THANKFUL SUNDAY

In a week marred by tragedy, both at home and abroad, it's nice to hear that Congresswoman Giffords' condition has been upgraded from critical to serious. Let's pray for her continued recovery, as well as for the speedy recovery of the other victims of the Tucson shootings. As for the families of the deceased victims, may they remain in our prayers too!

A THIRST FOR BLOOD IS MADNESS

You know the world's gone mad when a United States Supreme Court Justice states publicly, with all the bluster of ancient Rome’s Caligula, that a country’s use of torture is justifiable in the name of national security. It’s hard to believe, given all we know about the atrocities committed by Germany’s Hitler, Rome’s Caligula and all those who perpetrated the Inquisitions of the Middle Ages, that some would still think that the depravity of torture could be excused, let alone encouraged, but that’s exactly what Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once suggested on BBC Radio.

As if that was not enough, Justice Scalia took the occasion to mock European criticism of the U.S. death penalty, calling Europe’s opposition to the American practice ‘self-righteous’ and ‘ridiculous’.

One could almost forgive Justice Scalia as being ignorant on both topics, as he’s never witnessed the atrocities that millions of Europeans did or lost friends or relatives to Hitler's campaign of horror, but Scalia is routinely touted as one of the most brilliant thinkers on the United States Supreme Court. Thus, it can only be concluded that Scalia is perfectly satisfied with the use of torture and state-sponsored killing, which speaks volumes about his moral character.

You wouldn’t think that the bloodthirsty would achieve such high respect in the United States, but like I said, “The world's gone mad”.

WESTBORO BLACKMAIL

Lost in all the drama over the Tucson shooting episode was a small, hateful side-show that never received much publicity, and rightly so. It seems that "The Hate Church of Topeka" a/k/a the Westboro Baptist Church (the church that pickets military & gay funerals with their hate messages) announced to certain media outlets that its members were planning to picket the funeral of Christina Taylor Green, the 9-year-old girl who was slain during the assassination attempt on Congresswoman Giffords.

In order to head off another ugly and hateful campaign by the Westboro Baptist Church and its members, two radio stations – one in the Tucson area and another in Canada offered the Westboro Church free airtime in exchange for Westboro's promise to stay away from Christina's funeral.

The church accepted the offer, but made no promise regarding federal Judge John Roll's funeral. In fact, members of the Westboro church planned to picket at both the judge's funeral and outside the Safeway Food Market where the shooting took place.

While I appreciate and applaud the motivations of the radio stations in wanting to do everything in their power to enable the family and friends of Christina Taylor Green to grieve in peace, it really irks me that the Westboro church would hold a family and a nation hostage to their evil and hate-filled messages.

BRAVERY OVER VIOLENCE - A REMEMBRANCE

Three years ago last week, a very dear friend of my wife and I was taken from this world, the tragic victim of domestic violence at the hands of her estranged husband. She was survived by a then seventeen year old daughter, Tiffany. In light of the recent violent tragedy in Tucson, my thoughts have returned to the senseless violence that struck closer to home.

The following is a reprint of a memorial to Tammy Albino, whose dream of a happier life was cut short by a senseless act of violence.

Sometimes, ordinary women summon extraordinary courage to transform lives; and sometimes, those women pay for their courage with their own life. Tammy was one of those women.

Sometimes, ordinary women find the extraordinary courage to free themselves from the yoke of emotional abuse and domestic violence; and sometimes, the violence consumes them anyway. Tammy was one of those women.

Sometimes, ordinary women find the extraordinary courage to dream for a better life, a happier life, a safer life, a calmer life, a more rewarding life; and sometimes, that dream is extinguished in the blink of an eye with nary a rhyme or reason. Tammy was one of those women.

Sometimes, ordinary women find the extraordinary courage to teach their offspring that hope can be found in the midst of utter desolation, that resolve and determination can give rise to hope for a better tomorrow and that a life lived by one’s own choice, no matter how short, is far superior to a lifetime of living according to the will of another. Tammy was one of those women

And sometimes, extraordinary courage transforms ordinary women into extraordinary women. Tammy was one of those women too.

She loved her daughter. She treasured her family. She cherished her friends. She yearned for a happier life – a dream unfortunately cut short – but by her courage she planted a seed that is Tiffany’s hope and a reminder to us all that courage to take the first step is truly extraordinary.

