Bodhi’s Blogs

© Copyright 2005 Christopher S. Knepper, all rights reserved

Bodhisattva

Last Updated:
May 28, 2008

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Male
Status: Single
Age: 40
Sign: Virgo

City: BUENA PARK
State: California
Country: US

Signup Date: 06/23/05

Blog Archive
Older     Newer ]


Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Making A Better World
Current mood: inspired
Category: Life

Making A Better World
"Just leaving the world a better place than I found it." (14 May 2008)

A friend of mine commented the other day how my habit of returning shopping carts to the store (or, at least, the cart collection area) drove him nuts... and I usually grab a loose cart from the parking lot on my way and take it back with me.

That habit began one sunny Southern California afternoon, when I started to turn into a parking space, only to find FOUR carts sitting in the middle of the spot I was angling into. I should mention that this parking spot was close to the cart area. By "close," I mean there were TWO parking spaces between the one the carts were blocking, and the cart area. A total of maybe a dozen steps, round trip, for some shopper, that wouldn't take more then six or seven seconds to complete... maybe ten seconds; I'll be generous.

I got out of my car, moved all four of the carts out of the way, parked, and took three of the offending carts back to the cart area, taking the fourth with me to the store. Instead of fuming about how lazy and inconsiderate other shoppers were... well, OK, I did some of that, too... I made the decision to "leave the world a better place than I found it."

Leadership is by example, and this was a simple solution to the problem. Whenever I go somewhere, I always see things that should have been done, and I take a few seconds from my day to do a few of those things... leaving the world a better place than I found it.

Here's another example (albeit slightly more extreme): I was in a WalMart last Christmas Eve, doing some last-minute shopping. When I stopped to look through the $5 DVD bin, it was a mess! Wanting to be thorough (and not pick up the same disc 14 times), I started straightening out the bin as I looked at what was there. I wasn't sorting them so all the copies of, say, Hope Floats, were together. I was just lining them all up neatly, with the titles facing the same direction, so fellow shoppers could scan the titles quickly and easily... saving everybody time during the holiday rush. Someone asked if I worked for WalMart, and I said, "No. I'm just leaving the world a better place than I found it." Again, The Mantra.

It has occurred to me that, if everyone did little things (and raised their children to follow their excellent example), this world could be a terrific place. It wouldn't even need to be everyone, just a critical mass of people (though I would hope shame would drive the remainder to follow suit, my cynicism prevents me from expecting that).

  • Instead of stepping over or around that piece of trash, pick it up and put it in a trash can. You can carry some disposable plastic gloves (the kind food preparers use - available at Smart & Final, WalMart, and maybe Sam's Club or Costco) or some wet naps for your hands.
  • Take your own (and one or two other) shopping carts back to the store or cart collection area. Don't leave them loose in the parking lot.
  • Hold the door for someone with his or her hands full.
  • Say, "please," "thank you," and "you're welcome."
  • Stop and give someone directions when they're backing up their car.
  • Return loose items in the supermarket to their proper locations.
  • If you have 48 items in your cart, and someone gets in line behind you with three, let them go first.

The list is endless. Every day, you see things that somebody should have done, but didn't. Take ten seconds and do them. No, you won't get paid for it. No, you won't get kudos or a pat on the back. Yes, you will feel good about having done the right thing. Yes, you will feel good about helping to make a better world. Who knows? Maybe someone will see you and follow your example. Maybe enough people will join the movement to attain that critical mass of which I spoke earlier. Maybe the world could be a better place, for all of us. Many hands make light work, as my grandmother used to say.

Official legal-type stuff: Please feel free to copy this blog and repost it. My only request is that you give proper attribution and include a link to this blog:

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&FriendID=19487059&blogMonth=5&blogDay=14&blogYear=2008

"Realism tells me I cannot fix the entire world. Idealism drives me to clean up my little corner of it."

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
- Edmund Burke

The Floor Is Open.

1:21 PM - 10 Comments - 10 Kudos - Add Comment

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Dismantling Hate
Current mood: catalyzed
Category: MySpace

Dismantling Hate
Exposing the vitriol of The Memphis Lee. (23 March 2008)

I was perusing the "Most Popular Blog Posts" the other day, something I don't often do (it's way too easy to manipulate them), and I noticed several with the same title: Dismantling Hate.

Being a curious sort, and a person who pays attention to the choreography of the coinci-dance, I clicked through to one of them and read a post by Catalyst, regarding a certain... person (I use that term loosely)... who calls himself "The Memphis Lee."

Now, I have read several comments on other folks blogs, penned by this cretin. I have even read a couple of his own efforts. I find him to be an offensive type. This is the kind of person who gets his jollies insulting, belittling, and cutting down others.

I have often said, "There are two types of people: Those who make themselves feel better by helping everyone around them be at their best, and those who try to make themselves feel better by ensuring everyone around them feels worse than they do." Mr. Lee is among the latter.

Every post or comment I have ever read that came from the cesspool in his cranial cavity reeks of negativity, hatred, and contempt.

I have no desire to propagate his vitriol, but an example should be given for anyone who does not (or cannot - MySpazz seems to be mangling links lately) click through to Catalyst's blog (or any of the other blogs written by the coalition rising up to speak out against the insidious venom spewed forth by any whose heart is filled with hate).

A girl here was thinking about committing suicide and chose her MySpace blog as the place to cry out for help. The following is a screen shot of a comment The Memphis Lee posted to her blog (other screen shots may be found on Catalyst's blog):

Those of you who know me know that I am a self-described "First Amendment Freak." I am strongly in favor of allowing people to say whatever they please (excepting incitement to lawless action). Those who do not like what is being said may walk away, change the channel, or click off to another page. However, the comment shown above is cyberbullying, plain and simple. The entire attitude surrounding his comment is "let's egg her on until she hurts herself, then we can laugh about how much power we had over her. ha ha ha"

"People" like The Memphis Lee are a black mark on human society. They are offensive, despicable, and a waste of perfectly good air that decent folk could be breathing. Furthermore, they won't learn kindness, courtesy, or compassion until they are shunned by virtually everyone around them. When they find themselves alone and in need of the very compassion they so callously mocked, they might wake up and realize how loathsome they have been all of their pathetic lives. That is what must happen to this... person... calling himself "The Memphis Lee."

Full disclosure: I have all nine of his accounts blocked and, should he create more, I will block those, too. As far as I am concerned, he is filth and I will not have him anywhere near me. For like-minded individuals, here is a list of links directly to the block page for each of his accounts, so you may block them without visiting his pages:

The Floor Is Open.

Currently reading :
My American Journey
By Colin Powell
Release date: 04 March, 2003

7:38 PM - 2 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Monday, March 17, 2008

Nothing But Praise...
Current mood: artistic
Category: Writing and Poetry

Nothing But Praise
A tribute to warrior-poet Lt. Henry G. Lee. (17 March 2008)

Henry Lee was a 27-year-old lieutenant in 1941, serving in the Philippines. He was captured by the Japanese in 1942 and endured the "Bataan Death March." As a POW, he was held for a time at Camp O’Donnell, then three years at Camp Cabanatuan, where he kept up his journal of poetry.

In December of 1944, he was loaded on an unmarked Japanese transport ship with other prisoners to be sent to Japan as slave labor. Before he left, he managed to bury his journal, hoping to return as a free and victorious American soldier and retrieve it. Unfortunately, on the way to Japan, an American plane spotted the unmarked boat and, not knowing it held captive POWs, the pilot dropped his bombs, sinking the ship. Henry Lee was 30 years old.

In January of 1945, the Sixth Rangers liberated Camp Cabanatuan. Lee’s journal was found and sent to his parents. In 1948, his poetry was published in a volume entitled Nothing But Praise, from which these poems were taken.

The first was written the day after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, when Lee realized he was about to be thrown into what promised to be a bloody war.

Three years later, on the anniversary of his penning of Prayer Before Battle, he wrote another poem, somewhat less known. I think this one is more powerful, though, especially when you know his history, previous and subsequent. The differences between the two show how much he grew in the brutal years he suffered as a POW. If the Sixth Rangers had raided that camp just a few weeks earlier, what more might this Poet of Bataan have penned? Perhaps more importantly, how much could we, as a society, have learned about the emptiness of hate?

The Floor Is Open.

