The fact is, you should just trust me.

Election 2012 is not about the economy, Medicare, or policy-- it's about trust, which is kind of hard to have nowadays. There are so many distractions, motives, and scandals that there is no credibility left.... I mean, look at Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson. ($#@&^!!) The institutions and people we used to turn to for truth are now corrupt or bought. Even entire media networks operate 24/7 with an agenda (cough ..FOX, cough). For every idea, there's a website or voice who validates it with expert testimony, statistics, and research.  How else  could your vegan- libertarian brother in-law cyber-scream all those "facts" at you?

The campaign ads alone will make you paranoid. But the trust-me thing doesn't stop there.  This theme has manifested itself in several different ways this season, which maybe isn't new, but it's certainly overwhelmingly in your face. Well, maybe not in yours, but in mine for sure. 

Mitt Romney won't release his tax records, but we should trust that he's done what is legally required, which according to him, isn't less than a whopping 13%. But we just have to take his word for it. Same goes for his stance on his economic plan. Generally, he wants to cut taxes, reduce spending, but the details are for us to trust him with, and he knows it will all work out. Paul Ryan says he didn't accept stimulus money, but did, and then said he just couldn't recall. He also says that President Obama stole $70Billion from Medicare to put in into Obamacare... we were supposed to trust that it stopped there. He neglects to mention that his plan would've done the same thing, except he wouldn't put it back into "care". This past week, Romney and Ryan have changed positions on Medicare and the economy, it amazes me how they act like their current position has been their only position. For a littler perspective, President Obama was questioned for being a real American aaaand he showed us all his birth certificate. Interesting....

I've always thought that voting for the President was like voting for the person who essentially represents you and your interests. How do you even know what Romney has to offer? Is it trust? Me thinks not. 

And speaking of voting, are we supposed to believe trust that voter fraud is a problem? Or, do we trust that voter ID requirements would mostly affect inner-city minorities who can't afford cars (or a driver's license)? Do we believe that in 2008 more voters than before were young, poor, and African American? I think we know who they voted for... Trust me. ;P

It's got to be Paul Ryan (but I certainly hope not)

A week ago, 5 of my friends "liked" Mitt Romney. Today there are 7. Did Mitt release his tax returns? Did he actually answer a question? Do they feel bad because Rafalca didn't medal? Is it the commercials? I thought about posting another status asking the "what's to like" question, but considering the crickets I heard last time, I'm not gonna pull a Romney and repeat something that's pointless.

I really hope that the 2 newest likes for Romney don't have anything to do with his veep pick, Paul Ryan. Do people NOT know about Ryan? Do people understand the implications of having Ryan as a Veep? 

Ryan in a hoot. First of all, a very good friend of mine said he dyes his hair. So he's a liar. Do you see all of President Obama's grays? At least he's honest. Other than that, just to name a couple things, here's what I know about Ryan:

• He voted against the Lilly Ledbetter fair pay act
• He believes live begins at FERTILIZATION (wtf)
• He wants to defund Planned Parenthood
• He wants to turn Medicare into a voucher program
• He wants to cut Medicaid
• He basically wants to criminalize abortions

Oh and he says that President Obama is driving our country into the ground. Right. Cos all the things he wants and believes in wouldn't. He's such a forward-thinking man, that Ryan! 

I really don't think that those 7 people believe that planned parenthood should be defunded, or that abortions should be illiegal, or that women shouldn't be paid at a decent rate... So what do they believe in? They don't believe in President Obama, and they like Mitt Romney. Maybe they seem themselves in Romney's message of "you did that on your own (so don't give back or give anyone else a chance)". 

All I can hope for is that swing voters aren't as batshit-crazy as these 7 friends of mine...

Well, he's not boring (just scary)

It's on: Mitt Romney chose Paul Ryan, an equally scary man, perhaps scarier, as his Veep. Elections are just around the corner, but this is where we seem to be at. I really can't imagine America's toss-up states to go with the Romney-Ryan duo. At least I really hope not. I have faith in you, America. Even though you have proven to be untrustworthy.

What's to "like"?

Of my 686 Facebook friends, 5 "like" Mitt Romney. Yea, I had to take a second to process that too. I went so far as to go to Mitt Romney's Facebook page to confirm this. Most of my Facebook friends is a friend of one type or another, so of course, I respect their opinions. This one too, sort of... But I am very curious to know what it is about Romney that they like. If it's just because they don't like President Obama, then it's not really a "like" for Romney... it's just a like by default. That's not really winning. So I posted the following:

I have yet to receive an answer from a Romney fan. My most vocal Republican supporter for which this blog is primarily dedicated to is no longer my Facebook friend, so I have been waiting since yesterday for someone else to step up. I realized that anyone directly connected to me on Facebook can see I am a progressive, Pro-President Obama kind of gal, which is exactly why I worded it the way I did. I even added the disclaimer that this is a freebie. But no....

I did a little stalking of these 5 friends and (not surprisingly) discovered that 2/5 listed themselves as conservative, 1 claimed Latter Day Saints as their religion, 1 is from the middle east, and they are all pretty young. Coincidence?

So why like him? I'm not sure what there is to like because I haven't heard him actually stand for anything. In most interviews I've seen, he dodges questions, has no stance on anything, and isn't funny (if he is, it isn't on purpose). Granted, I get a lot of my news from the lame-stream media, so I may be biased. I decided to check out MittRomney.com, which confirmed things I don't like:

• Values:
• He wants to over-turn Roe v. Wade and defund Planned Parenthood
• He supports "traditional marriage" (aka, anti-gay marriage rights)
• Energy:
• He prioritizes carbon-based energy sources
• Immigration:
• High-fence border between the U.S. and Mexico
• Taxes:
• Cut corporate taxes by 25%
• "Smaller, Simpler, Smarter Government"
• Privatize Amtrak
• Defund the National Endowments for Arts and Humanities 
• Reversal of Obama-era Defense cuts
• Reduce federal workforce by 10%

Oh, and did I mention, most of those sections began with a description of President Obama's failures? So is it about really liking Mitt Romney, or hating the President?

After a lot of squinting and head-scratching, I had enough. I don't get it. If they knew all of that, would they still like him? How does any of that seem like a good idea? The only way that could happen is if someone told them to... FOX NEWS! But no, none of them liked Fox News.

I guess it won't be that easy to figure out. This will continue to perplex me just as much as Chick-fil-a appreciation day. I just hope the swing voters aren't as crazy. ;)

I know I shouldn't, but I kind of like it...

Ah, I haven't lost my touch. That ability to concisely articulate my opinion and get an angry reaction from a family member. It doesn't matter if we are blood related or connected by some institutional technicality, but I gone done it again. Sorry, Uncle Dave, you aren't the only one. 

I know what comes with going against the grain, or the family... but IDK, true colors intrigue me. It's very interesting to see how one will react to my "radically liberal" views. Uncle Dave at least attempts to reason with me condescendingly before deleting me as a friend, but this one is new: "So what's your fucking point" followed by "if you love the gays so much you can go to hell with them and get aids". 

Interesting.

Those two sentences were posted on a chick-fil-a related wall post on another relative's wall. Her friends were having an interesting discussion of it, and I even contributed a funny in there. A day after the record-braking sales day for the anti-gay fast food chain, it became apparent how much it wasn't just about the chicken. It's about the gays, and how they should all go to hell like they're supposed to. 

One thing is for sure: I will say what I think if I feel that it's necessary. In this case, that was true. The original status update was the "what's the big deal" stance. "Hate Sandwich Bonanza" is on the front page of HuffPost today, and the pictures don't lie. People stood in lines that wrapped around the building and waited for hours to reach the counter, order the traditional "family meal" (get it?), and tell the person at the counter how all the faggots should die. OK, not everyone said that last part, but some totally did. A lot of them probably said stuff like, "I support marriage between a man and a woman, just like chick-fil-a does". But still. You didn't go to chick-fil-a yesterday for the hot sauce. 

Back to the post: I prefaced my commented by saying "I just gotta say", meaning, "really, I tried to hold it back but I just can't". And I put it out there. It's not a freedom of speech issue. It's more of a anti-hate issue. Chick-fil-a's philanthropy consists of donating millions to anti-gay organizations, including the Pray the Gay Away stuff. wtf. I thought I was being pretty light and polite about it, and I even said that I anticipate being called lame-stream... but I guess lame-stream doesn't always encompass the fate of hell and/or AIDS.

It all started with "what's the big deal? it's just chicken and you're really missing out on a great sandwich". 

Well, it IS a big deal when people respond to a boycott by doing the opposite of boycotting (in masses). It's a big deal when Sarah Palin and her wife husband, Todd have to stop by for a photo-op. And it's honestly, kind of a big deal if you have to testify on Facebook that the sandwiches are so good that you don't care about any of this since you're the winner who gets the yummy chicken. It must be a big deal if an inanimate, non-living, consumable thing's deliciousness is more important that a human being's rights... It's especially a big deal when someone tells you to go to hell and get AIDS because of it. 

Gay rights is just another component of the culture war, but it can't be dismissed in the name of tasty fast food. Being tolerant of gays existing isn't enough. Tolerance is not far from a dislike. It's probably a just few steps above hate. I tolerate the smell in public bathrooms, but I try to pee before I leave the house so I can avoid the hassle of tolerance. 

The post was deleted within 5 minutes of the crazy. It's unfortunate, but it's not hard to find similar rhetoric.

You are what you eat (on Chick-fil-A day)

Chick-fil-A: 5 Reasons It Isn't What You Think

Aug. 1: Chick-fil-A day. HAH. It looks like Uncle Dave isn't the only family member of mine who wants discriminatory free speech to be tolerated. Today is the day CFA fans are supposed to "come out" and support the Christian, anti-gay marriage business. And these supporters are citing the first amendment, saying that we all have the right to proclaim intolerance. If David Badash is correct, not only did CFA's CEO say that he doesn't support gay marriage, he also has donated millions of dollars to anti-gay groups and is bringing God into the argument. We will be judged for the sinful behavior of the gays! 

Now, let me just say that boycotting CFA is not a big sacrifice for me. I don't like the food. All this hullabaloo is just an extra thumbs up to back up my distaste of the place. BUT just because it's not a big sacrifice for me, or for others doesn't make it a non-big deal. It is a pretty big deal that people feel so strongly about "freedom of speech" that they will go out of their way to stand in line for a mediocre chicken sandwich. Is it really worth the time and effort to stand in hour long lines to prove a point that discrimination is a right? I guess so.

Some would say that being American means freedom, including freedom of hate. And if you want to go down in history as that kind of American, then you are free to do that (get it? you're "free"?).  But let me just say that this has kinda-sorta happened before, and is happening to other minority groups as we speak! Immigrants, African Americans, Native Americans, women... the list goes on.

Being American should mean that you can practice your religion and have your beliefs, as long as you don't set us all back by promoting inequality.