Opinions on a Lot of Stuff

You may think that because I haven't posted anything here this week that I have no opinions on the various things that have been happening. Oh no, that isn't true. It's just that whenever an opinion struck me about some topic, it was not the right time to be blogging. And by the time I had time to blog, the will to blog had become weak.

So I thought I'd spend today catching up with the various things that I've wanted to post about all week.

Let's go backwards in time starting with the most recent news first.

In regard to the decision to try the 9/11 masterminds in civil court in Manhattan:

I'm totally in favor of this decision. It shows that the our country will stand up for its principles of justice and try these men fairly in a court of law. Of course, not everyone is in favor of this decision. According to the NY Times, opponents included members of Congress, some 9/11 victim's families, and neighbors near the courthouse.

"They argued that Qaeda suspects did not deserve the protections afforded by the American criminal justice system, that bringing them into the United States would heighten the risk of another terrorist attack, that civilian trials increase the risk of disclosing classified information, and that if the detainees were acquitted they could be released into the population."

TomCat over at Politics Plus has a good post about this. As he says,

"While it is true that these terrorists do not deserve the protections afforded by the US criminal justice system, look at the statement that giving them these protections anyway makes about the US before the world. Dispensing justice in full transparency can go a long way toward undoing some of the damage that eight years of torture and abuse of prisoners under Bush and the GOP did to our world prestige."

He also points out how the GOP, represented by Boehner, is once again showing no support for the American principles of justice. Sure, these people aren't citizens. But their crimes were committed on our soil and they should face our type of justice.

And if anyone is worried they may just get off and be released into the United States? Think about it - if you let them go in downtown Manhattan, how far do you really think they'd get? No worries there. (Yes, I know that is not a nice way to think about it. But I can't help it).

Onward to the health care debate.

I am glad the health care bill passed in the House. I know there are many progressives who feel as if this is a Pyrrhic victory, given Nancy Pelosi was forced to allow the Stupak Amendment that will effectively eliminate the possibility of coverage for abortion for a large number of women.

I understand and agree with the disappointment and outrage on the part of progressives and women. But I am practical, and believe that "the best is the enemy of the good." Sometimes it's better to get part of what you want even if it's not perfect. Opposing the bill and refusing to pass it is probably not the right answer.

First of all, this is not the final bill. The Senate needs to pass their version, and then the two versions have to be made into one. A lot can happen during that process.

Secondly, even if the final version includes these abortion restrictions, providing all Americans with health care will still do more for the greater good than if the abortion amendment were left out, but the legislation didn't pass. Having health care coverage will save money for poor or currently uninsured families if someone in the family became ill and incurred large medical bills. Ongoing well care will also ultimately help them stay in better health overall.

Third, whatever passes is not set in stone. When Medicare originally passed, it wasn't the same program as we have today. Later legislation can amend the terms if we have the will to force this to happen.

That said, I have grave concerns about the way the right wing and religious groups are slowly but surely chipping away at a woman's right to choose. Please, go over to Utah Savage's place and read what she has to say on the subject. She has forcefully reminded me of what it was like in those dark days before Roe v. Wade and also made an impassioned plea to the current generation to take up the cause and not take women's rights for granted. Please, read her most recent three posts (starting with the one entitled "My Abortion in 1968"), as she tells it better than I ever could.

The last issue I'd like to talk about today is the defeat of gay marriage in Maine on Election Day. Naturally, I was very disappointed that the voters of Maine voted for this miscarriage of justice. To me, it is ridiculous that basic human rights for our citizens are being put to a majority vote. If this had been done in the past, there would still be a number of states that would have had miscegenation laws on the books - and be enforcing them. Heck, there might even still be slavery!

Why should the majority get to rule on the rights of a minority? It doesn't even make sense. This is a constitutional issue and rightly should be decided by the courts. This is not activist judges at work - this is exactly what the courts are meant for - to enforce civil rights even when it's not something the majority may want.

Of course, the real solution would be for the government to get out of the marriage business altogether. Civil unions for all - let your religion dictate whether it's called marriage. That way religious groups that didn't want to marry gay couples wouldn't have to, and those that do, could. Either way, you could be married, whether you were gay or straight.

This evenhandedness should extend to benefit designations as well. If a person has medical or other coverage from their company or organization, they should be allowed to designate anyone as their beneficiary: spouse, domestic partner (male or female), relative, even friend. We pay extra to add spouses/families to our benefits anyway - why should the company care who you designate? It's all ridiculous to keep basing everything on whether someone is married or not, in this day and age when there are so many different types of households. It is time to move past this antiquated way of judging everything.

