Horton Could Teach Us Something

If you don't know me, and maybe even if you do, you should know that Horton Hears a Who! is one of my all time favorite children's stories. I loved that book growing up and was excited when I found out it was going to be made into a full length film. Back then I was only excited because I was getting to watch one of my favorite stories on a movie screen. I was watching that movie today on my iPod at work and discovered another reason to love that story even more. It's relevant to what's happening in America today. Let me explain.

In the story Horton, an elephant, discovers a small world on a speck of dust. He then makes it his mission to protect that speck of dust and will risk everything, eventually including even his life, to protect that community. Meanwhile the Mayor of Who-ville is noticing that things aren't quite right and consults with one of his trusted friends who says their world could be destroyed if they cannot find a "safer, more stable" home. The mayor, and his friend are the only ones in town who believe this. The city council believes things should go in another direction and do everything they can to show that the mayor is crazy and is not to be believed and that everything is "just fine". They even do things during the movie to distract the citizens of Who-ville everytime the mayor tries to bring it up.

In Horton's world the local "authority", the Sour Kangaroo, is trying to discredit Horton as strange and unstable. The population of the Jungle of Nool not wanting things to be disturbed go along with their "government". During one scene the following dialogue is spoken:

Sour Kangaroo: "Are we going to let troublemakers like Horton poison the minds of our children? When Horton tells our children about worlds beyond the jungle he makes them question authority, which leads to defiance, which leads to anarchy!"

The crowd: "We have to do something....for the children! FOR THE CHILDREN!!"

Eventually things begin to happen, such as snowing in summer, strange earthquakes and unusual winds and the citizens wake up and understand that the mayor was right. Once the citizens know the truth they stand up against the government that is telling them something else. The citizens voices are finally heard and both creatures trying to bring the truth to the population are vindicated and the civilization survives.

If that's not a perfect parallel to what's going on today, I don't know what is.
We have a government trying to force legislation through many times attached to education bills and other laws to protect the children. We have them doing things to distract us like dealing with a birth certificate or giving us cash for clunkers or global warming. Things that in the grand scheme of things are stupid or irrelevant, or a waste of time and money. They're setting things up to get us dependent on the government.

We have people trying to get the truth to people. Great Americans like Glenn Beck, or Sarah Palin, or Ben Stein, or Sean Hannity. The people's voice is slowly being heard and things like healthcare are falling apart because it's not what the people really want. The government is trying to do things before the citizens have a chance to react.

Authority is meant to be questioned. Not to defy them, but to know the truth. Never take anyone at their word. Trust them, but do what you can to learn the truth. Questioning authority does not lead to defiance or anarchy. It leads to understanding and the truth.

When the citizens voices' are heard, the government has no choice but to listen. When the citizen's voices are heard, their world can be saved.

President Obama Pledges to be Champion to Gays

America was a country founded on Christian principles. President Obama campaigned as a Christian man wanting to be the leader of a country of Christians. America is not a Christian nation, we are a nation of Christians.

Because of that many of our laws are based in Christianity. The Bible says, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." (Leviticus 18:22)

If you hold that the Old Testemant no longer applies because of the coming and sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ, the New Testemant offers its words as well:

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders....will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 4:1)

God did not created homosexuals, though they like to champion that argument despite the fact that many do not believe in God. Homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God, as well as many men and women.

While it is a sin, homosexual men and women should be protected from discrimination. You wouldn't keep a man who committed adultry from a job based on that fact alone, neither should you refuse a homosexual man a job.

This agenda is being forced down the throats of the American people day after day. The media portrays this as a natural thing and something that should be seen as normal.

President Obama said, during a White House meeting with gay leaders, that "I want you to know: You have our support. I will not only be your friend, I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a president who fights with you and for you."

He continued, "I know many in this room don't believe that progress has come fast enough. And I understand that," Obama said. But he added: "I expect and hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I've made, but by promises that my administration keeps."

