Well, one could say the Senators are finally earning their pay as they stay in Washington over the weekend! Multiple things to discuss - the Rand Paul Amendment (regarding foreign policy). This amendment is to ensure that aid to Pakistan, Egypt, & Libya will be restricted immediately. This is mainly due to the unrest within the region and the stated nations do not hold the same values as the United States. Earlier today, Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) made a pleading case that the United States needs to "stop funding dictators" and to also allow the chance for the United States to take a lesson from the "Arab Spring" and the events surrounding the fallen dictators within the region. I find it interesting that Senator Paul would attempt to compare the "Arab Spring" to something the United States should endure. While the junior senator from Kentucky was talking about the various dictators using the aid on their family (by buying Bentleys, Ferraris, and other high-priced cars) instead of giving to the people, he also reminded the listeners that those citizens - I remember he named African countries in general - living off of of $2.00 USD a day. I guess I am a little confused by this: It is not okay to fund those that clearly have money and (abuse such allocations) while the working citizens get no results in a foreign nation; but, it is not okay to have the wealthiest of our citizens to pay a little more, because they clearly have money also, and provide services to the working & middle class within our own county's borders? Furthermore, how is it okay to give "tax breaks" or "tax incentives" (feel free to use whichever rhetorical term that most aligns with your political preference) to the very "American dictators" who were in charge of our financial system which is finally starting to get off life support?
I also find it interesting that even members of Senator Paul's own party are against this notion. On CNN's show: Erin Burrnett: Outfront, Ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee John McCain stated that this was a bad idea. He actually said that "these isolationist members of our party fail to look at history. In the [19]30s & 40s under Eisenhower, after World War II, because of our isolationist thought we suffered dearly for it. Whenever we attempt to return or conceive that isolationist idea without looking at history, we always come to a unfortunate ending."*
I really don't believe this amendment will pass, as it needs sixty votes. If anything, Senator Rand Paul may get 8 votes on his amendment (if that). Time will tell.
*I am certain I paraphrased his quote. Also, I was off the votes by two.
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Fired Up & Ready to Go - DNC Aftermath
Well, I've had time to recover from all of the excitement of the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, NC. What a wonderful experience! I enjoyed seeing, and meeting, so many new people. I met so many amazing political figures; for example, I shared an elevator with General Wesley Clark (and met Congressman Kucinich)!!! The speeches were wonderful and very inspiring as well!
First things first, I was so honored to be apart of two historic caucuses! For the record, I did attend four caucuses: The Hispanic caucus, the Disabilities Caucus, the LGBT caucus, and the Women's Caucus (I also attended the Small Business Council). Each of these caucuses are important in one way or another to me. The only thing I can really say, regardless of your political affiliation -you should at least go to one convention. It is certainly a "wow" moment. I even got quoted in the StarTribune and appeared on MSNBC's Hardball With Chris Matthews! There is so much I could write about my time at the DNC, but I will try not to bore you too much with it.
In other news though, and I promise it isn't political, I'm taking a class at Western Carolina this semester. Furthermore, I have been accepted as a non-degree seeking student next semester which will allow me to take classes and figure out what I really want to get my Master's degree in regarding a field of study. I am still deciding whether it will be Public Administration or English with a concentration in Composition & Rhetoric. Speaking of Rhetoric, the class I am taking this semester is...Political Rhetoric! I love the class so far even though I'm not a fan of Immanuel Kant.
Okay, back to politics for a second. While I know that I wrote a blog entry supporting Hayden Rogers, I am really not sure if I can fully support him in the general election. The main reason is that he is a "blue dog" democrat and I am a "yellow dog" democrat. I know I certainly will NOT be voting for Mark Meadows (anyone who is endorsed by Rick Santorum will NEVER receive my vote). As for the governor's race....Walter Dalton all the way! I also hope Minnesota will vote No on their amendment; and, I hope Washington State will approve Referendum 74. Maine & Maryland will hopefully vote in favor of the LGBT community. With 50 days left, I will continue to campaign for all of the issues and causes that I believe and support.