That said, the interesting thing is that we are even having these conversations today about gay marriage. A decade ago the idea of domestic partnerships or civil unions was what was setting off the right wing nutjobs. Now even they are hedging and saying that civil unions are OK, but marriage is another story. Change is happening - too slowly, yes - but happening nevertheless.

So, I think I'm all caught up on being opinionated. Baxter will be back next with his own thoughts on the latest news. In the meantime, I'll start trying to catch up with all the blogs I'm behind on reading!

The Real Terrorists

Yes, as cartoonist Walt Kelly famously said, "We have met the enemy and he is us." It isn't those scary "Arabs" or those much-maligned "Islamist terrorists" who are to be feared. It is the home-grown hate groups that exist right here in the United States, who have no connection to these other groups.

What am I referring to? This: Obama Has More Threats Than Other Presidents-Elect.

According to the AP,

"Threats against a new president historically spike right after an election, but from Maine to Idaho law enforcement officials are seeing more against Barack Obama than ever before."

According to the article, there have been more threatening writings (both on-line and off) and other activities than have been seen for any other president-elect. Strangely, the Secret Service is cautioning the public not to assume these threats are "due to racism." Hmmmm. So what else is it based on when there are signs in Idaho talking about a "free public hanging," in reference to President-Elect Obama, a rise in racially-motivated graffiti, and worst of all, a rise of +2,000 members in a white-supremacist group the day after the election?

Thankfully, the investigations into the Obama-related threats so far have turned up no truly credible plots. But we must keep a close eye on these groups that threaten the future of our country, and the benighted bigots out there who just can't deal with the idea of a President who is a different race from themselves.

Most people who opposed President-Elect Obama have accepted the outcome of the election and are moving on. They acknowledge that he won and support him. Many even cheered his election as a step forward for America, even if they voted for John McCain.

It is those who refuse to accept this step forward and threaten the new President who are bent on destroying this country. They must be stopped before they do any harm -- they are the real terrorists we have to watch out for.

A Cat's Eye View

Baxter here. My Humans finally got Home after being gone for Too Long, in My Opinion. At least I was here by myself without That Dog, since they take It with them. My Humans' friend came and Served Me in their Absence.

Well, this has been an eventful couple of Weeks, hasn't it? I have to tell you, I am so glad I am only a Cat and don't have to worry about Money. My Humans have given up on the idea of ever looking at their 401ks again, as that Stock Market thing just keeps sliding downward. Today at first it looked as if it was going to be Better, and then in the last 10 minutes it tumbled over 200 points! Those People who invest in it keep looking for it to be the Bottom but it never is.

In other News, it was just announced that Senator Ted Stevens was convicted of corruption. While I don't like to wish Evil on anyone, it is Good to see him get his come-uppance. However, he still intends to continue his campaign for re-election to the Senate. I find this Bizarre:

"Despite being a convicted felon, he is not required to drop out of the race or resign from the Senate. If he wins re-election, he can continue to hold his seat because there is no rule barring felons from serving in Congress. The Senate could vote to expel him on a two-thirds vote."

From what I understand, regular Humans who are convicted of a Felony lose their right to vote - but apparently Senators don't lose their right to be a Senator? This just makes no sense to Me...but of course we Cats probably just don't understand the intricacies of Government.

Meanwhile, the Obama Human continues to lead in the Polls, which is good news. Despite my Female Human's fear of a Stolen Election, I think he's going to actually win. Interestingly, about 40 telemarketers in Indiana walked off the job rather than read a Script attacking Obama. I wonder if THAT had ever happened before?

In the meantime, there is some Scary Stuff going on Out There. There are breaking reports of a white supremacist plot to assassinate Barack Obama having been, thankfully, broken up by the Feds. But how many more are Out There? This Country is a Very Scary Place. I am glad that, being a Cat, I can just hang out at Home and not put Myself at Risk. The Obama Human deserves a Lot of Respect for putting himself Out There and taking these Risks.

Apparently the United States has launched yet another Attack on some other Country out of the Blue - killing a bunch of people in Syria, including some Children. According to the Report,

"Syrian officials lashed out at Washington on Monday for a 'sheer violation of international law,' saying the U.S. attack killed eight people and wounded one."

Seems to Me that a Country can't get away with calling other Countries "Terrorists" if that Country is going to act the Same Way they do. I mean, what is Up with THAT?

Well, telling you all this News has now made Me depressed. I was trying to find some Lighthearted Stories to share with You but couldn't find Any. That is Scary in itself, isn't it?

My Female Human is thinking of taking off on Election Day to make calls to Get Out the Vote. Even though she lives in a Blue State, there should be no taking anything for Granted this year, no matter where You live.

So with that I leave you with this LOLCat from YesWeCanHas.com: