Get Out and Vote! Odds and Ends from a Long Campaign...

Yeah, Ive been disgusted by the self important youngsters questioning Obama's experience, or the rich folks and their tax cut concerns....like, not that they need 'em, but they just sorta like 'em!
Vote, and not just for the free coffee at Starbucks...I wonder if you have to show them your purple thumb to get that coffee...and heaven knows that some of you will no doubt have to stand in line for a long time so may need the coffee.
My thoughts are with those voters who will wait on lines, including my Mom (though she has that uncanny ability to get up really early ad be there before the line forms!)
My thoughts are also with voters who will be blindsided by questions that are misleading at best (that was, vote NO to question one in CT!!)
Bring your camera/phone/camcorder....

For your party, Bill Maher has kindly provided a party pack including a coloring map to follow along with the ice rink at Rockefeller Center, and special libation recipes to grease the wheels. Check the printout buttons and name tags...This pack is a must for every election party.

...and remember, Maron v Seder will be broadcasting live at around 9PM here. They're also on, you know, weekdays at 3PM, so tomorrow is a double!

The Seditionist blog will have a chat, which I may or may not drop in on depending on what time I get home. The link will be posted here and there.

At this point, it looks good, but I'm not counting my...well, you know...

Ben Afflek did a really funny Keith Olbermann on Saturday Night Live this past weekend...its long but pretty damned funny...if you catch nothing else, check out the special comment towards the end:



For your nervous snacking pleasure, I think its OK to finally eat those Obama heads that you've been saving in the fridge






A dutch company came up with these, and because of overwhelming interest produced the head in white as well as dark chocolate.
The McCain head only came in white chocolate...and for the life of me I cant find the link to the place that was selling them; they're obsolete anyway after tomorrow....Ill keep looking for it.






What am I gonna do with this? I guess she goes down to the shelf in the basement with the Spice Girl dolls,

and Cher...We call it "mom's collection" but I wonder if I'm ever really gonna get around to that eBay listing thing I've been planning for so many months now.














I'd like to send a big shout out to the Freeway Blogger who has managed to take blogging to the next level during this nightmare and reach more people than we could imagine. I hope that he continues his work and that his followers keep on going too...I'm seeing a bit of it around here even, so...its working as a great way to get the word out. Is it possible that we may be looking at the end of our long national nightmare...?
Good luck to us all...At some point some little bit of insight and logic has to dawn around the edges of things...right?


Great thanks to Colbert and Stewart for their part in opening some eyes out there!
And as always, Olbermann himself....

More to come...stay tuned...

c/p Brilliant at Breakfast

Connecticut's Questions and the Hidden Agenda Driving Them. No to Question #1. Jim Himes for Congress! Midnight in the land of the Flip Floppers!

I know I shouldn't rely too much on my own personal experience, because I live in this southern CT to NYC liberal bubble, and I know that the democratic party in this area doesn't really bother much with the workaday signage and campaigning; we live blue here. The big push in these parts is to have calling parties to call voters in swing states to talk with them, and its not beyond the candidates to stop in to attend high roller fund raising events in tony houses in Greenwich or Rowayton.

I'm usually happy to do the calling thing, and even happier to speak with the bunch of neighbors here who have McCain Palin signs out, because I can say that I'm their neighbor....whatever, I suppose we're all neighbors in some higher sense...but CT. swings blue, so even if we have red voters, its not a strong focus. People don't want to be called, and its so seldom that someone has a question that one can answer.

In any case, I'm troubled, as usual, that the local party hardly bothers to put out signs or rally us generally more than to ask for money and a little bit of volunteerism. Its always the same crowd running things and it smacks of the local PTA where a few alpha moms run the show. I'm still pissed that so many "dems" supported Lieberman after he jumped from the party, and that Lamont's organization was sent to a back room as if we was the independent candidate!

The McCain signs are an annoyance and an emotional drag, as things like this always are when the aggressively stupid or the just plain greedy, insist on their point of view with the bold surety that Fox News is the only network that tells the truth unvarnished. Humvee drivers who seemingly want to project an image that they perceive as being very American, but which comes off as just plain idiotic; the silly young men who drive by my bumperstickered car giving me the finger, as if their vote means anything in this county or state...the young man who last night sat around a firepit at a Halloween party up here, and said with all authority that he is just worried that Obama doesn't have the "experience," which I read as "he's black," readying himself for the vote that is not gonna serve him in his construction job and middle class life where he is unable to buy a house in the town he grew up in or even afford healthcare. These things trouble me, but its not about wining CT for the democrats; Its about the American psyche and how twisted America has become about our collective place in things.


