious (not based on merely race, but behavior, travel itinary, luggage checked etc.) you're far more likely to find the real threats. TSA has failed to use any of these simple measures. Maybe because their workforce is not a very qualified and intelligent one (no offense intended - I'm sure they're nice people, they just don't have to prove any particular smarts to get the job). And even if we finally secure airports with scanners and pat-downs, it'll hardly stop there. Then terrorist will see how they can exploit malls, sports events, schools, trains, buses, bridges, ships, parades,...you name it. They'll find something else. So, what are we going to do? Scan everyone as they leave their home, not let anyone enter the country anymore, and do regular searches of all homes to make sure we don't have anyone dangerous in our midst?
The new scanners supposedly still cannot detect low-density explosive, such as the ones the underwear bomber used. So, you get your nude picture taken, looked at by who knows who, in some dark room, associated with your personal info, hoping it wont be safed, or made fun off, or jerked off to, or whatever else, and hoping the radiation really isn't harmful, and then have it all be for nothing??? Great. Oh, and even if you get scanned, if they see something where they're not sure what it is (pace maker, artifical knee, whatever) you still get a pat-down.
The new pat-down includes feeling around breast and feeling the breasts, patting up all the way to your crotch, and between your buttocks, and putting hands inside your pants waistband to feel all the way around. The benefit? According to a recent NY Times new articles where a reporter went through the pat-down 8 times with various metal objects to see if they'd notice, the benefit is nill. They never noticed any of the items in the pat-down. And supposedly explosives can't necessarily be found that way either. But there are plenty of youtube clips showing kids that are very uncomfortable being touched that way, as well as adults.
Lastly, if you still think this is not bad, Mrs. Napolitano has just said that these measures should be spread to ships, buses and trains. And soon probably any major public place. Is this really what you want?
I find this all very disturbing, and I'm still kind of baffled that not everyone is outraged the way I am. Are people seriously ok with being groped and having their nude pictures taken, being exposed to radiation, and lastly to simply be inconvenienced left and right, for a minimal risk with measures that don't even improve the risk factor?????? Really? Am I the only one who thinks this goes beyond "too far"???? Please tell me you're peeved as well.
Ok, to give you an up-front warning: this post will be mainly political, with some more Sophia cuteness at the beginning. So, read past Sophia stuff at your own risk. I'm NOT responsible for anyone getting offended. :) Now with that said, let's talk more about how cute Sophia is.
Today in Church, I tried hard (as every Sunday) to keep her quiet and reverent. We've been working on various things at home to help her get more reverent (like singing "Andachtsvoll, Friedlich Leis" a primary song). So, today at first she struggled to fold her arms etc. during the sacrament prayer. I finally got her to do it, just for her to shout out really loud "Amen" at the end of the prayer, and then one more time, just because it's fun. After that we proceeded to look at picture of Jesus during the Sacrament. She saw the picture of Jesus praying in Gethsemane and got all excited, saying 'Jesus, Jesus'. Then she started kissing the picture. Then she insisted I kiss it, too, leading me to having a real Greek-Orthodox moment there. Anyway, sacrament continues, and Sophia starts getting a little restless again, so I whisper into her ear "Andachtsvoll", just for her to start singing the song. The fun continued when she remembered that it's funny to talk while holding your nose closed, or saying 'Quesadilla' (this is Sophia's personal joke - for some reason she thinks it's funny to say this word). Also, when we looked at a book about a man getting baptized, Sophia had to comment on the lack of close by saying 'Jesus Nackedei'. She notices a lot of nackedeis these days - Adam and Eve, Jesus, Papa, Sophia, etc. Anyway, overall she really was quite reverent and well behaved, and we only had to go outside once. I'm just glad she's so full of ideas, and energy and life and laughter.
Now, on to the political stuff. This is where you may want to stop reading if you can't stomach my political stuff...
Actually though, I don't have a whole lot to say. I just read a new article, and it kind of went along with a few thoughts I had the other day after visiting the YMCA pool. Basically I concluded that even though I'm not opposed to certain government-run things, or 'socialism' per se or however we want to define those things, it seems to me more and more that it's just a bad idea in the US. Not because I think it can't be done, but because I think the US can't do it. So, let me explain what I mean.
Let's take health care. In Germany, the services provided by the few general health insurances is actually regulated by the government. I know, here in the US people would die of a heart attack thinking that the government has that much power, and everyone would be convinced that it would be crappy. Well, I don't think it is in Germany. Actually, everything that's reasonable and some more is usually covered, and while I'm sure the system isn't a 100 percent perfect, and that now and then there as been a problem, overall people are happy with it, and overall it works really well. I've never had a problem in Germany getting a service that I needed. And I know a lot of the routine stuff that you get in Germany, you don't get here, even with some of the finest insurances (an example would be 2-3 Ultra sounds in Germany vs. barely getting 1 paid here). So, seeing Germany, convinces me that a government can do a decent job at regulating big, important things. Yet, I think if the US would attempt the same thing here, it probably would end up awful. Why? I'm not sure. I'm still trying to figure out why I think this, but maybe my next story could illuminate this more.
I went to the YMCA the other day to take Sophia swimming. We had barely been in the pool for, I don't know 10 minutes, when the 10.000 life guards blew their whistle, and everyone got out of the pool. I was a bit confused because I didn't see a single cloud, or anything else that explained why we had to get out. So, I asked. The explanation: It's an Ohio State law that once every hour, everyone has to come out of the pool for 10 minutes.
I thought that was the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, and I tried to figure out why they would have such a stupid law. Well, I'm not really sure, but I'd think it's for the same reason that they have a life guard on every corner of the pool - lack of responsibility. Let me explain this a little further as well. I think at some point some kid probably died/drowned because it was in the pool wayyyyy too long, without eating, or drinking or something, and so something bad happened, and now there is a law to make sure this never happens again. It seems to me that a lot of laws in the US are not so much the result of a need to regulate the smooth co-existence of people in one nation (or state), but rather to fix problems that arose due to lack of responsibility. For example, when I go swimming in Germany, at the public pool, which often has 4-5 different pools, you'll usually only find one life-guard. That's it. One. And he's definitely not standing by the pool every second checking on people. Why? I think because there is some general assumption that you're in charge of yourself and your kid. You need to watch your kid. You need to make sure it doesn't drown, or does something stupid. Period. If something happens, I'm sure the life-guard will help, but it's not his job to watch your kids, or yourself. And I agree. I also don't think it's the government's job to make sure I'm responsible and exit the pool whenever I need to.
Do you get my point? It seems to me that the US has a problem with going to extremes. I feel like things are either way under-regulated, or then when they try to regulate, they go to extremes that are just ridiculous and end up having little to do with the actual problem and more with trying to take on the responsibilities of others. I'm not sure why things are like that, and maybe I'm not even right in how I see things. I also don't want to suggest that every German is a model of responsibility or something like that. That certainly isn't true. But, it seems that the US deals with certain problems that we just aren't dealing with in Germany.
