The ad for the bear leads off praising the great American grizzly bear. This is the same bear that was been delisted from the endangered species list in 2017 and of which the State of Wyoming (under the guidance of the Game and Fish Department) is now planning to allow hunters to kill up to 23. In the 40 years of protection, the population increased from 150 to 690. That’s only about 12 per year. So we are going to kill off 2 years worth of growth, kill 13 females and therefore future growth (from the second-slowest reproducing mammal in the country), and possibly kill other bears because of course there will be hunters who cannot tell a grizzly from a black or brown bear.

I guess the Trumpy Bear grizzly is to remind us of the species that we are going to kill off, little by little. I mean, do you really think that any hunter who wants his trophy is going to pay attention to the number already killed and not bag his bear? So, yes, let’s celebrate a President who is allowing this to happen. Teddy Roosevelt is rolling over in his grave to think of what the GOP under Trump is allowing to happen to the wildlife and environs he did so much to protect.

May God watch over the grizzlies and allow as many as possible to escape the hunters.

Advertisements

All these people who claim to be pro-life are simply pro-birth. They do not support any policies that would ensure that mother and child can survive. They do not support pre-natal and neo-natal care for mother or child, they do not support child care or child nutrition plans, they do not support education for child and possibly the mother if she is young and did not finish school because she was pregnant. No, all the pro-lifers are interested in are in forcing a life to be born, but with no guarantee that the life will be given the same chances they had.

Anti-abortionists are almost as bad. They are trying to force their views on others. Abortion is something the mother may be considering because she is too young to be a mother, because she has no support structure to help her care for a child, because the scans indicate there will be medical issues in the child that she will not be able to address, because her own health is endangered by the pregnancy, or some other reason. No one should make a decision about abortion for anyone else unless they are prepared to provide the emotional, pscyhological or financial support of not having an abortion when a mother or family feels that is the only option they have.

Many pro-choice people would never choose to have an abortion, but they would not stop anyone else from having one if that is their decision. And that is a major difference between the two sides. Personally, I believe that abortions should be avoided if possible, but I recognize that it is not always possible. I would never force anyone to incur the responsibility for another life if that person were unable to assume the responsibility.

Taking money away from facilities that provide abortion IN ADDITION TO ALL THE OTHER WELL CARE SERVICES THEY OFFER is a travesty. To say that canceling money to, for example, Planned Parenthood, would stop abortions is not taking into account all the well care counseling that Planned Parenthood and other clinics provide to women and men. With all the anti-abortion legislation in so many states, to say that women will have other places to go if they want an abortion is insane. Yes, they can cross state or even country lines, if they can afford it, but most women are not in that position. Abortions will once again become a back alley threat to the lives of women. Of course, that probably doesn’t matter because most of those screaming that abortion is wrong is men. I wonder if they have any clue what goes on in a woman’s mind if she feels that an abortion is her only option. Probably not, as men tend not to think in terms of anything outside their own grandeur. Excuse me, not all men. Only those in positions of power that they have to protect at all costs. Treating women as equals means that they would have that many more competitors for their power, and they just can’t have that.

This has been an ongoing button for me – people who scream about keeping the government and other people out of their business are all too intent on imposing their beliefs on others, rather than allowing other people to make their own decisions. Maybe if these men, who traditionally have done little for their own families except bring home a paycheck, actually had to be involved in raising a child or being home to care for a pregnant woman who is confined to bed for months because the pregnancy is wreaking havoc on her body, or has a teenage daughter who doesn’t want to be pregnant (and it does take two to make a girl pregnant), just maybe he would be a little more sympathetic.

By the way, birth control works better than giving lip service to abstinence to prevent pregnancy. Reduce the number of pregnancies, and there would be a lot less need for abortions. But, that’s a cause and effect process, and most pro-lifers and anti-abortionists aren’t interested in preventing pregnancy, they just want women to continue to have children and be dependent upon them for the scraps they are willing to dole out.

My President would be a respected world leader, not a blustery bully laughed at by everyone else in private.
My President would support all the people who make America a great place to live, not just those who say nice things about him or shower him with gifts.
My President would be reasonably intelligent; he wouldn’t have to be a genius, but he would understand cause and effect.
My President would understand how to use taxpayer money to protect and serve the American people, not to waste it on his own frequent holidays at unsecured locations.
My President would surround himself with people who want to make America a better place, not an anrchy with no rules.
My President would support men, women and children; he would make decisions that would give them all the best chances to succeed in life. (This would include accessible and affordable healthcare and education, from birth to death.)
My President would not send Americans into harm’s way because he never outgrew the need to play war games. War is not a game, and has real, long term, repercussions.
My President would have proudly served, despite bone spurs (which apparently were never removed but he no longer has). My father had no money and flat feet and still managed to served in the US military before he was awarded citizenship. At least one member of my family has served this country every generation we have been here, something the current President cannot claim.
My President would not back out of carefully crafted and negotiated multilateral agreements just because his predecessor signed them.
My President would not be enveloped in constant scandal. I once said of President Bill Clinton that I would rather have him screw an intern than the entire country. Our current President appears to screw anyone and everyone.

I just heard that Twitter closed down accounts of suspected trolls and fake accounts. Conservatives are screaming that they lost thousands of followers overnight. Do these screaming Conservatives realize that the “thousands of followers” that were lost weren’t even real followers? If they can’t tell the difference between actual followers and fakes, how can they tell the difference between anything else? I, for one, would rather know that my 10 followers were real people than someone else’s 100 followers were all fake. But I guess it doesn’t matter when how loud you can be is more important that your ability to reason and play well with others.

Adding to this, and making me laugh, is the complaint that all these actions were taken against conservative accounts. Maybe its because the more liberal folks actually talk with people and don’t just tweet. I’ve noticed that conservatives are more likely to complain on twitter than liberals, who don’t get noticed because they don’t have the same presence there. So, proportionately, yes, more conservative twitter accounts would be taken down that liberal ones if the fake accounts were all conservative-leaning. It must have something to do with the more open minds of the liberals and the refusal of conservatives to listen to any viewpoint different from their own.

A teacher, who often doesn’t have the resources needed in the classroom and uses their own money to help support her students, who is considered to be not worth the time of day to pay a decent salary or be entitled to a pension or decent healthcare for the work she has to do, now should be armed.

Where will the money come from to pay for the training to use the weapon? Who will be paying for the guns? (Why can we afford guns in the classroom, but not books or other supplies?) How are we going to secure the guns from unhappy students?

Most importantly, how can anyone with any experience with guns expect that a teacher with a pistol will be able to stop someone with a semi-automatic rifle? Or are the teachers supposed to be protecting their students with semi-automatics of their own?

And kudos to the Florida Legislature, for refusing to discuss guns, but declare porn to be dangerous, especially to teenagers, and also to think that forcing schools to place “In God We Trust” on the schools will make a difference.

This is how children will be taken out of schools and either taught at home or not taught at all. Yes, this is making America great again, if you think that life in the old, wild, lawless West was great.

A little over 5 years ago this nation was shocked by the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Every shooting at a school has since been followed by prayers and condolences, but its always too soon to look at our gun laws, which have been relaxed since then. Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School is the site of the latest victims of politicians with the power to protect our children, but not the inclination.

I hate to wish this on them, but I can only hope that the next school targeted is one of the exclusive private schools attended by children of Republican congressmen. I’d like to see them continue to say that its a mental health issue and guns are not responsible. I don’t want more children hurt or killed, but I want the GOP to know how other parents feel when their children are in danger because of the inaction of the party of family values.

I stress again, I don’t want more children hurt or killed, but I want GOP congressman to know the pain their inaction for years has caused.

Apparently our esteemed Congressmen (that includes our Senators) have forgotten the basics of getting a bill turned into a law.

The short and non-tedious version:
1. Either house creates and votes on a bill.
2. Then the other house votes on it.
3. Assuming it passes both houses, it goes to the President.
4. The President can sign it, veto it, or ignore it. The first and third options give it a chance to automatically become law.
5. The second option, the Presidential veto, takes a little bit of backbone, but if both houses override the veto with a 2/3 vote, the bill can still become law.

If Congress were serious about doing something about DACA and the Dreamers, or anything else for that matter, they could do what the people of the U.S. want, rather than bow to the President.

Karma may take some time, but every elected and appointed representative supporting the President against the people of the United States will eventually feel the wrath caused by their (in)actions and behaviour.