YOUR CROOK AND MY CROOK

If breaking a law is considered criminal behavior, and a crook is somebody who's engaged in criminal behavior, then it's fair to say that former Republican Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Tom Delay is a crook.

If a person espouses the same policies that Delay claims to espouse, and holds Delay in high esteem because he shares their views, then I can understand why those individuals would want to believe that Delay's money laundering and criminal conspiracy convictions were unfair. After all, nobody wants to think that they are championing a crook.

Bill Clinton was a crook too. He lied under oath – a criminal offense. Many of us who espoused similar political views as Clinton wanted to believe that he was being unfairly treated too, and reasonable minds can differ on whether perjury was a "high crime or misdemeanor" under the U.S. Constitution, but the bottom line was that Clinton was a crook, just like Delay. He might have been "our crook", but he was still a crook.

On this Monday past, a judge in Texas sentenced Tom Delay to three years in prison, followed by ten years on probation, for the crimes Delay committed. He could have received more time, and he could have received less. All things considered, in my opinion it was a fair sentence. Then again, Delay fans will beg to differ. That's okay. Everybody's entitled to their opinion.

What stood out as noteworthy to me was that, prior to his sentencing, Delay took a rather defiant attitude about his convictions and refused to express any remorse for his actions. Of course, to his supporters, his position was an act of bravery and his defiance was justified, but to me, his lack of repentance was just another example of Tom Delay's arrogance.

Delay could have taken a different approach before the sentencing court and still maintained his innocence. He could have remained quiet and said nothing. He could have indicated that he recognized the public's interest in prohibiting financial corruption in politics and the inherent evils of money laundering. He could have apologized for not working more diligently to avoid situations that entailed the appearance of impropriety. He could have acknowledged that, as a national leader, he should have paid more respect to the honor of the institution in which he worked. He could have apologized to his wife and family…but he didn't.

Instead, Delay blamed everybody, but himself. He blamed the law. He blamed the prosecutor. He blamed the witnesses. He blamed his political opponents and he blamed the jury. He pointed a finger at everyone and everything, but refused to take a look at himself in the mirror. That's because Tom Delay is an arrogant man…and a crook!

LESS THAN NOTEWORTHY HEADLINES

Did you ever read a newspaper headline or an Internet article title and think to yourself, "Duh! Is that something all that noteworthy?"

For example, yesterday I read this headline: "Arizona Sheriff says Shooting Suspect not Cooperating." The article dealt with the fact that Jaren Loughner, the 22-year old who tried to assassinate Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and killed a 9-year old girl, a federal judge and four other is in the process, was not spilling his guts to the police about why he committed those horrendous acts. Don't get me wrong. I can see why an article about the incident would mention the guy's lack of cooperation, because all of us would like an answer to the question why, but to make his lack of cooperation a central point of an article doesn't seem all that noteworthy.

Both the State of Arizona and the Federal Government have launched or will be launching capital murder prosecutions against Loughner, and I have little doubt that some of those charges will result in the imposition of the death penalty. I can't say Loughner's as good as dead today, because he hasn't even had a trial, but it wouldn't be a stretch given the proclivity of Arizona jurors to send murderers to their death. Is it really that noteworthy that Loughner wouldn't lend assistance to speed up his lethal injection? In my mind, the only thing such an article does is give Loughner's criminal defense another reason for asking for a change in venue. In Loughner's case, it probably won't make any difference – we all know he did it, but that still doesn't make it relevant…or all that particularly noteworthy.

~~~*~~~

Another headline that caught my attention was this one: "Thieves Steal Social Security Numbers: This is how they do it." Pardon me, but is it really a good idea to disseminate a step-by-step set of instructions on how to steal a neighbor's social security number? Isn't it enough to warn people about what steps they can take to prevent such thefts without giving crooks a tutorial on how to run a successful scam? Seriously, is that stupid, or what?

Everybody knows that identity theft is a big problem. Let's not make it worse than it already is by publishing a how-to guide for criminals.

~~~*~~~

And finally, this gem just came to my attention: "Lindsay Lohan Faces Uncertain Future." Here's a thought: everybody's future is uncertain. Just because some of us have a greater chance of spending it behind bars ought not make it newsworthy, especially after a number of court-ordered rehab failures.

