The SoapBoxers

What a week for political news! First, Senator Santorum drops from the Presidential Race, citing the illness of his little Bella (she has Trisomy 18) and has been very sick lately. This is the most honorable reason, that I can think of, for someone to drop out of a political race.

As a comparison, most candidates drop out due to lack of funds, a scandal or inability to compete. I think that Santorum bowing out now, for this reason, should be respected. Anyone who supported Senator Santorum should be proud. He brought many issues to light that may not have seen discussion if it had not been for Santorum. However, Santorum supporters must recognize it is time to move on. I’ve seen/read quite a few bitter Santorum supporters who are not reviewing the remainder of the field to support the GOP. Folks, I know it’s only been a few days, but we’ve got to move on. When T-Paw dropped out after the Iowa Straw Poll, it took me MONTHS to decide on another candidate. But I did. There’s no point in holding a flame for a candidate who is no longer in the race. If we want to defeat Obama this year, we’ve got to suck it up and move on. It’s how politics works.

Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen

And speaking how politics works, I would like to encourage the left to keep talking. Last night, Hilary Rosen (a Democratic strategist) stated that Ann Romney “hasn’t worked a day in her life.” Really? Really. Ann Romney, a stay at home mother of 5 boys, who has MS and fought Cancer, “hasn’t worked a day in her life.” As a work at home mom of 3 boys (and one boy on the way), I think the only appropriate punishment for Rosen is to have to clean every ball pit in the world. Then maybe she’d understand just how hard mothers work.

It seems the Democrats are attempting some damage control. Michelle Obama (herself) tweeted “Every mother works hard, and every woman deserves to be respected.” The best thing the Left could do is put as much space between themselves and Rosen right now. But if they distanced themselves from every member of the Liberal Left that said something stupid, we’d stop hearing from Biden, Maher etc. I suppose that wouldn’t be a bad thing.

It seems the real war on women has been exposed. I thought the whole women’s lib movement was for women to be able to make their own choices. Yes, I have a 4 year degree, but I CHOOSE to work from home (gasp). And yes, I do work.

Thank you, Hilary Rosen. Thank you for bringing the GOP together. I encourage all of the working women (those who have children and those who have not been blessed with children yet) to back the GOP. Let’s show the left just how hard we do work.

Romney is the inevitable GOP nominee

As we get into April and many primaries become winner take all, it’s going to be easier for Mitt Romney to put distance between himself and Rick Santorum.  The carrot for Santorum is the fact that the month of May could hold some big wins for him – including Texas – but he might be in too big of a hole by them.  Currently, Romney leads 655 to 278.  He’s expected to win decisively in Connecticut, Delaware, New York, and Rhode Island. 

There’s also the key battle in the Keystone State on the 24th.  If Romney wins Santorum’s home state of Pennsylvania, it’s going to be hard to hold out much hope for Santorum.  Honestly, at this point, it’s a question of whether Romney can get to 1144 delegates.  Santorum doesn’t really have a shot at 1144, but if Romney can’t reach the number, a brokered convention could decide the nomination – incentive for Romney to keep the pedal to the metal.

Is Santorum focusing more on 2016 than 2012 at this point?  That’s a definite possibility.  His harsh anti-Romney rhetoric scores points with his own fans, but comments such as the one comparing Romney to Obama can only serve to hurt Romney in the general election.  A candidate in a primary really has two goals.  The first goal is to ensure that their party wins in the general election.  The second goal – a lesser goal, in my mind – is to get themselves elected to be the standard bearer for the party.  Is Rick Santorum handing votes to Barack Obama every day that he stays in the Republican race?  Probably.

The other candidates in the GOP field have really fallen to the side and at this point are really just serving as a spoiler for Santorum.

Billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who has funneled millions of dollars into the Gingrich campaign through Gingrich’s SuperPAC, is putting his checkbook back in his pocket.  At some point, you stop throwing good money after bad.  With his campaign in the red, Gingrich has begun charging $50 per pose for photo ops with supporters.  Yes, $50 for a photo with a guy who finished third in the 2012 Republican primary.  I think Gingrich has the whole concept of “buying votes” a bit backward. 

Is Ron Paul being cheated?

And then there’s Ron Paul.  Paul’s campaign really sheds light on the fact that there are two dimensions to a candidate’s popularity.  The first is the size of the following, and the second is the intensity of their support for the candidate.  Paul is off the charts in terms of average intensity.  The only problem is that all votes count the same – a fervent supporter’s vote doesn’t count any more than a tepid supporters.  A vote is a vote.

