Obama's First State of the Union Address

It's all Bush's fault!!!!

[Thanks, M!]

The Power of Iconography: The Ubiquitous "O"

A good friend of mine tipped me off to this YouTube video about Obama's ubiquitous O.  Bill Whittle of PJTV offers some insight into Obama's O -- the branding of America.



Some of Whittle's finer points:

• The O is the gold standard of branding: plowed fields of grain under the sunrise of a new tomorrow; the circle - complete and self-contained; Whittle compares this to the occasional use of "W" during the presidential campaign, but then set aside thereafter

• From Obama's website Whittle analyzes the O: all traditional icons fade out with the O pulling your eye into the future; the American eagle isn't perched but seems to be on the verge of flying away, the American flag falling, our nation's motto "e pluribus unum" is virtually unreadable - like letters stamped in soft sand.  The only things that's sharp and well-defined in this image of the circle -- the O.  That's what's permanent and immovable.  Everything else is fading away.

• mybarackobama.com: run by the Democratic National Committee -- all the people depicted here are "branded";

• Whittle makes good points of how poorly the RNC has packaged its image -- the RNC uses stodgy, uninspired iconography

• The Obama "O" is EVERYWHERE

• Whittle points out that we are seeing an individual brand being used alongside, or sometimes in place of, the Seal of the POTUS.  The DNC's use of it: is it a perpetual campaign; a branding of ideology; a cult of personality

• The O is shorthand for all of the positive the President wants to project.  It is also being used as a shorthand of the negative.  (Love the spoofs of the brand!  LOL is my favorite.)

[Thanks, C, for this tasty morsel!]

Driving The National Debt

Great visual!!!

"Obama's planned spending makes Bush look like a coupon-clipping housewife."

[Tip: BlondeSagacity]

Craziness continues in the world of Political Correctness, as evidenced by this article that appeared earlier this week on UK's Daily Mail Online:

Employer told not to post advert for 'reliable' workers because it discriminate against 'unreliable' applicants


When it comes to hiring staff, there are plenty of legal pitfalls employers need to watch out for these days.

So recruitment agency boss Nicole Mamo was especially careful to ensure her advert for hospital workers did not offend on grounds of race, age or sexual orientation. 

However, she hadn't reckoned on discriminating against a wholly different section of the community - the completely useless. 

When she ran the ad past a job centre, she was told she couldn't ask for 'reliable' and 'hard-working' applicants because it could be offensive to unreliable people.

'In my 15 years in recruitment I haven't heard anything so ridiculous,' Mrs Mamo said yesterday.

'If the matter wasn't so serious I would be laughing out loud.

'Unfortunately it's extremely alarming. I need people who are hardworking and reliable - and I am pleased to discriminate in that way. If they're not then I really can't use them. The reputation of my business is on the line.

'Even the woman at the jobcentre agreed it was ridiculous but explained it was policy because they could get sued for being dicriminatory against unreliable people.

'She told me they'd had lots of problems with people taking them to court for adverts stating something like "would suit school leaver".'

Mrs Mamo, 48, of Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, runs Devonwood Recruitment, which supplies hundreds of cleaners, caterers and porters to hospitals across the country.

She filed the advert for a £5.80-an-hour domestic cleaner at a hospital in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, through the Jobcentre Plus online service last Thursday.

However, when she rang the nearest branch in Thetford, Norfolk, to make sure details would be available to jobseekers who turned up in person, she was transferred to a woman who said the wording was unacceptable.

The 'offensive' advert which Job Centre Plus allowed on the website but not on the instore display.

Mrs Mamo, a divorced mother of two, added: 'I had to battle to have "must speak English", which they also said was discriminatory.  'In the end, I had to write "must speak English due to health and safety reasons" because they're dealing with hazardous materials.'

The diktat was widely criticised yesterday. A spokesman for the Campaign Against Political Correctness said: 'This is absolutely ridiculous.

'Of course people want reliable workers and employers should be able to ask for them. If they can't advertise for what they want then the system is broken.'

The Equality and Human Rights Commission added: 'This is in no way in breach of any discrimination law.

'Mrs Mamo should consider very unreliable any advice that she may have received implying that this aspect of her advert was discriminatory.'

Yesterday the Department for Work and Pensions said it could not comment on the conversation Mrs Mamo had with the member of staff at Thetford.

However, a spokesman insisted her original advert had run on the Jobcentre Plus website and on computer terminals in branches.

She added: 'Reliability is important to employers and we welcome ads seeking reliable applicants.'

Fer cryin' outloud!

Superbowl: A Battleground Again ... This Time for Gays

Ha!  After just blogging about the controversial pro-life ad to possibly be aired by CBS during the Super Bowl, now there's another controversy surrounding the huge sport event: CBS has rejected a commercial for ManCrunch.com -- a gay dating service.

Here's the scoop from The Money Times:

CBS Refuses to air gay dating site's Super Bowl ad; sparks protest

Los Angeles, January 30 -- After reviewing a comercial from a gay dating site called Mancrunch.com, CBS has rejected it as inappropriate for the upcoming Super Bowl XLIV, according to reports.

Gay dating Web site ManCrunch.com created an ad for the Feb. 7’s Super Bowl and submitted it to CBS, the network that hosts the popular event, on Jan. 18 for consideration.

But, CBS rejected the ad Friday after a fortnight's consideration, saying the commercial, which features two male fans making out while watching the Super Bowl, didn't meet the network's standards.

The Mancrunch.com’s 30-second commercial shows two male football fans watching the Super Bowl on TV, and then accidentally touching hands when they reach for the same potato chip into a chip bowl. After a moment of hesitation, the two men begin kissing, as a third male football fan observes the sudden turn of events in shock.

After a fortnight's consideration, CBS sent a rejection letter to Mancrunch.com, noting: "CBS Standards and Practices has reviewed your proposed Super Bowl ad and concluded that the creative is not within the Network's Broadcast Standards for Super Bowl Sunday."

