I had a baby...

And its name is English.

Dear God I never realized how much college was like having a baby.

It cuts into your sleep (1-3 naptime included).

It sucks up ALL of your money.

It makes you wonder why it was ever a good idea.

And you often consider giving it up for adoption.

Closed adoption.

BUT! I daresay I love it. I've been so busy that I didn't hear Herman Cain say that African-American voters are all brainwashed. Which also means that I didn't say that he's a complete ass for implying that we colored folks (please note sarcasm) are somehow incapable of thinking for ourselves - someone must have planted all of these ideas about equal rights, healthcare for all, fair taxes, etc., in our heads. Because the only way to believe in such "socialist" ideals is to be brainwashed. And obviously, rejecting Republican politicians means that we are close minded. We clearly live in a world where being republican and open mindedness go hand in hand.

Nope. I didn't say that at all.

I've also been too busy to notice how the media (much to the conservative right's glee) pounced all over the Chris Christie (non)ordeal. While the world was so focused on this man's (nonexistent) potential presidential run, the republican's were doing....Oh, wait... We don't know because everyone needed Mr. Christie to say for the hundredth time that he would not be running for president.

Nope. Didn't notice that at all.

I didn't notice North Carolina's decision to put the gay marriage amendment to the state constitution to vote in 2012. I also didn't say that it'll be a cold day in hell before NC gets any more of my tax dollars if that amendment passes.

Nope. Not at all.

Suffice it to say that I've been living in a bubble, content to ignore the world for a time as it falls apart around me.

The sheer size of the cojones on the US Government never ceases to amaze me.

Debt ceiling.

Ceiling of Debt.

Consider it to be the stop light on our government’s spending – more of a guideline than a real rule. Oh, haven’t you heard? You don’t REALLY have to stop at red lights. Those are more like yield signs.

Of course I’ve been reading all about the red light on spending, and getting up and watching the news to see how “talks” on Capitol Hill have progressed, and having debates with myself about it while in the car on the way to work. (Oh, haven’t you heard? I am now GAINFULLY employed – but more on that later.)

Of course I’ve been watching MSNBC (gag), CNN (cough), and really any other news outlet that I can get my hands on.

Why, as I’m sure you’ve heard, even Don Lemon’s upset about the situation.

As you watch this video, ask yourself a series of questions: do we want the truth from our news reporters? And, if so, why are we upset when they try to dig through the bullshit to get to said truth? We complain and complain and complain (just in case no one heard it the first  2 times) about politicians that beat around the bush so much that you forget what the actual question even was – but when someone comes along to try to Hulk Smash their way past that – they’re bad reporters. Screw that. Don Lemon – I tip my hat to you. Sure he was rude. But what's worse? A rude reporter, or a congressperson that sits on his or her ass all day doing absolutely nothing, but still taking home a 6 figure salary? I don't pay Don Lemon. I pay congress. I could give a damn about Mr. Lemon being rude. 

He hit the nail on the head. The American people want something done. Period. At this point, I’m not even sure if any of us actually care WHAT gets done. We just want something to BE done. But that is, naturally, just my opinion. 

They were hired to do a job. They positioned themselves as worthy candidates. They showed up to the interview, paid their dues and we chose them. Some of us weren’t happy with that choice – but, hey, majority rules and all that.

Now, they sit on Capitol Hill, day after day doing nothing. They’re leaned back in their chairs (chairs that WE paid for, mind you) with their feet kicked up on their desks, eating their foie gras and nurturing their principles. But they keep TELLING us that they’re hard at work. And we’re just supposed to be at ease with that.

They keep saying “we’re working for the American people,” but they aren’t! They’re working against us. They hear our complaints, our requests for compromise, our belief that it would be best to increase revenue AND cut spending – but still they’ve done nothing! Congressmen and women are supposed to listen to what WE are saying and transfer our grievances/desires to the Hill. They are not supposed to take them, parcel through and decide what they like the best and then transfer to the Hill.  

We are telling you to stop being pansy asses and cut spending and raise revenue, but somehow 

our desires go ignored.

Ignoring the voices of the people you claim to work for and calling it principles is like ignoring the will of God because you “know better” and still expecting to get into heaven.

Please stop doing what you think the Tea Party, the Republicans or the Democrats think you should do – and do what NEEDS to be done.

Differentiate between wants and needs. You’re adults; you should be able to do that. If you can’t, then resign. If you can’t, you clearly are not old enough for this job.