Rumors of a third party run are swirling again, but I really don’t see how this is a viable option.  How, exactly, would Paul get enough votes to be viable in the general election?  He’s running fourth in the Republican field, and it’s not likely that he would peel off many liberal votes from the Obama camp.

I’ve also seen some folks in the tinfoil hat brigade allege vote fixing in the primary, pointing to “huge” Ron Paul crowds and saying this with such huge crowds, his vote counts should be higher than the official tallies – so someone must be fixing the numbers.

Recent “evidence” of this is a recent Paul rally in Los Angeles.  His supporters show images of a packed house and allege that there were 10,000 in attendance.  Well, the facility in question (UCLA’s tennis center) has a max capacity of 6,000.  Even if the 10,000 number is accurate, look at this number in context.  The LA metro area has about 12.8 million people.  That would mean that one out of every 1280 people in the LA metro showed up to the event.

Fervent supporters, Paul has.  He just doesn’t have enough of the “grunt” variety who quietly cast votes.

Is Obamacare constitutional?

Barack Obama signing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act at the White House.

The federal mandate to buy health insurance is the very heart of Obamacare.  This is interesting because people keep saying that health care is a right.  Maybe so, but this law doesn’t mandate health care, it mandates health insurance.  This is a big issue for me.  I don’t HAVE to buy auto insurance unless I want to license my vehicle.  That’s a far cry from saying I’m going to buy auto insurance or face a tax/penalty or whatever.

There is an argument that people abuse the Emergency Rooms and clinics and they don’t have healthcare coverage.  I agree; that is most certainly true.  Yes, we’re all paying for it and that isn’t fair…I agree with that too.  This however isn’t the answer; if we enact a government health care plan we’re all still paying for it!  How stupid is that?

I would propose a program for unpaid health care bills similar to the way unpaid child support is handled.  If someone isn’t paying their bills or they aren’t on a payment plan they get put on a list.  This list then causes any tax rebates/refunds to be held for payment.  This list should also keep someone from obtaining a driver’s license unless they are acting in good faith by establishing and staying current on a payment plan for their health care costs.  This (of course) would have to be driven by the states and not the Federal government or we’ll end up in the courts again.

If the courts decide that we can’t be forced to buy health care insurance, what will happen?  I’ve heard that the mandate is the only thing that made this work financially.  The law of large numbers is the key to making insurance work.  If Obamacare accepts everyone but only a small group of people apply for it (like the uninsurable) the cost of the care will not be affordable or it will be subsidized by the government making the entire purpose of the law moot.  How will the government cover those costs?  Raise taxes?  Cut or limit the coverage?  This is what traditional health insurers have had to do to cover costs and no one is happy with that.

Presidential Race

We’re into April, and still we don’t know for sure who the Republican nominee will be.  The rule changes made by the Republican National Committee to force all pre-April caucuses and primaries to use proportional delegate allocation (as opposed to winner take all) is playing a part in this.  With a winner take all contest, a relatively small win can shower a candidate with a large number of delegates.  When delegates are awarded on a proportional basis, a small win becomes just a small difference in the number of delegates awarded – making the race to 1144 delegates much longer.

SuperPACs are also playing a big role.  Romney definitely isn’t hurting for money, and Santorum and Gingrich each have had a billionaire in their pocket (Sheldon Adelson for Gingrich and Foster Friess for Santorum).  Under the new rules, these two heavyweights have been able to funnel millions in cash to their candidates through SuperPACS – and it’s 100% legal.  The SuperPACs have allowed candidates to remain active in the race even without broad-based support from the electorate.  If you can have a buddy write a $1 million check, that’s just as effective as getting twenty thousand people to contribute fifty bucks.

Romney or Santorum—we just need to choose. Seriously, how long can this indecision be stretched out?  Tell me this will be decided by convention time.  It’s time to rally behind one Republican candidate and focus on the true task at hand – ensuring that Barack Obama is a one term president.

Communism Talk

North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, and China – they’re all bad, they have terrible leaders and we shouldn’t be supporting them in any way.  We need to make sure that we’re revoking any funding and not lending any aid.  If they want it they need to play by the rules.  If they don’t play by the rules and agreements they get nothing.  What is North Korea doing testing ICBMs that could reach the US?  Now is the time to be tough.  Clearly Bill needs to screw around with Monica again, get Hillary really mad and then send her to Pyongyang to dismantle Kim Jong-un’s newly acquired government.  Can you imagine a more intense strike force?  I’m not sure that Seal Team 6 could survive a wife scorned twice by the Slick Willie.

