RECLAIMING HOPE by Michael Wear

This is a memoir by a a former Cabinet member of faith, whom former Pres. Obama had appointed to his administration. Michael Wear begins his book with a Prelude, telling the story of his first days in the White House. He follows this with an Introduction to this book and what to expect from it. He spreads his story over 12 chapters, which are well-researched. He includes many subheadings, to make his material more readable. Michael Wear includes a section of Acknowledgments of all those who have made this book possible, following it with his author bio. He wraps it all up with Notes of sources used for each chapter, and an Index. The author had founded Public Square Strategies, LLC. This is a consulting firm that businesses, nonprofits, foundations, and Christian organizations in matters involving faith, politics, and culture. WEar also directed faith outreach for former Pres. Obama's historic historic 2012 re-election campaign. Wear was one of the youngest White House staffers in modern American history. He lead evangelical outreach and helped manage the White House's involvement in faith-based and values issues. THese include adoption and anti-human trafficking issues. He serves on the Board for Bethany Christian Services

I was excited to read this book's content. I didn't know what to expect of a Christian person who would accept join Obama's Cabinet as a staffer. If he was pro-life, how could he reconcile his pro-life worldview with our former President's pro-abortion policies. This author made his case for why he chose to identify as a Democrat, though he also identified as a pro-life Christian. This book is a page turner and I finished it in a matter of days. I was disappointed to learn that our President had lied to us when he assured us that abortion funding would not be part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). I sense that many pro-lifers would accuse this author of not being "really pro-life" because he chose to align with a pro-abortion President, instead of "the pro-life party." This author wrote about his objections to the REpublican party and why he felt more at home in the DEmocratic Party. But he couldn't support them fully because of abortion. He describes adoption initiatives that he helped work with in his time in this administration. I was unclear about his stance on same-sex marriage, whether he is for or against it. I don't agree with him that if voters leave both major parties, that they have given up on politics. Identifying as Independent is an act of protesting against the political Establishment. WHat is wrong with that? Though he mentions Hillary Clinton and the 2016 election a couple of times, one thing is absent. I could find no mention of Donald TRump anywhere in this entire book. Nor of anything about his campaign. Was this a deliberate omission?

I recommend this book for Republicans, Democrats and anyone else regardless of religion or political ideology. You may not agree with all of this author's conclusions (I didn't) but he makes a lot of sense. Ahd you, like me, might learn something. Read this book with an open mind. This author shows us how to become better citizens without placing our hope in politics or politicians. Maybe a youth version of this book should be written. Pastors, whether conservative or progressive in theology, may benefit from reading this book.They may learn some things about our former President.

I received a complimentary copy of this book throughBookLook Bloggers, in exchange for my honest review. I was not required to give a positive review of this book.

The Homecoming That is Dividing A Country

Unless you live under a rock, I daresay that you know that the US is bitterly divided now. Actually, we have been divided ever since our current President has taken office. What should be a joyous even, a homecoming after five years of being kidnapped and missing, has caused an often angry or troubled firestorm of questions and controversy. The controversy and questions? The conditions under which this homecoming was allowed to happen, ironically, has backfired and split a nation.

The Situation of This Controversy

Over a week ago, we in the US celebrated when the news broke the story that Bowe Bergdahl, detained for almost five years, had been officially released by the Taliban. Now I remember when Bergdahl's case began, almost five years ago. It was announced, along with the report that he had deserted his post. In the course of these five years, reports and videos had leaked out of Afghanistan, where Bergdahl was held, that he was alive and was pleading, "Please bring me home." Now this former POW, released and currently recovering in Germany, has cause a firestorm, much of it along political party lines. I had a dream, in fact, that I was taken a position on Bergdahl and this controversy, and an acquaintance let me have it and accused me of being hateful. If you are in or from the US, I'm sure that you have a clear position on Bergdahl, especially on the circumstances and the terms of his release. Is Bergdahl a hero or a traitor? Was his life worth releasing five Gitmo detainees who are, after all, "bad guys"? These questions are swirling around and around. In the meantime, some details of the abuse this POW endured, is coming out. He was caged for a time and kept in a dark room. The celebration of his homecoming, sadly, has been called off for now. His parents have been getting death threats. More and more Americans, including veterans, are calling the former POW a "traitor" and a "deserter." A few have called for his execution. Some people, seeking to be voices of reason, are calling for patience as the investigation into the circumstances of the former POW's capture and release. What has happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

The President Obama Role In This Controversy

Many, many Americans are confused, troubled and angry at President Obama and his administration for their decisions about Bowe Bergdahl's release. Many citizens are calling for his impeachment. Calls for his impeachment are nothing new, but they have intensified with the release of the former POW. The Internet has been popping up articles about President Obama's "making deals with terrorists" and "consorting with them." The Internet has been popping up articles about Bergdahl, suggesting that he should be executed for treason. I'm hearing of leaked stories that Bergdahl had written a note before his capture, declaring that he was tired of "fighting for Americans." Leaked stories indicate that he had deserted his post before this. Other stories have come out, but how do we know what is true and what is not? Why not wait for the investigation to be completed? Why not wait for Bergdahl to heal adequately so that he can tell us his side of the story? What about his parents' side of the story? The hate against the government, already rampant before this raging controversy, has just intensified. I know that there is another Marine who is detained in Mexico, and President Obama is being accused of hypocrisy for not "making any effort to free him." How do we know that the President is not working behind the scenes to do just that? I have seen posts opening declaring that President Obama is supporting the slaughter of Christians in Syria, and that he is consorting with the Palestinians against Israel, just to mention a couple of the things he is accused of. Worst of all, I'm hearing him being called a "traitor" who has freed a "deserter" in exchange for "terrorist" though there's no evidence that the five released men had anything to do with the tragedy of September 11. Our President has become very unpopular, vilified and the hatred of him is intensifying. The other day, an article told the story of of a dummy placed in a street, looking like President Obama, and placed in a hanging position. Can the message be any clearer of the perpetrator's contempt of the President? Where is this contempt coming from?

A Call for Patience and Reason

I know that the allegations of desertion and treason on the part of the former POW, are troubling. The only two offenses that are punishable by death are first-degree murder and treason. But do we have clear-cut and hard evidence that Bergdahl deserted his base, and betrayed his country? A rent poll tells us that 69 percent of Americans are unsure of that. And it is unclear. Since these are, at this point, allegations, Bowe Bergdahl is innocent until evidence tells us that he is guilty. The polls tell us that many Americans disagree with the swap of five Gitmo detainees for the former POW, but we are not privy to what went into this decision. I know that some are calling for us to refrain from getting our news from the media, because they are said to "incite hate." Well, the Internet is also the media, and much of what you see there is meant to stir up hate, also. Before we let this current controversy divide us any more, why not exercise patience, and wait? Wait for the investigation to be completed? Wait for the former POW to heal enough to give us his side of the story? How can we stand if we remain divided?

Dishonoring the President & What It Says About Us

Both online and in real life, I keep observing a troubling and disturbing practice. Many of us are so understandably upset, frustrated, and disillusioned by those who lead our country, especially in Washington, DC. We tend to react to these feelings by lashing out our politicians, including our President, and blaming them for everything that occurs in our country and in our lives. I'm sure we have done this for a long time, but it has hit an all-time low, with our President and the fear and hate directed at him. Why do so many of us fear him and hate him?

The Problem

In the past six or so years of our current President's first and now second term, I have never seen so much contempt leveled at any President. On Facebook, over and over and so many times I can't count, I have seen hate posts of this President. I have reported a number of them. I have seen many propaganda photos of President Obama, even pics with devil's horns on him! Examples of anti-Obama posts I have seen are many. Examples, over the years, include this pic of a soldier and the President. The caption over the soldier said: "Some gave all." The caption over the President said: "Some gave nothing." I have seen a Facebook page called, "I Wake Up Every Morning and Hate it That President Obama is My President." When Osama bin Ladin was taken down and many credited the President's policies, posts like this declared: "It is those brave Navy Seals who took down that master terrorist. Don't give this President ANY credit!" There have been, almost from the beginning of the proposal of The Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, and certainly after it became law, calls to "Repeal Obamacare!" For years, opponents of President Obama have called on Congress to "Impeach this President!" He has been called "Hitler," a "socialist," a "consorter with terrorsts," even "Anti-Christ." Though this President has produced his Hawaii birth certificate, many die-hard opponents persist in declaring that he is a "non-American Muslim President." I know that much of the hysteria is because the President's biological dad was born in Kenya, and this President's middle name is "Hussein." Some people not only call the President by his first name, but call him "Barry." Recently, a rock star has called this President "subhuman" and a "treasonist." Why all this disrespect, contempt, and hate?

