Minimum Effort

I'm making an effort to get back on my blogging schedule. Today is Current Events Wednesday where I voice my very opinionated voice-y opinion on something in the news. Or something people are talking about. Or something that I feel like talking about. Ya know.

Anyway, I saw on Instagram on Monday an image furthering the movement to raise minimum wage to $11.00. You really gotta be kidding me there. $11.00??? Really??? I'm sure this sounds good to all the high school drop outs out there, but let's be realistic.

How many small business owners can afford both the Affordable Care Act and paying a 16 year old kid $11.00 an hour?? Even before the health care deal, a small business owner would have a hard time paying a minimum wage of $11.00. Who do you think is really going to pay those increased wages? The consumer will when all businesses, because you don't really think this will be confined to just small businesses do you, raise their prices to offset the increase in minimum wage.

The instagram pic said to raise minimum wage because, "nobody can survive on $7.25." I'm not even trying to debate that. I can't imagine how hard it would be to live off of $7.25/hour, especially if you're a family. But you know what? Minimum wage equals minimum skills. Get yourself educated. Get yourself some experience. And don't even begin to tell me that there aren't enough resources out there. There are free job fairs all the time. Most communities have workshops for job hunting, resume writing, etc. And if all you're doing is earning minimum wage, you qualify for student loans/grants. Can't afford books? Rent them. My school had a thing where I could designate part of my loan for books and I still had money left over after paying tuition. What other excuse do you have?

Don't cry to me and don't expect me to support/vote for $11.00 minimum wage.

Today, It's Games

This is a subject that has annoyed me for many years. First of all, I’d just like to say…How very easy and convenient it must be for people to be able to lay the blame for mental illness and/or a lack of parenting and/or a lack of personal responsibility on the doorstep of video games. It takes a severe lack of imagination, or at least a good imagination, to use video games, television, and movies as an explanation for why people do dumb things.

Anyway…

 I’d like to open my topic by saying that I am by no means, an expert clinician on mental illness. I only have my familial experiences and examples to go by. Haha. I kid.  Sort of. My undergrad is in English and I only took intro to psychology. Still, I would like to claim a sort of expert-ship when it comes to gaming. I’ve been playing video games since the original Atari. I even played the black and white Pong but I think that was a little after it was initially introduced. I played The Oregon Trail in elementary school on a Commodore 64. I’ve played games on every Playstation console and almost every Nintendo console. I admit to never having had a Sega or Xbox though. I put my foot down against the Xbox because we already had a Wii and the PS3. I also game on a PC, Mac, iPod/phone, and iPad as well. Suffice it to say, I’ve been playing video games the majority of my life. I still play some sort of game at least once a week and participate in the gaming world via Twitter and blogs. Yup. I’m a geek or nerd or whatever you want to call it. I am joined by millions. We are legion. Deal with it.

I’ve played a variety of games from first person shooters to MMO fantasy games to platform games to simulation games to role playing games. I’ve even played a few sports games even though I’m not a sports fan. I can’t think of a genre of video game that I haven’t played or at least tried. AND LO AND BEHOLD!!! I’ve never felt compelled to get a gun and kill actual people. I've never gone on a hunt for elves or gnomes. I have also never developed a gaming compulsion.

I’ve known people that have had a compulsion to play video games. All of them have said that their compulsion had roots in another problem or issue in their life. For instance, one person said that his/her gaming compulsion stemmed from issues with his/her father (this person was 19 at the time of their gaming affliction). The game became a place to hide, a place to avoid confronting the real problem. Another person said that they had a generally addictive personality. Video games weren’t the first, nor were they the last, addiction that this person had to overcome.

I have to say that I’ve never known someone who translated actions in a game to real life like the criminals we’ve been hearing about in the news. Most people understand that something that is animated, such as video games, isn’t real and isn’t an example by which to live their lives.

How many millions of people who play video games every day and aren’t criminals are there versus the people that play video games and have committed violent crimes because of them?

I’m not saying that there are not inappropriate games, at least in my subjective opinion, out there. Personally, for my family, Grand Theft Auto and all of its incarnations, aren’t allowed in our home. You know why? Because the Mister and I actively parent our children. Still, offensive, objectionable, unacceptable, inappropriate, are all subjective words. What I call offensive someone else might not and vice versa.

I’m also not saying that in some instances, video games cannot play a part in the motivation behind a violent crime. But I am saying, in my inexpert psychological opinion, that even if games have been part of the drive behind a crime, that it is only one piece of a diverse and complicated puzzle. People that have the ability to pick up a gun and kill innocent strangers have way more complicated problems than the video games that they play or the movies that they watch.

My point being is that of all the people that I have known of that have had addictive issues with video games have all had other underlying personality flaws and/or mental instability(s) and/or social issues. They have all said that if it hadn’t been video games, it would have been something else. These people had the ability to take personal responsibility for their actions despite everything else they had to deal with which is more than you can say about most people. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, we are a society full of people with an inability to take personal responsibility for our actions and pass the blame off onto someone or something else. Today, it’s video games, yesterday it was guns, who knows what it will be tomorrow. How about we all take an old fashioned look at our values and personal ethics for a change. If you think I'm wrong, some of my opinions here are supported by someone who is an expert. Read this article on video game addiction/compulsion.

It would be a breath of fresh air if people could demonstrate that they possess common sense. And I’m not talking about the criminals here.

Freedoms, Poop, and Parenting

All we hear about these days is, "It's my right" to whatever; say what I want, go where I want, do what I want. Yeah. You'd be correct. Speaking from the point of view of an American, as a citizen of the United States, I do have certain freedoms. Speech, bearing arms, religion and all that. But those freedoms come with the responsibility of living with the consequences of my decisions and actions. Sure. I can say that I agree or disagree with gay marriage, but then I have to live with the backlash of whichever group disagrees with my opinion. I can decide to breastfeed in public, but then I have to live with the consequences of offending people that think baring my breasts in public should be considered indecent exposure. I can beat the crap out of my kids with a belt and defend my actions by saying, "It may not be the exact right thing to do, but at least my kids aren't shooting up their school." But then I have to live with my kids' hate and fear of me and the judgement of the public that believes that is abuse.

This week, two headlines have been going through my head. The first one is about the couple that changed their baby's diaper in the middle of a Starbucks. It's my opinion that the parents in question were incredibly rude and that it's just disgusting to wave around human excrement in a place where food is being served and consumed by the public. Also, the headlines for this story are so misleading. The Huffington Post, for example says, "Starbucks Diaper Change Prompts Call To Police". It wasn't the diaper change that caused the Starbucks' employees to call the police, it was the actions of the father, Alex Burgos, that prompted the call. According to the article, he became belligerent and purposely dumped coffee on the floor. Really raises my opinion of these people that they behave so childishly right after claiming they were doing nothing wrong in the first place. How would you feel if I changed my kids smelly, dirty, germ-laden diaper on your dining room table during dinner and then right after than, shoved the meat platter onto the floor for kicks? Those parents had other options than changing that diaper in the middle of the Starbucks. I've been the parent of two babies. I speak from experience.

 Secondly, I just saw this article from our local news station this morning:  "Group of Vets Refused Service at Oceanside Grill" According to the article, the Davino's Cabo Grill refused to serve a group of American Legion motorcyclists because of the vests they were wearing. The motorcyclists said that the vests were covered in pins and patches that were all military related. But, the grill has a policy not to allow patrons to "wear colors", no matter what those "colors" may or may not be associated with. I guess that this particular grill has had problems in the past with certain groups so they have a policy in place that doesn't allow people to wear clothing associating them with a group, any group. 

As you know, my husband is a Marine. I also come from a very long line of veterans serving all branches of the military. I've even lived in a place where we didn't advertise being a military family because military service members were oftentimes the targets of violence and discrimination. Even so, a policy is a policy. This group wasn't being singled out. It's like a rep from the grill said, if they allow one group to get away with violating the policy, then they have to let everyone which, in the past, has led to fights and whatnot. It's my opinion that this business, or any business, should be allowed to protect their property and their patrons. The bikers had the option to remove the vests and then be served, but they refused. Free will exercised.

It's easy, at least to me, to see both sides to each of these two stories.

Sure. As a parent, sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do. Been there, understand that. On the other hand, unless that baby had explosive diarrhea (in which case the baby should have been at home resting and not out on the town), I have a hard time believing that the parents had no other choice but to change that diaper in the sitting area of an establishment that serves food. I've been places where there wasn't a changing table in the restroom. I remember using the pad thingy that comes with diaper bags in the backseat of my car in those cases. If the situation was so immediate, why did the parents let the diaper get so full in the first place? Diapers hold a lot.    

As for the Vets, I believe in the absolute respect of our nation's Veterans. But I don't believe that being a Veteran makes you exempt for rules and laws. They were expressing their freedom of speech but the restaurant was also expressing their freedom to refuse service.

All actions, opinions, and words have consequences. Be sure you're willing to deal with those consequences when people call you on your sh--, er, I mean crap. And now that I've used my freedom of speech to express my opinions, I have to be prepared to deal with people that disagree with me. 

One last thing. Being a parent does not mean you get to behave like an inconsiderate, disrespectful, holier than thou, asshole. Being a parent does not put a golden bubble around you that allows you to violate other people's freedoms by being naked in public or exposing perfect strangers to fecal matter. Being a parent does not give you the right to behave like you are above the expected rules and norms of society. It certainly doesn't make you better than anyone else. Again. Just my opinion. 

 Ok. One more last thing. Maybe we, as Americans, should learn the difference between freedoms granted by the Constitution and free will. I'll explain what I mean. As a sentient human being, I have free will. This means that I am in control of myself and free will allows me to walk where I want, say what I want, behave how I want, etc. I could, right this minute, grab a gun and walk into a bank and and use my learned vocabulary to demand that they give me all their money. There is nothing physically stopping me from doing this. That's free will. Free will comes with consequences which means that my hypothetical actions would most likely result in my being jailed. The Constitution grants me the right to say what I want but it doesn't exempt me from negatively using my free will to say what I want when it threatens the safety of others. Those parents had the free will to change their baby's diaper in public. Free will didn't exempt them from being inconsiderate human beings. No man is an island. Unless you decide to cut yourself off from society 100%, you have to deal with the consequences of your actions. Get the difference???

Laws vs. Morals

(The following is my opinion. It is not meant as a resource for you to use to form your own opinion.)

I wanted to write this huge piece on this topic that would have been researched to within an inch of its life and cited and all of my opinions and facts backed up by scholarly, or at least, credible sources. I might still do that, but for now, this is where I'm at with this particular subject.

Gun Control

  

I’d say about 50% of what I see on Facebook are those card things, pictures, articles, and opinions about gun control. Whatever they might be.  It’s in the news almost every day. Everyone has an opinion.

Whether or not I believe in gun control, I don’t think that’s the root of the problem when it comes to gun violence. The problem began way before all of these various teenagers and adults decided to get their hands on a gun and shoot up the handiest target. The problem began way before those offenders were driven to commit these crimes.

What causes gun violence?

·      Lack of parenting.

·      Lack of morals.

·      Lack of  consideration for the consequences of our actions.

·      The stigma attached to depression and other mental disorders.

In my opinion, and from what I observe on a daily basis, parents don’t parent anymore and teachers don’t provide structure and consequences anymore. Nobody commands nor demands respect from kids. We allow kids to walk all over us. They strut around tattooed and pierced, wearing enough makeup for ten people and clothes that wouldn’t cover an infant, pretending to be adults when they still act like irresponsible kids that they are. They show up late for school or just don’t go. They disregard their curfew if they have one at all. These same kids play in the streets and vandalize people’s property either deliberately or due to a lack of respect for other people’s things. They don’t turn in homework because there is little to no consequences for doing so. They bully other kids because it’s funny, because the other kids are different in some way, because their parents and teachers don’t tell them it’s wrong. NOBODY takes ownership of their screw-ups and EVERYBODY passes the blame off onto someone or something else. A kid is failing their classes. Well, it’s the school’s fault for not teaching them. No. It’s the parent’s fault for not making them do the work. No. It’s the kids’ fault for not doing their job as a student. Pick one. You don’t have grocery money. Well, it’s the government’s fault for not handing you money. It’s the economy’s fault for not having enough available jobs. It certainly isn’t your fault for spending money on beer, drugs, cigarettes and cell phones instead of food. We don’t teach our kids the fundamentals of respect, that they are not entitled to passing grades or iPods or cell phones or trips to the mall. We don’t teach our kids that there are consequences for their actions.

Society’s moral compass has become skewed. When did it become ok to walk around with your butt and/or underwear hanging out of your pants or out the bottom of your shorts or skirts? Sometimes I see women/kids/teens (who can tell with the amount of makeup on their faces and the provocative clothes they wear) walking around my neighborhood and I honestly can’t tell if they’re hookers or not. When did it become okay to portray drug use on regular, non-late night, non-premium channels? When did crass jokes of a sexual nature become every day on TV? Our society has become accepting of these things to the point where we no longer even notice them because they have become normal.

So, if it’s ok to be a half-dressed, potty mouth, when will it become acceptable to have, to talk about, and to ask for help for mental disorders? When I finally figured out that I have depression and social anxiety, I started talking about it out loud. Almost everyone that I have told, when they heard me talk about it first, they talked about their own messed up heads. This has led me to believe that there are a lot more people out there with some sort of mental disorder, whether mild or severe, than we realize because they are too embarrassed and/or ashamed to talk about it. Bottling this stuff up inside and then compounding it with shame only makes things worse or at least seem worse.  It’s sad that people have to feel this way about something that is largely out of their control. I certainly didn’t ask to feel anxious every time I’m around people. How many of our veterans return from combat only to silently deal with PTSD and then when it becomes too overwhelming, opt for suicide?? The stigma attached to mental disorders has to go away.

These are the things that lead people to picking up guns with the intent to do harm to others or to themselves. And you know what? They also go for knives, chemicals, and other means of violence. The invention of guns didn’t facilitate the invention of violence.  People have been doing violence to each other since cavemen were defending their mastodon meat from a neighboring caveman with wooden clubs.

Are you aware of the countries where gun ownership is already against the law or where they have very strict (I’m aware that’s a relative term) gun laws? Let’s take our neighbor, Mexico. The following are the types firearms Mexican citizens are allowed to own:

            1.            Semi-automatic handguns of caliber no greater than .380 (9mm Browning, 9mm Corto, 9mm Kurz, 9mm Short, and 9×17mm). Left excepted are calibers .38 Super and .38 commander, and also calibers 9mm. [Such as] Mausser, Luger, Parabellum and Commander, as well as similar models of the same caliber of the excepted, from other brands.

            2.            Revolvers of calibers no greater than .38 Special, left excepted is caliber .357 magnum.

Land tenure owners, common land owners and farmworkers outside urban zones, may keep and carry, upon registration, one weapon of those already mentioned, or a .22 caliber rifle, or a shotgun of any caliber, except those of a barrel length shorter than 25 inches (635mm) and of caliber greater than 12-gauge (.729" or 18.5 MM).

Additionally, Article 10 of the Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives states:

(translated) The firearms that can be authorized to participants of shooting or hunting, to keep in their home or to carry with a license, are the following:

            1.            Semi-automatic handguns, revolvers and rifles of caliber .22, rimfire ammo

            2.            Handguns of .38 caliber for Olympic shooting or other competition

            3.            Shotguns in all their calibers and models, except those with a barrel length shorter than 25 inches, and calibers greater than 12-gauge.

            4.            Triple-barrel shotguns in the calibers authorized in the preceding section, with a barrel for metallic cartridges of different caliber.

            5.            High-powered rifles, of repeating or semi-automatic function, non-convertible to full-auto, with the exception of .30 caliber carbines, rifles, muskets and carbines caliber .223, 7 and 7.62mm, and Garand rifles caliber .30.

            6.            High-powered rifles of greater caliber than those mentioned in the previous section, with special permission for their use abroad, for hunting of game bigger than those present in national wildlife.

Anything of a higher caliber than those listed above are considered to be for military and police use only. Additionally, Mexican citizens are only allowed to own up to two firearms for home protection.

·      The percentage of homicides in Mexico committed with a firearm:  54.9%

Now let’s consider our other neighbor, Canada, which doesn’t have a guaranteed right to bear arms law at all.

·      Percentage of homicides in Canada committed with a firearm:  32%

 I didn’t bother to look up statistics on gun violence that did not result in death. Call me lazy.

The point I’m trying to make is that countries with strict gun laws have not eliminated gun violence and I feel safe in predicting that they will not do so, at least not in my lifetime. Probably not my children’s lifetime either. When and if various countries eliminate gun violence, people will still have the ability to strangle each other to death with their bare hands. What's the solution to that?

Limiting or eliminating American’s right to bear arms isn’t the solution to the problem of gun violence. All this will serve to do is to take firearms away from law-abiding citizens while ensuring that criminals will remain armed. You can’t end gun violence until you get rid of all the guns on the planet, including those used by the police and military. Then you also have to get rid of all the facilities capable of producing and manufacturing guns. This includes getting rid of the minds with the knowledge needed to manufacture guns. What would you, those of you in favor of eliminating gun ownership, propose that we do with those people? Take them out back and shoot them?

Dreaming up stricter gun laws is easy. Taking away guns is a tangible so-called "solution". Actually owning up to our lack of morals and ethics as a society is hard to do. It’s not something that we can actually put our hands on whereas guns are and therefore the "obvious" answer is to take them away from law-abiding citizens. Again, admitting out loud that we are making mistakes with our kids and neglecting them by not setting rules and boundaries and then enforcing those rules and boundaries is hard to do. As is not making excuses for their bad behavior. It’s hard to admit and it’s even harder to figure out a solution and then act on that solution. You can’t look at incompetence and societal degradation and then take it away and melt it down into something else the same way that you can a gun. Gun laws are easy and America is kidding itself if it thinks an easy "answer" is the actual solution to this difficult problem. It’s not even a starting point.  

And for pete’s sake. Don’t you realize that the politicians who, yesterday, didn’t have an opinion on gun control or had a relaxed opinion on gun control but today they are all about writing new gun laws to "protect" their constituents are only doing so to get or keep your vote?? Can’t we think with our own brains and stop eating that crap up with a spoon?? Hello! Obama and gay rights. Just saying.

Further Reading (may or may not have anything to do with my opinion):

http://news.brown.edu/pressreleases/2011/10/guns 

https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/35_1/iclr_35_1_web.pdf

A vast repository of articles on the 2nd Amendment as well as a plethora of other political-type subjects. 

More: Do your own due diligence. Form your own opinion based on valid research, your own sense of ethics, and information presented from both sides of the issue. If you attend school, use your school's library to find scholarly, researched, peer reviewed articles.

Honoring the Iron Lady

(This post is courtesy of the Mister. All writing, thoughts, opinions, and research are his own.)

With two major incidents recently occurring in the news, the Boston marathon bombing and the ricin letters, we may have forgotten that the world lost a pioneer for women’s rights and conservatism on April 8^th, 2013. Margaret Thatcher’s death was a blow to many who grew up in the 1980s. Whether you agree with her politics or not, you must admire the way she went about her business with the same tenaciousness as any man. She was so effective as a politician; she held the office of Prime Minister for 11 years, the longest of anyone, and to a generation of Americans, she was the ally that could be counted on as the United States and the UK fought against the “evil Empire”, USSR.  I will always remember her as the “Iron Lady” and the strong ally of the United States that she was.

Instead of treating the death of a significant leader of our biggest ally in the world with the respect due her, the Obama Administration decided that they were too busy with other affairs to send someone from their administration to pay the respects of a nation. Instead, Obama opted to leave it up to the former presidents and the civil servants who had worked with Thatcher.

I can understand if the President doesn’t want to take time away from his arm twisting and plotting the demise of the 2^nd amendment of the Constitution to go himself, but what was VP Biden up to, or even better yet, where was the Secretary of State? This falls directly under the responsibility of the SOS, so what was Secretary Kerry doing on Wednesday that he couldn’t travel to UK to attend the funeral? He was testifying on Capitol Hill about the Benghazi attacks on 9/11. This could easily have been moved to another day so that Kerry could have made a showing at the funeral.

The White House said they were too busy to attend but I believe that they did not want to attend the funeral of one of the longest serving conservative leaders in the world. The left does not like Thatcher for her standing up to the labor unions in England and helping England come out of the financial crisis they were in when she took office. Not to mention the close relationship between Thatcher and Ronald Regan, whom in the eyes of the left, does the younger President Bush only match in his evilness.

Politics is why America did not have an elected official or a high ranking member of the Administration at the funeral. I, as an American, am embarrassed by the blatant disrespect this president shows to all conservatives.

Repercussions of the Boston Marathon Bombings

(This post is courtesy of the Mister. I happen to agree with this post 100%, but he wrote it and all thoughts and research are his own.)                 

 Boston Marathon Bombing Suspect Formally Charged

 In the week (and a day) since the Boston Marathon bombing, the country has gone from extreme lows to a euphoric high by the time Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was captured late Friday (4/19/13) night. Not since shortly after 9/11 have I seen a community come together and support its first responders with such reverence. It was an amazing sight to see when people were cheering on the local police and other agencies as they were leaving the scene for hours.

                  However, now that several days have passed and it looks like the bomber is going to survive the injuries sustained during his shoot out with the police, we now have to get down to the business of prosecuting Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for the crimes he and his brother (allegedly) committed.  The first couple of acts have been put in place. To begin with, the White House has decreed that the United States will not treat this guy as an enemy combatant and will prosecute him instead in US Civil Court. Usually I would be up in arms with this ruling. Any Muslim that comes to the US and causes the death of three people and wounds a hundred or more should have a one-way ticket to Gitmo. However, these guys came here over ten years ago and used the system. They applied for and received political asylum and from what I can see, did everything that they were supposed to do. The Tasrnaev’s received their green cards and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev became a naturalized citizen on September 11, 2012, ironically enough.  My entire reasoning is that once you are a US citizen, the government should not be able to try you in a military court for any reason. James Homes is not being tried in a military court, nor are the Sandy Hook shooters and they killed many more people than did the Tsarnaev brothers.

                  There is one big difference between the Tsarnaev brothers and the other mass shooters of the last few years; they are not natural born US citizens and they are subject to lose their citizenship status. As I mentioned earlier, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev became a US citizen seven short months before he (allegedly) took part in this bombing plot. I have a very hard time believing that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was 100 percent truthful in his interviews and applications during the naturalization process and he certainly was not honest about the oath of citizenship when he raised his hand and swore his allegiance to the United States. It is not believable that he went from wanting to be a citizen to wanting to kill Americans en mass in just seven months. With the level of fraud and deception that he had to use to become a citizen, the State Department should ensure that his citizenship is revoked. Once it is revoked, then he should be immediately re-categorized as a terrorist and be moved to a military court.

                  I am not an advocate of trying Americans in military court nor am I an advocate for revoking a natural born/naturalized citizen’s citizenship, that is unless he takes arms up against the United States for a militaristic purpose, which is what I believe happened in this case.

The Mister

Guess Where I Stand

The Navy has cancelled all the rest of the Blue Angels' appearances for the rest of the year. Even though we won't be here to not see it, this includes MCAS Miramar's 2013 Air Show.

Read the story for yourself.

On April 1, 2013, Tricare West transitioned to United Healthcare. Health benefits didn't change under the new contractor, which is great. However, we've been a military family long enough, 16 years this September to be more specific, that I have been able to observe changes in our health coverage. For instance, I remember a time when we paid a $6.00 copay for prescriptions. This week, we paid over $100 for allergy medications. I realize that a lot of people with different health insurances pay a lot more than that. I have to shake my head at how military families are being taken care of while our military risk their lives in war zones across the world and their families are left at home to worry and to deal with the Murphy's Law of deployments. But I guess that doesn't matter.

From what I've heard through the grapevine, military healthcare will eventually resemble that of the free healthcare given to no or low income families. So my husband is giving 20 years of his life, the best 20 years of his working life, to the military only to be treated like a welfare case when he retires??

I just read a story about multiple stabbings at a college in Texas. Wow. Gun control laws really worked to prevent that tragedy, now didn't they???

The Worst Side of Politics

I'd like to welcome my first guest poster to my blog who just happens to be my husband, The Mister. The only thing I do with politics is get a hothead and angry. So, I asked The Mister to be the person to cover some current events on my blog. He thanks me at the end of his post but he's actually doing me a large favor and he deserves the thanks. I hope you enjoy this different perspective.

On March 20, 2013, Senate majority leader Harry Reid made the following statement on the floor of the Senate:

Late last night, seven of our Marines were killed in Hawthorne, and many others were injured in an explosion during a training exercise near the ammunition depot in Hawthorne, Nevada. We don't know exactly what happened, but it was a violent explosion, we know that. My thoughts are with those who are injured and of course the families of those who lost loved ones, and Marines all over the world are now focusing on the loss of their fellow Marines. They are grieving this loss. Details are emerging. We really don't know, the area has been blocked off. As I indicated, it was quite a big explosion. ... It's very important we continue training our military, so important. But one of the things in sequester is we cut back in training and maintenance. That's the way sequester was written. Now, the bill that’s on the floor, we hope to pass today helps that a little bit. ... This sequester should go away. We have cut already huge amounts of money in deficit reduction. It's just not appropriate, Mr. President, that our military can't train and do the maintenance necessary. These men and women, our Marines were training there in Hawthorne. With this sequester, it's going to cut this stuff back. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/19/harry-reid-sequestration_n_2909706.html).

Republicans and at least one Marine official have jumped on the anti-Reid bandwagon over these comments. Was Mr. Reid politicizing the death of seven Marines? Let's look at the history of the sequestration to determine if he is trying to score political points on the backs of dead Marines.



This is a tweet from Mr. Reid:

@SenatorReid 28 Feb
It’s not too late to avert the damaging #sequester budget cuts, for which an overwhelming majority of Republicans voted
https://twitter.com/SenatorReid/status/307191531138347008

The following is a story from when the sequester was implemented that clearly shows that there was support for the Budget Control Act of 2011 that implemented the sequester but guess who else voted for it…. Times up…It was Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid while his republican counterpart from Nevada voted against it. (http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/senate/1/123)

While the White House and the Democrats have tried to paint the sequester as a Republican tool to force the Democrats to negotiate on the budget, the sequester was actually brought to the table by the President and his staff as a way to scare the Republicans into cutting defense spending. (See Politifact) However, after the 2012 elections, the Republicans call the bluff and here we are now, less than a month after the sequestration started and Harry Reid is talking about the evils of the budget cuts and via the tweet from February 28th, pointing the finger to the other side.

Yesterday’s actions by Mr. Reid may not rise to the level of actually tying the deaths of these Marines to the sequestration, as many news outlets have reported, they are very disingenuous and I do believe he is using the death of these Marines to move the discussion of sequestration fixes forward. He, however, is just as responsible for these budget cuts as every other senator and representative that allowed the Budget Control Act of 2011 to go into effect.  And I will not mention the debate that led to the BCA that is a discussion for another day.

I would like to thank Trisha for allowing me to be a guest poster for this week.