CONNECTING THE DOTS

Five or six years ago, Richard D. Young of the University of South Carolina College of Liberal Art's Institute for Public Service and Policy Research, in Columbia, South Carolina published a paper on volunteerism in America that is worthwhile reading on the subject. Young's paper examines the roots and motivations of volunteerism in America and can be found at the following web address for anyone who is interested:

http://www.ipspr.sc.edu/publication/Volunteerism%20FINAL.pdf

One of the points Young made in his paper was the Americans were world leaders in the number of hours they spent volunteering each year, and he noted by way of example that volunteers were providing an overwhelming majority of firefighting services in communities around the country. If you take a moment to give the subject some thought, you'll quickly realize that each and every one of us is being served by volunteers in some fashion or another. Sometimes, these volunteers receive the recognition they deserve. Oftentimes, they don't. The next time you see a volunteer, take a moment and tell them, "Thanks". This country would be a lot worse off without them.

~~~ * ~~~

Several articles have appeared in the news over the past year or so regarding an ironic twist in the job market. At a time when the national unemployment rate was hovering around ten percent and millions of Americans were out of work and looking for jobs, employers with job openings were frequently listing in their employment advertisements that they were only accepting applications from individuals who were already employed.

Employers who used the "currently employed" criteria in their job hiring process essentially subscribed to the theory that people who were then currently employed were more dedicated workers than those who were unemployed, and thus, were more attractive hiring candidates.

Personally, I don't subscribe to that theory because (a) millions of people lost jobs in the current economic downturn through no fault of their own, and (b) I can name quite of few slackers I encounter on a regular basis who are still on payrolls. Nevertheless, I do recognize that employers have wide latitude in setting their own hiring criteria, so the practice of seeking only currently employed applicants is just another fact of life that must be endured. That said, if you're hiring…give the unemployed a chance.

~~~*~~~

Human Resource departments around the country were not the only places where the unemployed have been rejected. Many politicians during this past election cycle made political hay by disparaging unemployed workers and characterizing them as lazy individuals who were simply suckling at the public's teat. Only when tax cuts for the wealthiest in America were solidified were politicians willing to extend (and only begrudgingly) unemployment benefits for millions of Americans whose only lifeline was literally those benefits. With the unemployed held in such low esteem, I guess it's no wonder employers are weary of hiring them.

~~~*~~~

And while I'm on the subject of low esteem, if you take the time to research the subject, you'll find that there's a significant link between unemployment and depression and low-self esteem.

In December of 2009, the UK's "Men's Health Forum" noted in an article that, "It's not easy to stay healthy when you're unemployed. The loss of confidence that inevitably results from losing your job and the sudden need not to get out of bed in the morning can be a toxic combination when it comes to both physical and mental health. Make no mistake about it, unemployment can kill."

The article went on to state: "Unemployment always reminds you that the world in general and the world of work in particular will carry on turning quite happily without you." It also warned to watch out for boredom because the long drawn out days of not working can be stressful and depressing. Unemployed individuals frequently find themselves questioning their own worth, because so much of what is valued in our society is tied to one's occupation.

The moral here is that not having a job is not all it's cracked up to be.

~~~*~~~

I have placed all of the above issues in one article because I think we (and by that I mean America) have overlooked a solution that could address each of the above-referenced problems. That solution is volunteerism. What's wrong with asking people who receive unemployment benefits to spend a certain number of hours each week volunteering for a tax-exempt charity, organization or government unit? There is much work to be done in our society and government entities and charities do not have the resources to accomplish all of it in the current economic climate. Much of that work volunteers could perform, if only their energies and talents were so directed.

Once more, unemployed volunteers could maintain their own sense of self-esteem by knowing that they continue to be contributing members of our society. Volunteering would also help fight the disparaging label that politicians frequently place on those who receive unemployment benefits. If prospective employers would join the effort, and recognize volunteerism as having the same value as employment, unemployed volunteers would know that their time contributions could eventually lead to gainful employment. The end result would be a win for everyone. The time to start is now.

