Kathy Petersen’s Blog


Posted in politics by Kathy on August 30, 2009

Ted Kennedy passed away recently. Many people, particularly women, have mentioned how he championed women’s rights and women’s causes. Of course, his dealings with Mary Jo Kopechne are well known; less well known are his other dealings with women. Perhaps they were intentionally ignored by liberal feminists who would have castigated him personally, but felt that he was too important politically to their particular cause to disavow. Perhaps, like so many people about my age or younger, they just didn’t know. After all, it’s old news — Mary Jo Kopechne drowned 50 years ago, after all; and even the William Kennedy Smith rape scandal was 18 years ago. I remember it, of course — quite a tawdry affair. I did not remember that Ted was involved in the happenings of the night, though. Perhaps his part was downplayed by the media. My recollection of it, was that had it not involved a Kennedy nephew, it wouldn’t have even been news — I didn’t realize that a sitting U.S. Senator had played a role. And, indeed, for the past nearly 18 years, Edward Kennedy kept his nose clean, and apparently kept his pants zipped — always a good thing for politicians!

One of my online friends posted a recollection, perhaps a video, or an old article (or a recent eulogy of a past occurrence) of Kennedy grilling formula manufacturers for their role in reducing breastfeeding and thereby increasing infant deaths. I didn’t read it — just saw the headline. Frankly, I don’t really care too much about Kennedy, and am only glad that this “royal family” [barf] in America is dying out — or at least, the political influence is. [Clarifying to say that I don’t wish anyone death, nor rejoice in the death of anyone, but I look at the Kennedy family, and I say, “WHY?? Why were they so revered? Why were they so honored? What did they really contribute? And since they are on the opposite side of the political spectrum as I am, I can only be glad that their influence is diminishing, and hope no one comes up to take their place, so that conservatism becomes stronger and liberalism — particularly the peddling of influence, which is, I think, what made the Kennedys so important — becomes weaker.] The article I linked to already talks about how various feminist organization joined in the general eulogizing of the late Senator. So that is one point of irony.

The other point of irony, is that socialized medicine has apparently been a driving force, a life-long desire of Ted Kennedy. While the bills look a little sick at the moment, they may still pass, and it is the first time in a long time that that has been even a possibility. So, now he’s dead. Of course, they are now talking about reviving more interest in the bill(s), and renaming the Senate version in his honor. Fair enough. Although the Democrats hold a significant majority in both houses, there are enough moderate and conservative Democrats to hold this up, so every liberal vote counts. With Kennedy’s death, Massachusetts is short one Senator. Up until 2004, the governor could appoint a successor to fill the empty seat; but during 2004, Senator John Kerry was running for President, and the Democrats in the state legislature got worried that Republican governor Mitt Romney would appoint a Republican should Kerry win and thus vacate the seat. With Kennedy’s help and encouragement, the legislature quickly passed a bill stating that the governor could no longer appoint a successor, but there would have to be a special election, no sooner than X days after the seat became vacant, and no later than X days after the seat became vacant (I think the spread was something like 120-165 days). That law still stands, although there is a movement afoot to repeal that law, because suddenly it would be horrible should Massachusetts be without a Senator for any serious length of time. But at least for the moment, it stands; and Kennedy’s seat is vacant. Should the bill come up for a vote, it may fail. Kennedy can’t cast a vote for it, and the supreme irony is, that if it fails by one vote because his seat is empty, it would be his own fault, for being so partisan 5 years ago, and helping get a law to pass, that is now biting his precious socialized medicine bill in the butt. How ironic.


Hate Speech

Posted in Uncategorized by Kathy on August 20, 2009

Ok, if a preacher says that homosexual behavior is wrong, even though God says it several times in the Bible, both in the Old and New Testaments, that’s “hate speech,” because it might incite someone to go do something bad to a homosexual. But this guy can say, “We need to exterminate white people,” and it’s not a problem? not hate speech? Oh, come on!

He starts off well enough — he views the problems endemic in the society he was raised in, and made a choice to leave Brooklyn and go to North Carolina. Fine. He and his wife had two of their three children at home with midwives. Excellent! Preach it, brother! He determined to live debt-free, and even built a log house with his own hands debt-free. Awesome! More power to you! He and his wife saw the disease and other negative impact from poor diet, so changed to being vegan, and have been vegans for 30 years. I’m sure that has helped many people overcome disease, obesity, etc., and was a wonderful choice to make (although I do think that some people do need meat for best health — but probably not as much as the average person consumes on a daily basis). When I was on a vegan diet, I felt excellent and lost a lot of weight. I’m getting closer to that diet once again.