And, America – stop blaming everything on President Obama. He had 535 people to help him get this country where it is.

You can find their names here: http://www.house.gov/representatives/

And here: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

If they don’t shape up, and do something about not only this debt ceiling, but every damned thing else – I say that we all go to our human resources departments, grab the pertinent tax forms and decrease our withholding to 0.

If that doesn’t send a message, I don’t know what will.

When a good night's sleep just ain't enough.

If you listen closely you can hear my eyelids as they scrape shut over my sandpapery eyeballs.

I’m way too exhausted for someone that sits around and watches Golden Girls and 3^rd Rock from the Sun all day. (In addition to The No. 1 Ladies' Detective Agency and Breaking Bad). Watching TV (with a critical eye, of course, is SO tiring. Especially when you’re watching Wilfred – a show that I can only assume is some twisted person’s idea of what happens when Stewie Griffin grows up and replaces Brian.

But I digress.

I think I’ll blame my current bout with lethargy on the heat wave that’s gripping the country. I could fill a river with all of the water that’s been leached from my fleshy cocoon over the last few days. And, adding insult to aqueous injury - my AC doesn't work. 

I could also blame it on the book that I haven’t worked on in weeks. I get tired just thinking about all the work I have to do to make the story make sense.

Or I could blame it on the fact that the people who we elected to run this country are running it straight into the f*cking ground. I read today that Speaker Boehner (pronounced bow-ner. Don’t  let him fool you, folks) walked away from debt talks today. Oh. That’s classy. Also, very adult of him. I love the message it sends – when you don’t get your way, walk away, pout, bitch and moan and all your problems will be solved.

I keep hearing about the fact that PRESIDENT Obama (notice the emphasis on the “president” there. Some of you seem to keep forgetting that he’s the president and should be addressed as such) hasn’t personally come up with a deal/proposal of his own.

I ask you, America (i.e. all 7 of my followers) what difference would it make if President Obama had come up with a deal of his own? How many deals have both sides walked away from? What’s one more? Would it make you feel better if Mr. President had come up with a deal just for congress to walk away from it?

I ask you, America – if both sides have walked away from multiple deals, multiple times, what makes you think that a plan that was devised by the President himself would be any different?

But, of course, I’m looking at this WAY TOO LOGICALLY. Let’s ignore the fact that in 11 days the United States’ credit is going to be as worthless as an education in Atlanta. Please, let’s focus on the fact that President Obama has yet to come up with a plan in the face of countless other (apparently) unacceptable plans.

Or, maybe I’m just exhausted because I’m tired of hearing about how tax laws and the current tax rates in this country are somehow stifling job creation. Jobs aren’t being created because employers have realized that they can get the same amount of work done with half the employees. “How have they done this?” you ask? It’s simple. People are scared shitless of losing their jobs. So they’re staying at work later, taking less pay, and doing double the work just to be able to feed the families they never get to see because they work so late. (Of course, I’m making assumptions. You can trust me though. I was almost a doctor).

Jobs aren’t being created for numbers of reasons – and I won’t catalogue them here. Why? Because all you have to do is turn on the news to find out why. Read a book. Read a newspaper.  I just wish (which is something I do every single day) that our elected officials would stop making it seem like lowering/not raising taxes is somehow going to result in this explosion of new jobs.

It won’t.

Perhaps I’m exhausted because I’m tired of the hate in the world. My heart goes out to Norway today. I think of those families that got phone calls today. Phone calls that relayed messages of loss and heartbreak.

Why do we, as “civilized” human beings, as the “more intelligent” species, hate each other so much? Over things as simple as religion? Skin color? Who we love?

Is the value of a person’s life and happiness so negligible?

If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other – Mother Teresa

High on the sense of life

Okay.

I admit it.

I’ve started watching the news again. [Excuse me while attempt to give you the courtesy of looking ashamed]

I had the extreme pleasure of seeing Rick Santorum on CNN’s American Morning (click the "On TV" tab CNN doesn't link you to the video directly). He talked about jobs, creation of jobs, President Obama, and – of course – gay marriage.

I hated everything he had to say.

I don’t want to start with references to how he skirts direct questions and blames everything on President Obama – because all politicians do that.

I don’t want to start with his discriminatory views on marriage. Besides, I don’t think I could do it better than Dan Savage. And we all know that Rick Santorum doesn’t like gay people and doesn’t want them to have the same rights that we straighties have. (Even if he has pulled the infamous “some of my closest friends are gay” card. I think I’ve seen him hanging out with a few black people, too.)

