The Way I See It

For those who haven’t read my short and sweet About Me page, I’ll save you the trouble of clicking away and tell you that the important tidbit there is that I am a Libertarian. I’m not particularly fond of either of the two major parties so I’ll probably cast my vote for the least of all the evils. This is all significant because I want to be clear from the start: my opinion has nothing to do with my choice for president. None of the candidates reflect my views. My commentary on the 2008 race in general and this post’s topic in particular is not partisan in any way. Feel free to comment an opinion of your own but I don’t promise to debate you, even if I disagree. But I might.

I’ve watched for a week now as the media played the endless loop of Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s offensive sermons. I’ve listened to the pundits and I’ve listened to and read the transcripts of Senator Obama’s response. And I am amazed.

Why does it matter what this man’s religious and spiritual leader says and believes? Why must we conclude that Senator Obama agrees with Reverend Wright on every issue? Is that even fair?

According to Catholics In The Public Square, the 110th Congress claims 157 Roman Catholics. Of those, there are 89 Democrats in the House and 16 Democrats in the Senate. Think about that.

A handful of those Democrats are pro-life but for the most part, these Catholic Democrats vote the party line of pro-choice. We all know that the world wide leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI, has taken a decidedly pro-life stance and has instructed US politicians to do the same. Maybe I’m not paying attention but I haven’t heard an outcry that all Catholic Democrats secretly agree with the Pope and will work to undermine the pro-choice laws of the United States.

Of course, being pro-life isn’t necessarily a hateful thing, as racism is. So let’s look at another issue that Catholic Democrats face: Gay rights. While both parties seem to be intent on denying gays the right to marry, Democrats have always talked the talk of gay rights (even if “Don’t ask, don’t tell” was a cop out). And yet the Pope, as leader of the Catholic Church, has called gays “sinners” and homosexuality a sin. Some claim that the stance of the Catholic Church on homosexuality is hateful.

Do we question Catholic Democrats who claim to disagree with their spiritual leader on this issue? No, we do not. In fact, we don’t find it at all unusual for Catholics, whether in political life or not, to disagree with their Pope or their Bishop or their priest on this and other issues. And yet, we are holding Barack Obama to that standard. Why is that?

If we’re going to question Barack Obama on the beliefs of his spiritual leader, then we need to question every member of Congress about how their political beliefs match up with the teachings of their spiritual leaders. We need to examine them with a fine tooth comb just as we have Senator Obama and the Reverend Wright.

The way I see it, the man who brought Barack Obama to Christ is a flawed man. That doesn’t mean that the Lord did not use Reverend Jeremiah Wright to bring His child Barack into the family of Christians. Maybe it simply means that Christians are sinners but that God can still work through us. Maybe it means that no matter our shortcomings, the hand of our Lord can bring forth goodness. Maybe the message in all of this is not about hatred but about God’s power.

If the media really wants to do some digging, let’s find out who is really fueling this story. That’s what I’d like to know.

Yes, it is. It’s time to bring this blog back.

I’m not sure why I stopped blogging here. It was doing so well. It bears my name, after all. For some reason I did stop blogging here and the site just sort of fizzled. But now it’s coming back.

With politics at the front of everyone’s mind, either because of interest in the election or frustration from being bombarded with the same thing over and over, this is probably the best time to resurrect a blog that focuses on my thoughts. Because, well, I just know everyone wants to read my ramblings on the passing political, social and bizarre scene.

Somewhere along the line I’ll be changing the look here a little. I think the tiara is getting old. Hell, I’m getting old. Time for a new look, too. But first, I’ll blog. For now, keep in mind that I am neither a Liberal or a Conservative. I am a Libertarian. I have no problem separating my spiritual (Catholic) beliefs from my political beliefs. I’ll probably expound further on that later. And more.

Stay tuned. You’re about to discover The Way I See It.

Anita Roddick, who founded The Body Shop and pioneered the “ethical” beauty movement in the 1970s, died on Monday. She was 64.