I have a few ideas of why that may be. One reason, I think, may be that the US is very sue-happy. And that may be the result of two things: people feeling like they have a 'right' to everything, and courts that will grant ridiculous amounts of money for certain claims. In Germany, apparently, there is a law that regulates how much you can get. Basically, it suggests that the money you get needs to be proportionate to the damage you suffered. So, if you bought a boiling hot coffee at McDonalds, and it spilled on you, and you got a burn that put you in the hospital for a week, then you may only get money that kind of adds up to the hospital bills, a week of lost wages, and maybe an amount of money for pain that's reasonable. You wouldn't be able to get millions. Because your damage wasn't equivalent to millions. I think the fact that you can sue here for just about anything, and make millions is ridiculous and disables the country. I think it leads to people not wanting to take on responsibility, and the government jumping in to take the responsibility no one wants. And then instead of regulating the things government reasonably can and should regulate, they go overboard, creating dumb rules like the getting-out-of-the-pool-every-hour.
I think another problem may be the whole political correctness thing. I think that disables a country as well. Now, don't get me wrong. I think it's really important that both individuals and a nation as a whole are considerate and kind. I think a lot of Europe could make a greater effort at not being such pigs at times. But, at the same time, I don't think certain things should be permissable just because we need to 'keep everyone happy'...or something like that. Let me explain this one as well. The other day when I parked my car at Aldi's, I noticed another driver. It was a nice-looking older lady. I noticed her though, because she had her head in a really odd position - turned about 45 degrees to the right, and then turned up a little. At first I thought she was looking to the right for traffic or something, but shortly after noticed she didn't move her head at all. It was in that position - for good. I saw her in the store later on, and sure enough, the head was still in the same position. I about flipped. How is someone like that allowed to drive???????? How are some people in general allowed to drive, and how come that the most crappy, unsafe cars are allowed on the roads? In my opinion - political correctness. It wouldn't be 'fair' to keep the poor, uneducated, mentally slow and/or handicapped off the roads. Really? It's so ridiculous to me. If we don't think drunk drivers are safe on the road, why would be a car in really poor driving condition be safe? Why would be someone who is not capable to grasp general safe driving rules etc. be safe on the road? Why would someone who's unable to look both directions safe on the road? It's crazy to me. And not because I don't want poor or disabled people or whoever to get places. I just think compromising something we consider important to keep certain people happy or to pretend to be 'fair' is like letting my 2 year old child go to a party that I let me 17-year old attend just to be 'fair'. Arghhhhh....
Anyway, so, now I just read this article and it made me happy. Mostly, because I feel like it's the right thing to do. The deficits need to be reined in. Germany passed a law a few years ago that allows Germany's deficit to only grow so big before its government is forced (by the law it passed) to cut spending until the deficit is reduced to allowable amounts. What a great idea. I'm pleased to see a lot of countries making the right decisions (in my opinion), and I'm disappointed with Obama's choice on this (and not because he's a democrat - I think Bush, or even McCain would have pushed for the same thing). I don't know why the US struggles to figure out some of those things that seems so clear cut. It's easy to blame it all on 'socialism' or stuff like that, but since a lot of the 'socialistic' countries seem to figure things out better than the US (at least right now), I don't know that that's the answer.
For now, I think it's a result of not wanting to take on responsibility, feeling like you have a 'right' to everything, and political correctness. I may be wrong though. Comments and thoughts appreciated.
Nope, this is not what you think! It's not going to be a discussion on the second amendment, gun control (or not) or whatever. But, it is related to guns. Basically, I just have a question. Without wanting to get political on the issue (I believe the right to bear arms is like abortion - not changing any time soon, so no point fighting over it - especially not with those who have guns), I'm rather apprehensive of guns. I don't want them in my house. I also don't want my kids to be around them, or be in a home with guns unless I know for sure that they are safely and securely stored in that home. I think I'm totally and rightfully entitled to those views, and I think it's also my responsibility to make sure that I don't subject my children to things or environments that I don't deem safe or healthy in one way or another. All that is not up for discussion. That's just how I feel.
But, here is my question. How do I go about 'living' this way, without offending others, or overstepping boundaries? Let me give you an example of what I mean. The other day, after a little talk with Henry about people wearing concealed weapons etc., I said how I wouldn't want anyone around my kids who carries a gun, or would want them to be in home with guns. Then Henry asked me "well, what about X (a friend of ours, who was going to watch Sophia the next day for me)?". Hmmm, well, I didn't know that family X had guns, and I immediately felt uneasy to the point of not wanting to leave Sophia with them, even though I'd let them watch her in every other regard. They're great people and great friends. I was only concerned about safety and gun presence. Eventually, I figured, I should just ask them about it, and ask how they stored them. It so happened that they were unloaded in a safe, which I felt was really safe. So, I was ok to leave Sophia. But I felt really uncomfortable asking about it, and wasn't sure how the family felt about it.
The whole issue made me think. There are probably people who carry guns without me knowing, or who have guns in their homes without me knowing. Is it wrong/inappropriate for me to ask people about that before I leave my child at their house? What would be a good/bad way to go about asking? What about expressing my wish to not have guns in our house? I've been seriously thinking about simply putting up a sign that asks people to leave their guns outside. I've also been thinking about simply asking people about guns in their houses. But then, I don't want to weird people out, or overstep boundaries. I mean, in a way it's none of my business if someone has guns, and how they store them. But, it IS my business to know that my child is in an environment I want it to be in...So, regardless of your own views on the political issue, how would you handle this? Any good advice? People already think I'm a freak. How can I be a freak without making it too obvious?
Well, it's about time we have a controversial post again, right? I hope you prefer this to the post you'd otherwise gotten (one on miscarriage). If not, I can still write about miscarriage later on again. Anyway, I don't know if you've heard about this Arizona immigration bill that got signed a week ago or so. It's caused quite a stir, and it definitely hasn't made me happy. And since I am an immigrant, I thought this would be a good time to write down some of my thoughts on immigration. I'll start of with some general views on the issue, but I'll talk a little about the Bill and why I don't like it later on. Also, if you don't like controversial topics, or my views on immigration, now is a good time to stop reading. If you keep reading just know you're doing this of your own free will, and at your own risk. If you get offended, it's your problem. Not mine. :) But, I don't think it'll be that bad.
I've been thinking about immigration a lot. Having undergone the process of immigration myself has definitely opened my eyes to a lot of things, one of the main ones how crummy it feels when you're deprived of privileges and freedoms you're used to. When you're used to go and do your own thing as you like to, and then you can't anymore it doesn't feel so nice. Or, when you're used to being treated just as everyone else within your nation, and then you don't get that anymore, it just doesn't feel nice. But at this point I suspect that almost anyone who immigrates to whatever nation, gets to experience this 'second-class human being' feel. It ain't fun. Anyway, as I write, I'll be talking about immigrating to the US, since I haven't immigrated to any other country. However, I'm sure a lot of the issues I'll describe aren't unique to the US, though I hope they aren't the same in Germany. I'd like to think that my home country does better with this.
