Recently I was attending a school Christmas pagent which took place in a church. I got there and observed the young children excited to be partaking in the even. The kindergardeners recieved their Christmas bells and were jingling happily - until their teacher yelled at them. The pageant was pretty impressive. The little ones seemed on best behavior trying to impress their parents, friends and relatives and, dare I say, their Lord.
As I looked around the older grade students looked less impressed, bored even. It made me think back to my childhood. You see God and the Church were always important to me. Sure there were times I had my doubts, who doesn't? My hope and faith in something better led me through those doubts. Some of my generation didn't make it through this stage. It seems that a majority of people who walk away from the Church do so at the teen age time. I started to think about a reason for this and that led me to this revalation...
SPOILER ALERT.... SMALL CHILDREN NAVIGATE AWAY FROM THIS PAGE NOW...
You see, we raise our children to believe in fantastical things, magical things... and then systematically we pull them all away from them. Is it any wonder that a teen ager who has lost so many magical figures in their lives wonders about God and Jesus? Realistically is the story of the tooth fairy or Easter Bunny or dare I say S.C. that much more fantasic than the story of Christ or the other stories in the Bible? Here we have our children and we yank away these figures in a period of 3 to 4 years and they realize those gifts were not for magical figures they were from parents. Why wouldn't a child of 13 or 14 who has been educated in history, science and other aspects of life be doubtful of a Virgin birth, or rising from the dead for other people's sins?
I am just wondering if we are doing a real disservice to our children by throwing so many different things at them and pulling away many of them as fiction. Let me say this as well, I am a Christian, I believe in a higher power. Do I believe every story in the Bible as completely true? No, I believe that they are stories of wisdom and messages from our ancestors on how to live a good life. I do believe that good people go to Heaven and the way to Heaven lies within those stories. I do believe that other religions have merit as well and many of the stories, while the characters may be different, the message is the same. I wonder if for our future generations sake if we need to get away with making up fictional characters who bring gifts, and just give the gifts anyway and explain that they are given out of love...
Just a thought...
Happy Holidays to all, religious or not, and a prosperous New Year to all
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Occupy Everything!
You all didn't think I'd let the Occupy protests get off without a comment did you?
Here in Chicago you have a group of protesters who are protesting the corporate greed and influence on our government. I agree with them in concept. You also have people who are protesting the Tea Party, I'm okay with that, it is their right. Then you have people who are protesting just about everything you can think up, gay rights, student loan forgiveness, legalizing marijuana, racial harmony, I've seen it all, and again I don't have a problem with this.
What have I not seen at these protests? I have not seen one anti-Obama sign, not one. It made me think just who is behind this Occupy Movement? (Occupy by the way is a horrendous name for this movement one of the very definitions of occupy is "to take possession of or control a place as in a military invasion, not very non-violent sounding there)
Let's take a little lookie into just who is at these protests
SEIU - The Service Employees International Union, per CBS news the SEIU PAC spent $27 Million on Obama's first campaign.They also backed him in 2004 for Senate. Is that a little like a corporation influencing a government entity? You decide.
Jordan Farrar - The leader of the Young Communist League, what else has Mr. Farrar done in his life? Oh yes that's right I remember he is a member of Obama's Organizing for America group, ANOTHER Obama tie? Let's see who else is behind this...
Lisa Fithian, who is Lisa Fithian? You remember those riots in Seattle a decade or so ago? Yes that was her group who led that protest, she's also behind Cindy Sheehan's antics. What does she have to say about protesting? Well here is a quote right from her mouth "I have no issue with property destruction. I think sometimes it’s appropriate, sometimes it’s not. Again, I look at it strategically. Does this help us or does it hurt us? Does it help us achieve our goal, or does it not? We’re in a society where property is idolized, so a lot of people don’t get it yet that it doesn’t really matter. It’s just glass or products." That's right Chicago Lisa doesn't care if a building gets destroyed if it helps her cause. Fithian started in the 1970's working with Abbie Hoffman, she has advocated violence in the past. Most recently during the 2008 elections at the Republican National Convention. There were two radical left wing protesters who were turned in by one of their own and arrested for the planned Molotov Cocktail bombings at the convention. Fithian when asked about the arrests supported the arrested and condemned as a traitor the member who turned them in (people they planned to throw fire onto other human beings and she supported them). Who is Fithian affiliated with? Not Obama directly silly! She is a self described SEIU Commander who trains protesters on how to protest for the group. Fithian tied to SEIU who is tied to Obama.
Folks I'm just scratching the surface here, it's all right there for you to google. I have given about an hour to two hours of research for this article, it's not really all that hard to peel away the layers of the onion to get to the core. Now am I suggesting that our President is behind all these protests? As much as it would make me a genius to uncover that fact, I can not say that he is, nor do I think he is. I do think people around him are though.
The name George Soros keeps popping up as a possible financier for the movement but proof of it keeps coming up empty. Reuter's did publish a story where he did finance Adbusters a group that is credited for being one of the designers of the OWS movement, but it ends there. Soros is a huge supporter of the Democratic party and Obama in general, it is interesting to note that you can go on the Internet and find that SEIU spent 27 million dollars on Obama in 2008 but a search of how much money Soros spent is not available, must mean he knows how to hide what he does with his money. Possibly even fund protest groups...