The network, however, did not give any reason why it’s not be airing ManCrunch.com's 'Playing for the Same Team' ad during the NFL game next week.

"After reviewing the ad — which is entirely commercial in nature — our Standards and Practices department decided not to accept this particular spot," CBS noted. "As always, we are open to working with the client on alternative submissions." 

Oh, how CBS is drawing fire on all fronts!  Oh, how what used to be a fun family-and-friends festivity has become so mired in controversy!

Superbowl to Be Abortion Rights Battleground

Ah, yes ... the Superbowl.  Now, I'm not a sports fan; but, I do attend Superbowl parties like everyone else.  I'm not really all that interested in the sport or game itself, but I do enjoy getting together with people, consuming huge quantities of deliciously unhealthy food, and watch the commercials.  I revel in how noisy the room can be during the game, but the moment one of the SUPERBOWL COMMERCIALS comes on, the room instantly falls silent as everyone rivets their attention to the screen.

Judging from news reports these past few days, it appears that one of commercials will turn the Superbowl into an ideological, religious, and human rights battle ground.  Focus on the Family and football hero Tim Tebow have produced and plan to air a commercial that tells the story of his mother Pam who chose to deliver her son despite being counseled to abort him.  NOW (The National Organization of Women) and other feminist groups are on the attack.

Here's the story from FoxNews:

The 30-second spot, paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family, is expected to recount the story of Pam Tebow's turbulent pregnancy in 1987:

When Tebow suffered from a dangerous infection during a mission trip to the Philippines, doctors recommended that she terminate her pregnancy, fearing she might die in childbirth. But she carried Tim to term, and he went on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy and guide the Florida Gators to two BCS championships.

It's a happy story with an inspirational ending, but pro-choice critics say Focus on the Family should not be allowed to air the commercial because it advocates on behalf of a divisive issue and threatens to "throw women under the bus."

"This organization is extremely intolerant and divisive and pushing an un-American agenda," said Jehmu Greene, director of the Women's Media Center, which is coordinating a campaign to force CBS to pull the ad before it airs on Feb. 7.

"Abortion is very controversial, and the anti-abortion vitriol has resulted in escalated violence against reproductive health providers and their patients," Greene said. "We've seen that clearly with the murder of Dr. George Tiller," the late-term abortion provider who was gunned down in his Kansas church in May 2009.

But Gary Schneeberger, a spokesman for Focus on the Family, defended the ad and said it will stand out on Super Bowl Sunday because its content is original and family-friendly.

"We're not trying to sell folks a big-screen TV, we're not trying to sell them a soft drink, we're not trying to sell them a Web domain name. We're not trying to sell anything — we're celebrating families," he told FoxNews.com.

"Some people will be surprised when they see the actual content of the ad. It's anything but the way it's been described with that fiery rhetoric."

Attacks on the ad, which has been seen by only a handful of people, are mounting. The Women's Media Center is coordinating a campaign with the National Organization for Women and other women's groups to launch an online petition and letter-writing campaign targeting CBS. Another petition set up on Jan. 22 has garnered over 8,000 signatures.

So has the fearless Gator bitten off more than he can chew? Tebow addressed the controversy while chatting with reporters in Alabama on Sunday, explaining his opposition to abortion.

"I know some people won't agree with it, but I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe," he said. "[T]hat's the reason I'm here, because my mom was a very courageous woman. So any way that I could help, I would do it."

Two interesting points in the news story caught my eye:
1)  The notion that the ad could add to the an already vitriolic atmosphere, referring to the murder of Dr. Tiller.  Coincidentally, Tiller's murderer was convicted yesterday and sentenced to life in prison.

2)  Schneeberger discussed what FOF is not selling the public, compared to other ads viewers typically see.  This made me think of the Superbowl ads we've seen in the past.  I wonder if NOW campaigned against some of those, such as the Go Daddy ads that were hypersexual with overtones of lesbianism ... purely for the titillation of male viewers.

The above article mentioned The Women's Media Center's letter-writing campaign.  Here's more about the letter the WMC sent CBS from USAPlayers (dated Jan. 26th):

"By offering one of the most coveted advertising spots of the year to an anti-equality, anti-choice, homophobic organization, CBS is aligning itself with a political stance that will damage its reputation, alienate viewers, and discourage consumers from supporting its shows and advertisers," the letter claimed.

As of now, CBS plans to move forward, and run the ad as scheduled on Super Bowl Sunday, February 7th.

Gregg Doyel, a columnist for CBSSPORTS.com said that his objection to the ad is base on timing, not the message.

"If you're a sports fan, and I am, that's the holiest day of the year." he wrote in his column. "It's not a day to discuss abortion. For it, against it, I don't care what you are. On Super Sunday, I don't care what I am. Feb. 7 is simply not the day to have that discussion."

So, Doyel doesn't like the idea of the ad possiblly pushing families to discuss abortion ... would that be as bad as a few years ago when Janet Jackson's breast "accidentally" popped out of her costume during her infamous half-time performance?   Odd and sad, too, how Doyel describes Superbowl Sunday as the "holiest" day of the year.

I went to NOW's website to see the organization's presentation of their side of the controversy.   It's "Say it, Sister!" blog for equality calls for an attack on FOF:

Make no mistake about this ad: it's offensive to women. Yes, it features Heisman trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mother, who had been advised to have an abortion after a serious illness. Standing alone, it sends the message that all women who give birth are heroes; it sends a message that abortion is always a mistake; and it is insulting to the one in three women in this country who have abortions.

"One in three" ... I had heard of that statistic before -- that one in three pregnancies end in abortion.  I have frequently wondered if that were true and still a current number.  Well, that's now been confirmed by NOW itself!  The reference almost appears as a "bragging point."

I found the comments that followed the post interesting.  Many readers left comments supporting FOF's right to free speech and reminding NOW that "pro-choice" includes choosing to not abort.  At least NOW has the guts to let those conflicting opinions remain on its site.

