My son’s class is having a cacophonous torture session patriotic program, next week, to show case their hard work and singing talent (or lack of, in my son’s case.) As he was practicing the “Star Spangled Banner,” something dawned on me. The words in the song are extremely sentimental and rich in patriotism, yet the majority of our citizens are not. Many people who were born and raised in the good ol’ US of A, have lost (or never had) a strong sense of patriotism. They spend much of their lives complaining about the state of the union, the war, the politics. Not until a national tragedy occurs, do many of our neighbors show a sense of pride for their country. It is pretty sad that the only time I saw amore than ten vehicles display a flag or support slogan, was right after the events of 9/11. Over time, the display of support dwindled. Eventually the complaints started seeping back up through the patriotism. Election years are especially rampant with negative nellies and anti-American slurs. So, as I endured relished my son’s serenade, new words came streaming into my mind. In five painful blissful minutes of being a hostage captive audience, I formulated a new version of our beloved National Anthem. Yes, I am quite the multi tasker….I have mastered the art of pretending to listen while composing poetry, cooking, ending world hunger, etc… It comes from nine years of school performances. Here is the “new” Star Spangled Banner according to the Complainers Anonymous Club of America (aka: CACA)

Oh say can you see

that this country’s lost sight

of the values and God

on which it was founded.

Through long wars and false tongue

we are robbing our young

of a world rich in peace

and a leader who’s grounded.

And the battle for oil

lines their pockets with spoil.

Our leaders live well

from the fruits of our toil.

Oh say does our poor mangled

country cry loud

for return to our first creed

and a truth that stands proud!

While I agree that there are some changes needed and that this is not a perfect land, I still love this place. I feel privileged to live here and think that those who hate it so much, should leave.

 

Bookmark to:
    

Sales analytics are showing that the sale of the controversial morning after pill is skyrocketing, much to the dismay of conservative and Christian activists who consider the pill a form of abortion.

Putting politics, religion, and morality aside, are blessings and consequences fully being considered in the light of objectivity?

Of course, the morning after pill is nothing short of a miracle for those women who are raped or have a night of indiscretion (after all, everybody makes mistakes) in preventing a pregnancy before it’s really viable, but what are the real consequences? Could it be the lack of consequences?

Some more moderate pro-lifers may be grateful in as far as the morning after pill might affect how often an invasive abortion procedure is needed or done, but is a society free from accountability and responsibility one of integrity and boundaries?

We keep creating policies, products and procedures to circumvent consequences. While some of these inventions and policies are miraculous and life saving, is it possible that diminishing the need or skill to control ones impulses or negate sound judgment may be counterproductive? Isn’t there a benefit of second guessing oneself or making an attempt to be responsible?

Bookmark to:
    

One would think it’s not good practice to mix politics with business, but a New York storage facility likes to use their advertising as a venue to promote their personal politics:

In case you can’t read the photo, it says, “Your closet space is shrinking faster than her right to choose.” There’s one group that thinks it’s bullshit, and that’s the (surprise, surprise) Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. (There’s a Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights??)

The president of the organization says this:

“Why a storage company finds the need to advertise its support for abortion is a story all of its own, but when it seeks to depict the pro-life community—which is primarily Catholic and Protestant—as oppressive, then a line has been crossed.”

Personally, I think it’s really crass (hello, a coat hanger?) and cheapens the message it’s trying to convey. But I also think that if a business wants to wear their politics on their sleeve and face the consequences, they have the right to do it (I would feel the same way if this ad had a “pro-life” message).

Would this billboard inspire you to store your crap there, or would it make you never want to give them a dime of your hard earned money? Or does it not matter either way?

Bookmark to:
    

One routine debate that comes up on The Imperfect Parent forums quarterly is the introduction of gay lifestyles into the  public classroom. The debate is contentious and emotional and almost always ends with name-calling.

Dennis Prager, a conservative radio show host, contends that the gay marriage debate will be a defining factor in our nation, one that further separates and divides us much in the way abortion has. In some ways, it’s even more divisive, but the issue is not solely owned by the conservative movement. Given that 9 stated voted on banning gay marriage and only one moved not to, it is becoming clear that conflicting beliefs span over party lines.