Is the Occupy movement a tool of the Democratic party, I would hope it is not any more that the Tea Party is for the Republican. Are the protests of the Occupy movement valid? Hard to say because as of right now it is a jumbled mass of requests, as I said before on the main points I can get behind some of them but some of the others, please, a living wage? You want to get paid for living? By whom?
In parting a few things I would like to point out to the protesters, the real ones, not the professionals who are only there for their own egos, the real ones who want to make a difference.
1. Stand strong, while I might not agree with you, the fact that you are an American gives you the right to protest which is why this country is so great.
2. Do not get caught up in the moment, antagonists are within your ranks and they could care less if you take the heat for a bad situation, in fact they hope you do so they can get camera time for themselves.
3. If the police tell you it is time to go somewhere else, then please do that, you can continue the protest tomorrow, or at your house or a friends house that same night.
4. If you do get a chance to "Occupy" the streets en mass do it responsibly, if you hear a siren move aside! That ambulance is not trying to trick you, it's trying to save a life.
As always God bless this country
Here in Chicago you have a group of protesters who are protesting the corporate greed and influence on our government. I agree with them in concept. You also have people who are protesting the Tea Party, I'm okay with that, it is their right. Then you have people who are protesting just about everything you can think up, gay rights, student loan forgiveness, legalizing marijuana, racial harmony, I've seen it all, and again I don't have a problem with this.
What have I not seen at these protests? I have not seen one anti-Obama sign, not one. It made me think just who is behind this Occupy Movement? (Occupy by the way is a horrendous name for this movement one of the very definitions of occupy is "to take possession of or control a place as in a military invasion, not very non-violent sounding there)
Let's take a little lookie into just who is at these protests
SEIU - The Service Employees International Union, per CBS news the SEIU PAC spent $27 Million on Obama's first campaign.They also backed him in 2004 for Senate. Is that a little like a corporation influencing a government entity? You decide.
Jordan Farrar - The leader of the Young Communist League, what else has Mr. Farrar done in his life? Oh yes that's right I remember he is a member of Obama's Organizing for America group, ANOTHER Obama tie? Let's see who else is behind this...
Lisa Fithian, who is Lisa Fithian? You remember those riots in Seattle a decade or so ago? Yes that was her group who led that protest, she's also behind Cindy Sheehan's antics. What does she have to say about protesting? Well here is a quote right from her mouth "I have no issue with property destruction. I think sometimes it’s appropriate, sometimes it’s not. Again, I look at it strategically. Does this help us or does it hurt us? Does it help us achieve our goal, or does it not? We’re in a society where property is idolized, so a lot of people don’t get it yet that it doesn’t really matter. It’s just glass or products." That's right Chicago Lisa doesn't care if a building gets destroyed if it helps her cause. Fithian started in the 1970's working with Abbie Hoffman, she has advocated violence in the past. Most recently during the 2008 elections at the Republican National Convention. There were two radical left wing protesters who were turned in by one of their own and arrested for the planned Molotov Cocktail bombings at the convention. Fithian when asked about the arrests supported the arrested and condemned as a traitor the member who turned them in (people they planned to throw fire onto other human beings and she supported them). Who is Fithian affiliated with? Not Obama directly silly! She is a self described SEIU Commander who trains protesters on how to protest for the group. Fithian tied to SEIU who is tied to Obama.
Folks I'm just scratching the surface here, it's all right there for you to google. I have given about an hour to two hours of research for this article, it's not really all that hard to peel away the layers of the onion to get to the core. Now am I suggesting that our President is behind all these protests? As much as it would make me a genius to uncover that fact, I can not say that he is, nor do I think he is. I do think people around him are though.
The name George Soros keeps popping up as a possible financier for the movement but proof of it keeps coming up empty. Reuter's did publish a story where he did finance Adbusters a group that is credited for being one of the designers of the OWS movement, but it ends there. Soros is a huge supporter of the Democratic party and Obama in general, it is interesting to note that you can go on the Internet and find that SEIU spent 27 million dollars on Obama in 2008 but a search of how much money Soros spent is not available, must mean he knows how to hide what he does with his money. Possibly even fund protest groups...
Is the Occupy movement a tool of the Democratic party, I would hope it is not any more that the Tea Party is for the Republican. Are the protests of the Occupy movement valid? Hard to say because as of right now it is a jumbled mass of requests, as I said before on the main points I can get behind some of them but some of the others, please, a living wage? You want to get paid for living? By whom?
In parting a few things I would like to point out to the protesters, the real ones, not the professionals who are only there for their own egos, the real ones who want to make a difference.
1. Stand strong, while I might not agree with you, the fact that you are an American gives you the right to protest which is why this country is so great.
2. Do not get caught up in the moment, antagonists are within your ranks and they could care less if you take the heat for a bad situation, in fact they hope you do so they can get camera time for themselves.
3. If the police tell you it is time to go somewhere else, then please do that, you can continue the protest tomorrow, or at your house or a friends house that same night.
4. If you do get a chance to "Occupy" the streets en mass do it responsibly, if you hear a siren move aside! That ambulance is not trying to trick you, it's trying to save a life.