Zimmerman vs. Martin

I have to make a follow up comment to my original piece on the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin situation.  NBC released an apology for editing the 911 call from Zimmerman that made him sound like a racist.  If you’re one of the people that have been calling for George Zimmerman’s head on a platter you need to read my original blog and this story in the Washington Post.

Again, it is not your duty to judge based on the limited and biased information you’ve been fed by the media.  Just wait until all the information comes out.  The Grand Jury hasn’t even convened on this so don’t rush to judgment.

The Pendulum Swings

Romney

Santorum

Romney

Santorum

Gingrich

Romney

Santorum

North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Russia and China.

Obamacare is constitutional, Obamacare is unconstitutional, Obamacare is constitutional, Obamacare is unconstitutional….now we wait for the Supreme Court.

Why is there so much up and down lately?  Everything is back and forth, ebb and flow, left then right.  This is frustrating for me because I really try to make quick and informed decisions.  When I see this pendulum swinging each direction so frequently I don’t understand why.

Squeaky…
 

With the case of Florida vs. Department of Health and Human Services, the circus came to Washington this week in and outside of the Supreme Court. Now that the arguments are over we will sit back and debate over things ad nausea until the opinion of the court is released, which is not expected until sometime in June. It basically will come down to how Justice Kennedy will decide upon the issue of the individual mandate. It is going to be a 5-4 decision either way, and I am really unsure at this point how things will fall in the end.

On one hand you had Kennedy discussing an analogy of burial insurance on the arguments over the individual mandate. Would you go up to a young person and say that you are going to die one day so you must buy this burial insurance policy from me to cover your expenses. Now I liked this analogy, at least in the fact that it was original, unlike that partisan hack Justice Scalia and his talking points handed broccoli analogy. Then on the other hand, later in his talks Kennedy talked about maybe healthcare being different.

Like I said at this point I have no idea how his vote is going to sway. I do know though that depending on how the majority opinion gets worded and whether they go all Bush v. Gore and state that this cannot be used in any other case, it is going to have a profound effect on many things if it is a 5-4 decision striking down the individual mandate.

Like I said it all depends on how the opinion comes out, but after decades of trying to do so, the Republicans have backed into a way of getting rid of Social Security and Medicare. Based on the Justices’ line of thinking on those obviously voting to get rid of the mandate both Social Security and Medicare can be deemed unconstitutional. What gives the government the right to come to me as a young worker and say you must put side this money for later on in life for you and to pay those older workers currently receiving the benefits of this if I choose not to. Hey I’m young I can do that later, if I really want to. Hell even the Republicans tired old private accounts argument would be unconstitutional. So you are going to force me to put my money into the market? What gives you the right? Then the same applies on to Medicare as well. What gives the Government the right to force me to put money forth for older people’s medical coverage now and mine in the future if I really don’t want to? Under the argument set forth in the Justices’ line of questioning this rational would be the same for these as well.

Another effect that a ruling that strikes down the law would have is disturbing as well. If you don’t like something the opposition party writes into law, have it brought to the court to strike down. Say Mittens or Santorum by some evil joke of God wins the election. A state with liberal control will just bring its argument against the law before the court. It’s a long shot in any circumstance to succeed, but right now it’s a 4-4 split of hard conservative to moderate liberal on the Supreme Court. Then with Kennedy and is usual swing vote there is a shot you can get things done and with this precedent set try and try again will constantly be the partisan fight from now on to get rid of whatever is passed that you don’t like.

Maybe Gingrich is right. Did I just say those words; I am throwing up in my mouth just a little. Anyways, I have been thinking this all day in hearing the arguments on what the Justices felt on different parts of the law if the individual mandate was struck down. We really do need to just arrest these partisan Judges from legislating from the bench. Your job in my opinion is over with you striking down the individual mandate, you don’t have the authority on which legislation is worthy to be kept or not, or what can be salvaged for cost reasons. That is Congress’ job, not the Judicial branch’s

job.

Tragic

That is the word I would use to describe the death of Trayvon Martin. It’s a loss for his family that I can’t even begin to understand. I think about losing one of my children to a death like this and it infuriates me. It makes me think how much I would want revenge. How much I would want to take George Zimmerman and clean the floor with him. Unfortunately, we’re seeing this reaction from people without any skin in the game and without any knowledge of what happened.

At this point in the investigation very little has been “officially” released to the media. We know that George Zimmerman, a 27 year old 5’9” 200 pound man, shot and killed a 17 year old man who was 6’3” and 150 pounds. We’ve heard some of the 911 call. Almost everything else has been rumor and innuendo. The only people that should be having a meltdown right now is the family of this young man. I can understand vigils, but marches and demonstrations are not what we need.

Now, the Black Panthers have gotten involved which is probably the least healthy aspect of this. They’ve offered a $10,000 bounty for George Zimmerman. They have alleged that Zimmerman (who is ½ white and ½ Hispanic) shot Martin because of racial tension – yet that has not been released by the police or prosecutor’s office. Meanwhile, I’ve seen two different news reports that indicate witnesses have reported seeing Zimmerman on the ground being beaten by Martin. Martin allegedly tried to get Zimmerman’s gun, a struggle ensued and that is when Martin was shot.

Someone from the police department leaked that Zimmerman had lost Martin while following him and had started to walk back to his vehicle. Martin allegedly then approached Zimmerman and either attacked him from behind or confronted him and began hitting him.

The police have “officially” reported that Zimmerman’s injuries and other physical evidence was consistent with what Zimmerman told police although they didn’t elaborate on what that version was. The police have turned over their evidence to the prosecutors. I’ve read that the FBI is also looking in to this situation for another independent review. The grand jury is ready to review the information on April 10th.

I have seen marches, demonstrations and candle light vigils for Trayvon Martin. All the usual celebrities have made their way into the spot light (Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc). I ask this though, “Who are we to judge either man with the little bit of information we have?” People have already condemned and crucified Zimmerman. This hasn’t gone to trial and we don’t even have all the information from that night or the autopsy.

While I’m on my soapbox, shame on the media. I’ve seen nothing but pictures of Trayvon that look like he’s 11 or 12 years old. He was 17. Are you telling me there are no pictures of him taken in the last 5 or 6 years? Obviously there are, but pictures of children killed by grown men stir up more emotions than pictures of men killing men. No one is talking about Trayvon’s current 10 day suspension for marijuana use. This may or may not be relevant. What if he was high when this happened? Don’t you think it could impact his judgment? Does it make you mad that I brought up his marijuana use? Think of how it must make others feel when people say that this was racially motivated? It’s likely a similar feeling.

The police had a hard job to do. The prosecutor’s office has an equally hard job to do and the Grand Jury is going to feel like they’re in hell. The last thing they need is the distractions of a bounty for Zimmerman and the Black Panthers saying an eye for an eye and a life for a life. (Watch this video because Zimmerman will never rest easy again)

I don’t know where this story will end, there is a lot of evidence they need to consider. The injuries to each person should be very telling. It’s possible that they will confirm no charges will be filed against Zimmerman. If that happens, what will the consequences be? From the current look of things, we will see riots, civil unrest and likely violence on a wide spread scale. The Black Panthers in the previous video have promised to hunt down Zimmerman and bring him to justice on their own. The demonstrations will without a doubt grow and become more unruly than we saw with the growing demonstrations from the Occupy movements.

I hope that whatever happens, the family of Trayvon Martin can eventually find peace. If it is decided that Zimmerman was acting in self-defense I hope he can find peace and safety as well. I pray that the different groups currently protesting will be satisfied with the outcome of the investigation either way. If Zimmerman is arrested, tried and found guilty…let the court determine his punishment. If Zimmerman is exonerated, I pray that they will accept his legal defense and move on from this.

Squeaky…

Talking TO my generation

I realize I’m in my early 30’s so some may see me on the cusp of the generation I speak of, but I have to make my voice heard. Social media makes it easy to speak, and while I’m a big defender of the first amendment, I believe social media has allowed speaking one’s mind to become way too easy.

I meet so many people who meet with me after I address a crowd, whether it be a GOP event, a rally or even a school board meeting, and they say they “could never speak in public” because it’s their biggest fear. And then they tweet.

Isn’t that exactly what twitter is? Public speaking without the face to face crowd? Think about it. Say you have 500 followers. Every time you tweet something, up to 500 people could be reading it. If it gets a re-tweet? Your words, your statement, just went to all of your followers, followers.

Facebook is the same thing. Say you have 500 friends. Everytime you post an update, up to 500 people could be reading it.

