Symbolic Votes and Trusting in "God"

You saw that the House of Representatives had a symbolic vote re-affirming that "In God We Trust" continued to be the national motto, didn't you? (Of course, the GOP #2 Rep. Cantor believes that symbolic votes are silly, but that is neither here nor there.)

Here is my question about the symbolic vote: In which G*d does the People's House trust? Is it Zeus? Jehovah? Loki? It cannot be Gaia. Follow up question: Apart from people like me who fail to believe that leftovers from the Cold War that were created by paranoid rednecks who care more about their God and their Guns should have a place in a modern society, who was really complaining about "In God We Trust" being the motto? Who was trying to get it changed and to what were they trying to get it changed to? (I would vote for "The Land of Free and Home of the Brave" but that is because I try to avoid anything that sounds like it comes from a childrens' book or a story about a carpenter that turns into a friendly zombie.)

The House, as you will see below, tried to gut even more of the EPA and has had members complaining about symbolic votes but the pressing issue was "In God We Trust"?

So Congress, I have a message for you:

You know what, I do not believe in magic, and this world is all I have to look forward to, so I would appreciate it is you tried to keep it clean instead of focusing your efforts on something that you have NO FUCKING EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOR!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Yeah, I am a little pissed about this, and not in a "ha ha" way but in a way that has no place in political discourse. I am not asking people not to believe in what they want to believe, far from it, however, what I am asking is that we pay attention more to what is going on around us and not in preparation for some day that may not come and will not be at all like you imagined.

Let's keep our water clean, our schools strong (and teaching science), our military prepared and honored, and the citizens of this great experiment not lacking in the Four Freedoms.

Forty Eight Hours Later

I am not a liberal.

I am not a conservative.

I am not a Democrat.

I am not a Republican.

Yes, I am defining myself by what I am not.

I am an American.

I get goosebumps and my eyes tear up when I hear the Star Spangled Banner, but I hate when I hear God Bless America and I have an appropriate physical reaction to that as well.

In the past forty eight hours, I have listened to and read a lot of opinions about what should be done as a result of the assassination attempt on Rep. Gifford.

Some of them have been unhelpful.

These include many of the calls to criminalize speech. Yes, SarahPAC's map of the United States, especially in the light of this tragedy, was ill advised, and the vitriolic nature of the attacks (by both sides) on those who disagree with political beliefs often pushes the boundaries of decorum, good taste and decency. However, there is a huge difference between a spirited disagreement (even using harsh language) and a mentally unstable young man shooting someone in the head.

While we do need to have a conversation about the demonetization of political "enemies" and the lack of decorum that has been part and parcel of American politics since the inception of the Republic, that is not what Saturday was about.

Saturday was about two things: handgun control and mental illness.

On Saturday evening, FAU and I had a spirited discussion about handgun ownership and what it meant in the wake of twenty people being shot by someone imbalanced with a Glock. We did not end up agreeing, but...maybe that was the point. We couldn't come to a consensus because that was not the issue...well...not the primary issue.

The primary issue was someone who was mentally ill was able to legally purchase a handgun and the underlying question is why?

I have read reports from various sources about how teachers were afraid of this person. That he displayed behavior that showed his unbalance.

And...

They asked him to be removed from the classroom.

That's what happened. This person who so scared his instructor that he had to be removed from class was removed from the classroom.

What should have happened?

Joe Scarborough commented this morning that if the alleged shooter had been drunk in class he would have received different services.

Why shouldn't an obviously "crazy" student have been offered services? Could this have been prevented if we as a society didn't stigmatize mental illness?

If he had access to services, would he have been able to buy the handgun? If he had access to services, would he have felt compelled to shoot twenty other human beings over a perceived slight by Rep. Giffords?

Or would he have received help?

So, while we have necessary conversations about political rhetoric, violent imagery, handgun control, and the security of our elected officials, can we please have a conversation about prioritizing mental health services?

Irrational people are always going to act irrationally, and occasionally, they are going to engage in violent acts, but...while the conversation is going to continue about how to prevent events like this in the future, is the conversation going to start regarding helping those who need help.

It isn't about being liberal, or conservative...it is about being human, American, and making an attempt to prevent actions like these from happening by preventing the root causes from coming to a head...in a hail of bullets in a Safeway parking lot, between the flags of Arizona and the United States of America.

My Last Word (Hopefully) on Rep. Massa

Bill Maher was on Countdown last night, talking about Rep. Massa (see video below) and the term "snorkeling" was used to describe behavior that then Lt. Com. Messa engaged in while he was in the US Navy.

Guest Host Lawerence O'Donnell referenced Urban Dictionary for the definition (which I did not know) and there were nine definitions of the site. (For the sake of ease, here is the link which is not safe for work, home, or anyone who has friends that have gone snorkeling while on vacation that you want to be able to look in the eye in the future) Bill Maher, who is outspoken with his views on (well, everything) human sexuality was unfamiliar with the term as well.

(NB: The Maher segment was a followup to another piece that had been done on Countdown earlier in the show regarding Massa's claim that when asked by Larry King about his sexual preferences he should just ask his Navy buddies or his wife because this is 2010 and he isn't going to answer this question. That clip can be found here. You ask for a reference check, you are going to get a reference check. Plus, if Glenn Beck apologizes to his audience after interviewing you, you have to know that you are not the most stable of people.)

Anyway, Messa has become a punchline and is acting in a way that not only diminishes himself, and his party, but what the real story is.

"What is the real story?", you ask.

According to the Advocate (via WaPo) Massa had a pattern that party and elected officials were warned of his behavior. House GOP Members are calling for an investigation into this matter, largely because of the investigation into Rep. Mark Foley in 2006 (Page Scandal, history of abuse, et cetera) and they are right to call for it.

This is not a witchhunt for gay Congresspeople. This is about power, the abuse of power, and a sense of entitlement that allows the belief that a quid-pro-quo of sexual favors in turn for political benefits is acceptable.

As a moderate, as a New Yorker, and as someone who does believe in the power of republican democracy, these allegations do need to be heard and behavior such as this needs to stop.

Even if it is just a good ol' fashioned tickle fight.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy