Are You Qualified to Vote? - Shaun Hautly

You shouldn’t vote, because you don’t know anything.

Well, let me be nice and say you’re at least proactive in reading this political/current events blog, and are slightly more informed than the average American. Obama won the 2008 election because of marketing. Not because of his experience, points of view, visions, or accomplishments, but because of how well he was marketed. People voted for the word “change,” not for the man. Others voted for McCain because they are pro-life, anti-gay, gun nuts, gung-ho for the war, or any other number of conservative reasons.

Americans need to understand that our president is not a dictator. His views do not become law. He doesn’t even get a vote. He has veto power: that's it. I’ve said this before: Bush was pro-life, yet we still had abortions.

So I propose this new rule for voting:

If you want to vote, you first have to take a test that assures you understand what you’re voting for and how it will affect the country. Questions will include things about the basic structure of American government, the roles of the leaders for whom you’re voting, and the implications of any propositions on the ballot. If you miss ANY of the questions, your votes for those categories will be void. You will not be notified of this. They just won’t count.

Lobbyists prey on the obedience of uninformed voters. Slam campaigns and other publicity stunts skew polls and influence weak voters. This system would make sure that our votes are coming from well-informed citizens. It will also push average citizens to become MORE informed.

If anyone argues against a policy like this being added, it’s because they’re uninformed and afraid of losing their opportunity to vote. However, this policy has NO weak spots. If there is a valid argument against this, I’d love to hear it.

Sign? (Sigh), Everywhere a Sign - Shaun Hautly

It seems like I can’t drive down a street or round a corner without seeing four signs for a “Zone 3 Comptroller” or a handful of old people holding signs that -- as of lately -- say, “Liberate America.” Sunny Saturdays are perfect for many things, and shouldn’t be wasted on mindless pride. That’s all these people and their signs are: pride. Did anyone vote for Obama because of what they read on their street? No.

Sure, in some cases, with smaller elections, it helps that informed voters may at least recognize a name; however, in most cases it’s a pointless waste of paper and wood. It gets really dumb when these people stand outside holding up their signs at passing traffic.

1) The text is way too small. I have perfect eyesight, and can read “Liberate America.” That’s it. I can't read whatever they want me to vote for or support.

2) Even if I could read it, I don’t care. You look trashy and unkempt. I don’t take intellectual advice from people who look like they need the concept of a toothbrush explained to them.

3) Most importantly, NO ONE CARES. This country is decided by votes cast by our elected officials. If you want them to vote on something for you, write them. Call them. Give them signed petitions. A congressman can’t go into session and say, “a bunch of my constituents held up signs for six hours on Saturday.” However, if he or she can say, “We got 300 phone calls, 500 letters, and 1500 signatures wanting XYZ,” then we’re more apt to make some progress.

Don’t waste time, trees, and Saturdays telling people what you believe in. Go make a phone call, then play Frisbee like the rest of us.

Is Obama the Worst President Ever? - Shaun Hautly

Read this piece carefully, because it’s not what you think.

While one could argue that Bush suffered more criticism and judgments, in the past four years we’ve seen the rise of Twitter, Facebook, and the instantly reactive Internet. This means that every move and mistake that Obama makes is captured, documented, shared, and spread within minutes. There’s no more “controlling the press” or hiding things. This is the transparency he wanted and got. Tenfold.

The oil spill: Already the worst environmental disaster of its kind in history and getting worse by the day. Obama has already gained media attention for using some profanity, making some pretty hefty “no rest until” promises, and had a fair share of media friendly face time with the victims. However, oil continues to spread. Obama continues to meet with NCAA champions, foreign countries, and novelty organizations for vanity’s sake. Sounds like he’s doing plenty of resting.

Healthcare: We heard the same “no rest” promises over a year ago, and I think there was a bit of rest in those nine months from idea to bill.

Unemployment: Continues to plague this country. My Honda still sucks, even with Cash for Clunkers. CEOs are still going on million dollar vacations with the government’s bailout money. Yet there’s Obama, smiling on TV.

Is he the first President to be so fickle on his promises, or are we the first society who demands real-time updates of the President’s whereabouts? And do we get our news objectively or from skewed sources that give more opinion than fact?

Our Parents Had It Easy - Shaun Hautly

Tonight, as Boston's “More Than a Feeling” came on in the restaurant, I realized that our parents (and grandparents, especially) had it WAY easier than we do. That’s because I had to DIVE into my pocket to check if my cell phone was ringing, because “More Than a Feeling” happens to be my ring tone. While this particular example is a little funnier, there are many pressures and expectations with which the previous generations never had to deal. We’ve become so connected and communication is instantaneous. Failure to communicate becomes a blot on your character: you get a reputation for poor response times, etc. Just as everyone has a friend who is “always late,” we also know which people never respond to text messages.

I was in a Frisbee game yesterday and there wasn't an e-mail sent out to inform us which field the game would be on. So I had to e-mail people at the last minute, and finally check the schedule on my phone, which was loading slowly. While this sounds like a stuck-up problem to have, it’s true that if I didn’t show up because I hadn't found the schedule online in my car, people would have been disappointed in me. The same rings true (haha) for a dead cell phone. People get ANGRY with me when my cell phone isn't answered because it’s dead. It’s almost scary. “What if we can’t get ahold of you?”

Lastly, the pressure to get spelling and wording right is higher than ever. A few generations ago, if you sent someone a letter, and the address was off or name was spelled wrong, they still got it. The mailman knew. However, today if one letter is off, MAILER DAEMON gets mad. Web sites won’t download if you don’t know how to spell them properly. My grandfather has NEVER asked the question, “Is that all one word?” Times have gotten complicated and pressures have risen to accommodate those complications. Our parents had it easy.