By the way, it feels great to write a blog post and I really have to write more of them. Also, I'm the one waving in a white long-sleeve shirt and I think I am holding up four fingers chanting, "4 more years!"
First Lady Michelle Obama speaking at the Women's Caucus!
First things first, I was so honored to be apart of two historic caucuses! For the record, I did attend four caucuses: The Hispanic caucus, the Disabilities Caucus, the LGBT caucus, and the Women's Caucus (I also attended the Small Business Council). Each of these caucuses are important in one way or another to me. The only thing I can really say, regardless of your political affiliation -you should at least go to one convention. It is certainly a "wow" moment. I even got quoted in the StarTribune and appeared on MSNBC's Hardball With Chris Matthews! There is so much I could write about my time at the DNC, but I will try not to bore you too much with it.
In other news though, and I promise it isn't political, I'm taking a class at Western Carolina this semester. Furthermore, I have been accepted as a non-degree seeking student next semester which will allow me to take classes and figure out what I really want to get my Master's degree in regarding a field of study. I am still deciding whether it will be Public Administration or English with a concentration in Composition & Rhetoric. Speaking of Rhetoric, the class I am taking this semester is...Political Rhetoric! I love the class so far even though I'm not a fan of Immanuel Kant.
Okay, back to politics for a second. While I know that I wrote a blog entry supporting Hayden Rogers, I am really not sure if I can fully support him in the general election. The main reason is that he is a "blue dog" democrat and I am a "yellow dog" democrat. I know I certainly will NOT be voting for Mark Meadows (anyone who is endorsed by Rick Santorum will NEVER receive my vote). As for the governor's race....Walter Dalton all the way! I also hope Minnesota will vote No on their amendment; and, I hope Washington State will approve Referendum 74. Maine & Maryland will hopefully vote in favor of the LGBT community. With 50 days left, I will continue to campaign for all of the issues and causes that I believe and support.
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Paul Ryan: Romney's #2
Okay, props to Mitt Romney for allowing President Obama a second term!!! I, like many others within my field of work, was somewhat surprised at his choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate. I think in the end it will hurt Romney, not just because Ryan is such a risky candidate; but, mainly because he undermines (and arguably turned his back on) the south.
Let's start at the beginning - a very good place to start (and points to those who get the reference) - Paul Davis Ryan was born on January 27, 1970. He is a member of "Generation X" which I find personally fascinating, yet a little creepy - for the record, he is eight days older than my father. He graduated from Miami University in Ohio. He was in multiple clubs and organization both in high school and college. A funny piece of information is the fact that we was a "frat boy" - being a member of Delta Tau Delta.
After college, he went to work with various politicos in Washington, D.C. Some of them included Sam Brownback (former senator and current Governor of Kansas), Bob Kasten (former Senator of Wisconsin), and Empower America (a conservative think-tank in DC). When he finally did get elected to Congress by the constituents of Wisconsin's First Congressional District, he was twenty-eight years old. After getting elected by only fifty-four percent of the votes cast, Paul Ryan was assigned to the following committees: House Budget Committee (where he would eventually become Chairman of the Committee); the Committee of Ways & Means; and, the subcommittee on Health. Furthermore, he was a part of a number of caucuses in the House of Representatives including the Congressional Middle East Economic Parliament; the International Conservative Caucus; the Representative Stud Committee; and, the Sportsman Committee (where he would become the co-chair).
It seems odd that Mitt Romney would chose a rogue from the Midwest. There is little chance that Romney will even win one - if any - of the Midwest states. He really needs to focus on the south.
Alabama, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Tennessee....what do all of these states have in common? These are the states Mitt Romney failed to win the GOP Primary in both the 2008 & the 2012 election cycles. From 2008 to the present, Mitt Romney did not even win in the states he won in 2008 - like Minnesota, North Dakota, Maine and Colorado. If Mitt Romney wants to have a fighting chance at being President, he should have chosen a running mate though could deliver the South. Now this is not to say that "The South will Rise again" rhetoric is accurate, but i really believe that by adding Paul Ryan to the ticket does nothing for those that cast their support behind John McCain or Mike Huckabee [back in 2008], and Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum [this election cycle].
