With the impending fight to repeal cost of living allowances for state employees about to kickoff this Friday here in good ol’ Nevada, I’m being bombarded with sample letters to send to state representatives and leadership. I haven’t found one, however, that has contained the appropriate tone, and therefore, I decided to create a “choose your own letter” so that anyone struggling with just the right words for Governor Gibbons can strike just the right chord. Enjoy.
Governor Gibbons,
(Greetings / Hello there! / Rot in hell!) I am a humble teacher in the Clark County School District here in Southern Nevada, which by the time you read this will be the (fifth largest school district in the nation / fourth largest district in the nation / wait a minute, four students just walked into my class).
As you can tell by my (concerned / incendiary / vitriolic) tone, I am writing to you in response to your (short sighted / asinine / !@#$@#% stupid) attempt to repeal the four percent cost of living allowance that we, the (humble / pissed off) public servants of the state were scheduled to get. Now, Governor Gibbons, with (all due respect / a burning hatred that will endure the scorching heat of Hades), I’m not going to talk dollars and cents with you, because (I wouldn’t understand it / you wouldn’t understand it), but there has to be a better way, doesn’t there? I even voted for you, something that many people wouldn’t even own up to now.
I have to say your questionable decisions in the time that you’ve been in office have caused me to (question my decision / cry myself to sleep / flagellate myself with a whip Opus Dei style!) daily. I know that in your eyes educators are (noble in thought and deed / lazy nogoodniks) but your actions (are not consistent with your campaign promises to be education minded / make you look like a simpleton and an idiot).
On a personal note, I hope that your divorce proceedings are (going well / going poorly / giving you what you so richly deserve). Please give my regards to (your mistress / your ex-wife / your other mistress).
In closing, I would just like to say (please do the right thing and keep the COLAs we were promised / good luck getting re-elected / please don’t get drunk and beat any women in any parking garages). Seriously.
With (sincere regards for your political future / a hope that we will make it above the poverty line next year! / a burning rage that makes Naomi Campbell look like Mother Theresa.)
Your Name Here
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Happy Immigration Day!!!!
I found this article today on CNN's website. I don't necessarily frequent CNN.com because it is the greatest reporting, but it is an easy web address to remember, and it is pretty funny to see what passes for news nowadays. The other week, no kidding, Martha Stewart's dog dying was a top story. But I digress.
Anyways, I like to peruse the op-ed's of CNN correspondents (I have to say, I think they have fairly good representation from a variety of political ideologies. FAIRLY good, not great) and I came across one piece that I found myself mostly agreeing with.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/01/navarrette/index.html
For those too lazy to haz clik (click on the link, to my English speaking friends) it basically illustrates where demonstrators go wrong when they are trying to fight for more rights for illegal immigrants.
"I don't buy this argument that there was no racism or acrimony in the immigration debate until the protests started. Get real. Those things have been present in every immigration debate for more than 200 years. Of course, they were going to be part of this one.
That isn't to say that a lot of people don't see red when they see protesters do things like waving the Mexican flag. They do. As tactics go, that's a foolish one: demanding rights of one country while showing allegiance to another. It's bad manners -- and bad civics. "
Thank you! I finally figured out what bothered me about protests and marches for immigrant rights. I have to tell you, I'm a fairly level headed and moderate kind of guy. I lived in Mexico for 2 years for heavens sake! These protests were not supposed to bother me. But they did! And why? Because, gosh, we're in the U.S., and if you want more rights, don't talk about how great the place you came from is, talk about how much you love it here, and how much you'd like more of your people to have that opportunity.
Last time I checked we were a sovereign nation here, governed by the rule of law. I think we're allowed to determine what our policy towards immigration is, and just because we have an immigration policy, that doesn't mean we are racist. It's like we're your older brother to the north. Just because we don't want to let you in our room while we play Xbox and listen to Metallica, don't get mad at us. It's our room, and we decide when to let you in. We still love you though, and if you're cool with us, we'll let you come and play Halo 3 eventually.
It is just a simple fact, we cannot take in everyone. Logistically, it is impossible. But let's get this thing straightened out, let's get more immigrants legal, not with amnesty, but with a way to work towards legal citizenship while incurring some sort of penalty.
Another true story, as a missionary in Tijuana, we taught and baptized a really great guy, but when we came back to invite him to church the next week, his wife let us know that he was gone. We were dumbfounded. Where did he go? Well, he got baptized to help his chances to jump the border. And apparently, we were pretty good missionaries, because it worked. We didn't see him again for a few months. Why do I share this story? If you saw where this family lived, you wouldn't have blamed him one bit for trying to jump. However, I truly believe that jumping the border is not the solution for more than the short term. "Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses". Amen. Absolutely. But, as you consider the decision to leave Mexico, the question must be asked, where can you best serve your country. You are needed to fight another fight. The government of Mexico, not the U.S. is the real monster here. I think that one protestor got it right.