As always God bless this country
Saturday, October 15, 2011
# 5. Political Correctness
I have a feeling the top 5 will really rankle a few people, but this is my blog and how I feel so be it.
Why am I so against political correctness? The fact that it has failed and started creating a bizzaro world. I mean think about it. In the 70's America had a beloved show called All in the Family, it featured a bigoted main character. This kind of bigotry would most likely not be allowed on the big three networks any longer, possibly not even basic cable stations like FX. In All in the Family you did have a main character who had a flawed way at looking at things and it often led to comedic spots in the show, but in the end the main character could always be trusted to do the right thing in the end, mostly for his family. What was missing from that show? Swearing, nudity, sexual situations, etc. etc. etc.
So with the growing movement of political correctness you have more gratuitous violence and sex, drugs, but you can not have a character who has biased opinions. The only show I can think of in recent memory would be Rescue Me on FX, but that still had all the sex and drugs alcohol, violence etc that All in the Family did not need. The main character in Rescue Me was biased for sure but it was more like biased lite, they never pushed it too far for fear of the backlash.
Now am I saying there should be a comedic show featuring the Klan or Black Panthers? Absolutely not. My feeling here is that when we censor free speech and reality we lose part of who we are. Our country is filled with bigots and the best way to handle them is to laugh at their absurdity and perhaps try and show them the errors of their way.
Then there is the thing called "Hateful Speech" this has gotten out of control as well. I understand that we should not be going around yelling blatantly hateful things to each other, but it has gotten to the point where everyone has some kind of pet name so as not to speak the truth. As an example I will describe myself as a fat, lazy, crude, slob of a man who likes to speak his mind mostly at the wrong time. Translate that into "non-hateful" speech and I am a gravimetrically challenged, non-overachiever, who sometimes does things that would be described as non-happyish.
My feeling is hey, I'm a big boy tell it like it is. I grew up and was called fat, stupid, retarded, even a gayrod (5th grade), amazing I was called all these things and yet I made it through and became a productive member of society. Why? Because I grew a thick skin, that's why, it could be a reason for why I am crude but I can live with that. I'm more productive as a matter of fact than most people I knew that were never called those names and were sheltered by their parents from the mean hurtful words.
Political Correctness became a big thing in the 90's and I have seen a decline in our society ever since then. Maybe its time to start calling it like it is again. Maybe then we will have less cases of bullying. See when you have kids who have been sheltered from the meanness of the world and are suddenly exposed to one side or the other of it bad things happen. On the bullied side you have a person who is suddenly getting picked on and is not prepared to shrug it off and even worse becomes easy prey for more bullies. On the bully side you have people who have suppressed their natural animal instinct to dominate others (Alpha male/female), once they turn on that side of their psyche it's almost like they need to make up for lost time and go a bit off the deep end. Incidences of bullying have become shocking at just what is done to the bullied. We've gone from calling people "idiots" to group beatings, that's insane but is expected when you have people making up for lost time.
It's time to start letting people be people again, if you don't like the way a person treats you, stand up for yourself or don't go near that person, it works!
Why am I so against political correctness? The fact that it has failed and started creating a bizzaro world. I mean think about it. In the 70's America had a beloved show called All in the Family, it featured a bigoted main character. This kind of bigotry would most likely not be allowed on the big three networks any longer, possibly not even basic cable stations like FX. In All in the Family you did have a main character who had a flawed way at looking at things and it often led to comedic spots in the show, but in the end the main character could always be trusted to do the right thing in the end, mostly for his family. What was missing from that show? Swearing, nudity, sexual situations, etc. etc. etc.
So with the growing movement of political correctness you have more gratuitous violence and sex, drugs, but you can not have a character who has biased opinions. The only show I can think of in recent memory would be Rescue Me on FX, but that still had all the sex and drugs alcohol, violence etc that All in the Family did not need. The main character in Rescue Me was biased for sure but it was more like biased lite, they never pushed it too far for fear of the backlash.
Now am I saying there should be a comedic show featuring the Klan or Black Panthers? Absolutely not. My feeling here is that when we censor free speech and reality we lose part of who we are. Our country is filled with bigots and the best way to handle them is to laugh at their absurdity and perhaps try and show them the errors of their way.
Then there is the thing called "Hateful Speech" this has gotten out of control as well. I understand that we should not be going around yelling blatantly hateful things to each other, but it has gotten to the point where everyone has some kind of pet name so as not to speak the truth. As an example I will describe myself as a fat, lazy, crude, slob of a man who likes to speak his mind mostly at the wrong time. Translate that into "non-hateful" speech and I am a gravimetrically challenged, non-overachiever, who sometimes does things that would be described as non-happyish.
My feeling is hey, I'm a big boy tell it like it is. I grew up and was called fat, stupid, retarded, even a gayrod (5th grade), amazing I was called all these things and yet I made it through and became a productive member of society. Why? Because I grew a thick skin, that's why, it could be a reason for why I am crude but I can live with that. I'm more productive as a matter of fact than most people I knew that were never called those names and were sheltered by their parents from the mean hurtful words.