I wish more members of the public would catch on to the hypocrisy of NOW and abortion rights activists: that "pro-choice" to them obviously only means "pro-abortion."  Should a woman choose to give birth, her decision is frequently followed with scorn and derision.


For years I have criticized NOW for having concentrated its efforts solely on abortion and gay rights.  This is quite evident when you look at NOW's website, where it calls for getting abortion funding into the health care bill while deleting "abstinence-only" sex ed courses, celebrating 37 years of Roe v. Wade, as well as claiming that abortion is a "human right!"  I don't recall them ever voicing opposition to the objectification of women in the "entertainment" and marketing industries.  If anything, they seem to applaud using a woman's sexuality as her source of "power" ... whatever that is.  

But, I guess that's OK with NOW and other feminist groups: If, in the exercise of that sexual "power" a woman should become pregnant, pro-abortion groups stand at the ready to help her terminate that life.  No questions asked.  No alternatives offered.

FoxNews' Marjorie Dannenfelser offers a similar criticism in her article "Why Is NOW So Afraid Pro-Life, Pro-Family Ad?":

Could you imagine anything more ironic? The organization that purports to embrace women and “choice” is desperately clamoring to shut down the most loving choice of all: the choice for life. Yet the women of NOW can’t abide 30 seconds of a heart-warming story. What would producers at Lifetime Television say?

Let’s be real. What’s the worst case scenario here? That if Americans hear this message they will choose to make sacrifices in order to have a child and bring a wonderful life in to the world? That’s hardly an abhorrent message.

These groups are not “for” women and they don’t want them to have a “choice.” They only want women to “choose” the path of abortion. Never mind that abortion has been shown over and over to be destructive in numerous ways, both physically and psychologically. But, *please* don’t tell people that there are alternatives.

In their efforts to cling to the old feminist mantra that we somehow “need” abortion, NOW sells American women short. They assume that women are so weak-brained and easily manipulated that they must be protected from a life-affirming message.

Now, this is where one can truly say "Say it, Sister!"

Haiti: Donations Deductible on 2009 Taxes

Wow!  It appears that our the House of Representatives has managed to come together in the true spirit of non-partisanship and passed H.R. 4462, allowing taxpayers to deduct contributions to Haitian relief on their 2009 income tax returns.   Here's what Compassion International reports:

Is my cash donation to Haiti earthquake relief efforts applicable to my 2009 tax returns?
Yes. Charitable contributions made before March 1, 2010, in response to the Haiti earthquake can be claimed as itemized charitable deductions on your 2009 tax return instead of waiting to claim these on your 2010 tax return (see The House of Representatives bill H.R. 4462 passed 1/20/10).

Obama: The Teleprompter-In-Chief

For months, I've referred to President Obama by various sarcastic terms: Dear Leader, Obamessiah, The Community-Organizer-In-Chief, The Teleprompter-In-Chief, and so on.

This picture and description from the AP makes the last nickname sad ... confirms it ... but, it's still sad.

President Barack Obama points to the media, as he enters to speak, after a discussion with 6th grade students at Graham Road Elementary School in Falls Church, Va., Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2010.

So very, very sad

 

How sad that Obama can't even -- won't dare -- to speak off the cuff with sixth graders!!!!!   Is this what a Harvard law degree gets you?

"Eloquent" ... "articulate" ... yeah, right.

Fer cryin' out loud!!!!

[Tip: GatewayPundit and Black & Right]

Haiti: Formerly Homeless Kids Raise Funds for Haiti

It's always so touching to see children being charitable towards those in need.  This brother and sister, formerly homeless themselves, have raised $400 by selling cocoa to neighbors and Facebook friends.



From NewsChannel 5 KSDK --

Formerly homeless kids scoop out cups of cocoa for disaster relief

Ksdk- A big "yum!" and a giant smile, that's how 9-year-old Serra Smyly describes her hot cocoa concoction. The piping-hot cups dipped out of a crock pot and topped off with heaps of whipped cream are the work of Serra and her twin brother, Phillip.

Serra and Phillip Smyly are raising money for Haiti disaster relief. They're a couple of kids who really can identify with the people of Haiti.

"Cause me and Phillip went through it before and it was hard," Serra says. 

Serra and Phillip know what it's like to have nothing and sleep on the ground. They were homeless for a time. After spending three years in foster care, they were adopted by Cindy Smyly of St. Charles County.

Cindy says the kids came to her with the idea, but she's not surprised. "They're very compassionate towards other people that are suffering. A couple of birthdays ago they decided they didn't want to get birthday presents they decided they wanted to use the money that was spent on them to make care packages for foster kids," says Smyly.

So for three days, the kids stood outside their home, selling cups of cocoa to friends and neighbors. They managed to raise about $400 for disaster relief.

Air America Bites The Big One!!! Good News, America!!!

This put a smile on my face this morning while preparing for work ... [from that evil network FoxNews, of course]:

Air America Goes Off Air

Air America Radio, a progressive radio network that once aired commentary from Al Franken and Rachel Maddow, said Thursday it is shutting down immediately.

The company founded in April 2004 said it ceased airing new programs Thursday afternoon and will soon file to be liquidated under Chapter 7 bankruptcy. It began broadcasting reruns of programs and would end those as well Monday night.

Air America said 10 consecutive quarters of declining ad revenue and the difficulty of making money on the Internet contributed to its financial woes.

"The very difficult economic environment has had a significant impact on Air America's business. This past year has seen a `perfect storm' in the media industry generally," the company said in a statement on its Web site.

The network had some 100 radio outlets nationwide.

Franken, a Democrat, hosted his own show from 2004 to 2007 before going on to become a U.S. senator from Minnesota last year after a close election. Maddow went on to host her own TV show on MSNBC.

George Soros -- financial backer of Air America -- has his announcement here.  I find it interesting that he blames the broadcast's demise on the economy, overlooking the fact that the radio show has been struggling since its founding in 2004. 