The problem that I see right now is that Chris Shays signs that are everywhere. I believe that alot of people are voting for Shays because hes a hometown boy and pretends to be a liberal. That's, um, liberal republican, and hes really only as liberal as his BFF Joe Lieberman is a democrat! These guys are strong supporters of the Bush agenda, even now, and they really don't represent CT., so much as they represent the last bastion of cronyism that is dying a terrible wheezing death around this state.

I worked hard on the Lamont campaign to get rid of Joe Lieberman, and during that time I had the opportunity to speak with Shays at a town meeting and then on a conference call. My issue was not only with Lieberman changing parties after he lost the primary; he started his own party with the dismissive attitude that he was doing this because we didn't know what was best for our state. The whole thing boiled down to the war in Iraq; Joementum had gone to Iraq with Shays some 14 times,becoming one of the biggest defenders of Bush and his war, and he and Shays were the token liberals in the push to victory. Its well known that Joe Lieberman will do anything for the adulation of having the senate floor erupt in cheers as he returns from his fact finding missions ready to advise and instruct or from his close bid with losing his seat, only to be voted in by Ct's republicans who shunned their own candidate because Lieberman was representing them just fine!


The soft spoken Shays has some sharp claws, and skirts the issues that are important to his constituents, while hiding behind the "liberal" label. Its long past the time when Shays should have retired his seat and moved on. Diane Farrell almost unseated him two years ago, and he retained the seat by a slim margin mainly with a last minute flip flop on the Iraq war. Shays claimed that a trip just weeks before the election changed his mind; this after so many, many trips and the fantasy ideals that were put forth even as the entire country crumbled and people died needlessly.

Last week, the Stamford Advocate had a front page story in which Chris Shays threw McCain under the bus in the service of his own re-election. This is the Chris Shays that I know. He flip flops at the drop of a poll number and heaven forbid that reality ever take hold; until recently he was parroting the republican talking points about the economy. Worst though is that he boasts that CT is the first state to provide health insurance for all of its children. Well, its a horrible system with little coverage, and its not working! Having talked to him about this personally, I can say that what he does is to just deny that its true or possible that providers won't take the state insurance. Shay's modus operandi is that when he is confronted with a problem he acts like it is merely a personal problem of the questioner and he refers them to a staff member who will discuss it in private.

But this is an undeniable problem across the board in CT, so even if his staff were to take me into an office and out of the town hall, so that he could move on to other issues, they couldn't solve the problem that I have to drive 2 hours to get to a specialist for my son....or that it took us an entire year to get a surgery approved, only to have it canceled on the night before because it was suddenly denied again; oh they had approved the surgeon but not the hospital!! By the time this orthopedic surgery was performed on my son, he was the oldest, biggest kid that this surgeon had ever done this procedure on! Now we will probably lose our coverage anyway because our provider, a subsidiary of Blue Cross and Blue Shield, is opting out of the state's program, and our Dr. barely takes what we have...no one will take the alternatives. I'm looking into private insurance and its going to probably be a grand a month for a family plan if I can even find one that will take us! The issue is that the paperwork involved for a tiny reimbursement is not worth it to many doctors who have full time staff trying to deal with the bureaucratic nightmare that is this program (and unregulated health insurance in general!) I've heard lately that some doctors don't want the responsibility of prescribing drugs to children for a gross payment of maybe $19 per visit, which is much less when overhead and man hours processing the claims is taken out! The hospitals with the clinics for the poor, who have the "A" type of insurance, have a deal with the state and they also have institutional insurance and rotating doctors in clinics, so the responsibility is much less.

So, its not about my personal medical issues, as much as its about the boasting that goes on with Shays and Lieberman around this being such a great program. It's the kind of thing that might make them eligible for a task force on national health coverage in a bipartisan position...and I don't think that this plan should be used as anyone's blueprint for how health care should be taken care of in this country. What is really reprehensible is to do this experiment on children...the very poor kids who go to the hospitals tend to get OK care because they have the clinic doctors available. But we cant all go to the hospital clinic, can we? And we make too much money to be in the "A" program, so we pay a premium, which disallows us from a level of service that poorer people have...and no pediatricians or specialists are taking this insurance around lower Fairfield county anyway....so...I would very much NOT like to have the liar Chris Shays walking around Washington DC, misrepresenting what he's done here. It sucks, and along with just about everything else in this region, the move is to push the poor out and make room for more high rises (Trump has a tower going up in downtown Stamford) and mansions. And of course, foreclosures are at an unprecedented high....while Shays claimed that the economy was stable, until he just changed his mind a little while ago.