"Cesar (a protestor)...blasted the Mexican government for allowing this kind of inequity to occur. That is who the immigrants should be picketing with their marches, he said, instead of wasting their time demanding rights and privileges from the United States. It was time to go home, he said, and fight the battle for fairness, dignity, and economic justice where it might do some good -- on Mexican soil.(quotation added by me) "
(Just for good measure, google Mexico's southern border policy and you might just get some interesting hits.)
I don't know who you are Cesar, or what you're doing. Possibly waving an American flag in a country you love, while figuring out how you can help your fellow countrymen back home in your native land. All I can say, my man, is amen Cesar, amen.
Que dios les bendiga en la lucha de libertad.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
The time honored tradition of presidential pandering.
Pandering is a long and established tradition among political candidates. I am just a little young (thank heavens) to remember, but in a debate with fellow Democrat Gary Hart, Walter Mondale famously countered Hart's continual use of "new ideas" as his slogan with this quote:
"When I hear your new ideas, I'm reminded of that ad, 'Where's the beef?'"
Where's the beef. That's right, Mondale countered with a popular catch phrase from this Wendy's add campaign.
Who can forget Michael Dukakis' famous tank ride to assuage fears that he might not be strong enough militarily:
I don't know about you, but he looked about as comfortable in that tank as Elton John would be at a Scores nightclub. Now, these were some pretty good examples of good old fashioned baby kissing pandering, but this year, our current crop of presidential candidates have really taken it to a new level, as illustrated in this recent bit to promote WWE Monday Night Raw:
Holy mother of pearl! That just takes the cake! Now, I'm all for flag pins, embarrassing catch phrases, brazenly irrational declarations of war against Iran (thanks Hillary!), but I have to say, in 100,000 years, I never thought I would see the candidates, hoping to take the office of the most powerful person in the free world, on WWE Raw. Unbelievable. I'm reminded of the phrase "elitist" being bandied about as though it were a bad thing. Personally, I want my president so many times smarter than me it cannot be measured. I want a president that has been successful in just about everything that they do. I hope that they would have the saavy and business sense to be millionaires many times over. I want a president that has been toughened cultured, and refined.
And with all respect to wrestling fans (I've watched my share to be sure) I'd like my presidential candidate to steer clear from debacles like this, like, well, like Elton John steering clear of Scores.
"When I hear your new ideas, I'm reminded of that ad, 'Where's the beef?'"
Where's the beef. That's right, Mondale countered with a popular catch phrase from this Wendy's add campaign.
Who can forget Michael Dukakis' famous tank ride to assuage fears that he might not be strong enough militarily:
I don't know about you, but he looked about as comfortable in that tank as Elton John would be at a Scores nightclub. Now, these were some pretty good examples of good old fashioned baby kissing pandering, but this year, our current crop of presidential candidates have really taken it to a new level, as illustrated in this recent bit to promote WWE Monday Night Raw:
Holy mother of pearl! That just takes the cake! Now, I'm all for flag pins, embarrassing catch phrases, brazenly irrational declarations of war against Iran (thanks Hillary!), but I have to say, in 100,000 years, I never thought I would see the candidates, hoping to take the office of the most powerful person in the free world, on WWE Raw. Unbelievable. I'm reminded of the phrase "elitist" being bandied about as though it were a bad thing. Personally, I want my president so many times smarter than me it cannot be measured. I want a president that has been successful in just about everything that they do. I hope that they would have the saavy and business sense to be millionaires many times over. I want a president that has been toughened cultured, and refined.
And with all respect to wrestling fans (I've watched my share to be sure) I'd like my presidential candidate to steer clear from debacles like this, like, well, like Elton John steering clear of Scores.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Get ready for a political screwjob!
This is not as timely as it should have been. I actually wrote this, what, a month ago? Some of it may still have relevence. Some may not. Tell me what you think:
So, recently the political flavor of the week is the fact that neither Hilary nor Barack will achieve the delegate count necessary to get the presidential nomination. Of course, this makes votes from those wacky Michigan and Florida primaries crucial. That also means that somehow, someway, there’s going to be some brokered back room deal that is going to get us the democratic presidential nomination! Yay democracy!
I’m also not one of these huge media watchdogs, but it certainly would seem that rather than passive spectator, at least some media outlets are trying to influence rather than report on these happenings. These examples are pretty subtle, and maybe, just maybe I’m grasping for straws here, but hear me out. The first example comes from time.com:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1720264,00.html?xid=site-cnn-partner
Read with me the first paragraph.
It is looking increasingly likely that Democrats in Florida and Michigan are going to have a do-over of their primaries, so that their 366 delegates — who could be enough to tip the nomination one way or the other — can be seated at this summer's Democratic National Convention in Denver.
I suppose that one could surmise that the increasing pressures from these states to have their delegates seated at the democratic convention would warrant such a statement, but it certainly feels like the tone of this paragraph is to get the potential outraged onlooker used to the fact that a re-vote is going to happen, and that we should not only get used to it, but start considering how it might happen. A slightly more overt example can be found here at cnn.com:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/07/florida.michigan/index.html
Democrats agree that new voting is needed to determine convention delegates for Florida and Michigan, but they can't figure out how to pay for it.
