NRA- holes

So the NRA promised the American public that they would come up with meaningful solutions, and contributions to the discussion on gun control. These new ideas were well thought out, so much so, that the organization needed a week to put them together. So naturally some people thought that the NRA might, just might, add something of real substance to public discourse. Well as it turns out we should not have worried the NRA's message was the same old tired thing.
since I was a child I have heard the call from conservative groups, the NRA included about putting more guns in schools. Some schools even tried it, Columbine is a famous example, so even as most people gasped at this idea it isn't a new one. It would seem that for all their screaming about tyranny, the NRA is the group advocating far reaching government intrusion into our lives. You see to them, having armed guards in schools is preferable to responsible gun ownership. why prevent guns from falling into the hands of mentally ill people, just flood the country with more guns. Why address issues that lead people to commit acts of violence when you can attempt to address an armed gunman instead.
Oh but it doesn't end there, oh no. It seems that while guns don't kill people, movies and video games do. This argument is almost as old as I am. You see when you are an organization that represents gun makers, you can't even think about limiting what they can make or sell, so you vilify someone else. That's right, those of us who play video games and watch T.V. and movies, we are the problem.
This isn't even what pisses me off about this statement though, you see the NRA is supposed to say stupid shit like this. What pisses me off is that the news media is listening. Where the media had been talking about mental illness and it's intersection with gun laws in feeding mass shootings, now they have changed the dialogue to the topic of violence in video games and movies.
Come on people! The answer is not to become a third world nation, a state that sensors what it's citizens can watch, while surrounding them with armed men.

These colors don't run

Today in the House of Representatives a truly remarkable thing happened. The speaker John Boehnner brought a debt deal bill to the floor to be voted on, or at least that was what he planned to do. The bill called for a tax increase on income over a million dollars, and steep cuts to food stamps, meals on wheels, and other social spending. These types of spending cuts are what Republicans salivate over, but because of the tax increase, an increase on a tiny part of the population, Republicans in the house said they would not vote for it. So Boehnner took his bill and literally went home. There are some Washington insiders who are saying that House Republicans were going to vote against the bill because it would never pass the Senate. I don't buy this for an instant, House Republicans have voted on a number of bills that were similarly "symbolic." They have voted over 20 times to defund planned parenthood, and almost as many times to overturn the Affordable Care Act, so the idea that House Republicans are somehow wary of symbolic votes is not borne out by evidence. 
What it comes down to is this, Republicans don't want to see a single dime in new tax revenue until all social programs are severely cut. They want this so bad that even making a tiny concession is seen as un-patriotic and weak. 
This brings me to the title of my post. As I watched this fiasco unfold today, I was reminded of a scene in one of my favorite movies. In Talladega Nights  Will Ferrel's character Ricky Bobby has a confrontation with a new driver. The new driver has Ricky pinned down and threatens to break his arm if he will not say that he loves crepes. Ricky it should be noted does in fact love crepes, but refuses on principle to say so. Even after the new driver tells Ricky that he can say "I love really thin pancakes", and after his friend Cal tells him that concession is a good deal, Ricky refuses and his arm is broken. 
That is where the Republicans stand right now, even after getting a good compromise, they refuse to do anything, stubbornly standing on a principle that in light of what will happen if no deal is reached, is no principle at all.

More than one cause

The last thing a neglectful blog owner wants to come back writing about is a horrific school shooting. Like many of you I was stunned at what was reported The idea that a person would target children is so shocking it took me until now to even attempt to talk about it. 
I am not sure if what I have to say will be worded just right, or even if it will make any sense, I just know that I have to say something.
I have been open about my feelings on gun control in the past, and do not wish to repeat them here. The truth is, the easy legal access to large capacity weapons is only one of many issues that need to be talked about. One of these other issues that is getting more recognized in recent years is mental illness. Less than 1/3 of people who have a mental illness are receiving any treatment. Mental illness is protected under the American's with Disabilities Act, but these people are the most likely to be under served by programs that could help them. Many programs that help children do not help them once they turn 18. Most of the reason for this is that mental illness, and those who live with one, is still seen as a weakness of character. The negative stigma keeps people from seeking help for themselves or their children. Spending on treatment programs is not even close to keeping up with the need for them. 
I am under qualified to discuss this issue, so I will leave it to more informed minds. What I want to talk about is  something that is simple in concept, and costs nothing to implement. 
I want to talk about compassion. One thing that has been said about all of the shooters this year, is that they were "quiet", "loners", and people "left them alone".
Too often today people are kept at a distance, if they are different. This is what a propose, that we reach out to each other, that we realize that we are all part of the same human family. At a time when family relationships are lost because of political or social views, it might seem impossible to think that we can reach out to people we don't know. This is exactly what we need to do. We need to tell people that it is okay to ask for help, and we need to be there to give all the help that we can. As American's we often reach out in huge and impact full ways AFTER a tragedy, I propose that we reach out to each other BEFORE a tragedy. 
I am not naive  and  I second the view of the president, no law or set of laws can prevent all tragedy, but changing how we treat each other is bound to have a major impact. 
We can do better, we can pass better laws, and more importantly we can change how we treat each other. 