BLOODIED HANDS

In the Old Wild West, U.S. Marshalls could round-up a posse and ride off to track down a band of stagecoach robbers or apprehend a cold-blooded killer, or they could post "Wanted – Dead or Alive" posters around the territory and offer a reward, knowing full-well that bounty hunters would accomplish the task for them. The latter method worked perfectly well in the mostly lawless regions of the Old West – that's why they called it Wild – because U.S. Marshall could accomplish their goal (capturing the suspect) without risking their necks, because suspects in the Old Wild West tended to return gunfire whenever chased. That made the task a dangerous proposition. U.S. Marshalls could also wash their hands of an incident if a bounty hunter was involved in the apprehension of a suspect and innocent people got killed in the process.

Yesterday, Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was the victim of an assassination attempt on a street corner in Tucson, Arizona as she was in the midst of holding an event outside a grocery store in her district.

The event Congresswoman Giffords was holding at the time of the shooting was a town meeting of sorts; one where constituents in her district could meet with their Congressional representative in person, share their concerns, ask questions and engage in a face-to-face discussion about national and local issues of concern to them. It was Gifford's way of bringing the government in Washington into direct contact with the people it exists to represent.

Gifford's would-be assassin interrupted that meeting with a hail of gunfire that left the Congresswoman seriously injured with a gunshot wound to the head, a federal judge, a 9-year old girl, plus four other adults (including a congressional aide) dead and several others seriously wounded.

Here is where the "Wanted – Dead or Alive" poster comes into play. Last week, Tea Party leader Sarah Palin launched a PAC (political action committee) website dedicated to killing President Obama's Health Care Reform Law. On Palin's website, she placed a bull's-eye on twenty U.S. House of Representative Congressional Districts, including Giffords', with the accompanying headline that read, "We've diagnosed the problem…Help us prescribe the solution."

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognize that posting such an invitation would encourage a crack-pot somewhere to take up Palin's challenge to get rid of Giffords with a gun. Now, Giffords battles for her life and six other, including a 9-year old girl and a federal judge, are dead. No matter how you look at it, the blood of every last one of them is on Sarah Palin's hands!

IMMIGRANTS, BIGOTRY, FLAG WAVING AND IDOL WORSHIPPING

There's an anti-immigrant e-mail floating around that depicts a group of Hispanic high school students raising the Mexican flag above the American flag on a flagpole outside their high school. The creator of the e-mail expresses utter outrage at the lack of respect for our national symbol and urges the viewer to pass on the e-mail if they are similarly enraged.

I received that flag e-mail again this week, and this is how I responded to its sender:

"I’ve seen that e-mail before, and it never comes accompanied with a note urging folks to keep things in perspective. Then again, I never was big into idol worship, even when the idol was a piece of cloth, so I guess I just don’t have the same visceral feeling others get when they see an American flag so depicted.

The first thing that strikes me when I look at those photographs is that they depict a bunch of kids, who by their very nature as kids don’t grasp the depth of emotions they trigger in folks here who revere the flag like a god. Five years from now, they’ll know better.

The other thing that strikes me about the e-mail is how it’s engineered to create the impression that all Hispanic immigrants are disrespectful, flag-hating people. It takes the actions of a handful of nitwits and attempts to use them to smear a whole class of people; a classic example of bigotry in action.

I can’t decide which I loathe more – the bigotry or the idol worshiping."

Subsequently, the sender took issue with my reference to flag adoration being akin to idol worshiping. Here is my rebuttal:

"One reason I'm so negative about the 'pro flag' sentiment that has reached a crescendo over recent years is the corresponding willingness of those same flag wavers to shed every freedom and value that the flag was said to represent - all in the name of maintaining national security. If the events of 9/11 proved anything, it's how little we actually treasure our freedoms...because we quickly jettisoned them at the first sign of adversity. If Americans defended their freedoms and time-honored values with the same intensity as they worship the U.S. flag, this country would be a place worthy of national pride...and so would the flag.

I remember, back when I was a kid, asking my grandmother why God was so mad about the Israelites worshiping the golden calf. It was just a large piece of gold, she said. Some people thought it could do something, but it was just an object and God was upset that it took their focus away from Him and what was really important.

