Let me start by saying there are things that I like about Senator McCain. I feel he does tend to cross party lines in some instances. He has integrity, and his military service has been honorable. I do not think he should be the next president however because I disagree with many of his policies.

His choice for vice-president was not surprising because it was a woman, it is surprising because of the perceived motive behind it. The governor of Alaska is clearly a very intelligent woman, but I question and wonder if she is simply being used as a hand in a game of political poker.

The democrats did not purposely nominate a black man as their candidate to invoke racial sympathy, he simply won and just happened to give his speech on the anniversary of Dr. King’s memorable address. The republicans, however, perceivably chose the governor of Alaska to politically match one minority against another. It is also perceivably a pathetic attempt to woo Senator Clinton supporters with a “we have a woman too” approach.

Any moron with a sixth grade education can see through this pathetic political strategy. McCain, in my opinion, actually took the safe choice. Instead of choosing a more qualified vice-presidential candidate, he took the easy road so it would not look like the republican party is a group of old white guys. I expect more out of Senator McCain, who I like, than to not make this a closer battle. He should not have played political poker with a vice presidential choice. Choose who can help you to win, not who you feel looks like the better choice!

Even though he has played his hand, he still cannot beat the political policies, inspiration and leadership of Obama or the foreign policy experience of Biden. Senator McCain negated all of his arguments about Obama in one move and may have cost his party a true fight in this presidential race.

Pundits like Limbaugh and Hannity are only praising his choice because they want to do what they said the democrats can’t…unify the republican party. This was not a smart choice for McCain. When you take a gamble, sometimes you lose!

Both of these candidates have received criticism recently. Huckabee for his release of questionable prisoners, and Obama for his lack of connection to the black community. The latter I find the most appalling. In this country, it is amazing that a candidate stills has to deal with superficial criticisms instead of criticisms of the issues. The mere idea, that is unfortunately being perpetuated by so called black “leaders,” is ridiculous. Question his stance on the war, question his health care plan or his experience, but no one has the right to question his African American authenticity.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton of all people do not have this right. Obama spent years in the trenches as a community organizer in the inner city streets of Chicago. He has a results oriented reputation as it relates to African Americans and his political record shows he has always been sensitive to the concerns of the Black Community. Obama understands one of the most important principles of a presidential candidate, a true African American candidate must represent all Americans.

There can be no color lines for a president. I wouldn’t want a white president to only focus on issues important to that community no more than I want a black candidate to. To say he is not black enough really shows the accusers are not mature enough to distinguish racial loyalty from racial progression.

Racial loyalty means you stay in the “black box” or side with your race no matter if it progresses the community as a whole or not, hence Jesse and Al. Racial progression however, means a person knows their race, but still takes a stance to advance the plight of the race as a whole by getting involved in main stream initiatives. All races are advanced in American when balanced representation is sought and individuals in that race realize the importance of working with all.

Because of his democratic affiliation, he is accused of not being conservative enough and because of his race, he is accused of being not black enough? Who wrote the book on blackness? Obama represents racial progression whether he wins or not. The same so called leaders of the black community that are criticizing him are ignoring the fact this is the first time there has been an African American candidate in the presidential race that has a true chance of winning.

I am glad he is unconventional and forward thinking. Blacks are not a monolithic people.

I recently heard about the plans in the state of Texas to provide vouchers for pre-1996 vehicles. According to the Houston Chronicle,

“By the end of the year, the state will begin offering up to $3,500 in vouchers to replace pre-1996 vehicles, some of the heaviest polluters on the roads.

The program will be available in 14 Texas counties surrounding the Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston areas, as well as Travis and Williamson counties.

Owners who agree to ‘retire’ their vehicles will get $3,000 vouchers that can be used toward buying a new car or truck or a late-model used vehicle. If they opt to buy a hybrid, they can get $3,500. The program is voluntary.“

On the surface it sounds like a good idea right? It seems like the intent is to help the poor get a new vehicle and fight pollution all at the same time. This is not what will happen though. Once again, hard working Texans are being slapped in the face. What do you get when you work hard to make ends meet so you can drive a dependable car to get to and from work, you don’t get anything. On the other hand, if you have a old beat-up car, the state will give you up to 3,500 towards the purchase of a new vehicle.

I have a news flash for the brilliant legislators that have come up with this idea…if a person can afford a newer car, they will buy one. When you give vouchers to purchase new cars to people who couldn’t afford anything more than what they had, you simply contribute to the repo population. I do not think the intent is wrong, but the methodology will not work.

The goal should be to provide these individuals with post 1996 running vehicles. My truck is a 1999 and it runs great. Why not use that money to ensure that they have vehicles that pass the emissions tests. Isn’t the point of the test to ensure that a vehicle does not over pollute the air? If I would have known they were going to give vouchers, I would have purposely bought a vehicle pre 1996 and used the voucher money to buy what ever vehicle I wanted!

If you think my thought process is morally wrong, think again. This is exactly what will happen if they begin this program. The wealthy will be able to purchase pre-1996 vehicles from their connections for $1,000 or less and make an extra $2,500 dollars when they sell to the state so they can purchase a hybrid. I would like to thank the State of Texas for solving the whole “no down payment” issue for me when I go to purchase a new vehicle now. I do have my eyes on that new four door jeep!

I would like to commend one company for playing their part in restoring these values however. Why was Chris Baker talking about cheaters on his show? Apparently a cheating husband was less than happy when he found out the flower company he contracted to send flowers to his mistress told his wife! From a customer perspective, they did not have the right to do it, but from a moral perspective it was the right thing to do. Legally, they were wrong, but I love it when a cheating husband and an unsuspecting wife reunite by way of an exposed mistress.

The bottom line is he is suing the flower company for an invasion of privacy. Unfortunately this loser just might win the case based on its legal merits, but his moral case has already been lost. Hopefully he learns from this situation and, if she gives him a second chance, does not cheat in the future. Flower companies are watching…lol! As a victim of cheating before myself, I have one simple request…please put me on the jury!!!!

“Well, let’s just take one of your examples “figure out how to feed the poor in America” and apply a little cold, hard, light of reality onto your fantasy wishes.

Something I came across while doing a little research was a 1997 study by the US Department of Agriculture entitled “Estimating and Addressing America’s Food Losses.” The amount of food wasted by the U.S. (and I guess other similarly advanced countries) is absolutely staggering.

Out of 162 million tons of food available for consumption in the USA in 1995, 44 million tons was wasted by “food retailers, consumers and foodservice establishments.” That is almost 30% of the total amount of food produced for human consumption!

Fresh fruit, vegetable, milk, grain, sugar and corn syrup accounted for two-thirds of wasted food.

What is truly criminal about this is that not only was the value of this wasted food estimated at over $31 billion — but it is estimated that this would have fed up to 49 million people in the U.S.

That was 1997. Current figures now show how half of food in the U.S. goes to waste. This amounts to total losses of up to $100 billion per year — nearly SIX TIMES the annual budget for NASA — with $20 billion of that occurring in the farm and processing sectors, and $30-40 billion occurring in the retail sector. Household losses alone account for a further $40 billion, reveals research conducted by Dr. Timothy Jones, an anthropologist at the University of Arizona’s Bureau for Applied Research in Anthropology.

Dr. Jones found that U.S. households waste 14 percent of their food purchases. As much as 15 percent of the food wasted is food that was never even opened before the expiration date. The average family of four wastes $590 worth of meat, fruits, vegetables and grains each year, adding up to a $43 billion nationwide total.

You know, M.L., a billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its press releases a little over a year ago.

A billion seconds ago, it was 1959.
A billion minutes ago, Jesus was alive.
A billion hours ago, our ancestors were living in the Stone Age
A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it.

While this thought is still fresh in your brain, let’s take a look at New Orleans. It’s amazing what you can learn with some simple division.

Senator Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana) has asked the Congress for $250 billion to rebuild New Orleans.

Interesting number, but what does it mean?

Well, if you are one of the 484,674 legitimate residents of New Orleans (every man, woman, child), you each get $516,528.

or. . .

if you have one of the 188,251 homes in New Orleans, your home gets $1,329,787.

or. . .

if you are a family of four, your family gets $2,066,012.

Now, as for the Levies. . .the state government of Louisiana has been receiving federal funds (no doubt in the billions) for improvements to be made on those levies for over 30+ years and very little ever got spent on them.