To start of, I should first tell you that just because you immigrated, doesn't mean you're a citizen. I've heard people confuse that a lot. It's not the same. As an immigrant, you're basically allowed to work and live in the US, pay taxes like everyone else but you don't enjoy the privileges like everyone else. Here are some of the things (legal) immigrants must do:
carry their green cards with them at all times (if you're caught without it, it's a misdemeanor)
register with Selective Services (if you're a male - this is military stuff for those who don't know)
re-apply for your Green Card after 3 years, then 10 years
notify USCIS (Immigration Agency) within 10 days of your new address if you move (you may be denied a new green card, and can even get imprisoned if you fail to do this)
at re-entry of the US you are being finger printed and have your picture taken, every time
Some of the privileges you don't get to enjoy are usually government benefits such as Social Security, Medicaid, or other government aid, but also being able to vote, or leave the country for an extended period of time without permission from Immigrations (if you're gone for more than 6 months you need special permission but they can deny you re-entry for any time period if they 'feel' that you abandoned your permanent resident status). Sounds fun doesn't it? But a lot of the real fun is in the process itself. Did you know that when you apply for a Green Card based on marriage that immigration officers can pop in at any time of the day or night to make sure you're actually living with your spouse? That they can request proof of the marriage being consummated? That you need written testimony (notarized and all) of others to attest to the authenticity of your relationship? I know why they do it, but it doesn't feel very good when you're legitimately in love with your spouse, and just want to get married, and yet have to prove every single part of your relationship.
But let's talk about illegal immigration. From all I've heard, there seem to be 3 major concerns with illegal immigrants. First of all they came here illegally, breaking our laws by how they entered. Then people seem frustrated with the costs to citizens (and tax-paying legal immigrants) through schooling and health care provided to illegal immigrants. Lastly, there seems to be a safety/security concern of crime coming from illegal immigrants.
Let's tackle the illegally immigrating issue first. This one really irks me. People get sooo upset about people coming here illegally. And granted, I don't think it's ideal myself. I wish they'd come here legally, because then we'd all be better off. But here is the reality: There are virtually only 2 ways to immigrate to the US. One is through family relationships (like marrying a US citizen or adopting), the other one is through work (where your employer sponsors your immigration). That's it. There used to be a Green Card Lottery, where a few people can randomly win a Green Card. I don't know if they still do that. There are also a select few cases, where refugees can immigrate, or something like a Diversity Immigration where people may be allowed to enter if there aren't a lot of people of that nationality in the US yet. But, those are all small percentages. The average person cannot simply immigrate to the US.
Since illegal immigrants are often equated here with Hispanics, let's take that approach. Here are the issues I see with some fellow from Mexico (or Panama, Nicuragua, Beliz, El Salvador, or whatever) wants to come to the US. First, he must be able to get the documents he needs from his own country to even have a chance to apply for immigration. With no pass port or the like from your own country, you're not going very far. A lot of these people come from such corrupt and/or poor countries that that alone may prove impossible. But let's say they get their documents, and now want to apply for US immigration. Well, they can't. There is nothing they can apply for unless they're marrying someone from the US, or someone wants to hire them (but those are usually jobs of really, really high caliber - like some amazing scientist, or stuff like that). So, basically no go. But, let's pretend there was such an option. Then now Juan has to raise a couple of thousand of dollars to pay for the whole paper work. Where does poor Juan get that kind of money??? He doesn't, and if he had that much money in his poor country, he'd probably wouldn't need to immigrate. But let's pretend he DOES have the money, and he still wants to immigrate. Then he still has to fill out the paper work. And that's hard stuff. Trust me. Most people get lawyers. And even I considered it, fluent English speaker Fran. It can be really confusing. And there is no number to call to ask questions or something. It's 'fill it out, do it right or no Green Card'.
So, how does one immigrate legally to the US, if you don't have the good fortune of marrying a citizen or being a brilliant scientist that someone here wants to hire? It really is pretty much impossible. Except, it gets better. Let's say you ARE marrying a citizen. Then your immigration woes are still not over. See, if you make the mistake of marrying outside of the US, you may just be stuck for an indefinite period of time. This is why Henry and I had to marry in Utah (where neither one of us had family). I ran the risk of being stuck in Germany without Henry after our marriage for at least 3 months, but potentially even years. Why? Immigration laws. If you get married to a US citizen outside of the US, you cannot enter the US at all until you have your Green Card. Luckily, for most immigrants from Europe this doesn't take long. But let it be my former room mate from Mexico. She had been wanting to get married to her fiance for quite a while, but wanted her mom to be there. However, her mom, who was married to a US citizen in Mexico, was still waiting for her Green Card (and that after 2 years of marriage). Now the daughter had to decide between getting married in the US without her mom, or doing it in Mexico, but then probably being separated from her husband like her mom was from hers. But hey, at least they're doing it legally!
But it goes on. Here is what bothers me even more. Not only are we demanding the impossible of illegal immigrants, but we seem to have little compassion towards their plight. Granted, if someone came here illegal, and then becomes criminal (as in killing, raping, stealing, that kind of stuff), I'm all about sending them home. Go for it. Kick them out. But I doubt that this bill fits most illegal immigrants. Most of them come from such desperate and poor circumstances that they're willing to leave family behind, risk their lives, often loosing their lives (it is estimated that over 50 percent of people from Central/South American, who try to cross the borders die in the attempt) just to hopefully make a better life here. And how good is their life when they get here in comparison to ours? It's not that great. And yet, all we can think about is how wrong it is, and they shouldn't be here, and blablablabla. Really? Since when did this become 'our land'? It really bothers me, because I don't know that we have ownership claims on land. What did anyone do to claim land as theirs? How did the US not result because of a bunch of Europeans just marching over here and claiming it, pushing aside anyone standing in their way? So, if we can just go and claim land, then why can't someone else come and claim it as well, or claim it back? It seems weird to me to have such feelings of ownership over land, especially as members of the Church. Last time I checked, God created the world, for all his children, and sharing seems to be a big trend in the scriptures. Why can't we be more welcoming to all those who wish to share in the prosperity of the land? Especially when a lot of our own wealth is build at the expense of other, poorer, less developed nations?
It shouldn't be too hard to see if we could adjust the immigration process so people can actually reasonably immigrate legally, we may be a step closer to solving some of the immigration problems. It would definitely help with the costs, because as legal immigrants those people could pay taxes, and support the system like everyone else. It would also help separate the honest, good person more easily from the criminal. Instead though, people seem to just want to build a wall at the border, and discriminate anyone who isn't us (a citizen). At least AZ seems to want that.
The problems I see with the Arizona bill are simple. First of all, even though it is just a mirror of what federal laws already require, it has some nasty twists. By federal law, immigrants need to have their green cards with them at all times. True. If you don't it's a misdemeanor. That's not new. However, so far, this hasn't been enforced or checked much, except at places where status is checked with everyone anyway (like Social Security or at the borders). But it hasn't been checked by police officers, and as far as I understand it, they aren't even really allowed to. Now they are, at least in AZ. This causes various problems. Police cannot pull up Immigration data bases in their cars, as far as I know (I could be wrong). So, now when police officers are required to check status when reasonable suspicion is present that someone is an illegal immigrant, they may end up detaining a lot of people who are completely innocent (like legal immigrants who just forgot their card, or citizens who simply have no means of proving their status - a driver's license does not prove citizenship). It seems ridiculous to only target immigrants in a matter of legal status. If you want to be sure to sort the legal folks from the illegal folks you should check the status of every single person. In other words, everyone, citizens and immigrants alike, should be able to prove their status at the drop of the hat. Yet, only immigrants get targeted for status check. It certainly isn't fair, but it also doesn't make sense, unless...
...you think you can recognize an illegal immigrant, which is probably why the bill is claimed as racist. Of course, nothing in the bill allows racial profiling. It even says that it's prohibited. But, it does require to check status when there is 'reasonable suspicion'. Well, what's reasonable suspicion, please???? Can we clarify that before we go ahead with the bill? It's not clear. But it's clear that now officers need to check status. So, what will likely happen is that those who 'look' illegal, or should I say, Hispanic (because, let's be honest, that's the population we associate with illegal immigration), will be asked to prove their status. And that would be wrong. Even more, if not properly checked, and handled, it would turn into nothing short of of a police state, where police enjoy the privilege of randomly picking on suspicious people to prove themselves. It would but just a little reminiscent of Nazi Germany.
But if it's just about justly finding all illegal immigrants, and if checking legal status is not a big deal, then I'd say, go ahead, but make sure everyone, citizen, legal immigrant and visa-visitor alike, having to prove their status. Otherwise, all I have left is to accuse AZ of discriminating. Because that would be in fact what they are doing.
Immigration. Urgh. It makes me want to spend the few thousand dollars to naturalize. Then I too could be free.
I think I want to get more involved in pro-life movements. That's my recent conclusion. As I had to read up on D and C procedures, I came across way too much abortion stuff, and it really infuriated me. Now, don't get me wrong. I know there are good reasons at times for an abortion, and I don't seek to undermine that. I also am not a fan of millions of babies being born that were not wanted, and I think along with any anti-abortion involvement should come an equal involvement in preventing unwanted pregnancies. But, and here is my big but, there are too many inexcusable pregnancies, that are NOT the result of bad luck or rape or something, but simply the result of irresponsible sexual activity. And while it may be freaky to find yourself pregnant when you didn't want a baby, I don't think abortion should be the answer to irresponsible behavior. I think the most upsetting thing for me, while reading all that stuff is how easily these little fetuses are dismissed as 'valid lives'. It outrages me because I just lost a baby, and it's upsetting that there are people out there who want to declare this life I miss as invalid. Thanks guys. I'm so glad I have so many reproductive rights, even though you won't acknowledge the reality of my baby. Sweet.
Really, it's maddening to me. And it's maddening how many excuses we come up with to justify the common abortion. It irks me because I don't think that we would be ok with similar reasoning on other levels. For example, a lot of women choose abortions because they don't feel ready (financially/emotionally/time-wise) to take care of a baby. Ok. I can understand that. But, would that be a valid reason for eliminating life if we dealt with old parents? Or young children after our economic situation changed? I doubt it. Which means it all comes down to the definition of 'life'. So, here are my thoughts on 'life'. I think when there is a beating heart, and fairly distinguishable human features, you're dealing with a life. Some claim because a fetus can't live/survive on its own, it's not really a 'life'. Well, how many newborns can survive on their own? How many people on life-support can survive on their own? How many old people in rest homes can really survive on their own? There are lots of people who can't live/survive on their own. Yet, do we let everyone die who can't make it on their own? Why try to save someone who just had a horrible accident and needs serious medical intervention to live? Why help victims of natural disasters if they can't make it on their own? Hmmmm, maybe because, no matter what your religious or non-religious views are, there is this little part in our brains that tells us that the ethical thing to do is to sustain and protect life. And yet, with fetuses, instead of maybe trying to err on the side of caution, there is such a rampant willingness to ignore the possibility of life. All in the name of choice - like there wasn't a choice to be sexually active. Like there wasn't a choice to use contraceptives. Like there isn't a choice to give the child up for adoption. Like we're not robbing someone else of a choice by making our choice. Like there is no other option to deal with such a situation but abortion.
The poor logic of the 'pro-choice' movement drives me nuts. And I'm deeply upset to have my baby declared an invalid life, not worthy of protection. So, I think I'll get involved in something and try to promote some changes. I can't vote, but I can at least make my opinions heard. Here's to change!
Check out this link for starters. I really like the look of this movement.
Twenty years ago today, Germany made history - this time in a good way. It was the day that the Berlin Wall came down, and Germans from the East were finally able to walk past a line that previously may have cost them their lives if they attempted to cross it. As a German, I feel that this is a special day to remember, and it's a moment of history I'm very grateful for. My memories are a little weak of that day, since I was only 12 years old. But, I remember watching on TV how exciting everyone was when the wall came down, and people from the East could just cross over to the West. There were tears, there was excitement, there was happiness, and cheers, and I think a good portion of 'I can't believe this is really happening' on peoples faces. What an amazing day. I faintly remember how shortly before the wall fell, there was a surge in Eastern Germans trying to get out of East Germany, even if it cost them their lives. There was such a strong desire for freedom that people were willing to do whatever it took.
To me this is a great example of what can happen when a people are united in what they want, and are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to change things. I don't think Berlin Wall just came down due to mere politics (or Ronald Reagan for that matter). There was a change in the hearts of the people of East Germany, and when they took action, a weakened political system could no longer hold them down. This is also why I don't think that we can or ought to force 'freedom' on anyone. It doesn't work. It has to come as a result of people wanting it badly enough. Otherwise, a true change cannot be made.
Anyway, I don't think I'm able to write anything that does this day justice. I'm just grateful for the changes that took place in my home country that day. Those changes also came with a price. Rebuilding the East has been a costly endeavor for Germany. There have been hard times economically, and hardships for people in the East who had to adjust to a whole new life style. Yet, I'm glad for every penny this has cost us, and for every hardship that came with this change. Because not having that wall separating a nation is what everyone wanted, what everyone was willing to make sacrifices for, and what I think has made us a better, stronger people. At the end of the day, we were and are all Germans, and there is no place for any division. To me, it was and is worth all the sacrifices.
I think anyone who claims to be my friend, ought to read the news today and read a little more about this special day in my country's history. (If you don't read anything it's ok, too and you can still be my friend). Here are some links for your convenience:
Quoting Harry Patch, who died at age 111 last month: "Too many died,” he said, late in life, of the estimated 900,000 Britons killed in the conflict. “War isn’t worth one life.” He called war “the calculated and condoned slaughter of human beings,” Britain’s Press Association news agency said.
I thought this was an interesting article that might promote some discussion since we've got both Europeans and Americans. And, since no one ever responds to the comments I post, I figured I need to either start the conversation or say something controversial. So, here you are:
What age is it okay for nudity? I've seen topless women in Europe just sunbathing in the park. And European guys tend to wear smaller swimsuits. I think Europeans (in general) may be much more comfortable with being naked than Americans. However, in the states I notice more nudity in normal places, like shopping centers and the zoo (though I don't think I've ever noticed anyone topless at the zoo). And, I noticed while watching "Dancing for the Stars" on television that almost every female dancer is wearing a costume that looks like lingerie. I have seen friends and family, here in America, cover up the private parts of an infant or 2 year old child in pictures they take. My European in laws tend to let their kids run around naked more, at least at home. In Europe, it seems that people, generally, are more tolerable of children running around naked. While in America (maybe just with Mormons) it seems like nudity is almost forbidden. I'm thinking that being hypersensitive to nudity when children are young and innocent probably hyper-sensitizes them to nudity when they are older. And since teens like to push their bounds, they'll be more prone to wear less wherever they go. Then again, it could just be due to the media. Though, if Europe and America tend to be bombarded with the same type of media, why do we see a difference in the amount of nudity found in every-day situations vs at the beach or in the park?
Yesterday, a lady approached me as I was about to get into my car, telling me some sad story about how she got laid off, got evicted, has four kids, needs to find a motel etc. I asked her if she's asking for money (yes). It's been a while that I've been in a situation where I was asked for money, and had to make a decision. The last few times something like this happened, I never had cash, and so that pretty much took care of the situation. This time I happened to have a reasonable amount of cash in my wallet, and I couldn't just use my excuse of 'not having any cash on me'. Well, I won't tell you what I did, but I will tell you what I started to think about after I left (other than trying to figure out whether she was telling the truth or not).
First I had to think of the argument I've heard so many times that we shouldn't be forced to be charitable through taxation. Well, I sure am not a fan of force, but I am a fan of charity. And this argument has therefore always kept my attention. So, if we wouldn't want to take care of people through taxes, it now becomes our responsibility to take care of the poor and needy. But how would that play out? One group of people who seems the most adamant about not being taxed, especially for charity, are economists. Yet, a nationwide study found that economic professors in comparison to other professors where twice as likely to NOT give any money to private charities. Most of them also didn't respond with donations to public TV appeals, and in laboratory monetary games, students behave more selfishly after taking an economics course (source: Robert H. Frank, Thomas Gilovich, and Dennis T. Regan: "Does Studying Economics Inhibit Cooperation?" Journal of Economic Perspectives 7 (1993):159-71). Coincidence? Bad research? I don't know...sounds like those pushing the most for the tax cuts in the name of freedom and people doing things of their own free will, are the least likely to do anything.
Then I also had to think of this whole chapter in the Book of Mormon - Mosiah 4. 16 And also, ye yourselves will asuccor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the bbeggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish.
17 Perhaps thou shalt asay: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just—
18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.
19 For behold, are we not all abeggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?
20 And behold, even at this time, ye have been calling on his name, and begging for a aremission of your sins. And has he suffered that ye have begged in vain? Nay; he has poured out his bSpirit upon you, and has caused that your hearts should be filled with cjoy, and has caused that your mouths should be stopped that ye could not find utterance, so exceedingly great was your joy.
21 And now, if God, who has created you, on whom you are dependent for your lives and for all that ye have and are, doth grant unto you whatsoever ye ask that is right, in faith, believing that ye shall receive, O then, how ye ought to aimpart of the substance that ye have one to another.
22 And if ye ajudge the man who putteth up his petition to you for your substance that he perish not, and condemn him, how much more just will be your bcondemnation for withholding your substance, which doth not belong to you but to God, to whom also your life cbelongeth; and yet ye put up no petition, nor repent of the thing which thou hast done.
23 I say unto you, wo be unto that man, for his substance shall perish with him; and now, I say these things unto those who are arich as pertaining to the things of this world.
24 And again, I say unto the poor, ye who have not and yet have sufficient, that ye remain from day to day; I mean all you who deny the beggar, because ye have not; I would that ye say in your hearts that: I agive not because I bhave not, but if I had I would cgive.
This comes to my mind because a lot of those people who side with the economists also sit in Church. And then I hear all these arguments about how we shouldn't just give a beggar money because he'll just buy cigarettes or beer, etc. And I think 'hold on, didn't King Benjamin just say that we should give and not judge?'. How come that people are so eager to complain about paying taxes to support the poor, and so quick to discuss how we shouldn't give this or that to someone who asks, and so slow to just recognize how stinkin' blessed we are in comparison to the rest of the world and just be glad that we CAN pay taxes (because, doesn't that mean we're employed?), and so blessed that we can probably give someone some money when they ask (because let's be honest, who of us doesn't have 1 or 2 dollars to spare?), and how lucky we are that we don't have to be addicted to beer, or cigarettes, and that we don't have to ask others for money. What a sad life. After reading Mosiah I always felt that what we're really supposed to do is to simply be willing to give. Of course, at times it may not be right, and right now I wonder if it's right for me to give money when we're living on student loans (debt) and using government aide. If I can't provide for myself and depend on others right now to meet our needs, is it right for me to give away money? I don't know and I don't think anyone else knows. I have to figure this out with God.
But, I do have to say, it is amazing to me how unwilling we often seem to be to simply give - to just give money, and not think about it for the rest of the day. It amazes me how quick we are to buy burgers, cars, clothes, soda, ice cream, chocolate, lotions, rent DVD's etc. , but if some sorry bum on the street wants a buck - nope! I just don't get it. And I'm not saying I'm better, just that the mentality of wanting to always cut in the areas of the poor and the needy is an odd thing to me. For me, it seems so against everything I feel the scriptures teach me. And, with that I also do not say that we shouldn't help the poor and the needy to take care of themselves eventually. I'm just speaking about how stingy we truly are with our money. Maybe it's just me though. Therefore, I guess the question is: where does YOUR money go?
Hier ist er nun - der langerwartete (seit ein paar Tagen) erste deutsche Blogeintrag. Heute hatten wir im Gottesdienst schon unsere ersten patriotischen Lieder gesungen, und alle Ansprachen waren ueber patriotische Themen (The Cost of Freedom, How to retain our Legacy und an das erste Thema kann ich mich nicht mehr erinnern, war aber auch patriotisch). Fuer mich ist der ganze patriotische Kram eher schwer zu handhaben, und so fiel mir nach dem Gottesdienst ein, dass ich ja schon vor ein paar Tagen ueber dieses Thema schreiben wollte. Und nun nehm ich mir mal schnell die Zeit, dazu ein paar Sachen zu sagen.
