What has Obama done?

I often hear people going, "Obama has been a horrible president. He hasn't done anything except make America weak and vulnerable, and destroy our morals!" And it makes me so incredibly angry that these people are such idiots. Many of these people, I know from personal experience, are hardcore conservative Republicans who aren't going to accept that Obama has been a great president even if they were handed all his accomplishments on a silver platter. This post isn't for them, because they won't change their minds anyway. This is for the more moderate-minded people, who simply thin he is a bad president because that's all they hear. Let's go ahead and give a very brief summary of his accomplishments over the past few years, shall we?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Within days of taking office, he signed an executive order ordering audits of government contracts, and fighting waste and abuse.

On his first full day, he froze White House salaries. "Families are tightening their belts, and so should Washington," Obama said.

He released the Bush torture memos. On his second day in office, he signed a detailed Executive Order that banned torture, reversed all Bush torture policies, and put the United States in compliance with the Geneva Convention.

He signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, otherwise known as “the stimulus package.” In addition, he launched recovery.gov, so taxpayers could track spending from the ARRA. Transparency, anyone? The ARRA also cut taxes for 95% of America's working families.

Provided the Department of Veterans Affairs with over $1.4 billion to improve services aimed at America's Veterans.

Established Credit Card Bill of Rights, stopping credit card companies from pushing arbitrary rate increases on customers

Health Care Reform Bill, stopping insurance companies from denying insurance because of a pre-existing condition

Required health insurance plans to disclose how much of premiums actually goes toward patient care

Tax cuts for up to 3.5 million small businesses to help pay for employee health care coverage

Greatly increased Pell grants, which help lower-income students pay for college

Expanded the US’ hate crime law to include sexual orientation through the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act

Cut prescription drug costs for Medicare recipients by 50%

Extended Benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees

Created more private sector jobs in 2010 than during entire Bush years

Voluntary disclosure of White House visitors for the first time in US history

Signed New START Treaty - nuclear arms reduction pact with Russia

He signed the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, expanding on the Making Home Affordable Program to help millions of Americans avoid preventable foreclosures. The bill also provided $2.2 billion to help combat homelessness, and to stabilize the housing market.

Through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, he saved at least 300,000 education jobs, such as teachers, principals, librarians, and counselors that would have otherwise been lost.

He visited more countries and met with more world leaders than any previous president during his first six months in office.

He put an end to the Bush-era stop-loss policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan beyond their enlistment date.

He cracked down on companies that were previously denying sick pay, vacation and health insurance, and Social Security and Medicare tax payments through abuse of the employee classification of independent contractor.

He loosened the rules and allowed the 14 states that legalized medical marijuana to regulate themselves without federal interference.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

He's basically done everything right. Yet some people still won't accept that. For whatever reason, be it simple politico tactics, racism, or sheer stupidity, they vehemently testify that he hasn't done diddly squat and is bringing the country crashing down. Help me help them see that they are being biased idiots. If we want a good, noble, honest, hard-working President for another four years, we need to make sure this man retains the title of President, instead of handing it over to the flip-flopping, over-indulged brat that is Mitt Romney.

KONY2012: Don't Buy Into It

Okay, some quick background: Joseph Kony is an evil, vile, horrid man. He is the leader of a militant group in Africa that goes around killing and destroying villages. He takes the children from the villages and forces them to fight for his army, usually killing their own loved ones. KONY2012 is a movement to have him brought to justice by making everyone around the world aware of him and his evil deeds. For more information, visit the official KONY2012 website.

Now for my rant...

All these arseholes criticizing others for posting the KONY 2012 video... They never claimed that they are social activists, Jesus Christ. They simply felt that word of the movement needs to be spread. So stop being a douche and just let these people spread the word about the necessary capture of an evil man, and hopefully in due time they WILL become full-fledged activists.

That being said, if somebody asks "Who is Joseph Kony," actually tell them who he is and what he has done and is doing. Do NOT answer "Watch the video." It is not about the dang video; the video is just one medium to spread the word. If you watched the video and truly CARE about the cause, you will explain it to them. 

Then we're brought to the KONY2012 organizers themselves, Invisible Children... DON'T DONATE TO THEM. A little simple research will find you everything you need to know about IC, and it ain't pretty. Only about a third of their profits go to the efforts; the rest goes into the pockets of the founders. Not to mention, they are proponents of militant force. Fighting militant force with more militant force, what a wonderful idea, because that has worked so incredibly well in the past. This is much bigger than Kony, just like terrorism was not stopped when bin Laden was caught. If we want to stop him, great, but don't spend money on an effort that only focuses on him. Donate to groups that actually use donations for the intended purposes and are geared towards stopping ALL evil men such as Kony. Or, donate to one of the many groups focused on building the medical and educational systems in these countries torn apart by acts such as this, so when we do catch Kony and those like him, the child soldiers will have a safe place to return to.

My main point is this: the idea is good-natured, but the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. If you want to become a human rights activist, fine, but don't just go donating to any organization that parades around like an activist group. Do your research and decide where your money will best be used.

Righty Debate Tactics

Just now, I got into an argument with my sister, and I realized that she has the same debate tactics as conservatives:

-Very broad and unwarranted generalizations
-Faulty logic
-Not listening to the other side's argument
-Denial of past events
-Attempts at changing the past through words

Congratulations, far right, you have the "debate" tactics of a 13-year-old girl.

Tea Party Demographics

Nikki Haley just said that the Tea Party is made up of Republicans, Democrats, and independents... While this is technically true, she didn't mean it in the true sense. She was implying they are equally represented, when in reality it is more like 98% Republicans, 1.5% independents, an 0.5% Democrats.

Then again, when does Nikki Haley NOT use semantics to trick people?

#Occupy

I love hearing people make jokes and complain about the Occupy protestors. Why? Probably because when I hear somebody say insulting things about these people, I lose a little bit of my sanity. What is there to make fun of about a bunch of people who have taken it into their hands to use the provisions given to Americans by the constitution to attempt to fix our economy by going straight to the source?

Most of these people DO have the average-Joe jobs that you so quickly accuse them of avoiding, and that is the reason they are protesting. They don't want "free handouts" as many people are trying to say; they want the money they deserve. But they aren't being allowed to have that money, because it is being hoarded by "the 1%." You see, the 1% is the very small portion of the American populace to which 98% of America's wealth is attributed to. That's right, you read that correctly: the money that is just barely keeping most families above the poverty line, and is still not enough to keep some families above that threshold, is only TWO FUCKING PERCENT of the money in America.

These rich-as-fuck assholes sit on their asses all day, accumulating thousands of dollars each day which just sits in a bank and never gets used, and the hard-working people of America can barely stand to feed their families. Where is the justice in that? People want to call the Occupy protestors lazy and ungrateful, when they are the ones actually protesting and bringing attention to the sons-of-bitches who actually DO have these attributes?

There are 100 people living in your house, and everyone in the house has made 1 million dollars total, but the one person in the house who doesn't have a job is keeping $980,000 in their personal bathroom so they always have something to wipe their ass with. Now, you can go ahead and be content with your $202, but I'm gonna cheer on anybody who is willing to throw that fucker out the window in order for everybody else to get the $10,000 they worked so hard for.

Bible Belt

So, as I was surfing the net today, I came across a rather... interesting few bits of information. Because I don't feel like wasting time, I'll give you a link to the stats supporting each fact and you can look at those, then Google it if you want to see more stats on the subject. Honestly, guys, I don't need to spoon-feed you EVERYthing; Google isn't that complicated.

The Bible-Belt is:
-the divorce belt (Of the Bible Belt, only SC is below the US average percentage of divorces)
-the homicide belt (Notice especially the spikes in the WSC, ESC, and SA categories)
-the teen pregnancy belt (Notice how, in the top [or worst] half of the data, all but 2 of the BB states show up, and half of them are in the top 10)
-the obesity belt (Again, half the BB is found in the last 10, and all but two in the worst half)
-the poverty belt (I think the graph says it all; just look at the dark blue area.)
-the STD belt (Table about halfway down; notice the top five in each category)
-and, go figure, the Republican belt (Not a single BB state in top ten Dem, a couple in top ten Rep)

Gun Control

Yep, yet more left-and-right bickering incited by the Tucson tragedy.

This country is, for the millionth time, in a heated debate about gun control. Like in most debates, each side is making callous remarks to each other and completely disregarding what the other is saying. I know what you're thinking: "The gun control debate was around in preschool?" HAHAHAHA no. This, my friends, is modern American politics.

Alright, you wouldn't hear anybody from either side admit this, but as a moderate, unbiased spectator, I can: BOTH sides have very valid points.

On the pro-control side, we have... well, the basis of the whole argument: guns are dangerous and deadly. And this is true, guns do pose a serious risk. Look at last year; 71.8% of all homicides in the USA involved a firearm. This is an ALARMING statistic, and as technology increases, it will be easier and easier to conceal a gun. Some even MORE alarming numbers? About 50% of suicides are by firearm, guns are used in more suicides than homicides, and 83% of gun-related deaths are suicide. Let's be honest: guns are, by far, the easiest way of killing somebody.

On the anti-control side, we have the argument that even if guns were outlawed, those that wanted them could get them, and those who wouldn't want to go through the trouble would just find something else to use. And this, too, makes sense. If somebody absolutely HAD to use a gun, they'd purchase one off the black market; if they didn't have any connections, there is always blunt force or sharp objects. They also argue that if every person had a gun in their house, we would be more protected; I won't elaborate anymore, because though it seems like a sound argument at first, delving deeper than that seem phrase exposes this argument as complete bullsh-- Y'know what? Never mind, just continue reading.

Now, let's compare the two points:

• As far as suicide goes, it makes perfect sense that if they didn't have access to a gun, they'd just use something else. Except for the entire reason they DECIDE to use a gun: the quickness. With most methods, there is an interval in which you can have doubts about your actions, and there is a good possibility of the attempt failing. With guns, once you pull that trigger there is no turning back, and as long as you know where your heart and/or brain are, there's virtually no possibility of failing.
• When it comes to homicides, it's a bit of a tie. If every person had a gun, it would be easier to protect ourselves. Though, judging by the extremely high number of gun-related suicides, giving everyone a gun may NOT be such a good idea. Also, the inability to acquire firearms by "easy" means would cause many people to throw away their notions of murder, decreasing the number of-- you guessed it-- homicides.
• Outlawing guns would tremendously decrease the number of successful suicides, as well as giving psychologists hundreds, if not thousands, more patients, resulting in more money in circulation and an economy hike. Not banning guns, and therefore changing absolutely nothing, would not do anything to the economy that wouldn't already be done regardless.

So, it seems we have 2 wins for pro-control and a tie... Looks to me that gun control wins. And honestly, I don't see how anybody could disagree with that, but I do have a theory. It seems to me that the only people who oppose gun control are the ones who like to play with their guns. I'm not a hunter, so I'm not hopelessly addicted to a dual-barreled shotgun. I think that, much like children fighting over the last LEGO piece, anti-controllers simply don't want to let go of their favorite toy. It could also have something to do with the fact that hunters are an angry, violent people; if they don't like somebody, they want a way to get rid of them. But that can't be right... You know, because they're all for self-defense and whatnot.