Kathy Petersen’s Blog

SNL Sarah Palin – Hillary Clinton skit

Posted in politics by Kathy on September 24, 2008

Of course this is old news, but here’s the link to the clip on NBC. As you can tell from my other posts, I’m quite conservative, so of course I didn’t like all the digs at Sarah Palin, but I thought it was a funny skit, all in all. At least they did poke fun at Hillary, too, and wasn’t just a one-note anti-Palin drum. It was unfair — if you read the full transcript of the Charlie Gibson interview, paying special attention to what ABC left out, you’ll see that a lot of the digs against Palin were unfounded.

To name a few — the skit had Hillary saying, “I believe diplomacy is the foundation of” something — can’t remember quite exactly right now — international relations or something. ABC cut out most of the interview in which she talked about diplomacy and diplomatic efforts, making her look one-sided and quite hawkish.

They also poked fun at Gov. Palin for requesting clarification of “The Bush Doctrine” — which anybody who pays attention to politics knows there is no such thing as The Bush Doctrine, as there is (for example) a set definition for “The Monroe Doctrine.” I do think that Hillary would say that she disagrees with the Bush Doctrine, but, heck, that’s easy for her to say — it’s a reflex reaction: “Bush – bad!”

But I think they nailed HIllary on her feminist attitude which almost completely eliminates femininity in a search for “equality.” And I think it’s funny that Sarah Palin has gotten closer to the White House than Hillary has, while keeping her feminine charms intact, and not “scratching and clawing” her way to the top. As one of my favorite blogs puts it on occasion, when women fight using men’s tactics, they lose — even if they win, they lose.

Obama and the Born Alive Babies

Posted in abortion, politics by Kathy on September 24, 2008

Go over to RealChoice to see the excellent video this blogger has created. I wish I could embed it, but can’t figure out how to do the One True Media (if someone knows, tell me — I only see things like YouTube and Google Video, and those don’t work for this).

Why to vote Democrat

Posted in politics by Kathy on September 22, 2008

I received this via email, and while I haven’t tried to verify if #13 is accurate, I definitely agree with the other 12!

  Thirteen (13) Reasons to Vote Democrat

1. I’m voting Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

2. I’m voting Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

3. I’m voting Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they’re doing because they now think we’re good people.

4. I’m voting Democrat because I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Prius.

5. I’m voting Democrat because I want to keep paying to keep all death row inmates alive.

6. I’m voting Democrat because I want to keep my borders wide open because we don’t have enough crime here already.

7. I’m voting Democrat because our taxes are not high enough.

8. I’m voting Democrat because I think every person is entitled to FREE education, FREE insurance, FREE food, FREE housing and any other things that I have worked for all my life.

9. I’m voting Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit.

10. I’m voting Democrat because I believe three or four pointy headed elitist liberals need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would NEVER get their agendas past the voters.

11. I’m voting Democrat because I believe that, when the terrorists don’t have to hide from us over there, when they come over here, I don’t want to have any guns in the house to fight them off with.

12. I’m voting Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want.   I’ve decided to marry my horse.

13. I’m voting Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.

Why do kids put things up their noses?

Posted in children by Kathy on September 20, 2008

Seriously. I put chalk up my nose once when I was a kid and too young to remember it. My mom took me to our local small-town doctor who was an old woman (very odd to have an old female doctor in those days, because when she was in med school, she was probably the only woman in the class). Anyway, I guess the chalk was visible, because she blew water up one nostril to push the chalk out of the other.

Well, the other night, my son followed in my footsteps. My kids aren’t bad about putting things in their mouths, so I let them play with my button collection, and of course, keep finding buttons about every other day that missed the initial clean-up. So I was reading them a story, and out of the corner of my eye, I see Keith (who is nearly 4) examining a button very closely. Or so I think. A couple of seconds later, he says, “Oh, no! The button!” Since he’s not usually melodramatic like that about dropping things, I asked him, “What happened?” And he said, “The button is in my nose!” Lovely.