It’s been my experience that more liberal leaning parents tend to side with integrating gay/bi/trans issues into early education, even as early as preschool; as a means to teach tolerance. My experience also tells me that more right leaning parents are opposed to it, arguing the rights of parents to introduce these types of issues and using tax dollars to what they see as indoctrination of children. While the deciding votes may be left up to the moderates, it becomes a heated debate in which people cannot help themselves from issuing personal attacks against each other.

In the recent past, news stories have surfaced about “diversity programs” in which young children in public schools read books that feature two dads or two moms, or organizations, designed to spread positive feeling and viewpoints about gay/bi/trans people. It usually makes news when a parent protests and asks why there wasn’t an opt-out program or why they weren’t informed and lastly, why this is part of the natural academic curriculum. These parents are either chastised or praised, according to ones personal beliefs.

This issue is still such that we are in the throws of determining a general consensus and a cultural and societal position on gay marriage, it’s no wonder it always become so explosive and heated. More and more, it is becoming about the norms that are mandated by the government and imposed on children. Children become the pawns of the political wars and at what cost? If we agree that there needs to be clear division of church and state, can we not see that the same of political agendas? Children get caught in the middle of whatever their parents political viewpoints are, which is fine at home, but is it okay at school?

For me, it’s not a matter of gay rights or whether or not alternative lifestyles are moral or immoral, but rather what is appropriate for young children. I also don’t trust schools and administrators (we all know how well American schools are run, right?) to teach a young child a complicated, grown-up matter in a way that preserves a child’s self-identity. In other words – doesn’t confuse them as to what being gay/bi/trans really is. I would rather leave that up to parents to explain to their children, even if that means some parents might pass on values and judgements that I don’t agree with because whether I agree with them or not, that is their right and unfortunately, their children will have to suffer the consequences of those teachings.

In my mind, children need more reading, writing and arithmetic and less responsibility for every-one’s self-worth. I hear small children made fun of by other parents for being naive, instead of celebrating their innocence. Let small children be little for just a little longer. Schools can teach universal acts of kindness and tolerance without expecting them to fight the battles of grown-ups and for that my friends, I am often times accused of being a bigot. You will have to take my word for it, that I am most certainly not a bigot and I wish no ill-will on gay couples or gay individuals, nor do I think they are doing anything wrong. What I do think is that relationships are complicated. Sex is complicated. Life is complicated — too complicated for small children to fully comprehend.

What do you think?

Should gay/bi/trans lifestyles be introduced to children as young as preschool?

 

Bookmark to:
    

Although I tend to be liberal on most issues, that doesn’t mean that I agree with every Democrat all the time. Case in point: House Democrat Rep. Charles Rangel has just announced that he will be proposing a measure in the next few months to reinstate the draft.?‚? One of his reasons for making this proposal is to “deter politicians from launching wars.”

“There’s no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm’s way,” Rangel said.

Um, is it just me or is that a really bad reason to reinstate the draft? What kind of crazy reverse psychology game is he trying to play??‚? I’m pretty sure that I don’t want the draft used as a way to double dog dare the administration to go to war. Because newsflash, Rangel, they may decide to go to war anyway. Are you ready to?‚? allow your children or grandchildren to be drafted into a war they may not even believe in? Because I’m not. And I’m pretty sure most Americans aren’t either.

The good news is that there is almost no chance in hell that this will pass through Congress given that Rangel has already failed twice to pass?‚? similar legislation. Maybe he should take the hint and figure out a better way to deter politicians from going to war.

Hmmmmm…?‚? Might I suggest the upcoming Global Orgasm for Peace Rally?

?‚?

Bookmark to:
    

Considering that we’ve made it our mission here in America to spread “democracy” far and wide throughout the world, you’d think that our country’s electoral process - arguably the most fundamental of all democratic processes - would be running smoothly. You’d think that there wouldn’t be any “funny business” going on that might, say, cast some doubt as to whether our elections are conducted fairly.