Roddick had contracted Hepatitis C over 35 years ago during a blood transfusion when giving birth to her youngest daughter. She died of a brain hemorrhage.

Read the full article on Anita Roddick.

I’ve neglected this blog and I’m so ashamed. I’m such a slacker sometimes. But that’s all going to change. I’m going to commit to at least two posts per week here to start. Hopefully, once I get into the habit, I’ll post more often. I really do have things to put here but sometimes my mind gets bogged down in other stuff. No more. It’s a new day.

So, pay attention. the focus here may sway a little as my brain negotiates the ebb and flow of ideas. Hopefully, in a month or two I’ll have a clearer picture of where we’re going here. Won’t that be fun?

I like to think of this blog as my own personal soapbox. This is where I can engage in long, tedious eloquent rantings.

Today, I’m giving you someone else’s words. I can’t explain it better. Please read it, join the outrage, sign the petition. We cannot claim to be a humane, caring people as long as this type of injustice continues.

I just learned about a case of segregation-era oppression happening today in Jena, Louisiana. I signed onto ColorOfChange.org’s campaign for justice in Jena, and wanted to invite you to do the same.

http://www.colorofchange.org/jena/?id=2453-219082

Last fall in Jena, the day after two Black high school students sat beneath the “white tree” on their campus, nooses were hung from the tree. When the superintendent dismissed the nooses as a “prank,” more Black students sat under the tree in protest. The District Attorney then came to the school accompanied by the town’s police and demanded that the students end their protest, telling them, “I can be your best friend or your worst enemy… I can take away your lives with a stroke of my pen.”

A series of white-on-black incidents of violence followed, and the DA did nothing. But when a white student was beaten up in a schoolyard fight, the DA responded by charging six black students with attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder.

It’s a story that reads like one from the Jim Crow era, when judges, lawyers and all-white juries used the justice system to keep blacks in “their place.” But it’s happening today. The families of these young men are fighting back, but the story has gotten minimal press. Together, we can make sure their story is told and that the Governor of Louisiana intervenes and provides justice for the Jena 6. It starts now. Please join me:

http://www.colorofchange.org/jena/?id=2453-219082

The noose-hanging incident and the DA’s visit to the school set the stage for everything that followed. Racial tension escalated over the next couple of months, and on November 30, the main academic building of Jena High School was burned down in an unsolved fire. Later the same weekend, a black student was beaten up by white students at a party. The next day, black students at a convenience store were threatened by a young white man with a shotgun. They wrestled the gun from him and ran away. While no charges were filed against the white man, the students were later arrested for the theft of the gun.

That Monday at school, a white student, who had been a vocal supporter of the students who hung the nooses, taunted the black student who was beaten up at the off-campus party and allegedly called several black students “nigger.” After lunch, he was knocked down, punched and kicked by black students. He was taken to the hospital, but was released and was well enough to go to a social event that evening.

Six Black Jena High students, Robert Bailey (17), Theo Shaw (17), Carwin Jones (18), Bryant Purvis (17), Mychal Bell (16) and an unidentified minor, were expelled from school, arrested and charged with second-degree attempted murder. The first trial ended last month, and Mychal Bell, who has been in prison since December, was convicted of aggravated battery and conspiracy to commit aggravated battery (both felonies) by an all-white jury in a trial where his public defender called no witnesses. During his trial, Mychal’s parents were ordered not to speak to the media and the court prohibited protests from taking place near the courtroom or where the judge could see them.

Mychal is scheduled to be sentenced on July 31st, and could go to jail for 22 years. Theo Shaw’s trial is next. He will finally make bail this week.

The Jena Six are lucky to have parents and loved ones who are fighting tooth and nail to free them. They have been threatened but they are standing strong. We know that if the families have to go it alone, their sons will be a long time coming home. But if we act now, we can make a difference.

Join me in demanding that Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco get involved to make sure that justice is served for Mychal Bell, and that DA Reed Walters drop the charges against the 5 boys who have not yet gone to trial.

http://www.colorofchange.org/jena/?id=2453-219082

Thanks.