Ah, yes.  The home of such brilliant minds as Rachel Maddow and Stuart Smalley ... er, Al Franken.

Wyclef Jean on Oprah: Ask More Questions Before Criticizing

I was at the gym this afternoon on the elliptical, switching back and forth between Glenn Beck and Oprah.   I've gotten to the point where Oprah annoys the beejeebers out of me, but I watched today.  Wyclef Jean, Haitian music artist, was her guest today reporting on his trips to his devastated native country.  It was sad to hear him recount what he witnessed, especially when telling of the art school he founded that had collapsed, killing students and teachers.

I have been stewing a bit following the show, finding some of Jean's accusations rather unfair.  I do, however, have to remember that this poor man is traumatized and was speaking out of his anguish.  But, the two points I wish Jean would reconsider are his saying that dropping food from helicopters to the people below was treating the Haitians like animals and that he should be running the airport and managing rescue operations.

Now, I'm not a pilot, but if one just simply considers why those helicopter pilots might be "just" dropping food, several possible reasons come to mind:

1)  Is it impossible or too dangerous to land due to obstructions and / or damage?

2)  Could landing put the helicopter and soldiers at risk?  Starving, frightened people will instinctively charge the helicopter to get supplies.  Also, I can envision people clinging to the helicopter as it tried to take off.

3)  Can the helicopters use time and fuel more efficiently by not landing to make each drop? 

To Jean's assertion that he should be involved in organizing the rescue operations, helping to land planes at the airport and directing them on where to take supplies ... well, Jean, you are no more qualified to lead mass disaster operations than I am.  (Oh, wait.  Maybe I'm a tad more qualified since I have taken a few Red Cross classes on disaster operations ... but strictly as a h-e-l-p-e-r.)  The idea of this guy running an airport where there's only one runway being used by over 100 flights per day is just begging for catastrophe.  And, just because I know the Midwest well does not qualify me to organize relief operations.

As I stated above, I do try to keep in mind that Jean has been traumatized and is speaking from passion and love.  He is obviously frustrated with how long relief operations are taking; but, we must remember that such huge devastation is not quickly addressed ... nor efficiently, given all the different groups there in the Caribbean trying to help.

Of course, with the UN being in there, that just makes the whole situation even more chaotic and inefficient ...

Can You Hear Us Now, Dear Leader & Henchmen?

Why I Voted Democrat

In light of Scott Brown's victory over Martha Coakley for Kennedy's seat as Massachusett's senator, I share this little beauty I found over at Babalú ...

Why I voted for the Democrat candidate in Mass today:

• I voted Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my boat. 

• I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't. 

• I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

• I voted Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it. 

• I voted Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they now think we're good people. 

• I voted Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves. 

• I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius. 

• I voted Democrat because I'm not concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death row inmates alive. 

• I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as IT sees fit. 

• I voted Democrat because I believe we need liberal judges to rewrite The Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters. 

• I voted Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my ass that it is unlikely that I'll ever have another point of view.
  

It appears that this explosive Republican victory might be making the Democrats shake in their little booties.  Makes me think of The Rock (implying no endorsement of his here!) --   "Can ya smell what the Republicans are cookin'?"

Haiti: Please Donate!!!!

This morning I volunteered to go in to the Red Cross office and man the phones for those calling in to donate to the relief effort for Haiti.  I spent 4 hours taking phone calls, as people in the area phoned in their donations and asked questions about other ways they could help.

For those of you who wish to donate, there are four ways you can make your donation to the American Red Cross:

1) By check: write your check to "The American Red Cross" and in the memo line specify "Haiti relief."  That way you can be assured that your donation will be directed as you wish.  You will receive a receipt and a thank you card from the Red Cross confirming your donation.  Mail your check either to your local chapter, which can be found on the ARC's website.  You can go here and print off a sheet to mail in with it to  

American Red Cross
PO Box 4002018
Des Moines, IA 50340-2018

2) By phone: 1-800-RED-CROSS  (You can also phone in your donation to your local chapter.)

3) Online using the ARC's secure site (click here).

4) By text message: you can text "HAITI" to 90999.  Your cellphone company will add $10 to your bill, text messaging fees apply.  You can send several texts.  I tried it today, and each time I promptly received a message back asking me to confirm the donation by replying "yes" or "no."  When I replied "yes," I promptly got a message that thanked me, but also offered me the chance to still cancel.  Seemed rather fail-proof.  (Click here for texting details.)

Due to the overwhelming support of the American people, the ARC has partnered with some retailers to be official donation sites, such as Walgreen's, Costco, Walmart, Riteway, Lowe's, and Bank of America.  (Click here for details on these and other official donation sites.)



If you choose not to donate to the Red Cross, I would caution you to choose your charity of choice carefully.  Be sure you donate to an organization that is reputable and highly respected.  Many con artists crawl out of the woodwork in sad times such as these.  Be aware, too, that corruption runs rampant in Haiti.  Avoid those groups that will just give the money to Haiti without accounting for it. 

I have a friend who works closely with an orphanage just outside of Port-au-Prince, Haiti.  She makes several trips a year and is involved in improving the orphanage and school.  There are also plans in the works for a clinic to be built.  The mission is called "House of Hope" and, if you're looking for perhaps a more direct, more personal, and hands-on relief effort, such a venture might be what you're looking for.

I will add a personal touch to this posting ... one that touched my heart and motivated me to be more generous ...

I took a call this morning from an elderly lady who told me she was on disability, but wanted to give what few dollars she had.  As she gave me her credit card number, she apologized for talking slowly and needing to pause to take a sip of water.  She explained that she was on oxygen.  When I asked her for the amount she was donating, she replied "$10.  I wish I could give more."  Her voice cracked with emotion, and she began to cry as she shared how sad it was to watch the devastation on TV.  She felt bad that she couldn't give more.  I assured her that we give in proportion to what we have, and that we knew that these $10 was a huge sacrifice for her.  I tried to comfort her in telling her that 91 cents of every dollar that goes to the Red Cross will go to the relief efforts, and that in Haiti, $10 would go very far.