Epidemic of Dishonoring A US President

I have just scratched the surface of all the hostility and animus that I have seen toward this current President. I understand and sympathize that the public is generally disillusioned, cynical, angry, and jaded when it surveys our politicians. Many people lump all politicians together, declaring, in utter disgust, "They are all crooks!" Given all the scandals that the media expose, it would seem that many of our elected officials lack a moral compass. Many citizens paint them all with a broad brush, declaring, "All politicians lie," and the link. It so follows that President Obama, according to many, is ethically challenged, dishonest, and lacking character. This President has never claimed perfection, and admits that "I'm not perfect, and, as your President, I will let you down." Yes, he has. I know that many of you reading this strongly disagree with policies or laws he has proposed or signed, most notably, GLBT marriage, abortion-on-demand, and increasing government spending on "entitlements" and welfare. One politician has called him the "biggest Food Stamps President in history." Many firmly believe he has broken many campaign promises. This pertains especially to his signature legislation, The Affordable Care Act. Yet I see that there is a level of dishonor shown toward this President that I don't think that has ever been shown any President in US history. Why is this?

Why All the Animosity Toward This President?

I think there are reasons for this show of hostility and disrespect for this current President. First, it would be intellectually dishonest to deny the existence of racism in the attitudes of many toward President Obama. This racism may, as many attitudes that we don't want to face about ourselves, usually operate at an unconscious level. Few people would ever admit that, of course. in our politically correct society, it would be called, "playing the race card" or race-baiting. Yet with the recent high-profile cases first of Trayvon Martin and, most recently, Jordan Davis, we must face the reality that racism is a live and well! Much anger toward this President may be because people listen to the Tea Party element among Conservatives and to the Conservative-leaning Fox New Network, as they advance their agenda to paint this President as evil, dishonest, unethical, and out to destroy the US and, especially the Christian community. So many people, buying into these paranoid media portrayals of the President, detest and despise this President and many are spreading their wrath on social media. Why do we prefer to buy into media hype over doing research into the facts?
What This Says About Us

This widespread disrespect and resentment toward President Obama says more about us than it does about him. Yes, I know that the un-Presidential conduct of former Presidents has caused many of us to lose trust and respect for the Presidency. Understandably. But once we lose respect and trust in the highest and the higher offices in the land, we find it easier to dishonor lesser authorities. This makes it easier to disrespect anyone and everyone. It's called the slippery slope. And an entire generation has grown up, spending their entire childhoods learning contempt and hostility. So many have absorbed the notion that life is cheap, and that people are expendable commodities to be used and abused as they see fit. Is it no wonder that we are raising a generation of young people who don't respect authority, who are angry and hostile, and even become "monsters" who commit violent crimes? What about the bullying among youth that just gets worse and worse? Have we become a society of disrespect? I think so!

This is not a call to get anyone to like or agree with the President or his policies. It's a call to respect and honor him as the holder of that office. If you are one who does not support this current President, it is possible to separate him from his office when at comes to showing respect. Thoughts?

The above photo is courtesy of MorgueFile, is by "omdur," and can be found here.

An Open Message To the US Government

To President Barack Obama and to each of the Members of the US House of Representatives and to the Senate:

I am sure that you are aware, if you care to see it, that so many of your citizens are not happy with your performance.  You know that a week ago, someone fired shots at the Capitol building. I think that you should not be surprised if this shooter's motive may have been rage at your actions that have caused the current government shutdown. That would not excuse this shooter's actions, but it certainly would explain them. Also, I know many of you pay attention to public opinion polls. Would it shock you to know that your approval ratings currently stand at only 5 percent, according to at least one poll?

We have a piece of legislation that so many people apparently oppose, as do many of you. Because of the opposition of many political leaders to this legislation, we now have another government shutdown. No legislation is perfect, and it will take time for it to be well-implemented and to run smoothly. Can't things be worked out here? In just a matter of days, you know that we have the even more serious issue of what to do to keep the US from going into default. Eight days now, as I write. We understand that the bills incurred by Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid have to be paid. We know that all the bills incurred by other government services have to be paid.

Yet we understand that you seem to have no plan to address this. The President wants to raise the debt ceiling, yet there are some who are agreeing to his proposal. But they are demanding that if he is to raise the debt ceiling, he is to make spending cuts to Medicaid and to all other government programs in proportion to how much he would do that. So what is it? Do most of us have to suffer from deep and painful cuts to programs and services that we need just to survive? Why should we have to make even more deep and painful sacrifices than what so many of us are already making? While all of you keep collecting your own paychecks because of your Constitutional protection from doing anything to your own salaries and very comfortable benefits?

Mr. President, all Members of the Senate and the House, so many of us are counting on you to set aside your egos and to put your country before your party loyalty. So many of us are fed up. You have to be aware that this Congress is considered by many to be the worst Congress in all of US history. You say that you want to do this and that. You pepper your speeches with your political rhetoric. Yet you so often do not back up your claims with actions. Talk is cheap. We know that your differences are based of sharply different visions on what is right and best for the US. But aren't there ways that you all can get together, iron out your differences, and find common ground?

We are not asking much from any of you. Even if each of you were to collect no pay at all during the government shutdown, I don't think you would really "feel it," now would you? We understand that there are some of you who agree that there is much government corruption. But you obviously are too afraid of your wealthy buddies on Wall Street to stand up to them and to truly work for us, the people who put you in office and who pay taxes. I wonder, how many of you are bought and paid off and so "beholden" to these wealthy benefactors, that you dare not run afoul of them? Do you blame us for feeling that many of you have accepted payoffs to get and stay elected, and that being elected is all you care about? Most of us are frustrated, disillusioned, and disgusted with all the rot in Washington. Many of us are worried and scared because of the profound effects of this shutdown on our real lives. Things will be far worse if you allow the US to go into default and do not raise the debt ceiling!

Some of us actually wonder: Who IS running this country? Your reluctance, yes, fear of standing up to these wealthy donors of yours and to be strong voices on behalf of us your citizens, makes us believe that your wealthy donors who obviously have bought and paid so many of you off, seem to be running this country. We have nothing against wealth. We just have major problems with it when it causes abuse and corruption. We see so much of that especially in Washington. Deep down, you no doubt are aware of it too. I'm sure that there are good people among you and that most of you started out with good hearts, sincerely wanting to serve your country. But then, along the way, the temptations of power and wealth apparently are too much.

As a Christian, I pray for all of you, as God tells us too. We as Christians are told to honor you because of the offices you hold. But the actions of so many of you make honoring you seem downright unattractive, even impossible. You can make it easier to respect you by acting in ways that make you worthy of that respect. I write to you as a citizen in St. Louis, Missouri but my fellow citizens in all 50 states share these concerns. So, when will you start working for us?

Photo Courtesy of PicDrome.org "blue-ink-ballpoint-pen" This photo can be found here.

The Fiscal Cliff

Months ago, as I have been doing more often, I logged into Facebook and was reading and examining the day's posts that had streamed into my Newsfeed. I read one post where the person expressed frustration with those in this person's network who were "spewing hate toward" and "discriminating against" millionaires and billionaires. The poster of this status exhibited concern that we were mentally categorizing people into categories, like rich and poor, and that wealth wasn't evil and that possessing it did not make anyone evil. Comments the person received in response indicated that that others agreed that the entitlement mentality is frequent among both those with wealth and among those facing poverty but especially among the "haves." I know that there is, statistically speaking, a small but substantial minority who, according to polls, oppose increasing taxes on anyone making $250,000. There are hardcore Conservatives in politics who oppose any tax increases on anyone who is wealthy, even millionaires or billionaires. The reasoning? "It is their money; they should be able to keep it and it is wrong to punish success. And they are the job creators."

I agree with the poster of that status that wealth is morally neutral, not good or evil, that wealth itself does not make anyone wrong or evil and that we have the moral obligation to value and look at every person based on who they are and not on personal qualities, including wealth or poverty. And I agree with those who commented that wrong attitudes toward money are found among both the "haves" and the "have nots." The Bible makes it clear, from cover to cover, that money itself is not evil but the love of it is the root of all forms of evil. Money and wealth can be terrible traps and sources of temptation. Greed for riches can sink people into the deepest kinds of human depravity known to humanity, not to mention that it can make is vulnerable to scams and even crime, whether as participants or as victims. And poverty doesn't make anyone immune to greed. Should the wealthy, who have $$$ to spare and would not miss these $$$ in the first place, be able to keep their "excess" when we as a country are on the verge of financial ruin? Asking them to contribute their share to prevent our country from going "under" and protecting those among us who are vulnerable, does not constitute "punishing success" in my book. It is only justice. Economic justice. Human rights.