Currently reading :
The Assault on Reason
By Al Gore
Release date: 22 May, 2007

1:59 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

Friday, March 07, 2008

The Myth of "Overqualified"
Current mood: frustrated
Category: Jobs, Work, Careers

The Myth of "Overqualified"
Top floor skills at a bargain basement price. (7 March 2008)

I’ve been out in the job market for several months, now. Hitting the bricks, constantly scanning every web site I can think of for employment. We’re not just talking about the standards (Career Builder, Monster, Yahoo! Hot Jobs, etc.), either. I’m going through city, county, state, and federal postings, as well. I’m hitting local school and community college districts, CSU sytstem, UC system, and major local employers like Knott’s and Disneyland. I’m even combing the local newspapers and going "Old School." The problem is: The people who would hire me, aren’t hiring; and the people who are hiring won’t even consider me because they say I’m "overqualified."

Pardon my French, but that’s a bunch of hooey. While, in an odd way, I appreciate their reluctance to take advantage of my situation and pay me less than I’m really worth, the bottom line is that they’d rather I lose my home to foreclosure than underpay me. Here, we have a difference of opinion. If I didn’t want the job, I wouldn’t be applying for it in the first place. I’d rather be working and underpaid (but still covering my bills), than not working, not being paid at all, and not covering my bills.

Furthermore, I have "mad skills" (to borrow a phrase from a friend). If my employer thinks they’re underutilizing me where I am, they can move me elsewhere when a more appropriate position opens up. They don’t have to worry about trying to hire me away from somebody else; it’s an in-company transfer. They get to benefit from top drawer skills at a rock bottom price, then bounce me over to IT, or PR, or training, or [fill-in-the-blank].

So, employers: Don’t tell me I’m "overqualified." Hire me anyway and count yourself lucky to be getting a computer/network/IT expert with 20 years of real world experience, well above average written and verbal communication skills, teaching ability, and a Bachelor’s degree in Communications playing the role of the cherry on top.

The Floor Is Open.

Currently listening :
Emerson Drive
By Emerson Drive
Release date: 08 January, 2007

10:04 PM - 6 Comments - 6 Kudos - Add Comment

French Tankers to Fuel U.S. Air Force Jets (WHAT?!!)
Current mood: indignant
Category: News and Politics

ECON 101: Overseas Outsourcing Hurts
"Economies work better when people have JOBS!" (7 March 2008)

The US Air Force recently awarded a $35+ billion contract to build military tankers (the "flying gas stations" that our military planes use to refuel in mid-air) to a French company. That’s $35 billion of our taxpayer money being outsourced to foreign workers, instead of having our military equipment being built here, in the U.S., by American workers! Our economy is circling the drain (trust me, I’m out there looking for a regular, full-time position to replace the hugely variable income I get from freelancing), and the government is sending thousands of jobs to France (of all places)!

Furthermore, this means that our military planes (and our national defense) is partially in the hands of a European company... in a country that isn’t always all that friendly with us.

This is an outrage, and this type of outsourcing has got to stop. If you agree that American taxpayer money should be used to pay American workers (NOT French workers!), then please take one minute to visit the following link to Representative Todd Tiahrt’s web site, and sign his online petition. The government needs to know that we will not just sit back and allow this type of outsourcing to continue! Please forward to anyone who you think would support this movement to get this decision reversed.

Also, here is the list of other government web sites that you can use to write your government representatives and tell them what you think (and how you’ll be voting).

The Floor Is Open.

Currently listening :
Camino Palmero
By The Calling
Release date: 10 July, 2001

10:02 PM - 2 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Auto Industry Psych
Current mood: hopeful
Category: News and Politics

PSYCH 201: Auto Industry Psychology
"We decide what you want to buy, not you!" (4 March 2008)

I recently wrote a blog about the modifications the California Air Resources Board is proposing to make to the Zero Emissions Vehicle Program. This is the same program that was adopted in 1990 but, by the date it was supposed to actually come into force, had been so weakened and gutted, the vehicles that actually were Zero Emission did not survive to be mass produced and marketed. I got to pondering as to why, and an interesting thought occurred to me. The auto industry is more focused on maintaining a status quo they are comfortable with than they are in listening to what consumers actually want and producing the vehicles that we are asking for.

Let me see if I can explain this odd blind spot that seems to be ubiquitous throughout the industry. Back in 1990, when the Low-Emission Vehicle and Clean Fuels (LEV) regulations were first adopted, California essentially showed the auto industry which way the auto market winds were blowing. We want low-emission, clean-fuel, high-efficiency vehicles. Seems pretty obvious, doesn’t it? At that time, the only technology (other than internal combustion) that was practical for powering cars was electric motors driven by rechargeable batteries.

The problem is that this is not a technology Detroit has extensive experience with. Detroit has the experience, the factories, the personnel, and the robotics to make big, powerful, internal combustion engines. Instead of taking an honest look at the changes going on in their own industry and investing in being a leader in those changes, Detroit invested in legal challenges to the changes. I don’t know exactly how much money the auto industry spends in legal fees, resisting the change to greener cars, blocking or gutting every low-emission regulation that gets proposed, filing lawsuits, and lobbying government representatives. I’m sure there is an accountant out there with that number. I feel a compelling need to ask, though: If Detroit had spent that money in research and development, instead of legal fees, where would we be now? What would we be driving? And would the environment be in any better shape?

Back in 1990, California sent the auto industry a clear message: We want cleaner, more efficient cars. Instead of responding with, "OK, we’ll do our best to give you what you want," the auto industry responded with, "No! You’ll buy what we build!" Now, who has the most fuel efficient cars on the road? Japan. Toyota and Honda. Who has the best market share? Japan. Toyota and Honda. Who’s getting spanked (economically, anyway) for their intransigence? Detroit. Chrysler, General Motors, and Ford.

Perhaps a more important question would be: How can Detroit fix this problem? My own, admittedly knee-jerk, reaction is this: Drastic times call for drastic measures. Everybody who is making seven figures or more a year either takes a pay cut down to something a bit more reasonable, or retires... let’s try to avoid the $210 million golden parachutes, too; spending millions giving executives a cushy retirement is not going to help keep the company afloat, much less profitable.

Replace them all with young, energetic, go-getters who have fresh, new ideas... preferably ones who will work for a salary in the low six figures (or less). Look for people who are familiar with what today’s younger market wants, and are passionate about making that kind of car. You’ll probably need to redefine your concept of where the company makes its profit, but those youngsters will have ideas about that, too. Take the money you saved on executive salaries and dump that directly into making efficient cars efficiently. Shorten the R&D cycle as much as possible; focus on making inexpensive, low maintenance cars; learn to be versatile.

You’ll end up with a smaller, nimbler company that can tack with the wind more easily. Better yet, the company will be going the same direction the market is headed, instead of fighting the headwind, as it were. Perhaps you could accomplish the same thing with the Old Guard, but my instincts say otherwise. Should the Old Guard prove me wrong, I will beg their pardon right here on these pages, for all to see.

Whatever you do, don’t lay off the people who are actually making the cars! Then you don’t have a product to sell, and you don’t have people to buy it. That’s just slitting your own throat. No matter how you slice it, the American auto industry must change or it will go under, California laws or no. If any of you have other ideas, chime in! Maybe together we can hash out a plan to Save the American Automobile Industry.

The Floor Is Open.

Currently listening :
Lifehouse
By Lifehouse
Release date: 22 March, 2005

9:56 PM - 2 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Sunday, March 02, 2008

Plugged In...
Current mood: electric
Category: News and Politics

Plugging In To The Future
Keeping the electric car alive.
(2 March 2008)

I recently got an "Action Gram" from Plug In America, regarding modifications the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is proposing to the Zero Emissions Vehicles (ZEV) Program. Since I've been focusing my limited time more on alternative fuels (hydrogen, natural gas/methane, ethanol, methanol, and biodiesel) than on plug-in hybrid and pure electric vehicles, I had to do some research. Here's what I've learned:

Back in 1990, the CARB adopted the Low-Emission Vehicle and Clean Fuels (LEV) regulations. A part of this was a mandate on the manufacture and sale of ZEVs. At the time, battery-electric was the only technology expected to meet the 1998 deadline specified in the regulation. The CARB also wanted status updates at least every two years, along with proposed modifications.

The original regulations required auto manufacturers to meet increasingly strict "fleet average" emission requirements, and include a certain percentage of ZEVs for purchase in California, starting in 1998 and ramping up through 2003. Auto manufacturers could make qualifying vehicles prior to 1998 and earn early credits toward the mandate.

