To Label Or Not To Label

Two hundred thirty six years ago this coming July our forefathers brought forth upon this continent a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men were created equal. If President Lincoln were to utter those words today he'd say that all men and women were created equal. I wonder if we don't actively work against that equality by the stupid things we say and do.

We have become a people who likes to pigeon-hole everyone by assigning labels. Back in Lincoln's time those individuals that we now call African Americans were slaves. Instead of integrating them into this great society as citizens with equal standing we had to overcome our irrational fears and prejudices. After all the struggles we still segregate them by calling them African Americans. We didn't stop there. Now we have Native Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and so on and so forth.

I blame the census as the number one cause of this type of racial segregation followed very closely by politicians, the media, and the school system. Every ten years everybody in this country is supposed to fill out the census forms to let the government know how many of us there are. They ask what nationality you consider yourself to be, (i.e. Caucasian, Hispanic, Asian, African American, etc.). If it's really necessary for the government to know this information, a better question would be: 'What country did your ancestors come from?'. Our nationality, (unless you aren't a citizen by birth), is American. We are supposedly the great melting pot of humanity, but our government seems to think it's necessary to keep us separated and labeled. Perhaps if we quit thinking of each other in terms of skin color we'd finally lose the racial prejudice that still exists. I might add that the bigotry between the races exists among all the races, not just a select few.

Race isn't the only pigeon-hole that we get shoved into. Religion is another favorite. There's Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, and Buddhist to name but a few. These religions are broken down into smaller categories trying to define who we are: Orthodox, Fundamentalist, New Age, etc. Let's not even get into the labels we put on people who are active versus those who are less active versus those who are involved in a religion in name only. All this pigeon-holing has created even more bigotry and hatred. Just as one race sees itself as different from another, being defined as to what kind of person you are by a religion pits one person against another.

I remember a story I heard in Sunday School, (aha you've already labeled me a christian), about these two little old ladies walking down the street. They were considered very righteous by everyone who knew them, but if they had a fault it would have been their propensity to discuss the faults of others. Okay, so they were gossips, (that's a label). This particular day as they walked along the street the subject of their discussion was another woman who lived in the neighborhood. She, (unlike them), didn't attend church. She was known to smoke, and drink alcoholic beverages, and was seen with a different man every night, and it was common knowledge that those men paid for her company, (you just decided I am either a Mormon, or a Baptist, maybe a Muslim, but the Sunday School phrase kind of throws that last option off). Anyway, the ladies talked about how terrible it was that such a person should be living in their midst and how she was dragging the morals of the community down. Just then they saw her coming down the street towards them and hurriedly they decided to cross the street rather than take the chance of having to speak to her. Her low-life, immoral behavior might somehow rub off. As they neared the middle of the street a car careened around the corner speeding directly at the two ladies who didn't move so fast in their golden years. From out of nowhere two hands grabbed them and gave them a mighty shove. They were thrown out of the way of the racing car with only skinned up knees and a couple of bruises to testify of their near death experience. The person who shoved them to safety lay still and lifeless on the cold pavement. This guardian angel was none other but the same woman that the two little old ladies had crossed the street to avoid. They'd have to make a new pigeon-hole for this heroic, non-church-going lady of the night.

We are labeled by what kind of job we have, (Boss/Labor), what neighborhood we live in, (Haves/Have-nots), how much education we have, (Grad/Drop-out), how much money we have in the bank, (Fat Cat/Poor Man), if we have an accent, (Local/Foreigner), if we're pretty (Beauty Queen), or homely, (Ugly Duckling), if we're good at sports,(Jock), and if we're whizzes when it comes to the computer, (Geek). The labels never stop, but the labels have next to nothing to do with who the person is. I have only one solution. It starts with me. Since I'm the only one who can do anything about me, I have to work on un-labeling everyone I know, and just let them be people. Maybe after a time I can learn to accept people for who they are. Maybe it will catch on and a bunch of us can start a new trend. We'll do majestic things, help to change the world to a place full of peace and love instead of distrust and hate. We'll call ourselves the un-labelers. Oh oops that's another label. I'm working on it

2012 Primary Totals & Averages

I decided to talk about the outcome of the 2012 GOP elections because the media is doing such a lousy job of just reporting the news. To be candid I must admit that I am a Romney supporter. My findings might be slanted in his favor, but on balance since the media does everything it can to negate and diminish Romney's accomplishments maybe that's okay.

