Elaine's Three Cents*

Got Papers?

Remind me to never get a tan and speak Spanish in Arizona.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed a bill into law on Friday making it legal for law enforcement officials to detain anyone they suspect is in this country illegally.  Brewer acknowledged concerns about the bill, saying racial profiling wouldn't be tolerated but that we had to "trust our law enforcement."

No, I don't think I will.  Thank you.  "Excuse me, can I see your papers?  Don't have any on you?  Can't prove you're not an immigrant?  Come with me."  Remind you of a particularly awful period in world history?

My question is, how in the world do you carry out this law without using racial profiling?  My guess is that white guys in cowboy hats with southern accents aren't going to be stopped on the street and asked for their immigration papers.  No, this law was written for the brown folk-specifically the ones who speak Spanish.  While I am Latina, I'm never one to use the race card.  I'm sure that has a lot to do with the fact that I couldn't look less Latin and haven't had any racially related incidents personally. However, this legislation couldn't be more racist.  I understand there is an immigration problem down South along the Mexican border.  I know that people are complaining about losing their jobs to illegal immigrants. I won't start on the fact that many of these jobs are the ones no one wants.  People want these jobs to go to American citizens.  Fine, I get it.

However.

We are all immigrants.  All of our families came from another country at some point, unless you're American Indian.  Whether your family came here on the Mayflower (or the Goodspeed Susan Constant for that matter) or they arrived at JFK yesterday with bewildered eyes and the American Dream playing in their heads, they all originated from some other place.  Mexicans, unless they're very rich or powerful, cannot come here legally.  The vast majority can't afford to pay off officials in order to get a visa.  The ones that risk their lives to come here by and large have poor families and are trying to make a better life for them.  What is wrong with that?

This is America.  People emigrated here in droves to seek better lives.  To seek refuge from political or religious persecution.  To escape plague and famine.  To work their way up the ladder to get rich or to just own a home and have a family.  I believe in the American Dream.  Yes, I'm a wide-eyed idealist and while I recognize all the many problems prevalent in this country I also recognize that it's always been in the people's power to change it.  I think that's an amazing thing-and rare.  We take that for granted.

This law is shameful.  It's a blot on our political landscape.  It's a reminder that the Civil Rights Movement was only a little over 40 years ago and that there's still work to be done. 

I love my country, I really do.  I'm proud to be American, proud to be from here.  I cry during the Star Spangled Banner.  Wherever I might be in the world, America will ALWAYS be home.  Today though, pride is a little hard to come by.

Rock Band: Keeping Classics Alive

I first played Guitar Hero about 2 years ago.  I was hanging out with my friends (could have even been a Christmas gathering, not sure) and we tried out this new game that was all the rage.  While I love playing games, video games tend to give me agita because they have become so complicated.  After all, I grew up on Nintendo with it's two button controller and fairly uncomplicated, though challenging games (Super Mario Bros. anyone?)  But I just look at an XBox controller and I break out into the sweats.  FAR too complicated for me (thank you Nintendo for the Wii for simpletons like me.)  So when Liz broke out Guitar Hero I was naturally a bit skeptical.

I needn't have been.  I was hooked instantly.  Having been musical my whole life, playing various instruments in addition to being a vocalist, it took me exactly ten seconds to LOVE this game.  Song after song, I felt like I was back in high school jamming.  Better yet, I felt like a freaking rock GOD.  Every time I finished a song and the game told me I ROCKED, I said to myself, "Hell yeah I do" and I would raise my hands in glory.  After all, what's a rock star without a little cockiness and swagger?  It wasn't long until I owned it myself, and when Rock Band came out that was soon in my possession as well.

However, in addition to Guitar Hero and Rock Band being a fun games, they became something else too-my jukebox.  They were a conduit to introducing me to songs I wouldn't otherwise have heard or paid attention to.  The songs would get stuck in my head and before long I was downloading song after song.  Even if I had heard some of them, something about "playing" them made them even cooler and more fun to listen to for me.  "Slow Ride", "Barracuda", "One"-all awesome songs that I now love because of these games.  While playing them I realized how important these games were to our musical culture-they're going to keep these songs alive.  After all, I'm sure I'm not the only one downloading these songs-some ten year old kid is thinking the Allman Brothers are pretty wicked.  I think that's amazing.

This is what makes the next Rock Band release so important.  On September 9, MTV Games will be releasing "The Beatles: Rock Band."  I have to admit I've never been a huge Beatles fan, but I appreciate the importance of their songs and the incredible lyrics they wrote (my problem, I believe, is with their voices-they don't do it for me.)  The idea that this generation is about to fall in love with The Beatles is really exciting to me.  This is a band that should NEVER fade into obscurity with time.  They need to live on, and this video game is going to do that.  Parents can tell their kids about their favorite bands all the want, but these video games make these bands cool-the most important factor in getting kids to appreciate them.  The idea that kids and their parents will be taking about/singing along with this incredible band is pretty exciting I think.

Many people pooh pooh these games, saying it keeps kids from picking up actual instrument.  Given a 35% percent uptick in guitar lessons I'd say that's garbage.  But even more important, they're helping share this great music with the next generation.  For me personally, I know it will help me appreciate The Beatles more.  There is nothing like actually playing the music to make me love it.  I'm looking forward to it.

Kris Allen on CBS

I actually didn't realize that I had published this to Typepad.  But since I did, let me explain. 

While I'm really not a Kris Allen fan I am an American Idol fan.  A series of events led me to take a train I almost never take.  I was also running late for work (sadly, this is not unusual.)  The CBS Morning Show films on a plaza on 59th Street, a few blocks from work.  Now I've seen crowds there before and never before thought twice about walking on, but something made me cross the street and take a look.  Sure enough, there is Kris Allen singing his terrible victory single.  He sounded great though, and I was able to get close enough for this shot.  Apparently Adam Lambert went on before him.  Now he I would LOVE to have seen, but alas, it was not to be

What can I say?  I love celebrities, even pseudo ones.

Adam Cook

While competing on American Idol, it was well known that David Cook's brother, Adam, was suffering from a brain tumor.  David himself never mentioned it, not wanting a pity vote and keeping that part of his life private.  However, celebrity being what it is, the media found out about it and soon everyone knew.  Late in the competition, his brother was flown out to see David perform.

After 11 years battling the disease, Adam succomed to the disease.  David made the announcement at Washington DC's Race for Hope 5K.  His brother had only died the day before, but he felt is was very important to be at the Race.  This is his speech.

Rest in Peace, Adam

Funny Stuff

I've never seen "Knocked Up" so I never knew about this scene.  I'm not a big Seacrest fan but I think this is awesome.  Profanity from Mr. Clean-cut?  Excellent!

Hate-Crimes Bill: Not the Right Step

Ok, ok.  So it's been a really long time since I've updated.  Let's just say some stuff has been going on and I've had a hard time gathering my thoughts and making sense of them.  So, let's give it another go, shall we?

This past Wednesday, the house passed a Hate-Crimes Bill.  The bill defines hate crimes as any crime, "motivated by prejudice and based on a victim’s race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability."  Democrats voted for it and most Republicans voted against it-no shock there.  According to the New York Times, "The measure would provide grants for state and local authorities to investigate and prosecute hate crimes, and it would empower the federal government to prosecute cases if states asked for Washington’s help or were reluctant to exercise their own authority."  The bill is no where near becoming law, because there is no vote scheduled in the Senate for it.  

Liberals, civil rights activists and President Obama are all hailing the vote, calling it a step in the right direction.  I, for one, am completely opposed to this bill.

Now, let me take a step back.  First of all, I am a woman.  I am also Latina.  So I would be completely protected under the law should I be attacked and my attackers prosecuted for it.  But my point is, that is already the case.  It shouldn't matter the reason WHY I was attacked, just that I was.  Justice must be served whatever the reason for the crime.  

Let me give you an example.  A straight, white, Christian man with no handicap walks down the street as is attacked by someone.  The man is beaten to death, for no apparent reason.  Another man walks down the street.  He is white, but gay.  He is also beaten to death and is called a faggot all the while.  Does the latter example have more weight than the first?  Should the second attacker be prosecuted more vehemently than the first because of his REASON for the attack?  I don't think so.  I don't believe prejudice should be an aggravating factor.  In the examples above, both attacks ended in the death of the victim.  The attackers should be tried as murderers, period.

I know this is a hot issue.  I know people feel very strongly that hate crimes should be punished.  And they should, but the same as any crimes of a similar nature.  I understand the history, I understand why people are so adamant about this issue.  From the genocide of Native Americans to lynchings to Matthew Shepherd, America has a long, sad history of hate crimes.  The way to bring the victims justice is to prosecute the crimes.  I'm sorry, but I believe that the day we start prosecuting people because of their thoughts and beliefs, regardless of how abhorrent those beliefs are, we are actually doing our country a disservice. We are taking a step BACK, not forward. 

There are two ways to bring justice to the victims of hate crimes, and they are both equally as important.  First, prosecute the crimes to the fullest extent of the law, as you would any crime.  Second, let's make sure we teach the next generation to LOVE people of all races, sexes, creeds, etc.  The more awareness we teach, the better off our country will be.  As long as racism, homophobia as the like continue to live in people's hearts, we will continue to hear about these disgusting crimes.  Eradicating hate is a far more difficult task, but it is paramount if our country is to move forward.  

Oh, the Humanity!! A President Who Can Speak!!

This is a wonderfully smart ass article by Andy Borowitz on The Huffington Post.

Obama's Use of Complete Sentences Stirs Controversy

In the first two weeks since the election, President-elect Barack Obama has broken with a tradition established over the past eight years through his controversial use of complete sentences, political observers say.

Millions of Americans who watched Mr. Obama's appearance on CBS's 60 Minutes on Sunday witnessed the president-elect's unorthodox verbal tick, which had Mr. Obama employing grammatically correct sentences virtually every time he opened his mouth.

But Mr. Obama's decision to use complete sentences in his public pronouncements carries with it certain risks, since after the last eight years many Americans may find his odd speaking style jarring.

According to presidential historian Davis Logsdon of the University of Minnesota, some Americans might find it "alienating" to have a president who speaks English as if it were his first language.

"Every time Obama opens his mouth, his subjects and verbs are in agreement," says Mr. Logsdon. "If he keeps it up, he is running the risk of sounding like an elitist."

The historian said that if Mr. Obama insists on using complete sentences in his speeches, the public may find itself saying, "Okay, subject, predicate, subject predicate -- we get it, stop showing off."

The president-elect's stubborn insistence on using complete sentences has already attracted a rebuke from one of his harshest critics, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska.

"Talking with complete sentences there and also too talking in a way that ordinary Americans like Joe the Plumber and Tito the Builder can't really do there, I think needing to do that isn't tapping into what Americans are needing also," she said.

Andy Borowitz is a comedian and writer whose work appears in The New Yorker and The New York Times, and at his award-winning humor site, BorowitzReport.com.

Thoughts on Patriotism

In 1967, the Supreme Court ruled on Loving vs. Virgina.  In 1958, the Lovings were arrested because they violated the state's anti-miscegenation law.  See, Mildred Loving was black, and Richard Perry Loving was white.  At this time, interracial marriage was illegal in many states, including Virginia.  They pled guilty and were sentenced to a year in jail, with the sentence suspended for twenty-five years as long as the Lovings left the state.  They moved to DC, and the ACLU sued Virginia on their behalf.  Nine years and countless appeals later, the Supreme Court finally heard their case.  The Court ruled that anti-miscegenation violated the 14th Ammendment, and interracial marriages were made legal throughout the fifty states.  The Court wrote:

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

On November 4th of this year, three states voted to ban gay marriage.  To me, this is an incredible step back, and an added stain to our nation's history.  I understand that gay marriage isn't "fundamental to our very existence and survival" since gay couples can not procreate, but marriage IS one of the basic civil rights of man and thus should be available to all Americans.  I understand many religious people disagree with gay marriage on moral grounds, and they have every right to say it.  However, how can any American actually VOTE to limit someone else's rights and believe they are morally correct by doing so?  That they are somehow saving our society from perceived evil, showing the rest of us the light?

There is an argument raging across the country about gay marriage vs. civil unions.  If homosexuals can have civil unions and share the same rights as those who are married, what's the difference?  The difference is that those in civil unions are not married, period.  Civil unions are not marriages.  Let me put this another way: marriages v. civil unions- Separate but Equal.  Sound familiar?  Another stain on our history.  In Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruled that separate was inherently unequal, and that all citizens have equal protection under the law.  By denying homosexuals the right to marry, a right granted to all other Americans, we are sending a terrible message to the world: America is not as free as it claims to be.

Yes, I'll say it again, we are not as freedom loving as we claim to be.  On the same day we elected our first African-American president, an accomplishment I was so proud to have been a part of, Americans took a step back in time.  I was both proud and ashamed of my country on that day.  Americans love to talk about the founding fathers-praise them, practically cannonize them.  When defending the passing of "Christian" laws, conservatives constantly point out the fact that our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles.  Yes it was- and slavery. Thomas Jefferson, a slave owner, wrote that all men are created equal, and have the unalientable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  In 1776, that excluded blacks.  In 2008, that excludes gays. 

We now recognize the hypocracy of the founding fathers, the fact that they would proudly sign a document claiming every man was created equal, and then go back to their plantations with their hundreds of slaves.  Today however, Americans fail to see the utter hypocracy of these anti-gay laws.  We can pat ourselves on the back all we want for electing a black president, but the fact is for the three steps forward we took in electing Obama, we took two steps back in the fight for civil rights.  The citizens of California, Arizona and Florida wiped their feet on the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

I am a patriot.  Being a patriot means believing that "all men are created equal."  It means believing that all Americans are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that amoung those are the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."  To deny anyone equal rights in unpatriotic.  To treat anyone as a second class citizen is unpatriotic.  To reinstate "separate but equal" laws is unpatriotic.  To ban gay marriage is unpatriotic.

You can believe that gay marriage is wrong.  You can believe that homosexuality is an abomination.  You can believe that homosexuality is disgusting.  I defend your right to believe it and to say it although I disagree with you with all my heart.  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."  However, DO NOT take this country back to those terrible days.  Let's live up to our ideals, let us live up to our promise.  When we tell the world that Americans love freedom, let's follow that up with action.  Although we have taken a step back it's not to late to move forward.  Defend gay rights, defend gay marriage.  In other words: be a patriot.  Homosexuals have just as much right to the pursuit of happiness as heterosexuals do, and they shouldn't have to change who they are to attain it.  I love my country more than I can possibly say, but today I am ashamed of it.  I'm praying it will make me proud, once again.

The Big Question

In May of 2008, there was a question that was on everyone's mind.  It was THE topic around the water cooler.  Blogs were abuzz- analyzing and speculating.  Who would it be?  Who would America pick? 

Of course, I'm talking about American Idol, and this past season people were particularly invested in the winner.  Would it be teenager David Archuleta-heartthrob to all the high schoolers and pre-pubescent girls?  Or would it be David Cook,-sexy rocker, heartthrob to women of all ages. 

The winner was David Cook, but not everyone took it so well.  This video is hysterical.  Even if you don't watch American Idol, you'll enjoy this.

Sorry for the Silence

I've been pretty sick this past week and really unable to get my thoughts straight.  As soon as I'm back on my feet I'll start writing again.  Thanks to those of you who are still checking in on me.  Keep coming back!  :)