Did any of you watch Oprah on Friday? It was an amazing show demonstrating the bonds between humans and animals, and also animals and animals. There were many touching segments, but my favorite was the first.

The first segment dealt with a program wherein prisoners train dogs to be service animals to Veterans of the Iraq and/or Afghanistan wars. I've seen similar programs and they are all fantastic, so I was not surprised to see yet another program that is amazing. You can check out the program here.

I have a particular interest in the criminal justice system. It stems from my early college career when I almost majored in criminal justice. Despite not majoring in it, I took many classes including Criminal Justice 101, Juvenile Deliquency, Criminology, as well as many Sociology classes which dealt with criminology.

One of the first things I learned in my classes, almost all of which were taken at BYU-Idaho, was that our prison system has many many problems. It attempts, very poorly I might add, to rehabilitate people who have never been habilitated, it teaches criminals to be better criminals, and often times turns addicts into worse addicts by allowing them to be introduced to different drugs.

But, it's through programs, such as Puppies Behind Bars, programs that allow inmates to get education, programs that teach prisoners skills, and other similar programs are vitally important to the prisoners and society.

I'm getting really tired of people, namely some Republicans, decrying our supposed move towards Socialism, or my personal favorite, Marxism. I taught several graduate level classes on Marxist theory and it's pretty heavy stuff and so I kindly ask that you not complain about Socialism or Marxism unless you can define what the aforementioned terms mean.

I mean, seriously, do we need to go over our "Socialist" Social Security system, Medicare, or Medicaid? How many of you were on Medicaid or WIC when you were pregnant? What about our Socialist fire and police departments? Let's just buy ginormous hoses and put out our own fires. Who needs them? Who needs the cops? Let the rapists, child molesters, and murderers police themselves.

Obama isn't even President yet and I am already getting bombarded with nutty emails crying apocalypse. Why do I have a feeling that Obama will be the scapegoat for everything? And the worst President in the history of the United States won't get the credit he deserves for SCREWING UP OUR COUNTRY by making a mockery of our Constitution, by allowing the torture of human beings, by reducing regulations that have led to the worst financial crisis we've faced since the Great Depression.

GWB got us into an endless unwinnable war, he has stripped many of our rights and liberties through the Patriot Act, he has put corporate interests ahead of regular people interests time and time again.

Far too many people still view GWB as some godsend, as some hero. I just don't get it. Do you not see what him, his cronies, and his policies have led to? Do you support torture? Do you support attacking a county that poses no immediate threat to us and invading them and staying there while 1,000,000 people die? Do you support the removal of our Constitutional rights through the Patriot Act and warrantless wiretapping and other illegal and immoral actions? Do you support the disenfranchisement of voters? Do you support the lack of regulations that have given us dirtier air and water, the recession we are now in, the hideous housing crisis? Aren't you tired of what has been taking place the last 8 years? Aren't you ready for something different?

Many Republicans sit there and decry "liberal" politics while they sat there and did nothing over the last 8 years. They throw out scary words like "liberal", "Marxism", "Socialism", "Communism" and most of them cannot even differentiate those terms and cannot even define them! They sit there and enjoy our roads, libraries, parks, public schools, public services, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, WIC and then whine about paying taxes and how we are becoming a Socialist country. Give me a freaking break. Give Obama a chance and get to know a little thing I like to call a dictionary.

Still think I'm a nut for thinking Republicans aren't hypocrites? Look at this:
If you can't read this, go here for the website.

I anticipate Idaho Falls and Pocatello getting it soon, but tomorrow would be nice! SiCKO has gotten really good reviews so far, including from Fox News.

Truly the health insurance crisis in this country affects Republicans and Democrats and the debate boils down to possible solutions. I always get annoyed at the cracks against Canada's system and the comments about all of the Canadians coming to America for health care. Uh, yeah, of course people do, this is the United States, a country with many doctors, many specialists, and a lot of technology. Did you know about all of the people who travel to Canada for lasix eye surgery because it is half as much there? What about all of the elderly folks who drive there for their prescriptions because it is so much cheaper?

