By Dahni

© Copyright 6/2/09

all rights reserved

As it happened, I turned on my television set and witnessed a shocking (as the British are fond of saying), display of civility.

Forget about the fact that this came from ‘Happening Now’ on Fox News if you do not like them. Forget about the moderator (whom ever he was), if you don’t like him. Forget about the one person mostly likely being a Democrat if you don’t like them or her. Forget about the other person that is most likely a Republican if you don’t like them or him. What took my breath away was, the display of civility among them, so civil, it was Shocking Civility!

Radio and television talk show hosts, with all your expected ranting and raving and all you media people with your assumed bias, should have watched this, and should take notice; learn from this and put it to good use.

The moderator asked his guests a simple question and the discussion (notice that word “discussion,” as opposed to arguing), centered around the upcoming visit of the president, to Egypt. His guests were:

Heather Hurlburt, a former speechwriter for President Bill Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, is a Michigan-based consultant and writer.

and

Elliott Abrams is an American lawyer who has served in foreign policy positions for Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. He currently serves as a Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations and as a member of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council.

There were no loaded questions or ulterior motives by the moderator and he should be commended on how he handled the subject, asked the questions and how he interacted with his guests.

Both Hurlburt and Abrams masterfully articulated their opinions and divergent viewpoints, calmly, professionally and oh my, courteously too!

There was no display of one-up-ing, interrupting each other, nastiness, eye-rolling, or loud talking. Oh my, they each allowed the other to complete their individual answers too! That was shocking, just shocking!

WOW, it was beautiful spectacle to behold! It made me glad (again), to be one of WE in the U.S.A and hopeful our British friends (that practice this behavior regularly), on the other side of the pond might be proud of US.

If I were to pick up a dictionary and look up “we agree to disagree,” I should find pictures of Heather Hurlburt and Elliott Abrams!

This is what WE are missing in this country, the art of conversation. Now maybe it’s jus’ little ole’ pea-brain me, but I betcha’ WE could find ways to work together despite our differences, if WE would act this way and treat each other like this!

Kudos to Fox News, their moderator for this segment, Heather Hurlburt and Eliot Abrams!

Enthused – one of WE,

Dahni

Are we a wee or a WE?

I always kind of thought wee meant like small, insignificant, tiny, does not matter much and stuff like that.

WE, with all caps is a plural pronoun which suggests the idea of one big collective of individuals bound together, by a single purpose, right?

This word WE is like a real simple – a two letter word which implies WE the people, e pluribis unum (Latin – “out of many, one”). WOW, that sounds really cool, but is we a wee or are we a WE?

No, no, no, I am not talking about the idea or the concept of WE as suggested in the U.S. Constitution. I am referring here to the practice of WE in our daily life.

We are one and together in the sense that we all reside in or are citizens of  the same country. On 9/12/01 we all seemed to come together, albeit briefly and it has been suggested that we were bound together by fear. But what happened to that? Did we not return to me, my party, my life, my thing, my money, my agenda and well – me, me, me, my, my, my and mine? Where are WE together now. What is it that WE are bound to?

People normally are bound to each other by a common goal or a common enemy. But if your enemy is not my enemy then they must be my friend and therein, we certainly are not bound together and are not a WE. If my goal or goals is not/are not your goal or goals, we be not a WE. So I guess, in my little pea sized; wee brain perhaps, we must be millions of voices loud, soft or silent, each going in an equal number of directions and therefore, small, insignificant, tiny, does not matter much and stuff like that, a wee.

Are you sick and tired enough to be sick and tired of this?

Over here, someone(s) getting some, all upset about what’s going on over there. Over there, someone(s) has taken upon themselves the battle cry of  ’Wake Up’ and seek to wake up others. Over here, some are tired and want to remain asleep. Over there, someone(s) are trying to fix the fixers that f—-d up this and that. Over here, someone(s) trying to give the present fixers a chance to fix what is f—-d up and some say is f—–g it up even more. Over there, ‘You can’t fight City Hall’ (the government), meaning why bother, no one will listen to you anyway. Over here, someone(s), just don’t care until they have to; something bad happens to them personally or somehow they are just forced to make some kind of change.

This and that, over there, over here, me, my and mine is not effective. There is not much power in that as it is just a bunch of me’s and you’s all separated, unlinked in purpose and unbound in will to change. We be a wee.

Now look, I’m not going to leave you hanging. We need read solutions to real problems. In these posts, I am endeavoring to offer some suggestions (ALL FREE OF CHARGE – NO STRINGS ATTACHED – NO HIDDEN AGENDA etc. by the way). But in order for you and I to ever get together on ANYTHING (IF that even is attractive to you and me), we first have to know where we are.

In order for you and I to become a WE, we must first clearly understand that we have been and are acting like millions of wee folk. And if you are offended because,you think I am racially motivated and am an offense to wee folk, it is only because we iz’ wee folk, unwilling to change and become a WE. It is not our differences that prevent us from becoming a WE, it is our indifference that make us a wee.

I am hopeful that we want to leave wee and become WE, so I’ll sign off this post with…

enthused – one of WE

Dahni

© Copyright 5/27/09

all rights reserved

Well yes, I’m proud to be an American again and it was not just today. But today, I saw this pickup truck.

Right, it must have been a redneck, gun-toting, bible- thumping, tea party moronic,  terroist,  radical right? Yep, that’s kind of what I thought too, especially when I saw the flag of the U.S.A. mounted on the truck and flying in the breeze.

Right, I should have forced the truck off the road and yelled at the driver for disrespecting the flag, since it was not being displayed properly?

13. “When the flag is displayed on a car , the staff shall be fixed firmly to the chassis or clamped to the right fender.”

source:

http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html

By the way, I did not read anything about displaying a flag on a pickup truck and this pickup truck had it mounted and it was flying from the truck bed.

Well, maybe they do not know proper flag etiquette, and ignorance of the law is no excuse right? Surely it must be OK to do whatever you want and say whatever you want cuz’ that’s freedom right? It must be Okey Dokey then, to burn it, spit on it, and all that, just to be politically correct and not offend anyone right? Surely then, it must be alright for the redneck, gun-toting, bible- thumping,  tea party moronic, terroist,  radical to fly the flag of our country in the back of their pickup truck, incorrectly right?  But the flag was still on the truck, blowing in the breeze.

Dare I say how this really made me feel? Well, it made me proud to be an American, again!

Enthused – one of WE,

Dahni

“First and foremost is a rigorous intellect — a mastery of the law, an ability to hone in on the key issues and provide clear answers to complex legal questions. Second is a recognition of the limits of the judicial role, an understanding that a judge’s job is to interpret, not make, law; to approach decisions without any particular ideology or agenda, but rather a commitment to impartial justice; a respect for precedent and a determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand.”

President of the United States 5/26/09

And what does the nominee think a judge should do?

“All of the legal defense funds out there, they’re looking for people with Court of Appeals experience because it is — Court of Appeals is where policy is made.  And I know, and I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law, I know. (laughing) Okay, I know.  I know.  I’m not promoting it and I’m not advocating it.  I’m — you know. (laughing)”

Sonia Sotomayor

And what has been her record? She has been overturned, 80% of the time. Sotomayor has a record of being rebuffed by the high court. Of the six decisions she was a part of that came before the Supreme court, five were reversed. In the sixth, the court disagreed with Sotomayor’s reasoning, that she erred in her stautory interpretation (she goofed up on the law).

So what do WE the people think about this nominee?

1. Can WE separate the popularity of the president; what he says and how he says it from what he does? I can and this choice for the highest court in the land, clearly shows what he says and what he does are miles apart!
2. Can WE separate the nomines’s inspiring personal story; her heritage and gender from her record as a judge? I can and though Lady Justice is supposed to be blind, Sonia Sotomayor like the president, might appear to be all warm and fuzzy, but she has one eye open to make policy whenever and where ever possible.

Lady Justice Blind?

Our U.S. Constitution never implied, defined or intended for the Supreme Court to make policy, as this is the work of the Legislative branch and  neither were or are they empowered to EVER INTREPRET the CONSTITUTION, only to defend it!

Screwed,

Dahni

   I’m feeling ‘screwed!’ According to many polls before and after the election, and from conversations I have had with others, I am not alone. Many of us in America, “We the People,” are feeling ‘screwed!’

   1. Most of us did not want Congress, (OUR elected representatives), to spend OUR 750 billion dollars to bail out what THEY screwed up, but they did it anyway, and they are not done.

   2. Congress heard from US that we wanted to drill here and drill now, for the oil we already have in our country. Now there are rumors that this will be reversed as soon as the new president is sworn in, January 20th, 2009.

   Now I could be wrong about this, but is’nt this “TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION?” If so, can’t we according to our constitution, “petition government for redress of grieviences?”

   What do you think we should do? What are your suggestions?

“WE” Little Bit for the Day: If you are up on the roof with a broom sweeping off your leaves, make sure you take the broom down before you put the ladder away.

If you would like to post, click on the page: About ‘Screwed or Enthused’ or here

One of WE,

Dahni