Vor 2 Wochen waren wir bei Henry's Eltern in Virginia zu Besuch, und hatten dabei die Gelegenheit ein "Reenactment" ueber eine Rede von einem wichtigen Revolutionskaempfer (Patrick Henry) anzuschauen. Dieses 'Reenactment' (keine Ahnung wie wir das auf Deutsch nennen) war wirklich interessant. Was nicht so interessant war, war der ganze patriotische Kram bevor die Show losging. Erstmal wurden lauter Militaerlieder auf der Orgel gespielt zu denen alle mitsingen durften, und es auch taten. Dann kam "God Bless America" und die Nationalhymne, und wir sollten fuer beide Lieder aufstehen. Habe ich natuerlich nicht gemacht, und mich lediglich fuer die Nationalhymne erhoben. Inzwischen lebe ich nun schon fast 8 Jahre in den USA, und Patriotismus wie man ihn hier findet ist immer noch schwer fuer mich zu verdauen. Inzwischen habe ich ja schon Spass an gewissen Sachen. Ich finde es voellig ok, und mach es auch gern, an Aktivitaeten und Feierlichkeiten fuer den 4. Juli teilzunehmen. Das finde ich alles angebracht. Was ich nicht angebracht finde, und auch gar nicht verstehen kann, ist all der Patriotismus in der Kirche. Soweit ich alles richtig verstanden habe, sollte Jesus Christus der Mittelpunkt des Gottesdienstes sein. Da sind manche Priestertumsfuehrer sogar so rigeros, dass zum Beispiel manche Lieder, die sich zwar um Christus drehen aber nicht aus dem Gesangbuch sind, im Gottesdienst nicht gesungen werden duerfen. Aber niemand scheint ein Problem zu haben, wenn wir 3 Ansprachen haben, die Christus kaum oder gar nicht erwaehnen, und wir Lieder singen, die eigentlich auch nichts direkt mit dem Evangelium oder Christus zu tun haben. Das stoert mich echt. Und wieso gibt es ueberhaupt nur patriotische Lieder im Englischsprachigen Gesangbuch. Wenn Patriotismus so wichtig ist, sollten dann nicht alle Laender patriotische Lieder in ihren Gesangsbuechern haben? Also, ich kann das einfach alles nicht ab, und es geht mir immer total auf die Nerven, dass das so gehandhabt wird. Und dann kommt dazu natuerlich noch der Inhalt von den Ansprachen oder Gebeten etc.
Damit waeren wir dann beim Militarismus. Bin ich die einzige, die das Gefuehl hat, dass das Militar in diesem Land verherrlicht wird? Ich finde das problematisch und beaengstigent. Natuerlich verstehe ich, dass das was Soldaten im Krieg leisten und ertragen, gravierend und schwer ist, vielleicht gradezu traumatisch. Aber weil ich das verstehe, verstehe ich nicht was daran so glamouroes ist. Es ist traurig, das junge Leute so etwas erleben muessen, und oft wenn es vielleicht nicht mal noetig ist. Es ist noch grausamer, dass sie wo kaempfen, und das Leben eines anderen Landes dramatisch veraendern und beinflussen, und niemand das ueberhaupt mal erwaehnt. Ich hoere staendig Gebete in der Kirche fuer 'unsere Soldaten'. Ich habe noch niemanden gehoert, der auch mal fuer die andere Seite gebetet hat. Da sind Menschen, deren ganzes Land zerstoert wird, die Familienmitgliedern verlieren, und die fuer Jahrzehnte die Konsequenzen des Kriegs spueren werden, mehr als irgendeiner der amerikanischen Soldaten, und trotz allem scheint niemand es fuer noetig zu halten, mal fuer diese Menschen zu beten. Nope, statt dessen denken wir an unsere Soldaten, und das Gott Amerika segnen soll. Der Rest der Welt ist egal - wir wissen ja eh nicht wo das ist, oder was da genau los ist. Mir stehen da echt immer die Haare zu Berge. Mir stehen auch die Haare zu Berge, wenn ich sehe mit was fuer Begeisterung die Leute diese Militaerlieder sangen bei diesem Reenactment. Ist es etwa schoen ein Soldat zu sein und in den Krieg zu ziehen? Kann ja sein, dass ich das echt alles falsch verstehe, und es eigentlich echt Spass macht. Aber wenn es Spass macht, dann muessen mir die Soldaten ja auch nicht leid tun, oder?
Naja, ich habe noch mehr Gedanken zu dem Thema. Aber ich will mich jetzt erstmal auf's Ohr hauen. Zum Thema 'Schlechte Autofahrer' habe ich nur eine Sache zu sagen. Es mag ja sein, dass ich in vielen Dinge in Bezug auf die USA die Dinge nicht wirklich objektiv sehe. Und sicher urteile ich nicht fair in vielen Sachen, wo ich meine das sie in Deutschland besser sind. Aber von einer Sache bin ich ueberzeugt: Amerikaner koenne nicht vernuenftig autofahren. Ich krieg wirklich staendig die Krise. Die Leute passen nicht auf, benutzen ihre Blinker nicht, lassen keine vernuenftigen Abstaenden, wissen nicht wie man einfaedelt, in schlechtem Wetter faehrt, auf die Autobahn rauf/runter faehrt, sie traeumen vor sich hin und blocken Spuren, etc. etc. etc. Es ist furchtbar. Ich dachte eine zeitlang das es nur in Utah so ist. Aber inzwischen bin ich in mehr als 30 US-Bundesstaaten gefahren...mit dem gleichen Ergebnis. Die Leute koennen hier einfach nicht vernuenftig fahren, und ich bin mir 100 Prozent sicher, dass wir in Deutschland besser fahren. Eigentlich wollte ich mich auch noch ausfuehrlich ueber die Polizei hier mit ihren Speedingtickets beschweren, aber das muss auch warten.
So, in preparations to have an educated discussion on vaccinations I've been reading away diligently. One thing I stumbled upon that startled me regarding the 'land of the free' was that vaccinations are actually mandatory. You can be denied school access, day care access, and be denied all kinds of governmental benefits if you're not vaccinated. Hmmmm, I thought. Then I wondered about Germany having mandatory vaccinations. And what do you know...they don't. Interesting, no?
Maybe this is a result of the new "transparency" Obama is aiming for, but one thing I really haven't been too impressed with and/or too happy with is all the "problems" that seem to be going on with a lot of the staff/advisors etc. Obama has chosen. First, a lot of them seemed to have had some issues with paying their taxes properly, and the trend with questionable practices seems to continue. I bet there are lots of "innocent" tax mistakes all over DC (on both sides), but geeze, I really wish he would have been tougher on his picks with their problems.
Now we have fishy stuff going on with Steven Rattner. I'm not impressed. Come on Obama! If you want to be reelected, and want to keep the trust people have placed in you, you need to do more in regards to corrupted politics - don't let them get away with it.
That said, I'd have a lot more to say on politics and other pet-peeves I have, but right now I have to take a shower. Later maybe.
Ok, I have a little pet-peeve, and it has to do with peoples complaints about the government stealing their money. First of all, I should say that I favor taxes to not be excessive, and that I have clear ideas on how I'd like tax money to be spent, and that I do not agree in many areas of politics how tax money is used, and that goes for both the conservative and liberal sides. I think the whole lot could do much better in many ways. I also do not necessarily favor the whole scope of the bail-out, yet I am not completely opposed to it (which however, would be a completely other debate). Now here is my issue: people complain about the "government stealing their money", and usually I hear these complains from conservative people, who are mad over the spending of tax money of the liberal side (right now I hear a lot of this in regards to Obama's stimulus plan, which I just want to point out originated, though not in its full scope with a CONSERVATIVE). This bothers me for one particular reason: I don't hear anyone complain about taxation in general, which I think is the original "theft". I just hear them being mad because it's not used how they want it, and so therefore suddenly it's theft. They never seem all mad when it's the conservative side, using tax money for ...let's say the military. But then when it's the liberal side, spending tax money on such wasteful, unjust endeavors like education or the poor, then suddenly they are being "forced" into things, and are being stolen from.
