I am sure even if you don't know me well you know just by looking at me that I have a negative relationship with food. Lately I have been feeling more self-conscious about my weight than ever before and have taken little steps to address my over-eating problem. I joined a weight loss forum with other emotional eaters and I made my best friend promise to go to an over-eaters anonymous meeting as soon as I switch back to my normal work schedule. However, today I want to tell all of you about my small bout of willpower.
I was meeting with my daughters father to drop her off for a visit for the weekend at a Super America gas station. I saw a sign at the burger king across the street that said "Buy one chicken sandwich, get one free" and the wheels in my head started spinning. I went into the SA to use the cash machine and I bought myself a diet soda (which is also good because I usually end up buying snacks) and the whole time I was trying to justify going to the burger king and buying the chicken sandwiches.
I thought to myself that I had been good all day, all I had to eat that day was a slim fast shake for breakfast and a bowl of banana nut cheerios for lunch. I knew I wouldn't have eaten both sandwiches (I'd bring one home to my husband) and I begin to promise myself I wouldn't get any fries or anything.
I got back to my car looked at the burger king again and I said to myself "You know what, I'm not going to do it." And I didn't, I went home and ate some ramen instead. I know ramen isn't great either but I am sure it has a lot less fat and calories than that chicken sandwich would have had.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Thursday, March 17, 2011
My News Analysis Paper
Analysis of “Wis. standoff over anti-union measure nears abrupt conclusion after GOP outmaneuvers Dems” from the Minneapolis Star Tribune, March 10th, 2011.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/117671628.html?page=1&c=y
Political tensions have been high in Wisconsin since Governor Scott Walker proposed a bill that would require most state employees to pay more into their pensions and health care plans and strip them of their collective bargaining rights. This proposal has launched many protests state wide and caused all fourteen democrats in the state senate to flee the state in a measure to prevent the senates required quorum of twenty in order to vote on any proposals that include spending. This article describes how the GOP superceded quorum by removing all spending measures from the bill so that the issue of state public union’s collective bargaining rights could be voted on. Many residents of Wisconsin are questioning the intentions of Walker and the states Republicans and whether they are truly interested in balancing the budget or if they are more interested in union busting and weakening their opponents in the Democratic Party.
It seems that unions have been falling out of favor amongst many Americans, according to American Government & Politics Today “The degree of unionization in the private sector has declined over the past fifty years, but this has been partially offset by the growth in the unionization of public employees” (Schmidt, Shelley, Bardes, 146). With the rise in public unions alongside the decline in popularity of unions in general, this may put pressure on some politicians to curb public unions. The source also confirms that politician’s fears of public unions may be valid by stating, “…public employee unions have become quite militant and are often involved in strikes” (146). However it continues by stating “Most of these strikes are illegal, because almost no public employees have the right to strike” (146). This leads to why the stripping public unions of collective bargaining rights is such a hot button issue, because without them and the legal right to strike, many public unions in Wisconsin are now left with little options to defend the rights of their workers.
This leads to where Scott Walker and his colleagues’ true intentions may stand. The public unions affected by the bill have attempted to negotiate with the GOP by agreeing to a cut in pay and paying more into their benefits and pensions. Walker has rejected their compromise stating that he feels ending collective bargaining rights still is necessary. Many skeptics of his policies feel that there is little reason to end collective bargaining rights when the unions have already agreed to the cuts. Another reason skeptics question the governor’s motives is the fact that three public unions have been exempt from this bill. These three unions include the firefighters, the police and the state troopers. Walker says he has exempted them claiming that they are first responders. Many people are not convinced and believe that he has exempted them as a reward for supporting him in his election.
The tactics of both parties in this issue are also up for much criticism. If we look at how the book defines a political party, it states that “A political party might be formally defined as a group of political activists who organize to win elections, operate the government and determine public policy” (143). This may suggest that a political party’s main objective is to win and in my opinion this is how the republicans have conducted business with the way that they moved to remove spending measures from the bill in order to pass the ending of collective bargaining rights. If they were truly representing the people of Wisconsin with regards that the absent democratic senators were also voted to represent their constituents, they would have not used such a vulgar display of power (knowing they had the control of all branches of government) to do their business but rather negotiate with and reach a compromise with the missing democrats. It can be said that the democrats also showed bully tactics to get their way by leaving and preventing quorum, however since they were not given many opportunities to make their arguments and Walker has made it seem like he was not willing to hear them out, they may have felt like leaving was their last resort in representing the people who voted for them.
Despite which side one may stand in the political climate that is happening in Wisconsin, it is possible one thing may be agreed upon: the political parties are becoming even more divided than ever before. Scott Walker is hoping to be an example for states across the nation and strongly believes that the policies and tactics of Wisconsin’s republicans will help every state balance their budgets. There are a few questions that may come to mind when deciding whether these policies and tactics are right for America. Is it in the benefit of the public to render unions powerless? Is making many cuts without raising taxes a realistic approach in balancing a budget? Are tactics used by one party to exclude another party acceptable under a democracy? I am sure there is not one collective answer or opinion to these concerns, but it is certain that the re-election of many republicans in Wisconsin depends on the outcomes of these decisions.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/117671628.html?page=1&c=y
Political tensions have been high in Wisconsin since Governor Scott Walker proposed a bill that would require most state employees to pay more into their pensions and health care plans and strip them of their collective bargaining rights. This proposal has launched many protests state wide and caused all fourteen democrats in the state senate to flee the state in a measure to prevent the senates required quorum of twenty in order to vote on any proposals that include spending. This article describes how the GOP superceded quorum by removing all spending measures from the bill so that the issue of state public union’s collective bargaining rights could be voted on. Many residents of Wisconsin are questioning the intentions of Walker and the states Republicans and whether they are truly interested in balancing the budget or if they are more interested in union busting and weakening their opponents in the Democratic Party.
It seems that unions have been falling out of favor amongst many Americans, according to American Government & Politics Today “The degree of unionization in the private sector has declined over the past fifty years, but this has been partially offset by the growth in the unionization of public employees” (Schmidt, Shelley, Bardes, 146). With the rise in public unions alongside the decline in popularity of unions in general, this may put pressure on some politicians to curb public unions. The source also confirms that politician’s fears of public unions may be valid by stating, “…public employee unions have become quite militant and are often involved in strikes” (146). However it continues by stating “Most of these strikes are illegal, because almost no public employees have the right to strike” (146). This leads to why the stripping public unions of collective bargaining rights is such a hot button issue, because without them and the legal right to strike, many public unions in Wisconsin are now left with little options to defend the rights of their workers.
This leads to where Scott Walker and his colleagues’ true intentions may stand. The public unions affected by the bill have attempted to negotiate with the GOP by agreeing to a cut in pay and paying more into their benefits and pensions. Walker has rejected their compromise stating that he feels ending collective bargaining rights still is necessary. Many skeptics of his policies feel that there is little reason to end collective bargaining rights when the unions have already agreed to the cuts. Another reason skeptics question the governor’s motives is the fact that three public unions have been exempt from this bill. These three unions include the firefighters, the police and the state troopers. Walker says he has exempted them claiming that they are first responders. Many people are not convinced and believe that he has exempted them as a reward for supporting him in his election.
The tactics of both parties in this issue are also up for much criticism. If we look at how the book defines a political party, it states that “A political party might be formally defined as a group of political activists who organize to win elections, operate the government and determine public policy” (143). This may suggest that a political party’s main objective is to win and in my opinion this is how the republicans have conducted business with the way that they moved to remove spending measures from the bill in order to pass the ending of collective bargaining rights. If they were truly representing the people of Wisconsin with regards that the absent democratic senators were also voted to represent their constituents, they would have not used such a vulgar display of power (knowing they had the control of all branches of government) to do their business but rather negotiate with and reach a compromise with the missing democrats. It can be said that the democrats also showed bully tactics to get their way by leaving and preventing quorum, however since they were not given many opportunities to make their arguments and Walker has made it seem like he was not willing to hear them out, they may have felt like leaving was their last resort in representing the people who voted for them.
Despite which side one may stand in the political climate that is happening in Wisconsin, it is possible one thing may be agreed upon: the political parties are becoming even more divided than ever before. Scott Walker is hoping to be an example for states across the nation and strongly believes that the policies and tactics of Wisconsin’s republicans will help every state balance their budgets. There are a few questions that may come to mind when deciding whether these policies and tactics are right for America. Is it in the benefit of the public to render unions powerless? Is making many cuts without raising taxes a realistic approach in balancing a budget? Are tactics used by one party to exclude another party acceptable under a democracy? I am sure there is not one collective answer or opinion to these concerns, but it is certain that the re-election of many republicans in Wisconsin depends on the outcomes of these decisions.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Take Me As I Am
I have observed of myself that I have a tendency to hide or even feel ashamed of certain aspects of myself. So at this moment I would like to make a promise to be more true to myself. No longer will I hide my tastes in music, TV, movies or beliefs out of fear that I will not be accepted. Current and potential friends and acquaintances do not need to like or believe the same things that I do but they need to accept and not berate me for what I like and believe. I of course, in return will extend the same courtesy. So yes, I like nu metal, I like a pop or country song or two. I LOVE Twilight and Jersey Shore. I am overly liberal on some issues and conservative on others but moderate on most. Deal with it!
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
New Years Resolution
I have not made new years resolutions in the past (or at the very least, I do not remember making them) but this year I have decided to make one.
I am staying away from the health and weight loss resolutions, I don't know why, I just don't feel right about those. This year my resolution has to do with people.
Over the last year I have discovered that I have some serious social problems. While I seem to have no problem making acquaintances, I have not really made any close friends in ages(besides my friend Michelle). This year, my resolution is to make a new friend.
This may sound like an easy resolution to some of you, but it isn't for me. I do not seem to make friends easily. For one, I am socially awkward and I do feel that many people see my as a weirdo. Second, when I do meet someone I would really like to be friends with, I start to feel intimidated by them. I am a little insecure about myself and I am constantly feeling rejected and that no one likes me.
But this year I want to stop feeling that way and make a new friend or two. If anyone has any advice whether personal (stuff you have observed about me) or general, please feel free to communicate it to me. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.
I am staying away from the health and weight loss resolutions, I don't know why, I just don't feel right about those. This year my resolution has to do with people.
Over the last year I have discovered that I have some serious social problems. While I seem to have no problem making acquaintances, I have not really made any close friends in ages(besides my friend Michelle). This year, my resolution is to make a new friend.
This may sound like an easy resolution to some of you, but it isn't for me. I do not seem to make friends easily. For one, I am socially awkward and I do feel that many people see my as a weirdo. Second, when I do meet someone I would really like to be friends with, I start to feel intimidated by them. I am a little insecure about myself and I am constantly feeling rejected and that no one likes me.
But this year I want to stop feeling that way and make a new friend or two. If anyone has any advice whether personal (stuff you have observed about me) or general, please feel free to communicate it to me. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)