The US mainstream media is not doing its job – Medea Benjamin

Photo: EPA

00:00

Mute

Obama’s lies on Guantanamo are hurting people worldwide. For the families of the human beings held without trial or charge indefinitely it is an agony to hear Obama promise to close the illegal prison and then get their hopes up only to be dashed again and again. The US corporate/government controlled media is not helping bring an end to the situation and even reports of the hunger strike that continues is not talked about in the US media. According to the founder and director of CodePink Medea Benjamin, most Americans do not even know the illegal prison is still open. In an interview with the Voice of Russia’s John Robles, Ms. Benjamin retells the story of the 12-year-old daughter of Shaker Aamer, who has never seen her father, and who finally was able to talk to him through the Red Cross, only to see he was too weak to even pick up his head because of the ongoing hunger strike. Ms. Benjamin says the lawyers are enraged at Obama but he gets away with whatever he wants because the US mainstream media is complicit in the illegal policies of the Obama Administration.

Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Medea Benjamin, the co-founder and manager of Code Pink. This is part 2 of an interview in progress.

PART 1

Benjamin: So Obama has less of an excuse than he had before to keep these prisoners in indefinite detention.

So I think it is a question of will he… (every excuse is starting to be peeled away) … will he really do something about this?

And I think the prisoners are sick and tired of hearing Obama say he is going to close Guantanamo, certainly what they need after all these years now is action, not words.

Robles: Yeah right! Your personal opinion, do you think he is going to do something or..?

Benjamin: I think he does want to start releasing more of these prisoners, I think he has boxed himself in, in the case of the Yemenis, the 56 Yemenis, because he had previously declared self-imposed moratorium on sending people back to Yemen. He lifted that himself.

But he has now shone of spotlight that the Republicans and others can really focus on to say Yemen is unstable, they need a rehabilitation center and it is going to take time to get that running and all kinds of things that will get in the way of a release. So I think that is a situation that he himself created it is going to be difficult to get out of.

But then there are over 20 other prisoners from other countries that could easily be released. We talked about the case of Shaker Aamer, but he is not the only one.

And then there are the countries that said that they would take other prisoners. Kuwait has its own rehabilitation center, Saudi Arabia has its rehabilitation center, there are plenty of places to send people.

So the excuses are quite threadbare at this point. I unfortunately think Obama will not be quick in doing the right thing in the year to come.

Robles: I see. There were demonstrations, I don't know if we discussed this, on the news wires a couple hours ago that there were huge demonstrations in Yemen outside the US embassy. So people there are aware, apparently there was no violence or anything. I guess that was good. And also..

Benjamin: Yes we... I'm sorry.

Robles: Go ahead, please.

Benjamin: We have been in touch with the families in Yemen, in fact we went and visited with some of them in June of last year and heard the agonizing stories of these families and the way that they would get their hopes up when their lawyers would give them news of things like they have been put on a list of cleared for release. But then their hopes have constantly been dashed.

And just like we talked about Shaker Aamer having a child that he has never met, so we met with a 12-year old girl who had never seen her father. She has been born while her father was in prison and she said that her father at that time was on a hunger strike and that he was so weak when he had a chance through the Red Cross to have a video conference with him, he could not even pick up his head.

So we heard these very agonizing stories, we continue to be in touch with the organizations in Yemen that work with these prisoners' families as well as the Human Rights Ministry in Yemen, the Minister herself is very outraged that these prisoners have not been released. And we knew they were having a demonstration today as we were having ours here in Washington DC and there were other demonstrations in the US. So it was good to be in solidarity together.

Robles: That is wonderful. Do you have anything big coming up that we should be looking out for?

Benjamin: Well, we have a lot of things that we are doing as Code Pink we are on our way to Geneva next week when the peace talks around Syria are supposed to happen.

We are there with women that are coming from different parts of the world, mostly from war-torn countries to be calling for a cease-fire and end to all from all sides being sent to the warring parties and to be calling for women to have a voice at the peace table.

We are also planning in March to have a trip to Gaza for International Women's Day, that is March, 8 to have women from different countries around the world saying:' It's time to break the siege of Gaza, the conditions there are so terrible'.

We will continue to do our efforts around the prisoners in Guantanamo as well as people who have been whistleblowers in the US giving support to Chelsea Manning, to Edward Snowden. We are doing work to try to counter the NSA spying. And then Iran and the terrible legislation that Congress is trying to pass in the Senate that would increase the sanctions against Iran just as negotiations that are taking place. So we are trying to stop that from happening. So we have a full plate in a coming month.

Robles: I see. Can I ask you about your Geneva protest?

Benjamin: We really are not doing a protest, we are actually in favor of the peace talks. But we are there to be a voice and a presence, we don't want to take any sides. We are just saying that the fighting is hurting the civilian population, that there is no military solution to this.

This is coming from a position, the reason that Code Pink is going there, is that we were very active in trying to stop the US government from getting involved militarily in Syria. And we felt very proud that we were able to stop our government from doing that, yet on the other hand to see the agony that the Syrian people are going through it doesn't seem enough to say:' We are glad, we didn't get involved militarily'.

We have to do more than that. And I think certainly we want to be calling for more humanitarian aid, for open corridors for that aid to get through. But the main thing is to say, the world has to stand up and say: 'Let's put an end in the fighting'.

Robles: Definitely. I don't know if you are aware, right now, currently as we speak, right now Al Qaeda affiliated groups are battling each other there. I mean, it is complete insanity.

Benjamin: Well, yes. I mean, the level of..I've read that there is over 1,000 armed groups in Syria right now. I mean, this is just insane.

So anybody who thinks that there is a military solution is just not watching how much splintering has gone on and how much suffering for the civilian population, the millions of refugees, the people who are internally displaced.

There has really got to be a cease-fire.

Robles: Really, really. Most of the world I think agrees 100% on that. I want to ask you regarding Guantanamo. Have you seen any movement, or whispers, or anything, amongst the lawyers or anyone regarding a possible boycott of all proceedings at that location?

Benjamin: I'm not close enough to the lawyers to know that. But I can say that there were several lawyers out on the streets with us today in the pouring rain and the cold in Washington DC in front of the White House and then the march that we had and they were just unbelievably angry.

They just could not believe what Obama has been doing, the lies they have been said in terms of things supposedly changing, the violations. And it is very interesting to see these lawyers, some of whom come from prestigious law firms that were very supportive of the Obama Administration, and to see how angry they have become.

One thing we did today which was quite profound is that we had a march that went from the White House to the National Museum of American History. And inside we set up displays of people in orange jumpsuits with hoods over their heads and signs attesting to the violation of the US Constitution.

And at first the security in the museum wanted to arrest people, throw them out and then decided no, that they were going to let this exhibit stand and so for hours we were inside the museum giving all of the visitors not only a visual but an oral discussion of how the US is violating its own constitution.

And yes, President Obama, “the constitutional lawyer” and of course “the Nobel Peace Prize winner” should have a hard time sleeping at night knowing that thanks to him these men remain in indefinite detention in the US GULAG.

Robles: I don't think he does. I mean, when I saw him laughing… laughing it up, at Nelson Mandela's funeral, any humanistic ideas I had about Obama were completely out the window, but anyway...

Benjamin: Politics is dirty and he has gotten down in the dogs and you are right probably he doesn't think very much about it when he goes to bed at night.

Robles: So, Medea, how do you do that? I mean, you put that display up there in the museum and it seems… I’ve got to hand it you sometimes you pull off some things that nobody else can. What is your secret?

Benjamin: Well, this was a coalition of groups led by a group called Witness Against Torture that is namely people from a faith-based background and there were about 60 people who are willing to get arrested in the museum if that was the way things were going to evolve.

But luckily they didn't and I think it was very beautiful to be in there and to be singing and chanting with the message 'Make Guantanamo history', so in the Museum of American History to be saying: 'Let's not just look at these rooms full of, depictions of the US Revolutionary War, the Civil War, other things throughout the history. Let's look at what we are doing right now. And how this is going to go down in history as such a shameful mark on the US.

Robles: They will have to open up an exhibit 'The Hall of Shame' or something..

Benjamin: That is right, but I don't think it is going to happen because even in the exhibit that I poked into today looking at the depiction of the War in Vietnam, it was not a very clear one talking about the use of Agent Orange, the killing of 2 million Vietnamese, the reall shame of that war.

So there is a lot of our history that is hidden from the American public.

Robles: I see. Medea, have you had… (I just want to ask you one last question if I could and anything you would like to say, please go ahead) …have you had any experience with media being more inaccessible than say it was a year ago in the US?

Have you seen anything like that going on? I mean stricter control on the media, more people being, basically shut up.

Benjamin: Are you talking about in relationship to Guantanamo?

Robles: In general, with the Snowden revelations, with Guantanamo, with government secrecy. I mean, are they winning are they losing? Are things getting out the way they were a year ago? What is the situation with media access, etc?

Benjamin: I really can’t answer that what I can say is from my own experience, in that, a lot of the times that we have had actions like the one we had today we used to get mainstream media that would cover them. We used to have CNN there, MSNBC would come there and these days we don't get any mainstream US media.

The media that we get is Russia Today, maybe we would get Al Jazeera, maybe we would get TV from Europe, from Japan, but the US media tends to ignore what the activists are doing, tends to ignore a lot of these key issues that are so damming of US foreign policy.

So unfortunately I think we have a media that is obviously under corporate control and has also been cutting back on the funding of reporters and so we have fewer and fewer reporters especially on weekends.

And it means that there is not a lot of information through the mainstream channels that can educate the American people and just to circle back to the issue of Guantanamo I would think that if there would be a poll done that most Americans wouldn't even know that we still have people in Guantanamo. They probably think everybody there was let go, it has been shut down or if they thought that anybody was left it is because they have been tried and convicted and happened to be the worst of the worst which is not true at all.

So, unfortunately I think that a lot of the reasons that the Administration can get away with policies like this is because the US mainstream media has not been doing its job.

Robles: Oh boy. And that is a problem, that is not going to be corrected any time soon as far as I know. What do you think?

Benjamin: No but thank goodness we do have alternative kinds of media from other countries and people who are anxious to get information from other sources, at least have that opportunity.

So let's hope more and more people start searching for that and it perhaps will even shame the mainstream media to start covering more of these things.

Robles: Yeah, sure, right. Let's hope they don't take the Internet away from us. What do you think?

Benjamin: Yeah, I think we have a huge movement on our hands to try to stop that from happening but it is very scary to see not only the NSA spying but in general the government and corporate control of more and more of our lives.

But thank you for the work that you are doing and for this interview and I'm actually optimistic that in 2014 we can fight back against these policies and take back some of the freedoms that we've lost in the past years.

Robles: I hope so. I've gotten some rumblings that big changes are coming up, hopefully they will be for the best.

Listen, you're going to be in Geneva, I'm sorry, what date?

Benjamin: We are going to be there from January 20 to January 24.

Robles: If people want to support you or take part or learn more about your activities where should they go?

Benjamin: They should go to our website which is codepink.org and the summit that we are having the Women’s Summit the day before the official talks start, we will be live-streaming and you can find all that information on our website.

Robles: Of course this is not only for women, you welcome men into your activities, right?

Benjamin: We welcome men into all of our activities, the summit I'm talking about is a summit for women to speak but everybody is invited to be part of it.

Robles: Ok, I'm just making sure so nobody is scared off or anything. One more time, that will be January..

US journalists call for media shield laws to protect information sources

© Flickr.com/richardmasoner/cc-by-sa 3.0

US journalists are forced to reveal their sources of information they relied on in a variety of stories, they have even been issued subpoenas in recent months. All these actions inspire media personnel and political pundits to call for more comprehensive media shield laws.

US Senators are trying to force a bill demanding to reveal source of information. In September 2013 the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the Free Flow of Information Act (FFIA), a bill that would prohibit federal agencies, prosecutors, and litigants from threatening reporters with prison time if they refuse to turn over their sources’ identities. The bill is awaiting a full vote in the Senate.

There have been numerous cases when journalists were threatened with arrests if they refuse to reveal their sources. For instance, a Fox News reporter was threatened with jail time if she did not reveal the source of a tip on the Aurora, Colorado shooting case. Or in December, lawyers in New York City subpoenaed documents and tape recordings from a journalist Graham Rayman, a Village Voice reporter, who covered a police department whistleblower. More recently, in January, attorneys for Trenton, New Jersey Mayor Tony Mack sought force Alex Zdan of the Trenton Times to provide information about a co-defendant in a corruption case against Mayor Mack. That co-defendant told Zdan he had bribed the mayor with $8,000 in cash.

With all these cases, activists and political pundits are calling for media shield laws to protect journalists’ sources, as the current situation in the US media landscape threatens to exclude independent journalists at all.

US journalists are traditionally permitted to print any information they choose if it is accurate, with potentially controversial facts often attributed to a source. But with the new laws and lack of media shield, American journalist will be compelled to turn over their source or otherwise face jail time.

