Another commentary on the Tea Party

Published by Starfish


I just got an e-mail from Grassfire Nation that got me all fired up. It also had me laughing. Here is what it stated

The latest comes from actress Eva Longoria who spoke of the new "extremist movement" that is "very dangerous" and is"not the character of America."

Who are these "dangerous" "extremists"? The Tea Party, of course. This comes just days after Morgan Freeman blasted the Tea Party as "racist" and the "dark, underside of America."
...

Sadly, these attacks from the Left are working. "Tea Party" has become the new "dirty word" in politics. In fact, The New York Times reports that the number of people with an"unfavorable" opinion of the Tea Party has more than doubled in the past 18 months. Even worse, according to the Times:

           "The Tea Party ranks lower than any of the 23 other groups we asked about... It is even less popular than much maligned groups like 'atheists' and 'Muslims.'"

Aside from the obvious reason this is happening (being an agenda to destroy any chances of a conservative winning the presidency), I am laughing so hard deep inside.

Either these commentators have an empty skull, or they really are very stupid. Another option, they are simply part of the agenda, you know how these "actors" can be.

The Tea Party is just a movement to promote LESS GOVERNMENT. That's all. They are not racist, they are not dangerous, they are not extremists. Could there be racists and extremists going to Tea Party rallies? Yeah, sure. There are extreme and racists democrats, but not all democrats are extreme and racist. But that is not what it is about.  I'd like for these people to have some proof, because without justification for their comments, they just look as they are, which is stupid. I've been to a Tea Party rally, it certainly is anything but the "dark, underside of America". Everyone there was excited and happy despite their reason for being there. They have hope, and it's because they are using their right as an American, the constitution which they love, to make a difference for their government. As a patriotic American myself, I know that exciting feeling.

Another note: In just a couple of months the government is taking over the internet, to regulate it, to silence the Tea Party (conservatives). Now let's assess this. Who are the extremists? I'd say that anything Nazi-like is pretty extreme.

Beliefs, Movements and Avoiding Trends

Published by FRSC

One of my core beliefs is having core beliefs. I admire that people will show some fervor about their principles. “Grassroots activities” are events I like to watch with a bit of longing to jump in and swim in the trenches. With that said, I am not really a “joiner” and don’t like to get on someone else’s band wagon. It feels trendy. The word “trendy” is not a word I associate with genuineness.

With that said, grassroots movements can make a difference. Historically some movements did not have the same goals that I had and the power of the movement didn’t necessarily bring about positive results. For example, the “progressive movement” of pre-World War II was a disaster and we are still feeling the pain of it. The Civil Rights Movement lasted for decades and resulted in Title 7.

A powerfully constructive movement was the Moral Majority of the late 1970s. This group was a mix of ideals in both the religious and political arena. It resulted in the ousting of Jimmy Carter and the wildly popular Reagan Administration.

In many ways the Tea Party (movement) reminds me of the Moral Majority. Although there are huge differences – one of which was the MM had a visible leader in Jerry Falwell, Another difference was the blatant fund-raising done by the MM as a PAC. Tea Partiers are not as unified. Segmented organizations refer to themselves as Tea Partiers, each expousing various agendas. Some leaders claim to be a strong voice for the Tea Party (movement) but my view is that it is only within each segment do you have objectives and goals. For instance, Freedomworks wants something different than Young Americans for Liberty. Candidly I get confused on what a “tea-partier” believes. Is it all about no-government (a Libertarian Ideologue) or is it about making the government do their job in things such as stopping illegal immigration (Constitutional Conservatism).

Please weigh in on these questions –
1. Why did the Moral Majority have enough power to be politically influential for more than a decade?
2. Are those who are involved in the Tea Party movement the same people who supported the MM?
3. Do Tea Partiers expouse strong religious inclinations?
4. And last but not least, if the answer to the last question is yes – are those religious inclinations the same religious beliefs that I hold?

