Domestic Terrorism: Sarah Palin Puts Democrats in the Crosshairs, Tells People to “Reload”

The Republican Party has hit a new low, and the behavior of some of their members is becoming downright frightening.

Ex-Governor (and currently holding no elected office) Sarah Palin crossed the line yesterday with a post on her Twitter account that said “Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: "Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!" Pls see my Facebook page.” Her Facebook page then goes on to encourage those unhappy with the recent passing of health care reform to “...not get discouraged. Don’t get demoralized. Get organized!”

She goes on to express the desire to “ “reclaim the power of the people from those who disregarded the will of the people. We’re going to fire them and send them back to the private sector” …” commenting that when they join the ranks of the unemployed, maybe they will understand. But Palin also goes on to show a chart from Sarahpac.com listing specific democrats that she wants to target, and the chart has crosshairs – literally - on their congressional locations. With the all the references to guns – the crosshairs, the “reload” comment, and other words in her message such as “aim” and “salvo” – it is frightening in its blatant attempt to incite violence. She goes on to list them by name as follows, which reads like a proverbial “hit” list:

We’re paying particular attention to those House members who voted in favor of Obamacare and represent districts that Senator John McCain and I carried during the 2008 election. Three of these House members are retiring – from Arkansas’s 2nd district, Indiana’s 8th district, and Tennessee’s 6th district – but we’ll be working to make sure that those who replace them are Commonsense Conservatives. The others are running for re-election, and we’re going to hold them accountable for this disastrous Obamacare vote. They are: Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ-1), Harry E. Mitchell (AZ-5), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8), John Salazar (CO-3), Betsy Markey (CO-4). Allen Boyd (FL-2), Suzanne M. Kosmas (FL-24), Baron P. Hill (IN-9), Earl Pomeroy (ND-AL), Charlie Wilson (OH-6), John Boccieri (OH-16), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-3), Christopher Carney (PA-10), John M. Spratt, Jr. (SC-5), Tom Perriello (VA-5), Alan B. Mollohan (WV-1), and Nick J. Rahall II (WV-3).


While I understand that all Americans – even those that aren’t particularly smart – have the right to free speech, that does not mean they have the right to incite hate or violence. Sarah’s message, while it may seem innocent at face value, almost seems like it was written in “code” with key words, as if she is hoping someone will take her up on the subliminal intent and make it real. Let’s be honest here, if some “normal” person made threats like Sarah Palin has done here, the FBI would be knocking on their door. Her not-so-subtle suggestions and threats are alarming and I think that not only should the FBI consider her words as real threats, but should also make an effort to make sure that the people on her list get protection.

I am greatly concerned with the amount and level of vitriol coming out of the Republican Party, which has only gotten more frequent and more caustic with the passing of the health care reform. It seems that some members of the Republican Party are only happy with the way our government works when it works to the advantage of the Republican Party alone. Party officials need to reign in - or jettison – those party extremists that are acting more like petulant, spoiled children who are having a tantrum because they didn’t get their way. Maybe for starters, Ohio voters should make sure that when Republican Leader John Boehner (R-West Chester) comes up for re-election that he is voted out of office. But, in the meantime, someone with real authority in the party should come out with a clear statement that they do not condone violence as a solution to any political disagreement. If Sarah Palin can’t remove or retract her hit list, then I expect the party to distance themselves from her. At the least, I hope the FBI comes knocking on her door for her apparent threats of violence against our elected officials. Domestic terrorism, no matter what form, cannot be tolerated.

Update January 9, 2010 - In light of the recent shooting of Congresswoman Giffords and the killing and wounding of several others at that same political event, I have have more commentary on this topic which can be found at this link: "Sarah Palin’s “Target” List: Incited Murder, or Unfortunate Coincidence?"


Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.

Health Care Reform: Critical

It seems that the debate over health care reform has been going on forever. That’s because it HAS been going on forever.

While I am not thrilled that passing the legislation for health care reform will mean money out of my pocket in some shape or form, I also believe that the money to cover those who are currently uninsured is already coming out of my pocket in some shape or form.

The current proposed plan is not perfect, but if we continue to wait for the perfect plan, we will be waiting another eternity. It is painfully obvious that our elected representatives still want to play political games. They appear more interested in fighting for their own turf, or their own glory, or for covering their own behinds, instead of looking out for the needs of the people they represent.

Too many people in this country are being denied medical coverage because they either can’t afford it or worse yet, because of insurance company loopholes. It’s time to allow people to enjoy their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness by making sure that they have the means to protect their health - and their lives.


All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Who Is Destroying Cleveland’s Catholic Churches?

Cleveland’s Catholic Diocese is dying a slow and painful death, and as a result, many churches in the Cleveland metropolitan area are being closed. If you listen to my mother, she thinks I am personally to blame, because I don’t go to church anymore. My argument is that the Catholic parish in my city (which has been spared from the chopping block) is growing and thriving without me, so I know it’s not just because of me.

The problem with the Cleveland Catholic Diocese is caused by more than one thing. Many people aren’t as disciplined about going to church any more, and that in itself has multiple causes. Most adults have to work, and spending time every Sunday at Mass can be a drain if you spend all a lot of energy on the job during the week, and you have to play catch up with everything else over the weekend. When I was growing up, most families had a stay at home mom, who took care of the kids and other things during the week, so spending time for church on Sunday wasn’t an issue. There are also many people like me who were raised Catholic but have long since lost the need for the structure and ritual of the church to remind them how to behave.

St. Procops, Cleveland Ohio West Side (Now closed)

In Cleveland, however, the issue is compounded by many Clevelanders fleeing to the suburbs in droves, something that started in the early 1960s and continued at a faster rate each year. Anyone who could afford to get out of the inner city got out, and over time, this left many churches without sustainable parishes. But this is not a new problem.

Everyone understands these factors, and everyone understands that a parish and church building cannot be financially sustained without money from parishioners. And this is where the Cleveland Catholic Diocese took a left turn. Rather than close churches as they became financially unstable over a period of several years, they allowed many to stay open. Bring in a new Bishop - Richard Lennon – who appears to be the designated hatchet man - to cut loose those parishes that cannot sustain themselves in one fell swoop.

Bishop Lennon, however, completely botched the execution of his church consolidation plan. He established “clusters” of parishes - usually parishes within close proximity - and had representatives from each church in each cluster put their heads together to decide which churches in their group stayed open, and which ones had to close. It sounds very nice on paper – you know, letting the people decide their own fate. Things were tough but seemed to be working out OK as each parish submitted their recommendations. The problem arose when Bishop Lennon ignored virtually every recommendation and closed very popular parishes, some which were not even losing any money, and some which also provided services to the community such as housing for the homeless and/or food for those who needed it. Adding insult to injury, some of the churches being closed by Bishop Lennon were some of the finest churches in the area, with not only stunning structures, but some of the finest religious art work and artifacts in the area. Many of those things are up for auction on an Internet web site, causing outrage with parishioners whose parents, grandparents, and great grandparents paid for those things out of their own donations to the church, in some case going back over 100 years, and when money was very tight. There is doubt that any of that money from the sale of those objects or even the church buildings themselves will be returned to the churches in the new communities, and many worry that it is a simple money grab by the diocese and the Vatican. Needless to say, Bishop Lennon has shown zero respect for not only the current parishioners, but for those people whose families worked hard to make those churches possible.

St. Casimir's, Cleveland Ohio (Now closed)

Local Catholics have protested in many ways, some making very vocal protests at church closings and also picketing churches. A group was formed called Endangered Catholics whose intent is to get justice and equal opportunity for parishioners. Protests are also working their way up to the Vatican. Sadly, I suspect that these protests will fall on deaf ears for the most part, although Bishop Lennon did reverse his decision for one parish. In some cases, Bishop Lennon’s competency has been questioned. The Cleveland Plain Dealer has devoted a lot of coverage to the issue and many, if not all, of the articles paint Bishop Lennon and the diocese in a poor light.

Even though I am not a church-goer, it does sadden me to see both the church in which I was baptized and the church in which I was married close. The church where I was baptized is also the church where my parents were married and also the church where my grandparents were married. The building did need a little repair, but the structure is sound and very well kept for the most part, and the parish was not losing money. This church also supported the poor in the neighborhood with a place to live as needed and meals for those who could not afford food. It is a huge loss for the neighborhood community.

When it all comes down to it, everyone knows these churches are just buildings. But, the diocese seems to have lost any concern for the parishioners who have kept many of these facilities afloat, the Bishop completely ignoring their recommendations. It is also clear that the diocese does not have enough priests to cover each parish, a problem easily solved if they would only discard their narrow-minded opinions about women becoming priests. While Bishop Lennon is driving the stake into the heart of the parishioners, it’s the Catholic Church and its dated practices that are driving people away. I have hopes that one day, the Church will have leadership at all levels who are willing to question the status quo and to have the courage to make changes, otherwise what is happening to the Cleveland Catholic Diocese will continue to spread throughout the faith like a malignant cancer, and more cities will see their beloved churches, and the history that goes along with them, die a certain death.

All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.

Reaching The Social Media Breaking Point, How Much is Too Much?

Google recently announced Google Buzz , what PC World describes as “a social media sharing service built into your Gmail window. Buzz will let you share photos, links, videos, and status updates through your Gmail inbox or your mobile device's Web browser.” PC World also highlighted a whole host of privacy concerns with Google Buzz.

Maybe it’s me, but I am not sure how many more different ways of keeping in touch with people that I can handle. I grudgingly set up Facebook accounts under my real name and for some of my blogs. After resisting Twitter at first, I set up Twitter accounts and found that - being a person who like to get information in short bites - I actually have come to like Twitter quite a bit; Facebook, not so much. Besides maintaining my 7 blogs and two Twitter accounts, I don’t think I want to have one more place where I have to input information. Time is precious to everyone these days, and who wants to have to follow people in several different places?

So, take no offense if you want to “friend” me on Facebook and I decline, or if you follow me on Google Buzz and I don’t follow back, or if you want to be my friend on YouTube and I ignore you, or if you try to connect with me on Linked In and I really don’t know who the heck you are that I don’t wish to connect, and so on. It’s not personal, it’s just that in order to stay focused on providing good content on my blogs, I’ve decided to limit the amount of “socializing” that I do through social media sites. I’m picking an choosing on where I decide to connect with people in order to make sure that when I DO have something to say, that it means something or provides value to somebody, and doesn’t simply get lost in a flood of minutia.

So please continue to follow my blogs either through Blogger and Twitter. I will be on Google Buzz just because my Blogger posts go there automatically, but it is highly unlikely that I will post separate “buzz” topics there. My time is valuable, and I am sure yours is too, and I don’t want to readers feel the need to follow me in too many places. At some point, everyone will reach the on-line social media limit, and begin to wonder how much on-line social media is too much? Who knows, maybe someday people will go back to actually talking real time with each other. If so, I'm sure someone will send a tweet to tell us about it.



All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.

The iPad: idon’t care, iThink iWillpass

Apple’s Steve Jobs announced the iPad today , the much rumored and anticipated Apple tablet device. And you know what? I could care less. I don’t care that Apple thinks that it could be a rival to the Amazon Kindle, or that it could be good for gaming, or for whatever other things a computer can do. I think the iPad is just another toy made to siphon money out of one’s pocket, in this case, $499 for the iPad.

Seriously now, how many electronic toys can a person use? Some people need to have the latest in anything having to do with Apple, but not me. I guess I am just one of those people that never drank the Apple kool-aid. The iPod is nothing more than a simple MP3 player, and MP3 players are practically given away now and are included with most cell phones. I’m not into gaming, so the iPad doesn't grab me on that feature. I do a lot of typing so I like a full size keyboard. I also like to see what I’m typing, or reading, so a full size screen that I don’t have to hold in my hand works just fine for me. Maybe I am in that demographic that is a little wiser about spending my money and am able to control myself from buying something that I may not really need. But I am sure there are some people out there who are already lining up somewhere to buy an iPad, even though they aren’t actually selling them as yet.

For me, I’m taking a wait and see approach. After all, sometime in the early 1990s I was trying to get the company that I worked for to use the GridPad, a tabled style computer. It’s nice to see that Apple has caught up to a 1990s concept, and is making it into a product that consumers, not businesses, may shell out the money to buy for entertainment purposes. But the question remains – with many people having personal computers or Macs, cell phones, netbooks, laptops, etc., does one really need a tablet too? The size also is a turn off; if I can’t fit it in my purse, I’m not going to carry it with me. And if I’m home, I’d rather be using my full size computer or laptop. I still like to read a book by actually turning the pages, and I love to page through my three daily newspapers. Sure, I still get plenty of news or do a lot of reading off the internet, but there is still something for the relaxing feeling one can get by sitting back and leafing through the newspaper or a book. It’s just not the same experience reading it on a Kindle, and I suspect it would be the same for me using an iPad - a sterile experience.

For me, I think I already have plenty of electronics toys to keep me occupied, entertained, and informed. Sorry Steve, but I think I will pass on the iPad.


All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.

The Haiti Earthquake Disaster: Horrific and Real, Relief Needed

I’m not a big fan of Hollywood disaster movies as they treat big disasters as a vehicle to entertain, often desensitizing people to the reality of the effects of a major catastrophe caused by earthquake, tsunami, flood, weather, etc. When one sees the enormity of the massive earthquake in Haiti, Hollywood disaster movies seem almost sickening in their desire to make money off massive human tragedy, even if it is fictional.

In real disasters, people die, people are seriously injured, food and drinking water are scarce, basic utilities are out of order, and hospitals or medical services are stretched to the limit, if they are even available at all. An earthquake such as Haiti's could happen anywhere in the world, and could happen right in your home town. While one shouldn’t necessarily live as if disaster looms every moment, it is good to be as prepared as you can, realizing that one can’t always prepare for anything. The people in Haiti, however, were already living in serious poverty, and the devastation they are facing now makes it all that much harder to overcome the country’s problems. This is the time where we can all help in the effort by donating to the The American Red Cross and it can be as easy as sending a text message on your cell phone. Complete instructions can be found at this link: The American Red Cross Haiti Donations. Please consider making a donation!


All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Roll Over or Get Tough? Time Warner, and Viewers, Should Get Tough

Full page ads from Time Warner appeared in local papers today and asked readers if Time Warner should roll over in the fight with Fox as Fox wants to increase rates for their channels carried on Time Warner cable. If Fox doesn't get the money they want, Fox says that on January 1 they will pull the plug on Fox channels carried by Time Warner. Some markets are more affected than others, likely those who have Fox owned local stations. Those not in those markets only run the risk of losing minor Fox cable channels. For example, the Cleveland Ohio market only stands to lose the following channels: Fuel, Fox Reality Channel, Speed Channel, Fox Soccer Channel, Fox Sports World Espanol, and FX. I don’t watch those channels anyway, and see this as a low risk to lose. Clearly I would rather that Time Warner get tough and not pay the extra money, since I know that if Time Warner has to pay more, I would have to pay more. Why should I pay more for channels that I don’t care about?

I went to Time Warner’s “Roll Over Or Get Tough” website and checked how this would affect a New York City Time Warner customer. I saw this listing of channels: WNYW, WWOR, Fuel, Fox Reality Channel, Speed Channel, Fox Soccer Channel, Fox Sports World Espanol, and FX. I would imagine that the first two channels on the list are the local Fox owned stations which likely carry more of the Fox network programming, something that viewers may miss and would want to pay for. Fine. How about if each market can decide what they want to do? If New Yorkers want to pay a premium for local channels, fine. But I don’t want to have my rates raised because some other city wants to keep their local channels via cable, channels that can likely be obtained by using a simple antenna or an antenna and a digital converter box.

This brings me to my ideal way of paying for television – let me pick and chose which channels I want and I will pay for those channels. When I think of all the TV channels I have available to me right now, I watch maybe less that 30-40 of them regularly. At least 6 of them are local HD channels that I can get over the airwaves without needing cable. Viewers need to get tough with cable companies and the big networks and fight for a change that allows viewers to drop the channels they don’t want and not have to pay for them. Sure, this could hurt those networks who tailor their content to a certain niche. But that’s the way it goes. If networks like Fox want to nickel and dime – or in this case maybe “dollar” - me, then I should have the ability to tell them to stick it. And if the cable or satellite operators will lose revenue because they can’t make up the cost of carrying channels that most people don’t watch, that’s too bad. Maybe it would force them into revising their pricing structure so that viewers who demand niche channels pay more for them to cover the cost of carrying them.

Regardless, I think that people have just about had enough of the rising cost of television, and I sense that Fox trying to demand more is only going to hurt them later on down the road. People are getting tired of paying ever increasing prices for content that is sub par or that they don’t watch. If Time Warner caves in, it will only be a matter of time before other networks try the same thing as Fox is attempting. Comcast, after buying NBC Universal, may have a lot more control over what they decide to charge their own viewers, and maybe even more so to NBCU viewers not on Comcast (such as Time Warner). I certainly hope in this current case of chicken with Fox that Warner doesn’t swerve off its course.

All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.