So why is that different than public speaking? Is it because you’re not physically in front of all 500? Your words carry just as much weight (if not more) on social media because, with the restriction of characters, it really can’t be taken out of context like a public speech can be. With your words already put into text, it makes it a lot easier to copy/paste.

If you want to be taken seriously, use correct spelling. If you write like a moron, I will think you’re a moron, it’s as simple as that. You could be writing the most brilliant, thoughtful tweet or facebook update ever…but if u rite it liek thes…I won’t read it. And if it was important enough for you to take time to write it, you must want others to read it, correct? Then take the time to make it readable.

Unless you’re yelling something, DO NOT USE ALL CAPS. I READ IT AS IF YOU’RE YELLING AT ME, EVEN IF YOU’RE NOT. And you just read that as if I were yelling at you, didn’t you?

I’m tired of the arguement “It’s MY Facebook/Twitter wall…” because, well, that’s just a false statement. Do you pay for Facebook or twitter? No. And if you are, you’re getting hosed. Therefore, you don’t own “your” wall. If Facebook or Twitter wanted to suspend your account, they can. And they will. And then you’ll realize while you’ve been held accountable for your words, you no longer have the medium you seemed to think was “yours”.

Come on, guys. We’ve got a great tool in our hands. Social media IS a tool. Think before you tweet/post/update “Is this something that I’d actually SAY in front of 500 people?” If your answer is “no”, please hit delete. 

If you think I’m overreacting, I’m not. Anything you tweet is being archived in the Library of Congress. No, really.  Think of it this way, in 300 years, my great-great-great-great grandchild might want to do a history report on me. Do I really want them to see that on March 22, 2012 I tweeted the size/shape/color of a bowel movement? No. And no one in the present day wants to know either.

Don’t let this tool make a tool out of you. Stop and think. Is this something I would approach a podium and announce?

That being said, feel free to follow me on twitter @bowmama.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’re probably well aware that last week Rush Limbaugh called a Georgetown law student a “slut” and demanded that she post videos of herself having sex because she (according to Rush) wanted the government to pay for her birth control. There’s just so much wrong with this statement it might be hard to tackle it in one article, but I’m going to give it the old college try.

As the story goes, Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown Law student, testified in front of congress in late February in support of President Obama’s proposed mandate that insurance companies be required to offer women’s contraceptives like any other covered medication. She argued that birth control for women can cost as much as $1000 a year and low cost/free clinics could not help in many cases. In her testimony she stated her friend has a medical condition, polycistic ovary syndrome, and birth control pills are prescribed by a doctor to treat that condition. Despite this fact, the insurance company got in between her friend and her friend’s doctor (you know, that very thing Republicans argued Obama care would do? Yeah, it’s already being done by insurance companies). In response to this, Rush Limbaugh said,

What does it say about the college coed Susan Fluke [sic], who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex.

Later that day Limbaugh also said the following:

Can you imagine if you’re her parents how proud of Sandra Fluke you would be? Your daughter goes up to a congressional hearing conducted by the Botox-filled Nancy Pelosi and testifies she’s having so much sex she can’t afford her own birth control pills and she agrees that Obama should provide them, or the Pope.

Furthermore, on March 1st (a few days later) he continued on this same subject and said,

So, Ms. Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here’s the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it, and I’ll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.

My first thought is that if Mr. Limbaugh thinks he has a right to watch videos of women who want birth control covered by their health insurance companies having sex, then I want videos of Rush Limbaugh in agonizing pain because his health insurance company paid for his extreme doses of oxycontin. I’m just following his line of logic, shouldn’t be a big deal to him, right? Also, Rush really is showing his ignorance if he thinks you need to take more birth control pills the more sex you have. I guess he’s just too used to popping his narcotics from dozens of different prescriptions he got from his housekeeper when he has issues, so he figures throwing more pills at something should help get rid of the problem faster or better.

Ms. Fluke’s testimony was a response by Democrats in response to Republicans inviting an all-male, all-conservative panel to discuss the requirement that health insurance companies provide contraceptives in the same fashion as other drugs. If the democrats really wanted to balance out a panel of 10 conservative males discussing contraceptives, they could have called Ellen DeGeneres, Rose O’Donnell, and Iceland Prime Minister Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir to discuss Viagra and prostate health issues. Again, it’s along the same lines of logic, just taken to the opposite extreme.