In all honestly, Paul Ryan would be the better candidate for President because he relates more to the average American. However, the fact that he is backed by a majority of Tea Party supporters, has no idea how to appeal to female voters and wants to cut funding to everything under the sun, except to the military [and wants government out of the people's lives unless it involves telling a woman what they can and can't do with their body, telling people who they can and can't marry, and telling students to fend for themselves when it comes to their education] makes him the most divisive running mate in the history of the country. To put it another way, Paul Ryan is Palin 2.0 (and yes, this is Romney's GameChanger).
Let's start at the beginning - a very good place to start (and points to those who get the reference) - Paul Davis Ryan was born on January 27, 1970. He is a member of "Generation X" which I find personally fascinating, yet a little creepy - for the record, he is eight days older than my father. He graduated from Miami University in Ohio. He was in multiple clubs and organization both in high school and college. A funny piece of information is the fact that we was a "frat boy" - being a member of Delta Tau Delta.
After college, he went to work with various politicos in Washington, D.C. Some of them included Sam Brownback (former senator and current Governor of Kansas), Bob Kasten (former Senator of Wisconsin), and Empower America (a conservative think-tank in DC). When he finally did get elected to Congress by the constituents of Wisconsin's First Congressional District, he was twenty-eight years old. After getting elected by only fifty-four percent of the votes cast, Paul Ryan was assigned to the following committees: House Budget Committee (where he would eventually become Chairman of the Committee); the Committee of Ways & Means; and, the subcommittee on Health. Furthermore, he was a part of a number of caucuses in the House of Representatives including the Congressional Middle East Economic Parliament; the International Conservative Caucus; the Representative Stud Committee; and, the Sportsman Committee (where he would become the co-chair).
It seems odd that Mitt Romney would chose a rogue from the Midwest. There is little chance that Romney will even win one - if any - of the Midwest states. He really needs to focus on the south.
Alabama, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Tennessee....what do all of these states have in common? These are the states Mitt Romney failed to win the GOP Primary in both the 2008 & the 2012 election cycles. From 2008 to the present, Mitt Romney did not even win in the states he won in 2008 - like Minnesota, North Dakota, Maine and Colorado. If Mitt Romney wants to have a fighting chance at being President, he should have chosen a running mate though could deliver the South. Now this is not to say that "The South will Rise again" rhetoric is accurate, but i really believe that by adding Paul Ryan to the ticket does nothing for those that cast their support behind John McCain or Mike Huckabee [back in 2008], and Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum [this election cycle].
In all honestly, Paul Ryan would be the better candidate for President because he relates more to the average American. However, the fact that he is backed by a majority of Tea Party supporters, has no idea how to appeal to female voters and wants to cut funding to everything under the sun, except to the military [and wants government out of the people's lives unless it involves telling a woman what they can and can't do with their body, telling people who they can and can't marry, and telling students to fend for themselves when it comes to their education] makes him the most divisive running mate in the history of the country. To put it another way, Paul Ryan is Palin 2.0 (and yes, this is Romney's GameChanger).
Monday, June 18, 2012
54…40…FIGHT!!!
So I am now living in Seattle , Washington
I am out
here on the West Coast working on a Congressional campaign. I’m working in the
first Congressional District of Washington State. We still have to go through a primary. Some things to consider regarding Washington State
For example, I was on campaigns in the following states:
2008 – North
Carolina
2009 – New York & South Carolina
2010 – New Hampshire & Massachusetts (arguably Rhode
Island as well)
2011 – Virginia
2012 – Washington
State
So far, I really enjoy the Pacific
Northwest . Contrary to popular belief, it doesn’t rain every day –
if anything it is just overcast a lot.
