Monday, February 27, 2006

I'm Like Drudge, Except That I Tell the Truth

Not that many people read my blog or anything. But I thought I'd make a better case for my previous post on Saddam's WMD. I've always wanted to join the blogger news force and help break a story that is not getting out there because no one will talk about it, including the White House.

One mainstream news article after all.

Up to the minute.

UK news article, it's not just us.

Here's the story on O'Reilly.

Here's a summary of the summit to discuss the whole thing.

What will happen to the mainstream media? Or who cares, they suck anyway.

The argument is not so new after all.

Don Knotts Died

I'm devestated! Don Knotts was one of the funniest actors ever. If you've ever watched reruns of "The Andy Griffith Show" you know this truth.

I'm going to go rent "The Incredible Mr. Limpet" and "The Ghost and Mr. Chicken" and watch them back to back to console myself.

Sunday, February 26, 2006

I Can't Believe It . . .

. . . or maybe I can. For those of you who still think Bush lied, go ahead, eat your heart out.

Friday, February 24, 2006

A General Update and A Tagging

Of course, it's worse than I thought. After ending up in the emergency room and having the doctors there be unable to diagnose me I have come to that conclusion. I'm going to see a specialist this week to find out what is wrong with me, but I suspect ulcers. Anyway, lots of pain, no fun and not much ambition to write. So, I'll participate in a little survey that I got tagged to do and leave it at that for now.

1: Black and White or Color; how do you prefer your movies?
It just depends on the movie. Some are better in color, some black and white. For example, "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" would not work as a black and white film. One needs the rich colors to imagine the flavor of all that candy. On the other hand, the point of "It's a Wonderful Life" is very immaterial and deep. Color would take away from that aspect of the movie and cause one to focus more on the visual aspect than the thematic.

2: What is the one single subject that bores you to near-death? Listening to music majors/people talk about music. (Note: it is not music that bores me, it is listening to people who know too much about music go on endlessly about intracies that no one else cares about and criticize other people's singing or music because most of them have really big egos and do not believe that anyone else could possibly be good at what they do.)

3: MP3s, CDs, Tapes or Records: what is your favorite medium for prerecorded music? CDs, they're cheap and any song I want to hear is going to exist on CD.

4: You are handed one first class trip plane ticket to anywhere in the world and ten million dollars cash. All of this is yours provided that you leave and not tell anyone where you are going … Ever. This includes family, friends, everyone. Would you take the money and ticket and run? So what you mean to say is, "your money or your freinds?" Thank you for the kind thought, but I'll keep my friends.

5: Seriously, what do you consider the world’s most pressing issue now? Terrorism and nuclear proliferation are near the top of the list, so is the utter disregard for human life exemplified throughout the world. But as a Christian I try to remember who is really in control and it's not us. The most pressing issue might actually be something very different than my ant-like perspective can identify.

6: How would you rectify the world’s most pressing issue? When I find out I'll tell you.

7: You are given the chance to go back and change one thing in your life; what would that be? You can never change just one thing. Changing one thing would have a ripple effect on every other event that came after the one you changed. You never know what would have happened. Even if I regret something in my life, I would not want to change it because I learned from it. Besides, life is too short to live it on regrets.

8: You are given the chance to go back and change one event in world history, what would that be? Nothing. You never know what would have happened. Killing Hitler might not have prevented the Holocaust, there were others who believed what he believed.

9: A night at the opera, or a night at the Grand Ole’ Opry –Which do you choose? I enjoy opera, so that's what I would choose. A good Mozart opera.

10: What is the one great unsolved crime of all time you’d like to solve? I don't know. Unsolved crimes are usually surrounded by myths and weird crap. I'm reminded of the movie "8mm" upon hearing this question (don't worry, I only saw the edited for tv version). Some things are better left alone and truth is always stranger than fiction. Now, if you want mystery, who are the workers in Willie Wonka's chocolate factory?

11: One famous author can come to dinner with you. Who would that be, and what would you serve for the meal? Brian Jacques, of course. I would serve Deeper'n Ever Pie and pasties with strawberry fizz to drink and some rhubarb crumble for desert. And I would ask him to talk mole speech and talk like a hare. We would have a hilarious time and I would tell him that he is my inspiration for becoming a famous author one day.