Jim Himes, who is running against Shays, is an experienced businessman who has worked successfully in business, but his most important work has been in the not for profit housing and financial support sector:

After over a decade at Goldman Sachs, Jim devoted himself full-time to pursuing business-oriented solutions to the problems of urban poverty. Jim found an ideal role with Enterprise Community Partners, where he has run their Northeast operations since 2004. Under Jim's leadership, Enterprise worked with private, public, and community organizations to address complex issues of urban poverty. At Enterprise, Jim developed an innovative program to provide tax preparation assistance and financial services to low-income families at very low cost. Jim led the way in financing the construction of thousands of affordable housing units in the greater New York and Northeast regions, often using new green technologies to achieve energy efficiency and reduce utility costs.

Himes is not a career politician and he is not steeped in the rampant cronyism that has overrun this state. He has spent years developing ways to help lower income people handle their finances and to find affordable housing. He may enter on a junior level, and I'm hearing grumbles from people who feel that he will not be able to get a foothold or be heard on anything important... But, my feeling is that we are going to see an unprecedented turnover of power and faces in this election, and granted that Shays will have to go at some point...besides that he doesn't represent what the voters of his state want, and he lies and flips whenever its convenient...and we always have Chris Dodd, who is the strongest representative that we could hope for!

Shays was so wrong about the war, and even when specialists were telling him and Joe that what they were seeing was not as it seemed, they both insisted that because Baghdad looked better to them in their military security caravan, that it must be so. Shays has been wrong on the economy, on insurance for our children, on federal eavesdropping and privacy issues, and on medicare...he has sided with Bush in just about everything and changes his mind back and forth...I don't want it anymore. Its time for him to go!

Connecticut needs a congressman like Himes on board, and the American house needs this kind of new upcoming public servant working hard to get us back on track and to help America work again. This country is just not feasible for so many people anymore, and the Bush administration has managed, unbelievably, to fulfill its objective, which was to funnel all of the money upwards to a rare few, while the middle class crumbles, and the legions of the voiceless poor grows. Leaders who have been complicit with that movement should have no place in our government going forward. Shays is a lifetime politician who began his career as a young man in my district in North Stamford. Back in the days when the residents of this part of CT were more interested in how a representative might do in bringing funds to our state and our city, the largely democratic population here felt that Shays was liberal enough to represent us. But, more recently, Shays has been singing the Bush line, and that is not working for any of us on any level. And thus the flip flop of this past week...its vintage Shays and I hope that the voters don't fall for it.

There are Shays signs all over the place in Stamford, and its more likely due to the organized republican party getting the signs out, rather than being representative of who is going to vote for the entire republican ticket. There are way more Shays signs than McCain Palin signs, leading me to think that his independent campaign is more organized, and as has happened in the past, democrats will leave the line for the congressional seat vote. I don't encourage that, because it causes confusion, and even with the new ballots, alot of people may lose their votes by making silly mistakes while trying to serve someone that they are familiar with. That is no reason to make decisions about our children's future; no reason at all.

For CT voters who will be faced with 2 questions about the state's constitution,(those of you from towns with other questions about budget concerns and marching bands are on your own!) I have this to say: They vaguely word the first question to be about having the ability to edit the sate constitution in the upcoming term. The answer would be no, because hidden in that simple question is the stated objective to make gay marriage unconstitutional in CT. It is not the time to mess with any constitution for anything.

The time now is to change our leadership and stop worrying so much about what your neighbors are doing in their bedrooms in private. If people want to enter the unholy alliance of marriage, then that's their problem. I don't recommend it personally, but hey, it makes some people feel more secure; so go for it! Just sign a pre-nup so we don't have more backup in the court systems in this state. My question of the secretary of state is why is this aim on stated in the ballot question?