Then he gets a little… well… off. I think he has some wonderful insights into the problems of the world, although he views them as solely the problems of black people, and caused solely by white people. From a Biblical perspective, we see that everything God does, Satan wants to mess up. God gave family, Satan attacks the family in a multitude of ways, including teenage promiscuity, easy divorce, easy adultery, etc. God gave sex, Satan attacks sex in a multitude of perversions. God gives food, Satan urges us to eat too much of it, and mess up the God-given food with a bunch of man-made chemicals that are actually harmful although they taste good. That sort of thing. Of course, fallen man can mess up things pretty well all by himself, but we must remember that “we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against angels and principalities,” etc. So, our primary enemy is not man nor men, particularly men of different skin colors. Our primary enemy is spiritual — Satan. God made man in His own image, and Satan likes for men to die, regardless of how, where, when, or who, because it is killing God in effigy. Murders of all kinds, including abortion, suicide, suicide bombers, euthanasia, all feed into this.

This man is right when he perceives the high death rate of black people from all different types of problems (abortion, pre-term birth, infant mortality, childhood death, drive-by shootings, gang-land slayings, other types of murder, disease, drugs, etc.) as being orchestrated. But he’s got his head stuck so far up his color that he can’t see that these things affect all of us, and it’s not just “white people” who are in control of all these things. There are some do-gooders that really think that the social experimentation that we have been under for at least the past 70 years, if not even further back to Darwin’s time, or before, is actually beneficial to the people that are under it. It seems plausible — single mothers have a hard time making ends meet, so let’s let them have abortions so they won’t be burdened with a child. Yet abortion carries with it unintended consequences — not least of which is the societal devaluing of human life, partly evidenced by the increased incidence of child abuse. Lack of education leads to poverty, so let’s get everybody education. Well, has that really helped? Are we more or less poor, are we better or worse educated, than we were in the 1930s? I’m not decrying education — but there is a reason people choose to homeschool their children, and for the most part it is because they do not think the education in the public school system is good enough. And they’re right. Homeschooled children consistently outrank public-schooled children in every subject, at every age. A nice idea in theory, but in practice, not so much. The problem is not with making sure that every child is educated — that is still a laudable goal! The problem is the way the children are being educated (or not), and the unintended side effects of the way the current public-school system works. We are seeing a gradual (or not so gradual) consolidation of power into central units — for example, instead of education being on a small, local level with a lot of local accountability, we see education is a federal thing, with all the bureaucracy that entails. This means that they have to take a “one size fits all” mentality to solve the problems — but that doesn’t work, because one size almost never fits all. The problems in Brooklyn are different from the problems in rural Mississippi. This consolidation of power also leads parents to become less involved with their child’s education. My husband teaches school in an area with a high percentage of black kids, and it is a poor school district. He deals with these problems all the time — parents who want their kids to learn, but either don’t help or encourage them at home, or even actively though unconsciously cause problems for their kids by their attitudes and enabling, or disabling. This is happening everywhere, in every aspect of society.

But this guy’s conclusion is completely wrong. In addition to the wild conspiracy theories he spouts from time to time. His conclusion is, [paraphrased] “White people are the problem, so we need to kill all white people. White people are trying to kill us, so let’s exterminate all white people.” Hitler said this about the Jews. I bet David Duke says this about black people. There are plenty of people who will let color, ethnicity, and heritage divide the human race into artificial groups of people, and pit one group against another. The last thing we need is for more fomentation of racial anger, tension, and strife. Rather than focusing anger one against another, the “one solution” he is looking for (which he has decided is to kill all white people) is to fight against the “spiritual powers in high places” — namely, Satan.

The odd thing, though, is that he has figured out and is living the perfect solution, even though he doesn’t recognize it as such: namely, to stop participating in the destruction (however that destruction is coming — whether through eating refined foods, smoking cigarettes, living in debt, killing other people, etc.). But instead of urging people to follow his footsteps into health and financial peace, he’s urging them to kill the “white oppressor.” There are two ways out of oppression — one is to kill the oppressor, and the other is to refuse to be oppressed. He has figured out how to do the latter, so I don’t know why he is pushing the former.

I’m gonna have to start shopping at Whole Foods now!

Posted in politics by Kathy on August 14, 2009

We live about 90 minutes away from the nearest Whole Foods, so this won’t be easy, but I want to support the company because of this bold and commendable op-ed piece the CEO wrote against ObamaCare. I agree with him, that the current proposals are too expensive and don’t address the root issues; and that his suggestions will go a long way in minimizing the perceived problems in health care. Here are the eight points:

  • Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs).
  • Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits.
  • Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines.
  • Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover.
  • Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
  • Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost.
  • Enact Medicare reform.
  • Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren’t covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

He goes into greater depth in each of these points in the article (except the last one, which is completely self-explanatory — except I wonder how many of these liberals who are so ready to force everyone else to be charitable will be freely charitable themselves); plus has more commentary on reasons why health-care is so expensive today (preventable things like smoking, drinking, eating too much — things the Whole Foods crowd usually laps up).

Unfortunately, there has been the typical knee-jerk reaction from some loyal Whole Food customers who are now calling for a boycott of the company. Yeesh! From what I’ve seen, there hasn’t been a lot of dialogue from them as to why these things are so horrible — just that the author opposes government intrusion into the health care arena, specifically in the area of ObamaCare, and the proponents don’t want to hear alternatives.

If anyone has any reasons why the above won’t work, and ObamaCare will, that’s one thing. But these things seem sound to me. I wanted to get some organic spelt grain anyway!