Today, I look at the flag in the same light. It's just an object that takes every one's focus away from that which is truly important. If that viewpoint makes me unpatriotic, so be it, but I tend to think that defending freedom is a far higher calling than defending a collection of strands of cotton, polyester and nylon."

ROMANIAN WITCH BREW-HA-HA

Witches in Romania are on the rampage this week. Broomstick riders are up in arms. That's because the Romanian government has deemed witchcraft an official profession. Ordinarily, you'd think that the witches would be pleased by the official recognition they've earned, as opposed to being burned at the stake, but that's not the case in Romania.

Why?

Well, along with the official recognition of their profession comes a corresponding obligation to pay income taxes. Romanian witches don't think they make enough to warrant government intrusion into their pockets. If I were a tax official in Romania, I'd be on the alert, just in case there's a special spell for tax collectors.

THE TALE OF THE WAYWARD GROOM

Picture this: A bride and groom exchange vows before a huge crowd and the minister declares the pair man and wife. The groom lifts the bride's veil, they kiss, and then face the congregation as the minister introduces them for the first time as Mr. and Mrs. [you supply the name]. The mother of the bride cries. The bridesmaids beam. The father of the bride shrugs his shoulder, because now he's lost another income tax deduction. The organist begins playing a joyous recessional march and the bride and groom start walking down the aisle toward the back of the church. About ten steps into his stroll, the groom spots the most beautiful girl he has ever seen (and it's not the bride) standing at the edge of one of the pews with a 'come hither' look on her face. The groom immediately drops the bride's hand and walks over to the beautiful maiden. He takes the girl into his arms and begins passionately kissing and fondling her as the entire congregation looks on.

What would you call such a guy? A cad? A bastard? A cold, hardened sonofabitch?

Nah! He's just a Republican congressman in the newly sworn United States House of Representatives.

Remember "A Pledge to America" - that much ballyhooed oath Republican congressional candidates vowed and declared to the America people last fall? Remember how those same Republican candidates stood before flag-draped lecterns all across America, paraded before TV cameras and pledged on their Bibles to carry out every word of their so-called sacred pledge?

Well, they lied! And like the wayward groom, they wasted no time in going back on their vow!

The Republican "Pledge to America" stated, and I quote: "We will let any lawmaker – Democrat of Republican - offer amendments to reduce spending."

The Pledge explained the reason for the inclusion of that oath as follows: "House Democrats have relied heavily on what is known as 'martial law' procedures during the current Congress, particularly provisions that allow them to bring any bill to the floor with little or no notice and deny Republican members of Congress or even factions of their own party their right to debate and offer amendments or substitutes for consideration or vote."

And now, on only the second day of the 144th Congress, a mere couple of steps from the vow they so solemnly declared at the election alter, Republicans have broken that vow by prohibiting debate and votes on amendments to the Health Care Reform Repeal bill they seek to vote upon next week. Democrats, and even members of the Republican's own party will be denied their "right to debate and offer amendments or substitutes for consideration or vote", a process that could reduce the federal deficit.

Here's why Republicans are being so quick to break their own vows; there's a prettier girl waiting anxiously in the wings – a girl called insurance companies.

Consider the provision of the Health Care Reform Act passed last year that prohibits insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions and prohibits companies from terminating policyholders who become sick or disabled. Before the Health Care Reform Act, those patients (and there were millions of them) were unable to get insurance and the tab for their medical treatment fell mostly on taxpayer funded Medicaid-type programs. By preventing insurance companies from dumping million of patient onto taxpayer funded programs after collecting premiums from those patients, the Health Care Reform Act was saving taxpayers billions of dollars. Repealing that specific provision of the Health Care Reform Act would actually add to the federal deficit.

Insurance companies, however, are not interested in reducing the federal deficit. They are interested in boosting their profits, and Republican House members have shown that they are more interested in Insurance Companies getting their way than the federal deficit actually being reduced. That's why they want to prohibit amendments to the repeal bill.

If amendments to the repeal bill were allowed, no Representative would dare vote against keeping the pre-existing condition provisions in place, because over 90% of Americans favor having those protections and they help reduce the federal deficit by millions of sick patients off Medicaid. Americans also favor retaining the provision mandating insurance companies to cover children up to age 26, and were the amendment process permitted, that part of the Health Care Reform Act would be retained too. The problem is health insurance companies hate those provisions and want them eliminated. The rest of the population wants them to stay, and if amendments are allowed, those provisions will stay.