Snowden’s leaks: Are journalists ‘fencing stolen material’?

Gary Cameron/Reuters - U.S. FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, Director of U.S. National Intelligence James Clapper, Defense Intelligence Agency director Army Lt. General Michael Flynn, and National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen appear Tuesday before the House Intelligence Committee on “Worldwide Threats.”

• 
  

By Paul Farhi, Wednesday, February 5, 6:22 AM E-mail the writer

It’s against the law to steal classified government material. But is it also a crime for a journalist to sell a story to a newspaper or Web site based on that material?

Some elected officials and government appointees have suggested the answer is yes in the wake of Edward Snowden’s release of secret documents showing the extent of the National Security Agency’s surveillance activities. Since June, Snowden’s documents have been the basis of articles primarily by Glenn Greenwald, formerly of the Guardian newspaper, and Barton Gellman, a journalist working on contract for The Washington Post.

 

While experts in media law say the stolen-goods theory has a questionable legal basis, the idea was floated on Tuesday by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., both critics of Snowden.

In an exchange with FBI Director James B. Comey, who was a witness in a hearing about “Worldwide Threats,” Rogers pushed Comey about whether selling “access” to classified material to newspapers or another publication amounts to “fencing stolen material” and should be prosecuted.

Comey said that selling stolen goods, such as jewelry, is indeed a crime. But he stopped short of saying it would be a crime if it involved selling a story.

That answer didn’t deter Rogers, who drilled in. Without mentioning Greenwald or Gellman by name, he asked Comey, “So if I’m a newspaper reporter for — fill in the blank — and I sell stolen material, is that legal because I’m a newspaper reporter?”

Comey, a former No. 2 at the Justice Department, replied that this was “a harder question” because the First Amendment might protect reporters and publishers. He demurred, saying Rogers should ask the Justice Department.

Rogers obliquely referred to the reporters working with Snowden as “accomplices” — the same word Clapper used in separate testimony on Tuesday and last week during a Senate hearing in which he called on Snowden and those possessing NSA documents to return them.

In interviews Tuesday, Greenwald, a journalist and lawyer, and Martin Baron, the editor of The Post, both said Rogers and Clapper’s characterizations “criminalize” the act of being a journalist. By extension, said Greenwald, their comments implicate any news organization that publishes or broadcasts information based on NSA documents.

“You have to be concerned when a member of Congress is framing the issue this way,” said Baron. “It leaves the suggestion that legitimate news reporting is tantamount to a criminal act. It’s not and shouldn’t be characterized that way.”

Despite many prosecutions involving the leak of classified material, no journalist or news organization has ever been tried on a “stolen goods” theory, said Lucy Dalglish, the former executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, which monitors First Amendment issues.

The closest parallel was the espionage scandal involving a former Defense Department employee, Lawrence Franklin, who passed classified documents regarding U.S. policy toward Iran and Israel to two employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The employees, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, were later indicted on charges of conspiracy to disclose classified information, but the case against them was dismissed in 2009.

The case is analogous to news reporting because Rosen and Weissman were merely middle men in the dissemination of classified documents, much as journalists are, said Dalglish, who is now dean of the University of Maryland’s journalism school.

Nevertheless, Greenwald said Rogers and Clapper were “trying to mainstream the idea that journalists can be intimidated. This is a very concerted effort on the part of the government to create a climate where [journalists] constantly feel threatened and where at any moment the power of the state will be brought down on you.” He added, “I will continue being super-aggressive in my reporting.”

In October, the head of the National Security Agency, Gen. Keith B. Alexander, called on journalists to stop “selling” NSA documents, although he stopped short of saying that doing so was a criminal act.

'Alone Yet Not Alone' Actress Views Oscar Controversy Over Best Song as Faith-Filled Opportunity (INTERVIEW)

BY ALEX MURASHKO , CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER

February 4, 2014|

(PHOTO: JENN GOTZON FACEBOOK PAGE)

Scene from "Alone Yet Not Alone," which recently became embroiled in some controversy over the Academy first nominating the title song for Best Song and then pulling the choice. Actress Jenn Gotzon, seen with two children above, says the controversy can serve as a way that more people can see the film and hear the song than before the song's removal from nominations, [FILE].

One of the primary actors of "Alone Yet Not Alone" says she doesn't blame the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences for taking back its nomination of the movie's title song for the Best Song award. Though it was a huge disappointment for her, the rescindment is now a source of encouragement as she believes that more people will hear the song and see the film than ever before.