I’m actually not quite sure why the big conservative religions are so uptight about this issue. It’s pretty widely known that the Catholic church (still) opposes the use of contraceptives, ironic considering 98% of Catholic women use or have used birth control. You’d think they would want to make sure their own people were following their views before trying to actually speak out vehemently about them. I guess it’s along the lines of Republicans being so outspoken against homosexuality when so many of them are caught having or soliciting gay sex.

I’d like to end on a note of linking this issue with another current event, the Republican Candidates. The response of the current 4 candidates has been tepid, at best, with Ron Paul being the most honest – he said Limbaugh is most concerned with his fiscal bottom line.  Yet any candidate not named Ron Paul is completely willing to keep railing about how we need to attack Iran, despite the fact that wars in the Middle East tend to be unpopular and cost the lives of thousands of young Americans and simply throw more fuel on the fire of terrorism. What does it say about a man who’s willing to start a war that will have nearly zero repercussions for him, but he’s unwilling to stand up to Rush Limbaugh? Do we really want someone like that for president?

Today is Super Tuesday, and the four leading Republican candidates are fighting for delegates.  Mitt Romney is favored in some states, Rick Santorum in others, Gingrich expects to win in Georgia (he represented the state in congress), and Paul might even have a shot in one state (North Dakota).

Then we come to Virginia.  Only two candidates are on the ballot there – Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.  It’s expected that Romney will win convincingly.  If Santorum and/or Gingrich were on the ballot, it might be a different story.

Critics of Virginia’s primary rules call them onerous.  Signatures must be collected be residents of the state (no out-of-state staffers), ten thousand valid signatures must be collected, and there must be four hundred signatures from each district.

Rick Santorum failed to get ten thousand raw signatures, so his case to get on the ballot is a non-starter.

Gingrich apparently fell short after some signatures were declared invalid.  It has been mentioned that in previous elections, the validity of the signatures was never checked – anyone who turned in ten thousand signatures got on the ballot.  While that’s interest, there’s not logical reason why such a bad practice should be continued.  If the rules say ten thousand valid signatures, then it only makes sense that the validity of the signatures be checked.

The final hurdle to jump through is to ensure that you have four hundred signatures from each of the eleven congressional districts.  The “problem” this year was that there was redistricting due to the results of the 2010 census – and that the requirement referred to the new districts, which were non-existent when the signature-gathering began.  However, this isn’t the first time that redistricting has occurred – district boundaries change after every census.  There are a few relatively straightforward ways to mitigate this requirement.

Signature Gathering Tips:

Gather signatures in every reasonably sized city in the state.  While redistricting might shift a few cities around, all of the new districts are going to have at least a few decent sized cities.

Do extra credit extra.  Don’t stop when you’ve hit 401 signatures from each district.  If you far exceed the required numbers, you’ll less likely to get the number knocked below the threshold when invalid signatures are tossed.

If your state is reducing the number of districts, there’s a really easy solution.  Focus your efforts on the physical center of each district.  While the  borders are going to shift a bit, the physical center of most districts should remain somewhere within the district (barring outright right gerrymandering).  Situations where a state gains districts is more difficult, as the new district might be a combination of the fringes of several old districts.

Are the requirements to get on the ballot onerous?  There are eight million residents of Virginia.  Ten thousand signatures means that one in 800 residents of the state signed your petition.  Each congressional districts contains about 700,000 people … meaning that the requirement of four hundred signatures from each district would necessitate signatures from one out of ever 1500 people in a particular congressional district.

If you can’t reach such a minimal level of support, maybe you’re not ready for prime time.  It’s true it’s hard to get people to turn out to vote in primaries, but it’s the candidate’s responsibility to energize the supporters!

And here’s the final reason why I am not concerned with Virginia’s rules.  The primaries are not a government election, but a party election.  Let the parties decide how they want to choose the candidates, and let the parties decide what’s necessary to get onto the ballot.  Don’t like how they do it?  Get into a leadership position and change it – or form your own party.

Is it finally time to start drilling in ANWR to offset the high price of gas for our cars?

Well, it’s that time again. Price of gas is climbing, the summer driving peak is approaching and the refineries will be adjusting their mixes. Every year we see prices rise in the spring and every time we hit a spike in price, a number of users start looking for ways to save money on gas.

Now we have Iran throwing a tantrum over their economic sanctions so they’re cutting oil shipments to Europe (Brits and French). While that may not sound significant, it still tightens the oil market and has impacted prices. The Saudi’s could increase production to offset this reduction by Iran but only time will tell if they do this.

