Consider This

I wrote this letter after witnessing what was supposed to be a neutral guide to educating young people on voting.  It wasn't neutral, to say the least.  This is....

Dear Editor,

I'd like to take this opportunity to share with the young people who are not yet of age to vote the importance of being informed and just what that means.  It won't be too long before you all are voters and I'm afraid that with all the publicity of presidential elections over the past couple of decades getting rather 'spicy' that you will not come to know the most important underlying considerations when casting your ballot one day.

First, know that everyone has an opinion.  Our opinions are influenced by our surroundings.  They are a result of our social interactions.  They are an estimation of the quality of something - not necessarily based on fact.  It becomes hard to separate fact from opinion when a great number of people share  similar opinions. This is where bias begins.  Bias is an opinion or attitude we have for or against something, and it stems mostly from our feelings about something rather than from rational thought.  Every single one of us is biased in some way or another.  The stronger our biases, the harder it is to differentiate fact from opinion.  

Many of our biases are handed down from opinions of our parents, teachers, leaders, friends, etc.  The most important thing is to examine the source of our biases.  Ask questions!  Ask 'Why do you believe this?' or 'Why do you think that...?'   Then, go and investigate, for yourself, if these claims are true, partially true, or skewed.

The internet is a wonderful thing, use it.  But, use it correctly.  Be smart.  Many of you have probably seen the quote and picture (of Abraham Lincoln) that reads:

"The problem with quotes found on the internet is that they are often not true".  - Abraham Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln lived from 1809 to 1865.  The internet came into being in the early 1980's.  Ultimately, everything you find on the internet was put there by a human.  Is the source you're reading from reputable?  How do you know?  Information found on the internet is not regulated for quality or accuracy.  The responsibility is yours to investigate internet sources and the claims made by those sources.

With regard to choosing a candidate you hope to become the next President of the United States make sure you not only validate your choice-candidates points-of-view, but that of the opposing candidate(s) as well.   If you're going to make a decision, that is informed, then you need to learn all you can, facts and fallacies alike, about all of your choices.

Please don't make a decision just because your favorite entertainer supports a particular candidate, or party.  If your favorite entertainer does support one candidate or party over another, be smart, find out why, and decide for yourself if you agree, or not.  You wouldn't be reading this if you weren't smart, so use what you have in your head to create your own mold, and to be a responsible voter.

It really isn't enough just to know all you can about both, or all, of the candidates.  You really need to understand how government works and how a president can affect change.  What is the presidents' job description?  As president will he/she have the autonomy to follow through with the changes he/she is proposing?  Or, will the president need the approval of congress in order to follow through with these changes?  Is congress aligned with either candidate so that proposed changes may take place or is congress aligned in a way that will prevent these changes from coming to fruition?

Once you know the candidates, and understand how the government works, you have to decide who to choose.  Do you want to choose a candidate whose stances are more in line with your own, or do you want to choose a candidate based on his/her ability to make changes that are the best for our country as a whole?  In other words, would you chose a candidate because of possible benefits for yourself alone, or for the good of the nation?  Or, if you find throughout your own investigation, that any of the candidates would make a good president, there are other questions you could ask yourself such as: What does this person's past performance indicate about his/her ability to be a good leader?  Does this person have the experience I think will make him/her a good leader?  What do I know of the people closest to this person;  Are the candidates' closest friends and advisers trustworthy?  Do I trust this person to make difficult decisions?

I hope you're able to see that in order to be a responsible contributor to the leadership of this country you have to do your own legwork.  Don't rely on others opinions when you are capable of thinking for yourself.  I hope this letter helps someone better understand the importance of being an individual.  You are capable of your own thought and decisions.

Sincerely,

Stacie Bryant

My babies

Test post

Post?

Spur of the Moment Project

Get tired of necessities sitting out like they're on display. But they're used too often to be put away time and again. So here's my before and after:

So I had some left over pallets boards from a previous project and threw this little baby together: 

I love it!  I have thought about putting a country stencil on it but I honestly kind of like it just plain like this. 

Downtown

Downtown for Friday's on the Fox. We LOVE being downtown!

Top of the parking deck. 

In the elevator, on the way down. 

Chilling out listening to the band play. They were quite good, actually..Consult the Briefcase. 

Tyler loves these aperents/condos (my dad does, too! Sent him several pics to encourage him to move on up here!!) two of Tyler's teachers live here. 

One of many sculptures along the way. 

Tyler would like to live here one day, the Metreau. 

Me, again!

Play Time

Tyler playing at Commando

Tyler is Now Working Two Jobs!

Newest Arby's employee!

Joshua's New Haircut

Funny attempt at a little photo shoot. He was trying to look all badass, LOL!  He's quite the character!

I'm Now a Licensed Emergency Medical Responder!

This is most members of our class at Los Banditos after our last class...the two Lisa's, Sherri, Catjy, David,Racehelle, Al, Rob, and myself. 

My little girl sure does love the pool!!!

Tyler and his Smiley Face

The crazy things this kid does.....

Joshua Learning to Mow the Lawn

Now he is out there quite often cutting grass!  I really think he enjoys it. 

With Mama and Robbie at Regatta 220

Found the tiniest frog!!

Sisters

Kisses from mama!

172 bridge

The three of us!

My Response to Race and Guns in Light of the Recent Attack In Dallas

I'm watching Fox News Sunday (I don't normally watch hardly any news) and the discussion is, of course, about the Dallas shooting of police officers. They showed a clip of Obama saying that part of what is creating tension in communities is the fact that police have a difficult time in communities where they know guns are everywhere. (That is almost a direct quote so no quotations.). I don't disagree 100%, but I do disagree with greater than 50% of that statement, prompting my little rant. 

It is my opinion that race issues are the problem, not guns. Race issues are encouraged by the media (all outlets), and by groups such as th NAACP. 

From the Atlanta Journal & Constitution a couple of days ago regarding protests after the events in Dallas: 

"Rev. Francys Johnson, Georgia NAACP president addressed a cheering crowd:

“The logical conclusion of racism is genocide.”

Johnson said some “smooth talking politicians” who want votes are urging calm. “This is no time to be calm. You would be a fool to be calm if you are under genocide,” he said. “Racism is not a black problem, it’s a white problem.”"

I'm sorry, the logical conclusion of racism is genocide?  Conclusion meaning the end and genocide meaning the killing off of a race of people. Hmm, so the logical end of racism is the death of all blacks?  Is that what he's saying, that blacks will continue to suffer racism until the white people kill them all?  I am sorry to say there is nothing logical about that. 

And I cannot fathom why he'd think black people are under genocide. He took a possible injustice and contorted it so that his agenda was magnified by the use of inciting words to rally masses of hate and bigotry. My question is, what does he hope to be the end result?  No more whites?  Who is under threat from who?

No one should be under threat from another. And I really don't know why some black people think all whites are out to get them. For every job a white man has, there's a black man doing the same job. There are MANY black police officers, FYI!  

And, why is it that only black people getting shot by police officers is the only news of police shooting deaths we hear of?  

Check out this article from the Washington Times:

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/

There are many other articles and news sources relating the same. If you're interested, search for yourself. 

Continuing on with the show, the news lady asks Rev Jesse Jackson if he thought Obama wasted an (8year) opportunity to help further racial conciliation. Jackson's reply was one of defense stating that Obama met with great rejection when Obama attempted to meet with those in the Boston incident. Allow me to say that during times of crisis is no time to seize such an opportunity.  (Frankly, the president shouldn't be involved directly, shouldn't be reaching out to anyone at that moment, as he should be allowing the local law enforcement to do their job.  His remarks trying to corral the situation, from a distance, in an effort to help settle the situation enough that law enforcement could get a handle on things, really could've been done better - without reciting his thoughts on the cause - because that just adds fuel to the fire. Remember, there is a time for everything. That time should've been reserved for 'let the law do their job and when it's calm we will delve deep into what has happened and find justice and solutions.')  Throughout his terms of presidency he had plenty of opportunity to do other things, in times of peace, to point out the good in many black communities and to point out communities and events where blacks and whites are working cohesively, for whatever reason: improving neighborhood safety, cleaning up poorer neighborhoods, mixed races of people helping one another - there's a plethora of good-hearted gestures that have been posted on Facebook, for example, that he could've had staff investigate, allowing him the opportunity to meet with the people on both sides of the good will and broadcast the helpful side of people to the world. But no. All we ever see is him speaking in terms of what happened, and his own conclusion which almost always seems to be that all these bad things happen because of guns.  Granted - it isn't his job to be a mediator, because his job is first and foremost to protect this country and its people. But, then again, it seems our battles within this country among its own people is a threat to this country as a whole. So, it seems his job over the past 8 years might've been introduced to a 'new' or new 'type' of threat that he and his administration failed to recognize in a timely manner, and certainly failed to intercept, contain, and mend. So, yes, he wasted 8 years of service in which he really could've been a great role model for people of all skin colors to come together and do good things together. Americans need to hear, over and over again, all the good things going on in our country. That needs to be the focus of speeches that don't address intercontinental goings on. Hear the good, believe the good, be the good. We need a glass-half-full president - even when the tides are low. (Look at Scott walker's Facebook page. He's very good at pointing out the good things in and around Wisconsin. He also appears at the end of Discover Wisconsin and it's stuff like that, that all people in this whole country need to see and hear.)  Point out the positives and focus less on the bad things. It really isn't much different than advice given to parents to encourage their children. 

Jesse Jackson had gone on to give statistics related to the unemployment of black people as part of his defensive answer in his response that Obama was left unable to do more in terms of racial conciliation. Now, take into account the total percentage of black people and the total percentage of white people - do what ever math puts these percentages equal and then calculate the difference in unemployment (and I believe he was staring the statistics for just the Chicago area). I would be willing to bet, those numbers would actually be pretty darn close. I don't for a moment believe businesses are refusing to hire people because of their skin color. But we can certainly find the statistics that say opposite. (I hate statistics. They're supposed to be reliable, but I think they can be construed many different ways, and certainly, they can be designed to affirm ones hypothesis.)

Again, as the show continued, Jesse Jackson pointed a finger toward gun control. Let me speak my thoughts here....the constitution and constitutional rights aside, IF -IF- guns could be taken from those who have them illegally, then I'd consent to super-strict gun laws, meaning only law enforcement should have, carry and use guns. Right now, there are too many out there, that you, nor I, nor the government know of, in order for officials to go in and strip all people who illegally own guns, of their stash of weapons. So, with that being said, I am all for arming as many individuals - legally - so that those who own weapons illegally - might have second thoughts about using their illegally obtained weapons against anyone for any reason knowing that they may become the victim themselves. Let me ask, for what reasons do people attempt to have and own weapons without doing so legally?  These are the kind of people who don't think twice about hurting others and generally plan to do something bad with their illegally obtained weapon. At any rate, I further believe in open carry. What's the point in concealed carry???  I'd rather know who else was toting a weapon. BUT, I must point out that it is my opinion that anyone who carries MUST know how to shoot and MUST have at least a 95% accuracy and that there MUST be rules stating no one is allowed to shoot at anyone or anything greater than ('X' amount) of feet away.  I know that currently, you don't have to be a good shot to carry concealed. I'll admit, that scares me. But I have a gun and intend to carry it someday. But by my own standards, it won't be until I'm satisfied I'm a good shot!

The rest of the show went into politics and the current candidates. That's a blog post for another time. So, I'd like to further my opinion on the issue of race before being done with this rant. 

It is my opinion that race needs to be obliterated as a 'landmark' for describing someone. A friend posted that the next time she's asked her race on an application she's going to draw a box and write beside it 'human.'  I have long thought that!  

Employers do not need to know your race. They may, however, need to know if you're American or not. The race question should be obliterated from any and all forms. Why is it asked?  So others, usually potential employers, can make judgements, that's why. If you want to know a persons character, meet wth them. 

So I say take your pick. Create your own box and write in either 'human' or 'American.'  We are ALL a part of the human race. 

Golfing with my Buddy