I was traveling recently to San Francisco. While at IAH i noticed an inordinate amount of MEN wearing capri pants. First, let me say that capri pants are not pants. They are a confusion between pants that are simply too short and well..... shorts. Real men wouldn't wear them, and those masquerading as men shouldn't wear them.
I hear regularly that the US is too macho. That we flex our muscles and make grunts.... uh uh uh.... like Tim Allen from Home Improvement. Not physically of course, but the talking heads on the boob tube has the US shirtless (or in a wifebeater) standing on top of the world beating its hairy man chest.
I personally believe that the US has never been more "wussyfied" because of the desire to avoid hurting any one's feelings. We have baned the word loser from our vocabulary. We have taken the red pen away from the teacher and replaced it with something "less offensive". We've baned dodge ball and tag on playgrounds... and the list goes on.
Without any way for our children to learn from their mistakes or, in some cases how to deal with humiliation we are left with a weaker bunch of people and... men who wear capri pants.
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Maybe I’m naive, but I thought we had a deal?
Here’s the thing, when I was a kid it was OK to call kids that weren’t white, names that were derogatory. Well… it wasn’t OK, but it was socially acceptable. As I got older (about 9 years old), I realized that it wasn’t OK and calling someone names or treating them different because they didn’t look like me was wrong and I wouldn’t participate anymore.
I felt like, while I never had a slave or oppressed anyone based on the color of their skin, I had taken part in making someone feel less of themselves based solely on the color of their skin. That was wrong and for that, I’m sorry.
The agreement, or so I thought, was to change my ways and raise my children different than I had been raised. I thought when I was in a position to make hiring or promoting decisions I would hire the best candidate not just the white candidate. And I did! When my children wanted toys, I would offer all dolls, not just the white ones. And I did! I would never allow the “N” word to be spoke in my house and tell my children when they heard it from TV or music lyrics that it was a bad word, comparable to the “F” word. We would be respectful of everyone. And I did. Being this person, I am keeping my part of the deal to make the world better and free of color barriers.
This Pastor (won’t call him Reverend because I don’t revere him) Wright comes along and catches me completely off guard. He teaches his children (about 8K in his church last time I looked) that the white man is bad and causes all the ills of the black man. He rants that the black man can’t get ahead because the white man won’t let him. He screams that because my skin is white that I am against him. The media says this is OK. Well…. Not OK but socially acceptable.
Wow! I guess I’m naive, but I thought we had a deal. We would all consider each other equal. We would raise our children to be better than we were. I guess I was wrong.
I felt like, while I never had a slave or oppressed anyone based on the color of their skin, I had taken part in making someone feel less of themselves based solely on the color of their skin. That was wrong and for that, I’m sorry.
The agreement, or so I thought, was to change my ways and raise my children different than I had been raised. I thought when I was in a position to make hiring or promoting decisions I would hire the best candidate not just the white candidate. And I did! When my children wanted toys, I would offer all dolls, not just the white ones. And I did! I would never allow the “N” word to be spoke in my house and tell my children when they heard it from TV or music lyrics that it was a bad word, comparable to the “F” word. We would be respectful of everyone. And I did. Being this person, I am keeping my part of the deal to make the world better and free of color barriers.
This Pastor (won’t call him Reverend because I don’t revere him) Wright comes along and catches me completely off guard. He teaches his children (about 8K in his church last time I looked) that the white man is bad and causes all the ills of the black man. He rants that the black man can’t get ahead because the white man won’t let him. He screams that because my skin is white that I am against him. The media says this is OK. Well…. Not OK but socially acceptable.
Wow! I guess I’m naive, but I thought we had a deal. We would all consider each other equal. We would raise our children to be better than we were. I guess I was wrong.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Robin Hood or Robbing everyone?
Yesterday I heard comments from Hilary Clinton saying that she wants to tax the rich (meaning anyone who makes more than 250,000 a year) and cut taxes on the middle class.. "so that we can cut middle-class taxes on people who get up everyday and do hard work to keep our country going" WHAT???? Just because someone makes more than 250,000 they aren't hard working? They don't help keep this country running? What in the heck does she mean?
Does she mean that if you make more than 250K you don't do anything to keep the country running? What she means is that if you have gone to school (or not) and gotten a great job, or maybe worked hard and clawed and scratched your way up the ladder and now make a decent living you are no longer in her voting demographic and she can safely alienate you.
This Robin Hood approach of taking from the rich and giving to the middle class hurts everyone. As small businesses try to get started these additional taxes restrict the number of employees they can hire. As more taxes are levied against the "rich" the government ends up with money that should spent buying goods and services. As less money is spent - guess what???? Less money spent means that business either can't hire new employees or they have to lay off the ones they have.
The Robin Hood approach of taking from the rich and giving to the poor really just robs us all and gives our money to the government who has proven time and time agan that they don't know how to handle it.
Does she mean that if you make more than 250K you don't do anything to keep the country running? What she means is that if you have gone to school (or not) and gotten a great job, or maybe worked hard and clawed and scratched your way up the ladder and now make a decent living you are no longer in her voting demographic and she can safely alienate you.
This Robin Hood approach of taking from the rich and giving to the middle class hurts everyone. As small businesses try to get started these additional taxes restrict the number of employees they can hire. As more taxes are levied against the "rich" the government ends up with money that should spent buying goods and services. As less money is spent - guess what???? Less money spent means that business either can't hire new employees or they have to lay off the ones they have.
The Robin Hood approach of taking from the rich and giving to the poor really just robs us all and gives our money to the government who has proven time and time agan that they don't know how to handle it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)