Political Correctness became a big thing in the 90's and I have seen a decline in our society ever since then. Maybe its time to start calling it like it is again. Maybe then we will have less cases of bullying. See when you have kids who have been sheltered from the meanness of the world and are suddenly exposed to one side or the other of it bad things happen. On the bullied side you have a person who is suddenly getting picked on and is not prepared to shrug it off and even worse becomes easy prey for more bullies. On the bully side you have people who have suppressed their natural animal instinct to dominate others (Alpha male/female), once they turn on that side of their psyche it's almost like they need to make up for lost time and go a bit off the deep end. Incidences of bullying have become shocking at just what is done to the bullied. We've gone from calling people "idiots" to group beatings, that's insane but is expected when you have people making up for lost time.
It's time to start letting people be people again, if you don't like the way a person treats you, stand up for yourself or don't go near that person, it works!
Friday, October 14, 2011
Chicago disgrace
Been away for a little while. I was a bit busy with selling a house and buying a new one, and just got access to the Internet again late yesterday.
With that in mind I'm going to stop the top ten countdown for the moment and speak on a new issue that has come up.
The closings of police stations to save money.
See when I read the first hints that the 013th district and 021st districts were slated for the axe I didn't really bat an eye. They are two old antiquated buildings in areas of relatively low crime. I felt bad for the officers who would be displaced but I actually saw the sense in shutting down small stations to save money (savings in heat, electric, maintenance, etc).
Then I read that the 019th district, the one I work in was slated to close as well. Well that didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. It has a range in it, a lock up that houses female prisoners from all around the northside districts, has gas pumps to refuel the squad cars and a repair garage to keep the fleet moving. I still wasn't that angry about it because it is a big tract of land and if the city truly closed it down and sold the land they stood to get quiet a sum of money. The station is not that old, in fact it's younger than I am, but if it saved money I would be willing to sacrifice and work somewhere else.
Then the announcement that it is not closing, but will be housing all the northside detectives. I thought "Where is the savings gained on that?" "What about the upstairs of Area 5, or the 25th district? Is that just going to remain empty?"
Now this just doesn't make sense. See the city keeps saying they are putting more "boots on the ground." and "streamlining the force". Bull Sh*t!
Will the 019th, 021st, and 013th districts lose police, no I don't think they will. Will it take longer to get to you if you need help fast and the night happens to be busy? Absolutely. Take as an example, you need help and are at say Wrightwood and Clybourn. Currently that is about a 3 minute trip driving fast coming from the Belmont and Western Station, about 45 seconds with lights and sirens and low traffic. Now under the new plan let's say the car that is assigned to patrol that area is in the new station, at Addison and Halsted, how fast are they going to be able to get there if they get the assignment? I'm guessing based on my experience, even with lights sirens and favorable traffic it's going to take a minimum of 5 minutes for that car to get there, if the gods are with you maybe a car is closer and available and you might get service quicker. But lets say there is a Cubs game letting out, now that same car has to get through vehicular traffic and pedestrian traffic and even with lights and sirens the best you can hope for is at absolute best 7-8 minutes but probably closer to 15 minutes. That extra car that might be closer to you? Forget it there is a Cubs game letting out, everyone available is busy with other things. So if you are being robbed, beaten or raped you now have to fend for yourself for between 7 - 15 minutes before help arrives instead of 45 seconds to 3 minutes.
Does anyone know what a robber or rapist can do with an extra 10 to 15 minutes? I do and it isn't pretty.
Am I bitter I'm being moved? Not really I've been doing this a long time, I'll be doing it for years to come unless I get fired for writing this, my whole concern is with you, the citizens of the city of Chicago and your safety.
Oh and by the way just announced today several top positioned police and fire and mayoral aides receive an average of 9% raises in this same budget, the police got an average of 1.5% and waited 2 1/2 years to get that. Makes you think just how much are things changing? How much have the aldermen sacrificed for you, the voting base? Have they given back their expense accounts and said "I'll pay my own way?" No. Have they said let's look at reducing the number of wards and streamline that so less of us draw funds from your taxes? Not even close.
It's time to wake up Chicago, your safety is being compromised and the top echelon is still sitting pretty.
With that in mind I'm going to stop the top ten countdown for the moment and speak on a new issue that has come up.
The closings of police stations to save money.
See when I read the first hints that the 013th district and 021st districts were slated for the axe I didn't really bat an eye. They are two old antiquated buildings in areas of relatively low crime. I felt bad for the officers who would be displaced but I actually saw the sense in shutting down small stations to save money (savings in heat, electric, maintenance, etc).
Then I read that the 019th district, the one I work in was slated to close as well. Well that didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. It has a range in it, a lock up that houses female prisoners from all around the northside districts, has gas pumps to refuel the squad cars and a repair garage to keep the fleet moving. I still wasn't that angry about it because it is a big tract of land and if the city truly closed it down and sold the land they stood to get quiet a sum of money. The station is not that old, in fact it's younger than I am, but if it saved money I would be willing to sacrifice and work somewhere else.
Then the announcement that it is not closing, but will be housing all the northside detectives. I thought "Where is the savings gained on that?" "What about the upstairs of Area 5, or the 25th district? Is that just going to remain empty?"
Now this just doesn't make sense. See the city keeps saying they are putting more "boots on the ground." and "streamlining the force". Bull Sh*t!
