And the Race Goes On

Quite the Super Tuesday, eh? It was a thrill a minute for me. As a gambler and a sports fan, this election has been one of the more intriguing of the last 30 years. Both major parties find themselves with highly contested races; although the GOP appears to be much closer to sealing the deal than the Democrats.

Ah yes, poor Mittbot 08 appears to be doomed for the trash bin of history. It's a shame. He's a real treat to watch. At his speech last night he reminded me of a short-circuited robot - stammering about and twitching, that emptiness in his eyes. He was very proud of his victories in three states where he had lived. Yeah, that's great. Hey, Mitt, you know that Walter Mondale won Minnesota. Don't get too excited about the home court win. True champions win on the road, too.

I'm shocked that Mittbot didn't get more votes. After all, he had the support of such leaders as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. Where were their legions of followers? They had very strict instructions. Social conservatives were ordered by Rush and Ann to pull the lever for Mitt, NOT McCain or Huckabee. Yeah, why would social conservatives want to vote for a Baptist minister when they could support a profiteer, a man who has made his living by getting rich off of others' misfortune? I'm so confused. But there are people goose-stepping along with Rush and Ann. A caller on NPR this morning suggested that McCain's time as a POW may have been because he did something wrong. I'm not making it up. I think she's a good representative of theRush and Ann crowd.

And on the Democratic side the horse race continues. Personally I'm hoping Bill Clinton gets on another roll with his distortions and hyperbole. I love seeing the true side of the Clintons. They're trying so hard to cling to the illusion of dynasty, no matter how many people they have to alienate and marginalize. It's going to be fun to watch. And it's just beginning.

Three Months in the Storm

You would think that this political season would have led to a lot of worthless observations on my part. Well, you would be correct; I just haven't posted any of those worthless observations. I wish you could have been sitting next to me at the neighborhood tavern; it would have been so much easier.

But today, three thoughts seem to be rising to the top of the stew in my head.

#1 - From yesterday's Wall Street Journal: "Today's housing crisis is even worse, says Mr. (David) Rosenberg (a Merrill Lynch economist), and the financial crisis it has precipitated is far more severe. University of Maryland economist Carmen Reinhart and Harvard University economist Kenneth Rogoff agree. They say the current crisis appears to be at least as bad as the five most catastrophic financial crises to hit industrialized countries since World War II."
Yes, read the business papers to get the real news. I heard Sen. Edwards on NPR yesterday say "we ARE in a recession." Being the underdog does give you certain freedoms, I guess, like being blunt. The others (Clinton, Obama, Romney, and anyone holding a seat in Congress) are all still talking about a recession that MAY or MAY NOT occur. Um, hello? Is anyone in here?

#2 - What does it say about a political candidate when they are hoping for low voter-turnout because they feel it gives them a better shot at winning? I find this to be a tragic reality. This has been bothering me since I heard aids to Romney and Clinton (different aids on different days) discuss the benefits their campaigns would receive from low voter-turnout. Wow, there's something to make you stand up and salute our democracy. We already have a depressingly low turnout at the polls - though it has risen this caucus / primary season, more so on the Democratic side. Why do we need campaign staff talking about the benefits of low voter-turnout? I understand what their saying. From a purely mathematical standpoint they may be right. But those kinds of discussions only cheapen our democracy and serve to further embitter the great majority of voting-age Americans who opt out of our system. Granted, the fact that 95% of the candidates we see are corporate stoolies probably has more to do with low turnout; but trotting out political aids to discuss the benefits of low turnout certainly doesn't help the situation. So I've made the decision to never vote for someone whose campaign in any way discusses a personal gain from low turnout.

#3 - Bill Clinton's penance. Oh how the mighty have fallen. I was never a big Pres. Hillbilly fan. He accomplished some good things for the country and I enjoyed watching how he made the far right go crazy; but overall I was thoroughly nonplussed by the man. But watching him campaign on behalf of his wife disappoints me. His constant attacks on Sen. Obama and his cavalier attitude towards facts show him for the true, calculating and manipulative politician that he is. But I wonder how much of it is up to Bill. Is it really his decision to distort what Obama has recently said about Reagan and the political landscape of the last 25 years or is this his penance for liking to poke tubby chicks on days that end in "y?" It's sad, it's upsetting, and people are buying the garbage. Hell, i believed it, too, for a second. Then I took the time to read the trascripts of the interview. You know what? Obama was right.

#4 - Race and Gender in 2008. The media sure loves to make you think these are important issues in 2008 race for the White House. They are not, though, and most people know that. In my interactions with voters between the ages of 21 and 65, not a single person has mentioned Barack Obama's race or Hillary Clinton's gender as a factor in their voting decision. Come to think of it, they haven't mentioned these two things at all. But our wonderful media resources, flooded with so many political experts, beat us over the head with it and insist that we drink the kool aid. Perhaps you heard about Sen. Clinton's remarks regarding Martin Luther King, Jr - he wasn't that important in the civil rights movement, he couldn't have done it without Pres. Johnson. How dare she say that? Well, she didn't say that. What she said was actually a very clear and intelligent observation - MLK laid the foundation, built a movement, and LBJ closed the deal by doing what a president does, signing a bill into law. It was one of those deals where people came together to create change. Don't drink the kool aid, kids.

These are fun times. I'm hoping both parties go into their conventions without a clear nominee. Perhaps then we will see real interest in our democracy, even if just a sporting one.

Save Jobs, Stop Gays

This past weekend, 1200 people showed up in Des Moines to show their support of a ban on gay marraige. It was a rally in response to the recent decision of a Polk County judge - he used his years of studying and applying law to determine that the ban on gay marraige is unconstitutional; this opened a brief window of opportunity for gay couples to get marraige licenses in Polk County, IA.

