Rainbows & Innocence

Remember when a rainbow was a reminder of God's love and promise to us?  Or when it was a sign of beauty and excitement at finding one after a good rain?  When we could fantasize about the pot of gold at the end of it?

Now, when we see rainbows they are typically promoting the gay marriage agenda.  Sadly, it's been completely commandeered. Rainbows are showing up everywhere, not as a sign of beauty but as an in-your-face expression of "Hey! Pay attention to us! We're discriminated against."

Then there is the ad-nauseam promotion of Gay Pride day/week/month and parades where costumed exhibitionists use rainbows as they jangle their scantily clad junk in people's faces.  If you question that activity you are accused of being a homophobe.  No, actually, I don't like it when straight people do that either!

I love my gay friends as I love my straight friends.  I don't separate them into friend categories like the Democratic party does their electorate.  They are all my friends just as we are all Americans (okay, yes, except for you Canadians, whom I love, too).  I want my gay friends to have the same legal and financial protections that my husband and I have.

But I am saddened that rainbows ... something that we learn to admire and draw and watercolor as small children ... has now become a symbol of sexuality rather than the innocence of water meeting sunshine.  Yes, yes, there is symbolism in using the rainbow, all colors come together, blah-blah-blah .... but I still find it sad that the innocence of a rainbow has now been replaced with a political issue.

Bill Maher & the Supremes

Here's today's round-up of news stories and headline catchers.  I feel a little like Drudge doing this ... I'll get better, and I'll do it earlier, too.  I hope.  :)

Bill Maher - the most despicable man in the world, but, ya know, it's okay because "He's a comedian." Perhaps in some alternate universe. I just find him to be vile:  Mega Obama Donor on Fast & Furious: "Republicans Don't Care About Dead Mexicans"

The Supreme Court today struck down three of the four provisions in the Arizona illegal immigration bill.  They only left the part where during a stop, detention, or arrest the police could make efforts to verify the person's immigration status.  It also says that immigration status must be determined before any arrested person is released.   Decision Reached on Arizona's SB 1070 

Obamacare - Word on the street is that the Obamacare ruling will come on Thursday.  Considering I thought the Arizona bill was within the state's rights to protect its citizens, and the Court disagrees, I'm getting a little skeptical of whether or not they'll strike this thing down.  No matter the ruling, though, it's going to be a mess to clean up.

Marco Rubio - I'm more in love with this man every day.  Rubio: Republicans Are "Compassionate" And Care About the Plight of Illegal Immigrants

Poverty & Welfare -  Reports are out of the massive increase of welfare recipients during the Obama administration, followed by the revelation that it has done nothing to alleviate poverty.  Big surprise there, not.  It's the ol' "If you give a mouse a cookie..." story.  Additionally, the minimum income for receiving government assistance has risen like a rocket under Obama (another non surprise).  As the Lord said, the poor will always be with us.  Right now we are sitting at 15% ... which is exactly what it was when welfare programs were instigated in 1965.  Welfare Spending Skyrockets, Poverty Rate Remains Unchanged Under Obama  I firmly believe that it is our job to help those in need ... not the government's.

Fast & Furious - The majority of Americans are not convinced it was appropriate for President Obama to utilize executive privilege.  Ya think?  After all these months insisting it had nothing to do with the White House, it's pretty interesting that the White House uses it's privilege, something that can only be used to protect the White House.  Hmmmmm .... Americans Not Buying His Assertion of Executive Privilege on Fast and Furious Docs

Photo ID Required!

This from Breitbart. Apparently acquiring tickets to an Obama event in Ohio wasn't sufficient to get you in. You also had to provide photo ID .... something that both Obama and Eric Holder have christened as "racist" when it comes to voting.  Interesting contradiction.

-------> Obama demands ID

Fast & Furious & Ideology

Bill Whittle is fast becoming my hero.  You want to know how serious Fast & Furious and the machinations of Attorney General (and possibly the President) really is? While the mainstream media and the Left wring their hands about it being racist to even ask about it, this situation has caused the deaths of hundreds of Mexican citizens as well as Border Agent Brian Terry.  Check out this video.  It's horrifying and revealing.  Watergate? Ha! Child's play compared to this ..... no one died due to Watergate.

Election Day is coming ... what do you know about the candidates?

Recently I read a short piece on political awareness, and it all boiled down to one question. "Do you know who Barry Soetoro is?"  I scoffed.  Of course I know who that is! How could anyone not know who that is? Then I started asking others, even my own children, and was surprised at the number of shrugs I got.

For those who do not know, Barry Soetero is a name attributed to Barack Obama, comprised of his childhood nickname (Barry) and his adoptive father's last name. When he was a small child, President Obama's mother married an Indonesian man named Lolo Soetoro.  Indonesian school records list Barry Soetoro as a student during the time Obama lived there.  Whether or not he used this name throughout his life or during his American education is a mystery.