Drug testing welfare applicants

When people post those catchy graphics around face book that call for the drug testing of people who receive welfare it is often paired with a comment about how they, the poster, worked to earn that money for the person on welfare and so has a right to require that the jobless bum pee in a cup. No doubt these folks think that they are being clever, but after seeing this particular Internet meme at least forty times, I can assure them that they are not as clever as they think they are.
The first thing that needs to be done in relation to this issue is this: it is time to dispel some myths about how welfare works.
1. people on welfare don't work.
This was always a myth, though no doubt some people on welfare choose not to work, the vast majority of them do. In 1996 then president Bill Clinton signed into law portions of what Newt Gingrich called the "contract for America." This document  offered many suggestions on how government could work more efficiently and save money. President Clinton turned the welfare reforms written in this document into law.
This is how it works:
Any adult seeking welfare has to be working full time. If they are not working, they must spend 40 hrs a week looking for work, or in job training. There are a few, very specific, exceptions to this rule.
1. If the person seeking assistance has a disability that prevents them from working, they do not need to work.
2. If the person seeking assistance has a disability, or other type of condition that keeps them from working full time, they can work part time.
3. If the person seeking assistance is a single parent, they can work part time.
4. If that single parent has a child that is too young for day care, they do not have to work until the child/ren are old enough for day care.

One thing to remember is that if someone is earning only minimum wage they do not earn enough to provide for their families without some kind of assistance.

2. People on welfare are more likely to do drugs.
When Florida passed their drug testing of welfare applicants law, many in that state believed this to be the case. What they found was the opposite. After testing thousands of people, the state found that less than 4% of those tested tested positive. The national average for drug use is 9%
3. Drug testing will save the state money.
This is also untrue. Again using Florida as an example: the state spent thousands of dollars on drug tests that came back negative, and of course ended up paying for the applicants welfare needs.

I am not blind to the fact that many readers want to remain ignorant about the nature of welfare and those who apply for it. It is my humble hope however, that if I talk about this enough that something will get through. To that end I want to point out some demographic facts, and then move on to questions of morality.

The majority of welfare recipients are children.
The majority of veterans are on some form of welfare program.
Welfare programs allow disabled and elderly people to live interdependent lives.

If you consider yourself religious, or family oriented, your opposition to these programs is confusing.

No doubt some of you are thinking, "I just want to make sure I know where my tax dollars are being spent."
Fair enough, have you posted any Internet memes about seeking drug tests for members of Congress lately?

Why Paul Ryan is good for Obama

So, let's look at why Romney's choice of running mate is good for the Obama campaign.

Ryan gives the Democrats some  real red meat to chew on. No more of this attach on Romney's taxes, now he has made a stand, now there is something that we can call him on.  Before his VP pick supporters of Obama had to go into strange and , frankly, useless territory. They had to do that because Romney had made no attempt at taking a stand on any of the issues. He talked a good game about the economy, but has never come out with a plan for what, specifically, he would do. So now all of that super pac money, as well as new money that will be raised as a result of this particular VP pick, will go into ads that bring up real issues of substance.
Ryan is great for exciting conservatives, but he is just as good at exciting liberals who do not want to see the poor and middle class thrown away for the sake of the rich.

This choice of VP should help Obama with fundraising, as well as help him cement his agenda.

Why Paul Ryan is a good choice for Romney.

I am sure that I was not the only person surprised by Romney's VP pick. Everything led to a softer, safer choice. So the news that Paul Ryan was the running mate was a little shocking. Many bloggers and TV pundits will be examining why Romney chose someone who will outshine him, but I will just give a quick thought on that and then move on to how Ryan is good for Romney.

 Romney is reluctant to come out strong on any issue, this is damaging to his bid for the white house, so he needed someone who had a strong stance.

Ryan's place on the house budget committee, coupled with his budget, will tie Tea Party supporters even more tightly to the Romney ticket. Those Tea Party members who would have decided to not vote rather than vote Romney, will now come out and vote for Ryan. This election is now, not Romney v Obama, for many people it is now Obama v Ryan. Like GW Bush, Romney now has a strong running mate that gives his candidacy life and personality.

Ryan will bring vigor and life to this campaign. He is extremely popular among young Republicans, he even excites those college students who find themselves drawn to selfishness and blind ambition. Those who see college, not as a chance to challenge the vies of their parents and find their own way to think, but as a stepping stone to the life of self propelled success. 

Ryan is popular with a large number of independent voters as well. He will bring voters to the polls in November. What the Republicans might lose in older voters, they will more than make up for in younger voters. This election could be won the same way that the '08 election was, by energized young voters who will vote for an ideal larger than themselves.

That ideal is a drastic departure from that held by Obama supporters, but it is being embraced all the same.

Fair wages for persons with disabilities

A few months ago I wrote my house rep about a bill that is going to be voted on. The bill would insure that disabled employees would get paid the Federal minimum wage for work that they do. Mr. Bishop wrote me back to say that he could not support the bill because it would limit a company's ability to train disabled employees. So what he is saying is that in order to train disabled people so that they can one day earn minimum wage, companies must first benefit from their slave labor. He claimed that businesses would not be able to "help" the disabled if they had to pay them a fair wage. He claims that this 'unintended" consequence is the reason he cannot support raising wages for a fifth of the population. What he doesn't seem to understand is that ending this so called flexibility that companies have is the entire intent of the bill.
For Rob Bishop to defend the rights of a company to pay people a sub standard wage rather than defend the rights of one in five persons to get paid the minimum wage is upsetting to say the least.
I urge all who read this to contact your house rep in support of workers rights. The bill is HB 3086 As long as companies are allowed to use the disabled as slave labor more of us will never find a way out of poverty.