Louisiana has had warning after warning that a Class 3 hurricane or greater would breach the existing levy system. Those warnings go all the way back to the 60’s — yet where did all those billions go?

While you’re contemplating an answer to that M.L., consider the following from writer Virgiliu Pop of Timisoara, Romania (in 2004):

“. . .Since the beginning of the space era, it has been argued that the money spent on space exploration should rather be used on meeting the needs of the underprivileged. “If our nation can spend … twenty billion dollars to put a man on the moon, it can spend billions of dollars to put God’s children on their own two feet right here on earth” – were stating respected figures like Martin Luther King, Jr.

People like him were not necessarily opposing space exploration; they were instead disputing the priorities – is space exploration worth pursuing when money is so badly needed elsewhere?

Unfortunately, the benefits of the space exploration are not self-evident, no matter how real they are. And people are genuine in their worry that money is being wasted in space. Their concern with spending priorities needs to be addressed.

The high profile of space exploration makes it appear more expensive than it actually is. The uninformed, yet caring citizen, is under the earnest impression that the money would make a genuine difference in the fight against poverty. The real dimensions of the social needs are, in reality, out of proportion with the money spent in space – be it in the past, now or in the immediate future. Otherwise, there won’t be any social needs left after the Congress stopped funding the Apollo missions to the Moon.

In the same time, many of the critics of the space program on social grounds are “limousine liberals.” They point the finger at the US government for wasting their tax money in space instead of helping the poor — but they are not feeling guilty for their own consumerist life style and for their own scale of priorities.

For instance, this year, total pet-related sales in the United States are projected to be $31 billion – the double, almost to the cent, of the $15.47 billion NASA budget. An estimated $5 billion worth of holiday season gifts were offered – not to the poor – but to the roving family pets – six times more than NASA spent on its own roving Martian explorers, Spirit and Opportunity, who cost the American taxpayer $820 million both. Instead of providing a launch pad for the immorally expensive shuttles, Florida can do better and clothe the underprivileged – a genuine alligator pet collar cost only $400 a piece.

Are space rockets expensive toys for the big boys? In any case, they cost less than the $20.3 billion a year spent in the US on the human popular toy industry. One doesn’t need toys to play with when the most popular game is playing deaf and blind to the needs of the poor – provided one criticizes the waste in space.

Instead of betting on the future, Americans spend $586.5 billion a year on gambling. It is perhaps immoral to criticize one’s personal choice, so instead of kicking the habit and feeding the poor with this money, one should stop instead the enormous waste in space who stands at a scandalous amount of 40 times less than gaming tokens.

Speaking about personal choice, $31 billion go annually in the US on tobacco products — twice the NASA budget — and $58 billion is spent on alcohol consumption — almost four times the NASA budget. Forget space spin-offs -– here are genuine tangible benefits: $250 billion are spent annually in the US on the medical treatment of tobacco- and alcohol-related diseases – only sixteen times more than on space exploration.

In the eve of the launch of Apollo 11, a moving event occurred at NASA’s moonport. The Reverend Ralph Abernathy, president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and heir to Martin Luther King, Jr., came to Cape Kennedy together with several hundred members of the Poor People’s Campaign, to protest the money being spent on space exploration, while so many people remained poor. He was met by Dr. Thomas Paine, the administrator of NASA, who was informed that in the face of such suffering, space flight represented an inhuman priority and funds should be spent instead to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, tend the sick, and house the homeless.

Dr. Paine enlightened the good reverend that the advances in space exploration were child’s play compared to the tremendously difficult human problems of the society, and told him that “if we could solve the problems of poverty by not pushing the button to launch men to the moon tomorrow, then we would not push that button.”

Here are $976.3 billion dollars -– almost a trillion — spent every year in the US on pets, toys, gambling, alcohol and tobacco. It is 63 times the amount spent on space exploration – with the difference that NASA has not destroyed lives as the alcohol, tobacco and gambling did. It is not the exploration spirit that Americans need to give up in order to alleviate poverty. It is the consumerist spirit. . .”

However, when you come right down to it M.L., the bottom line isn’t the bottom line.

It’s not about the cost. It’s not about fixing all our problems at home first before we go either. For over 2,000 years, those problems have always existed and will therefore never end; it’s an impossible condition to attain.