Today I went to downtown Seattle
and just did some shopping and other “tourist” stuff. Even though I am a little acrophobic, I went
up in the Space Needle and enjoyed an incredible view of the Puget
Sound , Downtown, and surrounding areas. Afterwards, I rode the Monorail – first time
– and went into downtown. Overall, it was a wonderful day. Next weekend is Seattle Pride so I’ll be
downtown for that as well. I’ll be
accompanied by the congressional candidate I’m working for this race (the
candidate’s name is Suzan DelBene).
I guess I
should also mention that I drove across the country – yet again – in order to
have a car out here in Washington . I drove through new states which is always
awesome. I mean, I’m still young I checked so I better get all of the states
marked off so I can travel the world after I retire…right? I only have five
more states to visit and I will have been to all fifty states! Those states
are: Alaska , Hawaii ,
Minnesota , North Dakota ,
and Wisconsin .
Also while I’m here, I will make it up to Canada – again! This time I will be
on the other side so it will be British
Columbia . I love traveling so I am definitely
enjoying my time in my car with the music and my thoughts. It’s like I’m living
the retired lifestyle at twenty-five! I think I can correctly say, “winning” ha
ha!
So I will try to post a blog piece every week. I noticed
that I haven’t posted in a month and that doesn’t sit well with me – what can I
say, I love to talk and write! Also, fifty points to the reader than gets the
title of this blog piece! ;-)
Sunday, May 6, 2012
NC Politics: Vote "No" on Amendment One on Tuesday, May 8th!
I'm sorry it's taken forever for me to post this piece. I've had to to an extensive amount of research and studying. Tuesday is an important day in North Carolina. It is the day when voter will vote on Amendment One. The text of the Amendment are as followed:
Now, this amendment is not only wrong and redundant, it is not constitutional according to both the United States and North Carolina constitutions. It should be noted that North Carolina already bans same-sex marriage (and yes, that is also unconstitutional but that's another blog piece). I'll present reasons why Amendment One is unconstitutional - I'll present the issues with the North Carolina Constitution and then I'll move onto the United States Constitution.
North Carolina State Constitution:
* Article 1 - Section 1
"We hold it to be self-evident that all persons are created equal...with certain inalienable rights...life, liberty, the enjoyment of fruits of their own labor, and the pursuit of happiness"
So everyone is created equal...except woman who are not married (but who to live with someone they are not married to), children who will be denied coverage because their parents are not married or because they have a parent living with someone who is covered under someone else's insurance (again, but are not married), or those that are already in a civil union, how does that make sense?
* Article 1 - Section 19
"No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws; nor shall any person be subjected to discrimination by the State"
So again, what if two people are joined in a domestic civil union? What happens with their status? If this amendment passes, will their civil union become null and void? How is that equal protection of the law? Those already in civil unions will be denied rights already granted to them and others that are married such as visitation, insurance, etc. Again, how is that equal under the law if their civil union is null and void?
I'm sure there are more areas of the North Carolina Constitution that would validate why Amendment One is a horrible piece of legislation, redundant, and just unconstitutional; however, I remembered I didn't go to law school (although I wish I had done so). Anyway, on to the United States Constitution.
United States Constitution:
* Preamble -
"We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice...provide for the common defence promote general Welfare..."
These three areas help protect women, children (as well as all citizens obviously), and allow citizens to help shape the nation as times change. Hence the "more perfect Union" part. Furthermore, those that have a civil union under the current justice system would be denied this if the amendment were to pass.
* Article 6 - Paragraph 2
"This Constitution...shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
Supreme Law of the land...so federal trumps state??? (I know my legal friends are screaming the 10th amendment; HOWEVER, it does say that as well in the document. I read this to mean that even judges in other federal districts review and make rulings on other cases (for example, the 4th Circuit court would review a case ruled on by the 9th or 7th Circuit Courts to see if it has any bearing on their potential ruling...I could be wrong though - remember I didn't go to law school).
* Amendment 14 - Section 1
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Notice we have "Equal Protection of laws" again in the argument; however, this is at the federal level so it HAS to be upheld. To put it plainly, you can suspend a civil union's rights by passing a law that bans civil unions.
Again, I'm sure there are more areas of the United States Constitution that would validate why Amendment One is wrong and should not be passed.
If Amendment One were to pass, and I have already voted to ensure that it won't, it would be challenged in a court of law. Even the Supreme Court would strike it down as unconstitutional. There would be plenty of court cases for the United States Supreme Court to review and rule on the unconstitutionality of Amendment One. Some of these cases are:
I strongly feel that this Amendment One is not justified and is unconstitutional. Furthermore, if we step back in history and words were added so that the proposed amendment would read, " An Act...to provide that marriage between one white man and one white woman is the only domestic legal union", then we would 1) have fought harder against it; 2) have had it struck down by the Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court Case of 1967; and, 3) have wondered why this piece of legislation is so discriminatory and a hindrance on progression for the United States of America.
To all voting citizens in North Carolina who read this; I urge you to vote "No" on Tuesday and vote against Amendment One. It's not constitutional and it's not who we are as Americans.
"An Act to amend the constitution to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state."This will be added under a new section (Section 6) under Article 14 of the North Carolina State Constitution.
Now, this amendment is not only wrong and redundant, it is not constitutional according to both the United States and North Carolina constitutions. It should be noted that North Carolina already bans same-sex marriage (and yes, that is also unconstitutional but that's another blog piece). I'll present reasons why Amendment One is unconstitutional - I'll present the issues with the North Carolina Constitution and then I'll move onto the United States Constitution.
North Carolina State Constitution:
* Article 1 - Section 1
"We hold it to be self-evident that all persons are created equal...with certain inalienable rights...life, liberty, the enjoyment of fruits of their own labor, and the pursuit of happiness"
So everyone is created equal...except woman who are not married (but who to live with someone they are not married to), children who will be denied coverage because their parents are not married or because they have a parent living with someone who is covered under someone else's insurance (again, but are not married), or those that are already in a civil union, how does that make sense?
* Article 1 - Section 19
"No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws; nor shall any person be subjected to discrimination by the State"
So again, what if two people are joined in a domestic civil union? What happens with their status? If this amendment passes, will their civil union become null and void? How is that equal protection of the law? Those already in civil unions will be denied rights already granted to them and others that are married such as visitation, insurance, etc. Again, how is that equal under the law if their civil union is null and void?
I'm sure there are more areas of the North Carolina Constitution that would validate why Amendment One is a horrible piece of legislation, redundant, and just unconstitutional; however, I remembered I didn't go to law school (although I wish I had done so). Anyway, on to the United States Constitution.
United States Constitution:
* Preamble -
"We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice...provide for the common defence promote general Welfare..."
These three areas help protect women, children (as well as all citizens obviously), and allow citizens to help shape the nation as times change. Hence the "more perfect Union" part. Furthermore, those that have a civil union under the current justice system would be denied this if the amendment were to pass.
* Article 6 - Paragraph 2
"This Constitution...shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
Supreme Law of the land...so federal trumps state??? (I know my legal friends are screaming the 10th amendment; HOWEVER, it does say that as well in the document. I read this to mean that even judges in other federal districts review and make rulings on other cases (for example, the 4th Circuit court would review a case ruled on by the 9th or 7th Circuit Courts to see if it has any bearing on their potential ruling...I could be wrong though - remember I didn't go to law school).
* Amendment 14 - Section 1
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Notice we have "Equal Protection of laws" again in the argument; however, this is at the federal level so it HAS to be upheld. To put it plainly, you can suspend a civil union's rights by passing a law that bans civil unions.
Again, I'm sure there are more areas of the United States Constitution that would validate why Amendment One is wrong and should not be passed.
If Amendment One were to pass, and I have already voted to ensure that it won't, it would be challenged in a court of law. Even the Supreme Court would strike it down as unconstitutional. There would be plenty of court cases for the United States Supreme Court to review and rule on the unconstitutionality of Amendment One. Some of these cases are:
- Loving v. Virginia (1967)
- Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
- Crawford v. Washington (2004)
- Romers v. Evans (1996)*
I strongly feel that this Amendment One is not justified and is unconstitutional. Furthermore, if we step back in history and words were added so that the proposed amendment would read, " An Act...to provide that marriage between one white man and one white woman is the only domestic legal union", then we would 1) have fought harder against it; 2) have had it struck down by the Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court Case of 1967; and, 3) have wondered why this piece of legislation is so discriminatory and a hindrance on progression for the United States of America.
