A Way for Illegal Immigrants

According to the LA Times, "Appearing in the Rose Garden at the White House, Obama announced Friday that, effective immediately, young immigrants who arrived in the U.S. illegally before age 16 and spent at least five continuous years here would be allowed to stay and apply for work permits if they had no criminal history and met other criteria, such as graduating from high school or serving honorably in the military."

I grew up in San Jose, a city located one hour away from San Francisco. There are many minorities in San Jose; I have met many illegal immigrants in my life. I also lived near Palm Springs where I met some illegal immigrants from Mexico working very hard to support their families. Oftentimes, it isn't one's fault that he / she goes over to America at, say, the age of 3 and grows up "Americanized" and believes he/she is a U.S. Citizen until the truth comes out... or even without the citizenship, the United States is what he/she knows and wants to do well at school and all that. There are those who don't contribute to society but those are the ones often gaining the national attention. Obama's move clearly doesn't give "amnesty" but it does provide a way for those who shouldn't be unfairly deported. The loss of jobs and crime shouldn't be blamed on one group, and illegal immigrants often get scapegoated. The system needs to be blamed as well, but this program appears to be a win for the current President.

PacMan and Politics

June 9 was a very important day for boxing aficionados everywhere- especially fans of the world-famous Manny Pacquiao and Timothy Bradley. Being of Filipino heritage, it is not shocking to know that many of my relatives threw little parties in which barbecue (and maybe some Coors) was served, excitingly sitting on a plush couch and eagerly watching the game on High Definition television. An array of "WTF?!"s and other expletives flooded my Facebook wall. I myself did not watch the game. However, I did read a couple of articles claiming that "PacMan" should have won the game and that it was an unfair fight.

I admit that in my life, overall, I have only watched two Pacquaio fights. I remember vividly a cool November night in Glendale as he fought Antonio Margarito, the game obviously far too easy for him. I once spotted him in Los Angeles International Airport around 2005 as I landed back from Manila, recognizing his short stature as he was being interviewed by a Filipino news channel. But maybe my sense of "nationalism" or "ethnocentricism" ends there. I admire him as a fighter, a talented boxer... but I always became irritated with others who automatically believed I was some hardcore Pacquiao-lover just because we happen to be of the same race.

Boxing is so much like politics... rough, tough, intense, messy, strategic, often requiring a quick-witted mind (okay, okay, maybe except for Bush 43). Each intellectual slogan and idea always adds a firm punch in the opponent, and many people often want to identify themselves with their favorite fighter.

Pacquiao is undoubtedly an international hero, with power emanating from his buff physique. And yet, at the same time, I believe that he should stick to what he is good at, which is boxing. Yes, he is extremely wealthy, and yes, he did have a few schools built in his name in the Philippines. He is also a Congressman who has switched parties at least twice- and who has openly shown his disapproval of gay marriage, at least in America. He is entitled to his own opinions- but really, must his political beliefs be taken very seriously, taking his intellect into account? I clearly think he has good intentions concerning educating those in the Philippines and spreading his wealth, but even as his title of Congressman... I don't see him as an authority on what I should politically agree with. Should give I a damn that he doesn't support gay marriage?

However, I wouldn't mind attending the next family barbecue for a Pay-Per-View boxing match. And save the roasted zucchini, baked potatoes, and organic green tea for me... agree or disagree with politics, I can appreciate Pacquiao for what he is- a great boxer.

I Didn't Know that Romney Could Rap!

Comical Rights

Look at the graphic. Need I say more?

Censorship

Well-known and well-beloved author Ray Bradbury passed away this week at the age of 91. His name has become synonymous with readable, enjoyable, yet thought-provoking literature- a defining voice in SciFi. Who can forget "The Martian Chronicles?"

Or, better yet, who can forget the following:

A book so iconic that it has become standardized literature in many public schools?

I certainly haven't, and it's been a little over 10 years since I read it in my Honors English class... which was in a private Christian school.

For those who haven't read the book, or who need somewhat of a refresher, the synopsis is this:  "Set in the 24th century, Fahrenheit 451 tells the story of the protagonist, Guy Montag. At first, Montag takes pleasure in his profession as a fireman, burning illegally owned books and the homes of their owners. However, Montag soon begins to question the value of his profession and, in turn, his life. Throughout the novel Montag struggles with his existence, eventually fleeing his oppressive, censored society and joining an underground network of intellectuals. With his newfound friends, Montag witnesses the atomic destruction if his former city and dedicates himself to rebuilding a literate and cultural society."

Bradbury tackled on the banning (and burning) of books, the pitfalls of adopting technological advancement in a society in such a way that the mind is no longer stimulated, intellectually-sound, the type becoming numb (perhaps by too many episodes of watching the Kardashians and re-runs of "Teen Mom").  But most importantly, Bradbury took on Censorship.

The Book has since turned into an e-Book, or a Kindle and a Nook. The Book is more accessible on the internet. Major bookstores, such as Border's Books and Music, have become defunct, and Barnes and Noble is losing money. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

In terms of censorship, First Amendment Rights have come under fire in 2012. On January 18, 2012, a series of websites "blacked out" their own words in lieu of SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect IP Act). ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) has gained attention and controversy as well. The NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) was signed by President Obama last January, and appeared to be a worsened version of the USA Patriot Act. It appeared to restrict free speech and automatically view any citizen as a terrorist- that is, until a federal judge suspended the NDAA provisions attacking free speech.

Memorizing all these restrictive acronyms can be a pain, but for your reference these links can help:

1) SOPA Explained: What It Is and Why It Matters

2) PIPA is the New SOPA

3) What is ACTA?

4) NDAA

5) Federal Judge Suspends NDAA Detention Provision 

----
In the midst of all this First Amendment-Attacking Chaos, I would like to end with this quote:

"The sun burnt every day. It burnt Time. The world rushed in a circle and turned on its axis and time was busy burning the years and the people anyway, without any help from him. So if he burnt things with the firemen and the sun burnt Time, that meant that everything burnt!"
- Guy Montag, Fahrenheit 451, pg. 141

Information Junkie

I live in an area that is otherwise political... and unsurprisingly, even admitted by The LA Times, there was less voter turn-out this year. Where I live, I don't see any posters or pins or brochures around election time, although I did bump into some rare Ron Paul supporters two months ago.

We live in a time in which people are questioning politics and the "1%" more than ever, and the World Wide Web has made it easier and harder at the same time. Virtually all of us can access revealing information but also be tracked for doing so. We can automatically look up Romney's past (er, flip-flopping) views at the touch of a button. We can easily watch the 2008 Vice Presidential debates so that we can remind ourselves of how Palin is like. We can look at old birth documents to determine for ourselves whether the ad nauseum"Birther" movement is even worth it. And while we can access this information, it isn't something we do in secret.

 

(Photo Courtesy of "Being Liberal" on Facebook)

Where's the "I Voted" Pin?

Today is the 2012 California Primary. Need I say more?

On my vote-by-mail ballot, I still saw names such as Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich on the list. If only they had stayed for this make-it-or-break-it, climactic type of primary- after all, California has always been a major deciding factor, especially in delegates. But save for the 2008 fiasco on Proposition 8, California has always been one of the most progressive states, and attempting to make it backwards in terms of a Bachmann- or Santorum-esque agenda would be nothing more than a laugh.

On a more serious note, there have been rumors of a Romney-Paul ticket... not of former Governor Mitt Romney and Representative Ron Paul, but of Romney and Senator Rand Paul. While this is not confirmed, I don't understand how such a combination could work together. The Libertarian ideal would want significantly smaller government, elimination of the Federal Reserve, encouragement of the free market, the legalization / regulation of drugs, legalization of marijuana, legalized gay marriage, and smaller (if not zero) taxes. How would Romney be able to work with such as ideas, and especially the other way around when he is still a part of the system?

In another world, candidates would be vying for votes by simply doing some dances, or at least having their campaign do a dance. 

The Other Woman

"The Other Woman" is an archetype that has been around, since, well, the beginning of time! She is feared, hated, seen as a seductress, homewrecker, manipulative witch behind the curtain waiting for the opportunity to ruin an "innocent man" and his family. The media loves it, and human nature brings upon that "Love to Hate" characteristic, with the tabloids often attempting to still pitt Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Aniston against each other over 7 years after the fact, assuming that Jolie was truly The Other Woman.

Marilyn Monroe is an icon of many facets, including that of "The Other Woman" although her overall persona and depression appear to give her that image of redemption. JFK was a great leader, inspirational speaker, Pulitzer-prize winning writer and beloved President- yet, no one can dispute his infidelities. I recently went to a bookstore in Los Angeles in which I found a book entitled, "Are You a Jackie or Marilyn?" and while this book was more of a coffee table / gift book full of style and tips, I felt like it was also insulting because it put together The Wife and The Other Woman next to each other, comparing and contrasting in the same realm. Would they have published such a book if Jackie O. was also alive?

I don't think so.

But it cannot be denied that society has a fascination with The Other Woman, especially when she is involved with a powerful figure. Just what is it about her that helped bring down a mini-political kingdom? Ashley Dupree was known for hooking up with Eliot Spitzer as an escort, and yet she was able to start a writing career, be featured in The New York Post, and hob-knob with famous people such as PR trailblazer Kelly Cutrone. Monica Lewinsky, the former intern of President Bill Clinton, was sometimes sympathized with in the public, with her Club Monaco lipstick flying off shelves after her 20/20 interview and Gap dress becoming notorious.

Maybe it does pay to be The Other Woman.

Maybe Rielle Hunter will let you know that.

This week, news broke out that John Edwards was acquitted on one count while the rest was deemed a mistrial; just today, it has been announced that Rielle Hunter's tell-all book will be released on June 26, just in time to keep the case fresh in the public's mind before it reaches the bookshelves in the 99 Cents Store a year or so later.

It might just be the antidote to Jay McInerny's 1980's novel in which he portrays Hunter as an obnoxious young woman in New York City, the type who would exchange physical favors for some free time in the tanning salon. While the main character's name was changed from Lisa Jo Druck (Hunter's original name) to Alison Poole, Hunter was clearly the direct muse for an unstable, annoying, self-absorbed, yet extremely intriguing young woman.

Intriguing or not, in the end, John Edwards confessed his sins, although it seemed very easy to do given that he is literally freed from prison and fines, but not public scrutiny and embarrassment. 

Why does The Other Woman get most of the blame? It takes two to tango.

May Elizabeth Anania Edwards rest in peace.