While I do not hold anything against a person for being homosexual, I hate the sin, and love the sinner, I do not expect my President to be a champion for a cause he claims to be against by labeling himself as a Christian.

Should homosexuals be afforded the same rights as other people? In most cases yes, but not in all. They want to change the definition of marriage, the definition of a word that has been unchanged for thousands of years. I cannot, and will not stand by that. If they are affored the benefits of marriage then the slide down the slippery slope begins. The next thing to go is the man who wants 6 wives, then the man who's in love with a horse, then the man who loves children.

I am glad that I live in a nation of Christians. A nation that is open to the idea of loving their fellow man. The founding of this great country was based on Christian principles, but none of our laws require you to be a member of that religion. That is the beauty of the country. We love everyone, everyone is welcome to practice what they believe, but you must adhere to the laws of the country or you must suffer the consequences under the law.

We also have a Republic that respects the right of the individual. Too often, though, the case has been that unless you are a member of a special interest group, or a minority your opinion is invalid. That is not something that can stand in this country. We are ruled by a government of the people, by the people and for the people. The only problem now is that the people are the ones being left out of that equation.

Thank you!!

While the resolution passed in the House of Representatives and moves on to the Senate, I want to say thank you to the 212 members of the House of Representatives that voted no on H.R.2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, or better known as Cap & Trade. This bill would amount to the largest tax increase on businesses in U.S. history.

Congress is essentially using the environment to place taxes on the amount of carbon emissions that are produced by businesses in the United States. The science of global warming is not fact, the debate should still be going on.

I'm not going to get into the debate right now over whether global warming is man made, or a natural cycle (my opinion), but I do want to thank the men and women who stood up against this horrendous tax increase, especially the ones who represent the State of Oklahoma.

They are Representatives Dan Boren (D), Frank Lucas (R), Tom Cole (R), Mary Fallin (R). Those men and women show that it's not about the letter after your name. It's about whether the issue is right or wrong. I will be sending a letter to each of the Representatives in my state and I encourage you to do the same.

Supreme Court Overturns Sotomayor Case Against New Haven FireFighters

In a move that should have come as no surprise, but may have been to some, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the New Haven Fire Fighters in their discrimination case against the city. Initially, judge Sonia Sotomayor ruled in favor of the city saying they were justified in throwing out the test scores of 17 white and 1 hispanic firefighter on the grounds they weren't qualified for promotion. The city threw those scores out because there were not enough minority candidates that scored high enough on the test for promotion.

The 18 firefighters sued the city for discrimination and lost. They appealed to the Supreme Court and the decision was overturned essentially meaning those men were right and they should have been considered for promotion. I agree whole heartedly with that decision. You cannot refuse someone promotion based on their race or ethnic background, which the City of New Haven had done.

The one point that really stuck out to me in the Supreme Court's decision was the dissenting opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg:

"The white firefighters who scored high on New Haven's promotional exams understandably attract the court's sympathy," she said. "But they had no vested right to promotion."

Essentially she is saying the men, even though they performed all the necessary requirements for promotion did not have the right to be promoted. How in the world can that opinion be justified? I would assume, and rightly so, that if I were going for a promotion in my job and was given a list of requirements that if I performed all the necessary items on the list that I would be given the promotion that I deserved. If I am the most qualified candidate, which these men were, I should be given the job that I seek.

The Equal Opportunity Employment Act and the Civil Rights Act were established during a time when people were not given the proper opportunites and they were created to help advance those abilities. If the only people applying for a job are white then the best candidate for the job should be given the job. If there are candidates from multiple ethnic groups the best candidate should be given the job regardless of their color.

I think the box on applications regarding race should be removed completely. It's not necessary in today's society to know the race of a person because it should not be a factor in the decision. Those acts mentioned above were necessary at one point in our history, which is regrettable, but they are outdated and too often used as a crutch to further a person's agenda. They are used to give minorities an edge they no longer need, or quite frankly deserve. You aren't better for a job because you're a certain ethnic group. You're better for a job because your qualifications say you are, not the color of your skin.