To all voting citizens in North Carolina who read this; I urge you to vote "No" on Tuesday and vote against Amendment One. It's not constitutional and it's not who we are as Americans.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Hayden Rogers: North Carolina’s 11th District Next Congressman
As Heath Shuler retires from Congress, it is important for
Western North Carolina to elect someone who can continue to represent the
district in Washington, D.C. The person
who is fit to become the next member of Congress from North Carolina’s Eleventh
District is Hayden Rogers.
A native of Western North Carolina, Hayden Rogers knows how
to balance jobs, education, and leisure.
While going to Princeton University, he balanced his courses and working
jobs at nights to pay for his education.
As a son of public school teachers, Hayden understands the value of what
an education can do for someone. In fact, Hayden values the investment in
education so much that he takes an active role in his daughters’ education.
Hayden strongly believes educational opportunities should be available to all
children without any reservations. Furthermore, Hayden Rogers stands alongside
teachers and will fight to ensure that no more teachers lost their jobs.
After his time at Princeton, Hayden Rogers returned home to
help our local economy by opening his own small business. After starting his own construction company,
he successfully expanded his business to other areas such as real estate
management, landscaping, and retail garden center. Through his ability to understand the
challenges of small business and the need to reduce costs and regulations,
Hayden Rogers was able to create many jobs throughout Western North Carolina.
He even has a favorable rapport with the Postal Workers Union and believes that
their jobs are valuable to the citizens of Western North Carolina. Hayden Rogers will fights for creating jobs
in Western North Carolina just like he helped create jobs as a small business
owner.
I’m voting for Hayden Rogers to serve as the next member of
Congress for North Carolina’s eleventh congressional district. On May 8, and in the general election, I hope
you will join me and send Democratic candidate Hayden Rogers to Congress. With
his bold leadership, job-creating opportunities, member of the National Rifle
Association (yes, he is an NRA member and supports the second amendment to the
U.S. Constitution), and ability to relate to the citizens of Western North
Carolina, it only makes sense to vote for Democratic candidate Hayden Rogers
for Congress.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
The Journey to the Wild West (Part 2 of 2)
Once I arrived in Arizona, it was an experience. The fact that I had cell service was amazing! I went line dancing, went to Tombstone (and watched Tombstone...ironically), went to Tuscon to see the Desert Museum, saw 'The Iron Lady" (again) with my grandparents, helped my grandmother make a pizza (half pepperoni and half broccoli), *cough* gained five pounds *cough*, went on a horrid ride to the salt River Canyon, and many other things. I bought souvenirs and even got some political campaign buttons (and a book by Hillary Clinton) for less than ten dollars!
While at the Desert Museum, I saw a rare lizard which is only one of two poisonous lizards in North America (I don't remember the name but I think it was a heela-monster and yes the spelling is wrong). I did not see the Grand Canyon though. I also went to Mexico which was cool. I walked into Mexico and I walked back into the United States. It was much easier to return to the United States from Mexico than it was to return to the United States from Canada.
