A is for...

A.

A is for America.

A is for Arizona.

A is for Are we really wanting to go there? I mean “Welcome to Arizona, may I see your papers please?” Sounds familiar… “Paper please!” Like a quote from a movie… “Papers!” What was it? Oh! That’s right! EVERY World War 2 movie ever made! It’s a return to 1940’s Germany! How is this OK, when people were so angry about racial profiling?


(Slow exhale.) If only we could recall the inscription on the Statue of Liberty...
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."
Seems like lately we've tried to amend that with the disclaimer "unless you have brown skin." We whine about the anti-American sentiment abroad, yet we become increasingly intolerant, racist and xenophobic.

Why can’t we just let them come here and work, legally? Make it easier for those who want it, to get citizenship, resident status, or at least work visas. If they're legal and in the system, paying taxes with the rest of us, what's the problem? They don’t speak English? That is true, unlike all our ancestors who came through Ellis Island. Wait…

Of course, the crazy thing is, we may not want to get rid of illegal immigrants at all... No one wants to step back and look at the danger this kind of hysteria could cause. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying that the existing laws are often ignored for a reason. If the big companies that use illegal labor were forced to use legal labor, they would have to pay minimum wage. Way more than they pay the immigrants (who won't complain because they don't want to be deported). Paying more for labor means charging more for the products they produce. Let's look at a big one. Food. Many of the illegal immigrants are migrant workers, harvesting food and processing meat (recent INS raids at the meat plant in Cache Valley). Do we really want the price of food going up in this economy?

So, now Arizona has become a big target. So big that people forget how many illegal aliens float into Florida, or stow-away into coastal port cities. It helps people ignore the fact that the US/Canadian border is much longer than our border with Mexico. Do they honestly think that criminals and terrorists don't know that? Or is it more likely, that while the focus is on the south, they'll use the north? Fact is, we're a big country. We have thousands of miles of border. We can only do so much. The most successful example of what many in this country are now calling for was the Berlin Wall. It wasn't popular either, and it didn't last...

Make it easier to be here legally, and the flow of illegal immigrants dramatically decreases. This makes it harder for the cartels, terrorists, etc. to blend in with the crowd. It means the resources we employ along the borders are more likely to catch criminals, than decent people trying to make a better life for their families.

Finally (yes, I know I'm long-winded) I would just encourage us all to give this some serious thought. Don't get swept up in the hype that is all emotion, with little understanding. If we forward provocative emails, jump on emotional bandwagons, etc. people could easily think we're just racist. The reason this whole issue seems scary, is because fear is the prime emotion that get's people moving. That's why Rush, Hannity, Beck, and the other hate-mongers make millions of dollars! They offer no solutions, they simply breed fear, anger, hate and contention.

Side note: Personally I don't get Glenn Beck. At the very least I find him, in particular, ironic. So many Mormons fawn all over Glenn Beck. They just love him. These same Mormons spend a lot of time talking about how "fear is the opposite of hope," and how Satan is the "father of contention," and how hate and contention are bad. Are they really that blind? I don't get it... K, back to my post.

To conclude, I think nothing but good can come from a little more thought before rash actions. Of course we all (OK, maybe not the atheists) want God to "Bless America," but do we really believe that He can only bless us by not blessing other nations? Can't He bless all nations? If we don't want Him to bless the cruel and corrupt, can we really expect Him to bless our country when the leadership is corrupt, the populace divided, and those most in need are overlooked?

As for me? I’m with tiny Tim. “God bless us, every one.”

My Epiphany:

Yes, I know I posted this in my main blog, but I feel so strongly, I had to post it here too.


A few weeks ago, we read an article at work to help us better understand common elements of any corporate culture that hinder inter-departmental cooperation. The result was literally life-changing for me. It went well beyond my job, and touched on many levels of my life. It rings true with many thoughts and feelings I have had over the years. I had struggled with the concepts, and thought about it at length, but never been able to explain it, or compile it into a logical argument. This article did. It is a remarkably complete, clear, summary of those thoughts and feelings.

I was so moved by the article, that I took a copy home for my wife. Even though I am fortunate to have a job that provides me with a good deal of knowledge and growth, rarely is something so universally applicable that I bring it home. She read it, and though I can't say she was affected to the extent I was, I do know it made a lot of sense to her. She refers to it in her August 13, 2009 blog post.

(http://meemersworld.blogspot.com/)

I am speaking of the timeless advice C.S. Lewis gave students at King's College, University of London in 1944. This speech is known as "The Inner Ring," and is every bit as applicable today as it was when he originally delivered it. I hope you will take a few moments to read it. Here is a link where you can read it without ads and other distractions:

http://www.geocities.com/bigcslewisfan/

I can only say I wish I had read this (and had been mature enough to get it) in Junior High! It would have made life in Jr. High so much easier, and High School that much less frustrating. I would have found more peace and contentment in the years between then and now too. I hope to teach my boys understand the basic concepts now and help them understand the ideas as much as I can. I strongly believe that this will help them have more meaningful teenage years, and be more prepared for college, careers, and young families starting out in life.

So give it a read. You may already know it. You may think I'm late to the party. I do think it will help you share the ideas with others, and help you teach the principles to those you care about. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts too.

this is not your father's america.

recent headlines have riled me up, so here's a quick gripe about something that has been bothering me for a while...

spin. perception vs. reality.

big current example? the artfully (if completely inappropriately) named "patriot act." if you don't give up basic american freedoms, you're unpatriotic!

politicians are masters of using words to hide or deflect unpleasant truths. sometimes, the new semantics are used to justify illegal actions. here is my "top ten" list of current favorites, and their appalling true meanings:

10- national security letter = subpoena for personal records (bank, email, phone, medical, whatever) with no judicial oversight
9- terrorism threat advisory scale = convenient distraction from government actions at key moments
8- coalition of the willing = co-conspirators
7- liberation force = invading army
6- detainee = prisoner of war
5- combatant status review = deny "detainees" right to trial, allows them to be held without charges
4- military tribunal act = geneva convention rights don't apply to "detainees"
3- black sites = secret cia prisons in countries where human rights are not guaranteed by law
2- enhanced interrogation methods = torture
1- economic stimulus = election year bribe

don't get me wrong. i am very patriotic. i love this country, and feel that it is a choice and rare land of freedoms. my fear is that it can't remain so if we continue to permit a corrupt government to repeal freedoms, commit war crimes, and bankrupt the economy for their own profit.

america will reduce its dependence on foreign oil!

we don't have a choice! when the oil is gone, so will our dependence!

last night on pbs there was an interesting aha moment. you know the little spots they run for corporations who helped sponsor the program you just watched? this one was from exxon/mobile. or as most people think, the richest incarnation of satan yet.

the whole thing was one employee saying the most exciting project of his whole career is his current one. developing new lithium ion battery technology. to most people, this would seem to be nothing more than a pr stunt. you know, like big tobacco ad's for their quit smoking website, or any oil company showing their commitment to wind or solar. this one struck me different.

having just read some finance articles online about exxon/mobile's investments. the article mentioned how even with people crying for blood in the wake of record high gas prices and record high oil company profits, they aren't putting capital into increased oil production or refining capacities. they're not funding exploration to find new oil deposits. they're investing in a broad and diverse stock portfolio. why? so they can continue to fleece the public? no. they diversify for the same reason they are researching battery technology.

there is no more oil to be found. at least nothing worth the cost of finding and extracting. they are investing in their future. they are finding a way to exist when the oil runs dry! impossible, you say? if you haven't heard of "peak oil," you will. google it. it is scary, and it will so drastically change our society, and our lives, that our grandkids will marvel at our stories of gasoline engines the way we marveled at how grandpa rode a horse to school!

in a nutshell, "peak oil" means that global production of oil (extraction and delivery to market) has peaked, or will peak within 10 years. that means, the number of barrels produced each day will never be higher, and will likely begin to decline. the big catch is, global demand is increasing more and more each year. as china fights to follow the development of korea and japan, an entirely new demand for oil will raise that global demand even faster!

don't believe it? think it's bunk? remember the mid 70's when there was a gas shortage to the extent that there were long lines at the pumps, and many places were forced to ration it? most any site you find by googling "peak oil" will have a graph showing that that is when u.s. oil production peaked. the national demand continued to grow, even while production fell. so why do we still drive gas powered cars with mileage not much better than the 70's? we began to import more oil than we produced. the gap has steadily widened ever since.