In 1996, the regulation was modified to eliminate the 1998-2002 "ramp up" years, but still leaving a ten percent requirement for 2003 in place. In 1998, the regulation was again modified to allow partial credit for extremely clean vehicles and were not, strictly speaking, zero-emission.

In 2001, the regulation was modified, yet again, allowing large manufacturers to meet the ten percent requirement with two percent pure ZEV, two percent "Advanced Technology Partial ZEV" (AT PZEV - e.g., state of the art hybrids), and six percent Partial ZEV (PZEV). Now, that does, indeed, add up to ten percent, but only two of that ten percent is truly zero-emission.

In 2002, the auto industry sued CARB and a federal district judge issued an injunction preventing the regulations from being enforced. CARB adopted more changes to the regulations, and the plaintiffs dropped the suit. The changes:

  • pushed the 2003 ten percent requirement out to 2005
  • knocked warranty coverage of the drive battery from 15 years down to 10
  • decreased the necessary PZEV all-electric-range for a zero-emission vehicle miles traveled (VMT) allowance to 90
  • increased the VMT allowance
  • changed qualifying criteria for hybrid advanced component allowance to drive system voltage and peak power output, instead of CO2 reduction, increased fuel economy, or maximum available power from "electric storage device" (i.e., battery)
  • tripled the multiplier for VMT allowances for 2007 model year cars, and expanded the model year range from 2007 only to 2000 through 2008
  • doubled the VMT allowance multiplier for 2008-2011 model years and changed the span to 2009-2011

Now, there are more proposed amendments to the regulation. It's difficult to wade through the legalese on the CARB website. There are seven parts to the proposed regulations, the first of which appears to eliminate the basic ZEV requirement entirely (though the seventh seems to put it all back). Regardless, every change that has ever been made to this mandate has made it more lenient.

Of the handful of electric cars produced since 1996, many are still on the road, owing to their low maintenance requirements (GM did recall all of their EV1's and scrap them). Also, virtually everyone who owns an electric car loves it! If The People speak loudly enough, both the government and the auto industry will hear... and, just maybe, listen. Here are some resources:

Plug In America
California Air Resources Board
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
United States Senate
United States House of Representatives
United States Envoronmental Protection Agency
The White House

I would love to know what you all think. Please comment.
The Floor Is Open.

Currently listening :
Countrified
By Emerson Drive
Release date: 19 September, 2006

10:00 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Super Tuesday Politics
Category: News and Politics

Super Tuesday and November's Election
"The only way to waste your vote is to not cast it at all."
          - Christopher S. Knepper
(6 February 2008)

I've been following the primary election results all afternoon on TV and, I have to say: It's a very exciting time... but (yes, I had to throw a "but" in there)... well, I'm on the fence, and the posts are starting to hurt my backside. Insert all the puns you like in there; I intentionally left it open for just that reason.

At any rate, I decided to put fingers on keyboard and let all y'all aboard my train of thought. I've found you to be intelligent and reasonable folks, so maybe you can offer me some Pearls of Wisdom that I might not ordinarily have stumbled upon. Here's the scoops, troops:

I'm a registered Libertarian. I'll pause for a moment while you gather yourselves and recover from your shock. You back with me? OK. I will be the first to state that I do not completely agree with my stated party. There are issues on which we are 180 degrees apart (e.g., Immigration), but I seem to agree with them more often than the other parties, so there it is. I've often been tempted to write up my own platform, and even started penning one, but it's a lengthy process requiring much cogitation and research and I just haven't had the time.

To bring the train back off of the siding it had drifted onto and return it to the main line... I ran several candidate calculators like the Vote Match one on SpeakOut.org (accessed here through Fox, because they were kind enough to provide the HTML code so I didn't have to write it myself). The first time I ran the calculator was about 6 weeks ago and I matched up (issues-wise, anyway) with 1) Chris Dodd; 2) John Edwards; 3) Cynthia somebody (she was the freak who assaulted a security guard at the Capitol Building when she showed up without her security badge and he did his job, refusing to let her in); and 4) Hillary Clinton (much to my surprise). In case you're interested, Obama was 8th, Richardson 9th, Huckabee 13th, Giuliani 14th, McCain 15th, and Romney trailed the pack at 18th. Republican, I'm not (even though the first president I actually voted for was Bush the Elder, and I still think Reagan was the last decent president this country has had).