Of course, I immediately start looking on the internet about how to get objects out of the nose, and end up coming across all sorts of blogs and articles and stories about boogers and nose-rings and nose-studs — absolutely no help at all. So, I look up things like “nasopharynx” and “nasal cavity” — trying to figure out how to encourage the button to come back out (I couldn’t see it — I looked). I called my mom to find out how Dr. Mauney had gotten the chalk out of my nose, and then spent some time trying to figure out a different way of doing it, because holding down my son and shooting water up his nose was not going to be fun. Especially considering that I didn’t know if we even had a straw. I started looking for the nasal aspirator (a.k.a., a snot-sucker), and couldn’t find it (it ended up being under the toy box, where I happened to find it the next day). While I was looking around the boys’ incredibly messy room for it, Keith came up to me very excited with the button in his hand! Woo-hoo! No trip to the ER at 8 o’clock at night!

I wasn’t too worried about the button as such, except for the thought that somehow it might fall out of his nasal cavity and into the back of his throat where he might inhale it and choke on it in the middle of the night. Not exactly a restful thought, eh? At least I’m reasonably certain he’ll never do it again. It didn’t traumatize him as such, but he was a bit distressed when it happened, and very relieved when it came out.

Macho Sauce Productions does it again

Posted in politics by Kathy on September 20, 2008

My sister told me about this guy on YouTube, and I’ve seen several of his videos and agree with him in general. Here is his latest video: A-Team Spoof. Enjoy!

This guy is awesome!

Posted in politics by Kathy on September 19, 2008

I’ve watched a few of his videos today on YouTube, and like them so much, I’m blogging about them. Love it!

And the rest are probably just as good, but I haven’t watched them yet. The guy’s user name is machosauceproduction, so you can look him up on youtube yourself.

Life Goes On

Posted in abortion, politics by Kathy on September 18, 2008

Since Gov. Palin was tapped to be the Republican VP nominee, much attention has been paid to her youngest son, who has Down Syndrome, and was diagnosed with it prenatally. Many people who call themselves “pro-choice” have criticized Mrs. Palin for her choice to carry baby Trig to term, rather than killing him before he ever saw the light of day.

Abortion advocates place much emphasis on the term “pro-choice” instead of “pro-abortion” because, they say, nobody (or almost nobody) is actually pro-abortion… rather, they are merely pro-choice — that is, that these people think that the woman should have the right to choose to kill her child or not as she sees fit, and that no one should interfere with that choice. Bull. Total and complete and utter bull malarky!

I have seen more than a few people post comments on various articles and blogs about Trig Palin, in which they say that Mrs. Palin should have had an abortion. They do not respect her choice to carry her baby to term, but instead prove that they are, in fact, not pro-choice, but pro-abortion.

Liberals, in addition to being champions of abortion also claim the mantle of promotion of “diversity” and being against “discrimination.” As long as the “diversity” is limited to men sticking their penises into other men’s rectums, or women fisting each other, then they’re all for it. But when it comes down to discriminating against fetuses with genetic disorders or congenital anomalies, then all their fine-sounding talk goes up in smoke. Then it becomes obvious that society is only allowed to be diverse or non-discriminatory within the parameters that they have chosen. Parameters which do not allow imperfect babies to be born.

One of the saddest comments I saw was from a man who said that if he knew his child would be less than perfect (have some disability or a genetic defect of some sort), then he would try to coerce his wife into an abortion, and if she refused, he would not love his child. It made me wonder what might happen if his child were born perfectly normal and then became abnormal or had some sort of mental or physical disability. What might happen, for example, if his “perfect” baby was dropped on her head when she was six months old, and became paralyzed or suffered from a learning or developmental disorder? What if he was one of the (currently) 1 in 166 children that are diagnosed with autism? What if he suffered from cerebral palsy? Would he stop loving his six-month-old baby or his 3-year-old toddler if something like that happened to him or her? Would he advocate for his or her death at that point, the way he would advocate for his or her death if the disability had been known prior to birth?

Do you remember the TV show that was on in the 80s or maybe early 90s called “Life Goes On”? One of the children in this TV family had Down Syndrome (Corky, played by Chris Burke). I watched the show sometimes, and most of the episodes did not focus on Downs as such, but only as it interacted with other facets of life. This young man was presented as normal. To hear people talk about Trig Palin, you’d think that having Downs turned a person into a monster. That to let one baby “slip through” that had an extra chromosome was tantamount to the reincarnation of Hitler.

At the time of the TV show, I was probably in my early teens, so you may forgive my half-formed opinions and ignorance of the time. But I remember thinking that it was a mark of how advanced we as a society in America had become, to have Down Syndrome accepted as a variation of normal, and made part of a fairly popular TV show. I remember thinking of how children with disabilities were frequently placed in institutions in the 50s and 60s, and their parents were encouraged to do so, and discouraged from keeping them and taking care of them — told that it would be better for everyone involved if they just forgot about their less-than-perfect baby and went on with their lives and pretended that this never happened to them. I remember thinking that this was one thing that liberals got right. I was wrong.

Now, instead of replacing institutionalization of certain babies with acceptance, it’s been replaced by their murder. So much for diversity and non-discrimination.

Are Feminists Comfortable Being Women?

Posted in politics by Kathy on September 14, 2008


What has gotten this on my mind is Sarah Palin. I saw her give her VP acceptance speech (which was flawless), and I saw her interview with Charlie Gibson (click here for the full transcript, not the cut-and-paste job shown on TV), and a few other times, and she seems very comfortable as a woman. I think about the difference between her and, say, Hillary Clinton or other prominent liberal feminists, and it is striking. I remember the 80s “power suits” for women, and the shoulder pads to make women appear more like men, with masculine shoulders — strong and broad. I just looked on Google Images for pictures of Hillary Clinton, and while there were a few pictures on the first page or two of her in more feminine attire and/or with feminine hair, in the majority of the pictures she had hair and clothing that could only be called “masculinized.” Googling images of Sarah Palin brought page after page of her with hair and clothing that could never be confused with a man’s. And she seemed happy and comfortable, to boot; whereas so many of the pictures of Hillary showed her with stern expressions. It just makes me think that Hillary Clinton, like so many of her fellow liberals, is having to co-opt masculine qualities in order to “make it in a man’s world,” whereas Sarah Palin, like so many of her fellow conservatives, enjoys being a woman and enjoys being feminine, and feels quite comfortable bringing feminine qualities into areas dominated by men — and is succeeding in that world without giving up one feminine charm.

I’ve seen a “Piece of Flair” (if you’re on FaceBook, you probably know what I mean; if you don’t, it’s a little button with a picture or saying on it) that says, “Feminism is the radical notion that women are people men?” And if you see enough feminists, you’ll see that so many of them seem to fulfill that. Not all of them, of course. I’m email friends with many women who would proclaim themselves to be feminists, and love being wives and mothers, and relish feminine qualities… but so many feminists don’t. They look like men, dress like men, act like men. But suggest that they’re looking, dressing, or acting like men, and watch out! “Oh, no,” they’d proclaim, “this is just who I am!” or “this is what I’ve got to do/be/look like to succeed — it’s a man’s world, and I’ve got to fit in.” Tell that to Sarah Palin, who could very easily become the first female U.S. President, without losing any of her femininity.

Oh, and I’m sure there are so many feminists who are going to vote for Gov. Palin simply because she’s a woman, just like I saw feminists urging other women to vote for Hillary Clinton over Barak Obama simply because she’s a woman. Yeah, right.

Do you believe in luck?

Posted in Uncategorized by Kathy on September 11, 2008

I don’t.

A friend of mine was in New York City on Sept. 11, 2001. His wife had a business trip there, and he accompanied her. That morning, she went to a meeting, and he was going to go site-seeing. To the World Trade Center. To see the view from the top. The alarm was set for him to wake up in time to get there early.

