She acknowledges there are 390 people in Guantanamo and then she asks if Elizabeth remembers that in WWII we interned all the Japanese people because we were afraid. “We’re doing the same thing only worse. And our government is sanctioning torture. The American government is allowing torture. It comes from the President all the way down.”

Does she know that in WWII our government interned over 100,000 people? Check out http://library.thinkquest.org/TQ0312008/bhjic.html for some information about the Japanese Internment. She would be hard pressed to convince me that detaining 390 people in Cuba is worse than interning over 100,000 people, including children, in the desert.

It’s as though Rosie would have us believe that these detainees at Guantanamo were just minding their own business, being friends with only law abiding, peace loving people and suddenly our government rounded them up in the dead of night and plopped them into a SECRET CIA TORTURE prison.

There is no easy answer as to how to determine which of the 390 people at Guantanamo are still dangerous to our interests but our government must protect us. I am confident that if our government released these people and any of them then participated in an attack on our country, you can be sure there would be an outcry about how we shouldn’t have let them go. This outrage is seen whenever our justice system frees drunks, rapists and pedophiles only to have them offend again.

Elizabeth asks her what we should do. Rosie’s response:

“We should uphold the standards of the Geneva Convention and lead the free world in Democracy.”

I have said enough about the Geneva Convention today but do wonder if Rosie knows that much of the world is not free.

Leading the free world in democracy is not the challenge. The difficulty lies in helping the non-free world move toward democracy and freedom. Many countries in the world, even those who vote at the United Nations, are controlled by dictators who would just as soon kill a dissident than put him or her in prison. If there is not free speech, freedom of religion and a free press there can not be democracy.

America must decide if it is in our country’s interests to promote democratic movements around the globe. Whatever the answer, let’s hope we are right.

Next, Elizabeth asks her how we can fairly interrogate them:

“I don’t think the United States government should ever, ever, ever torture other people.”

The following could be an interrogation session between Rosie and a suspected terrorist:

Rosie: Hello. I am Rosie and I am so glad to meet you. I hope you are comfortable. Can I get you anything? Anything at all?

Suspected terrorist: Well, actually yes. I would like a big glass of Iced Tea. And also, could you please put on a Burqa. I am very uncomfortable being in your presence like this. It is disrespectful to me and my customs.

Rosie: I am sorry. Of course. (She gets a burqa from some lackey.) I hate to ask you, but is there any chance that you might be involved in a terrorist plot to kill Americans?

Suspected terrorist: How could you ask me that? I am outraged! I love America and pray that someday your leaders see the wonder of Islam, convert to our beliefs and agree to live under Islamic law.

Rosie: Well, I am glad you love America and am so relieved to know that you would not commit an act of terror against this country. By the way, we have some real issues we are dealing with in America and I would like you r opinion. An issue near and dear to my heart and family is Gay marriage. The homophobic conservatives, led by our President and Dick Cheney, who thinks his own daughter is immoral because she is a lesbian, just won’t give on this. What do you think?

Suspected terrorist: While your President is an evil man, as is his Vice President who should never go to the Middle East again, they are right about this issue. It is American tolerance of such immoral behavior that will lead to the destruction of your society. We, the true followers of Islam, know that the Almighty will destroy your “freedom” as he did in Sodom and Gomorrah. Death will come to all who practice such atrocities when Sharia comes to America.

http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=2104&ln=eng&txt=homosexuality

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_isla1.htm

http://www.alinaam.org.za/library/homos.htm

http://www.islamic.org.uk/homosex.html

http://www.jamaat.org/qa/homo.html

Rosie: Well, let’s not argue about that. You can’t help that you haven’t been educated about these sorts of issues. I will do everything I can to free you from this horrible place, this SECRET CIA TORTURE prison. I know that after I help you, you will know that we really want to live in peace with you and then you will come to see the ways of the liberal, secular movement in America. Thank you so much for telling me the truth. I am so happy you are not a terrorist.

Suspected terrorist: Peace be upon you.

Wake-up Rosie: There are far greater problems facing America and the world than these 390 aspiring terrorists in Gitmo.