In terms of discrimination, though, the Bible is far more concerned about discrimination against those facing poverty than "reverse" discrimination against wealthy people. This is because the "have nots," by definition, are much more vulnerable because of they have many more needs and have far fewer options, than those who have money and wealth. As for a "middle-class," this seems to be a modern cultural construct and the Bible seems to see only "haves" and "have nots." As for wealth, it usually brings with it power and prestige and the means to lay hold of countless opportunties which can only be accessed by money or capital. Those fortunate "1 percent," of course, are just as likely to face illness, sorrow, death, and other losses just as much as anyone else, for many tragedies are also "equal opportunity destroyers." However, high-income people usually have many more options, tools and resources with which to deal with what they and their families may face. A wealthy person who has a missing loved one, for example, usually has the money, the social connections and the prestige that are essential to gain media exposure and awareness for that loved one and this greatly increases the odds for that loved one being found. Families without wealth have limited options and money for awareness and must deal not only with the nightmare of a missing loved one but with struggling to gain and keep awareness for their loved one. And a wealthy person, diagnosed with cancer, can usually access far more and better health care options, like state-of-the-art and cutting edge cancer care treatments. Superior health care greatly increases their chances for survival and for their cancer to remain in remission. The "have nots," however, have not only the devastation of a cancer diagnosis but the worry of how to obtain and keep getting cancer treatment, and the worry of out-of-pocket costs. Many do not have insurance at all. It's a well-known fact that health care providers often treat private pay patients better than those with insurance, especially if it's government-funded. And the quality of and access to health care will probably affect the outcome of any cancer patient.
This brings me to the twin proposals to continue tax breaks for the millionaires and billionaires while at the same time making proposals for spending cuts on programs and services that can have devastating effects on the middle-class and the poor. These spending cuts would be made to education, grants for needy college students, domestic violence protection and shelters, rape crisis centers, law enforcement, health care, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, disability services, postal services, and other vital services that are vital to our lives and well-being. We all should be deeply concerned about and angry at the sheer injustice of tax breaks (and hefty ones at that) for millionaires and billionaires while spending cuts are being proposed that could force so many less fortunate people to have to sacrifice even more than they are already giving up! Supporters of these tax cuts for the "super-rich" have long argued that the "haves" are the job creators on whom the entire economy hangs and that tax breaks provide incentives for them to create jobs and rewards them for stimulating the economy so they will continue to create jobs and hire more people. Supporters have also contended that all this should "trickle down" to the rest of us. And they argue that wealth and success should not be punished. These arguments seem to make sense until one looks deeper. Years of tax cuts have not induced these "job creators" to generate more jobs and they haven't prevented massive lay-offs, an economy on the brink of ruin, or "trickled down" to most of the rest of us. These tax cuts have not done what they were supposed to do! Why should the government take from the middle-class and the poor when most can't afford to lose $$$ out of their pockets, and give even more $$$ to the super-wealthy, who don't need it in the first place?! Shouldn't those who have profitted from a way of life, as President Barack Obama asked earlier in the year, be asked to pay more? Isn't this only fair? Aren't we yet sick and tired of the simmering anger, frustration and even rage at a government that most have lost trust in and respect for?

The case for millionaires and billionaires being required to pay, percentagewise out of their gross incomes, as high a tax amount as the middle-class already pay, is that of moral obligation and the Biblical principle that "From him to whom much has been given, much will be required." So I find the arguments of the supporters for the "Bush tax cuts" to not only be in conflict with Biblical principles but also violate common sense. None of us who oppose tax cuts for the "super wealthy" wants to punish wealthy people, especially all those who have gotten their wealth from talent and hard work. It's just that we are living in a time when many, even most people are are being hit hard by this economy. Many are losing their jobs, losing their homes, surviving on fixed incomes or low-paying, dead-end jobs and many more fear unemployment, homelessness or losing access to government programs that they need to survive. And they are being asked to bear even MORE costs through spending cuts? It is wrong, unjust and cruel to require struggling and hurting middle-class and poor families and individuals to bear the devastation of spending cuts that would hurt them and AT THE SAME TIME sustain give even MORE $$$ in tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires!
Over and over, I have been confused, frustrated, disturbed and angry at the apparent lack of concern about and outrage over the proposed continuing of tax breaks for the wealthy and spending cuts that would affect the rest of us. Several times, when I have circulated petitions on Facebook calling for an end to tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, I have actually gotten negative responses to the petitions. Recently, one person, vehemently, commented in the comment area under my petition, that the rich are the "job creators," that taxing them more would hurt everyone else, that this person came from a family of successful people who got their success through hard work and how dare petitions like mine seek to punish families like this person's? All I know is that such an attitude is in stark contrast to that of the US President, Obama, who has gone on record as saying that he is willing to have his own taxes be raised and that all those, like him, who possess more wealth than most should pay more taxes to level the playing field for all of us in the arena of sacrifice.

Lest we forget, the hostility to ending tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires is in stark contrast to the attitude of God in His Son, Jesus. Christ, the richest Being in the world, with access not only to all Heavenly wealth and the worship of all the angels but Who also is the ultimate owner of all things on this Earth, at one time, became poor for all of us. He left Heaven and came to our Earth. He grew up in a poor family and as an adult, he was homeless and faced hunger and thirst and a humiliating death on a cross to save us from sin and its punishment. Then He was rewarded with a historical, bodily resurrection. Friends, whatever the outcome is with the proposed spending cuts and the co-proposed continued "Bush tax cuts," we can be assured that the God of the Bible identifies with the middle-class and the poor and that He truly feels our pain.

In the meantime, we ought to stand with President Obama, whatever we feel about him and unite behind him in his advocacy on behalf of those "99 percent of us" who are among the middle-class or even facing poverty. Only a united country can be healed from its ills. If we continue to be polarized we will continue to see our epidemics of all the evils that continually make the news, including violence, crimes of all sorts, unemployment, poverty, and so much more. If you have not hear the President's April 3 speech, you can do to this link and get an idea what it was about at this link: http://www.cbpp.org/. Or do a Google search for the April 3 speech from earlier this year.

Anyone who follows the news should be aware of the "fiscal cliff" debate that has been raging for months. In a nutshell, the "fiscal cliff" is a comprehensive package of across-the-board spending cuts and tax increases that would, more or less, hurt every person in the US with the exception of millionaires and billionaires and those with substantial savings. All of these hurtful spending cuts and tax increases are set to take effect by Tuesday, January 1, 2013, if Congress does not act promptly and come up with a deal. My hope is that they will arrive at some kind of deal within the next few days for the good not only of the US but of our allies all over the world who look up to us and whom we trade with. What will it take to finally unite both Houses of the US Congress and us as a country? When will we wake up?

The Tragedy Of Needing Tragedy For Unity

What a very dramatic week it has been, whether you are talking about nationally or personally. Nationally, all of US in the USA are feeling the effects of the monster storm that is called Hurricane Sandy, which is anticipated to be the worst and most damaging storm in US history. It was this past Sunday afternoon that I first learned about it on the news when returning home from Sunday worship services. As I write this, 44 people are confirmed dead and this means that 44 families are mourning the unexpected deaths of loved ones on top of everything else they are dealing with. And, this death toll is expected to rise. This all has happened at a politically inopportune time and very close to the US elections. But are politics on the minds of people, or on the minds of the millions of those in the affected areas, including those now 80.2 million people who are now without power? I do not think so! And, guess what? Our poiticians, who have been shown so much mean-spiritedness and petty vindictiveness, have, for the time being, set all of that aside. When asked "Are you worried about the impact of Hurricane Sandy on your Presidential campaign?" President Obama answered, "I'm not worried about the impact of Hurricane Sandy on my campaign. I'm worried about the impact of this hurricane on the countless people whose lives, homes, business and families have been affected" and that he knew that it would take a long time to recover from this hurricane's effects and pledged to help. The New Jersey Governor, who had, before this, made no secret of his disdain for supporters of the US President, has praised the President for his Presidential response to this entire situation and especially, on behalf of those in the affected states (his state among those most affected). In the wake of this terrible storm, this show of nonpartisanship is inspiring and heartening, though we know full well that it, sadly, will not last.

Last year, I recall that a very similar dynamic was at play. At that time, we in the US were undergoing a major economic crisis. In Washington, DC, both Houses of the US Congress were engading in bitter and ugly battles over how to balance the US budget. If you had been following the news, whether online or offline, you were aware of all the feuding over making hurtful cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to balance the budget (advanced by the more conservative) vs. requiring millionaires and billionaires to pay more through increased tax revenues (as advanced by those with more liberal leanings). Both sides were strongly opposed to what the other side was proposing and no one was willing to give in. It was clear that compromise was needed, and such a solution would have something to please everyone, but not enough to satisfy anyone. But no one was open to this in Washington, except for the President, who was calling for compromise. Then, when the US House was casting their votes on this very matter, Congresswoman Gabrielle "Gabby" Giffords was brought in to cast her vote. If you recall the shooting, Gabby Giffords was one of those who was shot, and she was seriously hurt, having been shot in the head. She had a very long rehabilitation and fight to overcome the many serious effects of her traumatic brain injury. As she entered the room, the entire mood changed and everyone there was suddenly forced to see that they needed to unite to overcome their differences to do what was best for their country. Gabby had come to cast her vote because she so passionately wanted to do what was best for her country and for her own constituents; her perspective in the face of all that she had overcome had inspired everyone to vote their consciences. Had she not experienced her personal tragedy and overcome its effects to come and cast her vote, would our politicians have united to make a decision to balance the US budget that was the best for the country, all things considered?