"We are human and people face feeling isolated and alone – and that's the neatest thing that I think is happening as the result of the Oscar [nomination] being rescinded, is that if people can hear this song that never would have thought of it or heard of it and all of a sudden they are comforted in their own soul that they really aren't alone," Jenn Gotzon, who plays Lydia in the film, told The Christian Post on Monday.

The Academy first nominated "Alone Yet Not Alone" for best song then revoked its nomination two weeks later, saying that song creator Bruce Broughton improperly emailed "members of the branch to make them aware of his submission during the nominations voting period." Originally, the nomination had been controversial among Hollywood insiders because "Alone Yet Not Alone" earned just $134,000 in its 21-day run and Broughton is a former governor and current music branch executive committee member, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

Since the decision by the Academy last week, several prominent people within the film industry have spoken out against the action, including Gerald Molen, Oscar-winning producer of "Schindler's List."

"Every film, director, writer, cinematographer, actor, art director, costume designer and efx house finds a way to pitch or promote their work. Many will see this decision as faith-based bigotry pure and simple," Molen says in a letter to Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences President Cheryl Boone Isaacs.

Gotzon said she doesn't see it that way. Read Gotzon's interview with CP that has been edited below.

CP: When you heard the news that the song was going to be rescinded by the Academy, what was your reaction?

Gotzon: I was heart-broken for Bruce [Broughton], for Dennis [Spiegal] because they were the creators of the song, and also for Joni Eareckson Tada, who had the most miraculous experience performing the song.

That heartbrokenness wasn't about the fact, "Oh, we're out of the Oscars," but it was about the fact of their hard work which was honored is now under suspect that they did something wrong. I was so concerned about people looking at their character at being flawed with integrity because it was so far from the truth. They are really good, honorable, honest, and well-spoken people that you just don't like to see bad things happen to good people.

CP: The Academy appears to be receiving what is a growing backlash to its action; where do you think this controversy will lead to now?

Gotzon: It may lead to two things. One, which is the obvious in front of us, it is bringing more awareness to this little movie, "Alone Yet Not Alone," and by little I don't mean small budget because it is probably one of the larger budgets in inspirational and independent film-making at $7 million dollars. But I think this is developing awareness for people to be able to look past the controversy and hear the meaning behind this song that you are "alone," but you are really not alone – meaning that in the midst of life's wilderness, all these allegories, we have hopelessness, we have addictions, we have suicidal thinking, we have bullying, we have darkness that surrounds our world, especially with Philip Seymour Hoffman just yesterday committing suicide, drug overdose, we really don't know the reasoning behind it, but this is reality, what's happening in our world behind closed doors.

Free Sign Up CP Newsletter!

 

RELATED

Oscars Criticized for Revoking Nomination of Christian Song 'Alone Yet Not Alone'

After Academy Awards Yanks His Oscar Nomination, 'Alone Yet Not Alone' Composer Says He Has Been 'Discredited,' Reputation 'Besmirched, Sullied'

Academy Awards Rescinds Christian Film's 'Best Original Song' Oscar Nomination

Christian Movie 'Alone Yet Not Alone' Receives Surprising Oscar Nomination

We are human and people face feeling isolated and alone – and that's the neatest thing that I think is happening as the result of the Oscar [nomination] being rescinded is that if people can hear this song that never would have thought of it or heard of it and all of a sudden they are comforted in their own soul that they really aren't alone. If they chose, they could reach out to God and God would reach back to them and embrace them, and hold them, and love them because that's what God is, He's a loving father, who forgives and has grace and wants to be with us and carry us through those dark times. God has given us freedom of choice. It's our choice to reach to Him.

So that's first thing that I see that's happening as the result of the Oscars, is that this song, which nobody probably ever heard of prior is getting global awareness, that maybe people's lives can really be inspired and touched, and maybe healed. How cool would that be?

The second thing that I see that's happening is it's interesting from all perspectives, from political to religious to all sides of the camp, people are looking at this for the first time, saying, "You know, this really isn't fair." Was this removed because of Christian bigotry? Why was this removed? Those are some questions and conversations people are now spawning in the media. When I look at that as a great picture, you know, there has been a movement in inspirational, uplifting films – films that have a story line that can really bring hope and love and redemption to a viewing audience.

CP: Before this controversy, you were already an advocate for inspirational and uplifting films as not only an actress in the film industry, but in your ministry and mentoring work, supporting other Christians wanting to have a career as an actor or actress. What do you recommend people do in response to the song's removal from Oscar nomination?

Gotzon: I look at it as an example of actions speak louder than words. It's so easy for the world to place judgment or hatred on a certain belief system. I think the way that we in the Church react needs to only react in love, grace, and forgiveness. Those are the only ways that we need to react. Anything else is almost contradicting to really why we were forgiven. Everyone has a choice and a decision, and the choice that the Academy made, I personally believe they made that choice in the best wisdom and intelligence that they knew how to make that decision. I do not think it was a vendetta against Bruce, I do not think it was a vendetta against Christian film, I do not think it was a vendetta against anything. I just think they were trying to be honorable and keeping the Oscars as ethically based as possible, and bravo to them.

Ken Wales, [executive] producer of the film, said this, and I love this wisdom: "The only thing this should do is to point people to go see the movie on Father's Day, when it releases in theaters across the country and people then can see this powerful story of a historical, inspirational film."

It's not really an overtly Christian film to be honest with you. If nobody knew that it had a Christian undertone to it, people would watch the movie and walk away saying this was a historical, inspirational movie about a family who loved each other, and a faith that set them free. If you look at the movies "Steel Magnolias," or "The Blind Side," or "The Help," it's right inside that same vein. In fact, I think some of those movies have more Scripture in them than "Alone Yet Not Alone." I look forward to an audience everywhere to not look at it as a Christian film, but yes, it has a good wholesome loving hope-filled message to it, but there's so much more to this story.

CP: Tell me why you think this song made such an impact on the Academy when they voted to nominate?

Gotzon: Nobody really thought that would be nominated for an Oscar, but how neat that this powerful song really just, there's an anointing on the song. I think that's why when the people heard it who were the voters, and I don't know anything about what really goes on behind the scene in the Academy, but there is an anointing on that song that you cannot argue. If you've never heard that song and you don't know anything about the relevance of it, but you know about the theme of the movie and you hear the song, there's this anointing. It is almost as if God is kissing you in your heart when you listen to it. It transcends the human soul into a place of peace and comfort. I think that's what resonated, which is why people voted. And then you hear the back story of the song and how Joni [Eareckson Tada] sung it – that's a miracle. A miracle happened over her being with 50 percent lung capacity and pushing on her diaphragm singing one line at a time.

On the Web: http://www.aloneyetnotalone.com/

26 Reasons The Life Of A Toddler Is The Only One Worth Living

The Huffington Post  | by  Jessics

MORE:

Why Being a Toddler Is the BestReasons Being a Toddler Is the BestBeing a Toddler Is the BestParents News

1. Someone pushes you in a stroller everywhere you go so your legs don't get tired.

2. If those legs do get tired, up you go!

3. You don't have to chew your food because someone will just cut it into the perfect bite size!

4. If you miss your mouth while eating, no worries. (Someone will just wipe it off later.)

5. Speaking of food... pancakes for dinner!

6. You don't have to wipe your own butt. But if you do, you're endlessly praised.

7. Someone is always planning/praying for your next nap.

8. You are the same size as a puppy, so your cuddles are PERFECT.

9. Costumes, any day, all day.

10. No shoes? No shirt? No problem.

11. If you do want shoes, someone will put them on your feet and tie them for you.

12. Bath time is about so much more than getting clean.

13. If you go a day without bathing, though... NBD.

14. You stick your hands in paint, smudge it all over some paper, and all of a sudden everyone acts like you’re Van Gogh.

15. People are always taking photos of you doing mundane things like you're a movie star.

16. You can watch your favorite movie over and over again, listen to your JAM 100 times, or have the book of your choice read as many times as you need.

17. There is never a shortage of snacks.

18. Your only real problem is breaking down Dora's last adventure.

19. Birthday parties = Face paint, arts and crafts AND CAKE.

20. You play with someone in the sandbox once and they’re your girlfriend or boyfriend. No games or mixed signals.

21. Mom and dad won’t give you what you want? Call Grandma! Works. Every. Time.

22. You never have to wait to get your questions answered. Mom's on the toilet? No prob! Ask anyway.

23. If you're sick, people will hold you and cuddle you instead of acting like they're going to catch the plague.

24. You're rewarded with stickers and lollipops for completing the smallest of tasks.

25. If you fall asleep in the car, someone will gently carry you up to your bed.

26. Footy PJs.