No, I’m not talking about the war in Iraq. That one is the hot topic of every political site on the internet and every news show on TV. Iraq has been talked into the ground.

I’m talking about the war that our politicians on both sides of the aisle when never stop fighting even though they will never win it. Which war is that, you ask? The War On Drugs.

Ironically, anyone who has been through a 12-step program will tell you that Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results each time. And yet, when it comes to fighting drugs, we do the same thing over and over with the same results: failure. Why? Well how about a lesson we learned more than a half century ago. Prohibition doesn’t work. It didn’t work for alcohol and it isn’t working for drugs.

I’ve seen loads of statistics regarding drug use and abuse. I don’t put much stock in the stats that say drug use is going down, especially when those stats have to do with teens. Teens are not all that honest; drug users are notoriously dishonest. If you want real stats, look at hospital records for overdoses, numbers of kids and adults being arrested for drug related crimes, and sadly, statistics for drug related deaths.

Oh, and don’t forget that alcohol is a drug. And yet, some parents allow their “almost adult” kids to drink in the home so they’ll “learn” responsible drinking. Yeah, good call. Just when a kid is needing to really grasp the concept of dealing with negative emotions while overcome by a sea of hormones, show him how to dull those feelings with a drug so he’ll know there’s an easier way to deal with low self-esteem or a broken heart. Good call, oh wise parents.

Back to my original thought… this is about our War On Drugs and stupidity of passing new laws to fight this plague. The latest law that really irritates me is the extreme government control of various sinus medications. Every time I need to buy a box of Aleve Cold and Sinus, which works wonders, by the way, I come home fuming.

Apparently, the active ingredient in this over the counter medication (as well as other sinus meds) is also an ingredient used in making crystal meth. Since law enforcement is unable to stop the manufacture and abuse of crystal meth, our lawmakers have enacted laws to make it harder to get this ingredient. The problem is, those who use this medication for SINUS PROBLEMS now have to jump through hoops, show proof of ID and worst of all, pay high prices for this effective medicine.

That infuriates me.

As annoying as it is to jump through the government’s hoops to just get a little nasal relief, the price issue is what really makes me want to scream. I used to be able to buy Aleve Cold and Sinus at a discount store for half the cost of the drug stores and other department stores. Now a pharmacist must distribute it and the price is never reduced. Talk about the government and private business working together to screw the consumer! Just check the price on this stuff; it isn’t cheap.

This is just one more example of how our government places more restrictions on law abiding citizens because it has failed to restrict criminal activity. If you can’t stop the law breakers, tighten the reigns on the good people so they’ll think you’re doing your job. Sorry, we’re not that stupid. We know you have failed.

So, what is the answer? Well, let’s go back to the premise that continuing this War On Drugs has proven to be insane. Let’s rethink what drug use and abuse is. How about, a disease? Wouldn’t that be a novel idea? Let’s treat addicts medically, in rehab facilities instead of jails, to see if that works. We already know that more laws and jails do not work. What do we have to lose?

Let’s recap. Way back in September ‘06, Paris Hilton was stopped by the LAPD for driving erratically and registered .08 blood alcohol level. Paris denies knowing that her license was suspended due to the conviction in that case. When she was picked up driving on that suspended license, she was sentenced to 45 days in jail, later reduced to 23 days, for driving on a suspended license. At the time of this second stop, she was not intoxicated. She spent 3 days in jail and has now been released to house arrest.

Those are the facts. Now for the disclaimer. I’m not a fan of Paris Hilton. I’m not at all happy about the image she portrays to young, impressionable girls. Maybe everything we see about her is an act and she’s really a great human being. Maybe not. Whatever the truth, I’d like to see less of the Paris Hilton we’ve seen these past years. Being a person who believes in redemption and second chances, I’d like to see someone get through to Paris and get her to do some real good in the world. But that’s not what this is about.

Paris Hilton should never have been convicted of DUI.

