STOP THE SNORING!

While reading through the news articles available on Huffington Post.com, I came across a piece of controversial news that is taking the breath of many drivers away. An ad campaign devoted to a product called SnoreStop is causing a lot of problems because of the image the organization has chosen to portray the product. It is an image of a military husband and his Muslim wife. Now, I know what you are thinking, what does that have to do with snoring? Well, according to the organization, there is no hidden agenda. The image is simply out there to show that the product will stop snoring, so that you and your partner can be together. The billboard has no image of the product, just the man and the woman. Now, personally, I feel that there is some type of agenda here. I mean are they really just talking about snoring? The first thing you notice about the billboard are the man and woman. Secondly you notice the hashtag followed by be together. The last thing that the viewer notices is the words SnoreStop. However, the people behind the ad assure the news outlets that the product is simply what is being pushed, and that this is simply just an image of a couple. They claim that it was created to shock you and make you look, so that they could sale a product. So, what do you think? Is it an ad simply about snoring? Is it about Couples being together? Or, Is it about something else? What do you think?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/01/soldier-muslim-billboard-ad-snorestop_n_4192238.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D400333

Will 2016 be Terminated?

Okay, we all know that soon after elections that speculation begins for the next president. We are, as a nation, always looking for the next person to take the stressful ‘throne’ that is the oval office. However, this upcoming 2016 elections may be one of the most controversial conversations, we as a nation will have. I say this because right now there is a lot of talk concerning Arnold Schwarzenegger , mostly by him, running for President in 2016. The Huffington Post article reveals that he is lobbying for a spot to run for President in 2016, upon the congressional approval of changing Article II Section I that only gives the right to run for President to natural born citizens. Now, I know that our Constitution is old, but it has lasted more than two hundred years, so I completely disapprove of the amending of the section. I cannot even begin to fathom the idea of an immigrant being sworn in as President.  It is reserved for the persons born on this soil. It is an office that only someone who was born into a government such as ours can manage. We are a Republic; we elect the officials that represent us, but our President is our worldly face. How would it make us look if we amended that part of the constitution and any immigrant could come to our country, with an agenda of his or her own, and be president. What would that mean for our nation?  To me, our Constitution is sacred; I mean you wouldn’t want Congress to just amend any anything they wanted within the document right? If that were the case, what would stop them from completing changing the whole thing or eliminating one branch or another, which would inevitably cause chaos.  Also, lets look at from this perspective; say they change what is written by our founding fathers, and the Terminator runs for President. Other than popularity from movies, what qualities does he posses that would be beneficial to our country? He would be an embarrassment. His dirty laundry was flashed all over the news in the last year. Electing him would be like reelecting Bill Clinton, except this time we already know about his indiscretions, oh and his child! I know that no man is perfect, but we should not elect someone that would be an embarrassment because the person, who holds the office of President, to the world, is America. So, I say No to the altering of the Constitution and No to Conan! What about you?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/19/arnold-schwarzenegger-2016_n_4128022.html

Are you kidding me?

California has decided that more than physicians should provide abortions. They have implemented legislation that gives Nurse practitioners, midwives, and physician assistants the ability to provide aspiration abortions to women who wish to undergo the procedure. They claim that the complication rates do not waiver between actual Medical doctors and those who are non Medical Doctors.  This not a post emphasizing my personal views on the matter, and I am asking any who comment to maintain their personal views, but how is this safe for young women? They are claiming that they are thinking of the reproductive and physical health of Californian women, but how can this truly be? To me, a non MD may have the ability to write certain prescriptions under a doctor’s supervision, but this does not show that they are competent enough to handle a surgical procedure. I actually could find more understanding if the document only allowed a PA to do the procedure. These individuals are closer to a doctor than a Nurse Practitioner or Midwife.

Reading the article reminded me of the stories I have always heard of women getting their ‘underground’ abortion with a coat hanger in the alley. Anyone remember Dirty Dancing when the his first dance partner, Penny had to seek medical attention because the ‘abortionist’ butchered her insides?? In my opinion this is an irresponsible move by the Californian government. A number of issues could occur that could cause serious complications like severe blood loss that could lead to death.  I just think that this could lead to other ridiculous legislation that would allow unqualified individuals to do other procedures, like Cesarean Sections or hysterectomies. Allowing these people to perform a procedure meant for a real doctor is insane and will more than likely cause more issues than it helps.  I was more than open to a midwife vaginally delivering my baby, but when it came to me having a C-Section, I was glad that a Doctor is the only one allowed to mess with my insides. I believe a procedure like abortion should b performed by qualified hands ONLY! What say you? Would you feel comfortable allowing someone who was not a doctor to perform an intimate procedure like abortion?

Here is the article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/10/us/california-expands-availability-of-abortions.html?hp&_r=0

They Found Us!

So, social media has become our main outlet of communication. It is our source to brag, communicate, or establish relationships with distant friends, family, or strangers. PBS News Hour tweeted that there was a project initiated where the researcher collect over 1.2 billion photos from facebook profiles around the world. It is an interesting project that brings to light the world we live in today, the dependency that we have on our social media sites. I am guilty of over sharing myself. I love showing off my son on my private facebook profile, but it is private. The project gives people from around the world who would never have crossed paths a way to see the profile picture and information (public profiles) on the website. Check out the link provided:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/09/artist-collects-12-billion-photos-of-faces-from-facebook.html

What do you think about the project? How do you interpret the project? Does it represent society today? It seems like just a bunch of photos, but it is something remarkable because it took the unknowing participation of billions of people for her to create a project like this.

Obamacare: Blessing or Curse?

It is Obama versus the House and the people these days. According to FoxNews.com many people are calling him out for his lies concerning the true cost of Obamacare. The article dealt primarily on showing the hardships that people, from around the country, are going to be facing and are already facing, in some situations. This article succeeds in its attempt to put Obama in a bad light. It tells of people being laid off due to cost increases, being fined for refusing Obamacare, losing doctors due to cost increases, and many more things that reflect negatively on the President. The main purpose of the article is to call him out for lying to the public of the effects of Obamacare. My husband and I have been dealing with the effects in some light when concerning the company he works for. Thankfully, so far these changes do seem too drastic, but a small business owner in our community says that they will be unable to remain open if the ACA goes into effect. Apparently, the cost and fines are more than the small business can sustain. I have remained out of the issue for most of its debate because I have not read it, and most people only know what they are told by their preferred media coverage, but if these things are true and American businesses will have to shut down, then I say that it is a shame that a President would allow something to pass that would squish the American dream. People come here for freedom, life, and the ‘pursuit of happiness.’ This country was built on the American dream. It is the only country in the world that someone can come from the lowest of lows and in the end become a billionaire.  A poor person can get an education and turn their life around. People are paid decent wages so they can afford a life for their families. This country is supposed to raise of the people, not tear them down.

So, I ask you this, what do you think of the article?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/27/president-obama-lied-to-us-told-america-some-real-whoppers-about-obamacare/

I would also like to know what you think of the ACA situation. Has there been any changes surrounding you that would make you for it or against it? Are your premiums higher or lower? Have you been laid off because of it? How will it effect you?

Defunding Government??

The House of Representatives have passed a bill, against the wishes of the the Senate and the President, that will shut down, according to the Huffington Post, the government unless ‘Democrats agree to defund Obamacare.’ This measure is known as a stop gap bill, which means that it is being passed to stop the Health Care Law. The hope is that by stopping the Affordable Care Act, the government will save the middle class from devastation due to the increase in taxes that it will place on those who fall under the bracket.

The House Republicans maintain that by stopping Obamacare, they are protecting the American population, not shutting down the government. I feel that the Huffington Post’s wording is being used more as an influential tool, rather than an informative report on the matter at hand. Our media is constantly trying to influence our emotions one-way or the other. The important thing to remember is that the media is a source to gain information. It should not be used to gain ideologies.

Here is the Link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/20/government-shutdown-vote_n_3961908.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk1%26pLid%3D378658

Feel free to explain your point of view. How do you feel the Huffington Post is presenting this information? Are they being ‘real’ or simply dramatic?

Distress in the family

The Cheneys are at each other’s throats concerning the standing of one another on gay marriage.  Same sex marriage is a hot topic in the media these days. Opinions concerning who should be allowed and who should not be allowed to marry get the blood of so many individuals boiling. The story explains how one daughter of the Cheney family believes that the rights of gay Americans to wed should be decided on a state to state basis. It is her belief that judges and legislators should remain outside of the decision all together. The other sister, an openly gay and married individual, used her facebook page to take a stand against her sister. She believes that a right to marry the one you love should not be decided based off of what the people, or majority, may want.

Here is the link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/01/elizabeth-cheney-blasted-by-older-sister-over-gay-marriage-stance

So, what do you think? I do not wish to start an argument among my peers, but I would like to know how you feel as individuals. I, personally, do not discuss the subject with anyone but my husband. I find myself uncomfortable with discussing the idea openly because I was raised in church, and I know I am supposed to believe one way, but I find myself hoping that a solution can be found for this argument. For me, marriage is a symbol of the church. It says it in my bible. For some, marriage is simply a technicality separate from the church because it is a union that is recognized under the law of man. Should the government have say over who weds and who does not? Is there a compromise? Could there be a way for gays to wed that would not offend the church, a ceremony that takes place under the law of the land? So, tell me what you feel would bring about a solution? Feel free to express yourself openly, but do remember to be respectful of each other’s opinions because we are all people, and all we need is love for one another.