It’s about giving those at home some relief from their daily problems by giving them some hope that there’s something worthwhile ahead, something to look forward to, a reason for working through the immediate problems, to surmount them and to go beyond them.

Out of pocket costs for each American taxpayer PER YEAR (Data from the White House and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.)

- Whole Federal Budget (FY2004) $7867.67
- HUD-Welfare Programs $129.79
- Medicaid (2003) $927.76

(“Medicaid cost $269 billion in 2003 for medical care, nursing homes and prescription drugs for the poor.” –USA Today, 3/1/2004 That’s nearly 18 times NASA’s annual budget and is money that only maintains Welfare recipients as they are without doing a thing to improve anyone’s circumstances.)

- Federal Research and Development Budget $437.82
- Space R & D (non-defense, all agencies) $33.94
- NASA’s entire budget $51.72
- Moon-Mars & Beyond (FY06 request) $6.24

NASA’s budget is only a fraction of the total Federal Research and Development budget; the rest is in other agencies. This is the funding that develops new technologies, or advances old ones to create new products that build new businesses which develop new jobs that can improve people’s circumstances.

Yet only 5.6% of the whole Federal Budget is devoted to Research and Development that will result in new technologies, new products, new companies and new high-paying jobs.

And the new Vision for Space Exploration is only a piece of that. . .

So the question you should really ask your elected officials should be this:

“Since the future of the U.S. Economy depends so much on new technologies, new products, new companies and new jobs, why is the R&D portion of the Federal Budget, especially for the new Vision for Space Exploration, so small?”

Humanity can not be bound to one planet. It needs to expand beyond the Earth as it has expanded beyond known frontiers into unknown territories ever since the human species first arrived on the planet. Someone will do it eventually; it doesn’t matter who from a human survival viewpoint, but we want the history books of the future to show that our country maintained its leadership role in continuing human expansion into the space frontier.

Research into how to sustain human life in space, on other planets and in other places considered hostile to us is really research into how our species works and what is needed to support it. This increased understanding results in huge benefits in medicine and other aspects of living. The full extent of these benefits are completely unknown and unknowable in advance because it is not possible to predict what paths creatively thinking researchers will travel.

Welfare programs are not the best way to pump up people’s income. At best, they just provide a floor to support the recipients at some minimum level. The best way to pump up an economy is with new technologies, products, companies and highly-skilled, high-paying jobs that result from the long-term pure R&D programs that only a government can afford to wait for.

Most publicly-held private (non-government) companies can’t do much long range planning, due to having to satisfy stockholders more frequently. Only totally private companies can do that — and there are many examples of their failures in recent years (Enron anyone?).

Perhaps the following facts will help your discussion with those critics who are still concerned about the costs vs. benefits of opening the space frontier:

NASA’s entire $16.5 billion FY2007 budget, if it were to be cancelled and used elsewhere:

— Would only buy 43,000 of the several MILLION homes built in this country — if the median price of a home was $350,000, or;

— Would only support 250,000 ailing seniors in an assisted-living facility — if the costs do not exceed $5000 per month.”

We can figure out to send a man into space, yet we cannot figure out how to help a hardworking man keep a decent job to feed his family. We can spend money to chase the stars, yet we can’t figure out how to chase drugs, crime and poverty out of our neighborhoods. Endeavor is in some ways a proper name. It almost represents all the failed endeavors of the Bush administration, congress and the disappointments and social injustices we face in this country because of wasteful spending. We have soldiers that are asked to make the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq, yet they barely get paid enough to warrant that request. Congress debates over sending money to soldiers, but the beloved shuttle is never placed in question. Why don’t we put the same effort into the American people that we put into finding stars, and exploring lands for away.

Most politicians haven’t even explored the neighborhoods of their constituents. There are many people that may disagree with my stance on the space program, but I believe before we can explore lands for away, we must address the problems of the lands right in front of us. Money doesn’t grow on trees in America, it blasts on rockets! Our veterans need adequate health care, our schools need better resources, people are hungry, and violence is running ramped and yet no one is saying anything about the expensive waste of money in the sky.

I have an idea, why don’t we change the name from the space shuttle Endeavor to space shuttle Katrina or Veteran because as others watch in amazement as the light descends behind the shuttle, I look at the money we are burning. I see a neighborhood in New Orleans revitalized. I see food for the poor, programs for the homeless, and true help for the veterans that are coming home from Iraq wounded in need of sufficient health care.