Now, please, check the link so that you can determine for yourself whether or not I’m taking this out of context, but I have to tell you, this democrat doesn’t agree with that! This is just flat out speculation, being reported as fact, and not only that, it’s further trying to push this “re-vote is a foregone conclusion” angle. What the frick??? I personally applaud Howard Dean (not too often I can utter those words) in sticking to his guns at the peril of alienating Florida and Michigan. The consequences were set out for those states, they ignored those sanctions and went ahead, and as a teacher, I cannot tell you how loathe I am to perpetuate the growing idea that in this country, if you bitch, complain, or litigate enough you will get your way. Great example disgruntled Michegoneons and Floridians!!! I am disgusted with these primaries, but I have to say even taking it a step further, the Democratic nominating process is moronic.
But enough with the complaints, what do I propose that’s better? Well, Mister, I’ll tell you. 10 weeks. That’s what we need. 5 states per week, distributed according to relative electoral weight (although, if we’re at it, the Electoral College is a joke as well). So, we’ll say Texas would be paired with a few smaller states the first week, and California would be paired with a few smaller states, making the relative importance equal week to week. Winner takes ALL, none of this divvying up crap. If someone starts running away with momentum, people drop out, and we’re all happy. Every election year we’ll rotate the states so that New Hampshire ( New Hampshire people! What is even in New Hampshire???) doesn’t dictate the front runner status of candidates every year. This idea of our primaries is reified (second time I’ve used this word in a blog, check out my complaints on the Phoenix Suns being robbed of the NBA championship last year for a definition). We should change what sucks. I mean, once upon a time, people thought that slavery was a pretty good idea, but I think we can all pretty much agree that it wasn’t…
So, recently the political flavor of the week is the fact that neither Hilary nor Barack will achieve the delegate count necessary to get the presidential nomination. Of course, this makes votes from those wacky Michigan and Florida primaries crucial. That also means that somehow, someway, there’s going to be some brokered back room deal that is going to get us the democratic presidential nomination! Yay democracy!
I’m also not one of these huge media watchdogs, but it certainly would seem that rather than passive spectator, at least some media outlets are trying to influence rather than report on these happenings. These examples are pretty subtle, and maybe, just maybe I’m grasping for straws here, but hear me out. The first example comes from time.com:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1720264,00.html?xid=site-cnn-partner
Read with me the first paragraph.
It is looking increasingly likely that Democrats in Florida and Michigan are going to have a do-over of their primaries, so that their 366 delegates — who could be enough to tip the nomination one way or the other — can be seated at this summer's Democratic National Convention in Denver.
I suppose that one could surmise that the increasing pressures from these states to have their delegates seated at the democratic convention would warrant such a statement, but it certainly feels like the tone of this paragraph is to get the potential outraged onlooker used to the fact that a re-vote is going to happen, and that we should not only get used to it, but start considering how it might happen. A slightly more overt example can be found here at cnn.com:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/07/florida.michigan/index.html
Democrats agree that new voting is needed to determine convention delegates for Florida and Michigan, but they can't figure out how to pay for it.
Now, please, check the link so that you can determine for yourself whether or not I’m taking this out of context, but I have to tell you, this democrat doesn’t agree with that! This is just flat out speculation, being reported as fact, and not only that, it’s further trying to push this “re-vote is a foregone conclusion” angle. What the frick??? I personally applaud Howard Dean (not too often I can utter those words) in sticking to his guns at the peril of alienating Florida and Michigan. The consequences were set out for those states, they ignored those sanctions and went ahead, and as a teacher, I cannot tell you how loathe I am to perpetuate the growing idea that in this country, if you bitch, complain, or litigate enough you will get your way. Great example disgruntled Michegoneons and Floridians!!! I am disgusted with these primaries, but I have to say even taking it a step further, the Democratic nominating process is moronic.
But enough with the complaints, what do I propose that’s better? Well, Mister, I’ll tell you. 10 weeks. That’s what we need. 5 states per week, distributed according to relative electoral weight (although, if we’re at it, the Electoral College is a joke as well). So, we’ll say Texas would be paired with a few smaller states the first week, and California would be paired with a few smaller states, making the relative importance equal week to week. Winner takes ALL, none of this divvying up crap. If someone starts running away with momentum, people drop out, and we’re all happy. Every election year we’ll rotate the states so that New Hampshire ( New Hampshire people! What is even in New Hampshire???) doesn’t dictate the front runner status of candidates every year. This idea of our primaries is reified (second time I’ve used this word in a blog, check out my complaints on the Phoenix Suns being robbed of the NBA championship last year for a definition). We should change what sucks. I mean, once upon a time, people thought that slavery was a pretty good idea, but I think we can all pretty much agree that it wasn’t…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