I want to start with his take on job creation. Ugh. Job creation. It’s become a pop term. It’s like crack to the current presidential candidates. At a loss for what to say? Just sprinkle “job creation” liberally throughout your speech and everyone will be so high on the idea of a paycheck that they’ll forget that you’re a complete ass who has no idea how to run this country.

Luckily for me, I took some Benadryl this morning – it’s a special formula designed to block histamine and bullshit. I think I’m going to be pretty drowsy for the next few months.

Especially since Santorum supports a “0 rate tax” plan for business (more on that in a sec).

He feels that when the government “takes more and spends more the American people have less.”

How are we determine what “less” is? Sure, less money on my paycheck – I wholeheartedly agree. But let’s think about where that money goes – i.e what it’s spent on. It goes to social security, something we all benefit from. It goes to Medicare and Medicaid. It goes to repair the roads that I have to drive on. It goes to schools and the teachers in those schools. It goes to the men and women that have sworn to serve and protect, to preserve and fight for the fundamental rights that all Americans are granted. Oh, and those people with the water hoses that run into BURNING HOUSES to save lives.

I think I can give up a little extra in my paycheck for those services. Do you?

Santorum goes on to say that Obamacare should be repealed. That we should repeal the Sarbanes-Oxyley act (an act to protect American investors). That we should repeal “big chunks of Dodd-Frank,” (enacted to ensure consumer protection and greater accountability in big business). He further cites the EPA and FDA as being evidence of an “explosion of the regulatory process” on the part of the current administration. In short, he says there is TOO MUCH regulation and it’s encumbering business and its growth.

Whew. That was a mouthful. But, hold on to your butts, ladies and gentleman, we aren’t done yet.  Santorum’s answer to fueling job growth in this country is to, you guessed it, CUT TAXES.

I’ll pause while the masses rejoice.

He wants a 0% rate of taxation for corporations and individuals that manufacture in this country. What they’re manufacturing, I’m not sure.

Here’s my issue with this 0 rate taxation plan – well beyond the obvious ZERO FREAKIN DOLLARS IN TAXES. Job creation does not equate with job maintenance. What’s to stop these companies from opening a few manufacturing jobs on American soil, getting this tax break, and then firing these workers? I hope there’ll be a clause for that.

What’s to stop them from creating (for arguments sake) 5 manufacturing jobs in the US and 35 in India? Wouldn’t they still qualify for the break since they’ve indeed created American manufacturing jobs? Will there be a clause for this? Or is that too much Regulation for Santorum?

What’s to stop them from hiring American manufacturers, and firing American employees in a different sector only to ship jobs of said sector overseas? Sure, manufacturing jobs have been created – but other’s have been lost. AND this company still gets the tax break.

I’ll pause as the rejoicing ebbs.

Jobs have been created. Great. Incentives have been given to big business to create said jobs, great. But, our wonderful government has now lost out on a big chunk of tax revenue that would ordinarily (in a more perfect world) go toward bringing the budget deficit down. You’ve now lost out on money that’s used to fuel all of those wonderful programs I noted previously.

And, what’s possibly even more frightening – does this tax break apply to manufacturing companies or companies with manufacturing capabilities? For instance, companies that devote 100% of their time to manufacturing versus those that only devote 3% of their time to it.  Will they only apply the 0 rate of taxation to that 3% of earnings?

I guess it doesn’t truly matter since companies that bring in BILLIONS of dollars are getting away with paying 1.1% in taxes (in addition to gratuitous Capitol Hill ass kissing, and quite possibly corporate murder). Those programs I mentioned before aren’t being funded by these guys.

But wait, unfortunately there’s more.

When asked how he felt about putting tariffs on imported Chinese goods, for example, he said that it would increase costs for workers and that what we need to do is engender incentives. Okay – I agree with him on this point (SHOCK! SHAME!).

We all know that part of the issue of job creation in this country is demand. People aren’t spending because they aren’t working and big companies therefore cannot “afford” (as they say) to create more jobs. So, if we put tariffs on imported goods (especially those sorts of goods that can be (and are being) manufactured right here in the good old U.S. of A), the cost will go up and give American buyers an INCENTIVE to buy American products. Thereby fueling money into the economy and those businesses. Thereby giving said business the INCENTIVE to create more jobs.

I think I’m a little high on all the sense this is making.

Excuse me while I run off to locate some tasty treats.

Why hello, Jesus! Long time, no see.

