Dr. Laura, America's #1 Relationship Talk Radio Host
On: SiriusXM Stars Channel 109
Call 1-800-DR LAURA (1-800-375-2872) 11am - 2pm PT
Image 01 Image 02
Politics
05/13/2010
IconI'm all for feminists...in their place, of course (which clearly isn't in the kitchen; but I digress)Instead of marching in public to make sure that babies born even up to, but not including, their heads can be killed (also known as late term abortion), and that minors can abort their babies without mommy and daddy knowing, and demanding that the world provide day-care so that all mothers can dump their kids into the arms of hired help, and also that unmarried women can adopt babies in spite of the need of children for a daddy...how 'bout having these well- meaning activists go to Afghanistan and protect girls whose only wish is to go to school and be educated so they can participate in their society?'As reported by the Associated Press - and not for the first time - Taliban men on motorcycles attacked 15 girls on their way to school and squirted their faces with acid. The next morning, no girls showed up at school in Kandahar's Mirawais Mena girls' school.Arsonists have repeatedly attacked girls' schools and gunmen kill students.' UNICEF says there were 236 school-related attacks in Afghanistan in 2007.Activism is an important quality of people motivated with a mission to preserve and protect innocents.' Feminists go after fetuses...let them instead go after the Taliban.' I think it would make a huge statement and impact to have American women locked and loaded and protecting these young women who strive for the basic right to an education.If America's feminists would commit to such missions, I would respect and support them wholeheartedly. More >>

Tags: PoliticsSAHM stay at home momSocial IssuesValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconThe great state of Nebraska was the last state of the union to sign what became the most comprehensive child safe haven law in America.' In most states, the law specifies that an infant can be left at a "safe-haven" - usually meaning a hospital or a fire department...somewhere the child will get immediate attention - without the parent having to suffer any legal ramifications.' Since the law took effect in July, some twenty-three children have been brought to safe-havens...some across state lines.Obviously, this idea came about as a means of saving lives.' The thought was that now people who might toss their babies into dumpsters or abuse them would have the opportunity to save their lives by putting them in the care of responsible people.' From here, appropriate child care would be found through adoptions or the care of appropriate and willing relatives.' I always thought this was a great idea.I had fits hearing criticism that this is abandonment or passing on responsibility.' Children in the hands of parents addicted to drugs or alcohol, suffering from various mental illnesses and overwhelmed, barely functional and generally desperate, or simply unwilling are at great risk - and if even one of them has the compassion and good sense to make use of a safe-haven...then we have saved a life...not only from death...but from abuse and a childhood leading only to troubles and problems.Society is always better off when unwanted children have opportunities with adoptive families, quality foster-families, or placement with relatives who might not even have known there was a problem.' These children will have a better chance to grow up more adjusted, and that will obviously minimize bad "acting out" (sexual or criminal variety)' or substance abuse to quell emotional pain.Unfortunately, because of criticism aimed at parents who take advantage of protecting their children rather than harming them, the Governor of Nebraska, Dave Heinemen, is calling a special session of the legislature to change the state's unique safe-haven law - amending it so that it applies only to infants up to 3 days old.' I believe this is a HUGE mistake.The communications office of the Governor prepared a statement for all Nebraskans explaining his point of view. "Children from eight families have been left at hospitals under the safe haven law.' None of the children involved were infants and one was in immediate danger.' Courts are likely to require parents and guardians to participate in parenting classes, family therapy, conflict resolution or other services in an effort to reunite youth with their families." I'm delighted that the Governor points out that there are services that MIGHT...only might...eliminate the necessity for the safe-haven - but very often, parental termination might be in the best interest of children of any age.The Governor points out that safe haven laws were not designed to allow families having difficulty with older youth and teenagers to "abandon their children or responsibilities as parents." Well, some parents just can't or won't be responsible...and abandonment would be to throw them out of the house...not deliver them to people who can help.The Governor further suggests that parents considering safe-haven might turn to local health and human services offices...well, sometimes those are not as available or supportive or empowered to remedy a desperately difficult situation.While I support his concern about protecting infants in danger...they are not the only children who need such protection.I hope Nebraska keeps its child safe haven law and doesn't dilute it down to 3-day newborns. More >>