Discrimination is Not Okay

Today, President Obama will announce his selection for the replacement of Supreme Court Justice David Souter. By all accounts it will be 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
If you look into her background you'll find someone who became interested in the law after watching Perry Mason as a child. She's a child of Puerto Rican immigrants who lived with her mother in a Bronx housing project after her father died when she was 8. She eventually worked her way up through Yale Law School. She worked hard to get where she's at.
She was appointed as a federal district judge by President George H.W. Bush in 1992 and appointed to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals by President Clinton. She's been appointed to courts by members from both political parties.
That's where her appeal ends. In a ruling earlier this year she held up a New Haven, CT City Council decision to reject 18 firefighters for promotion on the basis they were white. The City cited the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as the basis for their decision. 128 people took the tests for promotion, 27 of them black. The 18 people that passed the tests were all white, or hispanic so the City decided not to promote anyone.
The men took their case to court citing reverse discrimation, but lost. Ms. Sotomayor was one of the judges who upheld the decision, essentially making it okay to discriminate against qualified candidates because they are white.

She has also been quoted saying, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life."

To me, this means she thinks that a minority has a better life experience and makes them more qualified than a white man. I don't believe this could be any further from the truth. Being a white, man does not make you superior. It does not make you inferior. It makes you a white man, who's had many different life experiences, much like a Latina woman. Comments like this, make me fear that there could be more appointees like this from President Obama. He has said he wants justices who feel empathy when they make rulings. I want justices who feel the law when they make rulings.

I urge everyone to let their representatives know they do not approve of this woman being on the Supreme Court. Discrimination is not okay. It does not matter what color you are. Lady Justice is blindfolded for a reason. Politics, race, sex don't matter when you're dealing with the law. We all want a color blind society. The only way to have that is to not allow people who discriminate to make laws in this country.

Why The Hate?

I find it amazing in this country that people find it okay to ignore facts that they themselves present or to flat out attack someone because they disagree with their point of view. Yesterday I read an article in the New York Times about a conservative talk show host that is gaining popularity. It was a positive article about someone who has called out the NYT many times, but theyfelt that this person was worth mentioning. I’m going to leave out the name of the person as it really has no bearing on what I’m talking about. I’ve taken a few of the comments from the article and posted them here. After each you’ll get my comments on what the commenter is saying.

I am appalled and frightened by ******'s comment to the effect that God and religion are under attack. No one is attacking religion. Our president himself is a religious person. Yes, religion is less apparent in American politics today -- and American atheists are thrilled that we are no longer having offensive rhetoric shoved down our throats. Yet religion is certainly not "under attack" in America. Such comments are dangerously alarmist.
P.S. The man's statement about FEMA concentration camps is even more disturbing. Who says such things except deluded, senseless, paranoid individuals? He should seriously look into psychiatric help if he believes that the American government would do such a thing to its people.
Charlotte, Kiev

While, I agree that religion is coming under attack in this country I’m going to focus on the comment about FEMA Concentration camps and how the American government would never let such a thing happen to their own people.
There were at least 10 known concentration camps for Japanese Americans in the United States during WW2, all of which had populations in the thousands. Those camps existed on US soil under the watch of the US government. Now, if that happened then, during one of the country's most trying times, why wouldn’t it happen again?


Though competition over at Fox News is fierce, **** has to be the dumbest person on that channel. He has been ranting like a lunatic for months now about how "this has been tried (the bailouts) in the Weimar Republic, and they wound up having to bring wheelbarrows of money to the store to buy bread! It's been tried, it never works! The result is always the same!" and on and on and on.
Of course, the collapse of the currency during the Weimar Republic had not the slightest thing to do with government bailouts - the Germans were printing money as fast as they could to meet their reparations payments under the Versailles Treaty.***** is an ignorant, uninformed maniac - he'll be a hit on Fox for years.
Mike, New York

The first paragraph is simply an attack on the man. The next paragraph is interesting. The US government is currently printing money in an effort to bailout the economy of the country. He says that the Germans were printing money as fast as they could to meet their reparation payments. How is that any different that what the US is doing now? Are we not printing money as fast as we can in effort to pay companies so they can “stay afloat?” While the situations are different, and the reasons for printing money is different both have resulted in a government printing money as fast as they could in an effort to pay for something.


Putting the principles of our Founding Fathers and the Constitution aside for a moment, has anyone realized that the world is a bit more complex then it was in 1780?—
jt, Wilton, CT

Putting the principals of the founding fathers aside would defeat the purpose of them creating the documents and the government that they did. They created the documents they did because of their principles. It was for that reason they felt the government of England was acting against the best wishes of the colonies.
They used their principles in an effort to break away from a government they felt was oppressive. You cannot cast aside someone’s principals when talking about the actions they performed. The world is a bit more complex than it was in 1780 which is exactly why you should stick to your principles. There are more things that can be used to attack a country today than there were in the 1700’s.


Another Republicriminal neo-con shill dispensing lies and slander to the gullible, brain dead American people. Whey American tolerates a right wing media propaganda network run by a foreigner is beyond me. Revoke the honorary citizenship that Reagan and his GOP crime cronies bestowed on Murdoch, break the Fox Propaganda Network into community oriented, public access stations and cable channels, and send Dr. Goebbels and company back to the land down under to ply their fascist agenda.
Ignatz Farquad, New York, NY

Again, a blatant attack on a group of people. The commenter also wants to silence a free citizen because he is not from this country and destroy the livelihood that Mr. Murdoch created in this country and likens him to one of the most notorious propagandist’s in Nazi Germany. I did not find a single piece of evidence in this comment to help people make a decision, except for attacks on a person. That’s definitely a class act.
The beauty of America is that everyone has access to all the information about a subject they could want. All they have to do is put in a little effort to find it. Then they can make a perfectly informed decision themselves. They don’t have to “rely” on someone giving it them. You should never take a person’s word as truth, unless that man is Jesus. You should always use it as a basis to begin your research, but find the facts yourself so you can make up your own mind.
Do not ever attack a person because they don’t believe what you do. If you feel they’ve been misinformed help them find the information that you used to make your decision and let them decide for themselves. If they feel the information is flawed then they need to do a bit more research themselves to find all the facts.


Given the choice between become more like a raional socialist European country (which is what ***** is fighting?) or becoming a ultra conservative religious nation like Middle Eastern countries I would much rather move towards the European model.What Fox News wants, and apparently *****, is that America become a fascist religious nation like Saudi Arabia only with Christianity instead of Islam. I think people need to actually think abotu what these guys are advocating.
WillT26, San Francisco

I think this one speaks for itself. This person would rather rely on the government to provide for their needs rather than rely on their own strength. That’s what socialist countries are all about. The Soviet Union failed because people relied on the government. Once capitalism was introduced the country began to flourish. The same happened in Japan, Germany, and Italy.
No country should tell another person what religion they should follow. That should be an individual choice and should not be forced upon someone. That’s part of the reason people fled to this country from England. They did not believe they should be told by the government what to do. Christianity was the basis of the founding documents of this country and a true Biblical approach to life does not force Christianity on a person. People do not go around anymore saying if you don’t become a Christian I will kill you. I would tell you that person is not a true Christian at all. Christianity is about free will and individual freedom.
Muslim countries limit women’s rights, what entertainment and media a person can listen to, and what religions can be allowed in the country. They are not given choice in how they make their decisions. This country has news and entertainment from every viewpoint you could imagine.
No one is truly silenced.

Are We Racist?

I recently read an article on FOX News that former Law & Order star Angie Harmon is having to defend herself against claims of racism because she disagrees with Barack Obama’s current direction as President.

