I want your opinions on a few things. So, please weigh in!
First:
Kev and I were watching an Extreme Home Makeover re-run the other night. I don't remember the family members' names but I do remember that they lived in Arkansas. Anyway, we had Mom, Daughter and Son present for the taping. Their "claim to fame"/reason they were chosen for the show is, Mom started a non-profit (which I also don't remember the name of) which assists/works with the Missing and Exploited Children Organization, after her 3rd child (a daughter) was abducted 10 year earlier. Ty and the gang were in attendance for the 10-year anniversary of when the daughter was taken.
While Kev and I watched the episode we discussed the fact that this girl had been abducted 10 years earlier and that I couldn't possibly be as hopeful as this mom was. Kevin disagreed and said if it were my own child that I'd feel differently. Egh... maybe. Maybe not.
I got to discussing this episode with my mom a few days ago. I told her I didn't believe that I would be able to hold onto hope for that long. I went onto tell Mom how 'they' (the episode) campaigned very hard to get your kids finger-printed and have a current picture (at least once every 6 months) at all times -- as a PREVENTATIVE measure. I'm sorry people but how on earth are having pics and your babies fingerprinted going to prevent some psycho from snatching them off of the street? Prolly won't. Sorry to poo-poo that idea. Well, Mom agreed. She suggested Chipping your kids. We chip our dogs, right? Why not?
Those of you who just cringed and cursed my mom, take a minute and really consider it. If (God-forbid) someone were to abduct your son or daughter wouldn't you want to have this back-up?? For anyone who actually has their dog chipped you know that you can't just voila! activate it and have your mutt picked up lickety-split; whomever finds your precious pup had to take them to a vet and the vet activates your chip....... if all that goes according to plan then you can bring your dog home. I'm thinking I'd prefer something more along the lines of "LoJack". GPS.
{again, stop cringing... hear me out}
"
LoJack, not
LowJack, is the only vehicle recovery system operated directly by law enforcement. The moment you report a car stolen, a routine entry into the state crime database will automatically trigger the
LoJack System hidden well on your automobile. The
car tracking device begins to emit an inaudible signal that police can use to track the path of your vehicle. Law enforcement authorities then follow the signal, track down and recover your car and return it to you. " -www.lojack.com
I think that if some sick-o stole my kid, I'd wish I had them chipped (at an early age, it wouldn't be painful, ect ect ect.) so that the Police/FBI (whomever "they" deem) could track them down and bring them home.
You're turn. What do you think? Sound off!
I brought this up to my neighbor, Nikki. She hated the idea. She didn't want "the man" (lol) knowing where she was at all times. I think this is BOGUS! "the man" already knows where you are; and if not, he sure as shit knows how to find your sneaky-ass ASAP! So I'm gonna go ahead and poo-poo that argument. I would rather have "the man" be able to track me because he's bored and has nothing better to do, if it meant I could (if the need should arise) find my stolen child and bring them home. Versus suffering, wallowing, wondering and HOPING they would someday find their way back home.
~***~
Second:
How do we feel about the Afghan discussion in Washington right now?
Yes, I say "we"... we are now a collective and think as one.
;)
Seriously, what are your thoughts? SOUND OFF!
This may be an immature or simple-minded viewpoint but really, troop increase or whatever they decide. I kind of don't really care- honestly. Here's what I do care about: I care about finality. I care about Levi, my brother-in-law currently serving his 4th deployment, in Afghanistan. I care that he got swept up in the first troop surge... which is odd because that was suppose to be in Iraq- right? Lord, who knows anymore? Well, he was in Afghanistan at the time and was still extended to 15 months. It sucked. Increase troops, fine. Whatever. I don't think that they should make the guys already serving over there have to stay even longer in order to reach their "additional surge numbers". Whatever they turn out to be. I say: Send the guy who's only deployed once and drove a desk since 03. Send the douche-bags I see walking around post without a combat patch. Versus, more or less penalizing the soldiers who know what they signed up for and who suck-it-up and deploy time-after-time-after-time.
Hmm. I'm thinking that's goin to be unpopular. Oh well.
Coming back to Finality. If an increase is determined to be necessary in Afghanistan then it better it be successful. Make it count. Please don't make it a habit either. The Iraqi surge was successful and the majority of the troops left behind are non-combat related. So "they" say. All the same, if a surge is necessary I hope it would speed up the final exit from Afghanistan.
Ok, I'm tired and have written enough for one day. Please weigh in. Please don't go on and on about how repubs or demo's suck at life. It's not relevant. And it sort of bores me.