Yesterday was a good day for the View- other than a few bad jokes about Bush and Cheney, they stayed out of politics. They must have been saving up for today- what a mess!!

On Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
Rosie’s overview of the situation is an okay recitation of the facts: “This man has apparently admitted to over 29 things that he says that he was solely responsible for. He did this confession while he was at Guantanamo. He was arrested and put in the care the U.S. in March 2003, He was then in a secret CIA prison and then he was brought to Guantanamo and then he confessed without reporters being present and without privy to a lawyer. He confessed to pretty much everything. He was responsible for the 1993 world trade center, for 9/11 from A to Z, for the shoe bomber… for everything… This man who has been in prison under the care of the United States government since 2003 and he just confessed to all of these crimes.”

The conversation spirals downward from there.

According to Rosie, the very fact that he has been in the care of the U.S. government should tell us all we need to know. He has been in SECRET CIA TORTURE prison.

She uses the picture of him in the paper today to belittle the relevance of his confession: “Doesn’t he look healthy.” She is trying to imply that he looks sick because of all of the torture he has been experiencing at the hands of our government.

Where are her handlers? How has she not seen this picture before? This is the picture the U.S. released of him immediately following his capture several years ago. He was captured in his sleep, hence the mussed hair. If he looks unhealthy it is because he had been on the run, living like a coward in the shadows. They use this picture purposely because it is not flattering. This is common practice in the media. (Ask any conservative how much they like many of the pictures used in print.)

Perhaps Rosie thinks we should let the liberals in Hollywood hire stylists for these people, give them makeovers and then let them talk to reporters and lawyers who will violate gag orders and spew their vitriol, or worse pass on information to other terrorists. (See Lynne Stewert)

Maybe he did give a false confession, or maybe some of his statements are true and some are false. Over the next several days, the media will investigate his statements and tell us what they want us to know.

Has this poor man been tortured? Rosie thinks he has been tortured every day, for years. Do we even know what torture is anymore? Apparently, underwear on people’s heads is torture. When I was growing up, some of the teenage boys I knew thought this was a particularly funny thing to do to their little brothers. They must be the guys working in the SECRET CIA TORTURE prisons.

Elizabeth goes on to make a very serious statement: “If he is admitting to these things, he should be tortured now for having a hand in 9/11.”

This is upsetting to Rosie. She only believes muggers of 100 year old ladies should be tortured. (See the blog posting on the March 12^th episode of the View.) She now clarifies that only if they have it on video doing it and we all saw it…should the mugger be punished to the full extent possible.

Here is the problem- these women should watch the news, read a newspaper… They might not know he is guilty because they haven’t personally seen a video of him conspiring with other fanatics to kill us. The thing is, our government knew, along with governments all around the world, that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was an integral member of bin Laden’s network. His involvement has been extremely well documented by many sources. He has now acknowledged his involvement, possibly because he has finally realized his denials are known to be a joke. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Shaikh_Mohammed )

This man is not a criminal who should have rights to our judicial system, where he would have access to rules of discovery that would force the government to turn over information about the intelligence used to capture him, including names of informants… where information becomes part of a public record… where liberals with no common sense would advocate for his right to a jury trial. (By the way, the jury would probably need to be a panel of his peers, i.e.12 other fanatical terrorists. This would be the only way to ensure a proper amount of empathy be used to understand his intent.)

WAKE UP!! This man has been and continues to be a terrorist. If we released him today he would rejoin his terrorist friends and renew his efforts to undermine the west. Our military should hold him forever in the SECTRET CIA TORTURE prisons.

I hate beating a dead horse but Rosie and friends should read the Geneva Convention.

Article 4

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. (With the possible, and unfortunate, exception of Hamas, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas, in Palestine, members of terrorists groups are not members of the armed forces of a Party- a legitimate government. They are not members of an organized militia or volunteer corps fighting as a part of the military arm of a legitimate government.)

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (Terrorist groups are not commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates even though there are loose networks of these people, all fighting for common goals like undermining freedom and non-Islamic religions and destroying the West, for example. Does anyone know specifically who is in charge of the Al Qaeda or the Taliban, right now? Can those fighting for these principles find their “leaders”?