Well, I think taxation itself is the theft. No one should probably have to pay money to anyone if they don't want to. So, I'd be fine with people opposing taxes (though I don't know how well a society of our size would function without a taxing system). I think it'd be right to feel stolen from, if you don't believe in having to pay taxes and you're forced (by law) to pay them anyway. But, I find it very hypocritical to get mad when the money is used for one cause instead of another and declare it "theft" only when I disapprove of the cause. I mean, if someone stole a $100 bucks from me, and used the money to either feed the poor or to get himself a gun, maybe one thing would be better than the other, but HEY, he stole my money, and it doesn't matter what he does with it, IT'S WRONG! It shouldn't have been his choice to spent the money is a good or bad way, it should have been my choice.
But, if I more or less agree to having to pay taxes, I find it hypocritical to complain and declare "theft" when the money is used for one program over another. That doesn't mean that you need to accept how the government spends tax money. Oh no! I think people should be involved and find out how the money is spend, and speak up when they want it used differently. I think that's fine, and that's how it should be. But, to say they are stealing my money, only when I disagree with how they spend it, is just silly to me.
For example, I really don't like how much tax money is spent on military. I think it's way too much and if only spent half as much on the military, they could probably do a lot in other areas I deem more important (like education or even fixing the welfare system). However, while I strongly opposed how much money is spend on the military, I have not once claimed that they are stealing my money because they are taxing me, and then using the money in ways I don't like. That's because, I'm not completely opposed to taxation (mainly because I don't have a better alternative for making things happen in a large society). Also, in the end, I think why complain so much about the tax money I have to pay. Sure, they are huge amounts at times, and it sort of hurts to give away something that I earned, but was it really mine to begin with? Where would I be without the help of God anyway? I probably wouldn't possess as much as penny. So, when Christ said to give to God what is God's and to give to Cesar what is Cesars, maybe he suggested to just not be so worried about what we end up giving, and to just count our blessings. Maybe not...So, please, if you have issues with taxation, speak up and do something. If you do not like how tax money is spent, please speak up, do something and get involved. BUT PLEASE!!! don't whine about being stolen from when you don't agree with how money is being spent, because you were stolen from the second you ended up having to pay taxes (be it for a conservative or liberal government).
P.S. I should also mention that I think I'm a little tired of Obama getting so much crap already for the stimulus plan from some people who never said a peep about Bush spending (by now probably) trillion for a war that by his own admission had nothing to do with terrorism. While I'm not sure how I feel about the whole bail-out etc, I don't know that it's better to spend trillions of Iraqi Freedom than on stabilizing the global economy. I also find it extremely difficult to figure out what the right thing to do with this economic crisis. It's easy to be against something, but I doubt that most of us truly understand the scope of the problem, and the possible repercussions if we let the market fix itself (which I think is possible, but it may come at a price that may far outweigh the billions we are facing now). Honestly, I have given Bush more time and more credit than I feel Obama is getting now. He's hardly done worse than the last president we had, and it bugs me a little that some are sooooo riled up all of sudden, where a few months ago, I didn't hear a word. Well, maybe it's just the straw that broke the camel's back, so I'll try and not judge, but I'll admit it's bothering me a little.
So far I've had rather mixed feelings about the happenings in the US's new administration. However, now I just read an article (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/04/business/04pay.html?hp) that makes me rather hopeful. The administration plans to have a rule that limits executive income to $500,000 a year for companies who receive bail-out money. I think that's great. It has always bothered me that in times of a recession, companies seem to need to lay off millions of people, pinch pennies left and right, but the chief executives are still making millions each year. I always thought, if maybe they'd cut their own pay checks a little, maybe they could keep more people employed, and lessen the drastic effects of a recession. Well, it thus makes me happy to see that Obama is not planning on letting those who ask for financial help pad their own wallets more than necessary. You should read the article. I think the most annoying part to me was this one guy suggestion how it's tough to only make $500,000 a year. Yeah, must be really really tough. I can hardly imagine the hardship.
I watched the Inauguration of the new US president today and thought it was quite interesting. I really loved the musical number composed by John Williams. That was way cool. What I also really enjoyed (to continue my list of things I love about America) was the excitement everyone had for this big day. It was a big deal, festive, with prayers, etc. People really got into this, and it was not only another president, but an emotionally big deal. I liked that. I liked the excitement, and emotional attachment to this event (versus maybe skepticism and cynicsm in Europe). But, what I really wanted to say, you may love Obama or you may hate him, but alas, the man can speak! I love listening to him, and while I realize he may not live up to his own words, I find his messages/speeches rather empowering and hopeful. Let's hope this president will deliver as promised!
is how America handles finances, or credit/debt more specifically. So, here I'm sitting, all happy about how we are handling our finances. We keep our debt minimal, we try not to spend money on stuff we don't have money for, and if we use our credit card, we pay it off each month. I think, we really try to follow the prophet's admonition to stay out of debt to the best of our abilities. But now, here is the fun part: now this freak of financial advisor for the optometry students tries to tell us that we need some loans, like a car loan, or credit card payments that we let roll-over to the next month etc. to be more eligible for a later loan for a practice. I can't even really write about this without getting angry. Maybe not enough time has passed, but one would hope that the current financial crisis would teach people one thing: debt is bad. But no: let's play the stupid credit game and try to show to lenders that we are "responsible" by using money we don't have to buy things we don't need, but we pay them off eventually, so therefore we are responsible financially. Yeah right...how come it's not considered responsible to live within your means, and to pay off your credit card promptly?
Maybe this guy is just full of BS, but I'm so upset to think that now we may have to buy a car or some other crap we don't want, pretend to be paying off some sort of loan or whatever, just so some idiot bank believes we're responsible, when truly it's the banks who are irresponsible these days.
I don't think I'm making sense. I just hate debt. I hate feeling like now I have to spend money where I don't want to spend money, and start pretending to handle my finances a certain way just so some irresponsible, dumb bank believes we're "responsible"...grrrrrrrr....
P.S. Please note that there is a cute post about Sophia before this one. ;)
P.P.S. A little up-date on the finances. I still hate debt. I still hate how things are run by the banks. I just talked to my dad today about an article in a German newspaper, that reported on this man who worked for the UN, never had debt, always paid 'cash', then came to the US and couldn't get a loan for a house, even though he could easily pay almost half of the house in cash, because of his income, simply because he never had debt/credit history. Kind of ridiculous. Anyway, I digress. Our financial advisor dude wrote us back, and from how his second email, it now is clearer was he's talking about and it sounds like we're doing things exactly as we should. So, that's nice. At least we don't have to buy a car now or something just so ...I still don't like what the banks do here, but I'm relieved to think we're at least playing the game right.