Tags: AbusecareerChild NeglectChildrenFamily/Relationships - ChildrenJobParentingPoliticsSocial IssuesValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconThe Pew Research Center tested the public's political knowledge earlier this year by asking 1) which party had the majority in the House of Representatives; 2) the name of the United States Secretary of State; and 3) who is the Prime Minister of Great Britain.The survey found that about half of Americans knew that the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives, but only 42% could identify Condoleeza Rice as Secretary of State.' Only a little over 25% of Americans could name Gordon Brown as the Prime Minister of Great Britain, and only 18% of the public answered all three questions correctly.' Got that? Fewer than 1 in 5 Americans could answer all three questions correctly! This is why candidates for leader of the free world go on television comedy shows like Saturday Night Live , The Tonight Show , and the David Letterman Show to reach the public.' Dignified presentations obviously don't make much of an impression on the electorate.It was interesting to note which groups scored the best on this survey.' In terms of getting all three questions correct, regular readers of The New Yorker and Atlantic magazines scored the highest, at 48%.' Listeners to NPR were next at 44%, followed by viewers of Hardball (43%) and Hannity & Colmes (42%).Rush Limbaugh's audience was next at 36%, followed by viewers of The O'Reilly Factor (28%), and the audiences for Larry King, CNN, and Fox News all came in at 19%.' Now here's a surprise - out of all those who got the three questions correct, 9% of them were regular readers of The National Enquirer ! More >>

Tags: PoliticsValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconWhen I was a child, I looked up with admiration, respect and even awe at the people who were in public office.' I never heard much about illegal financial activities or illicit sexual relations.' News anchors always spoke with respect about our governmental officials, and debates and opinions were offered with dignity.Here I am, at 61, hearing that if you don't vote for a black candidate that you are a racist (but you're not if you're voting for a candidate specifically because they are black).' I'm hearing feminists attack a woman Vice Presidential candidate simply because she's pro-life. I'm watching television political ads which outright lie and offend basic sensibilities, with both parties presenting people who don't really have the true knowledge and experience to be the most powerful representative of the free world.' I'm seeing a candidate with child-care issues and an out-of-wedlock teen pregnancy in her family, candidates appearing on undignified mass entertainment comedy programs to win votes, and a cacophony of television and radio commentators saying the most outrageously mean things about people they don't know personally. I'm also hearing about mass cheating in voter registrations, and a populace which seems to be relatively disinterested in facts...just emotions, looks and personality.The years of vulgar reality programs and'media free speech, unfettered by responsiblity, have dumbed us down and made us crass.' According to a recent Pew Research Center poll, only 18% of Americans know which party holds the House majority, can name the American Secretary of State, or the Prime Minister of Britain.' I find this a bit scary - and very sad. More >>

Tags: PoliticsValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
Tags: HumorPoliticsValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconEnough already with the over-reaction to the Sarah Palin cover picture on Newsweek .I first learned of this so-called serious issue watching Fox News in the morning.' One of their hosts, a gorgeous blonde, was holding up the magazine and the camera zoomed in on the cover, and I thought it was...fine.' It shows Mrs. Palin close up, with about 60% of her face exposed.' Frankly, I think it's a nice shot.'The complaints from the news hosts were that it wasn't retouched to take away the deepness of the marionette lines between nose and mouth and the slight creping around her eyes.My first reaction was, "Give me a break...that's what she looks like at her age with her facial contours.' It's real and she doesn't look bad at all - she happens to be a pretty woman."The hosts then flashed a prior Newsweek cover with Obama...at more of a distance without one obvious facial flaw and a light diffusing from the top of his head, which made him look like a moment in the movie The Ten Commandments -- the halo effect told a lot about the "messiah-like" impression that this publication was attempting to create to influence the readership.While I am not supportive of Mrs. Palin for the Vice-Presidency, as I have made clear in a previous blog , I am also not supportive of media manipulation to subliminally impact the populace to vote for the party of the media's choice.' That said, it is the Obama cover that should be criticized, not Palin's...hers is at least a real rendition of a real human being.I recently took a new set of head shots and publicity photos for an upcoming book (" In Praise of At-Home Moms ") and other promotional purposes.' When I first saw them, I just about cried.' Where did all those crow's feet, laugh lines, and creping of neck skin come from?' I work out hard most days of the week so my muscles and flexibility are amazing.' Working out and eating correctly are under my control.' Getting weekly facials to keep my skin clear and hydrated is under my control.' The changes one has through maturation (aka "aging") are not under my control.' I'm embarrassed to tell you that seeing those photos ruined my afternoon as I have never in my life before felt so womanly, sexy, and feminine!' The photos did not seem to match my inner image.The next day I looked at the photos again and - after sleeping on it and talking about it with my dearest friends - I just absolutely love them and told my business partner to make sure they were not air-brushed.' I never liked my current photos because they touched them up to remove all lines...making me, in my opinion, look absolutely bionic.' I love my new ones now because they are real and show me mature, attractive, happy, and, untouched, and make a statement about pride in oneself even with imperfections.So, to summarize, I like the Palin Newsweek photo. I disdain the liberal media's manipulations of Obama photos to further their political agenda.' And I love my new photos...you'll see 'em soon! More >>

Tags: PoliticsValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconI am watching TV news early this morning and hear that Senator McCain is suspending his campaign for President of the United States to stay in Washington, D.C. to actually do the job he's been elected to and getting a salary for.' I also hear that whether or not a plan is agreed upon to deal with the financial crisis of the United States, that Senator Obama will leave Washington D.C. early this morning to continue his campaign for President.After talking to one of my friends who quipped: "McCain is using this opportunity as a campaign maneuver." I said, "Hey, he's actually doing the job he's being paid for." I am always impressed when a politician takes personal responsibility to actually do their job.Unfortunately, by noontime, Senator McCain apparently had decided that he had completed the job and decided to call it a day and head off to join Senator Obama for a long weekend of campaigning.What other job is there in the known universe where you can get elected, have a nice title, get paid a really good salary, have fabulous job security for two to six years, and then spend most of your time working towards another job?' Only the job in Congress!' We have Senators from Arizona and Illinois who are spending just about every waking hour vying for the Oval Office, and a Governor from Alaska together with a Senator from Delaware who are trying to get second dibs on Air Force One.I, for one, believe that they all should have resigned to run for further office, and left the support of their constituents to someone who's doing the job full time. More >>

Tags: Personal ResponsibilityPoliticsValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconBarack Obama and Joseph Biden are both fishing for the women's vote - especially disenchanted Hillary Clinton feminists.' Biden has insisted that Republicans, including Sarah Palin, represent a step backwards for women.'But when you look at the labor market data from the Census Bureau (as Professor Casey Mulligan of the University of Chicago has in a new study), to figure out " the amount and reasons for women's progress in the labor market since the 1960s" something very interesting is revealed. (Wall Street Journal 9/12/08). In 1988, the last full year of Republican Ronald Reagan's administration, wage growth for women working full-time throughout the year improved by 8.3% from the end of the Democratic administration of Jimmy Carter. "Johnson, Carter, and Clinton were all Democrats, yet none of them witnessed much labor-market progress for women during their administrations:' eight years of Reagan, four years of George H.W. Bush, and six years of George W. Bush." The Nixon-Ford administrations were the only Republican administrations that didn't make it to this list of forward momentum for women.'In the Quarterly Journal of Economics , August, 2008, Professor Mulligan and Yona Rubenstein (from Brown University) calculated the statistics that showed women's annual wage growth relative to men's:'Under Republican administrations, women's annual wage growth relative to men was .0.87% under George W. Bush, 1.4% under George H.W. Bush, and 1.6% under Ronald Reagon.' Under Democratic administrations, women fared less well.' Their annual wage growth relative to men was 0.21% under Bill Clinton, 0.04% under Jimmy Carter, and minus 1% under Lyndon Johnson.'I like that color lipstick, especially if the kids are grown or Daddy is home with the kidlets. More >>