We all recall the worst terrorist attack in US history that happened on September 11 over ten years ago. These attacks took about 3000 lives and the lives of countless people were turned upside down forever. As countless affected people grieved on a personal level and as the US grieved on a national level for the thousands of lives lost, we all came to see some things with sudden clarity. We realized the priceless value of every human life and that we were all in this together and we would all get through this together. The popular song, "United We Stand," was heard often on TV during commercials. We began to talk very frequently about unity. We witnessed our politicians from both opposing parties uniting to help survivors of September 11. It was good to see the new nonpartisanship, but why did we need a huge national tragedy to make it happen? I recall reading articles about people all over the US who pondered what the terrorist attacks meant for their families and lives. They would write about seeing the priceless value of their families and friends and how all this was brought into sharp focus because of the terrorist attacks. As for New York City, the most affected by the terrorist attacks as that is where the two twin towers were, this ciry suddenly presented to the rest of the world a strong united front. Before this, there had been a stereotype that people in New York stuck to themselves, no doubt because of the sheer density of their population and because of so many of them being close together. But, this common tragedy forced them to see how all of them were "in it together" as they felt free to reach out to each other. Yes, unity happened. But at what cost? It took a major tragedy and the loss of many lives for this unity to happen and for differences to be set aside.


Much closer to where I am, a woman who had been a close personal friend (at the time) of my mom's and was "going steady" with one of my uncles, experienced every mother's nightmare, along with another woman whom she had barely known or spoken to. I will always recall how I had returned home and, as soon as I walked into the house, I was shocked and horrified to hear, "Stacy was found murdered." Mom, as I recall, told me that Stacy, then age 15, was babysitting little Tyler, 3 years old. It was then that both thse children were found murdered in the bathtub of the apartement they were in! Mary, Tyler's mom, and Jude, Stacy's mom, were acquaintances before this terrible murder and had not spoken much. But, with this common loss and tragedy, they were forced into an exremely close bond unshared by anyone else in their lives. But at what a terrible cost! The story of the double murder of Stacy and Tyler has, many years ago, been told in the book, EVERY MOTHER'S NIGHTMARE, by Charles Bosworth, Jr.fit for justice for Tyler and Stacy was long and the investigation was slow, but justice was finally won. It all has been told in the book, which is no longer in print. The point for this discussion is that two moms who, before the horrific murder of their children, had little in common and a weak bond, now were closer than any other two moms. Their common tragedy transcended all their differences because of their shared pain, loss and sorrow. Over and over, in the past years of my online advocacy, I have seen this same dynamic among families of the missing or murdered. As I have, over the days, months and years, seen post after post, and comment after comment on PEACE4THEMISSING and on Facebook. I have seen the intense bond that thse families share. Their bond and common and intense caring for each other, transcends all their differences in religion, politics, and everything else. They often call themselves "the elite club of the families of the missing or murdered." The bullying and petty differences that I have witnessed on so many social networks, is absent among thse families and those who advocate for them. They treat each other as we all ought to treat one another, but why is tragedy needed for us to set aside our differences, especially in religion and politics, and care for each other and recognize our common humanity?

In the world of the missing and crime victims, many people are grieving the loss of a crime victim advocate named Susan Murphy-Milano. I have never known Susan personally or spoken with her, but what I have heard about her makes me wish I had known her. Many who support Susan share an intense bond of mutual caring and sharing. Susan, for those of you who may not be familar with her, had grown up in an abusive home. I do not know the details of her past, as she descibes in her memoir HOLDING MY HAND THROUGH HELL. Susan witnessed her father, in law enforcement, hellishly abuse her mother, and he abused Susan, too. Eventually, Susan's father killed her mother and then killed himself. As a result of this horrific murder-suicide of her parents, Susan became passionate about helping others experience domestic violence escape with their lives, as she did and transition from victims to survivors, as she had. Many people in my social networks had known Susan personally, as she had assisted many of them and mentored many. I understand that she has also written three other books. She also hosted her own radio broadcast, "The Susan Murphy-Milano Show." Also, she had also appeared on national TV shows. Earlier this year, she had been diagnosed with Stage IV Cancer, and soon a Facebook prayer page was set up for Susan. Every time I visited this group page, I could see the bond and caring between all of those who Susan had helped, and who knew her and were supporting her. Their common bond was having been helped by Susan, their gratitude to her and their intense desire to support her and see her conquer her cancer. On pages such as this page that was set up for Susan, bullying and petty differences were absent and people treated each other as they should. It took the tragedy of one woman's cancer to bind many people, who loved her with passion because of what she had been to so many during her years of advocacy. Sadly, Susan lost her battle with cancer two days ago, but the community around her has not lost their bond of love, sharing and caring for one another.

This sad fact of needing tragedy for unity gets me to thinking about my own petition campaign. This weekend, I had read an article that surmised that all their most successful petitions have one thing in common: They are all surrounded by "human drama." In other words, it took tragedies to fuel people to sign these petitions and to be stirred up enough to pass them on to others, recruiting them to also sign these petitions. My Change.org petition, as many of you may know, is for autism and to appropriate, renew, and reallocate funds to cover all people with autism in the US through support services of various kinds. Over and over, I have wondered, with frustration, disappointment and sadness, why so many in and out of the autism community have not, to my knowledge, show widespread support for this petition's purpose in calling for coverage for people with autism of all ages; this petition calls for expanded coverage for children and coverage of now non-existent services for adults. I ask myself, will it take a tragedy to fuel people, in and out of the autism community, to convert my petition campaign into a grassroots movement? For, currently, I have been gathering, on the average, about 22 signatures a week and I know that this petition can and do much better. My fear is that this sad fact of a tragedy, especially in the autism community, will be needed to "light a fire" under this petition's mission and make it "go viral." And this sad fact should get us to see EXACTLY why God permits evil in our world, pain, sorrow, suffering and all forms of hardship and need. God, in His wisdom, knows full well that it takes a crisis in our lives to stop us in our tracks and force us to see what is really important. And, sadly, even that tragedies that so many people experience still fail to teach them what is really important is a reality. Suffering, even a life of suffering, is no guarantee that a person will become a better person, but only what he or she does with it. But, as we have seen over and over, it takes tragedy to bind us together. But, I may add, it does not take mere tragedy to draw us together. Often such tragedy had to be made high-profile and affect others also. This may explain my difficulty in gathering petition signatures: No tragedy that affects others, in connection with the autism community, has recently made the news.

None of us, of course, wills tragedy for ourselves or for anyone else. But the lessons of compassion, courage, perseverence, strength, patience and grace that often come from it, are priceless things that we would not want to be without and they only come through tragedy!

What's the Straight Scoop On Welfare, Entitlements and the Ryan Plan?

     Anyone who even casually is exposed to or follows the news can discern that the current, raging debate and controversy in the Presidential campaigns center around government programs and about what should be done about them and about our current President's supposed current role in "keeping them alive" for the purpose of "getting welfare recipients to vote for him." The philosophy of Republicans and the more the more conservative the more pronounced, is that government should not give people anything that would discourage what they call "personal responsibility," and this includes anything that would supposedly discourage the motive to work and make one's way in life. The Democrats and the more liberal the more pronounced is the befief, that while people do have "personal responsibility," that the government has a social responsibility to provide a safety net for vulnerable people in our society through government programs.
     But even before this debate that is going on, I have seen a widespread resentment of people who use government programs and misconceptions about what is welfare and about people who use government programs, including those that are, in fact, welfare. One day, recently, I was scrolling through my Facebook homepage. In my newsfeed streamed a poster bearing thse words, "So I'm supposed to be outraged about how Mitt Romney Spends HIS money? How about how President Obama spends MY tax dollars? And underneath this photo, four people clicked the "like" button, displaying their approval of the poster and its sentiment. Yes, everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions, but in an economy like this, we need to be concerned about the way all $$$ are spent.
     The posting of that photo, to me, is free speech. But posts like other are not; they lean closer to "hate speech." Many months ago one morning, I had just logged into Facebook and this vitriolic post, all in capitals, stared at me: This Facebook user was bitterly lashing out at "welfare bums" who "live it up and use the system." She went on and on with her bitter diatribe. Then she finished with, "AND YOU GO HOME AND ENJOY YOUR STEAK WHILE I EAT MY NOODLES!"
     I know that this stereotype of people who use government programs is widespread. In my network is one of many Facebook users who make no secret of their political leanings. I see nothing wrong with that as long as people share their views graciously, politely and respect differences. However, most people do not take this approach when they "get political. I have seldom seen it, in person or online. One Facebook user has been explicit in her contempt for "welfare bums." One day, I was scrolling through my homepage when a post by this user leapt out at me. Her post thundered about the uselessness of people who "sponge off on the US taxpayer" and that when this user's candidate of choice presumably took office, that the "free ride of the welfare bums will end!"
     Medicaid is the federal program that addresses the basic health care needs of qualifying US citizens. Many years ago, the Republican Governor who was in office at the time, Gov. Matt Blunt,
as a way to cut the Missouri budget, made a package of cuts to many Missouri programs, including many that helped the most vulnerable and needy in our state. He made cuts to Medicaid. So I found a petition to restore Medicaid and end the cuts to it in our state and got involved. I got a good response to my effort to collect signatures. One fellow parishioner refused to sign, saying firmly, "Sorry to punish children for the sins of their parents but I have seen adults cash in on their EBT cards to get liquor. I cannot support this." Another person refused to sign, stating, "I don't support the project; in fact, I support some of thse cuts."
     I have struggled with what to think about mandatory drug-testing, as I would like to see the serious drug epidemic come to an end. Should ANYONE be subjected to such drug-testing? Over and over, when scrolling through my homepage, I have seen this post. It says something like, "Whatever you think of my views, I'm in favor of people applying for government assistance to be drug-tested. Why should our tax dollars go to drug addicts who do not work? Those of us who do work and earn our money get drug-tested; what about those who get benefits for nothing?" Every time this status is reposted, multiple users hit the "like" button underneath it to show their approval of this status. I have no doubt that some people who use government programs of any kind use drugs, but the way the programs are set up, those who apply for government programs are carefully screened and "due diligence" is done on their lifestyles and there are stiff penalties for any who dare abuse benefits by using them for drugs.
     Food Stamps is a Federal Program that supplements the nutritional needs of qualifying US citizens. Recently, a certain politician said of the current US President and as no compliment to President Obama: "Barack Obama is the biggest Food Stamp President in history."
     The misonconception that poor people are lazy and do not want to work, is very widespread in our culture. The fact is that most DO work; many work at low-paying jobs with no benefits. Others who "live on wefare" are busy raising their families and volunteering their time. And often, many hours must be spent simply filling out forms, waiting in lines and "getting" reviewed to ensure that they qualify. But even politicians hold misconceptions about their constituents who are poor. Recently, one politician, obviously annoyed with the debate about the "merits" of making cuts to the "Big Three," Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, declared, "I agree that the poor need something. They need the opportunity to learn the responsibility of work."
     At one time I listened to a talk show run by a very conservative talk show host, mostly for entertainment. One day, though, I grew furious at him when he ranted at poor people in general. He ranted, "The poor should stop getting their taxes cut! It is time that they begin paying their share and it is called PAYING TAXES! I say an end to the free ride once and for all!" In anger, I turned my radio off! To me, this was NOT free speech but rather, hate speech. Plus, it showed how uninformed and prejudiced this talk show host was in defining "work" as being only paid, gainful employment.
     I was on Facebook one day and was circulating a petition calling for stopping any efforts to cut Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, the top entitlement programs, to balance the budget. I posted the petition's link to a certain fan page, which turned out to be a mistake. I got Facebook notifications that people were commenting on my post, so I checked to see what people were saying. People said things along the lines that many people who use these three entitlements are among "the underserving poor," whic, to the minds of those posting, included "illegal aliens" and those who refuse to work, whoever they are; people said to be irresponsible, freeriders, and parasites who "abuse the system." The fact is, that thse three programs, as "entitlement programs," are VERY strict in who can use them and they are not counted as welfare programs in that they are not (except for Medicaid) based on financial need) but on age or (in the case of Social Security Disability) on disability or, in the case of Veteran's benefits, US veteran status. In other words, one must be "deserving" to use thse programs. Yes, I know that some do slip between the cracks and use these programs illegitimately, but they are exceptions.
     We talk about the value of "stay-at-home moms" on one hand, but when poor woman use government benefits and take on this role, the tone changes to the need for those woman to "get off their duffs and go to work." Years ago, I read an article called, We Value Stay-At-Home Moms, Unless They are Poor." The point of the article was my point here, that we talk "out of both ends of our mouths" when we laud women who stay at home while their husbands work paid jobs, while castigating poor women on benefits who take on this role, trashing as "lazy, welfare bums," those moms who used Aid to Dependent Children (now Temporary Assistance To Needy Families) to make ends meet. Years ago, in college class, we were discussing the topic of depency on the government as "Big Brother." The topic got on that of poor single moms who use government assistance. The professor was saying, "These women can get out and work. They just have to take their children with them, even if they have to take them on the bus."
     I know and freely acknowledge that there are always those people who slip between the cracks and "work the system" and use it in their unfair favor. I have witnessed that and I do not condone it at all. Some who collect benefits do not use them for the purpose that thse benefits were intended. They hurt not only the taxpayers and waste and steal government $$$, but they give a bad name to all the deserving MAJORITY of those who are forced, by life circumstances to use these programs. Most people who use thse programs, given the choice and the right circumstances and where needed, the support, would much rather be gainfully employed or be helped to start their own businesses. Most know how they are perceived by their society. I see posts angrily castigating those who make "collecting benefits their careers" and are being aided and abetted by the government which is now accused of "funding the lazy." I know that many people will continue to entertain the notion that people who use government programs are somehow able to enjoy lives of ease and even lavish lifestyles. Those who may actually do that are in the MINORITY of those who lie to the system and who should not be collecting any government benefits.
    And what about the Ryan Plan? I have not mentioned that until now, but a HUGE part of this proposed program includes cuts, over time, to these programs and such cuts would especially hurt future generations.  Since the author of this proposed program is the running mate of Mitt Romney, and it is a major part of the Presidential race to the White House, we all need to take the time to inform ourselves about what can profoundly affect almost all US citizens who are not independently wealthy. It personally angers me greatly that, instead of raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires (which even some of them are calling for!), we are having to base our votes, in part, on a plan that proposes to balance the budget on the backs of those who can least afford it!
     I am providing materials which give facts about the candidates, welfare, entitlements and the Ryan Plan. I hope that you will take the time to read these materials and educate yourself about things that profoundly affect all of our lives. In my opinion, if we would spend more time doing "due diligence" about these poeople who have power over all areas of our lives, we would make more informed decisions about who rises to power. In a free country, we get the government we deserve.
    
    
http://cobacourses.creighton.edu/businesscommunity/new773/wfm.htm
This article gives the facts about welfare. The writers are based in Omaha, Nebraska but the article includes a national study and answers basic questions.

http://usaunemploymentbenefits.com/welfare-facts/
This article gives the basics about government programs in general and links to other informative sites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Path_to_Prosperity
This is a comprehensive analysis of the Ryan Plan, very detailed.

http://americanthinker.com/2011/06/ok_just_what_is_the_ryan_medicare_plan.html
This article discusses the Ryan Plan is is affects Medicare.   

http://politifact.com
This is a comprehensive website that examintes the truth and accuracy of the words of politicians

Politics and Seeking A Consistent Life Ethic

This year, as in no other recent year, what are known as "life issues" vs. "choice issues" have been brought before us as has not been seen in recent campaigns for re-election, if you follow the news. The issues I'm talking about are those that seem to be viewed by many as the "central" battleground life or choice" issues. I'm talking about mainly abortion and, to a lesser degree, euthanasia or physicial-assisted suicide (lesser because there is somewhat, I think,less controversy surrounding end-of-life issues than beginning-of-life issues). It began months ago during the primaries when some candidates called for legislation that would make contraception illegal and for the mandating of vaginal-probe ultrasounds for women considering abortion. I know that there is very strong emotion wrapped up in these issues on both sides and that differences are seen as personal attacks. I find this quite unfortunate. But, with the possible exception "marriage equality for LGBT people, nothing divides us more than the issue of abortion.

How is it that abortion and euthanasia came to be seen as the cental "battleground" life issues, especially the former? I don't think that abortion would ever been politicized and become so polarizing had it not been for the Roe vs. Wade ruling by the US Supreme Court in 1973 and became legal. And since then, the Church of the people of faith and many nonprofit organizations have seen ending abortion as the "primary moral or "life" issue of the day and everything else has been seen as only secondary. The argument has always been, "We are talking about our right to life in the womb and unless this right is kept safe for all of us, all the other rights we want and cry out for become meaningless." These hard-core "right-to-life" advocates do have a point, that our lives as unborn humans must be kept as safe and sacred as our lives outside the womb should be. My question is that are our lives outside the womb actually so sacred or so safe anymore, either? I wonder. Our murder rate is the highest of any country in the developed world. Many born children die daily, from things as varied as card accidents, drowning, serious childhood illness and even murder at the hands of adults or peers. This is not to mention all the other deaths that occur daily of teens and adults that are untimely and unnatural. Why does not anyone talk about being "pro-life" about these most serious matters? And poverty typically breeds crime, including murder. And it causes much hunger and illness and lack of access to health care and all of thse can kill. Why do we not use the word "pro-life in reference to poverty and related issues like access to health care for all?