At least that’s what I’d like to think. Unfortunately, I have been hearing more and more about the underhanded, and?‚? seemingly illegal, practices that are conducted to suppress voters.

There are so many shocking examples, I don’t even know where to start. Here are a few:

• In California, Tan Nguyen, a Republican candidate running for Congress, has admitted that one of his staff members sent out up to 14,000 letters to newly registered Latino voters, telling them that it is illegal to vote if they are an immigrant. Not an illegal immigrant. An immigrant. I guess Governor Schwarzenegger better stay out of the voting booth this year then, eh?

?‚?

• In Florida, early voting has revealed a “small little glitch” with the electronic voting machines. Apparently, after some voters selected a Democratic candidate, the computer registers that they voted for the Republican candidate. I know you think I’m joking, but I’m totally serious. This was reported in the?‚? New York Times today. Apparently, the elections officials in that county don’t really see it as a problem because as long as voters complain, an elections official can come into their voting booth (forget the violation of privacy here) and fix the computer for them. That’s if the voter realizes what has happened. And that’s a big if as far as I’m concerned.

?‚?

• Around the country, Republican campaigns have been “robocalling” voter households with pre-recorded anti-Democratic messages that have made many voters believe that the call is being made by a Democratic candidate. (i obsess linked to several good articles on this in her post today.) Because the calls are made to the same voters repeatedly and because voters often hang up before it becomes clear that the call is not actually from the Democratic candidate, many annoyed voters have called Democratic headquarters offices to complain and, in some cases, voters have even threatened not to vote for the Democratic candidate who they believe is making the calls.

Want more examples that will piss you off??‚? Read the transcript from Amy Goodman’s interview with New York Times columnist Adam Cohen who was interviewed today on Democracy Now!. Learn about how often electronic voting machines break down and how they often contain no paper trails or learn how in Georgia, a now defunct law required?‚? voters to buy an ID card?‚? if they didn’t have a driver’s license - too bad those ID cards weren’t made readily available for purchase.

So, tomorrow is election day, and I have already sent in my absentee ballot. I’m just crossing my fingers that it doesn’t get returned to me for using the wrong color ink. Somehow, that doesn’t sound as preposterous as it did yesterday.

Bookmark to:
    

So Patrick Crowe, a Kansas City, Missouri math teacher, wants Oprah Winfrey to run for President in 2008 and he won’t stop talking about it. She’s told him to quit pestering her and she’s even tried to steer him toward promoting Illinois Senator Barack Obama. Obama says he’s not ready to run in ‘08 and Crowe won’t stop pushing Oprah. I confess, I’m a little bit on the fence about this one.

I know it won’t come as a shock to anyone here that I’ll be more than a little elated to see this miserable excuse for an administration’s reign come to an end. You know it’s bad when you start thinking wistfully about Richard Nixon– and I don’t mean the sanitized history book version that hindsight provides. I mean.. the administration I lived through. Yeah…it looks pretty good from here.

And, of course, you can’t swing a dead cat around in the periodicals section of the bookstore without hitting a magazine touting the most recent humanitarian efforts of “Miss O”. She feeds and educates African kids. She gets her viewers to send money for AIDS. She profiles deadbeat dads. rapists and pedophiles and her fans turn them in to the police. She shames authors on national tv and devotes entire shows to advice on how you’re wearing the wrong bra. She’s “all that” and a package of Pop-Tarts. You’d think I’d be thrilled to have Oprah and her Pashmina-giving staff lend a healing touch to this angry and violated nation. And you’d be right…sort of. But President Oprah? I dunno. The whole “Legends Ball” thing rubs me the wrong way and why she thinks we care about losers like Bobby Brown or Mike Tyson is a huge puzzle to me. Plus, she interrupts her guests all of the time while they’re talking so that she can sagely sum up for them the point they were just about to make. I admit it. She irritates me just a little. I’d totally let her buy me a car, but I’m not sure I want her to be the Leader of the Free World. Here are a few reasons why:

(1) Oprah’s Book Club. At least when Oprah claims to have read and be able to discuss the existentialist views of Jean-Paul Sartre, the chat will be televised and the whole country can see it in order to believe it. Oh, wait! My mistake. A President who reads stuff like books and the daily briefings and warnings about 9/11 is a good thing. Right?