That puts Republicans between a rock and a hard place…and that's the very reason Republicans have broken their sacred vow on amendments. The only way Republicans can repeal the Health Care Reform law is to forbid amendments that would help reduce the federal deficit.

You didn't really believe them when they said that was their solemn pledge to America, did you? I didn't!

DEATH PANELS - Republican Style

For the second straight day, I'm turning to Arizona for commentary fodder. A spokesperson from the University Medical Center in Tuscon, Arizona just confirmed the recent death of a patient who had been on their liver transplant list, but had to be removed because the Arizona state legislature, a solidly Republican body, voted last fall to exclude coverage for transplants from state Medicaid insurance coverage for poor people. This was the second such death since the Arizona legislature effectively "pulled the plug" on poor people getting life-saving transplants at the public's expense.

People can debate the propriety of the Arizona legislature's decision regarding the use of taxpayer funds to provide such services all they want, but the next time ultra-conservative columnist Cal Thomas and Tea Party presidential wannabe Sarah Palin, and their ilk, attack President Obama's health care reform plan with the bogus charge that it creates "death panels", perhaps they should take a moment and look in the mirror at the death count of the Arizona Republican State Legislative Death Panel. That number currently stands at two…and counting!

THE CASE OF THE CALLOUS BISHOP

Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Olmstead of the Diocese of Phoenix, Arizona, proved once again, that just because a man holds the title "Reverend" doesn't mean that he should be revered or is necessarily a person with a better than average understanding of the will of God. Two weeks ago, Olmstead stripped St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix of its support and affiliation with the Catholic Church because last fall the hospital permitted the termination of a woman's pregnancy in order to save the woman's life. Previously, he excommunicated a Catholic nun who was one of the hospital's administrators because of the same incident. In taking these actions, Bishop Olmstead demonstrated either incredible ignorance of the core message of Christ or a callous disregard thereof. In either case, he doesn't deserve the title of respect on his letterhead.

Some background of the situation is in order. Last fall, doctors at St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix were treating a 27-year old woman for pulmonary hypertension. The woman was 11 weeks pregnant. Her condition was so grave that the doctors believed that she would die of heart failure if the pregnancy was not terminated, and the fetus would die with her because the woman's pregnancy was only in the 11th week and a fetus at that point could not survive on its own.

The St. Joseph Hospital's Ethical Board, which included the Catholic nun who was later excommunicated over the incident, reviewed the patient's condition and approved the doctors' actions because it believed that there was no other alternative for saving the patient's life. For Bishop Olmstead, that wasn't sufficient justification. I say: "Baloney!"

Bishop Olmstead ignored the core message of Christ's 'Good Samaritan' parable – that exercising compassion and rendering assistance to a neighbor in need is more important than rigid adherence to a religious belief. You see, the reason the priest and the Levite didn't stop to assist the half-dead robbery victim in Jesus' parable was because Jewish religious law considered the dead as so unclean that priests and Levites could not touch them. The people hearing Jesus' parable would have automatically understood that fact, so the Gospel writer didn't mention that part in the passage, but it is critical to a full understanding of the meaning of the parable. Jesus wasn't condemning the existence of the Jewish cleanliness law. He was criticizing the strict adherence to a religious principle in a situation that clearly called for human compassion.

Like the priest and the Levite in Christ's parable, Bishop Olmstead was more concerned with maintaining strict adherence to one of his Church's religious principles than he was for the pregnant woman's life. That pregnant woman's fetus was going to die, whether due to an abortion or due to the death of its mother. The only life salvageable was that of the pregnant woman, and the hospital took the steps they did to save her life.

Clearly, Bishop Olmstead didn't approve of that decision. Like the priest and the Levite in Christ's parable, he would have wiped his hands of the matter and left the woman to die. That's not following Christ. That's just being callous!

TEDDY REPUBLICANS - LONG GONE

"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy."

-America's 25th President, Theodore Roosevelt…a Republican

There was a time in America's history when Republicans, like Theodore Roosevelt, looked to progress as a means of bettering the life of every American, and recognized that America's best chance for success lay in championing the spirit of forward thinking and embracing new ideas and change. Roosevelt believed that the backbone of America was its vibrant working class citizens and advocated policies designed to insure the health and safety and long-term longevity of those people.

