At-Risk Youth

Today's blog is an amazing essay written by a 13 year-old.  Because she's a minor, we've left off her last name and location. 

AT-RISK YOUTH

Last year, I was asked to go to a meeting for “At-Risk Youth.”  They invited us because we were youth council members and they wanted our input on how to help the kids who were acting up, failing and about to drop out of school. During the meeting everyone talked about the “At-Risk” youth and ways to help them do better.  But nobody ever really said what an “At-Risk” youth was.  I think they invited us to the meeting because they thought that we were not “At-Risk” since we were not failing or acting out in school.  I decided to write about at-risk youth.

After doing some research I found that there are a number of things that make a young person “At-Risk”.  One study showed that kids who come from poor communities, underperforming schools and broken homes are more “At-Risk” than others.  It also showed that Black and Hispanic kids are more “At-Risk” then White and Asian kids, males were more “At-Risk” then females and poor kids are more “At-Risk” than rich kids.  So, I guess being an “At-Risk” youth means that if you live in bad family and community conditions there’s a greater chance that you will participate in negativebehaviors.

While thinking about that definition, I realized that I too am an “At-Risk” youth. Even though I come from a two parent home, with two incomes, have two sisters, a nice little house pet, and enjoy learning, because of the school that I go to, my race, and the zip code where my parents happened to buy our home, I’m classified as “At-Risk”.

However, I  personally think that all youth are “At-Risk”,  in one way or another. Whether by poverty,  race, community, school, an unstable home, violence, drugs, bullying, or anything else. A reason why I think that all youth are at risk is because youth are so dependent on everyone else. They are dependent on their parents to provide a stable, loving home for them. They are dependent on the community to provide a safe environment and they are dependent on the schools to educate them so that they can succeed.   

As a young person, I know that kids can sometimes do bad stuff, but if you ask me, the reason we have so many “At-Risk” youth is not only because of the kids but because of the conditions that have been created for them to live in. 

Submitted by Shanae, age 13 

DEEPER CUTS!!

by Ruth Sheets

Every news report this week has begun with the information that no compromise has been reached in raising the debt ceiling and the economy.  And, every report has an interview with at least one of the “Tea Party” congressmen who just keep saying that the spending cuts need to be deeper with no tax increases of any kind.

Since the Federal Government is so abhorrent to the Tea Partiers, I suggest that the deeper cuts begin in their own districts and states. If these super conservative, government-hating congress people received votes from more than 50% of those voting in their districts in 2010, my modest proposal is as follows:

1. Close military bases in their districts.

2. Cut Social Security payments to everyone in those districts who earn more than $100,000.

3. Increase the amount people in those districts have to pay toward Medicare up to the full cost of the insurance depending on their income.

4. Eliminate all subsidies to farmers, corporations, oil companies, etc. in those districts.

5. Eliminate the pensions, medical insurance, and other perks their retired Congress people and senators receive from the Federal Government.  They should have to be part of the same system everyone else depends on.  This is for every representative from now on.

6. Eliminate most contracted jobs in the military that soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen used to do.  If we don’t have enough military personnel to do those jobs, we can’t deploy.

I understand that none of this is in the “Tea Party” plan because their philosophy is “cut the government, but don’t cut my parts of it.  Everyone else is draining the system, not me or mine.”  This is hypocracy, of course, but isn’t that the subtitle for their whole movement?  We are paying less in taxes by percent than we have in generations, yet they cry “Taxes are too high."  The citizens in their districts benefit significantly from Government services and subsidies, yet they insight fear of the Government in the people

Tea Partiers refuse to see (or, perhaps are even glad to see) that the income gap between rich and poor continues to increase.  They can’t even imagine that fairness would demand the wealthiest Americans help to support the nation that gave them the opportunity to be where they are. 

Of course, it is easier to support the wealthiest and most powerful than to champion the most vulnerable.  You can just guess where the money for their next election is coming from.  And, an unmoving “pledge” not to raise taxes is easier than actually thinking about what is best for America, even what is best for the people of their own districts. 

Maybe the deeper cut we need is to cut them out of the Congress next year.  In the meantime, perhaps the media should place less emphasis on their childish whining and ranting.

Ruth

Growing Number of Americans Believe Obama is a Republican

President Asked To Produce Voter Registration Card

In the emerging field of GOP presidential candidates, only one acts remotely presidential. Maybe because he IS the president.  What's disturbing is that he's acting Republican, too.

The logic here is that something like 1/3 of registered Republicans believe President Obama is Muslim.  Many of them believe he was born in Kenya. I'm pretty sure ALL of them believe he's a liberal.  Well, it's been proven he's not Muslim, and wasn't born in Kenya, so doesn't it follow that he's not a liberal?

This week the president has been engaged in tete-a-tetes with Speaker Boehner.  The plan they seem to be agreeing on sounds an awful lot like Speaker Boehner's original plan, with maybe one or two concessions on the Speaker's part.  Seniors citizens will still be allowed to breathe, for example (assuming breathing isn't contingent on decent healthcare and a home to live in).  Millionaires and billionaires will still get a share of the tax money the rest of us pay in.  If all these rich folks would hire just one person per household with their ill-gotten tax-cut gains, more than 8 million more Americans could be employed.  A recent poll showed that none of the extremely rich are creating jobs at all.  Surely, if we're giving them money to create jobs, why aren't we demanding they do so?  If I give you $5 to go get me a sandwich, you'd better show up within a reasonable amount of time with my food or I'll come looking for you.  At best, I'd never trust you to go get me a sandwich again.  At worst, you'll know better than to volunteer again.

If President Obama is agreeing to all this nonsense, regardless of the fact that the plan won't pass the Senate, I think it follows that, in 2012, the president will be on the Republican ticket. Because, really, who else have they got?

