Haves VS Have-Nots

Jefferson County Monday will pick a purchasing agent to replace Naomi Lawrence-Lee.

Lawrence-Lee got caught with her hand in the cookie jar, using public resources and equipment for personal use.

I need to say up front, this is not an attack on Lawrence-Lee; I am only using her as an example because she was a public official and sparked this thought with her actions.

She lost a very good paying job for a few hundred dollars worth of theft, but no arrest.

If you have power or powerful friends, you probably will not go to jail.

Think about this.

I love history.

Let’s say I saw a nice trinket on display at the courthouse museum.

Let’s say the display case was unlocked and I Pocketed the item and left.

I bet if a sheriff’s deputy noticed me I would be wearing handcuffs.

The public official gets embarrassed, looses her job, but no handcuffs.

Dave Ingram goes to Jail and has to explain to Mrs. Ingram why she needs to bail him out.

This disparity goes as high as the white house.

Bill Clinton lies under oath and everyone excuses him by saying he only lied about having sex.

I know if I was testifying in a sexual harassment lawsuit and lied under oath about having sex, I would be charged with perjury.

I would most likely end up wearing an Orange jump suit and spend my days dodging some guy named bubba who thinks I’m cute.

Here’s another example of the Haves VS the Have-Nots.

If a 20-year-old black man gets shot, it might get a reader on the evening news or three lines in the Metro section of the paper.

If a young white college student gets shot, it has a much better chance of making the news in a prominent spot.

Our society still gives you an edge on the power scale based on race.

You don’t have to believe this assumption, just watch the news over a period of time.

If you have the ‘right appearance’, you get a cakewalk.

There are so many studies that show fat people make less money than people in shape… pretty women get paid more than plane-Jane chicks and tall men make more money than short dudes.

Our society judges people on race, economic status, height, etc.

All of these things are power.

Bottom line… if you have power… you can expect more.

If you have not…your screwed!

Cookies

Every time the state takes, or talks about taking parental rights away from parents, I wonder what things will be like when my children have kids of their own.

I firmly believe that the state screws up most of what it does because it wants a cookie-cutter answer to everything.

This would be great if every kid was the same, but the state is not allowed to admit that kids are individuals.

Look at the way the government handles schools.

In cases where it has been determined that test scores are too low, the bright answer of the state is to make tests easier.

I’ve heard the arguments that uniform testing is unfair.

What part of UNIFORM isn’t clear?

No, the state dances around the issue, and cannot admit that some kids are just simply not as smart as others… and some teachers are simply piss poor.

But rather than admit that some kids are dumb and not wanting to get the teachers union upset by saying some teachers would make better truck drivers, let’s make tests easier so things LOOK right.

Government cookie cutter answers do not work.

The state has a teen pregnancy problem.

It’s much worse than it was when I was in high school.

I think we had 2 girls get pregnant during their senior year.

As more and more school officials told us it was ridiculous for parents to expect kids to wait to have sex, the problem of teen pregnancy began to grow.

The state’s cookie cutter answer is to let every kid to have access to condoms, even if it is without parental consent.

Now the kids who abstained are told you don’t need to wait, don’t stick to those archaic ideas of your parents, have all the sex you want, we’ll give you a condom.

Uh, guys, your approach has screwed up a lot of things.

Today I'm convinced Aids, HPV and teen pregnancy are common place because of state policies.

Parents have less control over their children, the state has more control over the kids and the results speak for themselves.

Kids believe a state that says there are no consequences to sex before marriage.

Kids believe a state that says their parent’s morals are outdated.

The latest "improvement" is that the state is talking about giving an unproven HPV vaccine to my daughters.

Some would have it mandatory, others voluntarily.

You know, I bet the state would not even consider this idea if it was held financially responsible for the problems that could arise from this unproven vaccine.

I bet the state would not be so quick to push condoms if it had to pay for unwanted pregnancies caused by condoms that didn’t work.

Parents pay for the babies after the state supersedes parental rights by teaching moral-free sex with condoms that fail.

The state only steps in if the parents are poor.

What will it be like when my grandkids are in school?

I remember buying a coke from a vending machine in grade school, no cokes for kids today. They can get all the pot and crack they want from classmates, but forget the soft drinks at lunch!

I remember the first time I kissed a girl in Jr. High. Now grade school kids are having sex on the school bus.

I remember sitting in class and looking on with shock when a Jr. High kid talked back to a teacher. Now, well, just watch the now famous YouTube video and shake your head in disgust at what cookie cutter answers have given us.

I would think poor minorities would be outraged at school systems that say they cannot be expected to reach the same high goals as their rich white counterparts and need watered-down testing.

Wouldn’t our children be excelling far beyond today’s expectations if the state would just start getting to the root of problems rather than worry about political correctness?

Wouldn’t everything improve for our kids if the state got its nose out of parent-child relationships and encouraged parents to do their job?

Wouldn’t taxes be lower if the state would just give up on the cookies?

What’s so scary about the Easter Bunny?

It never ceases to amaze me how so many fine left-winged folks claim to be fighting for multiculturalism, but so many times their answers focuses on putting a damper on any culture they find offensive.

Before you stick your finger in your ear and start humming, I am not against multiculturalism, as long as it includes everyone’s culture.

Recently the Buddhist temple in Port Arthur was highlighted in the news as part of a cultural celebration.

I think things like this are great!

I may disagree with the Buddhists on their religious beliefs, but it is a major part of some cultures and should be accepted as such.

Here is the kicker.

Some of the same folks who would praise the publicity surrounding the Buddhist temple cringe at the thought of Christmas Trees or Easter bunnies.

I read an article this week about a city that got rid of its "Easter Bunny" and replaced it with a "Spring bunny" because some might be offended at the word Easter.

Give me a break.

If I'm not mistaken, the Easter Bunny is based on pre-Christian fertility lore and adopted by Christians and non-Christians to celebrate the season.

I have not met any preacher that would say the Easter bunny comes from the bible.

I would say that makes it multicultural.

But because it is part of tradition associated with Christianity, the so-called multiculturalists want it eliminated (see article at the end of this post.)

Experience has taught me that the far far left wing bible reads something like this:

1) All religions are good except for Christianity, it should be silenced.

2) Everyone is the same, equally good or bad. There are no groups that are, as a collective bad, except white people. They are the only ones that are racists.

3) Freedom of religion is the same as freedom from religion, but freedom of the press is different from freedom from the press (far-left folks want it both ways.)

4) A child should be able to dress like a gansta-rapper in school but a child bowing his head to pray before lunch is distracting and offensive.

5) Etc, Etc...

These are things I attribute to the far left, not everyone on the left.

Can't we all just get along?

Let the Hindu's wear their bright colors during Holi.
Let the Muslims pray facing Mecca
Let the Christians and others have an Easter Bunny.

I know there are those that would say a school or a public office is not supposed to teach religion.

Accepting something is not the same as teaching it to others.

Society says we should accept homosexuality, and I agree.

This is different from teaching kids to be homosexuals (if one could do so.)

I say society should accept religious people and their customs.

This is different from teaching everyone to be a religious person.

If a kid wants to tote a bible at school, let him or her do so.

Lets get some balance in the way we judge others who are different.

Most everything has two sides.

When are we going to have REAL multiculturalism that accepts everyone, the extreme right and the extreme left?

Here is the article on the bunny:

It's been nearly five years since Walnut Creek, Calif., renamed its Easter Bunny the "Spring Bunny," but the name change became news this week after a resident wrote a letter to the editor protesting it.

City spokesman Brad Rovanpera said he was surprised by the media buzz and TV news trucks outside City Hall Thursday, attracted by a change instituted in 2003 with no controversy. The city's Spring Bunny reigns over annual "Spring Egg Hunts" in two city parks.

"This will be the fifth year we are doing it that way," Rovanpera said. "This is the first complaint that I have ever heard. In fact, no one has ever complained to the city that we know of. This is from a letter to the editor."

The author of the letter, a former newspaper reporter named Michael Runzler, said banishing the word "Easter" from the bunny and the eggs strikes a nerve with many people. He is happy the story is getting attention, even if belatedly.

"First people can't wish 'Merry Christmas' at a store, and now they've taken Easter away from the Easter Bunny," Runzler said in an interview. "Everyone is welcome to celebrate what they want to celebrate, but if you're offended by an Easter Bunny or an Easter egg, then maybe you should not participate."

Rovanpera said the city renamed the bunny and the egg-hunt events after receiving a complaint from a Jewish resident in 2001 who said she was concerned that the city was sponsoring an event linked to religion.

The debate may echo the so-called "War on Christmas" battles in which a coalition of conservative talk radio hosts and religious groups have tried to prod companies to greet customers with "Merry Christmas" instead of the more generic "Happy Holidays."

Last year there were complaints reported in Minnesota when some malls renamed their bunnies and eggs to delete the term "Easter."

"It's really not a big deal," said Lawrence Cunningham, University of Notre Dame theology professor. "I don't see any intrinsic value to the rabbit to the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

"The bunny is a fertility symbol with no religious connection to Easter," added Cunningham who was the Christianity editor for the HarperCollins Dictionary of Religion. "The egg, which was popularized in Greece, Russia and Eastern Europe in connection with Easter, does not have a religious connection to Easter. By taking away the term 'Easter,' these symbols to some extent return to their pre-Christian roots as symbols of spring fertility."

Off Air

Ratings are over... gone on vacation.... see you in two weeks!