it's sad what the shooting has become

In reaction to the shooting and frustration of the coverage of it I refused to watch the president's speech from last week. I frankly needed a break from it. so hare's my comments based on what I heard from various news/entertainment sources.
The first thing it was a necessary speech and the president did what he had to do. The tribute to the victims individually was nice and needed after all most of the coverage was about the one injured congressmen Mrs. Gifford's and not the people that actually died. That understandable of coarse but still sad. The call to tamp down the rhetoric was all right but a little self serving, whenever a President says lets be calmer nicer in our discourse it seems a little like a lecture. Maybe it's needed but that's still something that's a personal decision. The president certainly gets a passing grade for mentioning that nobody on either side of the political spectrum caused the shootings but he could have went further but did not, saying to try and make hay from a shooting by blaming Rush and Sarah is sick.
The other thing is the atmosphere in the hall was not quiet enough for a memorial and I wish it had been done at a church and not at a university which gave it a carnival atmosphere. The president can't do anything about that but I wish the office could help him rise above the personal celebrity he has attained.
The speech came a little to late to do much good for him and the country, because when one side accuses the other of creating the atmosphere that perpetuated the shooting Republicans rightly see that as trampling down on political speech and we fight back they fight back and it's a political food fight. Bill Mahr's call to use the shooting to look as an opportunity to re-examine Glen beck and Rush Limbaugh'is personal to me because they clearly did not cause this and for the media to cast assperitions on them first and then get the story later is a little scary because if Rush and Glenn were ever to be totally discredited they would be the only providers of information and nobody would keep them honest. Everything is political now everyone has an agenda it's sad that the left and the Puma sheriff blamed politics for this once he did that the media ran with the story and everybody went to their rhetorical battle stations no one likes to be called to murder one that happens the President's speech just fades into the background like snow on the TV set. It's then that it's not just politics to us it's then that it becomes libelous and people get irrational and the Media creates the anger and frustration they are said to despise. It's a shame nothing rises above politics anymore not even a shooting!

Twisted justice is no justice for anyone

The promblem with the Gay marrige Ruling inside from my roigloous is it was based on te Equal Protection Clause which arrises from the Civil war and civil rights era. There was somthing back then that I could do as a white man if I was born then that tha a black men coukd not marry a white women, as a white man now I have the same rights as a homosexual he can marry one women I can marry one women therefore strickly speaking there is a no specal treatment being given to me that he does not have I have the option of marrying one women so does he.
That was not the case wih sslavery and racscim.
The secound and best reason that the judge is wroung is in reality there is no benift that gays and lesibans will be denied in Californa that straight people do not have. I recognize that even though I disagree with sodimy and yes that's what it is the goverment can not police or disqualify too people's acts so there is no reason why they can't be given the benifits of reguluar married couples and there's not reason to think that they would be denied that in California. If they are given all the finanal benifits of marrige then what exactly do they get from so called marrige, the acceptctance of the church perhaps. Can you name for me one right that is not currently being given to someone with a civil union that is not given to a stright couple, besises the word marrige and the morility that denotes. If you can then fix it sranthen the civil unions.
Back in the day the reason why people got married is to have children that is the reason why gay marrige will always be inferior to straght marrige, and that is the reason why goverment should favor it otherwise it should remain neutral yes there are people that choise not to have children after all the exception. Familys and procreattion are conerstone of cilivation and that's not religion speaking that's fact we gave tax credits to couples couples that have children we recognize the roll that men and women have in procreation. That's the same reason that most single people should not adopt because children do best when they have the male persptictive and the female persptictive. The very idea that homosexuals are akin to black there are thousands of former homosexuals that have beaten the condition which makes it for some a choice. Marrige is a decision that is left up to the states unless a class is singled out because of somthing they can not change. Homosexuality is a sickness that God can change, I know because I've met a person that uesd to be gay that is no longer. Gays derserve to live there lives free of dervision and they should live how they want but to forse socity to sanction reletionships based soly on the lustful sex is wroung. I say again there's nothing a gay couple can get though marrige that they can't get though civil unions besides acceptace from soxicty. That takes cultural change not from a judge but from people's hearts. Untill the gay community realises that sex is not a civil right unless you are being deniyed somthing tangeble like a job or houseing, because they will never have a majority in this country let alone universal exceptance in this country if all laws are subject to poblic judical review then we really do live in somthing like a judical tyranny. Christ wanted us to sacrifice for others satisfing sexual needs very rarely a sacrifisal act. If Cgristain conservatives were treating people without God's love you would have a point but two people making love without the possibilty of children and too ofen because of frustration because of socity is not somthing Jeusus would endorce. We are not saying that gays are going to hell we are not saying that gays should be persucuted but doun't say that our marriges are a Godly as ours not now not ever anyone who wants recognition because of there sex life is wroung both from a religous perspctive and a secular one

is he a President or a lawyer on tv?

Any speech by any president requires analysis and this one is no exception.
The first part of the speech blaming Bp was certainly correct. If there is a villain in this it clearly is British Petroleum and I have absolutely no problem with them being made to clean it up. It was after all there rig and their fault. The president was a little self self serving when he says were going to make them pay they were going to help anyway and public opinion would have drove them out of business. However it is clearly not out of line that a company be made to compensate it's workers for negligence caused by the company.
It is laughable that the President would refer to anybody employed by the government as a third party overseeing those funds weather he is working in his governmental role or not. But that's just what the president want us to believe Yes that's right the person over seeking the fund works for the federal government. Third party indeed...
grade for that part c
Now the reaction to the spill was completely political The president should have excepted the help of the dutch government and should have given the go ahead to the Louisiana government to create those little barrier like islands much quicker then he did. There's no question that the rejection of the Dutch help proves that the Obama Administration could have helped with this problem in a much more competent manor. that part d-

The truly despicable part of this speech is the the President used to pivots to his push for alternative energy. The reason why this spill is so hard to fix is because it's so offshore to become with. The President has no clue as to how much oil there is left in America because so much of it especially in Alaska is unexplored. For the president to act like there is even a possibility of replacing oil as a fuel source in his lifetime is quite frankly a lie] Other energy sources have yet to show any long term ability to surpass any fossil fuels in terms of reliability or effeteness. They have been some promising research in solar power but to imply that oil is on it's way out is crazy. The larger point is that it was in bad taste to use such a crisis in the Gulf to push for a new energy plan. This energy plan's main focas was not alternative energy but pollution credits for your carbon foot print. Sen Dianne Feinstein said it best the Cap and Trade legislation has nothing to do with the oil spill. She's right and for the President to use the spill to try to advance his programs is the most despicable kind of politics. It takes back to the most outrageous claims made against Bush using 911 to attack Iraq. Hopefully like President Bush President Obama truly believes this program will benefit, if he is just trying to score political score points or to distract people from the oil spill. then he is doing something that represents the truly worst kind of politics, and makes him looker like an ambulance chaser rather then commander and chief! A few more speeches like Tuesday's and his likability will be down as low as his approval rating. Total speech grade 62% and that's to generous