So yes, 1200 people took the time to stand against gay marraige. And all I can ever do when I see displays like this is ask, "Why?" Why is this a political issue at all? And why do people pick this as the issue they most care about? If they win on this issue will neighborhoods be safer? Will more Americans have jobs? Will they have better jobs with better benefits? Will American children have health care and better schools? Will we see a decrease in violent crime? Will we see a decrease in political corruption? Will the food we eat and the water we drink be healthier and safer?

Maybe your religion tells you that gay marraige is wrong. Okay, fine. But do us all a favor; before you spend your time on things that pull us apart, let's take care of things that can bring us together as a community and a nation.

Under the Influence

Well, hell, I can't be held responsible for my disappearance. Sometimes a person just vanishes. Ever hear of Jimmy Hoffa?

What I can say is that I came through the other side of the wall without so much as a scratch. And I came through in time to check out the total lunar eclipse this morning and was rewarded for my efforts. It's hard to imagine a trip to the moon without a serious paradigm shift, eh?

And really all I wanted to tell you is that these days of malaise must certainly come to an end at some point, right? And where do they come from? There is certainly little inspiration left. How long can we discuss the stupidity of politicians, the disappointment that is modern news media, the sadness of Lindsay Lohan - wait, what? I think we covered that one already - see "modern new media."

Really, how many 100s of thousands of weapons do we need to "misplace" in Iraq before we see some consistent and organized effort to get answers. What happened to this whole idea of checks and balances in our government? How is it we are going to set up democracies around the world when we can't even manage to hold on to our own democracy?

Good lord, why did I come out of hiding?

7th Inning Stretch

We should be able to sue politicians for false advertising. It might greatly pare down the banal rhetoric we endure as voters. Someone look into that. Who's to say we can't?

Speaking of politicians, campaign season is moving along at full steam. I don't think I could swing a cat without hitting a candidate or some college student shouting slogans. I found my peace of mind thoroughly molested last week while attending an Iowa Cubs game. I went to enjoy a game of minor league baseball; but a row of College Coffee-Shop Liberals for Obama sat in the row behind me, occasionally breaking into pro-Obama chants for all the crowd to hear - essentially pissing all over my sanctuary. Please people, don't bring your fucking politics to my baseball games. I thoroughly support your freedom of speech, but timing, in ALL things, is the key to success. Don't come on so heavy. I go to a ballgame to avoid your stump speeches and sloganeering.

Some will tell me that I should relax, that it is a good thing that young people are getting involved. And I agree with the latter. It does make me happy to see the kids out there doing their part, utilizing the rights granted them by the Constitution. But the obnoxious shouting I hear at a ballgame should be centered around the game, not politics.

But they were young. And they still think that the two parties are dramatically different. They believe all the rhetoric. Most of them will believe it all of their lives, goose-stepping along with the party line.

Outside of the wedge issues of abortion and gay marriage I wonder how great a distance really seperates the leadership in our two parties? Do you suppose the decision-makers up top really want to win on those issues?

Let's just say that the Republicans finally outlaw even the thought of abortion (suppose they'd give the death penalty?) and finally get that amendment banning gay marriage. What will they do when the former mill worker in Alabama realizes that those measures did not bring his job back? And that he still does not have health care and cannot afford to send his daughter to college?

And just imagine that Democrats completely restore a woman's right to choose an abortion and ensure that gays have the right to marry. What will be left then to distract the public from their marraige to the same corporate bosses as the GOP? Will they finally be forced to truly FIGHT for universal health care? Will they really pass public financing of elections over of the objections of those big money contributors? Or will they continue to dole it all out one teaspoon at a time, forever seeking to find the middle ground?

But We The People acquiesce and go on playing their games, drowning out any real discourse with our sloganeering and mud-slinging. I think it's time we all shut our mouths for a while and pay attention to what's happening on the field.

The Ever-failing American Press

The news media has an obligation to the American people, as it is the only industry specifically protected by the Bill of Rights. I wish there was some good, deliberate way of reminding those in charge of our press outlets of this fact. They seem to have forgotten; at least when looking at their coverage of the 2008 presidential race it appears to be true.

Our "news" outlets are fond of running polls under the headline, "If the race were held today . . . " and proceed to tell us which two candidates would be representing their respective parties. Of course the main problem with this is that the race isn't being held that day; we are still more than one year away from the election. So what possible service does this "news" provide? It does nothing to inform the public about these candidates and their policies.

In the current polls of Democrats it makes sense to me that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards are leading the pack in the Democratic race for the nomination this early - they've all received national news coverage for the last several years, and in Hillary's case the last 15 years. People know the names and are therefore more likely to jump on their bandwagons earlier. But how many of those same voters truly understand where these people stand on the issues? How many of these voters are given the chance to hear about other candidates, such as Bill Richardson or Mike Gravel.

But our Constitutionally-protected press chooses to ignore the psychology of those polled and instead immediately declares it a three-person race. Why? Are the talking heads simply lazy? Are they stupid? Do they have some hidden agenda? I really don't care. The fact is that they need to be reminded of their special position in our democracy. They need to spend less time talking about polls and which candidates have the most money and therefore the "best chance to win."

The news media needs to operate on an entirely different playing field than politicians who play the game of big money and name recognition. The media must remember that their obligation is to inform the public - who is running, what are their ideas, what have they done? Leave it to the politicians to claim they are the only ones who can win because they have the most money and throw the best parties.

It's our Constitution. We are the ones who have granted special status to the press. We need to be constantly reminding them of that fact.

The Road is Hard