Obviously, Dodd has dropped out, as has Edwards, and I wouldn't vote for Cynthia McKinney if you put a gun to my head (not that she'd allow that anyway, given her stand on the 2nd Amendment). That leaves me with either Clinton or voting the party line. Now, I don't much trust Hillary. It's just an instinct, but I've learned to trust them. I get the feeling that she says what she says not because she really believes it, but because it's what she thinks I want to hear. She's saying it to get elected, not to actually follow through. Still, I know she's ruthless and I don't think that's all that bad a thing in a president. Besides, I know what I'm getting with her. I can usually tell when she's blowing smoke, so it doesn't matter so much if she lies to me, because I know she's lying. I get the same feeling from Obama, but it's much more subtle, much more difficult to tell when he's blowing the same smoke. He reminds me altogether too much of Slick Willie. Ironic that I'd be comparing Hillary's opponent to Hillary's husband, isn't it?

The only person in politics who would get my vote without reservation, without even looking to see who else was on the ticket, is Colin Powell. I may not always agree with him, but I believe in his integrity. He may not have been a Senator/Congressman, or a Governor, or any other political office (though he was Secretary of State), but his history shows, when he's put into an office he doesn't have much experience in, he surrounds himself with bright, capable people, he listens to what they have to say, then he makes up his own mind. I honestly believe he would make an outstanding U.S. President.

Unfortunately, I think he's a Republican. Too bad. If Hillary chose him as her running mate, I'd give her the nod. If she teamed up with Edwards, I'd seriously consider that, too. That won't happen, either. That leaves me hanging another Libertarian chad... unless all y'all have some good points to make and you make them convincingly. Give me your insight, please.


To quote another Keanu Reeves movie: Hit me.
The Floor Is Open.

Currently listening :
Give It Time
By Hefshill
Release date: 22 February, 2005

1:22 AM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

Tuesday, December 25, 2007

Sunny and Share...
Current mood: productive
Category: News and Politics

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I am pleased to announce the first ever electronic edition of my Alternative Energy Newsletter, Sunny & Share!

Sunny & Share Masthead

Currently listening :
Emerson Drive
By Emerson Drive
Release date: 08 January, 2007

6:55 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

Thursday, December 20, 2007

This is UNBELIEVABLE! Unprecedented!
Current mood: Furious
Category: Furious News and Politics

EPA Denies California's Waiver Request!
"A state cannot stand once it has lost the trust of the people."
     - Kongzi (Confucius), 'Analects' 12.7
(20 December 2007)

First, a little background: In July of 2002, California passed AB1493, called the Clean Cars Law. Two months later, the California Air Resources Board set standards for the law; these standards are stricter than the existing federal law, the Clean Air Act. In order for California to set its own standards, independent of the federal regulations, the California standards must be at least as stringent as the federal ones and California must receive a waiver from the EPA. The EPA has always granted these waivers (more than 50 times, so far). November 8, 2007 (two years after California requested the waiver), Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger announced that California was suing the EPA for failing to act on California's request. For a more detailed history, see this page at EnvironmentalDefense.org.

Yesterday (December 19, 2007), the EPA denied California's waiver request! I am flabbergasted! Flummoxed! Floored! Furious!

I could launch into a lengthy diatribe, here, about the Bush Junior Administration and their [ahem] less-than-adequate performance (yes, the EPA is a federal agency under the auspices of the Executive Branch of the government - i.e., the President), but you've already heard it... so, insert your own tirade here.

The $64 question now is: What do we do about it? And the answer is: Write! Write everyone! Write your Congresspersons (you can do that here)! Write your Senators (you can do that here)! Write the President!

Flood the mailboxes of every government representative with your indignation! Remember, they serve you! We "hired" them; we can "fire" them, too. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to get my fingers working on making my own voice heard... loudly.

Currently listening :
All the Right Reasons
By Nickelback
Release date: 05 October, 2005

5:28 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment


About  |  FAQ  |  Terms  |  Privacy  |  Safety Tips  |  Contact MySpace  |  Promote!  |  Advertise  |  MySpace Shop

©2003-2008 MySpace.com. All Rights Reserved.