This being an election year, it only stands to reason that the debate will once again come up over drilling, especially in ANWR (Arctic National Wildlife Refuge). This is not a new debate, it’s one that has been on and off again since the late 1970’s. It’s been a consistent battle of: left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative and house vs. senate.

Once the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) was put into use in 1977, there has been a liberal push to protect Alaska’s natural habitat. Numerous bills have been passed into law protecting one area or another. Every few years someone on the conservative side has introduced a bill to allow drilling in Alaska (in ANWR). However, every time a bill is introduced, the democratically controlled House or Senate has defeated it or it has been vetoed by the democratic president.

• The sides were pretty well set from the start. I believe that the battle grew in the intensity in 1986 when the US Fish and Wildlife Service recommended that a large area in ANWR should be used for oil and gas development. The document noted that the economy needed the oil while those opposed to drilling noted that this development could threaten the caribou that live in the ANWR region.

• In 1996, the Republicans controlled by the House and Senate. They approved a bill to allow drilling in ANWR but President Clinton vetoed the bill.

• In 2000 the House passed another bill to allow drilling in ANWR but in 2002 the Senate defeated it.

• In 2005 the Senate passed a bill to allow drilling in ANWR but included it in a budget resolution. The House removed the drilling feature after House democrats refused to pass the budget with the drilling addition.

• In another 2005 showdown, democratic senators filibustered a defense appropriations bill that included a drilling provision.

Perhaps one the fiercest stances against drilling for oil offshore has been made by President Bill Clinton. In 1998 he signed a 10 year extension to a drilling ban to protect the US coastlines. This still allowed the drilling of the southern US which was already well established. I remember like it was yesterday President Clinton saying that drilling today won’t make a difference for nearly 10 years. He argued that making the change at that time wouldn’t fix the problems they had then. I kept thinking to myself; why not worry about 5-10 years down the road too? Why is he being so short sighted and just thinking about today?

It appears that Clinton’s thinking has come around after gaining a few more years of wisdom. In 2011, Bill Clinton told attendees of the IHS CERAWeek conference that delaying offshore permits at a time when the economy is still building is “ridiculous”. Furthermore, Presidents Clinton and Bush (George W) agreed on many aspects of oil and gas issues.

Today we are again faced with skyrocketing gas prices. AAA reports the national average for regular grade gasoline is $3.731 (2/29/2012) with the price one year ago listed as $3.375. The prices are climbing very early this year and we need to wonder where the price will peak. Better yet, we need find a solution to this and quit putting it off.

The “greenies” have pushed electric cars. Great thinking! I’m happy to see you’re looking for a solution. Right now though, electric cars suck. We can’t depend on that today just like we can’t wind technology (today). Those are potentially great long term solutions, but why limit ourselves to those two alternatives? We see that electric cars still need to run on gas, so we know that we’re going to need it for years to come. Thinking that electric cars are ready today is naïve and basing our decisions on the idea that electric cars will solve our problems is reckless.

If we open drilling today, it obviously won’t fix the problem today but it will help in a few years. Should we continue with this direction thinking that it won’t provide immediate relief? Continue thinking that we MAY harm the caribou if we move forward? Should we stake our economy and livelihood on that? Of course not, and that is why we see Bill Clinton’s thinking changing. He sees what is happening in the world. There is no green “silver bullet”. Wind and electric cars are not going to end these problems right now. It is going to take years to develop that technology and we have to still worry about the interim. If it takes 50 years to get electric cars & wind turbines developed to a standard that will actually work effectively for us, how are we going to manage the next 50 years? We need to drill. We need to use that drilling profit to fund additional research. We can’t scream carbon footprint and abandon fossil fuels entirely overnight.

We need to use some common sense. We need to plan for tomorrow so we don’t fail. We have to stop sending all of our money to manufacturer’s in China and oil moguls in the Middle East. Where is the pride? Where is the dominance? Where is the self-sufficiency that we need to re-establish?

Drilling and fossil fuels are not popular among the liberal crowd. Despite its lack of popularity, we are dependent and we need to address this. We need some long-term common sense solutions. People need to stop deciding everything based on their hearts and consider the logical business reasons too. This is not something that we can just go cold turkey on.

Squeaky…

Now that Rick Santorum won his trifecta of Colorado, Minnesota and a non-binding primary in Missouri, the race for the Republican nomination stays heated up and unsettled. However there is one thing that has seemed to return to the forefront, the so-called culture wars. My question is did they really leave? Sure, the Republicans tried to focus on the economy, but without offering any real plans they have returned to their bread and butter, forcing their views upon society. A big government intrusion into your life that they fully support and agree with. The “return of the culture wars might have been brought to the forefront by recent actions with healthcare access and the rise of Santorum in the race, but they have been there the whole time.