His wife was at her meeting, when life as we know it was interrupted by the news reports of the orchestrated terrorist attack against our country. Knowing her husband’s plans, she “knew” he was in one of the burning buildings, at the top. Frantic, she called her husband’s cell phone… and woke him out of a sound sleep in their hotel room. The alarm did not go off. Some call it luck. I don’t.

We will not forget.

That morning, I was sick and stayed home from work, so saw everything that was broadcast on TV. I remember how that people lined up to give blood, for all the survivors of the attack; and how people with “minor” injuries were transported to further-away hospitals, so that close hospitals could deal with the people who survived with major injuries; and that all non-emergency operations were canceled and rescheduled, so that ORs and ERs could provide necessary care (and have plenty of blood) for all the wounded people who made it out alive. Only… there weren’t that many survivors with major injuries. The ORs were empty, because the buildings fell, and anyone who was too injured in the initial attack did not make it out alive. I know there were many people who sustained severe injuries, from fire, falling debris, etc., but the thousands upon thousands of severely injured people that were expected to need medical care at the nearest hospitals didn’t make it out. It seemed almost as if there were only the “walking wounded” who were able to be quickly and safely transported to further-away hospitals, so that the more serious emergencies could be given first priority — only, everybody else perished when the buildings crashed. I remember seeing some reporters at hospitals that were close to Ground Zero, waiting, alongside the hospital staff, for the scores of victims… who never came.

That afternoon or the next day, I remember looking up into the sky and noticing for the first time a distinct lack of white contrails against the blue backdrop. In a few days when air travel resumed, every time I saw or heard an airplane, I grew nervous — knowing that security was super-tight, and there would not be a repeat… yet wondering if there would be.

It’s hard to believe it’s been seven years! In some ways, it feels like it was just yesterday, as I sit here and think on the things I saw and heard that awful day, and in the succeeding week of non-stop news coverage —  the agonizingly slow and ultimately fruitless search for any living thing that might have survived; the pause in the search when a body was discovered and carefully transported down the pile of rubble; and then the inevitable news that they had given up hope, and were switching to cadaver dogs, to find any human remains.

And yet, for me and for most people, life has gone on, and those horrible attacks are something we remember only rarely, except around this time of year. For those who were personally affected, I know it is much different.

I would like to say “Thank you” to all of those who have contributed through these past seven years, to keep our country safe from her enemies, and to those who have worked tirelessly to prevent another such attack. While I know little of the clandestine world of spies and secret ops (most of my knowledge is what you see in movies or read in popular books), I know that most of the people in the world, myself included, have no clue what measures have been taken at trying to stop the bad guys from hurting the innocent. While it is not enough, it is all I can offer. Thank you.

My handwriting *sucks*

Posted in Uncategorized by Kathy on September 9, 2008

I’ve never had good penmanship — never. In fact, that was the only thing that I regularly made C’s in, in elementary school. I can read my handwriting better than I can read my husband’s, but he can read his own better than he can read mine, so that’s not saying anything.

I just filled out the application to become a Peer Counselor for WIC, which I’m pretty excited about. Even though it might not pay much (I’m not sure what the pay grade is, but I’m pretty sure it’s low), it’ll be more than I’ll make if I don’t work. But it’s not about the money — I’ll be working with moms, helping them breastfeed — and these are the moms that most need it — the babies that will most benefit from it! As a childbirth educator, I look at statistics, and women at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale are always at the bad end of these statistics — more preterm births, higher neonatal and infant deaths, low birthweight, etc. It is just these babies that can most benefit from the best food on the planet, instead of that muck which fills bellies but doesn’t do that great of a job at growing healthy bodies and minds.

But, back to the point of the post — in filling out this application, I had to write about my breastfeeding experiences, and a lined sheet was provided for it. My hand hurt from writing just one stinkin’ sheet — and the lines were wide-ruled! And my handwriting sucks. About the only thing I write by hand is my grocery list or other notes — everything else I type. I hadn’t realized how bad my handwriting had gotten, until I looked at what I had written, and noticed how hard I had to try to keep the words neat and legible, and still did a pretty poor job of it!

Oh well, I’m an excellent author, even if I’m a poor writer. 🙂