Though I'm always sceptical of politicians, Obama's acceptance speech (along with many other things he's said during his campaign etc.) has really impressed me. While I realize that he may not live up to what he's said, I am impressed with just having said so many good things to begin with, and so far he's been pretty consistent in what he's said and what's on his agenda. Hopefully, things will continue to be consistent in the future. Anyway, words are words, but at least Obama has had some cool things to say. I can't even recall ONE statement from McCain that stood out to me as important and good. So, Obama's speech, even if it ends up being empty words, at least has the right message, as far as I'm concerned. And for that reason I want to capture the highlights of the speech. Here are the parts I liked (with a comment in parenthesis what I liked about it):
It's the answer that led those who have been told for so long by so many to be cynical, and fearful, and doubtful of what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day. (In a time where fear and cynicism dominate a lot of our lifes, and often create apathy and hopelessness, I love how he tries to fight that, and instill hope. It's hope that leads to action, not fear and cynical attitudes)
I would not be standing here tonight without the unyielding support of my best friend for the last sixteen years, the rock of our family and the love of my life, our nation's next First Lady, Michelle Obama. Sasha and Malia, I love you both so much, and you have earned the new puppy that's coming with us to the White House. And while she's no longer with us, I know my grandmother is watching, along with the family that made me who I am. I miss them tonight, and know that my debt to them is beyond measure. (I love that he expresses his love for his family so clearly, and that he realizes that whatever he's achieved in life is not just because of himself, but because of those who've supported him all along, and helped him become who he is. It's arrogant and prideful to think you've achieved anything on your own).
It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give five dollars and ten dollars and twenty dollars to this cause. It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generation's apathy; who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep; from the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on the doors of perfect strangers; from the millions of Americans who volunteered, and organized, and proved that more than two centuries later, a government of the people, by the people and for the people has not perished from this Earth. This is your victory. (Again, I love that he realizes how much he ows his "victory" to the efforts of those who wanted a change, and made sacrifices for it)
I know you didn't do this just to win an election and I know you didn't do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime - two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century. Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us. There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after their children fall asleep and wonder how they'll make the mortgage, or pay their doctor's bills, or save enough for college. There is new energy to harness and new jobs to be created; new schools to build and threats to meet and alliances to repair. (Nice - he actually seems to have a clue as to what people in this nation face, and deal with)
The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there. (I love that he is hopeful, while being realistic and down to earth about the seriousness of the problems the nation faces)
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government can't solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And above all, I will ask you join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it's been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.( I lovelovelove this part - I love that he realizes how things will be, there'll be disagreements, and not everyone will be happy, but he promises to be honest, he'll listen, and most of all he asks EVERYONE to join in making the changes happen - he's inviting people to act and be responsible!!!! instead of promising that the government will fix everything)
What began twenty-one months ago in the depths of winter must not end on this autumn night. This victory alone is not the change we seek - it is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It cannot happen without you. (Again, I love that he makes clear that everyone has to do something or nothing will change)
So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and responsibility where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other. Let us remember that if this financial crisis taught us anything, it's that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers - in this country, we rise or fall as one nation; as one people. (Well, this could almost be a part of a General Conference talk - yes, we need to work hard, be responsible, and help others, be unselfish etc...I'm glad he realizes that! And also that what we do impacts others - this is ONE nation! I love this part!!!!)
Let us resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, "We are not enemies, but friends...though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection." And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn - I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your President too. (I love that he acknowledges needing everyone's support, and reaching out to those who haven't voted for him)
And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of our world - our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand. To those who would tear this world down - we will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security - we support you. And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright - tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from our the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope. (I just like this part...)
America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves - if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made?
This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment. This is our time - to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American Dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope, and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt, and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people:
Yes We Can. (Again, I love the message of hope, and resolve to do something, to act, to change - go Obama!)
Today is a big day, as there are some major elections going on. I hope that anyone who reads this, who is a US citizen with the right to vote, is taking advantage of this privilege. It's a little sad and hard for me to sit at home and not be able to vote. Even though I'm not a citizen, I really care about what happens in this country since it affects me and my family regardless of my legal status. I wish I'd have the chance to make an input on where this country is headed with my vote, but unfortunately I don't. So, I hope that at least those who have the right, take advantage of it, even if you vote for a candidate I don't like. :) Go vote, and participate in the happenings and development of your nation!
I've been reading a couple of politics books on the development of the European Union. I find them really interesting. Something interesting I read just now was about some pretty well known companies, and which nation they are owned by. I was quite surprised at times. So, here is a list of companies. Try to guess how many of them are US-owned, and how many are European-owned. I'll post the answer in a few days.
1. Dunkin' Donuts 2. Amoco 3. Snapple 4. Lucky Strike 5. Holiday Inn 6. Miller Lite 7. Bazooka Gum 8. A&W Root Beer 9. Verizon 10. Lean Cuisine 11. Ben & Jerry's 12. Dr. Pepper 13. Texaco 14. Household Finance 15. DKNY 16. Sunglass Hut 17. Archway Cookies 18. Random House 19. Hawaiian Punch 20. Dodge, Jeep, Plymouth 21. Vaseline 22. First Boston 23. Pennzoil 24. Dove Soap 25. The New York Post 26. Mott's 27. RCA 28. Dreyer's Ice Cream 29. I can't believe it's not butter 30. Quaker State Motor Oil
But I have to make fun of a book I just discovered on my goodreads.com website. I just can't believe there is something like that out there. I mean, I'm not really surprised, but then, I am. How pathetic can Mormon writing get? Granted, I haven't read the book, but just reading the synopsis of the book, I noticed my IQ dropping a significant amount. And it gave me a good enough idea of what kind of wonderful ideas are presented in the book. The evil UN seeking global dominion, and the only ones rising out of the repression are the faithful, foodstorage-keeping American Mormons. Gagggggg....I'm sorry if this happened to be one of your favorite books, or if you like those ideas/concepts. But for me, reading that I'm torn between just laughing my head off or throwing up.
P.S. Don't get me wrong. I do believe we should have a food storage and that we will be blessed for our faithfulness to Heavenly Father. I just don't quite envision it happening like this author.
Here is the book description: THIS ARE TIMES THAT TRY MEN S SOULS! US citizens struggle to gain control of their lives as the UN sends food and financial relief. In return for support, the UN requires all to have a computer chip implanted under their skin. The LDS people are counseled to refuse the chip but draw instead on their food supplies. Communities are fractured as each person decides for themselves what they will do and who they will follow. The righteous are rewarded as independent tent cities rise all over America under the glorious banner of the flag. They enjoy miracles and blessings beyond their expectations! For country, for liberty, for freedom for GOD! United We Stand! IT IS THE END OF DAYS AND ALL IS IN COMMOTION!
A gal from Germany, a guy from California, another BYU love story, 1 bunny named Killer, 2 little girls, 3 degrees, 4 bikes, books in every corner, drawings on the wall, music and dancing, vegetable garden on the balcony, chocolate and prosciutto, pitched tents in the living rooms, cloth diapers in the bathroom, laundry piles in the bedroom, unvaccumed stair way, unironed clothes, lots of hugs, a bunch of tears, some heart ache, some fights, some disappointments, much joy, lots of traveling, nightmares and night cuddles, trips to the ER - swearing included, diarrhea disasters in public bathrooms, marathons, bike rides, prayers, faith, hope and hopefully some charity. Happiness.
Posts