12: You discover that John Lennon was right, that there is no hell below us, and above us there is only sky — what’s the first immoral thing you might do to celebrate this fact? Nothing. It is not the fear of hell that makes me what I am, it is the fact that God changed me. Of course, it would be fun to return to my alma mater and demolish the awful classroom building that caused me so much allergy pain for four years. I don't think that's an immoral act however, I think it would be an act of kindness.

Tuesday, February 21, 2006


Yup, I'm sick. Really sick. So, don't expect to hear much from me for a few days or a week. I'm in hiding. To be precise, I'm asleep. At the moment I am only half asleep, which is why I can write this coherently. In a little bit I will be completely asleep. You won't get anything out of me then.

Being sick hurts. All medicines have something in them that make me even sicker due to my favorite sulfite sensitivity. So the only thing I can really do to get better is sleep and drink water and orange juice.

I'm sure you all wanted to know this.

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Skipping Those Ones

Why is it that I have only ever seen maybe two movies nominated for Oscars? I consider my tastes in movies to be better than most people's. I only go to see the ones that get good reviews or the ones my friends tell me are really good. Still, of this year's nominees I have only seen "Pride and Prejudice," "Batman Begins," "The Corpse Bride," "The Curse of the Were Rabbit," "Cinderella Man," "The Chronicles of Narnia," and "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory." And those ones got nominated for really crappy awards (other than the two animated ones).

I'm never going to respect the people who nominate for Oscars. For example, let's talk about "Lost in Translation." That was all the rage. I watched the movie. I went through the entire movie wondering when it was going to start and then it ended. Maybe I missed something, but it didn't seem like much of a masterpiece to me. It's always like that.


Here's why he printed the cartoons. I apologize if you have to be registered with Wash. Post to get the article, however, since it is free it will not take you a moment to register and then you can read the article.

Upon further research, I have learned that it is not and never was against the Islamic religion to depict Muhammed in pictures. It is an influence of the Wahhabi sect of Islam and many Muslims still disagree over the idea.

Friday, February 17, 2006

Plugging Away

The more I look at this, the funnier I think it is. So I had to post a short plug and tell other people who might appreciate the humor.


I haven't rambled on this blog in a while. It is always so serious, or so seriously funny. I never just let my thoughts go wherever the wind will take them. So, here goes nothin'.

I like my new job a lot. It's nice not to have to deal with jerks all the time. Nobody cusses me out over the phone. Most of what I do is intricate, makes me think and includes staring at computer screens. I have a lovely little office where I can lock myself away and be all alone during lunch time. It's nice to get some all by my lonesome time every day. I like having a little space now and again. The one thing that differs between this job and the one I lost is the friendship factor. The people back at City Hall were my friends. I enjoyed hanging around with them and chatting. I miss having work buddies.

Furthermore, I have found that wherever I go I meet and make friends with the oddball people. The ones who no one else take seriously. I have never worked in a job and not had a "weird friend," as I call them. I enjoy hanging out with the people no one else understands. I do not make these strange friends because I pity them. Rather, because I see the good in almost every person and I think that every person can teach me something about life in general. Here, everyone is taken seriously and everyone likes everyone else. There are no oddballs.

Actually, I take that back, there is an oddball: me. I'm the one without friends. I'm the misfit who's happy to be here but does not make sense in this place. I'm a poli-sci major working in mental health. I do not think like anyone else here. But there is no other person like me who makes friends with the weird one out. So now I'm all alone. I'm not sad about this. It's a great job and I enjoy it. Yet, I do wish that I did not have to be the weird one. I guess I know how it feels now. I miss my weird friends. They've all been left behind and I just do my job without any funny interruptions by people who will never make sense to those more normal than me.

Monday, February 13, 2006

Stupid, Just Stupid

People are nuts. That story should be one of those here and gone things where you kind of notice it, shrug and then forget it. The one about Cheney swearing at a Senator is almost more newsworthy than this one. If this story does get noticed it should be because Cheney had done an exemplary job making up for his mistake. Instead people are acting like Cheny shot his hunting buddy on purpose or something. I mean, come on, if I was gonna shoot my hunting buddy on purpose I'd sure as hell use something other than a shotgun with birdshot in it at long range! The national media is all upset now because Cheney did not immediately get on his cell phone to let them know he'd accidentally shot his buddy. He actually rushed over to make sure his friend was okay and then got him to a hospital. Man, Cheney's got messed up priorities. He made certain that good health care was provided for the man who he hurt by accident instead of talking to every damn newspaper in the country.

If I wasn't jaded before . . .

When I Least Expected

At the moment and in the place where I least expected it, I found a job. This one looks feasible, workable, good and my style of job. I started today. I enjoyed my first day immensely. Even orientation was a bit fun. One of the company CEOs talked to us and he made it clear that the company is honest with its employees and seeks to treat them well. The atmosphere seems right for me. The people are very friendly. I started getting to know several of the other new hires right off.

Basically, I am working in a mental health facility, dealing with insurance coverage for patients. It's an area where confidentiality is key, but since I will never see the patients that will be easy. My work is complex and most of it is done by computer. It's kind of fun learning new programs and systems.

Thank you for your prayers. They are much appreciated. I will not call this the end of my employment journey, but for the moment I am content. If this is what God had in mind all along then I do not know why I complained so much in the beginning.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Engler Why Did You Leave?

Because he was going to be term limited anway. I know, I know. I'm talking about Michigan. In the early 1980s when Blanchard was governor the state motto changed to "Last one to leave, turn out the lights!" Then we had twelve years with Governor Engler and I never could figure out why people did not like him. I mean, jobs were plentiful and the state government was not too intrusive. My state scholarship was well funded too. Now it's Granholm and the motto is quickly going back to the one we had under Blanchard. Granholm is charismatic and nice. But Michigan needs something more than charisma, it needs economic help. I don't usually agree with George Will (I think he's a weirdo), but for once he made some good points in an article.

I feel for my former home state. In a sense I will always be a Michigander, it's something that I can't change. I will always be proud of American made automobiles. Flaunting your Honda at me may always be a hanging offense even though it gets better gas mileage and most of the parts in it are American made anyway. I will always love snow and wind and cold weather during the wintery part of the year. That goes without saying, despite the fact that my weakened constitution cannot take the cold anymore and I am frequently ill during the winter months. Trees and cars, that's Michigan.

Sadly, Granholm has sent it into a major decline. She also tried to take away my state scholarship (which never made sense to me because she's a liberal and aren't they supposed to be for free education?). I really wish she would go back to Canada, not that I have anything against Canada, it's just that many of her policies would be more welcome there. Of course, now I've moved and I have no say in the gubernatorial race that's starting to get competitive. But I still care. I hope DeVos wins, because he knows the importance of business and employment. His plans are also much more feasible.

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Creative Protesting

A citizen has launched a creative protest in response to the Supreme Court's recent decsion on eminent domain. He plans to take Justice Souter's land for public use as a hotel (the Lost Liberty Hotel) and to build the justice's house into a cafe (Just Deserts). I find this to be an utterly hilarious gesture, although I doubt it will go anywhere soon. On the other hand who knows? While it is kind of mean for this guy to pick on the poor, old justice, it was also wrong of Souter to vote the way he did on that case. The right to property is important and the Constitution clearly indicates that it should be protected by government and not violated. More information here.

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Three Ways To Lose A War

1. Completely ignore all philosophic and religious underpinnings, especially as regards the enemy's view of you. Check.

2. Spend way too little money on the war in the first place and pull your troops out before they can finish disarming the enemy. Check.

3. Never reprimand your really stupid press about leaking important, secret information to the entire world until it has leaked something that is way too sensitive to ignore (allowing the information to reach the press is part of this one). Check.

Monday, February 06, 2006

Sometimes I Feel So Blonde

I apologize, everyone. I had my comments set to moderate and I really don't know how that happened. Anyway, since I have not put any email address into my blog settings the comments were not sent to me. Therefore, I have no way of finding and publishing any comments that may have been left for me. I'm sorry about that. I just thought you would all like to know why I have not moderated my comments. I just had a blonde moment I guess.

EDIT: I found them! I found them! It's like Christmas! I found all the comments. I feel terrible. I didn't even know comment moderation was turned on. You know what's really funny, my husband left a comment and he's heard me complaining about the comment thing for a week and half and he never told me that comment moderation was working. I finally got an email from one of my blogosphere friends informing me of what I had done. Thank you Rinceoir.

And what's even funnier. Not two weeks ago I told my friend Isaac that comments were not working on his blog. Then he found out that he had comment moderation on by accident. You'd think I would have checked that if I knew all that.

Sunday, February 05, 2006

All Or Nothing

That fragment describes Americans. That's what we are: an all or nothing people. We choose extremes, only extremes, nothing in between will do. We will have something one way or not at all. I propose that we have not always been this way. That we, in fact, once allowed compromise and partial agreement to win the day. Some may not have liked the compromises, but they understood the fact that such things had to be. Now, however, we accept no compromises and thus none of us are content with the way things are. Perhaps a few examples would clarify the discussion.

The Constitutional Convention of 1787 brought enormous disagreements to the forefront of American politics. Delegates from different regions wanted the new country to be shaped according to their own agendas. Thus, it was only through discussion, debate and eventual compromise that anything could be accomplished. One common example of this would be the issue of representation in the legislature. Large states wanted to be represented by delegates chosen according to population, while small states wanted each state to have one or two representatives. In the end they agreed upon a bicameral legislature that chose representatives in both of the desired means of choosing.

Another example, that is not often given much weight, would be that of slavery. Northern delegates to the Convention did not want slavery (I do think it was an unconscionable wrong, so don't bother me about slavery, okay) in the Constitution at all, period, nada. Some southernors like James Madison, Patrick Henry, George Washington and (yes, even) Thomas Jefferson agreed. However, many delegates felt slighted that they would not have representation for part of their population. These men would have refused to vote for a Constitution at all without some recognition of their region's way of life. In the end a way was found to mention slavery, give representation to that segment of the population and still not put the words "slaves" or "Negroes" into the document itself. There are three compromises on the issue of slavery within the Constitution. First, the Three Fifths clause allows each state to include "three fifths of all other Persons." (Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3). Many people assume that this clause means the founders believed an African American was three fifths of a person. It does not. It means they were acknowledging without acknowledging because they hoped that this part of the Constitution would become obselete before long. The second compromise on slavery can be found in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1. Here the Constitution states that the slave trade cannot be stopped until after 1808. This was simply to reassure southernors. Congress did outlaw the slave trade upon January 1, 1808. The third compromise on slavery is that of the Fugitive Slave Clause from Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3. This, as we probably all know, provided that a person could not escape "Service or Labour" in one state, by moving to another state that did not have the same laws. Many believe that these compromises show the framers' unwavering support for the institution of slavery (these many not being students of history). However, they show that the framers knew they had to compromise on a terrible injustice which existed in America. If not for those compromises our country would not be one country today. The founders chose between union or an end to slavery. Since many of them believed that slavery was utterly wrong, they assumed that people would grow wiser and would allow it to die out over the next 50 years or so. While this prediction turned out wrong, there was no way for them to know that. Thus, you can see that on a very serious matter the founders were willing to agree on some things so that much good could be done in one way and perhaps more good could be done further down the road. They took a small step by not including the word "slave" in the Constitution, in the hopes that a larger step could be taken without bloodshed. Furthermore, they built a country with the belief that they could make that country better as they went along. Rather than do things the "all or nothing" way, they chose to take important issues one at a time.

Major polarization over the issue of slavery led up to the Civil War. You could read entire books on the sectionalism that preceded the Civil War, so I will let you do that. Suffice it to say that things got ugly. In the meantime, the great compromisers died. One of the most well known of these great thinkers was Henry Clay. An eccentric southernor with much influence and eloquence, he presented the Compromise of 1850 which took a lot of debate to pass. Not long after that Henry Clay, Daniel Webster and John Calhoun died. The three of them were, to my mind, the last great thinkers and compromisers left in the United States Congress. Their death left no men of influence who had been alive long enough to have witnessed and fully understood the birth of our country and the principles set up at that time (not that Calhoun understood that stuff anyway). Then we had the Civil War and since that time compromise has been a thing of the past.

Today we are faced with many important issues upon which neither of the debate can we find a willingness for compromise. Two explosive domestic issues are abortion and homosexual marriage. One polarizing foreign policy issue is our response to terrorists and rogue nations who harbor terrorists. On each side of these issues we find people who want all or nothing. Preferably all. But we cannot have all. That is the way of it. We must either destroy one another and our own country or agree upon a compromise. No amount of agreeing to disagree will solve the problems at hand. Only a concerted effort to agree upon a midway point will have any effect. And yet we will not do that, because we no longer understand the art of compromise.

Perhaps some more concrete example would help you understand my meaning. Pro-lifers want no abortion whatsoever. They want Roe v. Wade overturned, although many of us never stop to realize that since states have changed their laws to allow for abortion now, overturning Roe would have little effect. On the other side, pro-choicers (or pro-abortionists) want a woman to have the full right to choose up until the day her child is coming through the birth canal. America actually has liberal abortion laws compared with most of Europe because we are unwilling to accept small changes in the laws. By we, I mean, especially pro-lifers. We try to push for the big change, the one that's going to be the magic wand to solve all of our problems. We do not recognize those who make small victories in our case because that's not what we want. But the fact is, small steps are the best way to change this. Small steps are the best way to show people that the unborn child's right to life is more important than anyone's right to choose. It sounds radical when phrased thus because my words do not express that small change nor the passage of time that gives the small change weight. First, make people understand that an unborn child is a human being. Then move on to change some minor laws, finally, watch the big laws become unpopular and die out. That is the way we should think about this issue. Killing one another over the issue will not solve the problem, it will only make us hate the other side more.

Next, consider the problem of homosexual marriage. It has come before the national spotlight and will not go away if we ignore it. On either side compromises could be made. What is wrong with civil unions? Homosexuals consider them to signify a sort of second class citizenship. On the other side, many against homosexual marriage revile civil unions. They see homosexual marriage as an affront to their beliefs and faith. You notice I have not given my opinion on this issue yet. That is because no one can understand compromise anymore, so if I state my full opinion, everyone will be insulted. It sucks, doesn't it? I'm going to lose no matter what I say, so I will just go for it. I believe that God intended marriage as something to exist between a man and a woman for many reasons. I believe that it makes the most sense biologically speaking because the procreation of the species is important. I also believe that civil unions would give homosexuals the legal benefit of marriage which is all the government can really do. Marriage itself is something beyond the laws made by man, thus it cannot be redefined or cheapened in God's eyes no matter what we do. The real issue is legal recognition, and that can be compromised on. Or at least, at one time it could be. There, I said it, shoot me.

Third and finally, I pointed out the issue of terrorism and our response to rogue nations. I have talked long enough, so I will not digress too deeply into this point. We seem to believe that we can either destroy all those who stand in our way or hide under tables waiting for them to bomb our cities. A greater emphasis on defense and collaboration with other nations facing this threat might be an excellent compromise here.
One side of the dialogue (for it is not a debate) wants to destroy all threats, the other side wants to allow the UN to do everything for us (these are just examples and may not represent all views on the matter). And each side wants everything to be their own way, but there are no two ways to do this. Not now, not ever.

In conclusion, I realize that I have said some shocking things in the eyes of both conservatives and liberals. I have expressed opinions that undoubtedly offend. Many will misunderstand my words. "How can she be a conservative?" you will ask. And I will answer in the immortal words of Daniel Webster, "Liberty and union, now and forever, one and inseparable!" If the man who could say that could see his way to compromise then so can I.

Friday, February 03, 2006

Give Me A Break

I paused to read some news today and the first thing I read was this story. I had heard a whisper about the whole Danish cartoon thing before now, yet I had no idea it was being blown so out of proportion.

Okay, would I like it if somebody drew a picture that depicted Jesus wearing a turban in the shape of a bomb? No. But I would also probably laugh at the poor fool who drew the picture and shrug my shoulders. Such is life. There was a play made awhile back which
depicted Jesus as a gay man who sleeps around. If that's not offensive to Christianity I don't know what is. Take the Mormon belief that Jesus traveled around the Americas and you've got some really weird affronts to Christianity. But Christians don't say things like this about people who offend our religion: “Whoever defames our prophet should be executed,” and "Denmark must be blown up.” Any Christian who rattles of a remotely extreme sentence is publicly humiliated for weeks on end.

This whole mess does not make Islam look like a happy religion. Freedom of religion is necessary, and each religion should allow for other religions to co-exist as well as viewpoints against their religions. Attacks on one's beliefs are to be expected. Many do not understand the faith of others, no matter what that faith may be. One journalist drawing a stupid cartoon should not send so large a portion of a religious sect into turmoil. After all, if that religion has truth in it then it will survive the stupidity of an offensive cartoonist.

I do not condone the drawing of offensive cartoons. I think it was very wrong of newspapers to print those drawings. However, I do not believe the answer to the problem is to kill the person who drew the picture and destroy their country. If anything, that gives weight to the nature of the drawing. It would be far better to point out why Islam is a peaceful religion by admonishing the newspapers that printed the picture and giving them reasons why their ideas are false. Tell people why the drawings are nonsense, don't threaten to destroy the entirety of Europe. After all, throwing one's cities into turmoil over a few offensive drawings is akin to the message pro-lifers send when they bomb abortion clinics.

Even so, some more moderate voices do speak in the crowds and it is good to hear them:
"Al-Sistani, who wields enormous influence over Iraq’s majority Shiites, suggested militant Muslims were partly to blame. He referred to 'misguided and oppressive' segments of the Muslim community and said their actions 'projected a distorted and dark image of the faith of justice, love and brotherhood.'"

EDIT: Here is the link to the Danish cartoons that started it all. I include this for clarity's sake, not for any malicious reason. I know that the media in the U.S. will refuse to reprint these cartoons anywhere, and I believe that people should know the whole truth of the matter. Here, also, is a link to another blogger who paid closer attention to detail than I or most others. If my posting of these links makes you suddenly want to kill me and destroy my cities (not that I have cities yet) please pick up your telephone, dial the operator and ask for the nearest psychiatrist in your location. Then go see that person. Thanks.

Moods and Lobbyists

Right now I am trying to get over the sad feeling that losing my job has given me. Next week will be my last week. Monday will be the last Monday there. My co-workers have all become very dear to me and I will miss them. Some of the people there want to help me find a good job and that's great because I plan to stay in touch with them. I have thought about leaving pranks for the less than qualified individual who will replace me. I have considered writing random things in his calendar to freak him out and placing thumb tacks or gum in strategic locations. Maybe a random bottle of something nasty disguised as ink or maybe I should break all the lead off from every pencil there and bust the pens so that he will get ink stains all over himself. There's all kinds of things I could do if I put my mind to it. But really, I don't care. It's not his fault he stole my job, it's the stupid, corrupt Mayor's fault. Anyway, I'm not meaning to rant. It just kinda hurts, you know. It's hilarious when you stop to think about it. I mean, how many people can say that the Mayor of a city took their job and gave it to a homosexual alcoholic with a criminal background? Not too many, I'd guess. So then, moving on. I am also trying to get over the fact that no one has commented on my blog in freaking two weeks. While I do not live for comments and I write for myself alone, it is sometimes nice to read other people's thoughts and to realize that someone out there does care. Oh well.

Now, I have given some thought to the whole Abramoff scandal. This brings me to another reason as to why I like Mike Pence so much. I watched him being interviewed on C-Span about a week and a half ago. The interviewer had a fetish for talking about the lobbyist scandals and he said something to this effect: "People are very upset about the fact that lobbyists can get the attention of Congresspeople when their own constituents are powerless to have an effect on their opinion." The interviewer further suggested that we put an end to lobbying on Capitol Hill.

Pence shot the guy down in 30 seconds. He pointed out that not every lobbyist is evil. In fact, most are not. He also stated that lobbying groups are more often than not made up of constituents with similar interests who want their voices heard. Pence thinks that one bad lobbyist should not be enough to destroy the entire system. And I agree.

I worked in D.C. for a while and I met a lot of very nice, very concerned lobbyists. Often they were nicer and more down to earth than the staff people who take constituent calls in Congressional offices. That is probably because they are not always stuck in the bubble world of Washington, D.C. where constituents can become annoyances just because they can't read the mind of the person answering the phone. Not that all Congresspeople are horrid, they're not, they tend to have staffers who do not think highly enough of their constituents, however. I digress. The fact is, lobbying is a workable system that does not need to be scrapped because one guy got some bribes in. I think that those who accepted the bribes should be punished as should that lobbyist, he really took advantage of a lot of American Indian tribes. But I digress, on with the rant.

People need to realize that lobbyists are not a bunch of wealthy weirdos who want to screw everyone over. They are frequently groups of concerned citizens who pool their resources and take their common cause to the Federal government for help. While I do not believe that this is what the Founders meant for things to work, I do believe that it could be one of the best systems possible when you consider the way Congress has outsourced their power to agencies. The fact is that someone has to see the laws that do not make sense and point them out or try to change them. Congresspeople do not have time to do that anymore. But lobbyists do have time. Furthermore, who is going to bring people's concerns to the government? Most people are apathetic about government on the whole. Thus, we need someone who is willing to be more energetic in the voicing of opinions. Why not lobbyists?

Really, lobbyists are not a whole bunch of jerks who bribe public officials. One is for sure, and he's getting his comeuppance. So get over it.

Wednesday, February 01, 2006

The Tangled Web, or Corruption In A Town

I know, I am supposed to talk about the State of the Union Address. Don't worry, I might. Right now, my own problems are hitting home a lot harder than those at the national level. I learned something today, something that makes me both angry and triumphant.

Most of you know that I was trying to get a job at City Hall where I have been temping for the past month and a half. That's the backstory. The current situation is that I am the althernate for the job and the new person will be arriving on Feb. 13 to fill the position. I have agreed to stay on as a temp until then. That's more so that I have time to say goodbye to all the friends I've made than anything else. Today, I learned something noteworthy.

My co-worker turned to me and said, "Esther, for what it's worth, you were the first pick for this job." I was astounded. I knew that the Mayor sometimes dictates who gets jobs. However, I understood that he only did that when the job was something higher up, like a program director. Everyone I spoke to told me that the Mayor would not handpick a person for a secretary position like the one I wanted. But no, the Mayor put pressure on the department to hire this one guy. Guess who the guy is? Well, he's the Deputy Mayor's gay lover. I'm serious. I got passed over for someone's love life. Needless to say everyone in the department already hates the new person because they wanted me to get hired and they know the reason I did not get hired. Okay, can I say discrimination?

It all makes sense, you know. When the hiring manager called me into her office to tell me that I did not get the job she was practically in tears. She could not give me a real reason as to why they did not pick me. She just kept saying that I am such a strong candidate and it was a difficult choice to make. In fact, it sounded to me like she made the choice because someone told her what choice she had to make.

On the one hand, I feel elated. I know now that I am good enough to be hired. I know that I did nothing wrong. I know that these people were not choosing against me for any technical reason and that they took all my efforts into account. In the end, they had to keep their jobs. And the Mayor would have replaced them if they did not do what he said.

But I am also very angry and upset. I cannot help but cry foul and point out the fact that this administration is a very liberal one. People go on about Republican corruption and ignore the corruption in their own backyard. The ones who called for progressive reform are the ones who defy and corrupt it this very day. Honestly, a part of me wants to make that stupid, foul Mayor pay for this a hundred times over. But I'm not like that, and I know that I would be shooting myself in the foot if I did that. He would never allow anyone to hire me and he would probably fire half the people in that department if he found out that I know this. Don't get me wrong here, if the Mayor's appointee was worth hiring I would be fine with the situation. But apparently this fellow has no credentials, he stunk in his interview and he has a criminal record. Great.

So yeah, keep it on the down low.

I'm gonna find someplace to sit and cry now and construct campaign strategies for electing a new Mayor.