Will the 019th, 021st, and 013th districts lose police, no I don't think they will. Will it take longer to get to you if you need help fast and the night happens to be busy? Absolutely. Take as an example, you need help and are at say Wrightwood and Clybourn. Currently that is about a 3 minute trip driving fast coming from the Belmont and Western Station, about 45 seconds with lights and sirens and low traffic. Now under the new plan let's say the car that is assigned to patrol that area is in the new station, at Addison and Halsted, how fast are they going to be able to get there if they get the assignment? I'm guessing based on my experience, even with lights sirens and favorable traffic it's going to take a minimum of 5 minutes for that car to get there, if the gods are with you maybe a car is closer and available and you might get service quicker. But lets say there is a Cubs game letting out, now that same car has to get through vehicular traffic and pedestrian traffic and even with lights and sirens the best you can hope for is at absolute best 7-8 minutes but probably closer to 15 minutes. That extra car that might be closer to you? Forget it there is a Cubs game letting out, everyone available is busy with other things. So if you are being robbed, beaten or raped you now have to fend for yourself for between 7 - 15 minutes before help arrives instead of 45 seconds to 3 minutes.
Does anyone know what a robber or rapist can do with an extra 10 to 15 minutes? I do and it isn't pretty.
Am I bitter I'm being moved? Not really I've been doing this a long time, I'll be doing it for years to come unless I get fired for writing this, my whole concern is with you, the citizens of the city of Chicago and your safety.
Oh and by the way just announced today several top positioned police and fire and mayoral aides receive an average of 9% raises in this same budget, the police got an average of 1.5% and waited 2 1/2 years to get that. Makes you think just how much are things changing? How much have the aldermen sacrificed for you, the voting base? Have they given back their expense accounts and said "I'll pay my own way?" No. Have they said let's look at reducing the number of wards and streamline that so less of us draw funds from your taxes? Not even close.
It's time to wake up Chicago, your safety is being compromised and the top echelon is still sitting pretty.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
#6 Youth Image and feel good doctrine
Teens hanging out on the corner, tattooed up, pants hanging suggestively off their hips, underwear hanging out. It's alright because the teens are just expressing themselves right?
You see the country I have as an image has people who care about what they look like. Now I know I might get some heat that dressing in the current style is caring about your image. What I mean by caring is a stylistic approach to your appearance. You look back just a few decades and you see men in buttoned down shirts, with a tie usually, a dressy styled hat on their heads. Casual pants in place and dress shoes on their feet. The women usually wore dresses, they looked very stylish, but sometimes pants were worn and they too were stylish. When you shopped for clothes sometimes you didn't have a great budget but you still cared about your appearance. I think back to my grandparents as an example, these are fond memories. I look back to even the ghetto pictures from the 20's and the residents there wore conservative and stylish clothing. They might not have had money or prestige but believe me I would take them more seriously than I would anyone from the cast of Jersey Shore.
I blame television and the program producers as much as I do flawed parenting. When I grew up it was with such television shows as Emergency, CHIPS, and other type shows, it showed emergency personnel as heroes, and when they went home it was to a simple lifestyle that most of us have. What do we have now? Shows like the Sopranos, The Shield, Oz, and others. Do I think these shows should not be on television? Absolutely I think they should, but I do not think our young teens or pre-teens should be allowed to watch them, its a recipe for disaster. I also think our youth looking to the current bunch of celebrities for guidance is just as much a disaster. Lindsay Lohan, Gaga, Lil Wayne, Katy Perry all strut around in ridiculous outfits, sport new body modifications and put out that this is a normal thing that everyone should do. The thing is these people now have money and do not have to worry about presenting themselves for job interviews.
The big danger is somewhere the message has changed from responsible choices to "do what feels good". This is a foreign concept to me, life should not be just about feeling good, it contains struggle and to be properly faced you need experience in life making hard choices to face and eventually beat that challenge. Why do so many of our childhood celebrities have a horrible track record in sustaining their lifestyles? Its a simple thing, too much of a good thing is doomed to fail. The brighter a star glows the quicker it usually burns out and with great show.
To return to a better place in the way the world looks upon our country we need to be more responsible to our next generation and show them that a gluttonous lifestyle filled with excess only leads to downfall.
You see the country I have as an image has people who care about what they look like. Now I know I might get some heat that dressing in the current style is caring about your image. What I mean by caring is a stylistic approach to your appearance. You look back just a few decades and you see men in buttoned down shirts, with a tie usually, a dressy styled hat on their heads. Casual pants in place and dress shoes on their feet. The women usually wore dresses, they looked very stylish, but sometimes pants were worn and they too were stylish. When you shopped for clothes sometimes you didn't have a great budget but you still cared about your appearance. I think back to my grandparents as an example, these are fond memories. I look back to even the ghetto pictures from the 20's and the residents there wore conservative and stylish clothing. They might not have had money or prestige but believe me I would take them more seriously than I would anyone from the cast of Jersey Shore.
I blame television and the program producers as much as I do flawed parenting. When I grew up it was with such television shows as Emergency, CHIPS, and other type shows, it showed emergency personnel as heroes, and when they went home it was to a simple lifestyle that most of us have. What do we have now? Shows like the Sopranos, The Shield, Oz, and others. Do I think these shows should not be on television? Absolutely I think they should, but I do not think our young teens or pre-teens should be allowed to watch them, its a recipe for disaster. I also think our youth looking to the current bunch of celebrities for guidance is just as much a disaster. Lindsay Lohan, Gaga, Lil Wayne, Katy Perry all strut around in ridiculous outfits, sport new body modifications and put out that this is a normal thing that everyone should do. The thing is these people now have money and do not have to worry about presenting themselves for job interviews.