The following chart shows the results of the twenty two state GOP contests held through Super Tuesday March 6, 2012.

First Place: Mitt Romney has won fourteen states. Rick Santorum has won six states. Newt Gingrich has won two states. Ron Paul has won no states.

Second Place: Ron Paul and Rick Santorum came in second seven times. Mitt Romney has come in second six times, and Newt Gingrich came in second two times.

Third place: Ron Paul and Rick Santorum came in third seven times, Newt Gingrich has come in third five times, and Mitt Romney came in third in two states. I didn't award a third place in Virginia because Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum did not qualify for the state's ballot, and both got zero votes.

Fourth Place: Newt Gingrich has come in fourth thirteen times. Ron Paul has come in fourth eight times. Rick Santorum has come in fourth two times, and Mitt Romney came in fourth in none of the states.

7,881,788 votes have been cast in the twenty two GOP primaries, averaging 358,263 voters per state. Romney has averaged 39.54%, Santorum has averaged 24.85%, Ron Paul's overall average is 17.5% and Newt Gingrich is last with 14.98%.

Mitt Romney has averaged 145,288 votes per state with a total of 3,196,326 votes. Rick Santorum averages 88,988 votes per election (1,957,727 total), followed by Newt Gingrich (1,827,336 votes) averaging 83,061 votes per state, and finally Ron Paul has an average of 40,927 votes with a total of 900,339 votes.

Date	State	Gingrich	Paul	Romney	Santorum
01/03	IA	13.3%-4th	21.4%-3rd	24.5%-2nd	24.6%-1st
01/10	NH	9.4%-4th	22.9%-2nd	39.3%-1st	9.4%-3rd
01/21	SC	40.4%-1st	13.0%-4th	27.8%-2nd	17.0%-3rd
01/31	FL	31.9%-2nd	7.0%-4th	46.4%-1st	13.4%-3rd
02/04	NV	21.1%-2nd	18.8%-3rd	50.1%-1st	10.0%-4th
02/07	CO	12.8%-3rd	11.8%-4th	34.9%-2nd	40.3%-1st
02/07	MN	10.8%-4th	27.1%-2nd	16.9%-3rd	44.9%-1st
02/11	ME	6.2%-4th	35.7%-2nd	39.2%-1st	17.7%-3rd
02/28	AZ	16.2%-3rd	8.4%-4th	47.3%-1st	26.6%-2nd
02/28	MI	6.5%-4th	11.6%-3rd	41.1%-1st	37.9%-2nd
03/03	WA	10.3%-4th	24.8%-2nd	37.6%-1st	23.8%-3rd
03/06	AK	14.1%-4th	24.0%-3rd	32.4%-1st	29.2%-2nd
03/06	GA	47.2%-1st	6.6%-4th	25.9%-2nd	19.6%-3rd
03/06	ID	2.1%-4th	18.1%-3rd	61.6%-1st	18.2%-2nd
03/06	MA	4.6%-4th	9.5%-3rd	72.2%-1st	12.0%-2nd
03/06	ND	8.5%-4th	28.1%-2nd	23.7%-3rd	39.7%-1st
03/06	OH	14.6%-3rd	9.2%-4th	37.9%-1st	37.1%-2nd
03/06	OK	27.5%-3rd	9.6%-4th	28.0%-2nd	33.8%-1st
03/06	TN	23.9%-3rd	9.0%-4th	28.1%-2nd	37.2%-1st
03/06	VA	0%-4th	40.5%-2nd	59.5%-1st	0%-4th
03/06	VT	8.2%-4th	25.5%-2nd	39.8%-1st	23.7%-3rd
03/06	WY	0%-4th	2.5%-3rd	55.7%-1st	30.5%-2nd
	All	14.98% av	17.50% av	39.54% av	24.85% av
	Total Votes	1,827,336	900,399	3,196,326	1,957,727
	Average Votes	83,061 av	40,927 av	145,288 av	88,988 av
		Gingrich	Paul	Romney	Santorum

When Did Name Calling Become Acceptable?

I want to offer full disclosure before I start on my latest rant. I acquired the use of naughty words in my vocabulary in the eighties, developed the skill through the nineties, and have spent the last fifteen or so years trying to eradicate them from my life. I have to admit it's far easier to learn foul language than it is to quit using it. Based on my life experience I know how easy it is to take the road we're used to rather than the one less traveled.

I watched Sean Hannity last night on the Fox News Network. The focus of the show covered liberal media versus conservative media. Sean wanted to know why it is okay for liberal television hosts to use vile words when describing people, and it's not okay for conservative hosts to do the same. My reaction to Sean's question comes with another question. Why is it okay for anyone to publicly say vile and disgusting things about anyone? I realize that the censorship levels of network television are decidedly more lax than are the rules of what's allowed on so-called public airways. I also understand that these rules are determined by what the public says is acceptable. I guess my real question then is; 'Why do we citizens think it's okay for anyone to publicly use profanity, vile name-calling, and outrageous insults?'

The issue came up on the Hannity show because of two events that occurred this week. On Rush Limbaugh's radio program he called a woman who appeared before congress over the current contraception issue a slut. The other thing that happened was conservative media publisher Andrew Breitbart died, and a lot of public figures made nasty comments about him. More to the point regular everyday folks left rude and incendiary comments on places like Twitter and Facebook concerning both subjects. Contrary to popular opinion hate speech is acceptable in our society by just about everyone.

We all say, "oh how sad", when a teen commits suicide because a bunch of school bullies made the kid's life unbearable at school, and on-line. We blame the parents, the school, and the on-line social sites. Why don't we look in the mirror, and accept a good deal of the blame for our own involvement? If you think I'm wrong go on-line, find articles covering the election and the candidates, and read some of the comments left behind by visitors. They range from argumentative to horrifically vile. Our world has changed. We no longer have debates about issues. Today it's quite fashionable to attack the person who voices opposition to what we believe, rather than arguing the issue. The enemy becomes anyone who disagrees, or has a differing point of view.

If it can be proved in court that a person physically attacked someone else because of a skin color, or sexual preference prejudice, that person can be charged not only with assault, but with committing a hate crime as well. There is no difference between students tormenting the fat kid, the shy kid, the homely kid, the black kid, or the gay kid. The attack happens because someone is perceived as different, and thereby becomes a target. They're all crimes based on hate. Perhaps we've reverted back to the days when citizens gathered to watch Christians being fed to the lions, betting on the outcome, and feeling superior, and self righteous.

The media from both sides of the aisle plays this game everyday in the public square. Concerning Mr. Breitbart's death Rolling Stone ran an article entitled, 'Andrew Breitbart: Death of a Douche'. We should all be shocked, but further investigation proves that during his career this same Mr. Breitbart made a great many public comments that were just as shocking, and vile about those he opposed. Fans of Mr. Breitbart have emailed Rolling Stone with complaints, and even threats. Those who opposed Mr. Breitbart's work when he was alive have filled the airwaves and the internet with nasty comments about the man's life and his death. It makes me think of the Queen's famous line in Alice In Wonderland. "Off with their heads".

The only way this kind of behavior can be stopped will be when and if the public rises above the need to belittle those we disagree with and says 'ENOUGH'. Boycotting advertisers, changing channels, and unsubscribing are some of the tools that can be used to bring a wayward media back into line, but that won't happen until the public has had enough, and right now the public seems to be not only eating it up, but are also eager participants. It's kind of like when the kids are supposed to be in bed and asleep and you hear them laughing and giggling, and jumping on the bed. You call out to them to get to bed, and it gets quiet for a while. Pretty soon the noise begins again. Depending on your patience, coupled with your energy level you'll eventually be forced to actually get up and go into the kid's room to make them understand that when you say get to bed you really mean it. Hopefully the day is near at hand when we, (the real silent majority), who find this vicious, nasty talk unacceptable, and offensive no matter who it's coming from will get out of our comfortable easy chairs and tell the world to knock it off, and let them know we really mean it. Until that day comes it's okay to remind people, (whenever we get the chance), in a very polite, no-nonsense way that profanity, name calling, and general hate messages are not appropriate under any circumstances.