I don’t think grassroots movements have the same spiritual convictions that I do. And, my spiritual convictions are the basis for every political passion I hold dear. I suppose that is why I am not a joiner.

Thought Police

Published by FRSC

Today I am playing "thought police" and instead of giving out a citation I am nominating someone for an "Accomodation". I love this insightful composition. I agree wholeheartedly - do you?

Too Conscientious

A recent magazine article discussed the electability of presidential candidates based on personality traits. The lead-in said that Mitt Romney rated low on electability because he is too conscientious. My reaction was, “how can that possibly be a deficiency?”

The article went on to explain that being overly conscientious is off-putting to the general public. Mitt was described as being proper, diligent, detail-oriented, and super-rational. Those seem like redeeming qualities to me. The most electable candidate in recent history, the article stated, was Bill Clinton because he is an extrovert. I think history shows how that worked out.

The theory is that people want to relate to candidates. Does that mean the average person is not proper, less than diligent, sloppy about details, and irrational? Certainly a segment of society has a poor work ethic, lacks manners, and is unreasonable in many ways. Those are the clerks who provide poor customer service, persons who don’t want to be accountable, the habitually late, the rude movie-goers who texts during the show, or insert your own pet peeve. I like to think this is a small minority. It is too sad to consider that most people cannot relate to someone who is conscientious.

According to the article, the attractiveness of extroverts compared to those who are mannerly and meticulous is a recent phenomenon. I believe that we are returning to the thoughtful ways of yesteryear; the plethora of citizen activists is an indication. The silence of the majority was deafening in November 2010 when republicans regained the majority in the Congress.

Mitt Romney is indeed conscientious. Astute analysts think he is the most electable candidate. I don’t know who created the personality based rating scale but I think it is bunk. It reminds me of the notion that only attractive people can become president. I guess the populace wasn’t aware of that criterion in 1860 when they elected Abraham Lincoln. He led the country through a great constitutional, military and moral crisis with integrity and vigor. Who cares about his haggard and rather homely appearance? The electorate got it right and we are blessed with the legacy of his leadership.

By November 2012 we’ll know who is elected to be president of the United States. A constellation of conditions will determine the outcome. I am convinced that it will not be because someone is too conscientious.

Marilyn Mitchell

You are not forgotten

Published by Starfish

In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints, we believe the true church to be set up as Christ originally set up his church when he was on earth. We believe in a prophet who leads the church on earth under the direction of Jesus Christ. We believe in apostles who stand as witnesses of Jesus Christ in our day. Throughout the year we have the opportunity to hear them formally address us and give us counsel world-wide. 

Often, these addresses are so powerful and uplifting that it changes my life. One such was given last night at the Relief Society General Broadcast.

Dieter F. Uchtdorf  gave a talk, using a forget-me-not flower as a metaphor, that really touched me. You can view it here.

Three things really stood out to me about it:

1. I am NOT forgotten. God and Jesus Christ know me. As vast and as complicated as this universe is, He knows me. He created everything in it; the stars, the planets, the beasts and the fowl. He also created ME, and he does not forget me and does not intend to leave me alone on this path.

2. "The Gospel of Jesus Christ is not an obligation, it is a pathway." Yes, I remember that quote word for word, didn't even write it down. That simple statement means so much. What a blessing it is to have a testimony of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I have direction. If I become lost, I have a map to find my way back.

3. Be positive about life! I need to be patient with myself, understand my limits, and give myself credit. I have been thinking about this all week, actually, as I realized that I am a happy person despite my current stressful circumstances. After struggling with postpartum depression I have found myself in the last month or so feeling happy about life no matter what is happening. Yes I get stressed, yes I complain and get angry. But I feel normal again. This talk just confirmed what I had been thinking over the last week, I can find joy in my blessings! Instead of always thinking about what I want or think I deserve and letting that control my life, I need to revel in what I HAVE. Just last night I told my husband that even though we have things to worry about, I am finding it hard to worry, because I know that I have him and I have my children.

A friend on Facebook shared this blog post from another blog. I have not seen this blog before, but I love this "reminder" of the talk that President Uchtdorf gave. (I hope it's okay to post it here, I have linked to the blog post on the picture.) 

Now I want to plant some forget-me-nots in my front yard. I guess it will have to wait until Spring. 

Freedom of Speech is Dead in The UK

Published by Starfish

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogsfaithblog/52570874-180/missionaries-mormon-bus-buses.html.csp

Stop preaching on buses, Mormon missionaries told

Published on Sep 12, 2011 08:02PM  

A British bus company is asking Mormon missionaries to stop proselytizing its riders, especially telling passengers that their faith is all wrong.

“We do not permit any commercial or other organization to promote their products, services or views,” Stephie Barber, operations manager for the company, Stagecoach in Lancaster, told the Lancaster Guardian, “through direct engagement with passengers on our services.”

Robert Preston, president of the England Manchester LDS Mission, told the paper that he has encouraged his missionaries — about 140 young people in his charge — to talk to people on buses about their religion, but “we would not want people to feel intimidated.”

If a person does not want to hear the Mormon message, Preston said, the missionaries “should move away.”

Bus policies may now make even polite faith-filled conversations off-limits for the young missionaries and the Utah-based church.

Peggy Fletcher Stack 

I have been intently curious about what is happening in the UK. Some articles I've read have me thinking; What is wrong with them? They use to be strong and prideful, just like the US. Now they are just a bunch of push-overs. Muslims are taking over Britain, my friends. Even thought this particular article does not mention them, that is the instigator of what is happening here. That is not how it should be. ALL religions should be welcomed and tolerated. Not being able to talk about God in public? Hmm... well I guess we'll see what God has to say about that. And I thought the US was good at pushing God out.

NEED MORE DRAMA

Here is a suggestion for an antidote to the dole-drums of a long-drawn-out political season. We need more drama – not Obama drama (we’ve had 3 years of that and I am bored already). We need political theater. We need some comedy and tragedy. We need the kind of political theatre we enjoyed when Clinton was President. Say what you want about his reign, good or bad, Clinton provided 8 years of entertainment.

We are still enjoying the slogans or new clichés that came out of his presidency. For example, it was during the pre-election run against George Bush #41 that we first heard the expression “It’s the economy, stupid!” Here we are two decades later saying the same thing. We also got the beloved “It depends on what the meaning of the word IS is.” That came during a classic staged political event, for which we still don’t know the answer. But I remember the question – do you? Ironically, it was a yes or no question and only the king of drama could answer a closed-ended question with a quip such as that.

Nevertheless, we need clever slogans such as “drill baby drill” or “read my lips, no new taxes” (which is remembered because the aforementioned George Bush gave in after that promise and raised taxes.)

So what can we hope to see as the kind of fun and frivolity we might experience in the 2012 election season? I don’t think our current President will provide any illuminated moment of excitement. We are all tired of his shenanigans. At least I am.

Will some of the expressions we’ve heard so far carry forward through the next 14 months? How about the Romney comment, “Corporations are people, too, my friend.” Or, it could be Perry’s description of the Social Security system as a ponzi scheme? Who knows? I sure would like to have a sound bite that sticks. I want to make history – and not the downtrodden history of inflation and socialism that has taken over our life in the last three years.

Have you read or heard of an expression that can give some sizzle to our desire for drama? Share them. I want some entertainment.

Signed FRSC

True patriotism for right now

Published by Starfish

A big TV "DUH".

Published by Starfish

The following article was shared in an online group I am in. I have to admit that it made me laugh. Even though the article mentions that only 60 subjects were involved in the study I am surprised that a study needed to be done.

Now why oh why would people let their young children watch this kind of garbage? My children barely watch TV at all. Who has time to watch this kind of programming? It's on cable for one thing, so it has to actually be found on the guide and turned on for the kids to watch. Parents are letting this happen. What is wrong with Word World, or Sesame Street, or Barney? All on public TV and all educational and LOVED by children for generations. If you're going to have the TV on, let it be something useful... please.

