I am currently residing in Lincoln, Nebraska as my fiancé begins earning her PhD in Counseling Psychology from the University of Nebraska. Despite my change of location, Texas is in my heart. I love the cities of my home state and the people. I do my best to keep up with the political tides in Texas. Paying keen attention to who is, or is not elected to represent our great state in congress. Personally I feel that it is important for citizens to pay attention to whom they have elected to office, and when a particular action taken by an official deserves questioning, it is not only the right but the duty of said citizens to contact that official. With that said I would like to start with a bit about myself.
I was born and raised in the Great State of Texas. I grew up in a small South-East Texas town, where I learned to love the land and its people. I went through grade school, and graduated as valedictorian of my class in 2006. After which I attended Sam Houston State University where I graduated Magna Cum Laude with my Bachelor of Arts degree in Mass Communication with an emphasis on Public Relations in August 2009. I am a first generation college graduate, and I feel proud everyday when I think about everything I’ve accomplished at the mere age of 21. Throughout my life I’ve had many people, events and readings influence my personality and beliefs. However unfortunate it is for you as an elected Republican official, I am far more liberal than most people in Texas, outside of Travis County, would care for me to be. Many of my political beliefs are based on what I believe is better for all of the people in our country, and not just particular classes or their cohorts.
However this letter is not to question your political beliefs, or your total ability to judge what may or may not be appropriate for the people of the United States. Your judgment doesn’t appear to be too terrible as you’ve now been elected to two terms. No this letter is about something a bit more severe than your political beliefs. Here I intend to call out your moral fortitude, to see if you are willing to explain your reasoning behind a recent vote you casted. A nay vote which has thus far surpassed my ability to comprehend how you could, as a logical and educated human being, vote in support of such ridiculously heinous loophole. I feel that it is safe to assume that you, or whichever staff member may be reading this, know what I am asking about. That’s right, SA 2588 on HR 3326, or Senator Franken’s amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill.
In lieu of your recent decision to vote against Senator Franken’s amendment, I am forced to ponder where exactly your moral compass lies. As stated above, I am only 21. I have several years less experience on this planet than you, but even I know that rape is wrong. I also know that covering up rape is wrong. I realize that the employees willingly signed their contracts, and whether or not they read through the arbitration cause is up to them. However I do know that there is a point when an organization needs to take responsibility, and agree that there is a point when private arbitration is not enough to successfully bring about reasonable justice, much less any kind of compensation.
So with that laid out, why did you vote nay? I’ve witness the Jon Stewart report on this amendment, and I have to agree with a lot of what he has to say, though you seem like more of a Fox News fan. I’ve even seen the responses from Senator Sessions, but his claims that the amendment is not the place of congress, or is a political move (As a side note, would you mind demonstrating a piece of legislature that is NOT a political move?) are not substantial enough for my inquisitive nature. I’d really like to hear directly from you, what your motivations to vote nay were, and be honest. Also, please avoid replying via form letter with your signature stamped across the bottom. This nod at your receiving of my letter, will not be appreciated as much as an actual response will be.

Thank you for your time,

Chet Gassett
Patiently Pondering your Motives.

Share/Bookmark

Cuomo’s Letter to AIG

UPDATE @ 5:30 3/16:

Cuomo meant business and held up his promise to subpoena AIG if the information was not received by 4:00 p.m. today.

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo has subpoenaed American International Group Inc to get information about $165 million in bonuses the insurer is paying. Cuomo said in an interview with CNBC that his office wants to understand why AIG felt compelled to pay the bonuses to employees of its derivatives unit, the main source of the insurer’s troubles. Cuomo wants to see the contracts and is demanding a list of the bonus recipients. He noted that if the government hadn’t saved AIG, the bonus contracts would have been void. Contracts can also be re-negotiated, he added.

Courtesy of MarketWatch.com

Share/Bookmark

Share/Bookmark

Share/Bookmark

Share/Bookmark

All credit for this goes to Truthdig, I just happened to Stumble across it. In lieu of the recent New Yorker/Obama “fiasco” I believe this should definitely be their next cover.

Share/Bookmark

That’s right folks, he wants to cut his nuts off. My first response of course was, what the hell was this man thinking? He apparently forgot one of the cardinal rules of good public relations practices. If you’re in a television studio, in front of a camera, wearing a mic pack, about to maybe go on live, were just removed from live television, then shut your mouth.

Amazingly, the public seemed to absorb this bad press and move on. It’s as if these attacks by Jackson were completely ignored. I think this shows how much of a chance Obama truly has in this race.

By the way, did you know Jackson’s son works for Obama on the campaign trail, his response is summed up nicely with, “Way to be an asshole dad.” [Note: Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. did not actually say that. I made it up.]

In other news, The New Yorker, the East coast satire giant has been ridiculed lately over its controversial cover featuring the Obamas. Unfortunately the magazines editors overestimated the ability of the standard American citizen to grasp the concept of satire. This cover, as you can see, depicts Senator Obama and his wife in the Oval Office. Barack stereotypically looks like a Middle Easter citizen, and Michelle looks like a feminist from the Black Panther movement. To top it all off there’s an United States flag burning in the fire place. When I first heard of this I giggled a little inside, but when I finally saw the cover I actually laughed aloud. While some have attacked the East Coast rag, saying that this is detrimental to the Obama campaign, The New Yorker has graciously responded with, “lighten up, it’s a joke.” They say that this is meant to represent the Obamas in the light many ultra right wingers tried to cast him in. If you don’t think this is funny, or if this cover makes you worry about Obama entering the White House, then you may consider upgrading your satire radar.

Share/Bookmark

The implications of these actions are quite terrifying. Although I usually maintain that I believe slippery slope arguments are invalid, it is a greater likelihood in this case than ever before.

For more information follow the link [HERE].

Thanks to Sparkwash for this!

Share/Bookmark

It’s interesting that this is coming out today, because we’re actually discussing the death penalty in my contemporary moral issues class. I may add more to this post when the discussion comes to an end. I may actually just append it with a new post above. For today though, take a moment to review the following CNN article.

Child rapists can’t be executed, Supreme Court rules

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Wednesday that child rapists cannot be executed, concluding capital punishment can be applied only against murderers.

The ruling stemmed from the case of Patrick Kennedy, who appealed the 2003 death sentence he received in Louisiana after being convicted of raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter.

…rest of the story is [HERE].

How do you all feel?

Share/Bookmark