That's when I decided to give the donating via texting a spin ...  The conversation reminded me of how much I have and that I don't even blink when I spend $10.  I am truly blessed ... and may God bless the generous donations and efforts being poured out by those wishing to help our Haitian brothers and sisters.

Avatar: It's A Freaking Movie, People!

I can't believe all the whining and lame accusations surrounding James Cameron's "Avatar."  I got to see it last weekend -- in 3D, of course -- and found it to be very entertaining.

First, some accused "Avatar" of being anti-American and anti-military.  I've now seen the movie twice and can't recall ever hearing a particular country mentioned or that the "bad guys" were legit military.  All that is mentioned is Earth and that the main character is a Marine ... who turns out to be the good guy!  Conservative critics need to get the stick out of their butts and lighten up.

Some wonder (jokingly) if it's the most offensive movie of the year, claiming it is sexist, heathenous, unfair to those in wheelchairs and sprinkled with a few other "isms."

Then, others claim that there is a racist theme:

Near the end of the hit film "Avatar," the villain snarls at the hero, "How does it feel to betray your own race?" Both men are white — although the hero is inhabiting a blue-skinned, 9-foot-tall, long-tailed alien.

Strange as it may seem for a film that pits greedy, immoral humans against noble denizens of a faraway moon, "Avatar" is being criticized by a small but vocal group of people who allege it contains racist themes — the white hero once again saving the primitive natives.

Since the film opened to widespread critical acclaim three weeks ago, hundreds of blog posts, newspaper articles, tweets and YouTube videos have said things such as the film is "a fantasy about race told from the point of view of white people" and that it reinforces "the white Messiah fable."

The film's writer and director, James Cameron, says the real theme is about respecting others' differences.

Yesterday, I finally reached my limit when I read about people claiming to experience depression after seeing the movie, or what is being called "Avatar blues":

(CNN) -- James Cameron's completely immersive spectacle "Avatar" may have been a little too real for some fans who say they have experienced depression and suicidal thoughts after seeing the film because they long to enjoy the beauty of the alien world Pandora.

On the fan forum site "Avatar Forums," a topic thread entitled "Ways to cope with the depression of the dream of Pandora being intangible," has received more than 1,000 posts from people experiencing depression and fans trying to help them cope. The topic became so popular last month that forum administrator Philippe Baghdassarian had to create a second thread so people could continue to post their confused feelings about the movie.

As Bob Parks at Black & Right quips: "What a pussified society we have today."

The plot is, indeed, cliché and predictable, but it was still entertaining and the visual effects were stunning.  I find it exciting to see how artists envision the future -- all the high-tech stuff, what other planets might be like, etc.

The only bonafide critique I heard was from a local movie reviewer (I think it was Max Foise of 97.1 FM Talk): he described Cameron's simple plot as "Dances with Smurfs."

iTunes Releases "By The People" Soundtrack ... HURL!!!!!

This evening I went to iTunes to check on some new episodes of some favorite podcasts, and lo and behold on the first page of the iTunes store there was an ad for an album that was released yesterday: "By the People: For The People -- A Soundtrack Inspired by the Motion Picture."

"What motion picture?", I wondered.  Well, apparently (and luckily) I missed an HBO show back in November lauding Obama's election.  The description was this:

"BY THE PEOPLE: THE ELECTION OF BARACK OBAMA" is a movie record of the Obama campaign's history-making odyssey to the White House.  Interviews with the drama of the campaign is never-before-seen footage of Obama behind the scenes, as well as interviews and candid moments with wife Michelle Obama, the couple's young daughters, Malia and Sasha, and senior cmpaign staff, volunteers, reporters, supporters and opponents." 

The site then goes on to encouraging me to host a viewing party, add it to my Facebook page and blog, along with downloading the trailer and a handy-dandy tool kit.

Well, puuuuuuuke!  I couldn't believe my eyes!  More Obamajubilation ... sheeeeeesh!  (I guess you can tell I won't be ordering the movie ...)

At iTunes you can download the movie soundtrack: 14 songs from various artists for $9.99.

The movie By the People: The Election of Barack Obama is the results of a film crew gaining an incredible amount of behind-the-polls access in the years leading up to Obama's 2008 victory.  This collection of songs falls under the banner of "music inspired by the film" and features suitably inspirational and hopeful songs from the likes of John Mayer, Dixie Chicks, and John Legend (tackling Bob Marley's "Redemption Song"), as well as a collective effort from Jon Bon Jovi and Bettye Lavette (tearing out hears with Sam Cooke's "A Change is Gonna Come").  One hundred percent of the proceeds from this purchase will go to United Way and Enterprise.

As I winced and groaned while reading the description and the song list, my eyes luckily landed on the customer reviews.  At this time, the album as 2 1/2 out of 5 stars as its rating with some 889 people having reviewed it.  There are reviews that gush praise for Obama and the album, and were upset with the album's "detractors", shall we say.  Here's one example by "OldLatrobe":

"This is perfectly fine Album, stop with the political opinions and messing up the ratings.  Leave your conservative single mindedness at the door!  This is iTunes!"

And another from a reviewer named "andersrl":

"I see a whole lot of one-star reviews on this collection that read like political messages from red-headed dissers brainwashed by Fox News propaganda.  Have you forgotten Bush's first year? ..."

"Andersrl" then launches into the typical libtard diatribe of "blame-Bush" ... ironically sounding like a "red-headed" (whatever that means!) disser brainwashed by all the other media outlets.  (Hey!  Is that guy being racist by making all the negative reviewers red-headed?  Sounds like another open-minded liberal.)

One reviewer pointed out an unusual characteristic of this album: you can only download the entire thing rather than individually selecting the songs you want.  Hmmmmm ... apropos, isn't it?

The back and forth commenting is rather entertaining to read.

By the way, I won't be buying the movie or the album ...

[Curious: Blogger's spellcheck still doesn't recognize "Barack" or "Obama."  What about "Hussein?"  Hah!  That names checks out on spellcheck!  Mmmm!  Mmmmm!  Mmmmm!]

Ermey Blasts Obama: Videoclip

What a great video clip posted over at GatewayPundit ... actor R. Lee Ermey blasts the Obama Administration ...

Toughguy Actor R. Lee Ermey Unloads on Obama the Socialist During Holiday Broadcast

You Manby-Pamby Jackwagon…
Toughguy actor R. Lee Ermey unloaded on Barack Obama during a live Christmas extravaganza recently.
The crowd went nuts.
Via HotAir:

From the video: During a December 10, 2010 appearance on Roe & Roeper’s Miracle on Indianapolis Blvd. Holiday Extravaganza broadcast, live from The Venue inside the Horseshoe Casino, which benefitted the USO, GEICO’s R. Lee Ermey appearing on behalf of Toys 4 Tots took an opportunity to unload on President Obama, claiming his administration was destroying the country so that it could impose socialism.

Now, I do have to wonder ... could Ermey possibly be fired by Geico for voicing his opinions?  Remember how Geico last April fired voice over actor D.C. Douglas for blasting FreedomWorks and the Tea Party?

Publishing Teachers' Salaries

I was shocked to see that The St. Louis Post-Dispatch publishes teachers' salaries.  I'm not talking about just publishing the different pay scales of each district.  I mean you can type in a teacher's name and pull up the individual's pay!  YIKES!!!

Here's a screen shot of the page.

The page appears to supply information for both Missouri and Illinois counties.

I don't have a problem with publishing teachers' salaries, since we are paid with tax dollars.  District payscales should be public information.  However, I was truly shocked to see that a person could get really specific, being able to single out individual teachers.

Jean Buchanan of the Post gave the following explanation:

But, some teachers have argued, why don’t you publish a salary schedule rather than names? Why not just point out that someone with 10 years experience earns a certain amount of money?

I would argue that most people don’t relate to teachers by way of a salary schedule; they relate to them by name. They may not know that their third-grader’s teacher has 10 years experience, they just know her name and that she’s a terrific teacher. When they find out how much she is being paid, they will have information they can use in the continuing discussion over teacher salaries and school district tax rates.

We think that the pay of public servants is rightly a topic of public debate. The Post-Dispatch has reported that in general, personnel costs account for 80 percent of public school district budgets. That means fluctuations in salary have a big impact on tax rates.

When you look at this data, you can decide whether your school district is competitive with others on attracting teachers, whether the number of administrators is justified, whether administrator pay is in correct proportion to that of classroom teachers.

Some of the comments that followed Buchanan's entry wondered why teachers were in such a huff.  If we're public servants and its public information, what's the big deal?  Again, I wholeheartedly agree with the public being able to access that information.  School districts don't hide the information either, for that matter.  All districts publish their payscales on their website.  My frustration is that this is such an invasion of MY personal privacy that a person can look up my name and see my salary.  I don't buy Buchanan's notion that knowing what her child's teacher earns will help her in the discussion over teacher salaries and school district tax rates.

I also find it offensive that the Post advertizes this "service" about midway across the onscreen front page with a lovely little box: 

I guess checking out teachers' salaries is simply another form of entertainment, along with the Simpson's trivia challenge, the Heath Ledger quiz, and getting Cardinals tickets.  I shouldn't take it so personally.

I noticed that policemen's salaries were also available by name.

A Little Terrorist Humor

... from "Diversity Lane: A Liberal Family Saga"

"Strangers On My Flight": A Little Travel Humor

I got a little chuckle out of I Own the World's parody of Frank Sinatra's "Strangers in the Night."  Maybe they should pipe this into the airplane restrooms to discourage any more "knickerbombers."

Click on link for the music.  "Strangers On My Flight"

Big Freeze Hits Most of the U.S.

The Midwest and other parts of the country are experiencing some of the coldest temperatures in over a decade.  Poor Florida suffering the kind of freezing temperatures and threats to its agriculture reminiscent of the 70s, global warming ... er, climate change ... whatever ... seems even more ridiculous.

In light of the chill, I had to laugh when I watched this video.  I found it at DeathBy1000Papercuts:

"Once Upon A Time in AlGoreLand"

“Once upon a time in a land not so very far away, there lived a court jester who had nothing to offer but the sound of his butt cheeks, as they flapped in the cold, northernly winds that blew down from Arctic Wisconsin…”

That’s how we’d imagine a future history of the maniac psuedo-religion masquerading as science known as now-its-global warming-now-its-climate-change.

An Inconvenient Goofball chronicles the latest buffoonery from Al, the jester referred to above.

There is probably no greater example of the left’s adherence to the rule of “always be on offense” than Al Gore.

No amount of evidence contrary to his position can deter him. No exposure of the whole damn GreeNazi movement as a colossal hoax can sway him. Neither rain nor snow, nor sleet, nor friggin’ bone chilling cold all over the globe can shame him into shutting up. Worse, he keeps doubling down on insanity!

There’s more, but I Own the World invited Al Gore to their studio to read his famous poem.

School districts throughout the states are closed due to the weather, and I have been enjoying the day off.  (The new semester just started up and having to get back into the swing of things required a bit of respite!)  As I sit and listen to the fierce wind blowing outside, it makes me think about South America experiencing a mighty fierce winter back in 2007.  And this winter, Peruvian mountain people are struggling to survive in another harsh winter.  It's obvious why the Gorian cult members started using the term "climate change" rather than "global warming" to cover their asses for the extreme cold different parts of the globe have experienced the past couple of years.

Carbon Footprint of Your Food: The ClimateGate Deniers Continue in Their Insanity

It's so sad to see how the "ClimateGate deniers" continue on in their cult-like devotion and blind adherence to The Party.  This was in the UK's Telegraph on Tuesday this week (emphasis added ... and a snide comment):

Food labels to show 'carbon footprint' under Government plans

Hilary Benn, the Environment Secretary, said in future people will have to eat less “carbon intensive” foods like red meat or excessively packaged products to make sure Britain meets targets to cut greenhouse gases. 