But then, who have the Democrats got?

Peace,

muon

THE PLEDGE THAT CRIPPLES

Signing pledges these days seems to be the thing to do.  The thought is that signing a pledge is giving one’s word which, of course, one should never break.  When I hear that someone has signed a pledge, I wonder, is it a one-time thing?  If you sign a pledge you can never change your mind?  Is “signing” a pledge more powerful than saying a pledge? 

We say the “Pledge of Allegiance” to our flag for many occasions.  Is that because just saying it once doesn’t “make it so?”  Or, is it that the “Pledge” is just something we do from habit.  It is certainly not something that came in with the Founders.  The way people carry on about those who don’t recite the Pledge and the anger held by some regarding the phrase “under God,” you’d think it was a life or death issue.

Signing pledges seems to be in.  We ask teen agers to sign abstinence pledges as well as non-violence pledges.  We know that these pledges are not very effective, not because the intentions at the time of the signing weren’t honest, but because circumstances changed and the pledge wasn’t strong enough to stick.  Or perhaps, it is not reasonable to ask this of teens, then expect them to submit to it for the rest of their lives. As young people grow older, abstaining until marriage might not be practical or desirable, and if someone is acting violently toward them, they might need to respond in kind to save themselves or their family.

The Republican Party and conservatives in general, are stuck with the notion that voters expect their politicians to to “always” vote the party line, never even turning slightly toward another position, no matter how much sense that other position might make in the situation.   So now, it is not enough to SAY they support a particular position, they must sign pledges to declare for all time that they will always support a particular platform point.

The Temperance Movement of the 19^th Century attempted the same thing.  Signing the Pledge meant that one would never again drink and would support prohibition candidates and legislation.  Well, we all know how well that turned out.  The crime system that arose at that time is still in place in many parts of the country, although the focus shifted from drink to drugs and other vices. 

Grover Norquist and his gang are currently trying to get all Republican candidates and legislators to sign a pledge to NEVER raise taxes.  Those who have signed, essentially shut down concerning that issue.  Even though we pay a lower percentage of taxes than Americans have for the past 60 years, we are told that we are suffering from taxes and because of the Pledge we NEED to keep lowering taxes.  It is clear that in the past 30 years, the wealthiest Americans have received the most breaks, but they can’t be expected to pay more like their fair share because we can’t raise ANY taxes, not even close loopholes!

Who are these people that were elected last November?  Were they elected to help govern a great, complex country or were they elected to protect those who need no protection.  We don’t really need legislators to do that, pledge or no pledge. 

When politicians sign pledges like those presented to the Republicans these days, they give up their ability to govern intelligently.  They are allowing a special interest to determine their votes.  They are unable to negotiate anything.  I guess that makes things easier for them because they don’t have to think or consider.  Their response can be “I signed the pledge.” 

The pledgers’ explanations for why they cannot compromise even in small ways are generally ludicrous and sound childish and memorized.  The even sadder part of this whole thing is that almost no one ever calls them on it nor points out the poor quality of their arguments. 

Let’s ditch the pledges.  If we need to have a pledge at all, let it be to our country and the betterment of ALL its citizens and guests.

Peace,

Ruth

LOOKING FOR PC

One might think from the title that this piece is about buying a home computer or expecting people to be politically correct.  Neither is the theme for this blog.  I want to discuss “Political Courage.” 

As our president and congress are working their way toward some kind of deal for raising the ceiling on our ability to borrow money, and on cutting the deficit, I have heard a lot of talk about political courage. 

It began with Paul Ryan’s proposed budget proposal which was called “courageous”, particularly in the media.  When examined more carefully, it showed little courage.  How much courage does it take to cut critical programs and funding for the most vulnerable people?  It seems only the “bleeding heart liberals” will fight to stop that (and we all know how effective they are).

Republicans, especially the Tea Party variety, are so tax-averse that they can’t conceive of even the wealthiest 2% paying a bit more to help get the country on an even keel.  Where is the courage?  Since no one is exactly thrilled with having to pay taxes, it does not require courage to stand unmoving against any kind of tax increase.  There is no problem with cutting the poor, elderly, and disabled off because even inept representatives and senators will never be in that position.  Once one is in Congress, health care and pensions are taken care of for life (through taxes, of course).

The Democrats are desperately watching the programs to improve the well-being in the country evaporate.  They've always supported these programs and, thus,  cling stubbornly to every aspect of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.  These programs do need reworking and reshaping to reflect the needs of 21st Century America.  One can  understand their fear and reluctance to touch those programs because reworking them could devastate these supports, so desperately needed by so many.  Political courage requires respected Democrats to stand up and make realistic, practical suggestions for changes that would benefit everyone (e.g., have Social Security taxes paid on all income, raise the age to 70 years for collecting, discontinue Social Security for people earning more than $100,000.00 a year, but still allow Medicare when needed). 

And then there’s the military industrial complex!  Who has the guts to stand up to that monster?  No courage here!

There seems to be little courage on the state and local levels either.  Some governors and mayors are getting media attention by cutting programs, laying off state workers, blaming them for the state’s/city’s  woes.  It plays well, but isn’t true.  Now there are more folks unemployed.  Again, they hit programs that serve the disadvantaged who won’t make much of a fuss.  The politicians look like heroes because budgets are “balanced.” 

Political courage is standing up for what will be most helpful to the largest number of people.  It means holding personal standards of excellence and integrity that are reflected in one’s words and actions.  It requires one to explain positions to constituents in clear, honest language.  It also means acknowledging one’s weaknesses and mistakes and being able to grow in wisdom and understanding.

  

Courageous leaders might not be reelected, but they would certainly set a good example for the rest of America.  Maybe it could start a trend. 

Peace,

Ruth