(2) Gail King would have to be The First Lady because Steadman just isn’t around enough. At least with Gail there would be someone like a BFF around to tell Oprah to “step off” when she was getting a little bit ahead of herself. Someone whose advice she actually listens to and whose advice she would follow…instead of someone who stands by practicing the adoring Nancy Reagan expression that masks a lot of unexpressed hostility and a killer craving for a cigarette. Besides…I’ve heard that Oprah knows how to correctly pronounce “nuclear”. That’s gotta be worth something. That’s another point for Oprah.

3) Nate Berkus would be the official Presidential decorator hired to completely re-do the entire West Wing. What? Am I completely insane? Who wouldn’t want that? Get rid of the horrible flocked wallpaper that “43″ never saw because he was mostly on vacation in Crawford clearing brush… PLUS ditch the revolving bookcases with the fake Books of the Month that hide all the Presidential hooch. C’mon! You know it’s there! *sigh*. One more point for Oprah. Wow, I’m starting to lose my own argument.

(4)Want several million raised for Darfur? The fight against Female Genital mutilation in Third World Countries? More money for teachers in some impoverished backwater town…or any town? Illiteracy? Yeah…who thinks this Congress would vote to move on ANY of this stuff before giving itself another raise? I thought so. Maybe Oprah could fill Congress with her viewers who love and respect her enough to do her bidding…and then find a lovely Sheryl Crow cd and some Sephora gift certificates on their desks as a way of saying “thanks”. I’m sensing a pattern here…

(5)Her administration would have at least one voice of reason. A person who could quell the clashing of swords and the self-serving chest beating that power often brings to those in charge of making the law and yet somehow managing to live above it. Two words that might strike fear into the hearts of any one seeking to make Oprah a puppet figure for their own evil plans: “DR. PHIL”. Be afraid. Be very afraid, Dick Cheney. Someone inside the White House questioning the Prez and VP?? It’s called “Checks and Balances”. When was the last time we had that? When was the last time anyone listened when we had it? Why am I talking to myself? Score another for “O”.

(6)When Oprah made a pariah out of writer James Frey, she did it for one reason and one reason only: BECAUSE SHE DIDN’T COTTON TO LOOKING LIKE A TOTAL UNINFORMED BOOB IN FRONT OF HER NATIONAL AUDIENCE BY ENDORSING A NOVEL (A WRITTEN DOCUMENT CLAIMING SOMETHING HAPPENED , THOUGH IT DIDN’T HAPPEN EXACTLY THE WAY THE BOOK SAID) THAT WAS REALLY AN EMBELLISHED PIECE OF “FICTION”. At least Oprah knows when she looks bad and will go to great lengths not to let it happen again. I don’t recall her saying, “Heckuva book, Jamie boy!” after he was caught fabricating his life in print. And as for allowing her “Oprah’s Book Club” sticker to be pasted on something that makes her look as though she doesn’t have a clue about what’s going on? Nah! I doubt it. And what about declaring war for similar reasons? Nope. I’m not seeing it.

(7)Think Oprah would stand at a lectern and let any behind-the-scenes lackey feed someone else’s words/thoughts into her ear via an earpiece? Think again. The only grimaces and pauses you’ll see in her State of the Union Addresses will be the ones where she’s thinking about how to Fire Your Ass.

Oprah’s an only child. So…when she wins the election it won’t be because a sibling in Florida rigged the voting.

9) Photo Ops. Sure, there will be a lot of these. Miss “O” likes to have her picture taken. Rest assured, however, none will be taken atop a smoking and unexcavated pile of the World Trade Center or standing on an aircraft carrier wearing a fighter pilot costume.

And finally, Oprah knows when she wouldn’t be suited for a job. She’s never wanted to be commissioner of baseball and she’s built every one of her business ventures into empires…from the ground up. She doesn’t squander family start-up money because there is no family money. It’s all hers. Every dollar of it. Oprah isn’t running for President and that’s okay. But you’ve gotta give credit where credit is due. It’s a great thing to know you’re good at what you do, but Oprah gets my respect for turning down a job she thinks she’d do badly. Not everyone has that kind of guts or wisdom. Tough luck for us. She gets my vote anyway.

Bookmark to:
    

As most of you know, I only started blogging this past April as our site’s prior focus has always been on the feature essays on the homepage and on our forums. Recently, Prescott and I decided that we did not want to be left behind in the dust of the growing blogoshpere.

Acknowledging that having Prescott and Jessica all day, all the time, would be less than riveting, especially given that we do a weekly podcast as well, I decided to surf the net in search of talented bloggers who would want to share in all the imperfect glory that is The Imperfect Parent, and hopefully add a dimension of varying opinions to our growing site.

My first quest was to find gifted writers with the talent to express themselves in the written word and and to invite those with differing opinions and backgrounds to enhance the diversity of the site and to enlighten moms about various parenting methods, philosophies, and opinions, as well as political and social views as seen by a wide variety of people. If their opinions were polar opposite of mine — great! My wish was (and still is) to have all viewpoints represented, or at least, as many as fit The Imperfect Parent criteria of being a good writer and having something interesting to say.

I found out quite quickly that it wasn’t hard to find good writers with opposing opinions to mine. However, I did notice a common theme amongst these great writers and that was their politcal leanings – which all tended to be towards the left. There’s a subgroup that seems to be poorly represented in the mommy blogging world — the mom that leans towards the political right. You see, I tend to lean right of center on many issues, although I fancy myself a Libertarian. I believe that government should stay out of my private life, while my husband tends to lean left of center on many issues. If it doesn’t create balance, it creates tension, but it is never boring.

Problem is, when I went to look for bloggers like myself, those who might consider themselves Libertarian or Republican (oh, no!), I have fallen short. After hours of searching and thinking of possible ways to find back doors into the psyche of the conservative mom, it became more and more apparent that it was going to be like finding a needle in a haystack. Liberal mommy bloggers abound, conservative mommy bloggers, not-so-much.

You see, what was a shortly lived obsession and challenge of mine has given way to acceptance. Acceptance that the internet is ruled by lefty intellectual mommy bloggers. I even found demographic statistics to support this belief. From blogads.com:

According to the blogads 2006 Mom blog survey, 12,320 respondents answered that they are:

Apolitical  8.21%
Democrat 48.34%
Republican 13.87%
Libertarian 5.14%
Independent 18.64%*
Green  5.82%

*My personal belief is that there is really no such thing as an Independent. I think people lean one way or another on most issues.
The percentages explain why then, most of the conservative mommy blogs I do stumble upon have been pretty fucking awful. Percentage-wise, I just have a better chance of finding a wordsmithing lib than I do a neo-con.

This is interesting to me as radio tends to be ruled by conservative hosts and the internet has some hugely popular, conservative blogs (instapundit, The Bleat, Little Green Footballs…just to name a few…), but the ones which are popular are not written by moms. The fact still remains, mom bloggers, in the traditional “mommy blogger” genre, tend to be lefties. Why is this? I scratch my head.

Do more “mainstream” (conservative) moms tend to work outside the home? Do they spend more time at soccer try-outs than online? Do they read more books or are they simply illiterate and turn to speakies rather than torment themselves with phonics? I have no idea.

And don’t get me wrong, I’d rather surround myself with intelligent, left leaning people that are able to communicate and back up their viewpoints, than with judgmental (although that exists on both sides), lock-step, Bush-lovin’ conservatives of the religious-right. (I actually don’t think Bush is a Republican anyway, but that’s a point for another blog.)

I’m just wondering, where are the moms who think that if you make money, you ought to be able to hold onto it, who want the government to butt out of their business and think that we ought to have a strong defense, in order to protect our kids?

Maybe they’re all in the hills of Utah with dial-up. Does anybody know?

Bookmark to: