What will President Obama focus on in his State of the Union address tonight? We'll talk about what's on the agenda. We'll also consider online matching of non-romantic co-parents and discuss the disparity between men's and women's profanity use. Later, we'll examine the fight for businesses between Texas and California and examine the California Highway Patrol's new guidelines for lane-splitting motorcyclists. All that and more, today on AirTalk.
Nation, what do you want to hear from the President tonight?
In his first State of the Union address since his re-election, President Barack Obama is expected to focus on domestic concerns -- jobs, the economy and education. On the foreign front, early leaks of the speech this morning indicate he will call for the next phase of troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. Reportedly, 34,000 U.S. troops will return within a year -- cutting the American presence on the ground by half, according to the Associated Press.
In the audience tonight will be primarily Congress, of course, but many special invited guests will be victims affected by gun violence in recent months. Across the aisle, an invited guest of a Texas lawmaker is outspoken gun rights activist and musician, Ted Nugent. Other players to watch will be Marco Rubio, providing the official response of the Republican Party; and in what's being described as a "rebuttal-rebuttal," Congressman Rand Paul will provide the Tea Party response.
Which one represents the face of the GOP future? How will Rand Paul's presence affect Rubio's response, and vice versa? Will Obama say much that he hasn't said before about building the economy?
Guests:
Josh Gerstein, White House Reporter, POLITICO
Sean Sullivan, Political Reporter, The Washington Post - writes for its The Fix column
The new modern family includes non-romantic co-parents
Love, marriage and a baby carriage - that’s the traditional picture of starting a family. But what if Mr. or Ms. Right never appears? Is there a non-traditional option for prospective parents?
People looking for a non-romantic partner with whom to raise a child have been taking their search online. Websites geared towards matching people in co-parenting arrangements attract people looking for parenting partners as well as those who would like to get to know their sperm donor better than they could at a sperm bank. Many users of sites like Modafamily.com and Family By Design say that searching for a non-romantic co-parent gave them the opportunity to more thoroughly consider the process of child rearing and to strategize with their partner, something that traditional couples may do less frequently.
But what are the complications of finding a non-romantic co-paren online? The legal implications vary state by state. In co-parenting situations without legal documentation, potential custody battles could be hard to negotiate.
As ideas of what constitutes a “traditional” family change and expand to include divorced couples, same-sex partners, and step-parents, are non-romantic parenting matches another sign of the times? Is it a given that parents should be romantically involved? What are the legal pitfalls of entering into a co-parenting arrangement?
Guests:
Darren Spedale, founder of FamilybyDesign.com
Jennifer Lahl, president of the Center for Bioethics and Culture in the Bay Area. Jennifer is a former pediatric nurse (25 years), and she’s of the opinion that “co-parenting” is a form of experimenting on children to satisfy our own personal needs. She’s also in production on a documentary film about surrogacy.
Diane Goodman, attorney and past president of the Academy of Family Formation Lawyers, based in Encino
The relationship between gender and profanity
Last week, young women at a New Jersey Catholic school have taken a vow to clean up their language. At the request of the high school’s officials, the female students signed a “no cursing” pledge, but the male students are exempt. “We want the ladies to act like ladies,” a teacher told the local newspaper.
There are obviously stereotypes when it comes to gender and the use of language, and profanity is no different. Think of how you react when you hear a man swear, and then how you feel when you see a woman utter the same words. Does it affect you differently? Are there some curse words that are seen as female and some as male? How to the two sexes use profanity when in each other’s company? There’s also a generational aspect. While ladies used to be prim and proper, if you wander around a highschool or college campus today, you’ll hear the women dish out four-letter words just as much as the men.
So why the distinction between genders? How often do women swear compared to men? And are they judged differently for it? Do you swear more than most other women? Or are you a man who doesn’t like to curse? Call in to AirTalk and let us know. Oh, and watch your language.
Guest:
Michael Adams, Associate Professor of English Language and Literature at Indiana University in Bloomington
Will Governor Rick Perry's southern charm lure California business?
Texas Governor Rick Perry is in Los Angeles and Orange County this week trying to tempt California businesses to the lone star state. Yesterday, Perry told the San Jose Mercury-News that Austin, Texas is set to be the "next Silicon Valley." He said high taxes and strict regulation in California are stifling growth.
Last week, Governor Jerry Brown dismissed radio ads featuring Rick Perry making similar claims. "Who would want to spend their summers in 110-degree heat inside some kind of a fossil-fueled air conditioner? Not a smart way to go," Brown retorted. Brown also cited an increase in California jobs.
Which state is better for business? Which state is better for employees? Is California stifling entrepreneurship and innovation? Are you tempted by Texas?
Guests:
Chuck DeVore, Vice President of Policy, Texas Public Policy Foundation; Former California State Assemblyman (2004-2010) representing coastal Orange County, including cities of Irvine, Newport Beach, and Laguna Beach
Carl Guardino, CEO, Silicon Valley Leadership Group
California releases new rules for motorcycle lane-splitting
Have you ever been driving peacefully, only to be startled by a motorcycle zipping past your car between the lanes? You probably shake your head and think to yourself that such maneuvering must be illegal. Well, in California, that’s not the case. Lane-splitting is allowed in California, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t without controversy.
A recent study from the Office of Traffic Safety indicates that a mere 53% of Californians are aware the practice is legal. That means nearly half of the drivers on the road suspect lane-splitting to be unlawful, and some of these people even go out of their way to block the practice when they see it coming.
The ignorance is partly to blame on a lack of aggressively alerting the public, but also to the fact that no other state allows lane-splitting on its roads.
The new rules stress that motorcyclists can only split lanes as long as they don’t exceed ten miles per hour faster than the cars they are driving between, and said cars must be going less than 30 miles per hour. Reaction by motorcyclists is mixed. Some are glad to finally have some restrictions in place, so that there are now stated parameters for being pulled over my law enforcement. But others worry that this may be the beginning of the end, and that a complete ban on lane-splitting is soon to come.
Are you a motorcyclist? How do you feel about these rules? Have you ever had any encounters with lane-splitting as a driver? Should motorists be more aware of cyclists when they’re driving, or is the road no place for such risky behavior?
Guests:
Gabe Ets-Hokin, Editor in Chief of CityBike magazine, based in Oakland
Robert Gladden, Vice President of the Motorcycle Safety Foundation in Irvine, CA
‘Going to Tehran’ says U.S. opinion about Iran is based on myth
Iran is not trying to build nuclear weapons, the majority of Iranians support the Iranian republic and Iran is not on the verge of collapse– says Flynt and Hillary Leverett. The Leveretts cite their resumes to qualify such big statements. Both have served at the National Security Council, the State Department and as foreign policy analysts in the Clinton and Bush administrations. They have spoken extensively on U.S.-Iranian relations, and in their new book, “Going to Tehran: Why the United States must Come to Terms with the Islamic Republic of Iran,” they hope to dispel “myths” about Iran and change 30 years of foreign policy of sanctions, isolation and attempted regime change.
They believe that Iran is open to improved U.S.-Iranian relations but that the U.S. needs to recognize the Islamic Republic as a legitimate political order. However, if the U.S. refuses to do so, then the Leveretts predict the United States will lose its position in the Middle East and the world.
Are the Leveretts right? Why does this belief go against public opinion about Iran?
Guests:
Flynt Leverett, Co-Author, “Going to Tehran;” Professor of International Affairs and Law at Penn State; formerly served at the National Security Council, State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency
Hillary Mann Leverett, Co-Author, “Going to Tehran;” Lecturer, American University; formerly served at the National Security Council and State Department; and has conducted negotiations for the U.S. government with Iranian officials
Breaking: Christopher Dorner reportedly engaged in shootout with police in Big Bear
News broke in the middle of the show today that ex-LAPD fugitive Christopher Dorner was reportedly engaged in a shootout with police.
Follow our developing news story here.
View more videos at: http://nbclosangeles.com.
Guests:
Cindy Bachman, San Bernardino Country Sheriff's Department spokeswoman
Jay Obernolte, Big Bear Lake Mayor Jay Obernolte
John Miller, The U.S. Forest Service
Ben Bergman, KPCC Reporter
Erika Aguilar, KPCC Reporter