The Turkey Says "EAT HAM!"

On celebrating the holiday of Thanksgiving, we now must question just what it is we really are celebrating. Is it the fact that the pilgrims survived? Or has it just become another excuse for gluttony and the fulfillment of selfish desires. And just what does turkey, mashed potatoes and cranberry sauce have to do with it aside from being the traditional meal. Is there no deeper meaning behind it all? We’ve done the same thing to Christmas, although the original spirit behind that holiday is less obscured. It’s so disgustingly superficially so see all of the cheesy decorations that have evolved, and people seem to be traveling a parallel route.

On the Road of Life...

On Profit

Does our society profit at the expense of others or do we have a system of relatively fair trade? Is there moderation of extortionism? Have we deviated from original intents?
While it seems perfectly legitimate that one should have the potential of profit from one's labors, it is only right that input should have a great equivalence to output. However, the prospect of trade is no longer as simplistic as it once was. Items and produce are rarely exchanged first or second hand. Through a vast network, America receives cheap plastic trinket from China, motor vehicles from Japan, coffee from South America and sugar from Mauritius.
Mauritius: an island predominated by sugar cane plantations, yet they are unable to process their own produce. Mauritian sugar packets I observed were stamped with "Processed in Orlando, Florida, USA." as is dictated by international debt policies. Did not the 13 Colonies become an independent nation, The United States of America, for no less? While there is some profit to be made selling the raw goods, the finished product holds higher monetary value. What gives international powers the right to limit the original producer to the export of raw materials? In this manner one observes the control exerted so that one entity profits more than the others. Because of these behaviors the globe has been divided into first, second and third worlds based on so-called "economic progress."

Public vs. Private

If the entirety of our societal structure is based on the economic infrastructure, not only must we reexamine and redefine our values s a society, but one must question the feasibility of individual progress. How do we reach the top? It is really open to everyone? In principle perhaps. But when your third grade teacher told the class that anyone can become president someday, did you really believe them? Such encouragement seems to serve as a ploy-
“If you work hard enough…”
“Well, if you work hard enough at the right job…”
“If you don’t have anyone holding you back…”
“If you have the right connections…”
The list of criteria is potentially endless. When we are expected to better ourselves by hard work and perseverance it no longer becomes “if you work hard enough…” My mother has been working hard her whole life, but as her labors do not amount to anything terribly valuable to society, she is at poverty level. Thousands of people work full time and are hardly able to support themselves and their dependents. They work plenty hard… Ultimately, value is not placed on one’s work ethic so much as one’s ambition. Society lies when they place the emphasis on the quality of “doing a good job.” It is better to uncover inequality so it can be rectified, unless of course it is more advantageous to leave the status quo undisturbed. In the name of equality it is assumed that the standards must always be risen and never taken down. But if there is no cap, as the base rises, everything is pushed upwards. A minute percentage at the top controls the vast majority of wealth. Would they sacrifice that power in the name of equality? Should they? That would go against everything a capitalistic “Democratic Republic” stands for. Downright unpatriotic. Yet the general public is still placated by our title, which denotes equality… “liberty and justice for all…” On the other hand, how can equality ever really be achieve as there is no utopian society?

Falling Flagpoles

Here we go again... what is news? Despite a newspaper's affiliations, it should be expected that they report actual news and yet the latest coverage on Hillary Clinton's campaign is on falling flagpoles. One might hope that the article might cover something more valid that an "ill omen" of campaign. It was interesting to observe that reader responses ranged from "this is not news" to "even the flag poles don't want her to be president." It makes one feel rather disgusted with the media and American populace in general. Depressing, isn't it?

opposites

Oxymorons are tools used intentionally in creative writing and perhaps more often unintentionally in speech. An opposite within itself, they appear to emphasize the dichotomy of a situation or state of being. Although a literary tool, it seems that oxymorons can reflect a deeper meaning. Dichotomy and duplicity… Certainly vague statements are a favorite of politicians, who seem to not only contradict themselves but supposed party values and policies. Mankind is incredibly complex, which is reflected in our language.

Slogans

A motto can be a powerful tool, used to invoke feelings of support and pride in the individuals quoting it. At the same time, such sayings can be potentially dangerous when the general populace is ignorant as to the meanings and motives behind it. I tried to find some background information on the logo “Support Our Troops” and I came across this web site, http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/AmericaSupportsYou/index.aspx
A nationwide program initiated by the US Department of Defense. Why? Have such nationwide support groups been initiated for previous conflicts? Why this one? Americans are not protesting en masse as they did for the Vietnam conflict, instead, you can purchase a coffee mug to “Support Our Troops.” A coffee mug? A t-shirt? Does the money go to aid American troops overseas? How do I support our troops? By agreeing that it is the Presidential policies and not them that are wrong? Or do I have to buy a bumper sticker from the official web site? Perhaps the reasons behind the slogan are ambiguous, but I believe it means we should be appreciative of those who have sacrificed their freedoms to serve their country, even though their contributions are being sorely abused.

Candidate or Clown?

This is what appeared today on cnn.com’s news headlines…
Latest News
· CNNMoney: Chrysler to cut 12,000 jobs
· Tropical Storm Noel moves north
· CNNMoney: Foreclosures double in 3rd quarter
· As robber waves gun, cop interrupts holdup
· Bounty hunter 'Dog' taped spewing N-word
· KTVU: Laci's mom, not Scott, gets cash
· Martin: Time for more action, less complaining
· Dark horse Huckabee glad he's still alive
· Noose incidents: Pranks or pure hate?
· WSB: Men tried to sneak knives on flight
· Ticker: Gloves off: Obama rips Clinton's dodging
· CNN Heroes: Fighting AIDS with Ashley Judd
· Girls reunited with dog they thought dead
· 'Harry Potter' offshoot unveiled
· Michael Jackson (!?) spied at costume shop
· CNN Wire: Latest updates on top stories

While perhaps entertaining, what are Harry Potter and Michael Jackson doing on the internet site’s “front page” news?
Observation: on CNN’s meet the 2008 Candidates, all of the pictures seem to be rather unflattering… pictures taken while the person was in the middle of talking, leaving them with their mouth wide open… is this unintentional? Why are some pictures more comical than others? And if we truly have a separation of church and state, than why are candidates’ religious practices important enough to note denomination?.......


This presidential election will be my first as a voter. After visiting several of the candidate campain websites, I must say that they all look very much the same for the most part... How do I make an informed decision? Are we just being told what we want to hear? Is there any unbiased source... everything said is calculated to challege other candidates...

Responsibility

When one holds great power, there is a great responsibility for actions and policies, especially when such actions have an international effect. Why then does our current presidential administration refuse to do so? From Mukasey's ambiguity of what defines torture to Bush's desire for retroactive immunity covering communication companies and himself, is anyone seriously questioning and challengine these policies? Are the instituted power checks - congress, etc, just going to go along with such policies? Why? What are they afraid of? or is it simply in the best interest of their careers to go with the flow? Who really has control and what can be done? Some mess for the next president to deal with... Is Bush just going to sweep everying under the rug, or is going to attempt to do some housekeeping before leaving his office?