We must have money to burn!

With the recent turn of events surrounding the N.B.A. and speculation of a referee throwing games for the sake of paying off gambling debts, the sport faces more than a challenge…their jobs are on the line! Referees are already under constant scrutiny from fans for controversial calls because there is already little trust in their ability to be non-biased. Athlete’s are also already under constant scrutiny, having to fight for their integrity in the eyes of public opinion. I’ve often heard people make the assumption that playoff games in the N.B.A. are sometimes “drawn out” to the maximum number of games in a series because of the financial impact it can have. It always sounded like an “old wives” tale when that little conspiracy theorist proclaimed “the game is fixed” to produce a certain outcome. In this instance, it seems like chicken little might have noticed the sky falling long before anyone believed. The boy that cried wolf really had a wolf to run from.

What is the N.B.A.’s biggest threat? Belief! If “average joe” quits believing in the game, they quit paying for the game. If they lose trust in the referees, they loose trust in the value of the dollar they used to scrape together to go to a game every now and then. When no one believes in the N.B.A anymore, the very game faces its biggest challenge ever…extinction. Can you imagine the reaction on a player’s face when they realize unemployment only pays a maximum of 300 dollars a week in some cases? That is their lunch money. As comical as it may seem, their jobs are on the line. If the acused referree begins to feel like a Canary and starts singing, it can only get worst. The implications for the sport are endless from this one gruesome discovery. Do we need to remind people of the damage Pete Rose caused the game of Baseball? Do we need to remind people of the damage steroids has caused the game of baseball? This is actually worst than that…when a player or a coach gambles, it is bad, but when a referre gambles, the sport looses all integrity and respect and every call becomes a debate.

The N.B.A. is in trouble. No shoe contract, no new stadium, no public service announcement or athlete building a community center can stop this downward spiral. If noboby believes in the sport anymore, it may very well have to change it’s name to the N.P.A. because when people quit believing, nobody pays anymore for the sport!

Every fathers day since September 1983 has been a tribute to my father and a day to honor my mother for her ability to fill both roles in his absence. My mother used his example to articulate the value of fatherhood and the male figure in the structure of the family. Her respect for him still remains strong to this day…the brilliance in her parenting is reflected in her ability to never take his place while yet filling his place by expressing his values, along with hers, to us. I am often asked how it feels to come from a single parent home, but I cannot completely answer the question because I did have both of my parents until my father’s passing. Theoretically I come from a single parent household, but spiritually I come from a household where a foundation was laid by both parents. The foundation was laid so the structure would still be effective even if one of them were unable to be there for us all the way to adulthood.

My mother stepped up to be everything for her children often times sacrificing her own desires. I cannot speak of fathers day without acknowledging her role in fulfilling the very meaning of that day. We must make sure that in honoring the great fathers of the world on this day, we don’t forget about the mothers that courageously step into both roles.

The TAKS test in reality, is simply a popularity contest of a different kind. It puts district against district, school against school, principle against principle and teacher against teacher. The student gets caught in the middle. It has become, as many things in America are, a battle to gain more dollars. With the institution of financial incentives for better test scores, although the way they were achieved is rarely scrutinized, it has become a contest. Promotions are given off of these arbitrary scores that can allow a C student to graduate and an honors student to be held back. This sounds like it is ridiculous, because it is. If a student meets their academic requirements, why should one stupid arbitrary, unbalanced test determine if they graduate? The test measures how a student compares to their peers, it has nothing to do with personal achievement.

As I watched students with promising futures graduate from high school today, I was reminded of what is important. It is important for a student to be academically well rounded. It is important for a student to be able to survive in the “real world.” This means they need a real education. Teachers should be allowed to do what they are paid to do…teach. I have a lot of friends and family members in the educational system and many of them have the same complaint. They signed up to teach and educate young minds, not to teach a test. More students are graduating and failing out of college because when they get there they realize that all they learned was a test…

The TAKS is a mess, not a test and the legislation and proposals to do away with it need to be passed. Every concerned citizen that cares about the future of this country should lobby and harass their legislators to force the educational system to do what it was designed for…prepare students to become productive members of society. The standard of a students academic achievement needs to be measured like it used to be…with grades and graduation!