The second question is about young voters who will be 18 on election day and should they be allowed to vote in primaries when they are 17. I don't understand this or what it represents in a real way. It is supposed to encourage young voters to get involved earlier, but I'd be more in favor of lowering the entire voting age so that voting could be something that becomes part of high school curriculum and then we can bring back civics class and poli-sci and all that! The red flag there is that it also involves opening up the state constitution for editing, and its worded strangely, as these things always are! So, I say no right now, unless I get a compelling reason not to. My son just shrugged...it makes no real sense as a half measure regarding the primaries...like, why then don't we allow driver's licenses to people who will be of age when they can afford their car? I don't know if that is the equivalent, but I'm in favor of an across the board lowering of the voting age rather than this confusing half measure as part of editing our constitution...its all about gay marriage....keep that in mind. So, to question 1, vote NO!




c/p Brilliant at Breakfast

Jon Stewart and Barack Obama on the Bradley Effect ....Scary Socialism!....and also, Why Would Anyone even Want to be President?

Last night Jon Stewart interviewed a relaxed and happy looking Barack Obama. What has struck me this past week besides my PTSD from the Bush Administration, and fretting over the reports coming out of our good friend Brad's blog about the voting situation, is that there is a certain sour grapes feeling emerging from the right that no one would want this horrible state of affairs now anyway. (...just some ongoing wingnuttia on Hardball; to which I think that even Tweety said to whichever wingnut it was, "well you'd take it if you could, right?")

Woe is to the President that has a House and Senate fully in line with him, because then the blame cant fall anywhere but on that one party. I suppose that some sort of investigation and...er...impeachment might have laid the blame for alot of this on the correct shoulders, but that was not what the party wanted to focus on. So, the American short memory will ensure that the democrats get all the blame for things not moving forward fast enough or things overlooked in the coming years. There will be blame for sure, even if its the American people, so trained in their responses and set in their imperialistic ways, regardless of if their dominion is a mobile home or a mansion, unable to effect and allow change for fear of losing a few dollars here or there. Hey, you save in the long run with preventative care, but most people seem to want the payoff now!

My favorite part of Jon Stewart's interview with Barack Obama last night was that Obama makes it clear that now is the perfect time to effect change, if you're really in it for the right reasons. Presidential politics seems to have morphed into a game where the aim is to cause only enough waves to profit your friends, and emerge with a fine legacy or at least a compulsion fulfilled, regardless of if anything got better in the process. Its all about who gets the blame and who gets the cash. There are two types involved in this mess as far as I can see: the type that sees that there is more looting to be done before its time for the rapture, and the type that is actually a public servant and embraces the hard work of trying to put this thing back together. I could count the uninformed, the dreamers, the anger management problem folks, the risk takers and the gamblers who think that one more lotto ticket will put them up in that high bracket that Obama is attacking. Everyone can get whipped up into a frenzy by Donald Trump when the possibilities being real, but when you look around the Hyatt ballroom and realize that its full of suckers just like you with a pile of bills on the table at home, reality and logic have to take over in the world of grownups.

I believe that Obama is in this for the right reasons. And even though I haven't been his staunchest supporter along the way, I think he shows a great understanding of the hysteria that has gripped the country, and may be able to bring some calm and rational behavior to this situation. I sure hope so because I'm tired, I cant sleep, and I don't know if I can live here if McCain Palin get into office.




Americans of a certain stripe seem to forget the society part of our country; how our technological and intellectual advances were made possible by sacrifices of others who emigrated here or slaved away in factories to make a penny. This stuff isn't taught in school in any real way anymore, but the idea that so many American view the waxing and waning semi-socialist way that this country has run from the get-go as some sort of dictatorship, is just laughable.

So worried is the right about redistribution of the wealth that they forget that the only reason that they were able to earn that money was on the shoulders of everyone who came before, settled this place, fought in wars, invented and designed and worked their asses off in order to give Joe the Plumber the opportunity and the right to spew his nonsense. Call it greed or ego, but Americans are not all that special that we just deserve a chance...and God didn't just give us this fertile land; we took it from the Native Americans in grotesque and horrible ways that we are supposedly still repaying (though, last I looked, we still hold the principal of that, and its counted against the national debt...) Hoarding all of our money in the mattress with that smaller government or whatever it is they are calling it, and no standing army, would leave guys like Joe the Plumber out in the cold if his house catches on fire or he should need the police...or even if he drives down a road or highway to go to his non-job where he spins his web of lies.