"Here's my problem with this, I'm just going to come out and say it. If I have anything to say against Obama it's not because I'm a racist, it's because I don't like what he's doing as President and anybody should be able to feel that way, but what I find now is that if you say anything against him you're called a racist.” She goes on to say, "But it has nothing to do with it, I don’t care what color he is. I’m just not crazy about what he's doing and I heard all about this, and he’s gonna do that and change and change, so okay …”

I have to agree with her here. The left is using the fact that the man is of dark skinned descent to further their claims that Conservatives in America are racist. For the most part, that couldn’t be further from the truth. The general public will tell you they don’t disagree with the color of his skin, but of the policies he is putting forth. It could be that people are uncomfortable with him being a socialist rather than black.

I’ll give you a few examples. The recent news that the CEO of General Motors has been “asked” to step down by President Obama is one example. If he doesn’t GM cannot continue to get money from the administration in order to stay in business. This shouldn’t have happened for a number of reasons, but we won’t discuss them all here. The government has no business telling a company who can and can’t be in charge of their business, even if the government is “invested” in that company because that shouldn’t have happened to begin with. That’s bordering on unconstitutionality.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has requested the power to seize other firms besides banks in order to help with financial distress of firms such as large insurance companies, hedge funds, and investment firms. The Obama administration got a taste of the power they have with the auto industry and banks by investing in them and bringing them under government control. They now want to extend that power with these other firms. This is similar to a vampire. Once you start feeding you can’t stop or you die.

Those are just two quick examples of socialist practices already in play in this administration there are more, but that’s not really what this article is about. It’s claims that you are a racist if you disagree with President Obama because he’s black. Well, lets see what the definition of racism is.

Racism – noun

A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial difference produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
Racial prejudice or discrimination.

Both of these definitions of the word suppose that you are saying that his race tells you that he is wrong. Well, I don’t think race has been brought up in disagreements with him in the general population. Sure there are a few people that will say he’s wrong because he’s black. Look at the statement from Angie Harmon above. She doesn’t say I think he’s wrong because he’s black. She says, I don’t like what he’s doing as President.

A well thought out, intelligent argument against Barack Obama will tell you that his positions are leading towards more government control over parts of America and that once you begin to get power all you want is more. I believe that is where the disagreement with the man comes from. People don’t want the government controlling what they do. They want the government out of their hair as much as possible. The only people who want the government involved in their lives are the people looking for handouts, the ones who don’t want to work hard for their stuff. They want to know that the government will be there to give them what they need.

Racism stems from people not being given a “fair” shake because they’re a different color. It was a big problem in the 17 and 1800’s because people who were not white were not thought of as people. As time went on laws had to be created that gave people the same rights as everyone else no matter what the color of their skin was. In the beginning those laws were good and necessary though I believe they are less and less relevant as we go along.

People want a colorblind society. I do as well. The color of a person’s skin is not, and should not be an issue. You judge people on the words they speak, and on the actions they perform. Everyone is created by God with the same rights as the person next to them. There is no doubt about that. It’s in all of our founding documents.
Racism comes because people are hurt and even killed because of the color of their skin. They’re not given a job because of the color of their skin. If you truly want a colorblind society you have to remove these things from your thinking. They need to be taken off of applications for employment, education, and anything else that asks you what race you consider yourself. Until then people are always going to judge you by what you call yourself.
We need to remove labels such as African-American, Italian-America, Asian-American. What do all of those phrases have in common? They all label you as something before you’re an American. If you truly want to have a society where you are judged by the person you are you have to quit labeling yourself as something other than American. That’s what we all are, Americans. We’re not black, we’re not white, we’re not Asian. We’re people. We’re Americans.
If you disagree with a person you’re not a racist. You have a different viewpoint than them. It’s not wrong to have a different opinion from someone, especially in this country. It’s the beauty of America. People from all over the world can come here and live the life they want to live no matter what color they are, what religion they are.
I will continue to disagree with these positions of our President, and yes he is OUR president no matter what political party you belong to. If you’re an American he is your President. I will not however consider him wrong because he’s black. That would truly be Un-American.