To help consumers do this, new “green” food labels will show how much carbon was produced in the manufacture and transportation of food.

Tesco, PepsiCo and other leading brands are already displaying a “carbon reduction label” on certain products showing the amount of carbon dioxide produced in grams in growing the food, packaging and transportation.

As part of a new food strategy for the next 20 years, the Government calls on other brands to consider measuring the carbon footprint of goods as well as being more honest about where meat was bred and the standards of welfare.

But environmental groups said the Government needed to bring in legislation rather than a voluntary labelling scheme to really transform food and farming.  [That's right -- let's make this mandatory!]

Speaking at the Oxford Farming Conference, Mr Benn said choosing low carbon goods will help people fight climate change. 

...

“It needs to be mandatory because no producer is going to put people off buying their food,” she said.  Helen Rimmer, of Friends of the Earth, also said carbon labelling will do little to fight climate change unless more low carbon products become available.

She said the Government should be supporting sustainable methods of farming such as organic, while cutting subsidies to factory farms.

...

Great.  Now besides checking the label for refined flour and sugar, transfats, fiber content, artificial ingredients, cruelty-free processes, etc. now we gotta check the freaking carbon footprint!  Morons!

Or, as The Founding Bloggers describe it:

This is not about diet. It’s about raising tax revenue.

As soon as they have constructed all of the tools of measuring “carbon footprints” they can begin allotting limits on people, and taxing them for going over the limit.

Europe today, America tomorrow.

Sure, why not?  Here in the U.S. the ugly discussion about taxing junk food occasionally rears its ugly head.   Why not also throw on a tax for foods with high carbon footprints?  With both a fat or "sin" tax combined with another one for high carbon footprints, the government will be able to tax us coming and going!  Just think of the revenue this could generate!!!!  Brilliant!

2010 Census: 'Negro' used on questionnaire

Today's news shows that the 2010 census uses the word "negro" in one of its questions which asks participants to identify their race.  This from New York Daily News via FoxNews:

Use of 'Negro' on 2010 Census Form Upsets Modern-Day Sensibilities

The U.S. Census has shocked the senses for many who want to know why the descriptor, "Negro," is being used in the 2010 questionnaire, the New York Daily News reported.

The term is included under Question No. 9 of the 2010 census questionnaire, which was approved by Congress over a year ago.

The question, which asks about race, provides the following answer choice: "Black, African Am., or Negro."

The word "Negro," referring to individuals of black African descent, represents to many a low moment in U.S. history. Considered a racial slur by leaders of the civil rights movement, the term has since been abandoned for its association with slavery and segregation.

But the Census Bureau has defended its decision to include the word, saying older generations of African Americans often identify themselves as "Negroes," according to the newspaper.

"Many older African Americans identified themselves that way, and many still do," Census Bureau spokesman Jack Martin told the newspaper. "Those who identify themselves as Negroes need to be included."

Click here to read more on this story from the New York Daily News.

Lovely outreach to the "negro" community!  Sheeeesh!!  I wonder why they didn't include "colored" ...

The Census folks have been having to advertise themselves to the Latino population.  Perhaps in response to some Latino leaders calling for their constituents to boycott the Census.  To counteract the calls, the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) distributed posters (pictured right) to more than 7,000 churches to raise awareness and participation.  They were distributed in both Spanish and English.

There's been some prior "developments" in the run-up to the census.  From Michelle Malkin:

• More census propagandizing in the schools: $13 billion kiddie campaign

• The Census boondoggle: $340 million ad campaign: Otherwise known as the tax-subsidized National Democrat Future Voter Outreach Drive

Looks like the fun is just beginning, folks!

Obama Administration Too Tired to Take Terrorism Seriously

Here's more proof (emphasis added):

Anti-Terror Official Stayed on Ski Trip After Learning of Failed Bomb Plot

National Counterterrorism Center Director Michael Leiter didn't cut his holiday ski trip short upon learning of the attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner Christmas Day, the New York Daily News reports.

Leiter, who is in charge of analyzing terror threats, reportedly didn't return to his office post in McLean, Va., until several days after the holiday, and his decision to do so has been looked down upon by intelligence officials.

"People have been grumbling that he didn't let a little terrorism interrupt his vacation," a source told the Daily News.

The NCTC has been heavily scrutinized for failing to "connect the dots" on Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian suspect tied to the failed bombing attempt on the Northwest Airlines jet.

Leiter's spokesman did not say when he returned from the trip and fully retook the reigns of the agency.

Read more at the New York Daily News

The Most Transparent Congress Ever ... yeah, right!

Stupid Criminals: Laugh of the Day

Hah!  This is funny!

Two Sacramento Burglary Suspects Flee Into Police Football Game Practice

Two burglary suspects chose an extremely bad escape route while allegedly trying to flee from law enforcement.

Three alleged burglars tried to break into a home just after 3:30 p.m. Monday, according to the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department. A resident of the home called 911 and deputies arrested 19-year-old Jamario Hill as he attempted to run away, according to authorities.

Two other suspects - identified as 20-year-old James Hill, Jr. and a 17-year-old juvenile - attempted to flee across the campus at Foothill High School.

On the football field, law enforcement officers were practicing for the upcoming "Guns 'n Hoses" football game, a matchup between law enforcement and firefighters.

They spotted the two suspects running through the football stadium and noticed they matched the descriptions being broadcast by the Sacramento Police Department's helicopter, which was hovering overhead at the time.

"One of the guys said, 'I think that's him,' and we all turned around," said T.J. Price of the Sacramento Police Department. "His [the suspect's] eyes got big and he took off up the hill."

About 10 players in full football gear gave chase and tackled the two suspects, Price said.