After taking over many statehouses this past election cycle on changing the economy, what was the first action of the legislatures in each of these states? Was it something to create jobs or balance budgets? No it was not. It was creating personhood amendments to their constitution to make life defined at conception.

Then you have issues like the recent proposals in Virginia that require anyone seeking to get an abortion to have a medically unneccessary transvaginal ultrasound without the womans consent and against any dissent from her own doctor. Yes Virginia, your state really wants to rape you! Granted now that the national spotlight has shined down on him and more importantly his ambitions to be a Vice Presidential candidate, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell has said the law should be amended to require consent. However it does not appear that the GOP in the legislature will consider such an amendment as the Senate has already has said no to such amendment. Going as far to say they would rather not pass the bill than require consent in it. Also there is no word if McDonnell and the GOP would retake up old measures they had in the past of require the investigation of a woman’s moral views and sexual history before an abortion. In the end though if they want to take up this I really do think they should take the other medically unneccessary exam that has been proposed for men. In order to get a Viagra prescription, men must undergo an involuntary rectal prostate exam and cardiac stress test. It brings gender equality into the stupidity and after all if God intended for you to have an erection, wouldn’t you have one without medicinal help?

Then you have the same bill from Virginia now being introduced in committee in Illinois. However, the anti-abortion Democrat (pretty much in name only) has decided that women must be animals or something. The committee he brought the bill before is the Agriculture committee. Mainly because of the conservative makeup of that committee, but I think it is a huge statement on what conservatives really think of women and their issues. It has passed that committee, but will thankfully will likely fail going forward from here.

It’s not just probing vaginas and abortion that the conservatives are getting all fired up for. Now birth control, something an overwhelming number of people in the country use or support is now under attack as well. Granted I get the issues the Catholic Church had with a mandate causing them to pay for something they did not believe in, but with the valid compromise that issue is a moot point. Not to them and conservatives and their new champion Rick Santorum that is 100% opposed to all birth control. It should not be allowed for anyone to have is what they are now clamoring. Now if I was a Jehovah’s witness and I don’t believe in blood transfusions as a matter of principle under my religion, should I deny any of my employees coverage for such healthcare as a matter of my own religious principle? With what the “We are all Catholics now” crowd is shouting at the moment that should be exactly the case.

Then you have a couple of pieces of legislation in my own new state of Tennessee. First you have one law being touted as the “Right to Bully” law which redefines the anti-bullying statute of schools to protect people from it being enforced if the bullying resulted from their own religious or political beliefs. Mainly if you hate gay people because your religion tells you so, then you are free to bully the crap out of them without fear of punishment for your actions. However it can be taken many ways, I have a deep down political hatred of Republicans, so if my kid took up my views and bullied some conservatives kid then heck he is rightfully free to do so under their new proposed law. The other piece of legislation to note here is a “Don’t Say Gay” bill, which prohibits teachers from teaching about the existence of gay people in K-8. Granted I really don’t know of much that is ever taught in those grades about homosexuality before this law, but I doubt it was even a blip. However with the new law it prohibits the teacher from any discussion about any material inconsistent with natural human reproduction, so you can’t even talk about gay people. Afterall in conservative world they do not exist, they are just all evil fornicating demons.

Speaking of things that do not exist, Santorum’s recent remarks on things have brought back things he has said in the past. He has had some missteps in discussing the theology of Obama. Back in 2008 Santorum said that there is no such thing as a liberal Christian. That the two do not exist together, as you can’t pick and choose which doctrines you choose to follow. So being a liberal and a Christian are not two things that can go together. Well Rick isn’t that what you do on a regular basis? Don’t you yourself pick and choose what parts of scripture you abide by and which you choose not to pretend exist. I am sure I have seen some picture of Santorum with a pork product in his hand and aiming towards his mouth.

As the figment of Rick’s imagination I must be, in being a liberal Christian myself. I take big offense to things like this that Rick and the “real” Christians like his spew out. I can have my own beliefs without thinking I need to force them upon others. Rick, if you actually followed those biblical passages I “pick and choose” the nation would be a much better place. As clearly one of my favorite passages such as Matthew 25 clearly have absolutely no value to a “real” Christian and the conservative movement.