The big danger is somewhere the message has changed from responsible choices to "do what feels good". This is a foreign concept to me, life should not be just about feeling good, it contains struggle and to be properly faced you need experience in life making hard choices to face and eventually beat that challenge. Why do so many of our childhood celebrities have a horrible track record in sustaining their lifestyles? Its a simple thing, too much of a good thing is doomed to fail. The brighter a star glows the quicker it usually burns out and with great show.
To return to a better place in the way the world looks upon our country we need to be more responsible to our next generation and show them that a gluttonous lifestyle filled with excess only leads to downfall.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
#7. Revolving door penal system
We in America incarcerate more people than anywhere else on the planet. Now don't think I'm going soft on crime, because I never will. I believe in law and order. What I see as a danger in our country is a virtual revolving door of convicts. I can't tell you how many people I have locked up, put into the penal system only to come face to face with them a few years later doing the same criminal activity or worse.
I understand that some people are just inherently evil. These people can not be helped. They can not change, it's just the way they are. What I am concerned with is how do we, as a great country help those who want to change?
Recently for a college class I was given the task of finding something and changing it from the ground up. I took this as a challenge and dove into our penal system. I read study after study of peer reviewed literature and generally was unsatisfied by what I read. That is until I read a study of a prison program in Kansas where non-violent criminals were allowed to work 8 hour shifts making airplane parts for an airline company. The results were fantastic. The inmates involved in the program performed exceptionally, the quality was off the charts. The company was very pleased and saved millions on labor. The problem came when these trained individuals were released and then took their newly learned job skills to the company they were unwelcomed because of their status as felons. Some went back to a life of crime, some determined individuals were able to gain employment with smaller contractors for the airline company and continue to produce quality parts. This got me thinking, and I came up with a grand scale idea.
Bear with me because this is a long plan, but if you care for the safety and security of this country I think it bears looking at. I will use my home state of Illinois as an example.
1. Find land, preferably a shut down prison to retro fit, in Illinois I am thinking of a certain downstate prison that was recently designated as a place to send all the Gitmo detainees, that quite frankly will never go there.
2. expand on that land to purchase surrounding land making in effect a smallish city, wall it off.
3. Choose the top 5 to at max 10 % of non-violent criminals already in the system who have not committed any crimes or major infractions while incarcerate, I.E. model prisoners, and give them the option to transfer to this "prison city".
4. The terms of the transfer must be met with:
a. an admission of guilt by the prisoner
b. a willingness to forgo any parole options, a full sentence must be served.
c. a guarantee by the prisoner to stay a model prisoner any infractions of the law will get the prisoner sent back to a regular prison with no possible re-acceptance into the program.
5. In exchange for these promises the prisoner will get placed into a much lower level of security situation, his cell will in effect be a small one bedroom apartment to be built on this land. The prisoner will then be given an option of jobs needed to sustain the "prison city." Be it custodial duties, construction, cooking or agricultural. The prisoner will receive training for their new profession. The prisoner will be expected to work with their community to sustain it. There will be everything a normal city can expect to see, including farming. The idea being that eventually this community once up and running properly can maintain itself, costing the taxpayers virtually nothing more than paying the salaries of the guards and other staff. The prisoners will also get anger management classes, drug abuse programs, alcohol abuse counseling medical care, etc. My goal for this project is that within ten years of the first inmates being admitted to the facility they could actually then sell their products to the outside community effectively bringing in money for the "prison city" half the profits would go to staff salaries and half back to inmate accounts.
6. Upon completion of their sentence the inmate will be free to go, with their savings back into the outside world, with job knowledge. Ideally the inmates should be encouraged to go elsewhere other than where they originally were when they were arrested. Part of the program will help find outside affordable housing for the inmates, another part of the program will work closely with local businesses to hire these ex-cons. In return for participating in the program the businesses will receive tax break incentives from the state. Thus when a prisoner comes to his or her release date they are returning to our community with a home, a job, some money in reserve and most of all hope. Also as an added incentive the prisoners felon status will be erased if they have not gotten rearrested in a year period after release.
7. The cities population would remain fairly stagnant, as one convict is released one will take their place.
All too often when I speak to ex-cons their response is "I do it because no one will hire me anyway, no one cares about me." Another factor I see is that the ex-con goes straight back to his gang or previous lifestyle where criminal activity is encouraged, this would end with housing placement.
My goal with this whole rewrite of the penal system would be targeted at the model prisoners, but would also, with the success of the program show borderline prisoners that there is hope and it could pay off for the prisoner to become a model prisoner. I feel that if there is a hope that something good can come from this, there is an incentive to change bad behavior.
Remember this only applies to non-violent prisoners, murderers, rapists or other predatory criminals would never be eligible for this program. My hope is that the program will also help our economy by helping the businesses hiring these reformed criminals grow and produce more. I think it definitely bears taking a look at, I'm sure there can be holes found in my logic, but all in all I feel it is a strong idea.