I want to know what part of the infrastructure of America, physically and socially, the McCain campaign thinks is not some part of redistribution of wealth. I also want to know what part of the fire and police departments they want to privatize and outsource, because the failing infrastructure of the entire country should indicate how well that works! ...bridges and tunnels and highways and parks? How about the national forests?...come on!

I want to know how Halliburton would run social services? This is not how America was designed, and if what was once a village based economy, where each neighbor could rely on another, has grown to include an organized bureaucracy with which we imperfectly get help when we need it, I would have to say that it may be worthwhile for one of these guys to stand up and say that America is semi-socialist and that unregulated capitalism doesn't work!

A friend taking a friend in if their house is destroyed...is that socialism? Bringing a casserole when a community member loses a loved one...is that Socialism? Helping a friend with a sick relative....the list goes on, and its not considered wrong or strange in smaller view. Churches and social groups collect dues or contributions that go towards running an infrastructure; is that socialism? Its when the population grows and progress moves in such a way that we lose our tribal and family ties; when we begin to rely on the market of a bigger structure than just the farm fields, that we need more of a main structure into which everyone contributes. With proper representation there shouldn't be a problem. Its only a problem if it becomes a talking point and is misused to the point where the word has no meaning anymore. Rather than talking about it so much, I wonder how much time any of these disgruntled wing nuts in my town actually get involved in cutting down on overspending or bureaucracy! Ill tell you, its usually only involving something that effects their bank account or their backyard.

Up the road from me is the old town of Bedford Village, NY. I often take my dog Lola to the green, which, as part of the historic preservation of the area, has a plaque that notes that local farmers shared this village green for grazing their cattle. I'm sure then that they also worked on the green and reseeded it, as good neighbors banding together through hard winters and hot summers. Through history there have been cooperative efforts on the part of Americans, which can be seen in the endless piled stone walls around, here made of the stones that tough Americans plowed up from this rocky place, in order to grow crops. The stone walls built all over the Bedford town square and all roads coming and going from it, were not brought in from Home Depot; they were part of a cooperative where everyone gave time and whatever they had to better the whole. Its only now, in the twisted minds of these wing nuts, that we are seeing some deep rooted form of hate that throws the poor, and anyone else outside of some perceived lucky group, under the bus.

The horrible thing is that Americans likely need to have some tragedy, like the great depression with no social net, or children dying because roads are not maintained, to see that regulation is necessary. The greater good can only be served by Americans remembering that we are all the same, and if our weakest part is really our strongest as a society, then we have been neglecting that part too long. There is a greater good, and if life is fleeting for us , we still have the responsibility of every American since the beginning of this great experiment to leave something to our children; some foundation to stand on for their own dreams.

Ive been avoiding alot of this, and spending time with my birds because I find that I am just really...upset...worried. but I will be making some calls and doing something this weekend...and Im trying to not get my hopes up or take anything for granted in this. Anything can happen, and as much as Obama should have the numbers down...look at BradBlog for some scary facts that will give you pause.

Here is my friend Susan hobnobbing with the actual Barack!...um...or a reasonable depiction of him!...close enough! You go girl!

c/p Brilliant at Breakfast

That One...Yep, I'm Voting for Him....

h/t Oliver Willis...Like Kryptonite To Stupid
and
They Gave Us a Republic

The Silence of John and Elizabeth Edwards...New York Magazine's John Heilemann on Who Councils Hillary and Whatever Else About the Rest of It....

This week's New York Magazine has a piece by John Heilemann , and Ive been turning the thing over and over in my head since I found it in the mailbox, and shortly thereafter got a call from my Mom who, upon receiving hers, was excitedly reporting to me about how this little piece contains some answers about the silence of John and Elizabeth Edwards. Mom was saying that clearly he and Elizabeth had had some sort of falling out with Obama and that Elizabeth really, really hates Hillary.

Obviously she had just glanced at it, because the gist was really more about who councils Hillary and who is powerful enough in the democratic party to grab control of what seems to be a runaway train. The fact that Elizabeth Edwards finds Obama's health care plan to be not as good as Hillary's and that Obama had been supposedly "brusque" or rude to the Edwards' immediately following his withdrawal from the race, comes off as the gossipy headline but isn't the real story here. This is the sort of thing that you do find from time to time in New York Magazine, in that it can run with the more lurid lead, even in the face of a more substantial story, and people who do what my Mom does, which is to read the first paragraph and then scan the rest, can miss the point. And this is a kind of misleading journalism that is based on what the journalist can glean through his instant message interviews with party bigwigs, and just his gut, is a little misleading. I like Heilemann, but it seems that he is about opinion. Even as it seems like he is on the inside reporting real news, when you look through his columns, they are really opinion pieces, wrapped in whatever connections he has. I'm not saying hes wrong, but I read New York Magazine with a grain of salt, and I hope that everyone else does too.