President Obama had most of his personal and educational records sealed years ago, we have no access to evidence of his life history ... no grade history, no college applications, no copies of his thesis, etc. There has been no explanation for this lack of transparency, and to this day his records are sealed.

In his own autobiography President Obama claimed he rarely went to class in high school and did drugs a great deal. So how did he get into Harvard? He claimed he barely passed in high school.  Did he utilize his step-father's heritage to gain an advantage? Is that why we can't access this information? Some claim he registered as a foreign student, but there is no available evidence to prove or disprove this.

Sadly, anyone who questions President Obama's life history is labeled a racist or a whacko or a conspiracy theorist. Accordingly, we know very little about his life except what he wrote in his autobiographies. Can you imagine any other Presidential candidate, much less President, sealing his personal records like this and no one being allowed to ask why?

Personally, I believe Barack Obama was elected President because he was African American and had a pithy slogan.  After the brutalizing press that President Bush received the last four years of his administration, Americans were hungry for something positive and affirming.  Obama, who was a minority, had a Harvard Law Degree, was hailed as the "Smartest Presidential Candidate Ever," and gave great speeches, filled the bill, and Americans went for the change he represented. However, if we are honest with ourselves, we recognize that no white junior senator from a midwestern state would be considered for any party's nomination for President ..... certainly not with his limited experience and sealed records, and certainly not against an experienced politician like Hillary Clinton.

Now if you want to put yourself though conspiracy whacko-land, do a Google search on Barry Soetoro. I don't recommend it, though, it's depressing and scary. But hopefully my mentioning this has tweaked your interest enough to find out about our Presidential candidates this year.  We have Mitt Romney, who has his records open and available to everyone, and we have President Obama whose records are still sealed and has only allowed us to know what he wrote about himself in his autobiographies.

That alone should make you look very hard at your vote this Novemeber.

The DREAM Act and President Obama

First of all, I am a supporter of some kind of DREAM act legislation. We have, in this country, children who were brought here illegally yet were educated here and have known no other home but this. Some don't even know they are here illegally.  And, happily, most could be or are becoming productive members of society. These are young people with promising futures if given the opportunity. What is gained by discarding such young people and sending them back to their country of origin?

However, the timing of this is blatant pandering by the President in an election year which I find just as distasteful as his 11th hour "coming out" on gay marriage. He couldn't be more obvious if he wore a sign!  Additionally, he is essentially commanding this be so and is completely bypassing the Congressional process. This shows either a lack of knowledge in how our government functions or a complete disregard of it. This is a complex situation, it needs the attention and discussion of the entire Congress, not just the President waving his hand.

Any DREAM act will be complicated and will need very strictly adhered to criteria to be successful for everyone. This article is being written before President Obama makes his announcement today, but from what has been released so far, the guidelines will be:

[I]llegal immigrants will be immune from deportation if they were brought to the United States before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned a GED, or served in the military. They also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed. 

This is a good start to a more productive and compassionate resolution to a complex immigration problem. There is a lot I agree with here ... particularly no criminal history and military service.

There are, however, things I would change. Age 16 is too old. To allow any child under 16 into this program means we'll have scads of 15 year old illegals being sent over the border alone just so they can graduate from a U.S. high school. Not good. We'd end up with skyrocketing teen homelessness. I would be more supportive of age 10 or 12. Also, age 30 is too late. If someone is here illegally, has been here since they were 16 (or 10) they should have made some effort at acquiring legal documentation. That means they've been working and supporting themselves for 10-15 years, utilizing our school system and health care system and paying little (sales tax) into the system. Uh-uh. That's a deal breaker for me. Military service, however, cancels that out. Any who came here illegally and who is serving our country gets a break from me ... though it is troubling that non-citizens could be serving in our military. How is that possible? Illegal documentation? Also, voting rights should be withheld until full citizenship is acquired. 

Of course, the devil is in the details. Previously, one of the aspects of the DREAM act has been that such a "child"(for lack of a better word) could bring as many relatives with him/her as he wished. That's not going to wash. We can't have 50 illegals suddenly being legal simply because one relative went to an American high school.  If the child is a minor, they can be allowed minor siblings and their parents. If already married, allow their spouse and children. That's it. This isn't a get out of jail free card to lifetime U.S. benefits for all relatives.

One more thing to consider ..... we aren't just talking about Mexicans, here. Remember that, unless it is specified otherwise, this will also apply to those young people here illegally from Middle Eastern countries who may not be so friendly to us. That brings a dangerous kettle of fish into our midsts.

Ultimately, though, I have a substantial objection to how this is being accomplished. We've needed change in our immigration policy for decades, this is true. However, for President Obama to make a "policy change" without any Congressional approval is tantamount to dictatorship. It's, quite simply, not how our system of government works.  Additionally, in doing this during an election year and with so many states not requiring photo ID to vote, President Obama is inviting voter fraud. It's as distasteful as the circumstances surrounding him "coming out" on gay marriage.  Blatant pandering.