For the record, my teacher in the class, an activist, questioned me as to are we just creating more "projects" like Cabrini green. I countered that this would not be a band aid approach, we wouldn't just build it and forget it, it would be monitored and regulated with a microscope to make sure that the community within grows and flourishes. She also questioned about the cost, and while I am not an economist by any means, I will admit at the inception of the project it will be costly getting it started. I countered though that with proper administration of the "prison city" within 10 years it will cost the tax payers nothing and start actually making a profit for the tax payers.
I received an A for my overall project.
I understand that some people are just inherently evil. These people can not be helped. They can not change, it's just the way they are. What I am concerned with is how do we, as a great country help those who want to change?
Recently for a college class I was given the task of finding something and changing it from the ground up. I took this as a challenge and dove into our penal system. I read study after study of peer reviewed literature and generally was unsatisfied by what I read. That is until I read a study of a prison program in Kansas where non-violent criminals were allowed to work 8 hour shifts making airplane parts for an airline company. The results were fantastic. The inmates involved in the program performed exceptionally, the quality was off the charts. The company was very pleased and saved millions on labor. The problem came when these trained individuals were released and then took their newly learned job skills to the company they were unwelcomed because of their status as felons. Some went back to a life of crime, some determined individuals were able to gain employment with smaller contractors for the airline company and continue to produce quality parts. This got me thinking, and I came up with a grand scale idea.
Bear with me because this is a long plan, but if you care for the safety and security of this country I think it bears looking at. I will use my home state of Illinois as an example.
1. Find land, preferably a shut down prison to retro fit, in Illinois I am thinking of a certain downstate prison that was recently designated as a place to send all the Gitmo detainees, that quite frankly will never go there.
2. expand on that land to purchase surrounding land making in effect a smallish city, wall it off.
3. Choose the top 5 to at max 10 % of non-violent criminals already in the system who have not committed any crimes or major infractions while incarcerate, I.E. model prisoners, and give them the option to transfer to this "prison city".
4. The terms of the transfer must be met with:
a. an admission of guilt by the prisoner
b. a willingness to forgo any parole options, a full sentence must be served.
c. a guarantee by the prisoner to stay a model prisoner any infractions of the law will get the prisoner sent back to a regular prison with no possible re-acceptance into the program.
5. In exchange for these promises the prisoner will get placed into a much lower level of security situation, his cell will in effect be a small one bedroom apartment to be built on this land. The prisoner will then be given an option of jobs needed to sustain the "prison city." Be it custodial duties, construction, cooking or agricultural. The prisoner will receive training for their new profession. The prisoner will be expected to work with their community to sustain it. There will be everything a normal city can expect to see, including farming. The idea being that eventually this community once up and running properly can maintain itself, costing the taxpayers virtually nothing more than paying the salaries of the guards and other staff. The prisoners will also get anger management classes, drug abuse programs, alcohol abuse counseling medical care, etc. My goal for this project is that within ten years of the first inmates being admitted to the facility they could actually then sell their products to the outside community effectively bringing in money for the "prison city" half the profits would go to staff salaries and half back to inmate accounts.
6. Upon completion of their sentence the inmate will be free to go, with their savings back into the outside world, with job knowledge. Ideally the inmates should be encouraged to go elsewhere other than where they originally were when they were arrested. Part of the program will help find outside affordable housing for the inmates, another part of the program will work closely with local businesses to hire these ex-cons. In return for participating in the program the businesses will receive tax break incentives from the state. Thus when a prisoner comes to his or her release date they are returning to our community with a home, a job, some money in reserve and most of all hope. Also as an added incentive the prisoners felon status will be erased if they have not gotten rearrested in a year period after release.
7. The cities population would remain fairly stagnant, as one convict is released one will take their place.
All too often when I speak to ex-cons their response is "I do it because no one will hire me anyway, no one cares about me." Another factor I see is that the ex-con goes straight back to his gang or previous lifestyle where criminal activity is encouraged, this would end with housing placement.
My goal with this whole rewrite of the penal system would be targeted at the model prisoners, but would also, with the success of the program show borderline prisoners that there is hope and it could pay off for the prisoner to become a model prisoner. I feel that if there is a hope that something good can come from this, there is an incentive to change bad behavior.
Remember this only applies to non-violent prisoners, murderers, rapists or other predatory criminals would never be eligible for this program. My hope is that the program will also help our economy by helping the businesses hiring these reformed criminals grow and produce more. I think it definitely bears taking a look at, I'm sure there can be holes found in my logic, but all in all I feel it is a strong idea.
For the record, my teacher in the class, an activist, questioned me as to are we just creating more "projects" like Cabrini green. I countered that this would not be a band aid approach, we wouldn't just build it and forget it, it would be monitored and regulated with a microscope to make sure that the community within grows and flourishes. She also questioned about the cost, and while I am not an economist by any means, I will admit at the inception of the project it will be costly getting it started. I countered though that with proper administration of the "prison city" within 10 years it will cost the tax payers nothing and start actually making a profit for the tax payers.
I received an A for my overall project.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
#8. Sport team mentality in politics
If you are from Chicago you are a Democrat it has been said. If you are from Texas you are a Republican.