gas prices jump almost daily. the only defense is "supply and demand." why doesn't opec increase production? just because they like the prices high? come on! they know the higher the price, the more people will scream for alternatives. the more people will resent and try to free themselves from oil dependency. a billion $140 barrels is $140 billion. 1.5 billion $100 barrels is $150 billion. if they can make as much by increasing production as they can by increasing price, why opt for the high price that puts them in risk of losing their customers?

they can't increase production. or at the very least, the can't sustain it. the higher their production, the faster they run dry and lose all the wealth and power they have accumulated!

how big a deal is it? how high can gas prices really go? gas prices could easily top $10/gallon by 2020. it's a big deal, because gas prices are only the most obvious indicator of the problem. is the economy really hurting that bad because the national average is now over $4/gal? no. it's that, combined with inflation like no one has seen in decades. everything costs more. everything. higher fuel costs mean higher transportation costs. as people shift from oil to natural gas or electricity, those costs go up, so our utilities go up, while production costs on most everything we buy goes up.

unfortunately, that's only one side of it. apart from energy, we are only now starting to hear about how much oil we use without realizing it. plastic. plastic is made from petroleum. think about how much plastic you see around you. that includes a lot of the synthetic fibers in our clothing. (polyester) don't just think of the plastic products, think of all the plastic packaging. think about styrofoam. think of all the "disposable" plastic items. remember that empty water bottle, or plastic fork, or grocery bag it just oil that we throw in the garbage!


and of course the news lately if full of riots and panic as food prices begin to rise dramatically. apart from the oil used to power the tractors and equipment, most of the fertilizers and pesticides are made from petroleum! who knew? i know i was surprised by that one. food, is also one area, where part of the oil "cure" is actually killing us! e85 ethanol. it takes almost as much energy to produce as we get out of it. (think petroleum fertilizer, and machinery). plus, it's not only corn we can't eat, but it's farmland that used to grow wheat! (think sky-high wheat prices).

the real problem is, we started late. we let rich, powerful oil companies and automakers dig us into a hole, when we should have been finding alternative solutions 30 years ago! hybrids are a bandaid. electric vehicles need electricity that has to come from somewhere. hydrogen can't be purchased at the local 7-11. all of the most promising solutions, are suffering from lack of infrastructure. vital infrastructure that will take decades to put in place. decades that will cost us dearly!

how do you choose a candidate?

what kind of citizen are you? are you too lazy and/or apathetic to vote? (thanks for nothing! show up, or shut up!) if you do vote, what influences you the most?

do you choose the candidate who best:
• represents your social concerns?
• shares your core values?
• exemplifies leadership?
• protects you financially?
• keeps our country safe?
• maintains our individual freedoms?
• cares for the environment?
• helps minorities?
• deals with our global position and perception?
• meets several of the above?

be honest. do you research your choice? and no, campaign ads don't count. (really, you shouldn't count tv news channels either.) are you actively involved, or are you more passive?

do you choose the candidate who:
• is the most attractive?
• speaks the most eloquently?
• is more entertaining?
• is your gender/race/religion?
• has the best tv ads?
• is from your state?
• cheers for your sports team?

don't laugh! you know there are people who would never admit it, but if they looked hard, would find only one (or more) of these "reasons" behind their choice. but that's not the worst! the scary fact is, many, many people vote based on something far less substantial:

do you vote for the candidate who:
• represents your political party?

if this is you, your only excuse is if you are neither republican nor democrat. if you vote for any of the "third party" candidates, i'm letting you off the hook. (though i hope at least some of the reasons from my first list apply!) likewise, if you vote for a democrat or a republican because of anything on the first list, you're forgiven. otherwise, what's the point?

you're perpetuating one of the biggest problems in our nation. the "two-party" system. you've joined the gang warfare mentality. you happily vote for who "they" tell you to. way to be free!

and don't give me the "the party represents me" crap! they don't represent you. they use you! the only thing they want from you (aside from you money) is your vote, and the only thing they'll ever give you is a victory or a list of reasons to hate/fear the other party.