Well, today Elizabeth Edwards responded to Heilemann's piece on Morning Joe. In her usual dignified way, she attacked just the gossipy parts and left the rest alone...though if Joe had been a better reporter he might have dug a little. The thing is that I don't think that he wants to go there; not really. Elizabeth stated that she didn't find Obama rude and actually found him quite charming. She did confirm that she doesn't like Obama's plan, and prefers Hillary's, and then she left the question of her storied open dislike for Clinton hanging.

Heilemann's in print guess seems to be that Elizabeth may be the reason that Johnny has not made an endorsement. Y'know, I'm pretty interested in knowing what the hell is going on in the Edwards camp, but this reaching and turning some vague snippets into a story that ends with sentences like "Maybe that's why he...." is a little pathetic. The piece implies, or rather states, that Edwards endorsement has been held up by how nice one or the other of the candidates was to him on the day of his withdrawal. Isn't that silly? Does that make any sense? These people are politicians, and yes they have big egos, but they also have thick skin, and there is no way that an entire strategy could come down to how one or the other acted towards him on that one day.

In going over how badly Obama did with the Edward's, Heilemann pushes the envelope further into concern for his diplomatic prowess, in comparison to the story that Hillary was all over them and was almost, maybe able to win Elizabeth over with her kindness and ass kissing. So, then...he goes on to say that if its true that Obama failed to impress Edwards, he doesn't have the diplomatic skills to run the country! And McCain does? Clinton does? Bush does? I dunno...
I suppose that this is one area that Hillary has more experience than the average politician, because she traveled alot as first lady and was around the necessary niceties in diplomatic exchange, but I'd hardly call Obama a slouch, and certainly not because of this! But Heilemann must know that the art of ass-kissing is a very ass-specific endeavor, and best carried out by people who are very adept and the bend over and twist. I find this all a little embarrassing and rather condescending to the Edwards and everyone else involved in this farce of a democratic process...especially the main stream media.


The real point of this story is that Gore and Edwards are the most powerful people in the democratic party right now and...who is going to stop Hillary??? He eventually wends through the merits of Pelosi or Reid talking to her and how much weight or clout Terry McAuliffe or Stephanie Tubbs Jones might have. But ultimately, it appears, that even here, in the lap of gossip, Hillary listens to no one but herself....and that, my friends, is the real reason for everything that is happening.


We're fighting for our lives here, people, lets try to focus on McCain and his lies, lies, lies!
Its apparent that this thing is gonna go all they way because the M$M needs to sell soap, and the daytime drama market is just not cutting it.

c/p Brilliant at Breakfast

Are We All the Same? Rachel Maddow on the Differences Between the 3 Democratic Frontrunners...How We Decide...and all that...

We are the Deciders!
Today I posted some audio from Rachel Maddow's January 16th show, on my player over there. Rachel has spent the past week at MSNBC in the liberal's, gayz, and wimmin's only isolation booth, and during her moments on camera has been hammering her head against a wall of...I'm sorry, but the only way to describe it is stupidity... that prevails at that anchor table between Tweety and Pat and the other guyz, with Tweets scowling dramatically at Keith's every word. Yeah, Keith is the shining star over there, but he sure knows when and how to share the spotlight with really talented and smart people like Rachel. Hey, its not his fault if he makes all the rest of 'em look bad!

I understand that there is some deep need to get on with it, and that the job of the media has transformed from informing us into a service to expedite the wishes of the large corporations that have conglomerated any critical thought or problem solving skills that might be inherent in us, into an easy cartoon for the masses who are too lazy to think. But, before we sew this thing up, doesn't it make sense to, at least, know a few of the major differences between the 3 democratic frontrunner's? Isn't it worth a moment of thought in an election cycle that is drawing unprecedented crowds, and upsetting the control of powers that have put us in a box and decided for us for so long?