Tags: BudgetFeminismFinancesPoliticsSocial Issues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconI am extremely disappointed in the choice of Sarah Palin as the Vice Presidential candidate of the Republican Party.' I will still vote for Senator McCain, because I am very concerned about having a fundamental leftist, especially one who is a marvelous orator, as President.At first, I thought it amusing that McCain picked a pretty, smart, and tough female to counter the racist/sexist accusations going back and forth between parties.' I remember how Oprah Winfrey got caught in the cross-fire as she stepped up to the political table to support Obama with pride that a black man could rise to such heights in the USA, only to get slammed by feminists who told her it was gender, not race, that she should back.' Understandably, Ms. Winfrey pulled back from it all.Forget gender and race.' I'm frankly and sadly caught in the dilemma of having to balance policy versus example in touting a candidate for the office of the First Family.' I was ferociously attacked (what's new?) when I spoke out strongly against Bill Clinton's dalliances in the Oval Office.' That situation quickly turned into a debate whether "private has anything to do with public."' Nonsense.' Role models are very important.' Children and young adults look to those who are visible and successful as a road map of what is acceptable behavior and emulate those actions over the morals and values their parents and churches have taught and tried to reinforce.' It's a tough go these days, when the "bad that men or women do" is used for entertainment purposes without judgment, or is excused because of political or financial considerations.I'm stunned - couldn't the Republican Party find one competent female with adult children to run for Vice President with McCain?'' I realize his advisors probably didn't want a "mature" woman, as the Democrats keep harping on his age.' But really, what kind of role model is a woman whose fifth child was recently born with a serious issue, Down Syndrome, and then goes back to the job of Governor within days of the birth?I am haunted by the family pictures of the Palins during political photo-ops, showing the eldest daughter, now pregnant with her own child, cuddling the family's newborn.' When Mom and Dad both work full-time (no matter how many folks get involved with the children), it becomes a somewhat chaotic situation.' Certainly, if a child becomes ill and is rushed to the hospital, and you're on the hotline with both Israel and Iran as nuclear tempers are flaring, where's your attention going to be?' Where should your attention be?' Well, once you put your hand on the Bible and make that oath, your attention has to be with the government of the United States of America.I am positively moved that neither Sarah nor her daughter were willing to terminate the lives of their unborn children.' This is in sharp contrast to Obama's statement that "When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is education, which should include...which should include abstinence education and teaching children...teaching children, you know, that sex is not something casual.' But it should also include - it should also include other, you know, information about contraception, because, look, I've got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old.' I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals.' But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." (March, 2008) So, one Vice Presidential candidate and her daughter demonstrate, under conditions of great stress, that babies are valued human beings, not punishment.' However, that same VP candidate came forth in April of 2008 with a proclamation for "Family Child Care Week," in which she wrote: "These professionals are positive role models for the children they care for and the communities they serve." Clearly, Palin sees the need for positive role models.' I suggest that they be Mommy and Daddy, and not the hired help.Child-care facilities are a necessity when mothers and fathers (when they exist at all) are unwilling or incapable of caring for their offspring.' Unfortunately, they have become a mainstay of the feminista mentality that nothing should stand in the way of a woman's ambition - nothing, including her family.Any full-time working wife and mother knows that the family takes the short end of the stick.' Marriages and the welfare of children suffer when a stressed-out mother doesn't have time to be a woman, a wife, and a hands-on Mommy. More >>

Tags: Family/Relationships - ChildrenMotherhoodMotherhood-FatherhoodParentingPoliticsSocial Issues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconWhile the terrorist groups Hamas and Fatah fight for dominance in the Palestinian regions, one of their means of demoralizing each other actually concerns the issue of facial hair. The Jerusalem Post reports that Hamas has resumed its policy of shaving the mustaches of rival Fatah members to humiliate them as a form of punishment in its struggle to assert dominance over Palestinian politics.In response, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades issued a statement strongly condemning the use of shaving as punishment.'I can only imagine the uproar and the blogosphere going crazy if it had been American military who shaved a jihadist's mustache in order to get valued information. More >>

Tags: MilitaryPoliticsValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
Stay Connected
or connect at a place below
Normal Gear
Latest Poll
Do you believe a spouse has the right to know if there is any unfaithfulness in the marriage?
Yes
No
Not sure
Archives  |  Results
Programs
About Dr. Laura
Letters
E-mail of the Day
From Listeners
Audio & Video
YouTube Videos
Stay at Home
Parenting
Relationships
Simple Savings
Work at Home
Tip of the Week
Subscription
Membership
Help & Support
Family Premium Help Center
Podcast Help
Contact Us
Legal
Terms of Use
© 2014 DrLaura.com. Take on the Day, LLC
Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Powered By Nox Solutions