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (Terrorists hide behind civilian clothes so as to surprise their victims.)

(c) That of carrying arms openly; (Terrorists hide their guns, homicide bombs and other Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) under their clothes, in back packs, in trunks of cars or any other place they can find that will result in the most damage.)

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. (Terrorists do not follow the laws and customs of war. For example, they have BEHEADED those captured, even if those captured were journalists offering sympathetic coverage of their actions -the Taliban is threatening to kill a journalist in the next two days if their demands are not met. They threaten the lives of the civilians who assist the U.S. or Iraqi military. They do not warn the authorities before attacking targets so as to minimize civilian casualties...)

3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power. (Terrorists are not members of regular armed forces professing allegiance to a government. There is no “authority” that can be “not recognized” because there is no authority than can be recognized. Many of the terrorists in Iraq are believed to be Syrians or Iranians attempting to undermine the success of the new Iraqi government so as to prevent democracy from taking hold in Iraq.)

4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model. Terrorists do not accompany members of legitimate armed forces. Terrorists hope to destroy as many legitimate armed forces as possible.

5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law. (Terrorists are not members of the Merchant Marine.)

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war. (Terrorists are not taking up arms to resist invading forces; the terrorists are the people invading non-occupied territories and they are the people threatening the inhabitants of those territories.)

B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:

1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment. (Terrorists do not belong to the armed forces of the government of an occupied country. The U.S. has interned the terrorists because of the threat they will rejoin other terrorists to persist in their efforts to harm Americans’ interests or America.)

2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties. (The terrorists do not belong to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article therefore this provision does not apply.)

In conclusion, there are currently no provisions of the Geneva Convention that support the reasonable consideration of its application to those detained at Guantanamo Bay.

If this issue is so important to her, Rosie & Company should begin to work with their friends to convince the signatories of the Geneva Convention to update the language so as to protect the terrorists from the wrath of our government and our SECRET CIA TORTURE prisons.

She will find, much to her dismay, that most reasonable people can differentiate between people like those still held at Guantanamo and poor stiffs who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Newsflash: the Constitution protects free speech but says nothing about sexual conduct.

Rosie again misrepresents statements made by a person in reference to homosexuality to push her own agenda.

In the hot seat: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace. In this instance, she misquotes Pace – saying he said that he “believes that homosexuality is immoral so innately if you are a gay person you are immoral - you don’t even get a chance to be a good person, you are just innately bad; you are just less than, if you are gay.” She goes on to say that based on his comments “you can be a straight person who is a horrible person who is adulterous and has no morals but it is impossible for a gay person ever to be treated equal, which is the premise of this country, that all men and women are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. All people even the gay ones, General Pace, mister…its 2007, leave the gays alone.”

That is not what he said. His actual statement, quoted by MSNBC (See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17590518/) , was made in response to a question about the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy signed by Bill Clinton in 1994:

"In an interview Monday with the Chicago Tribune, Pace was asked about the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve if they keep their sexual orientation private and don't engage in homosexual acts.

Pace said he supports the policy, which became law in 1994 and prohibits commanders from asking about a person's sexual orientation.

"I believe that homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts," Pace said in the audio recording of the interview posted on the Tribune's Web site. "I do not believe that the armed forces of the United States are well served by a saying through our policies that it's OK to be immoral in any way.}

Pace’s comments referred specifically to homosexual acts, not people. In this way, the sexual acts are, in fact, like adultery because they occur outside of a marital relationship. He has made a factually correct statement that had nothing to do with saying all gay people are innately immoral. He was also clear that the armed forces of the United States should not tolerate any other immorality, which would include adultery amongst heterosexuals."

Of course Joy’s response is to point out that if gay people could get married then their behavior wouldn’t be like adultery so it wouldn’t be immoral. She misses the point, which is that many people, most people for that matter, do not believe that homosexuals should be allowed to get “married” and that they should not engage in homosexual behavior. Even if you allowed gay marriage, the behavior would still be immoral to many people because the natural order of things is for sexual relationships to occur between males and females.

Rosie is extremely defensive about this issue because it is personal to her. That does not give her the authority to misstate the views of others. She is absolutely stuck on the idea that Pace has said that you “innately have no ability to be a moral person if you are gay.” She compares gay people to blacks. Engaging in homosexual conduct is a behavior, not a characteristic.

When Fisher says we should see what’s in General Pace’s closet she should realize that at this point in his career, there has most assuredly been a spotlight on his behavior and a fine toothed comb examination of his entire life.

Sadly, Elizabeth has been led astray again. She loses all sight of her conservative tendencies when the women get going, trying her hardest to fit in. She chimes in with the following: “That’s what I mean. I think that he is actually I think that by putting a light on something that is other than his own sin I think that he is absolutely clouding over something of his own.” She did clarify she does not think he is a closeted homosexual but he must be covering up his own sin.

Apparently, any criticism of any person’s conduct really is a manifestation of the commentator’s own guilt about his or her own immoral behavior.

As always, liberals must refer back to Dick Cheney’s daughter as Rosie notes that according to Pace, she is immoral. Again Rosie, the person is not immoral based on her homosexuality alone. If she engages in homosexual behavior, many people would think her behavior is immoral.

Rosie, here is the point: Gay people do not have to engage in sexual behavior. They should be able to control themselves in the same way millions of heterosexuals forgo sexual relationships for lots of reasons, two of them being they are not married or they want to avoid pregnancy.

I do want to commend Rosie for mentioning the Creator in her quick lesson on the language of the Constitution. She is correct: Our rights are inalienable because they derive from God, not the government and not our fellow citizens. That being established, I now await the left’s movement to remove those words from the Constitution.

Schumer: “Probably not because usually impeachment is when you have committed a crime.”

Rosie: “Treason is not a crime?”

I just don’t know what to say about this other than Rosie may be a good comedian but her judgment is so lacking that it amazes me she has a job.

Her assertion, in the form of a question, that Bush has committed treason because she doesn’t agree with his policy is outrageous and indicative of the intolerance, and ignorance, of the left.

Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution states:

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

One would be hard pressed to assert that the President has waged a war against the United States or given aid and comfort to our enemies.

For those who just can’t seem to get the facts straight:

Bill Clinton was impeached because he committed perjury and he obstructed justice. He lied about his sexual improprieties to interfere with a lawsuit brought against him by Paula Jones. He encouraged others to lie on his behalf for purely selfish reasons.

Additionally, he used his position of power to influence the behavior of a subordinate woman and then engaged in inappropriate behavior in the Oval Office, at times while he was on the phone with legislators discussing issues of national security. His indiscretions, while denied initially, have now been admitted. On the way to the admission, he and his followers attacked the character of every woman who raised concerns about his behavior. The same women who raised the concerns were ignored by the feminist groups, who loyally rallied behind their President. (We know that Bill Clinton was the first Black President but was he also the first woman president?)

Now Newt Gingrich, the Speaker of the House who led the impeachment effort, has acknowledged, in an interview with Focus on the Family Chairman James Dobson, that he too had an extramarital affair.

Rosie is on this like flies on honey. The problem: she misstates the facts to bolster her own viewpoint. Gingrich did not go after Clinton because he had an affair, he did so because of Clinton’s assault in the justice system, which culminated in the United States Supreme Court disbarring him.

To be sure, politicians, and people in general, should take their marital vows seriously. While I personally do not believe people should seek divorces unless there is abuse, a person can no longer stop a spouse from getting a divorce. If a person finds him or herself in a marriage that is beyond repair, the solution is divorce and then the possibility of a new relationship not an affair with the possibility of divorce.

The fact that several republican candidates for President have had affairs or been divorced does not mean that conservatives are indifferent to their choices. These failings will be a challenge to conservatives. Conservative tolerance of these men who have failed to meet the high standard we prefer may simply demonstrate a commitment to the notion that a person’s past mistakes shouldn’t automatically bar them from future contribution.

March 12, 2007

Richard Jeni, one of Joy’s favorite comedians, was found with a gunshot to the head. It is being called a possible suicide. Joy says he was one of the funniest guys in comedy and she was shocked that he had depression.

As an example of his tremendous humor, she quoted one of his jokes on religious war: “We’re basically killing each other to see who got the better imaginary friend.”

Joy remained completely oblivious to the truth that his lack of faith had to have contributed to his depression. This is not to say that people of faith do not suffer from depression because they most certainly do. People with faith, however, can lean on their God or Christ or higher power to help them through their times of struggle. Maybe had he found religion, he would have had a better support system to pull him through his apparent depression.

If there is no God or no higher power to whom we are accountable, what difference does anything make. As a person of faith, I am sorry Mr. Jeni lived a life devoid of the hope and peace that a belief in God brings.

Faith in God may have been the only thing that could have saved this man.

I am not really into music and can honestly say I don’t know if I have heard Pink sing, but after hearing Rosie praise Pink’s “great” song about the war, “Dear Mr. President” I had to get information so I pulled the lyrics up on the internet.

These lyrics exemplify why America is truly in trouble. The ignorance of the song writer begs a response. Unfortunately millions of young people listen to this trash and never question the message.

Let me dissect lyrics. First verse:

“Dear Mr. President
Come take a walk with me
Let's pretend we're just two people and
You're not better than me
I'd like to ask you some questions if we can speak honestly"

First: The President used to jog but his knees are shot. Pink could join him for a bike ride.

Second: She hit it on the head: they would have to pretend that Bush is not better than her. He has given much of his life in service, and whether people agree or disagree with his policies, he has made the best decisions he can based on the circumstances. He has been faced with some of the most difficult circumstances a President could encounter and conditions that 99% of us could never handle. She is a spoiled performer who may have worked her way up the entertainment ladder but now seems to offer society, based on this song alone, trite and simplistic emotional rhetoric designed to incite class conflict and political strife.

Third: Bush would speak honestly but his words would be irrelevant. She wouldn't listen to either his positions or his responses to hers.

Second verse:

What do you feel when you see all the homeless on the street
Who do you pray for at night before you go to sleep
What do you feel when you look in the mirror
Are you proud

First: Does Pink think the President of the United States is responsible for homelessness? The economy is booming, unemployment has remained at record low levels and millions of jobs have been created in the past several years. Liberals allege on a daily basis that our country has 12- 20 million illegal aliens because there are no Americans willing to do the work they do. Those who want to work and are able to work should have no problem finding a job. The tragic reality: most homelessness is the result of two things: drug addiction and mental illness. These issues must be dealt with on a local level. There is nothing a President can do on a micro level to solve this problem. I wonder how many homeless people Pink has helped lately- to how many shelters she has donated her hard earned money? Has she spent a lot of time serving meals in the soup kitchens? Is Pink using the plight of these downtrodden to sell music and make more money for herself?

Second: At least we can be sure Bush prays before bed.

Third: He should be proud. He may not be perfect but he is making an effort.

Third Verse:

How do you sleep while the rest of us cry
How do you dream when a mother has no chance to say goodbye
How do you walk with your head held high
Can you even look me in the eye
And tell me why

First: I would be willing to bet that Pink gets hours more sleep every day than does our President.

Second: I doubt Pink spends much time crying about the things that concern most of us.

Third: When she refers to mothers, is she referring to mothers of soldiers who gave their lives fighting for freedom? Does Pink think that these soldiers would support her disrespect of their Commander-in-Chief? Does she think mothers, other than Cindy Sheehan, would support her disrespect of their sons and her efforts to use the deaths of their sons to sell her songs?

Fourth: I know the President would look her in the eye and show her the respect she does not show him.

Fourth verse:

Dear Mr. President
Were you a lonely boy
Are you a lonely boy
Are you a lonely boy
How can you say
No child is left behind
We're not dumb and we're not blind
They're all sitting in your cells
While you pave the road to hell

First: Is her insinuation that children who are lonely grow up to be horrible, evil people like she asserts the President is? All people are lonely sometimes. People who stand up for what is right are often unpopular. Pink should know that it is often lonely for people who do the right thing because the right thing is often the hard thing. Pink most likely makes her decisions based on popular opinion because that is the easy road. Unfortunately an increasing number of Americans prefer to take the easy road and fail to consider the long term implications of their decisions.

Second: The President has taken a stand that all children have the right to an education and that those children who are being left behind should be attended to by the schools that are failing them. How shocking that a plan created with the help of very liberal Sen. Kennedy to assist the poorest children in our country would upset Pink. Conservatives criticize the President about this issue because they generally believe that local education agencies should control the manner in which education is delivered. The truth is that liberal leaders criticize the President’s plan because they don’t want inner city children to succeed in school. Their very success will lead them to the understanding that the democrats need them to fail.

Third: The people sitting in cells were generally failed by the education system and their families long before this President came on the scene. President Bush has been in a national position of leadership since January of 2001. Her blame of the President for the populations in prison demonstrates Pink’s ignorance about crime statistics. People born to single moms living in poverty are dramatically more likely to grow up to be criminals. The people going to prison today had their fates largely determined decades ago, when they were born to women trapped in a welfare system that offered them little hope. Thankfully republicans convinced President Clinton to sign welfare reform, after several vetoes, in the 1990s. The sky didn’t fall. People who had never worked suddenly found jobs and began teaching their children about responsibility.

Fifth Verse:

What kind of father would take his own daughter's rights away
And what kind of father might hate his own daughter if she were gay
I can only imagine what the first lady has to say
You've come a long way from whiskey and cocaine

First: If Pink is speaking of abortion, the President would say that he does not have the power to take away a right that does not exist. Rights must be derived from some power. The President believes, as did our Founders, that our rights derive from Natural Law, from God. The government does not give us rights and the government can not take away a right. One would be hard pressed to say that any God conferred the right to abortion. This is an issue that should be decided by the states, end of story.

Second: The President would not hate his daughter if she were gay. This is an attempted slam against Vice President Cheney. I am sure that the President would love, unconditionally, his daughter if she were gay, just as I believe Cheney loves his daughter. That does not mean that they would condone their daughter’s choice to engage in a homosexual relationship. Loving a child is very different from approving of that child’s choice.

Third: Thankfully the President has maintained his sobriety for decades. This cannot be said for most addicts. Is her point that once a person has engaged in addictive behavior, there is no turning one’s life around?

Sixth Verse:

Let me tell you bout hard work
Minimum wage with a baby on the way
Let me tell you bout hard work
Rebuilding your house after the bombs took them away
Let me tell you bout hard work
Building a bed out of a cardboard box
Let me tell you bout hard work
Hard work
Hard work
You don't know nothing bout hard work
Hard work
Hard work
Oh

First: If she thinks the President hasn’t worked hard in his life, or that he does not work hard now, she is more ignorant that I thought.

Second: No one should be working for minimum wage with a baby on the way. Pink: minimum wage jobs are jobs intended for entry level workers, often high school students, who have no business planning on raising a family with that income. It is not the fault of the President that countless young women have made a choice to raise a child when they are earning minimum wage. If the woman had engaged in a relationship with a man who was responsible, she would have other options: A two-parent household is the best way to keep children out of poverty.

Third: If the lyric about rebuilding a house that a bomb took away refers to Iraq, she should know that not only will America spend billions of dollars rebuilding Iraq but that much of the destruction occurring in Iraqi neighborhoods is not at the hands of the United States. It is terrorists and insurgents from countries like Iran and Syria who are destroying much of Iraq.

After reading the lyrics of Pink’s “great” song, I am appalled that Rosie gave it praise on national television.

I am also glad I had never before wasted my time, or money, on Pink and her ignorant rant.

The View’s focus on depression brought a lot of great information to the women who watch the program.

Women should be aware that depression is a growing problem in society and also that women suffer from depression, 2:1, more than men.

Scientists have been able to determine, through the use of PET scans, that there are at times verifiable differences between the brains of people with symptoms of depression and those without symptoms. Additionally, pharmaceutical companies have developed many more medications to assist in the management and treatment of depression.

Fortunately, the many experts and Rosie honestly stated that medication was not for everyone but also appropriately suggested people remain open to options. People should explore all available treatment options and make decisions with the help of a doctor to determine the most appropriate course for themselves. Often people who combine medication use (whether short or long-term) with assistance from a psychiatrist or psychotherapist see the most success.

One interesting tidbit thrown out: Depression will be the number one cause of disability in the next couple of years. A question we should all be asking: Should people have the right to forgo treatment if their denial of medical intervention results in a dependency on the government (i.e. the taxpayers)?

While an individual’s depression, like many other disabling conditions, has an impact on society for a variety of reasons, the use of Social Security creates a greater responsibility on the part of the individual and the government.

When a person goes to the government seeking special assistance, to what lengths should the government go to verify their conditions or needs are legitimate? If the needy person has the ability to change their circumstances, should they be required to make efforts to do so?

The government has almost no business interfering in the personal lives of citizens who act within the parameters of the law. We should always remember the principle that one person’s rights should not infringe on the rights of another. When a person seeks benefits that require other citizens to support him, the government has at least some responsibility to protect the rights and property of those who will be forced to pay.

Hopefully, as more people come forward to share their personal stories of treating depression and other forms of mental illness, those continuing to suffer will feel empowered to seek help. If people seek appropriate help to manage their illnesses, fewer should need to turn to the government for support.

Thanks to The View for discussing this very important issue.

On HIV/AIDS:

Queen Latifah stars in a new movie, Life Support, exploring the struggle of women with HIV/AIDS.

The African American community continues to be hit especially hard by this virus, spread almost exclusively through sexual or drug abusing behavior. Black women are the fasting growing group to acquire the virus.

Interestingly, she doesn’t want to get all political but Latifah takes issue with this administration (remember, everything comes back to “It’s Bush’s fault”) because they don’t want to support groups that don’t strictly preach abstinence to stop HIV/AIDS.

She is right that HIV/AIDS virus doesn’t “care if people are Muslim, Christian, black white, gay, straight- it’s a killer.”

LATIFAH: The virus does care that people engage in irresponsible behavior because that is the only way this virus will survive. The only way to avoid getting HIV from sexual activity is ABSTINENCE!

After an interjection by Elizabeth interrupts Joy’s effort to belittle the abstinence movement, Latifah does acknowledge that abstinence does work but because people are emotional, they will engage in high risk behavior. Therefore we need to educate children and youth about how to engage in irresponsible behavior in the most responsible way possible. Brilliant!

Maybe if more people like Latifah would work harder to empower young girls to stand up for themselves and say no to the boys and men who would ruin their lives for a quick 10 minutes of mostly their own hedonistic pleasure, we could save these young women from not only HIV/AIDS but also the burden of sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy and the emotional baggage that generally comes from engaging in promiscuous sexual behavior.

It seems true that this is an issue that affects the African American community more than other populations: African Americans comprise approximately 12% of the American population, but just over 50% of people newly diagnosed with HIV/AIDS in 2005 were African American. The Hispanic population is approximately 13% of the U.S. population but makes up over 19% of newly identified cases of HIV/AIDS. Contrast this to the Caucasian population, which comprises 70% of the population but only 29% of newly diagnosed cases.

I think that it is possible this is really a crisis tied to socioeconomic status. While I couldn’t find statistics tied to socioeconomic status- which would probably reveal that the transmission rates are probably more equitable when comparing people of the same socioeconomic status- i.e. low income Caucasian women may be just as likely to acquire HIV as low income African American women. There are simply fewer Caucasian women living in poverty, therefore the statistics are possibly slightly skewed.

To get more information on HIV/AIDS please check out the following websites:

For general information on HIV/AIDS:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#aidsage

For data on women with HIV/AIDS:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/women/resources/factsheets/women.htm

For information on transmission to children:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/perinatal/index.htm

A couple of additional points on today’s show:

On American Idol:

Simon has a job to do- tell these people what they need to do to be the stars they hope to become. As these young people argue and act as though Simon is a fool, they are the fools. They should say “Thank you” and do some honest reflection about his comments.

On Bill Clinton and stray dogs:

Joy: Good joke comparing Bill Clinton to a stray dog who always comes back… I love when the libs go where no conservative could, at least not as a host on one of the major networks…