Prettyinpinks' Blog

How many of these do you remember?

In 2007

 | Funny Jokes at JibJab

Lyrics:

Global warming, terrorists,
Oil prices, Michael Vick,
Al Gonzales, Lindsay's blow,
Dennis saw a UFO...

Baby toys, poison lead,
Rudy, Mitt, McCain, and Fred.
Clinton, Edwards, and Barack
Darfur
Iraq.

Don's nappy headed h***s,
Coverage of Anna Nicole,
Blackwater USA,
Britney at the VMA!

In 2007,
Barry got indicted,
Malibu ignited.

In 2007,
Humans went insane!
They built a bigass plane!

Bob quit, Rove rapped,
OJ took his BLEEP back.
Pakistan, Al Assad,
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!

Beauty queen, Beef recall
Senators in bathroom stalls.
There's trouble everywhere worldwide
But let's look on the brighter side!

Ladadadadadada,
Ladadadadadada,
Ladadadadadada,
Ladadadadadada!

Facebook, Red Sox
Halo 3 for XBOX.
Awesome gaming on the Wii,
Marty won one finally.

Another babe for Ang and Brad,
So much good among the bad!
Knut (the cub) safe at home!

Steve Jobs invented iPhone!

In 2007,
There was famine, fire,
Don't forget Sanjaya.

In 2007,
Things were far from great,
But there's still.....'08!
(Still '08, yeah.)

Video found at JibJab.com

Lyrics found at http://www.chargertek.com/smf/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1
730

In AP US history we were discussing Reagan's policies.  Well obviously I'm not old enough to remember him but I remember when he died.  Anyway, what I'm wondering was--why is he so revered?  We learned how he

1. Could make four speeches a day and time it so his voice cracked at the exact same spot in each one, or he cried at the same word.
2. Backed Saddam Hussein, who was then our ally, while in turn doing a behind-the-back deal to sell guns to the side opposing Hussein, which would in turn support the US backed rebellion in Lebanon and allow us to have funds to channel into Nicaragua to combat Castro's forces.
3. Proposed a plan to cut money from domestic affairs--school lunches, student loans, mass transportation.  Congress slashed $40 billion off of the budget (Reagan wanted more).  This in turn would have affected mostly minorities and the poor in cities.
4. During the inauguration, his wife wore a dress that cost $35 thousand.  Someone remarked that for that much money, all of the East side residents in Saint Louis could be fed for a year.
5. Simoulaneously dubbed the Soviet Union the "evil empire," yet five years later flew to Moscow and, as the book put it, "cozied up" to the Soviet leader.

So I was just wondering what your thoughts are?  It could be that the book is biased--a lot of the authors lived through the period.  But if all this is true, why is everyone so gung-ho for a president that continued the cycle of two-timing the middle east for American benefits, acted out speeches, and cut money from domestic reforms?

I was watching a story on this site called "Are Wisconsin Elderly Drivers a Danger on the Road?"

It was discussing the dangers of impaired elderly drivers on the road.  A couple shared the story of how their son was killed by an elderly man who didn't see him; police reports were shared about drivers who became confused or disorientated; there was even a film clip of a man who blacked out behind the wheel and crashed into a football field.

 They interviewed several people regarding the issue, and one of them was Representative Sheldon Wassermen.  He wants to "close a loophole in state law that allows the natural ailments of aging to go unchecked for years" (regarding driving).  He introduced a bill that requires drivers 75+ to undergo eye exams and written exams (depending on their age), in the hopes of catching impaired drivers before they get out on the road again.

"This is political suicide," said Wasserman, "but I'm not in politics for my political career, I'm in politics to make a difference."

Why can't all politicians be like him?

Seriously, how many presidential candidates right now are saying "I'll do this, I promise I won't do that, blah blah blah," and how many of them are actually going to do it?  Why does it seem like no one actually genuinely cares about "The people" anymore--it seems like the only person they care about is themselves.

In Spanish, we're watching a movie called "El Norte" (The North), referring to the US.  The basic plot is about two Guatemalan siblings who flee their country after their father is killed and their mother is hauled away by soldiers.  It basically shows their journey from Guatemala into the US.

That got me thinking . . . I always assumed before that illegal immigrants were filthy no-good criminals who only crossed so that they could live a quick, cheap life, using the free public education and taking all of the cheapest jobs.  Maybe because that's all you really hear about--those dirty people crawling under the fence to get into our peaceful, prosperous country.

(And I know this is a movie, and some things are probably exaggerated, or made up completely)

But this movie doesn't show statistics, it shows the actual PEOPLE.  It shows two desperate people, probably only a little older than me, crawling through sewege pipes in order to make an attempt for freedom.  It shows them gambling away their mom's jewelry so they can get some money for some food.  But why aren't we thinking about the PEOPLE?  Why is it all about OUR economy, OUR education, OUR jobs, OUR taxes?  Why aren't we targeting the source of the problem?  What are these people fleeing from?  Oppression?  Poverty?  Why not fix it?

We can go halfway around the globe to fix a problem in Iraq (my personal opinion is that yes, we should be doing something to end the threat to terrorism from the Middle East, but maybe not the way we are . . . but that's neither here nor there), but we can't consulte nor confront a problem that's literally on our doorstep?  Why are we talking about digging a moat and filling it with gators from Florida instead of looking at the places these people are coming from?  Why not fix the problem instead of trying to find a temporary solution? 

At UW-Parkside recently they held the annual Model OAS (Organization of American States) competition.  Having never done it before I was in for a big surprise.

"Now, you all are representing countries.  Which makes you diplomats.  And diplomats are unfalteringly polite.  And diplomats also lie."  (this is our history teacher talking).  "So do what you have to do, even if it involves bending the truth."

Uhhh . . . I though.  That's a problem. 

We get there the following morning and wait in line to check in.  The boy in front of me (from a different school) turns around and extends his hand.

"Good morning," he says solemnly.  "I'm Nick, from Nicaragua."
I burst out laughing.  "Seriously?  That's really funny, did you do that on purpose?"
He glares.  Whoops.  Diplomatic.  Right.

My group was dealing with special-concern issues--Global Warming, Child Trafficking, Natural Disasters, and Biofuels.

At first I thought it was one big joke.  A bunch of teenagers sitting around in business attire raising placards to talk, with a bunch of political jargon thrown in.  After awhile I got a little more into it.  Amended a few resolutions, seconded some motions.  Saw a catfight between Chile and Honduras, which was pretty entertaining.  Then we all got a little bored during a caucus and declared war on Guatemala.  I spent a good fifteen minute break trying to convince the guy from Canada to say "eh" the next time he addressed the committee.

 Wasn't all fun and games, though.  We wasted two hours of time on a resolution that had a few minor glitches in it (it was one about Natural disasters, the guy from Canada thought that it didn't incorporate avalanches in as much as earthquakes and hurricanes.  We spent a good forty five minutes trying to write a sufficient amendment for it before the girl from Bolivia said, "You guys realize that we just wasted an hour talking about SNOW?!")

Then another resolution got failed because it couldn't be left on the table during the lunch break.  We failed an anti-child trafficking law because we couldn't wait an extra five minutes for pizza.  Okay . . .

What it got down to was the fact that we wasted a good four hours in total arguing over nothing.  The smaller countries couldn't afford the propositions made by the larger countries, and the larger countries didn't want to pay for them.  Around mid-afternoon people's egos started kicking in and before we realized it, we were arguing over things that had very little to do with OAS.

That got me to thinking . . . I know none of us are politicians, I know this is just a Model.  But is that what really happens in politics?  You start off talking calmly, things get heated, then people just fling mud and kick and scream (figuratively) until, hours later, you have no idea what you're even talking about anymore?  Is this why things seemingly never get through Congress, or any other form of government? 

I'd appreciate your insight . . . first political blog : )