The three suspects are brothers, according to authorities. All three face charges of attempted burglary and conspiracy.

The "Gun's 'n Hoses" game will take place on January 30th, and will mark the 36th anniversary of the charity game that used to be known as the "Pig Bowl."

Here's the video from the CBS affiliate in Sacramento:



[Tip: Black & Right]

Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings: Another Obama Crony That Must Be Booted!

The MSM has been dragging its feet on Kevin Jennings, Obama's Safe Schools Czar.  Perhaps the MSM's head-in-sand approach will backfire again, making them look stupid (at best ... radical at worst) once again to the American public for their lack of investigative independence, impartiality and integrity.  

Being a teacher and someone who tends to see the world through rose-colored glasses, I have been hesitant to blog on Jennings. The story is so creepy, with details of this man and his dealings being too sexually charged for school children, regardless of age.  His ideology goes against everything I stand for professionally and ethically.  But, I will give you the basics and then refer you to some bloodhound blogs that have done a lot of research.

Troy Silva posted the following background information on Jennings and how he, with his radical agenda, has redefined "safe schools" (from October's AmericanThinker) ... emphasis added:

Kevin Jennings' twisted terminology

Kevin Jennings is Safe School Czar not by some vetting breakdown. He was an official in the Obama Campaign as its Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual fund-raising co-chair. For twenty years until 2008, Jennings succeeded on a massive scale at pro-homosexual propagandizing of school children. His adeptness and accomplishment at semantic deception are extraordinary.

In a 1990 "report" for the Massachusetts Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, it was Jennings himself who re-coined the very term "safe school" to mean a pro-homosexual school. Just as the word "gay" is forever tainted and can now rarely be used in its original sense without prompting the snickers or confusion of the listener, so the term "safe school" is now a post-op product of Jennings that bears no similarity to its original meaning. 

This fairly recent change is lost on most of the public, to the severe detriment of millions of American children in public school whose curriculum is controlled by edu-crats who use the Jennings definition. The term "safe school" in the fraudulent sense used by Jennings, et al, must not be confused with the original sense of the term, which was quite literal. The term in this original sense dates at least to the Reagan-era Department of Education "safe school" initiative to curb drug and alcohol use in schools. ...

    

Jennings boasted in a 1995 speech entitled "Winning the Culture War" that he "tilted" the 1990 Massachusetts report with use of the term "safe" in order to put opponents of pro-homosexual curriculum in that state "on the defensive". His national template, used over and over in hundreds of districts and thousands of schools across the country, is to fabricate an epidemic of bullying and violence to homosexuals in schools, in part by citing bogus census or other statistics where classes of people are conflated to come-up with artificially high numbers of incidents of sexual-orientation-based "bullying", "harassment" or violence.

The next step is to contend that the only solution is to make "allies" out of 100% of the straight students in the school or district. "Allies" are made by implementing a usually district-wide "safe-schools" or "anti-bullying" curriculum that force-feeds homosexual propaganda to kindergarten through 12th grade. Prominent psychologists and psychiatrists who oppose them notwithstanding, these towering intellects that run school districts reject all research that will contradict their foregone conclusions. 

Michelle Malkin includes Jennings in her list of "Underreported stories of 2009".  After first blasting the Obama administration for the Van Jones appointment and subsequent revelation of Jones' radical past and then his dismissal, she then launches into Obama's next questionable appointment: Kevin Jennings as Safe Schools Czar (emphasis added):

Obama has appointed unaccountable czars by the mile whose statements and policies have yet to hit national media front pages. The “Safe Schools Czar,” Kevin Jennings, is a far Left activist whose organization GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) is infamous among parents’ groups for promoting explicit, outrageously age-inappropriate sexual lessons in the classroom. GLSEN’s recommended reading for teens includes pamphlets promoting leather bars and public sex in parks and lurid books describing incest, rape, adult-child fantasies, and essay collections in which one author recounted playing “sex therapist” at the age of six with a five-year-old friend, and exploring “our sexuality to its fullest.”

GLSEN’s corporate sponsors include Eastman Kodak, Ernst & Young, PepsiCo, and Time Warner. Eastman Kodak defended its sponsorship as an expression of its commitment to “diversity.” Secretary of Education Arne Duncan also said he stood by Jennings earlier this year, before this material was exposed in-depth on Fox News, talk radio, and conservative blogs. Where are the vaunted watchdogs of the Fourth Estate to follow up now?

My favorite blogger Jim Hoft at GatewayPundit has been tracking this story for quite some time, providing not only scathing criticism of Jennings' past record and activities, but bringin' the documentation.  Check out Hoft's two entries from last month  --

• "Fistgate VIII: Safe School Czar Jennings' org promoted book detailing gay sex between first graders."  It sounds incredible, I know, but this entry ends with a list of Hoft's previous postings and is an excellent source for those wishing to learn more about Jennings and GLSEN.

• Hoft provides detailed lists of Jennings' "reading materials" for students: "Breaking: Obama's "Safe School Czar" Is Promoting Child Porn in the Classroom -- Kevin Jennings and the GSLEN Reading List"

Michelle Malkin has several entries:

• "Safe schools czar now "regrets" failure to report child predator"
• "Who's funding GLSEN?" (Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network)
• "Who's funding GLSEN, pt. 2: Corporate phone/e-mail contact list; UPDATE: GLSEN gay bar guide for teens"
• "Eastman Kodak stands by GLSEN"

MassResistance, that bills itself as a pro-family action center for Massachusetts,  has been hot on Jennings' trail as well : Graphic Homosexual and paraphernalia given to kid at the Fistgate conference run by "Safe Schools" czar Kevin Jennings in 2000.  MassResistance has more posts, including information about a petition to have Jennings removed.

The Obama Administration has appointed some very questionable and radical individuals to its office.  Apparently, there is no vetting process to weed out unqualified and questionable people.  From that, one would assume that there is an intentional selection process for radicals. 

The public needs to speak out, demanding investigations and resignations!!!!