Thursday, November 26, 2009

Sexy Sarah Palin

Happy Thanksgiving! It’s the perfect day for turkey, family, and some good old Sarah Palin bashing.

Newsweek recently printed two essays that discussed how she’s ruining the Republican Party, but that’s not what got people’s (and Sarah Palin’s) attention. They released this photo on the cover, which is from a photoshoot she did with Runner’s Weekly magazine:

 

Apparently, she denounced the photo on her Facebook, calling it sexist and irrelevant. While it’s true that the photo was used to mock her, I don’t think it’s either of the above. Sure, she says she was promoting fitness in a country where weight is an issue. But did she have to do it in short shorts with her legs oiled up? I think anyone running for office or considering getting involved in politics should keep their body covered and focus on the issues in a serious way.

Sarah Palin seems to love calling everyone sexist. The problem for her isn’t that she’s held to a different standard than men, but that she’s held to the same standard. Apparently she’s not comfortable with the fact that she can’t flash her body and get away with it.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Still Waiting on Stimulus Funds

            It’s pretty frustrating when you elect a president based on his ideas and then they don’t get put into practice. Though the stimulus package was passed quite a while ago, it seems that the money is still stuck in transit. For example, the state of Massachusetts has only received $622 million of their promised $3.9 billion.

However, the government claims there’s a reason for the lag. Many of the stimulus funds need to be approved by the federal government before they’re dispersed to make sure the money is spent carefully. Much of it was set aside to be obtained competitively, which means applications must come in and be approved before the money can be sent out. The question is, is this a good or a bad thing?

On one hand, I’m glad that the money isn’t being thrown around lightly. With how upset people are about huge deficit spending, our government needs to watch where they’re putting their money. The way the budget is handled could make or break our economy.

However, the fact that most of the money is still in Washington D.C. makes me wonder why the package was passed in the first place. The point of a stimulus package is to pump money in the economy to help curb short-term economic distress. If we waited ten years and did absolutely nothing, the economy could take another dive (the dreaded “double-dip”), but it would eventually right itself. It seems that it’s going to take the next ten years to even get the money out there, and it’s increasing our deficit spending, which could have negative long-term effects.

Though I do believe that we should be careful in how we spend our money rather than just throwing it out there and expecting it to solve unemployment, it really needs to get out there. Soon. If it doesn’t, it serves absolutely no purpose.

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Good News for Same-Sex Couples

As disgusting as it is, gay rights still aren’t recognized in America. It’s like the classic saying: one step forward, two steps back. When same-sex marriage became legalized in several states, it was then repealed in California, and little ground has been covered since. Hopefully, with measures in several states gaining momentum, same-sex couples will soon be free from discrimination and be able to live equal lives.

            Legalizing same-sex marriage is about more than just the word marriage, or the idea of the government condoning homosexuality. Issues include health benefits, sick leave, adoption, and child support. Same-sex couples just aren’t given the same consideration as heterosexual couples. If a partner is ill, the other cannot take sick leave to care for them. If they separate, how does child custody get determined? And it is much more difficult for same-sex couples to adopt children, which limits their partnership immensely. Seems unfair? It is, and not only to these couples, but to their potential children.

            So why are there still naysayers? Of course, there’s the usual “protecting the family” answer, which I thought was outdated years ago. Families with heterosexual couples are far from perfect many reasons: abuse, alcoholism and drug use, the high divorce rate, etc. Yet many still think that these problems are far less harmful than the idea of homosexual families. Larry Stickney of Protect Marriage Washington, referring to the imminent legalization of same-sex marriage in Washington, says that most citizens of the state  “are uncomfortable with the radical social agenda coming out of Seattle.” Apparently, the idea that two people in love should have the same rights as other couples is absolutely radical, whereas the standard practice of tearing families apart via divorce is normal and acceptable.

            Moreover, many of these same-sex marriage laws have provisions allowing members of religious groups to deny same-sex couples the right to marry in their church. With this in mind, I can only wonder why anyone would not accept these laws. Opponents say that marriage is between a man and a woman because the Bible says so, which is a valid point. However, that is the Bible, not United States law. It’s understandable that many don’t want same-sex marriages taking place in their church because their religion frowns upon homosexual couples. But it’s only fair to allow these couples to attain the legal benefits of marriage.

            Equality may be scary to many Americans, but moves in this direction have already been made. Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire and Vermont have already legalized same-sex marriage. And though such laws have been repealed in California and rejected in Maine, states like Washington and Michigan are moving in the right direction. Currently, Washington has laws that allow unions similar to marriage, and citizens are voting on an initiative to legalize full marriage. Political leaders in Michigan are attempting to bring the Michigan Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage to a vote so it can be repealed, the first step toward legalization.

            Same-sex marriage advocates have had their fair share of difficulties in the past several years, but equality seems to be looming on the horizon. For many, this will mean a huge improvement in their quality of life. Though homosexual couples are not yet widely accepted in the United States, there is a strong enough movement toward acceptance that I believe the day will come.