I have a huge issue with the .08 BAC (Blood Alcohol Concentration) currently in effect in this country. For one thing, most states previously set the limit at 0.1 which was acceptable. MADD wanted the BAC lowered but many states resisted. Enter the federal government. The federal government had no constitutional right to set a nationwide BAC so they did what they always do when they want to overstep their bounds and strong arm the states: they tied tax money to the States’ BAC levels. In other words, if a state didn’t lower the BAC to .08, they didn’t get the highway dollars that are vital to every state’s economy. The federal government did the same thing when they wanted the legal drinking age raised from 18 to 21. So now, you aren’t mature enough to have a beer until you’re 21 but you are mature enough to be tried as an adult at 18 when you commit a crime. Excuse me for being dense, but if we’re setting arbitrary ages, then wouldn’t it be wise to, at the very least, be consistent? And shouldn’t those ages have some relevance to the issue?

Before I get bombarded by the MADD supporters, I’ll state right up front that DUI is a serious offense. I was just 11 years old when my friend, her mother and brother were all killed by a drunk driver. It isn’t something you forget. However, the person who killed my friend had a BAC level far above .08. And that is the point of my rant.

I have searched online in every way I know to find statistics regarding alcohol related accidents, with and without injury or death, where the BAC level was between .08 and 0.1 but have come up empty. The only thing I’ve found are statistics regarding accidents with BAC over .08. That isn’t the point. Those statistics would include BAC levels at 0.15 or 0.2. I want statistical proof that lowering the BAC to .08 was not just “feel good” legislation but was really an important measure.

My contention is that .08 is not an unreasonable level, does not indicate inebriation or drunkenness, and serves only to make criminals out of law-abiding people. This isn’t so much about Paris Hilton as it is about the 64 year old grandmother who goes out to dinner with a friend a few months after being widowed, has a glass of wine and gets picked up for DUI with a .08 BAC. (That isn’t a made up story. I know the woman it happened to and it still irks the hell out of me.)

I also contend that if the statistics backed the current laws and rhetoric from groups such as MADD, they’d be widely available. You won’t find them because those statistics would prove that the .08 BAC level is useless. So I challenge anyone to come up with the statistics I’ve tried to find.

Since this started out with Paris Hilton, I’ll end it with her as well. For all of her foibles and disgusting displays of unladylike behavior, I’ve never seen her outright drunk. She may be ditzy or trashy at times, but she has always appeared sober to me. With a .08 BAC level, I couldn’t call her an alcoholic. I don’t know if she’s addicted to anything else, but this conviction does not prove she’s an alcoholic. In fact, that low BAC level indicates the opposite, that she’s an occasional drinker who doesn’t overindulge. You know, normal.

Technorati Tags: Paris Hilton, DUI, Government, MADD

Before I start this rant, keep in mind that I did tech support for an ISP for 7 years. I’m not stupid. I know how to open Internet Explorer if you tell me to do that. I know that there are 101 things that can go wrong with an internet connection, dialup, dsl or cable. I also know that good tech support will attempt the least invasive procedures first and move up the ladder to more complicated possible solutions. And I know that good tech support will ask the right questions and actually listen to the answers.

So tell me, why on earth would you not do a simple line check to see if our lines are down after I’ve told you a storm is approaching? And why would you jump to the conclusion, after looking at my account and noting that my 2 year old modem is out of warranty, that my modem is at fault? Might it be because you want to get a pat on the back or a bonus for tricking customers into buying equipment they don’t need? Or maybe you were simply tired and wanted to get me off the line so you could relax. Did I call too close to quitting time?

Several days before, my Verizon DSL went out. As the tech support woman tried to get a line reading, she suggested that we work on the modem. She walked me through resetting all of my settings before she informed me that our lines were indeed out. And guess what? Her tweaking took down my home network so I had to completely re-do everything to get my machines to talk to each other. Yeah, I was angry.

And because of that problem at the beginning of the week, this second tech support guy, who definitely didn’t speak English as a first or maybe even second language, jumped to the conclusion that my modem is too old because it’s out of warranty.