Goodbye

This is the last entry of American Currents. Instead of discussing politics or news headlines, we'd like to take this time to say goodbye and thank you to all of our readers.


Jeff Weiss
Last fall I decided to write a blog. Then I realized that I don't live a particularly exciting life and therefore I probably wouldn't write a particularly exciting blog. Because I keep up with current events and usually have an opinion just about everything, I thought perhaps a current events blog might be interesting. Then I thought, “Why would anyone care about my opinion on current events?” It was then that I came up with the idea of getting the opinions of several people from across the country about a different topic each day. That is when American Currents was born.

It's been a (mostly) fun six months since we first began putting together the pieces of the site. Thirteen bloggers have contributed at different times throughout the months; six of them have been around since the beginning.

So, to all who contributed their well written words and to all who took the time to read those words, I thank you!


David Loftus
Though I had doubts at the outset that this would last or go anywhere, I’m sorry to see “American Currents” come to an end. Even finding myself sweating out a quick handful of paragraphs after midnight (following a play rehearsal, say), I enjoyed it. Having to check behind the headlines and write something thoughtful nearly every night was a wonderful exercise in self-discipline -- sort of a cross between writing calisthenics and a kind of social prayer.

Having been a sometime columnist before (for a daily newspaper in a small Oregon town back in the late 1980s), I knew that a typical theme of my pieces would have to be: “it ain’t necessarily so.” Anyone who writes on a regular basis, especially on topical subjects or breaking news, will inevitably come to that refrain, because too many citizens (not to mention politicians!) rush to have an opinion -- no matter where or how they derive it -- before bothering to obtain the solid factual background on an issue.

A decent commentator should at least be sharp enough to see the holes in a developing story, if not offer a few alternative explanations for what might seem obvious … and usually does, to most people. Breaking news is too often another form of gossip, or at least an excuse for it, because it’s easier to bellyache about “those Muslims,” or “those right-wingers,” or “big government,” or “illegal immigrants,” or a thousand other boogey-men, than ponder the complex and sticky issues that truly govern our daily lives.

I don’t think I’ll be writing about breaking news on a regular basis again for a while, but if you’re interested in following my activities, watch my acting demo reel on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI22qjrRjN4

Read my in-depth book reviews at the California Literary Review:

http://calitreview.com/author/david_loftus

Go to the British Web site “Book Drum” to see my in-depth profiles of Ray Bradbury’s Something Wicked This Way Comes:

http://www.bookdrum.com/books/something-wicked-this-way-comes/9780575083066/index.html

and Milan Kundera’s The Unbearable Lightness of Being:

http://www.bookdrum.com/books/the-unbearable-lightness-of-being/9780060932138/index.html

Sometimes I even remember to update my own Web site:

www.david-loftus.com

Or if you want to be a Facebook Friend, drop me an e-mail and let me know how to link up with you.


Austin Lee
A Haiku:

A place to opine
On current national news
My dream had come true.


Shaun Hautly
It's sad to see a project like this come to a close. I own my own business and started it in the heat of a recession, and while it's amazing to have such freedom to start companies and projects in this country, it's also heartbreaking that no matter how noble a cause or good a product is, there's no guarantee of success. American Currents was (is?) a dedicated group of writers and thinkers who gave unique insight and reflection on hot topics in America. However, even with the drive and passion of all of us volunteers, the project did not succeed like we needed it to succeed.
It's been a fast 6 months, and a lot of pieces have been written by all of us. Sometimes under quick deadlines, and trying to balance writing with our jobs and careers. I will miss writing with these people. If you liked what I wrote and are interested in more, please check out my personal website: http://colonelshaun.com

Bye!


Nikki Lorenzini
I just want to thank everyone who came and read. Its been a great run, and I hope our paths cross again in the blog future!

Sleeping Disorder Could Send Husband to Jail

Randi Kearns is used to being awakened in her sleep because her young son suffers from night terrors. However, on February 20 Mrs. Kearns woke up to something else – her husband Adam punching her. After Adam Kerns struck his wife in the face three times, he promptly rolled over and went back to sleep. Mrs. Kearns was taken to a hospital by paramedics after calling 911, and Adam Kearns was charged with assault. A judge has ordered the couple to live apart under a no contact order.
Randi Kearns insists that her husband is not a violent man, and does not want to raise her three children alone. Adam Kearns says he has no memory of assaulting his wife of ten years because he has an REM sleeping disorder which makes him act out his dreams.

Should a judge be able to force a husband and wife to have no contact with each other when there is the possibility of future violence occurring, or should the family be able to live together?

Shaun Hautly
I think in most cases where restraining orders are issued, the protected person is quite relieved to have the protection. However, in this case it seems that a judge has issued the sentence much to the dismay of both parties involved. If I am imagining this case like all others, there is a prosecutor and a defendant. The father is clearly the defendant, but who is prosecuting here? Who wants, so badly, to keep these people apart? If they were kids, if this was a routine occurrence, if the mother was afraid, if he had a history of violence, if he was hurting the children as well, then by all means, sentence him. However, the wife wants him back, he wants back, it just begs the question: who wants these people apart so bad?

It seems like the legal system should withdraw their sentence. The doctors, wives, and general public seem to side with this level-headed couple. Unless we hear a convincing case from someone who wants these people apart, then I don't see a need to enforce such a lose-lose situation for this family. Obviously the court has the authority to separate two people, but it seems like if they're not unhappy together than it's a little silly. This case is slightly more serious than my closing example, but if your bed-mate snores, and you can deal with it, then no one should come between you.

Jeff Weiss
I can actually see both sides in this situation. The couple has been married for ten years and have had no prior issues of domestic violence, and they raising small children together. They want to get past this one-time incident and move on with their lives. The judge, however, has a responsibility to maintain the law and there is no saying that if Mr. Kearns suffers from a sleeping disorder that causes him to act out his dreams, he may very well dream about taking on Mike Tyson tomorrow night. And then what?

If the Kearns are allowed to live together until the matter is settled and Mr. Kearns happened to have another sleep-punching incident that inflicted harm (or worse) upon his wife, just imagine the lawsuit that would follow. While I am sympathetic toward the family during this time, I can't say that I don't disagree with the judge. Let's just hope there is a speedy resolution to the case and Mr. Kearns finds medical assistance for his sleeping disorder.

Russian Adoption Return Controversy

Earlier this month, a Tennessee woman made headlines after sending her seven year old adopted son back to his homeland of Russia after complaining that the boy is “violent and has severe psychopathic issues.”

Torry Hansen has stated that the boy, Artyom Savelyev, was prone to hitting, screaming and spitting at family members as well as threatening to kill them. She claims the behavior started shortly after she adopted him six months ago.  Hansen purchased a plane ticket for Artyom to return to Russia alone, with a note stating, “I am sorry to say that for the safety of my family, friends, and myself, … I no longer wish to parent this child. As he is a Russian national, I am returning him to your guardianship.”

The incident has caused international outrage, with the president of Russia calling it a “monstrous deed” as his government decides whether or not to cut off adoptions to American citizens.

Today we asked our panel if they believe Torry Hansen went to far in “returning” her adopted child, or if she had just cause to do so if she felt unsafe with him in her home.


Nikki Lorenzini
My heart just breaks in this situation. It really does. Ever since I heard of this, I tried so hard to see both sides of the story, and each time,I side with the boy, but hear me out. It must be extremely hard to be an adoptive parent, especially to a child who is that age and who is from another country. Yes, it was incredibly selfless of this woman to adopt him, since it seems that in the adoptive world,  you can pick and choose who you want, and most of the children that are adopted are healthy babies. However, I have had some questions for this woman: Why did  you even want to adopt this child? Was it to make yourself look better or to fill some gaping hole that was in your life? What were you thinking when you decided to adopt a child, especially one who is already 6 and basically had his mind made up about life?

Now, she is saying that the Russians lied to her, saying that she wanted a stable, healthy child, and they gave her him, who was a "monster." Granted, he may have shown no signs of being a "monster" while in Russia. Children can act differently around different adults. They just click differently. Maybe this kid got a weird vibe off of this woman, thinking that she didn't really love  him. Now I believe that the Russian government has every right to be furious with her. She sent him back unattended with just a note. Seriously, who does that? This child was in her care for 6 months! I have bunnies that I had for about a month that I grew attached to, so how can this woman not  get attached? Okay, silly question. Maybe she didn't have motherly instincts? I don't know.

But my heart really goes out to this kid. I'm not really sure of the circumstances of him being in an orphanage, but whatever the reason, I'm sure its pretty bad for you to be taken from your parents (especially if your parents have passed away). This kid has been waiting to be adopted for 6 years, so he probably has it in his head that he is not wanted, not loved. Then to be sent back by himself on a plane? Oh the disappointment and rejection he must be feeling! Even before he was sent back, the poor kid was probably frightened, and didn't know how to express himself properly. You can't expect a child to act like an adult with their emotions. The kids is probably feeling a lot of things, and he just needs someone to show him some type of love and acceptance. Even if it does mean taking him to a psychiatrist when he was showing signs of violence. Sure, there are other kids that show violence, but this kid was not in a normal circumstance, so I think he just needed some extra grace shown.

David Loftus
Torry Hansen did not have just cause to put a 7-year-old child unattended on an international flight without notifying any official agency in Russia that the boy was en route, no matter how he had misbehaved. In fact, if he was a dangerous as she has claimed (the 33-year-old Shelbyville, Tennessee woman has said he threatened to kill the family and actually had set a small fire in the home), she should have made sure he was chaperoned and proper authorities notified all along the way, or she was not only endangering the boy’s life but those of many others as well.

Ms. Hansen had plenty of other options, far less drastic and expensive. She should at least have contacted the World Association for Children and Parents (WAfCaP), the Seattle-based agency that had arranged her adoption in the first place, but she didn’t. A representative of Miriam’s Promise Adoption Agency in Nashville suggested to CBS News that they or Catholic Charities would readily have helped her out. Both Russians and her Tennessee neighbors have expressed outrage: “They ought to give her some jail time,” one Shelbyville resident was quoted as saying.

This woman set off an international incident between the U.S. and Russia, leading to a temporary suspension of all adoptions from the latter to the former and affected hundreds of other families and prospective adoptees. Russia is the third-largest source of adoptions for Americans: according to the National Council for Adoption, about 2,300 of more than 18,000 adoptions last year came from there. If she received advice on the course of action she took from an “online lawyer,” as she told CNN, then that person should also be identified and investigated for possible malfeasance. The good news is that three Russian families have stepped forward and expressed a willingness to adopt Artyom.

Shaun Hautly
Wow. I'm somewhat shocked that this woman's characteristics weren't bleeps on the pre-screening radar. This woman is lucky that she adopted. A real parent does not have such an easy out. Careless teens, and fathers who's tubes come untied aren't afforded such a handy "get out of parenthood free" card. When a 'mother' adopts, she becomes legal guardian of the child. No matter how dangerous the kid gets, you don't just turn him loose.

There isn't much else to say about this. She definitely went too far. Be like the rest of us and deal with your mistakes.

Westboro Baptist Church - First Amendment

Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist Church are back in the news this week. The Supreme Court has decided to hear a case against them from the father of a deceased soldier whose funeral was picketed. Westboro Baptist Church is known for protesting at high profile funerals.

After they waved their “God hates fags” and “Thank God for dead troops” placards outside the funeral for Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder (who was not gay; the church merely contends that deaths of American soldiers overseas is God’s punishment for American toleration of homosexuality), the deceased soldier’s father Albert Snyder sued the church in federal court for invading his privacy and inflicting emotional distress. A jury in Baltimore awarded Mr. Snyder $11 million in damages in 2007, which a judge reduced to $5 million, but last September the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the verdict, saying the church’s protest was constitutionally protected free speech. The court also ruled that Snyder had to pay $16,510 for part of the church’s court costs.

Are Westboro Baptist Church's protests protected under the 1st amendment? Should the court make an exception in cases where the protest has nothing to do with the actual event?

Shaun Hautly:

With this case, let me begin by attacking this church: The cliche phrase by which Christianity is known, is "WWJD." What Would Jesus Do? Jesus wouldn't stage a protest at a funeral. Have some respect for the dead, eh? Someone died while serving our country, died protecting us, and you've got the gall to NOT go to war in the first place (I'm assuming our veterans would have had nothing to do with this), and then be completely heartless when someone who is brave enough loses their life. If you didn't believe that Jesus rose from the grave, you better believe that he's rolling over in it right now.

All this really boils down to homosexuality, though. It's not really about the troops. It's not about churches. It's about homosexuality. Sure you can find bible passages which support homophobia, but you can also find a lot of other stuff which has since been deemed 'out of date.' You get to pick and choose which ones to embrace, and which ones to hide behind. I understand that. However, there are only two sides to homosexuality: Not for vs against, not born vs choice, not civil unions vs marriage. There is only "I grew up with homosexuals" and "I didn't grow up with homosexuals." Slice this church up (or any other anti-gay group) and take a look inside. They come from places and schools where people didn't come out. Where homosexuals were tormented for their lifestyle and ostracized. That's who's protesting.

Right to free speech was created so that people could protest their government, that the government could not openly rule the media. The people who wrote that escaped from a King that dictated his country. A king who also forced his religion on the people and on the translation of the bible. So it was a good idea to put in a few blanket statements which would prevent something like that from happening again. Freedom of speech was not created to give people permission to be buttholes in public. The KKK, Sexists, homophobes, and any other prejudiced opinion (look it up, I mean it literally) cause much more trouble with their hateful picketing of funerals than soldier lives saved with the 'goodness' of their bigoted message.

Nikki Lorenzini:

This story greatly angers me. Greatly! I'm going to save everyone my rant of "Why would Christians do something like this, aren't we supposed to love everyone and not judge them?" From reading another article on this, in this case, technically, they did have the "right" to do this, since they did contact the law enforcement before hand, and only stood about 100 yards away from the actual funeral. But my real question is: what were their intentions?

I am sure that they knew full well that they were going to tick some people off. I am sure that they knew that they were going to get some type of media attention. I am sure that they knew of the probable outcomes of what they were going to do before hand. I am also sure that they did not care. Their actions show that they did not care when this pastor, who has children of his own, protest at someone's child's funeral. Yes, when someone dies, it is always hard. But to have to bury your own child? I can't even imagine the heartbreak.

I understand that the church doesn't agree with homosexuality, and I understand them wanting to take a stand about it. But there is a time, there is a place, and there is a correct way to show how you feel. How would they feel if atheists got a permit from their law enforcement, stood 100 yards away, and protested at one of their funerals? I'm sure they would get their panties in a bunch. Not saying that Snyder has his in a bunch, he is angered and rightfully so.

Yes, the church did the protest the "right way." However, we should think of start taking it to the next step, and before we start issuing permits, we should start thinking a few steps a head, and ask: "What type of outcome will this create."

David Loftus:

I don’t know anybody -- I can’t even imagine meeting anyone -- who doesn’t think the members of the Westboro Baptist Church are crazy, disrespectful, and (assuming it’s acceptable for an atheist to make such a judgment) downright un-Christian loons. It would be tempting to believe they’re indulging in performance art -- a form of ultimate irony or satire, perhaps, as if they were the fundamentalist flip side of the provocative gay activist group ACT-UP -- if they hadn’t been at it for so long (since at least 2001), and at such great expense. Now they’ve managed the amazing trick of making me (and most other liberal Americans) a temporary ally of Bill O’Reilly!

Nevertheless, it’s a mistake to try to use the courts to shut down the obnoxious Westboro Baptist Church protesters. Despicable and odious as their message may be, the church should continue to enjoy First Amendment protection. The facts are established that Westboro contacted the local police before their protest, they stayed on designated public land 1,000 feet from the church where the funeral was held, and they did not disrupt the service (which shows the church is crazy like a fox: founder Fred W. Phelps, Sr. is a retired lawyer, disbarred long ago for harassing a court reporter, and his spear-carrying daughter Margie Jean Phelps is also a lawyer who will argue the case before the Supreme Court). Albert Snyder never saw them that day, but with all that advance warning, a team of motorcyclists called the Patriot Guard Riders came to the funeral to pay their respects and to shield the family from the protesters. There was also a SWAT team inside the church to make sure there was no trouble. Snyder knew of the protesters’ presence on that day but did not see their signs or hear their statements until he turned on the news at his son’s wake. Snyder and his former wife “raised Matthew for the devil, taught Matthew to defy his creator and commit adultery and taught him to be an idolater,” a church press release declared, helpfully.

Strictly speaking, Snyder has no chance to get a ruling in his favor on the main issue: his original charge against the church of defamation was thrown out by a lower court, which said their assertions are so outlandish that no one would believe them anyway, so there was no harm. All that is being argued now is whether Snyder should have to pay the church’s other $96,740.21 in district court costs -- for expert witnesses, miscellaneous costs, court reporter, etc. -- which technically speaking, Snyder could be held responsible for because he brought a groundless case against the church which it had to defend. His lawyers are challenging the reasonableness of the larger tab. Attorney Nathan Tucker, in an opinion piece in the Baltimore Sun on March 22, suggested the First Amendment applies to protection of private citizens’ speech from government control, but that this is a matter of dispute between two private parties, so free speech protection shouldn’t apply; the church should be held liable for slander.

Perhaps that might work. But I don’t want a good cause to lead to bad legal precedent. The First Amendment exists to protect the speech of people you disagree with, not those you like; otherwise, what good is it? It seems to me the court could have ruled in favor of the church’s First Amendment rights without awarding it any court costs, though. If the Westboro Baptist Church wants to trample on people’s emotions at the most vulnerable time of their lives, they can pay their own way.

Vegas and the Human Wolf Pack

by Shaun Hautly

Last month I spent a week in Vegas. I had a good time because I won money. I had a really good time people watching though. I realized a lot about our population from looking around. In many ways, Vegas shows the full potential of our population. Technology at its best: Giant screens, lights, security, dancing fountains, and volcanoes. Architecture at its finest: elaborate lobbies, buildings, miniature Eiffel Towers, Brooklyn Bridges, Pyramids, castles, canals, and pirates. It also has a very functional micro economy: Food, entertainment, and gambling all funnel money to the same places and redistribute it randomly. Everyone has a chance to be on top, everyone has a chance to be screwed. It's well thought out, and it's impressive.

On the flip side, it also shows the vices and true weaknesses of the human race. Gambling addicts become homeless and flood the streets, and prostitutes approach you in casinos. There are fights, accidents, and people drinking to excess. The casinos swiftly snuff problems to hide the bad reputation and keep their consumers in a happy bliss. There are underpaid immigrants who hand you cards of naked women you can sleep with by dialing a number. It is reminiscent of Ancient Rome where even though it was so advanced for its time, it was barbaric enough to collapse.

However, collapsing and history aside, there was one aspect of Vegas which isn't unique to the town, but just more noticeable, and it amazed me to watch. The Alpha Male. While we think we've evolved with philanthropy, opening doors, altruism, and charity, we're no different than the animals. When a cute girl walks in, the guys all turn their bodies to address her. When an attractive woman joins the table for gambling, guys turn to her and edge each other out of the way. It's isn't a conscious move or something they do to be rude to each other, it's just how they establish themselves to her. Married, single, or otherwise? Doesn't matter. It's not even about getting together with her, but her knowing that they are the strongest, smartest guy around. Just like the animals do.

It was incredible to see all of this, and I still can't wrap my head around everything. I'm sure I will have more thoughts as I continue to observe, but for now, my head is overwhelmed and I can't wait to go back. Vegas, baby.

Shaun Hautly at the iPad Launch

The iPad has arrived.

Before I begin, the iPad is this: An Apple device announced in January. It's basically an oversized iPod Touch on Steroids. Almost a 10" screen, 1.5 lbs, and 1/2 an inch thick. It plays videos, music, browses photos and the web, all in an intimate touch-centric way. There is also a model appearing in "late April" which will also have a 3G radio to provide internet when WIFI cannot be found.

It's the 3G version that I'll be getting, so on today's big launch, I'm not going to buy one. However, that won't stop me from waiting in line for 2 hours just to play with one. It went like this:

I arrived at about 8:45 for the 9am launch. The line was down the mall for almost 500 feet. Two lines, actually. One for those who reserved one online and were picking it up and paying, and another for those who did NOT reserve, but still wanted one. I was in the latter. As we waited, some having been there for hours already, Smart water was offered to us for free, and mall restaurants were offering to deliver food to us in line while we waited. The wait seemed to fly by, however. Before I knew it, there was cheering, and ALL the employees (well over 40 of them) came running down the line, the leader was holding an iPad, and the rest were giving high-fives. The energy was high.

The employees regrouped in front of the store, said a few words that we couldn't hear from our spot in line, and then counted down the seconds to 9 O'clock. The gate flew up and moments later, the first customer entered the store amidst cheers and applause.

During our 2 and a half hour wait, the entire line of reservations left happy, and we made our way in at a much slower pace. The wait wasn't awful though, because employees were coming around the line with iPads, demonstrating them, and allowing us to touch them, use them, play games, type, pinch, zoom, swipe, tap, read, watch, write, and drool. While I have been anticipating the iPad since before it was announced, this blew me away. I'd watched EVERY video demonstrating the interface and read every review on the product before launch. However, they were right. Nothing does justice the experience of holding this device in your hand and having it react INSTANTLY to your gestures.

The staff was so friendly and just as excited as the rest of us. It was so worth the wait to hold one, and I'm looking forward to waiting again when the 3G version becomes available.

As far as my experience with one, everything blew me away. I spent most of my time trying things in pages as I'm always creating documents and proposals. Adding pictures was like scrap booking. I was able to move them around with a finger, rotate them with two, and resize them by pinching and zooming. I had complete control, a feeling that I've never had on a desktop or laptop before. Once in the store, I also took the time to type with all my fingers. I really was like a real keyboard. Only smarter. It corrected extra letters that my fingers hit, it added apostrophes to the words that needed them, and it felt natural. My advice on typing would be the same as it is on the iPhone: Go quickly and confidently and be pleasantly surprised at what comes out. Just because you hit the wrong letter doesn't mean you need to go back.

So I can't wait for "Late April" and I'm looking forward to writing my submissions from the new tablet computer that's probably going to change the world.

The 2010 Census: Be Counted

As the government continues working on the 2010 Census, some Americans are suspicious about filling out the forms the have received. Some have privacy concerns, others feel it is not important.

Today we asked our contributors if the plan on participating in the census, and if they have any concerns about being counted. After reading their opinions, join the conversation by leaving a comment.

JEFF WEISS:
I find it silly that people would not want to be counted in the United States Census. First and foremost, I can't think of any reasons why anyone wouldn't want to be counted. I can, however, think of plenty of reasons why everyone needs to be counted.

For starters, the census directly affects funding for communities. The government allocates hundreds of billions of dollars each year to individual communities for education, road improvement, public health, transportation and more. The census data is used to establish state legislative districts and determine the number of seats each states has in the U.S. House of Representatives. Census numbers are used to determine the amount of federal assistance areas receive in the event of a disaster. And let's not forget another important reason: all census information is completely confidential.

If you haven't filled out your census form and returned it, do it today.


RYAN JOHN:
For anyone who didn't know this, the 2010 census has a great website and a very citizen friendly approach to it's information.  The director of the 2010 census, Robert M. Groves , keeps a routine blog where he discusses all things census including myths to ease our apprehension.  I learned a lot from this website and was really happy to see the federal government taking this approach to educate us, as opposed to having a mandatory, punitive tone.

Turns out, this isn't a modern exercise in big government.  It was ran by the federal government since 1790 and the line of questioning is very similar to that of the founding fathers.  Now, what their true intentions were, I guess we'll never know for sure.  But it's sold as a tool to determine the number of seats your state will hold in the House of Representatives.  Therefore, even though it's a federal government plan, state officials should encourage participation to ensure maximum representation in congress. Plus, it a rather expensive cost for tax payers so delaying the process only costs fellow citizens more money. 

I'm not worried about it.  Maybe it's because I saw the website.  Or maybe it's because I have nothing to hide.  I mean come on- We shop and pay bills online, Google whatever our private minds inspire, share photos and personal information with our friends through social networking, blog and whatever else technology allows.  I sacrificed privacy for convenience a long time ago.    

SHAUN HAUTLY:
I had an opportunity to talk with census officials back in September and they told me about some of the reasons for the census and how it's used. One notable fact was that for every 100 people in my county that down turn it in, we lose about $10,000 of federal funding. That's our schools, our police force, etc. It seemed like taking the 4 minutes to fill it out was worth it.
As far as people being concerned about security, they need to stop being so paranoid. The only questions on it are about your age, whether or not you own your home, and if you're white or not. For all I care, they can tell that information to the Taliban. It's clearly important or the government wouldn't spend the millions of dollars on the coordination and collection of data from EVERY individual.

I know this isn't that long of a piece, but this isn't that complicated of a situation. Part of being an American is taxes, fireworks, and filling out the census. Security? Not really an issue. Unless someone is dumb enough to write their credit card information on the form for some reason, it shouldn't matter. Just go fill it out and complain about health care for now.


DAVID LOFTUS:
In 2000 I filled out the extended U.S. Census form. If I remember correctly, it was five or six pages with dozens of questions, and I enjoyed answering them all. This year my wife and I only received the basic ten-question form. We’ve already filled it out and sent it off.

It’s just another symptom of the silly, ignorant paranoia of too many American citizens (or perhaps the bill of goods they’ve been sold by conservative and Libertarian commentators about “government intrusion”), that some are loathe to complete and return the form. Dozens of Web sites urge people not to do it. Libertarians call it an invasion of privacy. Others are offended by the racial and ethnic classifications delineated on the form. Still others are afraid the census is another tool for the government to pursue nefarious ends, such as deportation or tax liens. A staff member of the large law firm I was doing some temp work for last week sent around in-house email asking whether we were required by law to answer all the questions because she was uncomfortable releasing her Social Security and telephone numbers. (An attorney laconically answered that the law requires all the questions to be answered.)

The Census Bureau assures us that it does not share the information it collects with either the IRS or the Immigration Service. And really, if such were not the case, do you think there would be no complaints? That they would be able to hide the fact? Census workers are bound by law and oath not to reveal the personal information they gather. Besides, don’t we freely hand out credit card information on the Web all the time? If someone were really out to get us, he or she could probably find out a lot more just by some concerted Internet surfing. Just like working-class Americans regularly get suckered into voting for conservative candidates whose economic policies end up hurting them the most, the people who seem the most nervous about the Census -- immigrants, racial minorities, and other unusual ingredients of the Great American Melting Pot -- are the ones who stand to gain the most if they participate. As called for in the U.S. Constitution, Census Bureau info is collected specifically to allocate apportionment of Congressional seats, and to guide Congress and other government agencies on where to allocate funding for education, jobs, and other vital functions. If you go uncounted, you could be underrepresented and under-served by the government.

Health Care Reform Becomes Law: Shaun Hautly

We have a system of checks and balances. An American system where "majority rules." So it's safe that so that if our REPRESENTATIVES are representing their constituents who selected them by majority, then the majority of representatives, selected by the majority of their constituents wanted to pass health care reform. Call it the nuclear option, call it whatever you'd like. There is NO WAY to pass a vote through our government that requires less than half of the voters to support it. America just voted to pass Health Care Reform because THAT'S WHAT AMERICA WANTED.

NOW, conservatives, buckle up, this is going to be hard to hear: Barack Obama won the presidency because more Americans wanted him in office. All the decisions and bills that he has helped advance were not MANDATED by him. He has Veto power. That's all. No scepter by which to dictate America. So before you go and hate him for it, all he did was sign the bill that our representatives got to him. He sat down with both sides and listened to arguments for MONTHS until finally something was created that was agreeable enough to vote through. He didn't even get to vote!

Now conservative bloggers have released the addresses of Democratic politicians and encouraged  their pro-gun followers to drop by. Democratic offices have been vandalized in the name of what? This is America. If you have a problem with a fellow American. USE THE SYSTEM. That's what the democrats had to do to get health-care through. They didn't terrorize or threaten republicans. No republican offices were vandalized because Dems weren't getting their way. This petty, BiPartisan shit has got to stop. There are two sides (At least) to every decision and it's so sad that we waste time worrying about one side or the other instead of looking at ourselves as ONE Nation and trusting a majority. This system was established by our founding fathers because it works. If you're truly a patriot, then please honor them by honoring the system they gave us to ensure that our country could never become a dictatorship. Let's be diplomatic and not stupid. It's just healthcare and taxes. Not worth death threats or vandalism. Grow up.

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!

Catholic Church Abuse Scandal: Shaun Hautly

Save for grades 5-8, I attended Lutheran schools from preschool through college. Regardless of my thoughts on Jesus or God, I have had my fair share of classes about theology and organized religion. I don't know which denominations or religious have certain things right: prayer, hats, communion, ordination, sacraments, evangelism, or books. However, across all major (and minor) religions, there is one characteristic which can doom one from success. A human figurehead.

Most religions have presidents or boards of directors, but only a few have humans in an untouchable role. The Mormons have a living prophet, the Catholics have a pope, and the Branch Davidians had David Koresh. Religions thrive on life lessons molded by traditions, morals, ethics, and values. However, the fastest way to destroy morals, ethics, and values are to give a single human being the power to influence and dictate their beliefs. The United States Presidency works because the president only has Veto power. Not the power to pass laws he feels are right. That's why we don't have health-care yet. The people don't want it yet, so it's not forced on them. However, regardless of what the people want, the churches in question are handing down mandates for sexual orientation, birth control, and political opinion.

If a religion truly wants to survive, they need to stop making rules. Cite a book or story from long ago, let its message be interpreted and offered to the followers, but don't cram it down their throats and pass it as law. Soon you're going to say that some people aren't allowed to have sex, and then you get sexually repressed individuals working with children and it turns into a big mess. Let the people take from it what they need to live upright lives-- if they need religion to do so. Otherwise leave them alone. We've got too much healthcare to worry about right now.

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!

The Palin Factor: Shaun Hautly

I think Palin is an underdog for many people. Being a woman, and a younger woman, no less, stacks the odds against her. People cheer for that automatically. She has a child with down-syndrome and another that got pregnant as a teenager. She gets pummeled by the media every time she opens her mouth, it's not hard to feel bad for her as a person. However, her political opinions seem archaic to many people: the nuke-em-all, drill-baby-drill, no-homos, and other strong conservative views turn many people off. The 1774 republican is slowly going extinct and she may very well be just the martyr they need.

However, regardless of my political opinions, there is no doubt something incredible about Sarah Palin. Something still makes her a threat to democrats and keeps us talking about her. One of the reasons democrats consistently put her down is likely because she's a legitimate threat. Bullies always picked on the kids they were jealous of, and this is no different. It's a complement to her every time we address her. She has a legitimate following just like Obama did. I know her supporters seem stupid and misinformed sometimes (and as they're portrayed in the media), but I know first-hand, Obama supports were just as dumb and he got elected. I interviewed hundreds of people in tons of US cities, all of them said, "Change!" I asked, "how?" they responded, "uhhhhhhh." People latch onto a relatable image, and our voters just aren't smart enough to see beyond marketing. That's why Axe Body spray is so popular, not because it's a great product, but because it makes you a man.

That's what Palin is to many people, a sub-par product that's marketed correctly. However, that didn't stop Obama. This is what our system produces, candidates and separation. Rivalries and unhappiness. Palin may get elected and make just as many people happy as Obama did, and piss off the same number. I'm anxious to see what Palin does in the upcoming months to solidify her status as a genuine politician ready to take America to the next level. She did Jay Leno, and who knows what's in store. Obama made his rounds, now she's making hers. Let's see where this goes.

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!

Rielle Hunter in GQ: Shaun Hautly

I had always liked John Edwards. I was supportive of him in the days where it was him, Obama, and Hillary. He's a UNC fan, and seemed like a family man. His marriage may have been terrible, and his timing even worse, but he still has to own up to breaking the vows of marriage. Not a smooth move for someone trying to win the trust of the American public. While I do understand that maybe getting a divorce during a presidential campaign is a lot more difficult than sneakily sleeping with a videographer, he should have at least used protection. There are a lot of "at leasts..." in his story. However, this article isn't about him, it's about the woman he chose to take him out of his political career forever.

So she's okay with being covered up from the media during the campaign, but now that it's all out of the bag, she decides to spill the beans to GQ (and their hard-hitting journalism) and while she's at it, strip down and pose. I'm with GQ on this one: get pissed at the photographer for making you wear something revealing or making you arch your back in the photo suggestively, but don't DO it, and then get pissed later. This is on par with someone suing Playboy for defamation of character. Besides, if she's becoming America's most talked about mom, shouldn't she have avoided suggestive photo shoots for a historically suggestive magazine?

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!

Kansas City School Closings: Shaun Hautly

The education industry is just like the postal service, and just like every other business in the US right now. Every business is closing branches, reducing employees, and cutting the fat. Of course critics are having a problem with this. That's what critics do. However, the solution for the critics isn't one that we can afford right now, so we go to plan be. Now, we can either go to plan B and figure this out, OR we can go to plan B and complain about it for years, as I assume most critics will do.

Teachers and other unions have long since gotten away with grandfathering and longevity. Since the majority of teaching pay-scales are based on "experience" (time and formal education), there isn't much incentive for trying hard nor much reward for those that do. The idea of performance based incentives and pay-scales based on results isn't such a bad idea. Yes it would upset the dinosaurs, but it's time they go extinct anyway, and this economy is just the comet to do it. Our tax dollars pay for these salaries, and I wouldn't pay for some lazy mechanic to take twice as long to not fix a broken car, nor do I want to pay for a lazy teacher who is barely meeting the minimum requirements.

There is also strength for the students in larger classes. The social interaction is more comparable to the "real world." Large companies, competition, and reward for those who try harder and seek out their supervisors translate very well into larger schools. It's a tough-love situation at times, but coddling our children and not teaching them to excel and stand out is only going to hurt them as they inherit our recovering economy and job-market. Having them prepared to battle out tough competitors for a boss that appreciates it is going to be a lot better than teaching them to wait for a handout, and achieve average test scores.

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!

Postal Problems: Shaun Hautly

I don't think I'd notice if Saturday deliveries stopped. With email having taken over much of the world of communication (and the rest is texting and Facebook), the post office can take an extra day off. FedEx and UPS do. Or you have to pay extra. That seems fair. People shouldn't be upset about the struggles of the economy affecting the postal service.

I don't know why people get upset about paying less than a dollar for a stamp. The fact of the matter is this. For $0.42, someone will come to your house, pick up a letter, and take it around the country. They'll also bring you tons of things for free. Sometime you have to go to the post office to mail something, but more and more those services are being offered online. Close a few, save a couple bucks. Every other company is doing the same.

Every other company is also raising their rates as well. Grocery stores no longer have the 5 cent barrel of crackers, and the post office should feel bad about raising their prices either. Try to send a letter by courier, try to send it across the country, tell me how much it costs and I bet the post office will still be the lowest bidder.

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!

Spy School: Shaun Hautly

This is a great place for a contract. When a student attains possession of a school computer, they should sign out the device and note it's number, etc. Then, in that contract, shove all the news about the computers, their security, tracking features, and voyeuristic capabilities into the small print. Then they have it. As it stands, I side with the family, a little heads up would have been nice. To help the school avoid this in the future, I offer the following advice.

Use your security-tracking features for just that. Monitoring suspicious behavior is too time-consuming for a school to be engaged in perpetually. If they were going to hide the fact that they can monitor, that's fine, but they better monitor only for the sake of their equipment, not for general crime-fighting reasons. Besides, checking the web cams of high-school students seems dangerous. If you snap a shot of a boy selling drugs, you have a lawsuit. Snap one of a 16 year old girl changing clothes, and you've got a whole new set of problems.

If you ARE going to use them for security, they should only be activated if a student reports it missing. If you entrust these devices to your students, you shouldn't waste time tracking them until you're notified. Handy technology, but seeing as there's enough gray area for a lawsuit, next time you should just leave a paper trail.

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!

John Mayer's Controversial Playboy Interview: Shaun Hautly

If people are going to read Playboy and then come away saying they're offended, they shouldn't read Playboy. If they're going to say that something in Playboy is sexist, I suggest they look at the adjacent pages where women are objectified to make money. Sort of like Jessica Simpson's music videos, stage performances, appearances in movies, and print ads. After spending much of her life in panties at the business end of a camera, I'm sure Jessica is losing sleep after such a comment. In my brief, informal search, there have been well over 650 Playmates, and only 21 have been Black. So let's not be too shocked by racial skews in the magazine either.

Now, onto Mayer. The guy can play guitar. Really well. Unfortunately for me, he chooses to play mostly lame love songs (this is an op-ed piece, remember?). The kind of songs that get him girls like Simpson and Aniston. Not songs like Cobain who got Courtney Love. That's a trade-off he was willing to make. Now, his musical talents I can appreciate without focusing too much on his superior women-wrangling abilities. Like with most celebrities, I tend to avoid caring too much about their relationships because in most cases (Paris Hilton excluded) they're famous for a reason other than their sexual behavior.

So Mayer said his penis was white supremacist. That should have been excluded. Just for its potential for controversy. However, he was speaking on his taste in women. Other penises are blonde supremacist, or breast supremacist. This isn't saying anything about discrimination on any other level than the woman he's attracted to. Mayer doesn't dig on black girls. Fine. That's not racist. He doesn't like them, others do. Gabriel Aubry (Halle Berry), Justin Chambers (Greys Anatomy), Wolfgang Puck, Robin Thicke, Robert DeNiro, David Bowie, and Thomas Jefferson. We all have our tastes, no reason to hate someone because they're attracted to a different type of person than you. 

As far as him using the n-word. He's on his own. That's one way that blacks and whites will NEVER be equal: whites never get to use that word. So keep on waiting for the world to change, just know it's never going to change to allow you to use that word.

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!

Palin 2012: Shaun Hautly

I'm nervous about writing on Sarah Palin as President. It's hard to be objective about it. If you're a republican, of course she is at least a viable candidate. Democrat? You may be booking tickets to Canada during her inauguration. I traveled the country interviewing people leading up to the 2008 election. I can say from experience that there is no middle ground for support of Sarah Palin. Love her or hate her. 

http://colonelshaun.com/post/256939622/paulscheer-sarah-palin-parking-lot-america

That's a link to my blog from several months ago when I posted a video of supporters interviewed at a Palin book signing. If you don't have time to watch, the summary is this: They don't know anything about her policies or opinions, they support her because they like her 'Real America' message, and the talking points she has without the execution method behind them. This is how most people are with candidates. This is why it scares me to see her run for president. Not that she'd have a chance to win, in my opinion, but her followers and supporters are so ignorant and so conservative, that she could have the power to push through some awful legislation without much resistance.

Obama was not a perfect candidate. His supports sang, "change is coming!" You ask them how, they have no answer. However, Obama's message of change was for the people, and about the general health of America as I interpreted it. Sarah's message seems to be one of persecution to wrongdoers, and taking rights from people instead of empowering and providing responsibility. Then again, I have to say that I am Pro-Choice (sort of), Pro Gay Marriage, Pro Minorities, and Pro Government. I am democratic, and have not liked the over-played artificial and condescending Sarah Palin that we have seen as Americans.

Email Shaun
Follow Shaun on Twitter!