A lot has happened in the past hundred years, and policies of today's Republicans bear little resemblance to those possessed by the man we fondly call "Teddy".

Roosevelt Republicans believed that American laborers were the driving force of America's greatness. Today's Republicans ascribe that honor to business owners and the wealthy.

Roosevelt Republicans believed that the government should protect the middle class to insure their safety and continued stability. Today's Republicans believe the middle class should look out for themselves.

Roosevelt Republicans believed that the environment was a cherished natural resource worthy of conservation and protection. Today's Republicans view the environment as an asset to be plundered and environmental conservation as an unnecessary barrier against making profits.

Roosevelt Republicans believed that America's greatest days were in the future. Today's Republicans believe they were in the past.

America will not right itself by returning to the past. Progress and the future is our only hope. Let's pray that Americans come to their senses before America totally abandons progressive thought and is no longer a great Democracy.

BOMBING THE HOUSE OF GOD

Whether adherents to Islam, Judaism and Christianity wish to acknowledge it or not, all three of the world's largest religions worship the same God - the God of Abraham and Moses and Noah. They call God by different names (Yahweh, Allah, Jehovah ), but the Almighty and omniscient being they claim to follow is one and the same entity. Why then, are supposed followers of these religions destroying temples, mosques and churches around the world in the name of carrying out God's will?

On New Year's Day in Egypt, a bomb planted in a Coptic Christian Church in Alexandria killed at least twenty-one people and injured dozens more when it exploded following a New Year's Mass.

In early November last year, a Sunni mosque in northwest Pakistan was the target of a Taliban bombing. Fifty Muslim worshippers were killed in the bombing and approximately one hundred more were injured during the explosion.

Last October, two synagogues in the United States received bombs delivered in packages from foreign locations. Luckily, neither bomb detonated.

Clearly, there are a lot of crazy fanatics out there who have no idea what God is asking of his followers. If you ask me, spending more time in prayer and less time with explosives would be a good start.

2011 - YEAR OF THE DOG...and the dogged!

Conservative political commentator Tucker Carlson created a stir last week when he stated, rather emphatically, that Philadelphia Eagles quarterback, Michael Vick, should have been executed a couple of years ago as a penalty for Vick's conviction for mistreatment of dogs.

As an ardent opponent of the death penalty, I'm not in favor of expanding its use for any reason, even for those convicted of committing vile cruelty to animals, but what I really find disturbing about Carlson's statement is the cavalier attitude it demonstrates regarding government sanctioned killing. In Carlson's world-view, if something offends the state, the state is justified in eradicating it via the death penalty, justice and human sensibilities notwithstanding.

That kind of thinking might give Carlson comfort when he and similar minded folks are in the majority, but majorities have a way of shifting with change in the political winds, so Carlson might want to reconsider his stance, just in case his fondness for bow ties should suddenly become equated with fashion sadism and some knucklehead commentator, or fanatic mob leader, should call for his execution because of it.

I recognize that many people love their pets and consider them part of the family. Some people love their ties too!

Sadly, Carlson's comment also illustrates the fact that latent racism continues to fester in this country, and that many in the public limelight are not shy about exploiting those sentiments for personal and political gain. Carlson would deny that fact, of course, but every black person in American would know he's lying.

Carlson wasn't calling for the death penalty for a white Bush Administration when it commenced an unjustified war in Iraq, causing the deaths of tens of thousands of people, or when the white President Bush and white Vice-President Cheney sanctioned torture of terror suspects, which resulted in a number of human deaths and disfigurement. Is white cruelty a more sanitized version, and thus, somehow more acceptable? Carlson must think it is, but he is wrong, and his willingness to condemn one black man's streak of cruelty and champion a crueler streak in white political leaders with whom he affiliates, belies his own racist attitudes.

As we turn our thoughts to the future on this first day of 2011, we should hope that lynching of blacks in America, an ugly blemish on our nation's past, will never rear its ugly head again. Unfortunately, with the likes of Tucker Carlson polluting our political discourse, our hope just got a little dimmer.