Study: Fast-Paced Kids’ TV Can Cause Short-Term Attention ProblemsSeptember 12, 2011 at 10:09 am , by Holly Lebowitz Rossi
A new study of 4-year-old children found that just nine minutes spent watching fast-paced shows like the Nickelodeon television programSpongeBob SquarePants can cause short-term learning and attention problems, The Associated Press reports.The study, which was published online in the journal Pediatrics, was small, researchers caution (only 60 children were involved), so the results should be taken with a grain of salt.  But the findings did show that children who watched SpongeBob scored measurably worse on mental function and impulse control tests than children who either watched the slower-paced PBS program Caillou or drew pictures for nine minutes.SpongeBob, researchers said, is not the problem per se, but it is an example of a type of fast-paced programming that has a short-term impact on children’s attention:
University of Virginia psychology professor Angeline Lillard, the lead author, said Nickelodeon’s “SpongeBob” shouldn’t be singled out. She found similar problems in kids who watched other fast-paced cartoon programming.
She said parents should realize that young children are compromised in their ability to learn and use self-control immediately after watching such shows. “I wouldn’t advise watching such shows on the way to school or any time they’re expected to pay attention and learn,” she said.
A Nickelodeon spokesperson told the AP that the study was unfair because SpongeBob is made for older kids, 6-11 years old.
(image via: http://spongebob-squarepants.otavo.tv)

Since this is an opinion blog, I must say how much I HATE Spongebob. I can't stress it enough. One of my children got a Spongebob in a kids meal once and I told him he could only play with it for one day and then it had to be thrown out. When he asked why, I simply said, "Because Spongebob annoys me and I don't want it in my home." I guess I'm a lot like my own mother because she had similar weird rules.

Introducing FRSC

Published by FRSC

Being born smack-dab in the middle of the baby boom, one might think that I am either hyper-conservative or a bleeding-heart liberal. During the 1970s decade, many of my buddies were liberals. It was tough to be politically involved during that time and stand up for my conservative convictions. I can’t honestly say that I am not unaffected by the Vietnam War Era. Although I applaud the principle of the 2nd amendment I am a pacifist at heart. Even though I have a right to carry a gun, I would choose to loose my life rather than take one. I just will never own a weapon.

If faced with a life-threatening situation I would not strike-out against my fellowman, except to stand firm for God, or protect my family. The 2nd amendment can live strong with my son-in-law, Tom Selleck and other famous members of the NRA. When looking at all of the 10 amendments in the Bill of Rights, I’m convinced that the first amendment (free speech, press, religion and petition) is listed as #1 for a reason. It is the most basic and important privilege Americans have.

Two forgotten amendments are numbers nine and ten. Number ten reserves the right of the state to make law—protecting each state from being forced to live by the dictates of the federal government. Number nine says that the constitution shall not take away rights as voted by the people. Local government by the voice of the people is how I describe a democracy. I believe the Founding Fathers understood the evils of big government. Small government executed through the people’s vote is intended to have the most power—not a government dictated by the legislative process, nor the courts, and not the President. Legislative, judicial and executive branches abusing the system deter freedom and economic growth.

A former governor of Massachusetts who believed in small-government and conservative principles once said, “The business of America is business.” That public servant was Calvin Coolidge who helped heal America after the scandal of Warren Harding. We have a scandalous situation in our country today. I call it scandalous because American core principles of liberty and the strength of the individual is overpowered by a big giant federal machine that costs trillions of dollars to maintain, each year—led by a man who thinks bigger is better. It is not.

Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, a German architect, used modern materials to bring efficiency and clarity to structural design in the post World War 1 era. He is associated with two expressions that describe my philosophical bent. He said, “Less is more” and “God is in the details.” If we all adopted that way of thinking the world would be a better place.

Signed: FRSC, An advocate for free religion, speech and commerce