Overall, Arizona was a nice place to visit and the people were pleasant; however, I couldn't get past the backwardness of the political climate. I really can't stand that idiot in the state governorship. I really don't understand her anti-immigration campaign. Her idea of "building a fence" is simply stupid! There is a fence already in place at the border and I am certain it is made of either tin or aluminum. During my time at the border - on both sides - there were at least 15-30 border patrol agents doing nothing except holding the ground in place. This was also the case in New Mexico and Texas. We don't need a fence - which will cost billions of dollars both in labor and training more agents to guard the fence, we need those on the taxpayer's payroll to quit standing around and actually do their jobs. While I'm on this topic, by only asking, "Are you an American citizen" and with a sufficient "yes", the people are let through without question is really insulting. Why not provide valid proof such as a U.S. Passport, a driver's license, or some other form of excepted identification (at the border I might add). Also, it would help to bear in mind the 4th amendment to the Constitution and not just go on the racial profiling. I am in favor of that. Here is what I am not in favor of and really makes me mad both as a Hispanic and as an American: Being an American citizen with a tan complexion being told to open his truck, have his luggage searched through, having his car license plates run through a database, and flat out asking if he is a citizen of the United States and where he is going and what he is doing! Nevermind the fact that he has his passport, his driver's license from North Carolina (which, last I checked was in the United States), and cooperated in the best way he knew how even though it took every ounce of himself to not get in a shouting match and make a (valid) scene of racial profiling. One would think the passport alone would have validated the citizenship but oh no, NOT in the state of TEXAS!!! Yes, I am referring to my time in Texas east of El Paso (this part is in the first part of my blog entry). I've said it time and time again - let Hispanic Americans be in charge of - and lead - all Hispanic issues. Furthermore, being Hispanic does NOT mean you are automatically a Mexican! I always thought the people were more open-minded and tolerant but clearly I was mistaken when it comes to the southwestern part of the United States.
Overall, I had a good time out in Arizona and I plan on returning next year to "the Grand Canyon State" to visit my family. Hopefully, I'll be able to see the Grand Canyon and visit a few more National Parks - mainly for the stamp to put in my National Park Passport...and yes, President Bartlett would be proud of me!
While at the Desert Museum, I saw a rare lizard which is only one of two poisonous lizards in North America (I don't remember the name but I think it was a heela-monster and yes the spelling is wrong). I did not see the Grand Canyon though. I also went to Mexico which was cool. I walked into Mexico and I walked back into the United States. It was much easier to return to the United States from Mexico than it was to return to the United States from Canada.
Overall, Arizona was a nice place to visit and the people were pleasant; however, I couldn't get past the backwardness of the political climate. I really can't stand that idiot in the state governorship. I really don't understand her anti-immigration campaign. Her idea of "building a fence" is simply stupid! There is a fence already in place at the border and I am certain it is made of either tin or aluminum. During my time at the border - on both sides - there were at least 15-30 border patrol agents doing nothing except holding the ground in place. This was also the case in New Mexico and Texas. We don't need a fence - which will cost billions of dollars both in labor and training more agents to guard the fence, we need those on the taxpayer's payroll to quit standing around and actually do their jobs. While I'm on this topic, by only asking, "Are you an American citizen" and with a sufficient "yes", the people are let through without question is really insulting. Why not provide valid proof such as a U.S. Passport, a driver's license, or some other form of excepted identification (at the border I might add). Also, it would help to bear in mind the 4th amendment to the Constitution and not just go on the racial profiling. I am in favor of that. Here is what I am not in favor of and really makes me mad both as a Hispanic and as an American: Being an American citizen with a tan complexion being told to open his truck, have his luggage searched through, having his car license plates run through a database, and flat out asking if he is a citizen of the United States and where he is going and what he is doing! Nevermind the fact that he has his passport, his driver's license from North Carolina (which, last I checked was in the United States), and cooperated in the best way he knew how even though it took every ounce of himself to not get in a shouting match and make a (valid) scene of racial profiling. One would think the passport alone would have validated the citizenship but oh no, NOT in the state of TEXAS!!! Yes, I am referring to my time in Texas east of El Paso (this part is in the first part of my blog entry). I've said it time and time again - let Hispanic Americans be in charge of - and lead - all Hispanic issues. Furthermore, being Hispanic does NOT mean you are automatically a Mexican! I always thought the people were more open-minded and tolerant but clearly I was mistaken when it comes to the southwestern part of the United States.
Overall, I had a good time out in Arizona and I plan on returning next year to "the Grand Canyon State" to visit my family. Hopefully, I'll be able to see the Grand Canyon and visit a few more National Parks - mainly for the stamp to put in my National Park Passport...and yes, President Bartlett would be proud of me!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)