I know what the argument is by confining abortion as the life issue of focus. The argument is: "The most vulnerable person is the unborn because he or she is totally helpless and totally unable to speak of for self." This is true, that the unborn are 100 percent unable to advocate for themselves. The argument that hard-core "right-to-life" advcates give for not treating the lives of others as top priority is this: "At least they are alive and are able to cry out for themselves." Well, up to a point they can. But we know that society makes it very hard to "find your voice" if you lack money or social connections. I am seeing this firsthand as I daily struggle to gather signatures for my petition for a group of people whose needs, in many ways, are going unmet because of ignorance and lack of resources. My frustration is that, to support a certain candidate and political party, and support the life issues that they oficially stand for, we have to withdraw support for the other candidate and for the life issues that they support. To stand for conservatives, we protect the unborn and infirm, dying people. But we withdraw support for the protection of the lives of everyone else from birth to old age. To support liberal candidates, we protect human life from birth to old age. But we withhold support from the protection of unborn human life and from those who are infirm or dying. I find this most frustrating and confusing. It has made me just want to stay at home on Election Day. I find it almost impossible to choose, pitting some lives against others.

I happen to belong to a Church body that, like so many others, has implicitly, if not explicitly, sent a strong message that to be true to God and His teachings, we should be "conservative" and this implies that we vote conservative. And to do that means to vote for Republicans and to support Republican "values." We are told in such church bodies, "Protect the unborn with your votes." Well, which party is oficially "anti-abortion"? The conservatives in the Republican party (there are liberal Republicans who support abortion just as there are conservative Democrats who oppose abortion). Those in the Republican party have, especially since 1973 and Roe vs. Wade, made the lives of the unborn their central life issue through for calling for restrictiong abortion, even criminalizing it. The official stance of Democrats has been to safeguard all life from birth to death, through government programs and funding of vital services for the public's protection.  Those who are "pro-choice" (whether democrats or Republicans) are more convinced that life in the womb may be "potential life" as opposed to "actual life" and therefore, that the expectant mom should, in crisis situations, have "choice" available. Even hard-core "pro-choice," liberal Democrats are NOT "pro-abortion" in the sense that they affirm this procedure as the best "choice" for anyone. They simply, for the most part, believe that this "choice should be available" for those who find themselves in difficult or crisis situations. Yes, there are hard-core "abortion-on-demand" proponents but I see them as being in the minority. Even "pro-choice" people merely see abortion as an unfortunate "choice" of last resort. As I read it in my Bible, I see that the lives of ALL people, at all stages of development, are equally vluable and sacred to God. So what does this mean for electing candidates where we have to pit some lives against others? And God, unlike "pro-choice" advocates, definitely sees unborn human life not as potential humanb life but as ACTUAL human life.

In the Church body to which I belong, the life issues espouses by the Democrats are seen as "secondary issues." The "primary issue" as seen by my Church body, is ending abortion and defending the unborn. We should be doing this! But what about all those other lives that are just as important and sacred to God? This question was posed to a prominent Christian leader who appeared on a major news network. The Host asked this Christian leader something like,"What about the Republican attempts, through their proposals, to cut back on services like firefighters, law enforcement, teachers, veterans, the elderly and the disabled?"  His response to that was, "Those are secondary issues." The main issue? "We need to defend traditional marriage and defend the lives of the unborn." For purposes of this post, I will NOT be going into GLBT issues but only into the "life issues." Who is to determine what lives are "primary" and which are only "secondary"? I know that Catholic nuns and others who call themselves "progressive Christians" have been speaking out against the Ryan budget plan which calls for cuts in essentail services which we need and which benefit all of us, especially the most vulnerable among us: the poor, senior citizens, veterans and those with disabilities. But I see the almost TOTAL silence on the part of those among "conservative Church bodies, Christian leaders and pastors about the Ryan plan, as disturbing and depressing. It seems that most in conservative "religious right" circles are refusing to see the moral big picture and see it reduced to just two issues: protecting the unborn and safeguarding tradional marriage. We ought to do this, I fully agree! But what about all the other moral issues that are embraced by "liberals" such as poverty, justice/injustice, education, ending corporate greed and political corruption, health care for all, and the other important issues? Must thse go begging if we embrace one set of moral values? Why must we choose?

So, as I go the the polls on November 2, as always, I will be torn and conflicted. I know that many people fall solidly on the side of liberal or conservative and that, if they exercise their right to vote, their minds will be made up. In fact, many of such people may already have their minds made up at this moment. That is fine. What is NOT fine is when people, whether individuals, Church bodies, Christian leaders or organizations tell me how I "should vote." I do not tell anyone else how they should vote and they should not tell me how to vote. And how can Christian leaders or Church bodies make any claims that God has any monopoly on any political party, that He is Republican or Democrat? Oh, they never come out and say it like that; they just say, "But Biblcal values are consistent with what Republicans stand for." That is true of SOME of the things that this party stands for. But this same things can be said about SOME of the things that the Democrats stands for. And There are things about BOTH parties that are not consistent with Biblical values. Call me biased, but I see most of the hate and nastiness, whether you talk about the political campaigns or their supporters, as coming from the "Tea Party" element of the Republican party.

As I stated in my last post, someone in my social networks saw a recent status update of mine and told me to state my political party for all to know. I will go on the record as saying that I am what some would call a Pro-life Democrat, a moderate, and an Independent who supports many Democratic values. I believe that we should shout out about what we are FOR, as the Bible does, whether than scream about what we are against. I see far too much screaming and railing, from politicians and from so many in "real life" and online. And I want to shout for what is called a "consistent life ethic" that upholds and affirms ALL life, starting from concetion to death.

http://www.consistent-life.org/
This website is set up for a nonprofit of people who seek to pull together all life issues and to unite people from all poltical viewpoints and to declare all life as sacred. This site is full of information, it educates and links to other helpful resources.

http://ncronline.org/news/politics/which-presidential-candidate-truly-pro-life
This article examines how both the Presidential candidates actually relate to life issues, especially abortion and gives perspective.

