Shoot Baby, Shoot!

Gun control, always in the back of the mind but until very recently (today), it wasn't main concern in Washington. It is no surprise why politicians have taken a lack-luster approach to the gun control issue, when you have problems such as two raging wars and a rapidly failing economy, guns seem to fall to the wayside. Let the hunters and overly-righteous right wingers have their 'toys' while everyone else worries about health insurance reform.

President Obama's lack of approach regarding gun control is justified and expected, from level-headed realists. The fact that he is ignoring the issue shows that he will not succumb to trivial issues during a time of crisis. That being said, state governments have taken the liberty upon themselves to fill the void Mr. Obama has left.

According to a recent New York Times article, states such as Virginia, Arizona, Wyoming and Montana have adapted gun control laws. The new legislation is highly troublesome to those, like myself, advocating stronger and stricter gun control. With these newly found liberties will have costly consequences.

For example, Virginia has changed gun control laws and it will now allows citizens to carry guns in public restaurants and bars where alcohol is served. Also in Virginia, consumers are now able to buy more than one gun a month. This is truly terrifying. Homicide rates will skyrocket with permission to carry a gun where alcohol is served. Ill-tempered drunkards will whip out a gun at the drop of a hat to settle a dispute of any kind. It is absolutely ridiculous to allow deadly weapons in alcohol infested environments. And why on God's green earth would someone need to buy more than one gun a month? You can only shoot one gun at a time. Multiple gun handy-work should be left to 007 and Batman.

I find these freshly revised laws in Virginia to be among the most poorly thought out decisions in quite some time, as far as state governments are concerned. The tragic shooting at Virginia Tech should have been a factor immensely considered in the mind of lawmakers. But alas, it was not and Annie Oakley still gets her gun.

In other states like Arizona and Wyoming, states are considering allowing citizens to carry a concealed weapon without a permit. Do I even need to explain why this is absurd? Perhaps this is my own, idealistic and utopia-like mindset but wouldn't this increase death by unregistered guns? Yes, it would.

But Obama can't escape the criticism that easily. He recently signed a bill that now allows people to carry guns in national parks and in luggage on the Amtrak. Granted, this change was irrefutably attached to the end of a bill that had nothing to do with gun control; the bigger picture was far more important than guns. Regardless, I won't ever feel safe getting on an Amtrak train knowing that someone may potentially have a gun in his or her suitcase. It is a mode of transportation, just like an airplane, the same safety regulations should apply.

When the founding fathers created our Constitution and added the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms, times were completely different. Guns were used for protection and food. Some would argue that is what they are used for today but not in the same way they were used during the late 1700s. When interpreting the Constitution, one must take 'original intent' into major consideration. The context in which the Constitution was written was set for the 1770s and 1780s. In 2010, we do not have the same issues as our founding fathers. It is unrealistic to interpret the Second Amendment literally, in the sense we have already have.

Weakened gun control will ultimately lead to more heartache and stupidity among the American people.

GOP Crazies Talk Politically Correct

Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin continue to yammer their (absurd) opinions with absolutely no regard for the potential constituency left to gain. Every word that slips away from the mouths of Limbaugh and Palin is vaguely similar to nails on a chalk board, as far as I'm concerned. These two prominent faces of the Republican Party are a joke. But the board spectrum of ignorance on behalf on Limbaugh and Palin is too vast to discuss in general terms. Let's focus on one particular item of offensiveness for today.

One Word: Retard.

Let's take a look at the statement made by Mr. Limbaugh, shall we?

"Our political correct society is acting like some giant insult’s taken place by calling a bunch of people who are retards, retards. I mean these people, these liberal activists are kooks. They are looney tunes."

So, let me get this straight. He is saying that it is O.K. to call the special needs people of America 'retards'? Yes, yes he is. The politically correct left-wingers, according to our friend Rush, are running a muck creating chaos for level-headed right-wingers. This may be the single most offensive statement geared towards special needs people and those whom are directly effected by a special needs person, one way or another.

Well done, Rush. You've done it again.

I am the older sister of two brothers, both of which are special needs children; Collin, 16, suffers from Wolf-Hirschhorn Sydrome and Keaton, 11, suffers from a mild case of Autism. The word 'retard' isn't just a word. The impact of what is said when that word is causally thrown around, as Limbaugh so beautifully demonstrated, is much stronger than anyone will ever be able to imagine. By referring to someone or something as a 'retard' or 'retarded' you are inevitably implying that said object is inferior to the (undefined) concept of normality. Different, yes. Inferior, absolutely not.

Endorsing such verbal atrocities was the ever-so eager sidekick and potential 2012 presidential candidate (a topic for another date), Ms. Sarah Palin. When asked by none other than Fox News about Limbaugh's inconsiderate remarks, Ms. Palin had this to say,

"I didn’t hear Rush Limbaugh calling a group of people whom he did not agree with ‘f-ing retards’ and we did know that Rahm Emanuel has been reported, did say that. There’s a big difference there. But again, name-calling, using language that is insensitive, by anyone, male, female, Republican, Democrat, is unnecessary. It’s inappropriate. Let’s all just grow up."

I find this statement fascinating. Clearly, Palin's attempt at an ambiguous politician answer left her between a rock and a hard spot. Having a child that suffers from Down Syndrome, it is truly intriguing why she did not dispute the statement in defense of her own flesh and blood. Is respecting the elders of the GOP more important to Palin than protecting her children?

The dynamic duo of Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin are the most terrifying aspect of the GOP. If these are the two, best faces the GOP has to offer the American people then good luck. Limbaugh and Palin will single-handedly destroy the Republican with one weapon: words.

(Quotes from dailykos.com)

The Victorious Butter

Once upon a time, there was a relatively young nation with a major deficit. A fairy tale, Mr. Obama is quickly learning, that may not have a happy ending. So what does the so-called 'Change' president have up his sleeve, you ask? Well, he potentially, and unknowingly, rips open another wound on the body of political debate, Guns. vs. Butter.

Within the past week, President Obama announced his plans for which domestic programs would see a budget cut; the New York Times reports air-traffic control, farm subsidies, education, nutrition and national parks will be among the many domestic programs suffering from budget cuts for the 201o fiscal year. While these domestic needs are sparingly let go, President Obama will proceed with expanding troops in Afghanistan and keeping this pestering war in tact.

Don't get me wrong, Obama's platform from day one was eliminate the war in Iraq and his stance on Afghanistan is as demonstrated. But is cutting funding for domestic programs (unrelated to national security) really the best idea? No. The government hands the military billions upon billions of dollars every year to spend on weapons development and secret projects civilians are to be unaware of. At such a crucial time financially for everyone effected by the recession, is maintaining these militant side-projects the right thing to do? Again, no.

The way to fix the deficit, or at least get the ball rollin' would be to cut back on military spending AND domestic spending. Our government needs to re-prioritize and then redistribute the money. Finally putting an end to loop-holes, harsher punishments for the Wall Street thief and making sure the money is actually spent the right way. All of these will indefinitely help in the short run. As far as the long run is concerned, education is key.

The government has an undeniable and tremendous responsibility in regards to educating the future of the nation. By giving more money to education programs and having stricter regulations and standards for our children, the government will be producing efficient leaders for tomorrow. Fixing your mistakes now and teaching the youth from them will be a major component for preventing future recessions and financial irresponsibility. Feed, cloth, educate, medicate and house the children of today for the betterment of tomorrow.

President Obama has, once again, shed light upon the timeless debate of Guns vs. Butter. And Butter has idealistically triumphed Guns. This is a call to action for a modern-day Robin Hood! Mr. Obama, are you up for the challenge?