Come on, John, how irresponsible would it be for any candidtate to give such specifics without being involved in the high-level meetings that include the generals responsible for the military operations as well as the secretary of defense, national security advisor, and secretary of state? HIGHLY irresponsible, and amongst the LEAST of the problems making such promises would lead to is, well broken promises.

Hillary has taken the only responsible path available - promising to address the issue early in her presidency (assuming she is elected) and promising to make withdrawal from Iraq, in a responsible manner, a top priority.

Any candidate who promises more, or more specifics, is just blowing hot air.

Everyone I’ve talked to today about this is intelligent enough to know that John Edwards is desperately trying to turn America’s growing frustration over the war in Irag against Hillary, which is not where it belongs (hello? Remember our current President who got us in there, John?). I hope the rest of the registered voters in this country are equally as intelligent, and see Edwards’ attacks for what they are - baseless, unfounded, and irresponsible.

This year my significant other and I have decided to do something different - we’re sending eGreetings instead. Now, I know there are a lot of people who feel that an emailed Holiday greeting is tacky - sort of like an emailed invitation to a formal party or wedding. So for those people I must explain…..

Although we’ve always been “concerned” about the environment (which in the past was primarily focused on cleaning up air & water pollution, removing trash from public areas, and paying lip service to the problem of overpopulation), the past year has witnessed a deepened commitment from us to reducing our footprint on this planet. We’ve replaced all our light bulbs with CF bulbs, work hard at conserving both water and energy, increased our attention on recycling (it used to take a few weeks to fill our recycle bin, now it’s usually overflowing each week when we set it out on the curb), and I’m in the process of replacing my old SUV for a Hybrid vehicle. We also pay closer attention to our use of (and recycling of) paper products, and stopped our newspaper delivery after realizing we were getting more and more of our news online, and I now take a collection of mismatched canvas bags to the grocery store when I shop, to avoid the lose-lose choice of “paper or plastic”.

To that end, we have decided that the best thing we can do this holiday season, in keeping with our commitment, is to NOT mail out a bunch of cards. Our trees are one of our greatest natural resources, along with water, without which we humans cannot live. For years we’ve been hearing about how quickly the Amazon basin rainforest (and other old growth forests) are being razed, sometimes illegally, to make way for development and ranching. This issue desperately needs more attention - after all, no trees = no oxygen, and how long would we survive with no oxygen? Not long.

Since it takes killing trees to make cards, not sending cards will hopefully contribute to killing fewer trees.

Instead we are taking what we would have spent on cards and postage, and donating it to the World WildLife Fund, a multinational conservation organization dedicated to the preservation and protection of nature and our natural resources. We know our family and friends will understand when they receive an email explaining what we’re doing this year, along with our picture and best wishes for the coming year. We hope they will follow suit.

Over the past month I’ve suffered a harmonic convergence of several factors - a “perfect storm” of perfectly timed obligations that managed to consume every waking moment, leaving me with no time for writing (which is only my hobby, after all)……..several important work projects with short deadlines, several out-of-state trips, and a flu that seemed to hang on forever, leaving me exhausted physically and mentally. I’m just now starting to get back some energy and feeling better.

In addition, I needed to take a step back from this blog, as I felt it was heading in a direction that was different from what I’d intended - I was spending more time just ranting, and less time writing about what I originally wanted to write about (a lighthearted, humorous take on what’s going on in the world). Anyone who knows me personally knows that humor is a big part of my personality, and yet it seemed that all I could focus on was that which pushed my hot buttons. Is that a bad thing? I don’t know. We all need to rant and rave and let off steam once in a while, so maybe not.

So perhaps this blog will be about what interests me enough to express an opinion - which sometimes may be funny, and sometimes not. But I’ll write about what I care about, and even if no one else reads it, I’ll feel better for writing it.

Even on shows like Discovery Channel’s Man vs. Wild, in which host Bear Grylls heads off into the wilderness to survive for a few days or a week, reality isn’t real. Come on, what would Discovery Channel do if Bear ever met with a life-threatening accident, like say getting eaten by a (real) bear? Would they air it? Of course not. Would they really risk losing their charismatic host? Of course not. So we have to assume that although it “looks” dangerous, it isn’t really. It’s simply entertainment of another form, not much different that any half-hour sitcom or hour drama, except without the canned laugh-track.

Apparently however, those at Discovery Channel themselves were fooled, since they’ve launched an investigation into allegations that much of the danger didn’t exactly exist as depicted in the carefully edited episodes.

While I won’t share my opinion of anyone at Discovery who really thought that Bear was risking life and limb in every episode, I heartily applaud their decision to keep the show on the air, albeit making clear that he does receive assistance, and not all the dangers presented are as real as they seem (as well as re-editing older episodes so as to be less misleading).

The reason I think this is a wise decision is that Man vs. Wild, along with The Science Channel’s Survivorman, presents the viewer with a true education in survival techniques, in a way that is both interesting and memorable.

I will point out that in episodes of Survivorman, it’s host Les Stroud does indeed venture into the wild alone, and truly does face a real degree of danger that is unscripted. No cameramen accompany Mr. Stroud (he films himself) and receives no outside assistance until he is picked up by his crew at a prearranged time and place.

But in either case, real or scripted, the techniques taught by these shows could very well come in handy should one unexpectedly find oneself in a dangerous survival situation. So should we care more that it’s “real”? Or that we can learn something from it anyway.

Less media noise is made when a corporation does something very good. Maybe it doesn’t “sell” as well. But when a company steps up to the plate and says “here’s a problem that we can help with” and it DOESN’T also boost their bottom line significantly, that’s worth trumpeting.

Nike, the giant footwear corporation, has developed a shoe specific to the needs of a segment of the population suffering most from severe health issues (including obesity and diabetes), Native Americans. Obesity generally causes major changes in one’s foot - which flattens, widens, and the arches fall - from carrying so much excess weight. Foot changes make it extremely difficult to find comfortable shoes, and not having comfortable shoes makes it difficult to get excercise in order to lose weight. American Indians, as an ethnic group, also have wider than average feet, making it even more difficult for them to find comfortable shoes.

Best of all, Nike is offering these shoes to American Indian tribes at wholesale, and all profits from the sale of the shoe will be reinvested in health programs for tribal lands, where problems with obesity, diabetes and related conditions are near epidemic levels in some tribes.

I would like to see Nike extend this wonderful program to include all Americans who have been diagnosed with morbid obesity, which is at near-epidemic levels amongst much of our population, including a large number of children, but regardless Nike deserves three cheers for exhibiting such a high level of civic responsibility.

Unless you’ve been traveling abroad or hiding under a bush, you’ve likely heard the story of the young Iraqi boy named Youssif, who was severely burned in an unprovoked and unexplained attack, leaving him so badly scarred that he has difficulty eating, among other health issues. His family had tried for months to get help from Iraqi authorities, without success, until they finally came to the attention of a CNN reporter stationed in Baghdad, who gave this story the media attention it deserved.

As soon as I saw this item almost a month ago, I knew that America would not let this sad story slip by unnoticed. There is no doubt in my heart and mind that this reprehensible act would not have occurred were it not for the brutal civil war Iraq is enmeshed in, the flames of which were fanned by the removal of Saddam Hussein from power, as a result of a war we had no business starting. Would other, equally violent, acts have occurred under Saddam’s rule? No doubt they would. But likely not this one.

We have a responsibility to try to clean up some of the mess we’ve made. We owe it to some of the ordinary, upstanding citizens of Iraq who have suffered much because of our war. And this is a good place to start. America has shown its unceasing generosity and compassion, its ability to help those in desperate need. There are so many Heroes in this story - everyone responsible for bringing this family to America so that Youssif can get treatment and surgery to correct as much damage as possible, Dr. Peter Grossman of the Grossman Burn Center (who will perform the surgery), and everyone who has donated to the fund set up at the Children’s Burn Foundation to help make this possible. All Heroes who deserve our respect and kudos.

To look into a child’s smiling face is to see hope for our future. To know that, someday when Youssif goes home with a smile on his face because he knows that Americans really do care, gives us even more hope.

Although this terrific month of activities included films, guest speakers, and a religious roundtable (amongst numerous other things), all open to the public and organized by volunteers, the picture she sent were from their memorial to those who have lost their lives fighting in Iraq, entitled “Remembering Lives Lost - Bringing It Home“. Even writing about it now brings a lump to my throat. (See below for some photos). This is taken directly from her letter:

“I personally see the “Remembering Lives Lost - Bringing it Home” project as the most impactful part of this year’s A@A. No one can just glance at a guest speaker and take away what they can from seeing 3,989 crosses on a college lawn. There is a cross made specifically for each American solider who has lost their life in the current war. The last cross we placed was for a solider who died on August 15th. 3,914 crosses were made with a picture, ranking, birth and death date, and how that particular solider became a casuality. We placed 75 blank crosses to represent the people who will lose their lives while the memorial is up. What is even sadder than seeing all the crosses is that, since putting the crosses I have been checking on CNN.com for the death toll, and as of Sept. 10th we have already lost 81 more lives. That surpasses the 75 we placed for representation. We have 3 locals represented in the thousands of crosses and to see family and friends out searching for their particular loved one is horrifying. I tear up just thinking about it. It took us about 7 hours to place them all; however, the group of about 15 people who helped to place the crosses can not take all the credit. There is a group of about 40 people in Telluride, CO that make, update, and ship the crosses all over the nation to be displayed. They have done tons of research and have numbered all the crosses so people can easily find a particular solider. They state that the crosses have no religious attachment and are simply used as an international symbol for death. The group is called “This republic CAN” and their mission is “To promote political participation through education and action”. Chris Myers, principal architect of the local non-partisan citizens group said “The organization has evolved as a result of the community need to act on important issues. It has given people the courage to step forward and erase the feeling of being a lone voice.” Working with Chris was a very eye-opening and rewarding experience. We will take the crosses down tomorrow, sad but true. If left up too long the impact may dilute.”

Even though Autumn@Adams is over for this year, I felt strongly that all those who participated and gave of their time to plan, organize, and conduct all the activities deserve recognition and kudos, as do the terrific folks at This Republic CAN for all their hard work ensuring that we don’t forget the sacrifices that have been made.

A big shout out and thanks to my niece Jandalyn for making me aware of this so that I could share it with you.

Click on any of the photos below for a larger version.

It may have started out as a harmless resource of funny user-created home videos. And yes, there still are a lot of very funny videos available, most made by non-professionals using hand-held camcorders - it’s easy to waste a great deal of time there with thousands of videos added daily. But then companies began capitalizing on YouTube’s enormous popularity, realizing that its viral-marketing potential made it a perfect medium in which to spread their own commercial propaganda. Sure it’s commercialism, but harmless still and all in good fun.

And yet anyone who isn’t aware of the true potential of YouTube must have missed the first clue - I’m speaking of course of the CNN/YouTube Democratic Debate, or doesn’t know that most of the current presidential candidates have filmed video answers to questions on a variety of important issues - the war in Iraq, the economy, healthcare, immigration, and more. It’s nothing short of an amazing resource for voters (with internet access) to educate themselves on the candidates positions, so that we can be informed voters when we go into the polls next year.

But even this is just an inkling of the power of YouTube.

With the recent incident at the University of Florida, we’re beginning to see how power itself cannot be contained - ultimately it will always be usurped by the masses, willingly or not. It used to be said that “the truth shall set us free”, but getting to the truth could sometimes be a challenge. With the digital age we live in, technology now has the power to set the truth free. Whereas we formerly had to rely on big media to dole out the truth as they wanted us to see it, anyone with a camcorder or cell phone capable of recording video can now capture events as they happen and post them online for the rest of the world to view. But what is true and what is not?

This ability of immediate and [mostly] unedited video documentation can be both a blessing and a curse. It can entertain us, expose the unjust, exonerate those unfairly accused, and educate the masses, just as it can also damn the guilty, embarrass unsuspecting individuals, or attempt to destroy someone’s reputation (okay, yes, that last one was a spoof, but you get the idea). Millions of people visit YouTube daily, and thousand blog about YT videos or email links to their favorites to family, friends, and co-workers. The power is equally in both the message and its reach. I can foresee a future in which YouTube has joined the ranks of big media.

In the past, with power came responsibility - to wield it wisely - and yet quite a bit of what gets posted on YouTube seems to be, at best slightly irresponsible, some of it wildly so. Thus it falls on the viewer to bear the burden of responsibility. Yes, most of the content is funny and intended to be so, but some of it is not. More “reality” documentation is creeping in than ever before - not at all bad thing, as it broadens the channels from which we can siphon information.

If you’re a YouTube regular, hold on to your own power - to be skeptical and decide for yourself what is truth and what is not. The message is only as honest as the messenger.

Whatever you think of Hillary, it’s difficult to argue against the fact that our health care system is desperately in need of reform - too many people are either uninsured or under-insured, health care providers are overworked and underpaid, a large number of folks can’t afford the medications that they need, and Medicare is just a quagmire of complexity, red tape, and fraud.

We are constantly being reminded that we live in the wealthiest nation on earth. That our country has the best medical care available. If this is true, why are so many Americans unable to afford adequate care? Why are some forced to risk their lives because they can’t afford health insurance? Or can’t afford the drugs they need? Or can’t afford the life-saving operation or cancer treatment?

Most of my Hillary-Hater-friends agreed something needs to be done, but they dislike anything that appears to be socialized medicine. Yet our “capitalistic” medicine isn’t working. It isn’t that health care costs have skyrocketed, but rather that insurance costs have skyrocketed. Many small businesses can no longer afford to offer free insurance to employees, and individuals can’t afford the high cost of insurance on their own. So with everyone who is struggling over this issue, who’s making money?

Insurance companies and Pharmaceutical companies, that’s who. Looked at a recent benefits statement from your insurance company lately? Your doctor or other health care provider is lucky to get reimbursed a small fraction of what they should be paid for the care they provide. Which means that they have to take on an overload of patients in order to stay afloat. Which is why it’s so hard to get an appointment, or be seen on time when you show up.

To be clear, I support Capitalism over Socialism, but if a small group of companies was controlling all of the water in our country, as well as any potential imported water, such that it was so expensive to take a drink that some of us could not afford to, wouldn’t we all be screaming for government intervention? Why then do we allow some companies to make billions of dollars while failing to adequately provide a product that is equally necessary?

Past attempts at reforming our health care system were met with massive attacks from lobbying groups representing the giant insurance and pharmaceutical companies (the primary reason Hillary’s previous efforts - during her tenure as First Lady - failed). Things were bad then (we needed that overhaul that didn’t happen) and they are worse now.

We - the people - need to let our elected representatives know that this is a serious issue that needs to be addressed. We need to tell them to NOT listen to the lobbyists, but to listed to US. And then we need to listen to the candidates explain their plans to reform the system (if they have a plan). And if a candidate doesn’t have a viable, logical plan, one that can actually be implemented, then they shouldn’t get our vote.

Serious health care reform will only come when we make it happen, at the voting booth.

Has there really been such a dearth of worthwhile musical contributions this past year that Justin Timberlake’s “Dick in a Box” is deserving of an award? Yes, I saw the original broadcast, and yes, it was funny. Not the funniest thing I’ve ever seen, but funny. I would have thought it belonged in a comedy category, not musical contributions. What’s even more surprising is that among its competitors in that category was a song from Scrubs, “Everything Comes Down to Poo”. You’re kidding, right? Who nominates this stuff anyway?

I also truly do not understand the category for Reality Programs. These shows are supposed to be about “real life” aren’t they? So someone can get an award for being themself? Or are Reality shows really “fake”, with a script and actors? If they are not fake, have no script, and use non-actors, how can someone deserve an award for simply doing whatever it is that they normally do? I don’t get it.

I wonder how a talented actor, who deservedly wins an award for a performance that both the nominating body and judges must have found impressive, feels when they speak to someone who can say “that’s great - I won an Emmy too, for singing a song about my genitalia!”….or the person who says “yeah, I won an Emmy too, for just being on television doing the same stuff I do everyday!”. Must feel real good.