you know how they choose their candidates right? the person who best represents the party platform. right. in your dreams! they choose the person who has the best chance of beating the other party. period. if you were guaranteed to beat the other party's candidate, you would absolutely get the nomination. ok, nothing's guaranteed. they may not choose you if: you're a gay, environmental, abortion doctor (republican) or the outspoken evangelical ceo of a giant corporation (democrat)

to wrap up, let me plead with you to seriously consider all the candidates, not just two. chances are, you'll find a third party candidate who fits your "list one" criteria at least as well as the republican/democrat. plus they won't have to vote with the party on anything. (because third parties don't get them elected, the people do.)

finally, if you were going to base your vote solely on list two or three, then don't! pick a third party and "throw away" your vote that way. until enough people do, we are stuck with our current quagmire. stop saying it will never happen, (even though you wish it would) vote for it to happen, and encourage others to do the same!

political correction

has anyone had the time to get a sum total of what all presidential candidates spend during an election? or even just during the primaries. i haven't made the time, because i know the amount would appall me more than what i already imagine. you always see articles about how much hillary got at a fundraiser, or how many millions mitt spent in a given state. the numbers are astronomical, and grow every year. does anyone else wonder what other, better purposes that money could serve? plus this just perpetuates our system of government where your chances of being elected is determined most by how much you can raise and spend on a campaign. (which in turn perpetuates our flawed "two party system.")

what if, instead of the various much-talked-about yet never enacted "campaign reforms," all candidates, regardless of party or name recognition, were given an equal number of print ads, and tv and radio spots in each state, and were barred from purchasing more. what if all candidates were thusly equalled, and the only benefit to be gained from fundraising was to show how much your campaign was donating to charity, or sponsoring programs that the government no longer will? sure, establish a set of constitutional standards, so these equal shares of advertising aren't wasted on some nut-job who just want his fifteen minutes. just let the money be used for something useful, or at least less corrupt than buying political favors, which is all making large campaign donations is. this would also let the voters of all fifty states learn about all the candidates. since i don't live in iowa or new hampshire, i don't hear a near as much. worse still, i'm in utah, which is so notoriously republican that neither party wants to "waste" their money on advertising here.

long term, let's work for some meaningful, helpful campaign reform. short term, let's just vote for a third party candidate!

democrat vs. republican

are you a democrat?
are you a republican?

if you answered yes to either question, my question to you is: why?

the problem with this country is that most people don't realize that there are other options. we are told, and we believe that when we vote for a third party candidate, we are throwing our vote away. rarely will anyone other than a democrat or a republican take office. the result is a government that no longer represents the people at all.

democracy? we talk about it, but we don't practice it. we push it on others, yet we have never technically been one. we're not even a republic anymore. we have become an empire that changes focus every 2-4 years. we are hated and feared by much of the world. sure, we have wealth, power, and freedoms that other people can only dream of, but compared with other "advanced" societies, we work longer hours, with far less vacation time, and pay far more for lesser healthcare. why?

the reality is gang warfare. look at the bulk of the ads, or listen to any politician discussing any topic. they will likely say more about how their party differs from the other, than the real issue. republicans are in power to fight the democrats at every step of the way. and democrats are in power to only to fight the republicans. regardless of the issue, each party will attach the other party's views far more than define their own views.

the sad result? nothing worthwhile gets accomplished because on principle, the two parties in power can't agree on anything. to agree with the other party is to destroy your own party's foundation. instead of progress, we get endless debates, finger-pointing, and mudslinging. instead of solutions, one party tells us what we want, and that the other party is preventing them from giving it to us.

as for representation, does anyone really believe that our elected officials represent us, or our values, beliefs, desires, and needs? apart from representing their party, they represent those who fund their party. democrats listen to the liberal media, and special interest groups. republicans listen to big business, and the super-rich. power swings from one party to the other, because neither party effectively represents the vast majority of americans, so every election or two we collectively get fed up with the status quo, and decide to give the other party a shot.

here is the root of the problem: neither party listens to the voice of the people. yet we continue to vote their candidates into office because they tell us no other party can get a candidate elected. they are only right, because we refuse to do anything about it. we don't want to support a loser, or even a long-shot. so instead of choosing a candidate who listens to us, and creates a platform that represents us, we align ourselves with the party who's agenda we agree with more. it's backwards! we vote for "the lesser of two evils," instead of looking outside the two parties for a candidate we agree with. as long as we vote like cattle, or sheep, or lemmings, these parties will continue to treat us accordingly.