Getting Ready for November 6

     It is not possible to tune into the news, whether on TV , newspaper, magazines or through social networks, without hearing about the 2012 US Presidential campaigns and constant anaysis of the candidates and sound bites from both of them. As a regular Facebook user, I find myself getting tired of hearing about it and I get very tired of all the sponsored ads that keep flooding my homepage, and more seem to be coming from the Romney campaign than from the Obama campaign. But I know that there are two full months, at least, before it will be all oficially over and we will stop seeing all those campaign ads. I know that these events are located in my country, the US, but as any President and his administration make many decisions involving foreign policies affecting the entire world, that who will spend the next four years in the White House, as any four-year period, will profoundly affect the rest of the world.
     I'm not writing this to tell anyone how to vote and no one has any right to tell anyone how to vote or which candidate to support. All anyone can ethically do is suggest that you check the facts about the candidates, do your "due diligence" on them  and do your research so you can make an informed decision when you cast your vote and that your vote is not based on a personal like/dislike for a candidate, loyalty to those who tell you how you "should vote," or opinions formed on your listening to campaign ads or partisan radio or talk show hosts. We all have different value systems and different visions of what we think of the direction that the country should "go in." There is nothing wrong with having strong opinions and talking about them. What is wrong is when talking about these opinions morphs into personal attacks, whether on the candidates or on those who support them.
It seems that it is very hard to disagree about political issues graciously and respectfully. It is not for nothing that we are warned, "Do not talk about politics or religion."
     Two separate times, including earlier this year on President's Day, I had sent causes invitations to almost everyone in my social networks who uses Causes, to a Facebook causes called, "Join the Fight to Stop Dishonoring the President." The mission of this cause has been to restore honor and dignity to the office of the Presidency. This honor and respect have been lost and that seems to have sharply declined when President Obama was elected in 2008. I offended a few people simply by sending them invitations to support this cause and they removed me from their friends lists. Many who normally support me, did not support this cause. And I fear that many, many people will cast their votes not because of enthusiasm for their preferred candidate but because they are so against the candidate that they do not like.
     In my Facebook newsfeed, I have seen posts by people who have gone on record as saying that they had their minds made up, well in advance, on how they will vote on November 2. More than a few times, I have seen people "like" pages or post photos indicating "I will NOT vote for Obama" or "I will vote Obama out" "I will vote this person out of a job," and show a photo of President Obama. The supporters of Mitt Romney and the supporters of President Obama have gotten relentless in attacking the other's candidate. I know I will sound biased but I see much more hate, vitiol and trashing from the opponents of President Obama; I cannot log into Facebook without seeing posts trashing the President or at least making slurs that make no secret of the Facebook user's contempt of the President. Some of my most loyal supporters are people who differ with me sharply on political matters, though I don't know if they are aware of this. I would hope that even political differences would not ruin my rapport with them but I'm too aware that political differences are often seen as personal attacks and offenses that cannot be tolerated. One Facebook page is called something like, "1,000,000 Strong Against Mitt Romney." Why is is easier or more fun, to scream about what we are against than to shout out about what we are for?
     This weekend, when Mitt Romney chose his running mate, Paul Ryan, the author of the very controversial "Ryan Plan," the Presidential campaign has really picked up steam. This choice of "running mate" will keep this controversial proposed piece of legislation in sharp focus for awhile. As this plan is an very important part of the Romney campaign, when considering whether to vote for Mitt Romney, any voter should know what the "Ryan Plan" is and what it would mean for self and family. I will provide links at the end of this post where you can find out more about the Ryan Plan and educate yourself about what it is.
     I bring up the Ryan Plan because it is a central part in the platform for the Romney campaign and because his running mate is the creator of this proposed legislation. We cannot afford to be ignorant of it and what it would mean for us and our families. We are living in a time which is the very first time when it has proposals to cut many government programs or services has ever been put before the public but that time is here. Republicans are the party which focuses on minimizing government spending but not until the Tea Party politicians have occupied seats in Congress, have I ever heard talk of federal cuts to Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. And these cuts are part of the Ryan Plan. I know that there are many people who may never have had to use government programs and may think they may never need them. And I hope they never will be in the position to need them! But we never know what life may hold for us, and we may find ourselves in situations where we may need to use a government program (s) and, if we are fortunate to live long enough, we will need to use Medicare. The only people who need not concern themselves with what the Ryan Plan will mean to their families and themselves are those who are wealthy and whose money will cover them even in times of illness or emergencies. Since that is not most of us, we owe it to our families and ourselves to educate ourselves about the Ryan Plan.
     Recently, in response to another Facebook user's slur against President Obama, and being fed up with seeing anti-Obama posts and comments, I posted a status update that was not directed at anyone in particular. I lamented all the hateful posts and comments that I was seeing more and more of; I said that while I did not want to sound biased, that I saw more hate being directed toward Obama and his supporters than toward Romney and his supporters. I got few "likes" or comments. One Facebook user said to me, "I'm a Republican and I am a proud one; okay, come out and say that you are a Democrat." Actually, I grew up in a family of Democrats and I support many Democrat policies, but I also support some policies that are considered Republican. I an Independent, I told the Facebook user in my comment.  Politically, I have always felt alienated and caught-in-the-middle because I sympathize with many of my family's views, which are strongly Democratic. But I also sympathize with some of views that are considered more "religious right" in nature, though I do not consider myself a "conservative Christian." As I read my Bible, God is neither Republican or Democrat. I do not think that even the Church, pastors or Christian leaders should tell people what candidate to support or how to vote. Both major parties have strengths and both parties have weakness.
     Like everyone else, I am excited about the outcome of this Presidential campaign but I will be relieved when it will end. I know that as my active petition calls for funds for a cause, that it will take resolution of the budget crisis in Washington before any action can be taken on what I am calling for. In many ways, it does not even matter who occupies the White House as the President can do nothing without the support and co-operation of Congress. This is why my petition is addressed to both Houses of the US Congress as well as to the US President, along with both Houses of my state Congress and to my state Governor.
     As the weeks continue, we can expect to see the Presidential campaign and other political campaigns, get nastier and nastier. We should base our votes not on attack ads or the opinions of talk show hosts but the facts and I will provide links to a few resources.

http://votesmart.org/
This is the website for Project Vote Smart, which provides a wealth of facts about politicians and this website is easy to navigate with its search bar.

http://politifact.com/
This is the website where the words and actions of politicians are evaluated and examined and where the record is said to be able to be set straight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Path_to_Prosperity_The_Ryan_Plan
This is the website that provides comprehensive information about the Ryan Plan but it is a lot of reading and may be tedious to wade through.

http://americanthinker.com/2011/06/ok_just_what_is_the_ryan_medicare_plan.html



    

Children With Autism Become Adults With Autism

        A chain of events in my life, my observations and research have underscored the need for funds for a population that is going to only grow in the years to come. I'm talking about the ever-growing number of those autistic young people who age out of the school system and out of resources, services and support. I have created a petition to the US government to release funds to each of the 50 states to be allocated to various services for adults with autism in each state. My petition, new and which I am having trouble getting the widget for on this site, should be found at this location:
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-u-s-senate-the-u-s-house-of-representatives-president-obama-release-funds-for-services-for-adults-with-autism-to-each-of-the-50-states#share. And do not just sign it but share it. I have created a Facebook page that should make the petition much more sharable, as it is hard to share from the petition site. If you have a Facebook account, "like" my page at https://www.facebook.com/ChildrenWithAutismBecomeAdultsWithAutism and share the petition from there.
       Autism is a lifelong developmental disability that, throughout a person's life span, affects how he or she sees and relates to self, others and the outside world. It isn't a mental illness or a disease that is able to be overcome or cured. Its a neurological (of the brain) disorder whose cause is unknown. So children with autism, even if they are fortunate enough to make great gains through early childhood intervention, usually continue to need resources and support services throughout life in order to avoid falling through the cracks, developing mental health issues, dependency on government assistance when they could find employment, or avoid entering into lives of homelessness or crime because of lack of services. In the US as I'm sure is the case in other developed countries, children and teens under 18 are entitled to diagnostic, treatment and support services. When they reach 18 or 21 (depending on the laws in each state), they are no longer entitled to any of these even though most continue to need these services to be successful in life. And that's true whether they have more severe, classic autism or the higher-functioning subtypes like Asperger's Syndrome or Pervasive Development Syndrome-Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS).
       As autism spectrum disorders have always been with us, even though the diagnosis has not, there are many in the "lost generation," many of us whose cluster of challenges would probably had gotten us an autism spectrum diagnosis if we had grown up today. Many in this "lost generation" grew up often being labeled with "personality disorders," or were called "mentally retatrded," "mentally ill," "behaviorally disordered," emotionally disturbed," or other unsavory labels and inappropriate interventions. Still others never received any attention. Today, many in this "lost generation" are suffering in silence, longing for answers as to why our lives have taken the twists and turns that they have. Some adults, even in their 50s and 60s, are fortunate enough to have the money, time and access to resources to get autism evaluations late in life, and find answers and closure. For the most part, professionals like psychologists, psychiatrists, neurologists and other related professionals and autism agencies which serve children and teens, cannot and will not diagnose or treat adults because of a lack of training and research that includes adults in autism research.
       In my own life, because our daughter, high-functioning, has been diagnosed with autism, I have, over time, self-diagnosed myself along the spectrum because of my childhood, teen years and adulthood of challenges that could not be explained by the labels I was given when I was growing up. I remain merely self-diagnosed because no professionals in my area feel able to diagnose autism spectrum disorders in adults. Also, it is believed that my biological dad (now deceased), who often had been treated for major mental health issues, probably also had an undiagnosed autism spectrum disorder. Thanks to my daughter and the autism awareness I have gained through her, I probably may never even be self-diagnosed. Yet even with self-diagnosis, not having my suspicions confirmed leaves me with a residue of the feelings of shame, fears, anxiety, frustration, lack of identity and confusion that I had growing up. Only the certainty of an official diagnosis can give answers and give me the feeling of finally letting go. As for our daughter, we have hopes for her future as she is thriving in public school, getting good grades, enjoying life, developing her talents  and giving us much joy. But when she ages out of the school system, we know that we can't guarantee her future as autism services for adults are very few in my home state. But even if she should not need such services anymore, many other adults may and they deserve to have access to those services.
       A whopping, estimated 70 percent (even higher) of adults on the spectrum are unemployed or underemployed, meaning that they work in jobs that don't use their talents and skills. In so many of these cases, it's because of lack of social skills and life skills. Many of these adults could be channeled into developing businesses of their own because of their interests and talents, with the right supports and resources to make that happen. As it stands now, many of these adults find themselves having to use government assistance, many develop mental health issues and heavily consume the mental health system; still others are homeless or commit crimes, particularly stalking and sex crimes. Many others are vulnerable to becoming crime victims because of their poor social skills. This epidemic affects all of us.
      Even if you do not deal with autism in your daily life or have personal connections with it, you probably know people who do. Neither you or your family or society will benefit if such a large population remains a tax burden on society or even commits crimes because of unmet needs; but you will benefit if they get the help they need to contribute to society.

     I have tried to get the widget for my petition to make it accessible from this blogspot, but I have not been successful. If any of you knows how I can make this work, feel free to leave a comment. First, sign the petition and then share it. Find the petition right here:
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-u-s-senate-the-u-s-house-of-representatives-president-obama-release-funds-for-services-for-adults-with-autism-to-each-of-the-50-states#share
    

About Government Programs

          The other day I was scrolling through my homepage when a post caught my eye. The poster declared, "So I'm supposed to be outraged at what Mitt Romney does with HIS money? What about what President Obama does with MY tax dollars?" And underneath this poster, four people had hit the "like" button to signal their approval of this poster's sentiment.
          Many months ago, I logged into Facebook one morning and an obviously angry, bitter post jumped out at me. The Facebook user posted with all capital letters, lashing out viciously at "welfare bums" who "live the good life on my tax dollars." This user let her subjects have it with her vitriolic rant. The user finished savagely: "AND YOU CAN GO HOME AND ENJOY YOUR STEAK WHILE I HAVE MY NOODLES!"
          One Facebook user who has been in my social network for a long time, makes no secret of her political leanings and has made clear her resentment for people who use government assistance. One day, I was logged into Facebook and was scrolling through my homepage. One of this user's posts jumped out at me. This user's status went something like: " People who depend on Food Stamps, SSI, Medicaid, or other welfare programs are sponging off MY taxes. Mr. President, I'm sick and tired of the way you spend MY tax $$$ to spread the wealth! One day the free ride will end and these welfare bums will have to get out and work!"
          Years ago, when our Missouri Governor Matt Blunt rose to power, he made a package of deep and painful cuts to the Missouri Medicaid program. When he left office, I got involved in circulating a petition to restore Medicaid to its original state, ending those cuts. A good number of people signed the petition but I was struck by the responses of those who would not sign. I circulated the petition at our local church where we were attending at the time. One fellow parishioner refused to sign, declaring: "Sorry but I will not sign this. I hate to punish the children for the sins of the parents but I have seen adults pull out the EBT cards and use them to get alcohol." I approached another person twice and the second time, I was told, "Sorry, I am not signing. I just don't don't believe I'm informed enough about this." One more person I approached said, "No I'm not signing. I agree with some of those cuts." One fellow parishioner simply said, "I'm not interested."
          Over and over, in looking at my Facebook homepage, I have seen this post. It says something like: "Whatever you think of my views, I hope you will have the courage to agree with this: We are in favor of those who apply for public assistance having to submit to drug-testing. Why should our tax dollars have to go to drug addicts who won't work? Those of us who work and earn our money have to submit to drug testing; what about those who want government benefits for nothing?" Every time someone reposts this status, other Facebook users hit the "like" button underneath this post to signal their approval of this status.
          Not long ago, a certain politician, meaning his words as no compliment to President Obama, declared with a measure of contempt, "Our current President is the biggest Food Stamp President in history."
          A few months ago, in Washingtom and in Congress, politicians were battling over the national budget and over the whether or not to make cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And a politician, clearly fed up with this debate, stated: "I think we need to give the poor something. No argument with that. We need to give them the opportunity to pay their way and to know the dignity of personal responsibilty through requring them to get out and work."
          Years ago, I liked a certain ultraconservative talk show host and listened to his radio talk show for a time. I agreed with his sentiments on a number of issues though I thought he bullied those he didn't agree with. One day, though, my opinions on his bullying were confirmed when he ranted about "those welfare bums." This talk show host ranted, "It's high time for these poor, welfare bums to start paying their fair share! It's called paying taxes, people! I say we need to end the free ride once and for all!" Angrily, I turned the radio off.
           One day, I got on Facebook to circulate an online petition calling for President Obama to fight all efforts to make cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security in the name of balancing the budget and paying down the national debt. I posted the petition on a certain Facebook fan page. This proved to be an apparent mistake. Checking my Facebook notifications, I could see that I got prompt comments on the petition. To sum up the comments, Facebook users on that page declared that users of "the big three" were often among the "undeserving poor" who live lives of fiscal irresponsibility, who seek a free ride in life and are social parasites who use the system to their own ends.
           More recently, I scrolled through my homepage one day and saw several Facebook users post an article about one wealthy couple, who collected Food Stamps yet who nevertheless enjoyed hugely extravagant, lavish lifestyles of travel and leisure.
          Years ago, I read an article that fully echoed my sentiments about the hypocritical mind-set that applauds the virtues of stay-at-home mothers, while at the same time despising and trashing as "welfare bums" those moms who use the Temorary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF and was once called Aid to Dependent Children), to stay at home with their children. That article was called, "We Value At-Home Moms Unless They are Poor." About that time, one person said to me and others, "If these moms can't afford to drive they can take their kids with them on the bus and go to work."
          Many years ago, I was viewing a talk show. When it was one troubled guest's time to present her needs, the guest psychologist who was advising her on her situation said something that has stuck in my mind to this day. This woman snapped at the person, "And MY tax dollars will NOT be going to subsidize you staying at home and doing nothing!"
          Currently, I have been a frequent visitor to this one website for a nonprofit organization that awards grants to individuals who have short-term, one-time financial needs which can't be met anywhere else. In taking note of the anonymous applicationsthat are posted, I have noticed a trend. At this website, donors get to recommend the applications that they would like to see get funded first. It seems that the applications that are prioritized by the nonprofit, that get most recommended by donors for faster funding and therefore tend to get funded fastest, are the ones placed by employed applicants. The applicants who are listed as using government assistance seem to get fewer donor recommendations for funding and seem to take more time getting funded.
          All these examples and many, many more, only underscore how those who use government programs as their source of income are perceived by society. Yes, I know that this one blog isn't going to make any dent in changing how many people see government programs and those who use them. The resentment is too deep-seated and widespread for that. It's just that I'm seeing so much of this resentment that amounts almost to behaving like people actually get rich using the programs and use the programs as a ticket to "the good life."
          Now I'm fully aware, as much as anyone, that there are people who abuse the system and government assistance, just as there are people who will abuse any good or service. This is why the use of these government programs, especially means-tested, need-based programs, come with a set of strict rules for screening, benefits and carry strict penalties if these terms are found to be violated. Persons who "use the system" for their own ends and are caught only increase the stigma of using these programs for all other users. Lazy people who are unwilling to work have always been with us. That's why the Bible says, "If a man will not work, let him not have the right to eat."
          Here's what everyone needs to know about Social Security and Medicare. These two programs are "entitlement" programs for all those age 65 and over where they draw off their own work records or off the work record of a spouse. These programs are a "safety net" for senior citizens when they retire. These "entitlement programs" are unlike the more stigmatizing programs where users must must follow many more rules to become eligible for these programs and to remain eligible and where they must be periodically "reviewed." Survivor's Benefits and the Veteran's Administration (VA) are also "entitlement programs with little stigma.
           Social Security Disability (SSD) is also an "entitlement program" for people whose disabilities are documented as ones that render them unable to get and keep a job. People who use SSD are also covered under Medicare. Use of this program comes with period reviews that are meant to prove that the user is still disabled." This program carries more stigma than Social Security for seniors as it's for younger people under 65. SSD is incredibly difficult to be approved for and calls for much paperwork and standard procedures to be followed. Attempts to get and keep employment can endanger SSD benefits and signal that the user "can work and therefore is not disabled."
          Supplementary Security Income (SSI) is needs-based and for people who are documented as living below the poverty level and/or have a documented disability. These things hold true for the federal Food Stamp program and Medicaid, which is administered by each of the 50 states. WIC (Women, Infants and Children) covers children age 5 and under and who are born to moms using the TANF program.These government programs carry the most stigma of all, came attached with many rules to follow for eligibility and can change at any time. Users must be "reviewed" on a regular basis. These are programs no one wants to need but they serve as lifesavers if needed to survive.
          I know that many people are fortunate enough to be in life circumstances where they have never had to use any government programs and have the $$$ to not need them, whatever their circumstances. I would not wish them to need these programs. However, we never know what life will hold for us and if we will need any of these programs at any given time. People who trash "welfare bums" and the users of needs-based programs do not realize that any of us at any time can find ourselves in situations where we may be compelled to use these needs-based programs or even so-called entitlements like SSD or Survivor's Benefits. And if we US citizens are blessed enough to live to turn age 65, we will use Social Security and Medicare.
          Despite the stories of wealthy people who collect government programs and others who apply for benefits under false pretenses, these are exceptions, not the rule. We ought not to make our judgments on anything based on exceptions. The overwhelming majority of people who use entitlements like SSD or means-tested programs like SSI, Food Stamps, Medicaid and others, do not get wealthy on these programs. Not by any means! People who use these programs do so just to survive and benefits cover bare needs and not frills or extras. There is little to no incentive to save $$$ as there is often not enough money for the entire month. And married people who use these programs get penalized which reflects the value, or lack of it, that the US government places on marriage. Most users would much rather, if they had the choice, be gainfully employed instead of using these programs. Also, we must never forget that these programs keep many people from life in the streets who would other wise be homeless. Medicare and even Medicaid reduce the number of uninsured people who add to ever-rising healthcare costs.
          And now our US government wants to make cuts to these programs, not only to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security but also to all the needs-based programs. All in the name of balancing the budget and paying down the deficit! Even Catholic Bishops are taking note of the current debate and are decrying these proposed cuts as immoral and inhumane.
          If you are among those who tend to feel contempt for those who use government assistance and especially the needs-based variety, remember that you or a loved one may one day find yourselves in circumstances where you need such assistance.