My health (and quite possibly my immortal soul) dictates that I should not watch the news every morning.  It drives up my blood pressure, feeds my as yet undiscovered brain tumor, widens my gastric ulcer and makes my eye twitch – rapidly. Also, my anger as a result of watching the news scares my boyfriend.

Because of this, I know I’m (more often than not) late with the political news. However, Rep. Todd Akin’s infamous words of the past week resonate with me.

As I’m sure you’ve all heard by now, this individual feels that “at the heart of liberalism is a hatred for God.”

Cue firestorm of outraged liberal media.

Cue religious leaders coming forward and denouncing the comments.

Cue liberal Americans standing proud as Christian citizens who love God.

Cue me, wondering where the hell I’d been for the past week.

Honestly, it’s a bunch of bullshit. If you love God, then love God. You’re love of Him will either define your political leanings or it won’t. I don’t personally believe that at the core of any ideology is a love for, or a hatred of, God.

What I do believe is that the average human being has their own established beliefs, ideas and leanings and that they use religion as a means of fueling those ideas. How many times in the history of the world has a religious text been twisted to suit the needs of one explosive group or another?

In the end, I try not to define myself as a conservative or a liberal.  I do, however, define myself as a person who believes that we help those in need.  That we aid the poor, feed the hungry, clothe the naked – essentially take care of those who cannot take care of themselves.  Take a gander at Matthews 25:31-46. I don’t take those words lightly. I don’t think they are there just because they look pretty in red.

For the most part, the people you accuse of hating God are the ones that are the most vocal about upholding the programs that ensure that our uninsured get medical aid, that our hungry get food, that our naked get clothed and that our rich don't continue to get rich off the backs of people that can't even afford to put enough gas in their cars to get to work. Hatred of God indeed.

I'm going to need you to man up and not take the pansy way out by saying you were referring to "ideology" and not people. If the average person is defined by their political ideology and you feel that liberalism is defined by a hatred of God, doesn't that mean that you believe that some liberals, on some level, hate God? Or, at the very least, that they are okay with adhering to a realm of thought that his defined by a hatred of God? (Which, let's just face it, is just as bad.)

Of course that's not what you meant! 

Rep. Akin – I know who I am. I know what God defines me and I know what political leanings define me. But, whether I’m conservative or liberal – I take offense to your assertions. Perhaps if you spent more time focusing on the core tenets of the Christian philosophy and less on the foundation of the liberal ideology – you’d be a better representative.

If you wanted to debate the fundamental differences between conservativism, liberalism, pansy-ism and backbone-ism - perhaps you should have become a professor of the political sciences. 

Oh, and if any of you were wondering: 

Conservative - adj. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones and to limit change.

Liberal - adj. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

I guess I'll be a liberal today. 

Here's to you Todd Rokita - upholding the laws of the land.

I received a letter from congressman Todd Rokita quite some time ago and never posted my response. I read an article this morning declaring that the Indiana state senate has passed a bill that would de-fund Planned Parenthood. Apparently supporters don't want to "fund an organization that provides abortions." Apparently, the work that they do that extends beyond providing abortions isn't worth funding either. You'll find my response to Mr. Rokita below. 

Dear Congressman Todd Rokita:

I received your letter in response to my request to vote against defunding Planned Parenthood today and I must admit that I’m deeply saddened by it. I understand that you are someone that firmly believes in the rights of the unborn and I applaud you for standing by it.  What I don’t applaud, however, is that fact that you are misleading your constituents.  Planned Parenthood is barred from using federal dollars to pay for abortions, Congressman Rokita. As a leader of this country I would think that you would have educated yourself on this fact before attacking the funding that is afforded Planned Parenthood. I do not believe that taking away their funding is somehow stemming the tide of abortion.  Nor I do believe that they are “actively encouraging the practice” of abortion. Have you or a loved one ever been to Planned Parenthood? Have you or they seen any behavior that “actively encourages” abortions? How do you legally define active encouragement? I can assure you that during my visit to a Planned Parenthood facility, I was never once “actively encouraged” to have an abortion.

If you seek to decrease abortions in this country, why would you start with agreeing to cut funding to an organization that provides birth control to the uninsured? Why would you attack an organization that provides screenings and healthcare to women and men who would otherwise not be able to afford such services? You want abortion to be stopped, yet you are attacking one of the very organizations that work to teach communities about proper birth control, and the prevention of pregnancy. Does that make sense to you, as someone who is smart enough to become a congressman? Planned Parenthood is not also known as Abortions R’ Us. Planned Parenthood is about more than performing abortions – a service that is legal in the United States of America.  It is about providing men and women with cancer screenings, yearly check-ups, STD panels, etc. 

Employees in the healthcare profession do not get to pick and choose who they will or will not help.  Would it be acceptable to you if a doctor decided against performing life saving surgery on a patient because they did not agree with the person’s choices in life? Healthcare professionals are not being forced to do anything. They are doing their jobs. If they do not want to do their jobs, they can find another one.  I highly doubt that anyone is forcing healthcare workers to perform abortions “against their will.” Anyone that does not want to perform or participate in an abortion has the right to not do it. Their employer also has the right to relieve them of their position, considering that they are not fulfilling their oath and promise as a healthcare worker and employee. It’s all about choice.

I do not believe that our government should infiltrate countries and strike down innocent and defenseless men, women and children, but my taxes still pay for wars do they not? As an American citizen I benefit from the rights afforded me in the United States constitution while understanding that I may be subject to laws and taxes that I may or may not like, and have to endure the leadership of politicians that I do not like. I don’t get to pick and choose which laws I will obey, just as I do not get to pick and choose what programs my taxes will fund. You, dear congressman, also do not get to pick and choose which laws you will enforce and which taxes people have to pay.  This is the country we live in and the one that you’ve chosen to lead. Either accept it, or get out of office.

I understand your desire to protect the rights and lives of the unborn. But what about the rights and the lives of the people that put you in office? Unless, of course, you believe that the people that put you in office do not benefit from the services of Planned Parenthood. Roe v. Wade protects a woman’s right to choose. Until that is no longer true, you have an obligation to uphold the laws of this land whether or not you agree with them.  You also have a duty to stop propagating the lie that Planned Parenthood is using the hard earned money of taxpayers to pay for abortions.

Please be assured that I will always fight for and abide by the rights and laws of this land, whether I agree with them or not.

Thank you for contacting me. Please keep in touch. I’d love to read about your version of the truth in the future.

Sincerely

Kristen Reynolds

Educated Constituent

My tax dollars don't pay you to hate and discriminate.

It’s 1 o’clock in the morning and, as usual, my brain assumes that’s the perfect time for writing. It’s one of those nights when “more tired than Katherine Heigl in a romantic comedy” just doesn’t seem to cover it.

 I find myself awake pondering the plight of the world – its incessant need to hate, its undying ability to spread that hate.  I wonder how we got here. I wonder how we ever get to a point where hatred is acceptable. Especially when it’s sheathed in the name of God.

The Indiana House of Representatives voted to pass an amendment banning same sex marriage.  This decision has had me quite perplexed for a few days, and I’m only just now finding myself calm enough to adequately respond.  Representative Eric Turner has been quoted as saying, “The basic unit of society is the family, and the cornerstone of the family is marriage. Marriage is and should be between one man and one woman."

Who gets to decide what marriage is or isn’t? Is that a power that “we the people” have given to our government? To define what makes a marriage and what constitutes family? If so, can someone please point out where the U.S. constitution allocates that right, because I damn sure haven’t seen it.

The people that voted for this amendment say that they are NOT writing DISCRIMINATION into the constitution. IF you are saying that marriage is EXCLUSIVE to one man and one woman, does that not exclude any other sort of relationship? Is that not, therefore, discrimination? Apparently our elected officials have a different grasp of what constitutes discriminatory activity. It was once acceptable to outlaw interracial marriages as well. But, maybe I’m comparing apples to oranges and I just don’t realize it. Maybe the prevention of marriage between two people who clearly loved each other in the early to mid 20^th century is totally different from the prevention of marriage between two people who clearly love each other in the 21^st century.

If I told you that marriage should only be between people from the same social class would you accept that? No, you wouldn’t. Why? Because it’s arbitrary and, as we all know, you can’t help who you love. 

Marriage is what you make it. Marriage, for some, is the ultimate testament of love. Marriage, for others, is a death sentence. But at least they get to make that choice.

Who does “same-sex” marriage harm? Is it murdering your child? Is it stealing your most prized possessions? Is it selling drugs at the local high school? If my gay friends get married, will a deadly earthquake occur halfway across the world and somehow wipeout 6 million people? Will it somehow prevent you from living your day to day life? 

How about a little perspective people. Marriage is not a gift to be doled out like candy on Halloween. It is a right, as inherent as the right to vote.

So, dear Rep. Turner – if you want to maintain the cornerstone of the family, you should probably start by realizing that families, like marriage, are what you make them. Family is what I choose it to be, not what my government tells me it is. Family is born from love and love does not only exist between one man and one woman. The Indiana state constitution is no place for your prejudices. Please keep them to yourself. 

The meaning of life

I hate getting up early in the morning for class.  If there’s a reason for an early arrival to awake-dom, then I’m all for it. I’ll get up at 430 in the morning and operate on 4 hours of sleep to get to the airport.  I’ll get up at 330 to begin an 8 hour car ride for vacation. But I hate, absolute abhor, getting up at 630 or beyond to go to [shudders] class.

At least I did. Then I bought a TV for my bedroom, and suddenly the world made sense again at 630 in the morning. 

It’s something of a ritual of mine to roll over, beat my alarm senseless, flick on the light and immediately turn on the news. It gets me all riled up in the morning and makes me feel…well…alive. This morning, for instance, I watched a story on CNN about former Senator Rick Santorum.  They discussed a report in which the former senator stated that in the face of his views of civil rights, President Obama’s stance on abortion was “remarkable for a black man.” Hmm…Didn’t I just talk about this in my Dr. MLK blog post? I believe I did.

The former senator then goes on to say that he does not believe that “you’ll find a biologist in the world who will say that is not a human life,” in reference to a fetus.  Now, I’m a biologist. I spend my working days with biologists. And I can say for a fact that I’ve heard it a time or two where a fellow biologist has indicated that a fetus is not a person.  Now, the former senator has done something quite interesting here – which is why I both love and hate politicians. They are like the Fae in how they tell a lie.  

How do we define life? As an undergraduate, I encountered professors both young and old that had no set definition for “life," and it was actually the topic of debate in class one spring day.  I would say that we encounter “life” when we encounter a living cell, but that is my definition.   A fetus is comprised of living cells and, as a result of my current definition, a fetus constitutes life because it is a comprised of living cells.  But what is life to someone that is not a scientist? For those people of the world that haven't chosen to pursue scienece, life is often synonymous with “personhood” so to speak. So, for former senator Santorum to come forward and say that he wouldn’t “find a biologist in the world who will say that is not a human life” is not necessarily a lie, but it’s so far from the truth it might as well be. Asking someone to define life is like asking a person to define love.

BUT, the point of this post is not to debate what constitutes life, what makes a person a person, or even whether or not abortion is right or wrong.  The point of this post is to discuss the use of the “[insert adjective here] for a [insert race here] person” formula. The point of this post is to discuss, yet again, why the use of such language – while fully endorsed by our first amendment rights – is just flat out wrong.  I would hope that a former senator of the friggin United States of America would understand that, but sadly he apparently does not. (Watch out kids! He’s slated to run for president in 2012.)   

Why isn’t it enough that the President fights for civil rights? Why couldn’t Santorum have stated that President Obama’s stance on abortion was “remarkable given that he advocates for the civil rights of all people?” Why does the fact that he’s a black man have anything to do with it? I say this, because a statement such as the one uttered by Santorum makes it seem as if black people are the only ones that should care about civil rights. Would he have said President Hu’s stance on abortion (whatever it may be) was “remarkable for a Chinese man?” I don’t know. 

Maybe the problem is me. Maybe I’m just supposed to accept the use of the insert adjective/insert race formula and turn a blind eye to it.  Maybe I’m just making a “big deal” out of it.  Ha! As if I ever would!

This wouldn’t bother me so much if it was a small isolated incident, but we hear it everywhere we turn.  Remember “Barack, The Magic Negro?” Remember Senator Harry Reid’s comments about the world being ready for a “light skinned” black President with no “Negro dialect?” Remember Vice President Biden’s comments about the president being the “first mainstream African American that was articulate and bright and clean?” Naturally Vice President Biden said those words were taken out of context. And Senator Harry Reid apologized. And the esteemed leaders of our nation expressed the appropriate disapproval of that magical song. 

How about you just not do/say/engage in this offensive shit in the first place?  How many times are we supposed to sit back and accept it when people say "it's just a joke," or "I'm sorry, I didn't mean it?"

And since you care so much about civil rights former senator Santorum – are you also going to begin advocating for gay marriage? A right that, in my opinion, is a right that belongs to anyone that lays claim to it.

I also looked up the definition of life for my own edification. This is what I and my good friend Merriam found.