You really can't compare any two countries, especially when one of them is this great country. And no one system in any country will fit this country perfectly. Moore has been advocating that we take good ideas from many countries and use what would be best here.

I leave for Vegas Sunday night. I figure driving at night through Utah would be a wise and cool choice. The first few days they will train me, though I anticipate not needing a lot of training. I think the biggest challenge will be acclimating to Vegas, and I mean that in a lot of ways.

It gets hot here in the summer, but never past 100 degrees for more than several days each summer. Pocatello has a population around 53,000 so getting used to a large city will be interesting. And getting familiar with the different groups down there will be challenging for me as well. But I know I will do well and I think it will be a great experience for me.

So, should I change the name of this blog? Temporary change? Can I even change it??? Not necessarily the url, but the name...I think it would be cool to do a strikethrough of Idaho and replace it with Vegas, but I don't know how to do that and if it is even possible.

Have you ever heard someone describe your life or events in your life? I have and it's weird. Many of you know that a few years ago my sister and I filed a lawsuit against the Mormon Church. If you didn't know, you can read about it here. Since the jury awarded us $4.2 million dollars, I have done numerous interviews. Interviews on the radio, television, in magazines and newspapers. In fact, I even did some anonymous interviews before it went to trial.

A few weeks ago, I was contacted by a writer with the Seattle Weekly and asked to give an interview. Of course I said yes and the article he wrote was printed today. You can read it here. It's quite long, terribly sad, gut wrenching, and heart breaking. Most of it contains the stories of other people, but my story is towards the bottom. I've copied and pasted the bulk of the article related to me below.

Just to clarify, I do not attend BYU-Idaho and haven't since 2002. I did graduate from Ricks College and BYU-Idaho in 2001 and 2002, respectively. And no, I wasn't kicked out! I think the writer got confused and mistook Idaho State University for BYU-Idaho.

In case you are wondering, I wasn't active in the Mormon Church from approximately spring of 2002-until last month. I do now attend Church, although I attend with friend of mine at her ward. And while it is no one's business, I haven't been subject to any Church discipline for my lawsuit or my words during and after the trial.

My feelings about the Church, including its teachings and its culture, which comprises the structure, its leaders and all of that, are complex. I don't know that anyone could characterize my current Church activity and beliefs in any particular way because my situation, my feelings, and my current position are incredibly unique.

I find deep and significant problems with how the Mormon Church handles complaints of abuse. I have heard too many stories to think otherwise. In my opinion, the Mormon Church, often times, engages in criminal conduct related to child abuse. THIS HAS TO STOP. The innocence, safety, and protection of children override any constitutional rights to freedom of religion the Church claims, any rights to priest-penitent privilege, and any other legal argument the Mormon Church has used, uses, and will use.

This isn't a uniquely Mormon problem. It is a problem with many religions and organizations.
I hope that by speaking out, I can bring awareness to the problem in our own backyard here in Idaho, and that other victims will feel empowered and unafraid to speak out.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seattle Weekly cut and paste:

To hear it from those who have gone to the trouble of suing the Mormons, the reason the church has garnered so little negative publicity is not because it's purged itself of the sin of pedophilia but because it's extremely good at repressing its victims.

Sisters Jessica and Ashley Cavalieri won a $4.2 million award from the church in 2005 for abuse inflicted by their Mormon stepfather in the early '90s in Federal Way. Theirs is a case example of why we haven't heard much about pedophilia in the church: The amount of hurdles the girls had to clear to get their voices heard is staggering.

Because living in modern society while also obeying the church dictums is so hard to do—drinking and premarital sex are strongly discouraged, as are caffeine, violent music and movies, and an unbalanced diet—Mormon culture is necessarily insular. "They're trying to live so differently from the rest of the world, almost like the Amish," says Jessica, now a 26-year-old student at Idaho's Brigham Young University. That means, she says, the first move when it comes to child abuse isn't always to involve the cops. "The police are outsiders. They don't have the 'true gospel,' so they don't understand things like we do."

The Mormon bishop does understand, however. He's presumed to be competent enough to oversee a ward, a land division much like a political district. The church acknowledged its bishops' roles as proper receptacles of child-abuse information when it created its 1-800 help line, which only church officials can use. If the bishop decides a victim's tale of woe is compelling enough to pick up the phone, he can talk with "professional counselors" (according to the church's Web site) who will rattle off a list of protocol questions and perhaps refer the case to a church lawyer.

Jessica, who's seen the questionnaire, describes it as containing a lot of "risk-management" inquiries—"Did the abuse happen on church property? Did it happen during a church-sponsored activity?"—which made her feel as if the church was already preparing a defense against her claims that her stepfather was touching her at night and offering her money for sex.

The bishop can also do nothing, as was the case for Jessica. When she was 12, she told her bishop about the abuse. He sent her out of the room so he could chat in private with her parents and then dismissed the family, who went home without a word on the subject. Jessica took it for granted that the bishop had told her mother about the molestation and that her mother didn't care. Only after her stepfather confessed, five mentally hellish years later, did Jessica learn the truth: The bishop just told her mom that the two weren't "getting along" and suggested they needed to spend more time together in spiritual study. "He didn't have very much psychological training," says Jessica, "and didn't really understand that child molesters aren't something that can just be treated and cured with prayer."

When the Cavalieris finally decided to pursue their case on a nonspiritual plane, the Washington state judiciary, Jessica says two bishops she had told about the abuse denied ever hearing her tale of woe. Her best friend testified that she was "a complete psycho," while her Mormon neighbors, outside of court, called her "evil" and told her she needed to repent.

Since Jessica's story appeared in the papers, she says she's heard from approximately 50 Mormons with similar horror stories. "I think it's an epidemic," she speculates.

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

I traveled up to Idaho Falls friday afternoon to meet a friend, we'll call her "S" because I don't feel right having her name all over my blog without her permission, though I know she wouldn't care and I have written about her before. We were going to shop a little, eat dinner, then meet her sister and her sister's boyfriend for Pirates of the Caribbean 3. I hadn't seen any of the Pirates movies, so I was a little lost, but it was pretty enjoyable and Johnny Depp is hilarious.

Saturday was spent going to garage sales, then I came home to watch some Felicity, took a nap, then met S (same one from yesterday) to help her pack as she needs to move out of her current house. We packed as we watched episodes from season 2 of The Office and played with two baby hamsters she bought for her brother. During this time, we had a little debate about Affirmative Action. The problem with those opposed to Affirmative Action is they point to little more than anecdotal evidence as proof that Affirmative Action is reverse discrimination.

I really hate debating Affirmative Action because it is not only controversial, but it reveals settle, though important, differences in people's core beliefs related to society, race, racism, discrimination, equality, and on and on and on. And really, is it not humorous that the biggest whiners about Affirmative Action are white men. White men who reside at the top of our stratified society in America and so many other countries. Ok, maybe I just find it humorous.

The fight led me to dream about a professor at ISU who has had a profound impact upon my life and my beliefs. When I walked across the stage to receive my diploma and hood for my Master's degree, then down the ramp to get my picture taken, this professor met me (just like she did when I got my Bachelor's) and handed me a card. The card read, "Rarely does a student like you come a long! You are truly exceptional. I love you and congrats!" It might sound weird that a professor said "I love you" to me, but not in this case. This professor has played a big role in my life since 2002. A confidant, a friend, a mother figure, and someone who has helped guide me to where I am today.

She is the one who has helped shape some of my beliefs about Affirmative Action and why I feel so strongly about it and though not perfect, and while I am adamantly opposed to quotas, I support Affirmative Action because it has benefitted not just people of color, but white women. It has led to a greater equality in the workplace and that cannot be denied. The means may not be perfect, and the ends aren't bearing a perfect fruit, but the goals of Affirmative Action (equality in the workplace) is perfect and one day, maybe, hopefully, and God willing, we won't need to force people to be fair.

This leads me to a conundrum I find myself in related to my blog, something you might have gathered from my words above...

My blog is more than politics, it is my blog, therefore it is about my life, the things in my life, and the people. I don't know how comfortable I feel naming people when I write about things. I've done it before, and I know most of the people I write about wouldn't mind it, especially if I kept it to their first name, but I think I should have respect for these people and not name them. If you know me well, you will know who I am speaking about when I write. I'm not going to edit any past posts, but from now on, I will try to be more careful when I refer to my friends and family.

Last night I was with some friends, most of whom are Republican, and the War in Iraq was mentioned. I knew a few of them, Republicans included, didn't agree that the war, even if justified (justified according to them), was headed in the right direction, so I felt more freedom to make a comment against the war. Whoopsy!

All of the sudden the war is a great thing because the Iraqi's got to vote and little girls can go to school now. I remarked that yes, getting to vote before getting blown up into pieces is wonderful indeed and the little girls can go to school knowing the rest of their family was just murdered...

I got annoyed because while Iraq wasn't this beacon of greatness before the war, invading and occupying didn't make it this beacon of greatness now. That even though a lot of the innocent civilian deaths wasn't at the hands of American troops, America destabilized the region, made it a breeding ground for terrorists and we are now at least partly responsible for all of the deaths, if not completely responsible.

One of the people who disagreed with me instant messaged me later and he asked if I was upset with him. I told him no because I knew that we agreed on at least 75% of the things with the war and the other 25% aren't things we disagree on because he is ignorant and uneducated. I told him that I get upset with conservatives, especially LDS (Mormon) ones who are always far too supportive of war, even if it is justified through self-defense.

Jesus is the "prince of peace." Christ taught that "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." And the Doctrine and Covenants tells us to "renounce war and proclaim peace." And really, I could go on and on with the words of Christ, the words of Mormon leaders who have taught us how to view war, and references from the scriptures, but I then remember the quote from Gandhi, who stated, "non-violence which is a quality of the heart cannot come by an appeal to the brain."

I became a pacifist, and there are many types of pacifists, because in my heart, I couldn't justify many wars and battles that have been waged and fought, not because of a scripture or quote, though they played a part in my conversion, but because my heart couldn't wrap itself around the idea of fighting for peace.

I guess I was annoyed last night because I felt that some of the people defending the war don't invest the time and energy that I do into investigating the war to be truly and accurately informed. This isn't to say that if you read and research you will disagree with the war, but if you want to support something, at least know what you are supporting! Just my two cents.

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

--George W. Bush, 4/9/99, criticizing President Clinton for not setting a timetable for exiting Kosovo.


"I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."

--George W. Bush, 6/5/99

In public policy courses you learn how policy entrepreneurs use a "focusing event" to attach to their "solutions." It's inevitable and it will happen with any focusing event. Hmmm, I should provide an example. Let's use 9/11. 9/11 was a focusing event for many reasons. It moved several issues to the top of governmental and media agendas. Issues such as terrorism, immigration, airplane safety, airport safety, national security, etc...Is this clear?

Policy entrepreneurs are those who have solutions that are floating around, waiting to be attached to an event that happens that makes it easier to sell your solution. Can you imagine before 9/11 being told you can't line up at the front lavatory on an airplane? Now I think most people hear that policy and don't think twice about it.

With the Columbine shooting in 1999, many policy entrepreneurs used that focusing event to attach the solution of gun control. Still others tried to attach more regulation with video games, movies, music, etc...Some entrepreneurs used it to point out how unsafe schools are, and should we install metal detectors?

The focusing event of the Virginia Tech shootings should reveal many "solutions" that have been created and it will be interesting to see what these "solutions" are. I think we can all agree that gun control will be one solution, though the shooter using two legally obtained hand guns, so the sell of gun control will be harder than it was for Columbine. This brings me to a place I don't like to be in. I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other about gun control right now. I support our Constitution and I support the right to bear arms. I don't support the idea of everyone having access to any gun that exists, like an AK 47. However, when you illegalize something, a black market is created. Let's use the issue of the criminalization of drugs. If I want to buy illegal drugs, I can do it. It won't be legal and I could be jailed if caught, but I can get access to illegal drugs. The same thing is true for guns. If we create more gun control, how do we combat a growing black market that lines the pockets of criminals with more money? Do we ignore a growing black market because we think we are doing the right thing? What about studies that have been done that have shown that crime in other countries has increased due to stricter gun control laws? I haven't investigated the studies enough to see if the methodology is correct and if other variables that affect crime rate were accounted for. However, is it really as simple as creating more laws will lead to lower crime rates? Do the issues of crime and school shootings have a myriad of causes that work together to make the United States such a violent and scary country to live in?

There are many unanswered questions in regards to the effectiveness of gun control. Right now, I am open to any data that can be produced and shown to me, for either side, because this is definately something that will remain on the media agenda and gun control could reach the governmental agenda as well.

As you all know, I passed my master's comps and received a case I have been working on for the last 2 weeks. This morning I turned it in. On monday morning, at 9am, I will present my case to my graduate committee and defend my decisions. Wish me luck!

This weekend I will be putting the finishing touches on a paper that I have been working on all semester in my policy class. The paper started out investigating the relationship between public opinion of the Iraq War and media coverage, but I decided to change the direction of the paper based on an assignment in the class. We started out writing a paper and then turn in this paper, expanded, three separate times this semester. Each time, adding a new area, one of the new areas I needed to add made me realize I needed to change the paper. So, now I am looking at 9/11 and the possibility that it provided a "focusing event" that was used by the Bush Administration to invade and occupy Iraq. Okay, seriously, is there any doubt that 9/11 was used to justify the invasion? Here is an excerpt from my paper:

"Without the attacks on September 11, 2001, would public support have been high enough for the Bush Administration to push the war? The attacks brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American minds. Many Americans believed Iraq was connected to 9/11 and terrorism in general. Because of this, Americans were more willing to support the War in Iraq as an extension of the war on terror. An act of terrorism on American soil, a rare event indeed, was a dramatic news event, one that Lawrence and Birkland would include as something that would drive an issue to the top of the governmental and media agendas. Aside from driving an issue to the top of the governmental and media agendas, did the 9/11 attacks and War in Iraq become another example of Kingdon’s three streams theory?"

or does it? I am reading Deborah Stone's, Policy Paradox-The Art of Political Decision Making, and her chapter on facts has really resonated with me. In this chapter, Stone critiques Charles Lindblom who believes that government indoctrination cannot occur unless the government is a totalitarian one. Stone argues that indoctrination can occur if the information being given is intentionally manipulative and robs people of their capacity to think independently. Lest you think I will argue that Idahoans don't have the ability to think independently, let me finish.

Stone states that we are strongly influenced by peers, co-workers, family, and other groups of which we are part. She states that the "drive to conformity is as strong as the drive to select the best means to an end." I am not stating that Idahoans are stupid, and can't think for themselves, I am simply stating that they/we are human. Stone goes on to say that "in our various social and political roles, we act largely according to prior attitudes and beliefs rather than new information."

Indoctrination, Stone argues, can occur outside the framework of a centralized and/or unilateral government. She states that this occurs in our schools which teach students about
"obedience to authority, about social stratification according to ascriptive ability characteristics, and about discipline, orderliness, and the subordination of self to central schedules." WOW! Stone then states that indoctrination can also occur through ordinary government-citizen contact. That 'street-level bureaucrats' "give out moral and political lessons, along with rewards and punishments." Stay with me here...

Stone states that "government social service organizations have some very potent weapons with which to prod client behavior in the right directions." This includes the power to reduce welfare payments/benefits, removing children from families, or placing children back into families, the power to institutionalize and release, judges have the power to jail, etc...
She then cites the example of a Texas judge that "berated a bilingual Hispanic mother for speaking only Spanish so her daughter would become bilingual: 'You're abusing that child and you're relegating her to the position of housemaid. Now get this straight. You start speaking English to this child because if she doesn't do good in school, then I can remove her because it's not in her best interest to be ignorant.'"

With this in mind, Stone states that when this type of intimidation is carried out by a "government official in a state with a large Mexican and Mexican-American population
and a law making English the only official language, it surely belongs near the indoctrination end..."

With no similar statements from an Idaho judge (that I know of), and a smaller population of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans in this state, could it still be argued that Idaho, having recently passed a law to make English the official language of state business, practices indoctrination?

It has been a year and a half since I last spoke at a press conference, so I was a little bit nervous for this one. There were at least 4 camera's there recording footage to possibly show on the news, someone from the Idaho State Journal was there, but I am not sure if someone from the Idaho Statesman was there. There was also a gentleman from a radio station. Pretty good turnout.

After the press conference, where I spoke and a lady from SNAP spoke, Mary Grant, I was asked by channel 6 and another channel, to give an interview, which I did, of course. It's always nerve wracking giving interviews because they edit most of what you say and can edit you in such a way as to make you look bad, like an idiot, or who knows what else! Many of the questions were profound and issues I hadn't really formulated responses to. What I said on camera in those interviews was as raw as you can get. There were questions that forced me to reflect back on a period of my life that seems like eons ago. It's painful and troubling to bring yourself back to a place, a hell in every sense of the word, but it is, and was, necessary.

I have a responsibility to speak out. Not just for myself and my sister, for friends and family, but for the untold number of victims who not only suffered in silence, but now try to heal in silence-still handicapped by feelings of shame, embarrassment, fear, etc...

Getting to a place where you are comfortable talking about your own personal hell is not easy and it takes you on an emotional rollercoaster, but the main reason I am able to do it is because I MUST do it. I stated recently that one day I will have children and they will go to church and I don't ever want to look back at this period in my life and know, or think, I didn't do enough.

I've been debating with myself on whether or not I want to post what I said at the press conference. I haven't made up my mind yet. Though shared publicly with many cameras, microphones, legislators, and other audience members, somehow it still feels intensely personal and something I have only shared with those I love deeply. But maybe the words themselves isn't what is so personal, maybe it is the emotions I felt and feel...

With that said, I must attend to my studying as tomorrow morning I take my comprehensive exams. When you read this and if it is before 5pm on friday (though I hope to be done before 5), please say a prayer for me. I've been carrying the world on my shoulders and I am feeling a bit weak and terribly weary.

So today I need to turn in a research project I was given for my internship. So I've been working on that this weekend, and I'm not quite sure I should divulge what I've been researching...but it's been interesting...

I've also been finishing up my presentation I am set to give in around 10 hours on the prison industry. I need to remember that it is a Communication Management class and not a Political Science class nor is it a Sociology class, so I should keep my political and sociological opinions to myself!

I've also been working on this paper that will be peer reviewed this afternoon in my policy class. I started out looking at the role the media has played in the public opinion of the Iraq War. However, I have changed it to look at the relationship, or lack thereof, between 9/11 and the Iraq War. Without introducing you to several policy/public administration terms, this is going to be an academic paper and not something I'm pulling from my arse!

I also have a resume and cover letter due in the class where I will be giving my presentation.

AND, I've been trying to study for my comprehensive exams that take place this friday.

For those who may have an interest in my relationship with the Mormon Church; I did attend sacrament meeting today. I have a relatively new friend who offered to go with me to my ward's sacrament meeting. I'm still pretty shocked she offered to go. I don't think her kindness knows any limits. I texted her to tell her that I owe her "big time" and she invited me over for dinner. Thanks, Liz.

I am a huge fan of C.S. Lewis's quote that says to a Christian, there is no accident/coincidence in people meeting and becoming friends. I truly believe that and I am grateful for the friends I have and the roles they play in my life.

I also want to blog about the Mormon Church finding my sister and I when we left no paper trail for them. They found my sister today and me a few months ago. How? I do not know. I think it might remain a mystery for a very long time.

I have been pretty busy with studying for my comprehensive exams that I take this next friday, finishing up a presentation I must give on Monday (on the prison industry) and paper that I need to have reviewed by my peers on monday (my paper I have mentioned before about the Iraq War and the role the media has played-though I have decided to go in a different direction), as well as a research project that is part of my internship and that I need to have have complete by monday. So, I think that adequately explains my lack of political commentary or commentary period. Wish me luck on my comps and keep praying for me!

-Some posts on the Frank Church Banquet weekend

-A post about Fiasco, by Thomas E. Ricks

-A post about presidential scandals

-A post about my idea on how to address and fix(?) teacher and nurse shortages

-A post about The Children's Center and other mental health clinics/agencies and how I feel they are getting rich off of Medicaid and how this needs to stop

-A post, or several, on the Democratic candidates for President and maybe a post about the Republican candidates, including some thoughts on Mitt Romney

-And a post about the loss of free speech on college campuses

I am sure some readers of this blog are interested in reading what I feel about GWB's speech to the nation tonight. Sorry to disappoint you all, but I didn't watch it. I was in meetings all night and didn't get home until 10:30pm, and...

I try to avoid watching and/or hearing GWB speak. For one, it is painful-in so many ways. Secondly, it angers me too much. Thirdly, it is incredibly frustrating for me. I haven't watched GWB's State of the Union address since 2003. Since that time we have started a war I have been against since 2002. If I can't watch his State of the Union, there is absolutely no way I can watch a speech about the war in Iraq.

I would venture to say that many political junkies have an issue they care about more than every other. My issue is war. I am a peacenik, and a proud one. Some of the greatest moments in my life have occurred while I marched with hundreds, sometimes thousands, of protestors in opposition to the war in Iraq. I wish everyone could experience the feelings I have when I march-I don't think there are words to express those feelings. I am very glad I have videos and pictures to look back and remember that though my opposition placed me in the minority, I was in good company. And I would also like to say that while I respect others who are opposed to this war, I truly respect those who take their opposition to the streets.

I am not like most Americans. My opposition to the war didn't occur in 2006, or 2005, or 2004, or 2003, it was 2002, before it started. I remember being called a "traitor," "Saddam lover," "terrorist sympathizer," because I protested against the war.

Call me naive, call me an idealist, call me stupid, and call me a peacenik, but I wear my peacenik title with pride and there isn't anything wrong with being an idealist, there are certainly things I am stupid about, and I am sure I am naive about many topics. But don't call me wrong, because I'm right. This war was wrong and stupid and naive. Somehow saying, "I told you so," just isn't enough.

I'm gonna end here because I get really passionate about this and I don't want to write things I might regret in the morning.

"I don't know the answer."

The answer could have been worse. He could have stated he is opposed to legalizing gay marriage, which I would have a huge problem with. He could have totally evaded the question, which he didn't. But as angry as I want to get with his answer, politicians are putting themselves in a place where supporting gay marriage can be a career killer. However, they aren't alone in placing themselves there...

The last public opinion poll I looked at shows a majority of Americans don't support legalizing gay marriage. I anticipate that this number will drop as time goes on, but since Americans still aren't ready for gay marriage to be legal, many politicians feel they are unable to publicly state their support, even if privately they feel discrimination shouldn't be legal.

How angry should liberal Democrats be when Democratic politicians are afraid and/or unwilling to fight for equal rights for ALL citizens, which would include legalizing gay marriage? Couldn't Edwards have even given the ultimate copout answer of stating his support for civil unions but prefacing that with his opposition to gay marriage?

I apologize for not blogging, though I haven't really shared this blog with very many people. I have been busy with work and flew to Seattle this morning/afternoon.

On my vacation in Seattle, I will be writing two papers. One on presidential scandals and another paper will be about the book, Fiasco, by Thomas E. Ricks. I highly recommend that people read Fiasco. It's not light reading, by any means, but it gives some very in-depth information about the build-up to the war in Iraq and the actual war in Iraq. Basically I am going to be analyzing the decision making process involved and analyze the book using some public administration principles. I plan on sharing some of both of my papers when I complete them!

For fear of revealing far too much personal information, I just want to say that something that happened today made my entire year, and I will end there!