Uh…. I have loads of electronic equipment that’s out of warranty. If I replaced everything that was out of warranty, I wouldn’t be able to afford to eat! I’m so angry that Verizon would employ such an incompetent worker with such a severe lack of understanding of the equipment and no concept of logical thinking that I had to voice my complaint here.

Oh, and for the record, the lines were out again this second time, just as I thought. I guess I didn’t need a new modem after all. Seems the Verizon genius tech support guy was just plain wrong

Sometimes when you have something to say regarding an online discussion, you just have too many thoughts to put into a simple forum post. Like now. So rather than creating forum drama or beating a dead horse or whatever it might turn out to be, I’m going to just spill my guts right here.

It all started with a post on a blog that bashed PayPerPost and ended with kudos to v7n. John from v7n picked up the story and posted a link to it at the v7n forum. The “Bash PPP” bandwagon began to fill up as more people joined in until a few Posties (PayPerPost bloggers) spoke up to defend the company.

I want to make it clear that I love PayPerPost. I don’t do PPP here because this blog is too new. Also, I’m very selective about which opps I’ll take on my other blogs. I go for weeks without a paid opp simply because my primary concern is quality blogging; monetizing my blog is a distant second. The Posties I know have the same attitude. We take opps that fit with the theme of our blogs and which we’d probably blog about even if we didn’t get paid. That’s a matter of ethics and it’s personal, not at all related to the company that you utilize as an advertising marketplace.

Back to the drama: It seems there are a number of issues causing a stir. First, some v7n fans dislike PayPerPost for a variety of reasons, most of which are not entirely true. I’m not saying anyone is lying, only that there is apparently a lack of understanding. I believe that Trish (dragonden) addressed several of the issues in the original blog post. I’ll address a few more.

One of the complaints by bloggers at the v7n forum is that PayPerPost offers low pay for a lot of work. Actually, you will find a variety of opportunities and pay scale at PayPerPost. Sometimes the higher paying opps are segmented by PR or Alexa; other times they’re available to everyone. One thing you will notice is that those opps requesting 200 words, 5 links and a graphic while paying only $5 will remain on the available opps board for a very long time. That may give the impression that all opps are like that. In fact, the good opps, i.e. those paying $10+ for 50 or 100 words, go relatively quickly.

Since I don’t have access to everyone’s numbers I can give only my own data here. I started with PayPerPost in October of 2006 with one blog. I don’t remember when I added my second blog but thus far, I’ve taken only about 4 PPP opps on it. My all time payout per post is $14.38. Going back only to mid-February (around 40 opps), my average payout per post is $29.60 and going back to March 24 (roughly two months, 20 opps), my average payout per post is $33.95. This would indicate that there are plenty of higher paying opps, especially since there were many that I chose not to take for a variety of reasons. To imply or even state outright that PayPerPost makes you jump through hoops for a paltry pay is not just misleading, it’s false.

As an aside, you can probably see from this post that I have absolutely no problem coming up with 200+ words for a blog post. Credit my Sagittarius moon and mercury for that.

Also, it appears that there are advertisers who prefer v7n contextual ads over PayPerPost’s ads. According to v7n’s John, these advertisers don’t want any blogs that also do PayPerPost because of lack of quality. At first blush that would seem quite unfair, given there are many very good blogs signed up with PayPerPost. John did explain further that his company is not primarily an advertising marketplace but rather a company focused on SEO (search engine optimization). He was referring to “link quality” not writing or blogging quality. That does make a difference.

First and foremost, this particular issue points out the most important fact: PayPerPost and v7n are very different companies with vastly different purposes. My understanding (and I’m sure John will correct me if I’m wrong) is that v7n is all about SEO. The links they sell are intended to raise search engine positioning for a particular keyword. PayPerPost concentrates on buzz, reviews, opinion, news releases.