What the politicians have been banking on for years is the general population like to root for things. We don't like losing so what the general public does is identify themselves as Democrat or Republican, Left or Right, Conservative or Liberal. Often times when I am having a political discussion with on or the other side of the line I will ask a question for clarity on why a person has a certain stance on an issue.
The response I get most often? "Because I am a (fill in political party here) it's what we believe."
Most can not answer why they just stand by their party line.
Here is my take, I am conservative on most issues, liberal on a few. That is just the way I think. I tend to vote right, but have not always voted for a right party candidate if I feel the other candidate will better represent my beliefs. That is the way I feel this country will prosper the most. No candidate who has ever run has seen eye to eye with my beliefs 100% so it is my responsibility to find the best fit.
My responsibility as an American, and my responsibility to my countrymen.
The problem I see here is we now have voters who vote based on their experience with watching reality television, or news channels, there isn't much original thought going on here. It is our responsibility to educate ourselves on the issues. Too often that is not the case, again the answer I get most often is because that is what my party wants.
America, what do YOU want? That is why we have a voting process. Tragically it has turned more into a "you will vote this way" policy. I have some amazing friends on both of the political spectrum who do educate themselves on the issues and I enjoy the back and forth in our discussions. What happens though when educated people get together and discuss issues is that sometime you can agree to disagree, but most times someone from one side will make a very strong argument for one side that makes great sense, and the other can not come up with an argument against it. Everyone knows what was just said makes sense.
By the political parties treating us as "sheep" or people without free thought is each side has dug themselves further against each other. The original idea behind the two party system was for a more streamlined government. When one side proved not able to get the job done, they could be voted out and replaced by the other who had similar but slightly different ideas. Government never missed a beat and went on.
Obama's "Change" campaign was brilliant, yet dangerous. It did play to millions of Americans who were not happy with the way things were going. The idea of electing someone who promised change sounded great, we were in a recession, fighting two wars, losing brave soldiers. Who wouldn't want change?
The danger in the "Change" message that I saw is it was identifying that the two parties are now so far apart on issues that a streamlined government no longer existed. Changing something means that the ideas from one side to the other are separated by miles not feet.
What we have seen is even more gridlocking, one side took control the other fought back, and what I see now is one party always is the underdog. Americans love an underdog, it's a great place to be. What we should be asking is not for fundamental change for change sake, we should be asking for a candidate who will lead us as a nation closer together. Obama's message was just that, what happened is it drove us farther apart. It could just well be time for a third party to rise up be it libertarians, tea party, green or any other party. I just pray that party can make the moves to draw us together before we, as a nation find ourselves fighting a second civil war because from everything I see there are parallels to that time period happening right now as I type
What the politicians have been banking on for years is the general population like to root for things. We don't like losing so what the general public does is identify themselves as Democrat or Republican, Left or Right, Conservative or Liberal. Often times when I am having a political discussion with on or the other side of the line I will ask a question for clarity on why a person has a certain stance on an issue.
The response I get most often? "Because I am a (fill in political party here) it's what we believe."
Most can not answer why they just stand by their party line.
Here is my take, I am conservative on most issues, liberal on a few. That is just the way I think. I tend to vote right, but have not always voted for a right party candidate if I feel the other candidate will better represent my beliefs. That is the way I feel this country will prosper the most. No candidate who has ever run has seen eye to eye with my beliefs 100% so it is my responsibility to find the best fit.
My responsibility as an American, and my responsibility to my countrymen.
The problem I see here is we now have voters who vote based on their experience with watching reality television, or news channels, there isn't much original thought going on here. It is our responsibility to educate ourselves on the issues. Too often that is not the case, again the answer I get most often is because that is what my party wants.
America, what do YOU want? That is why we have a voting process. Tragically it has turned more into a "you will vote this way" policy. I have some amazing friends on both of the political spectrum who do educate themselves on the issues and I enjoy the back and forth in our discussions. What happens though when educated people get together and discuss issues is that sometime you can agree to disagree, but most times someone from one side will make a very strong argument for one side that makes great sense, and the other can not come up with an argument against it. Everyone knows what was just said makes sense.
By the political parties treating us as "sheep" or people without free thought is each side has dug themselves further against each other. The original idea behind the two party system was for a more streamlined government. When one side proved not able to get the job done, they could be voted out and replaced by the other who had similar but slightly different ideas. Government never missed a beat and went on.
Obama's "Change" campaign was brilliant, yet dangerous. It did play to millions of Americans who were not happy with the way things were going. The idea of electing someone who promised change sounded great, we were in a recession, fighting two wars, losing brave soldiers. Who wouldn't want change?
The danger in the "Change" message that I saw is it was identifying that the two parties are now so far apart on issues that a streamlined government no longer existed. Changing something means that the ideas from one side to the other are separated by miles not feet.
What we have seen is even more gridlocking, one side took control the other fought back, and what I see now is one party always is the underdog. Americans love an underdog, it's a great place to be. What we should be asking is not for fundamental change for change sake, we should be asking for a candidate who will lead us as a nation closer together. Obama's message was just that, what happened is it drove us farther apart. It could just well be time for a third party to rise up be it libertarians, tea party, green or any other party. I just pray that party can make the moves to draw us together before we, as a nation find ourselves fighting a second civil war because from everything I see there are parallels to that time period happening right now as I type
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)