I know there were some advertisers at PayPerPost who were focused only on SEO. Jo, for instance, would offer opps that allowed the blogger to write anything at all about their own experience as long at they could work in her keywords and links. Those were a lot of fun to do. I haven’t seen Jo at PPP lately. Perhaps she’s one of PayPerPost’s former advertisers that John claims is now with v7n. If so, that makes perfect sense. The v7n model seems better suited to someone who wants only SEO benefits.

Regarding the quality of links, aka “link juice,” I understand some of what John says. Before starting any kind of Pay-to-Blog program, I had very few outgoing links on my PR5 blog. I won’t claim to understand Google’s algorithm but I do know it has something to do with a ratio involving outgoing links. Before October, 2006, I had less than a dozen outgoing links. My “link juice” was something like 3 - 4. Now, with 80 outbound links, my “link juice” is .053. I have no idea what kinds of numbers v7n are wanting for the blogs they use. It seems to me, though, that the more work a blogger does for v7n or any other Pay-to-Blog program, the more their “link juice” number will fall. Targeting PayPerPost (or LoudLaunch or Blogitive or Blogsvertise or…) as the reason behind this is either naive or disingenuous. Hopefully it doesn’t indicate an attempt to dethrone the most popular Pay-to-Blog company by using misinformation, lies, or other not-so-nice tactics. Equally upsetting would be an attempt by v7n to limit their bloggers to use only their service. Let’s hope that’s not what John has in mind.

I’m willing to give John and the v7n folks the benefit of doubt. Any decision to not use bloggers who also post for PayPerPost is based on advertiser requests. A company absolutely must take care of their paying customers and John is right to do that. However, there really is no need to bash PayPerPost in course of that action. I expect John to take the high road and state simply that this is a business decision. Period. End of story.

Each blogger, likewise, will eventually be faced with the decision to blog for PPP or v7n. There’s no sense in bashing the one not taken. I think it’s a great online blogging world that allows everyone to pick and choose where to spend their online advertising dollars and with whom to associate for monetary gain. If anything, we should all be sticking together and backing each other against the Pay-to-Blog naysayers.

As for me, I’ll take any offers v7n throws my way but I won’t stop blogging for PayPerPost. My PPP earnings have paid for my trip to Hawaii in March, my new computer and the sidewalks my husband is putting around our house this weekend. Both companies have great communities so whether I’m eligible for v7n assignments or not, I intend to keep visiting the forums there as well as the PayPerPost forum.

You know, after reading over this, I’m just not sure what all the fuss is about. Maybe I missed something.

I’m tired of the debate about this word. I never even knew the word existed until I was in high school. My parents never used it. No one we associated with used it.

No one needs to use it.

I’ve heard both sides of the issue about why it should not be used and why some rappers and comedians use it. It’s something about claiming the word and using it takes the power of the word away. And somehow that empowers those the word is intended to hurt.

That’s fine if those using it lived in a vacuum. They do not. They live in a world where small children will surely hear that word, unaware of the history of it or its insulting connotations. That creates even more problems. I know this first hand.

Two of my sons have had black friends. They were all frequent visitors here. My youngest son, Levi, was quite young at the time and like any kid that age was like a sponge, soaking up everything he heard and saw. And naturally, he adored his older brothers and their friends.

And so, when these black kids used the “N” word, I would cringe, knowing Levi was nearby and listening. I knew the debate; I knew that this white woman’s opinion might not be welcome. But it was my house, after all. And it was my kid being affected.

And then it happened. My little Levi, barely 3 years old, said the “N” word in front of a couple of Jesse’s friends. They stopped in mid sentence, unable to speak. They weren’t angry at Levi; they knew exactly where he’d heard that word. They knew that they had been this child’s teachers.

I never heard the boys using that word after that. I didn’t have to address the issue, either. Those 18 year old boys had been given a valuable lesson from a 3 year old child. They got to see how their words are important, how their words do impact those around them.

And that is why I believe there is no appropriate time nor place for that word. If you don’t want to teach it to the next generation, don’t use it. Even a small child can understand that.