The reason that so many people vote against their own best interest is because they accept the fear and manipulation of the parties without doing even a little work to find out the basic stances of the candidates. We are somehow encouraged to trust our gut, and to go with the feelings that we personally have about a candidate, as if this is some sort of high school popularity contest.

Last week Sam Seder said something really helpful while on the air with a caller. He said that he doesn't believe that voting is about your own personal preference, as in which candidate that you personally like, is pretty, or whose views you like. Its about assessing all of the information that you have and voting on what works and is logical for the process and the country. This is absolutely true.
We live in a me, me, me society that encourages individuality and political correctness to an extreme that was probably unthinkable in the election cycles of the founders of this thing. In order to be a workable society, we have to consider what is best for the entire society...right?
This isn't just about what serves YOU personally, but what serves, not only the process, but the continuation of this imperfect union, and the society as a whole. If we consider that this country is only as strong as it's weakest citizen, and that we are supposed to be a country of immigrants, each giving a hand up to the one below, then a question arises about how this thing got twisted into a way for the rich to get richer and to hang onto their wealth while the poor, and increasingly the middle class, are getting the shaft. Capitalism cant possibly work over the long run unless the more fortunate and talented members of our society pay a scaled percentage of their earnings back in. If they use their position to hang onto an unfair share, (that's a relative unfair share...as in, not comparing it to the average middle class wage, but to what is above and beyond most of our wildest dreams, as in the percentage difference between the CEO and the lowest worker, and that sort of equation rule of thumb,) then they are pulling the foundation out from under the society that allowed them to build that wealth in the first place!

You may be able to build your McMansion on the hardship of others for a while, but this is really a house of cards, and one natural disaster or catastrophic illness could be a great leveler. So, unless you really have no feeling about who we are or what our aim is, or who your neighbor is and how the homeless man on the street could be your brother, you need to learn what is happening out there and have real reasons for why you're doing what you do...more specifically, why you are voting the way you vote.


Conservatism is not a bad thing at all, and it actually is part of the delicate balance and the checks and balances of our government, but fer' Christ's sake, at least know why you are a conservative....and try not to have it always end up back at your disdain of taxes and how you deserve somehow to have more money in the bank as opposed to people who cant go to the doctor or afford their medicine.
I spend more time than I'd like talking to people about politics, because I am the political one...you know, the one who knows whats what, and so its easy to get a quick and easy fix on whats happening without having to sit through Tweety and...er...the national news, every night. And, I have to say that I'm hearing, more than I like and mainly from middle class people who are working so damned hard to just make ends meet, that they are sick and tired of these immigrants and poor folks with their hands outstretched. Give them health care for free? No way!! School for their kids? No way!!
But, the long view tells us that, on the ground its different. Should you spend some time at say, an inner city after school program, or a food pantry, you might see that neglecting a shot or a checkup can result in long term costs to society that are much more than it would cost just to make medical care available to all. I also have been very troubled by the ongoing impact of Clinton's Welfare reform package and the lack of programs for children who have no place to go in the afternoon. I see kids wandering around with little parental oversight, parents working way too hard to barely get by, and the very real possibility passes by me each day, that our society is saving money on social programs in favor of long term care for teen parents and their kids in the same cycle. Very young girls pushing baby carriages, and girls sneaking to see their boyfriends even as parents tell them not to...what can a parent do if they have to work so many hours and there are no programs for teens in this entire city? If we don't do something preventative now, we are throwing away our most valuable asset of educated future generations.
Knowing what your opinion is and why is of the utmost importance. For those who say that its just too depressing or that it infringes on their life to worry about such serious things, I say that if you find this hard, then just wait until we ignore this for a few more generations.
And we all have the responsibility for future generations. Its not like, if you don't have kids yourself you shouldn't have to pay for schools, because the schooling you're paying for is as easily your own, as it is for the people who will carry on for you, regardless of if they are your flesh and blood or not.

I also have to say that I don't know where the idea came from that Americans are somehow deserving of an easier ride in life than anyone else on this planet. We are lucky to have an abundant country and power in the world, but to assume that we deserve to never be touched by what happens in the rest of the world, or what the fallout is from our actions, and alto of what got us where we are in the world order, is a little shortsighted. If its about being safe and ensuring our continued luck of abundance, then the long view is necessary for all of our citizens. We also have to be aware of what we've done on the path to where we are. It was the disregard of history and scholarly advice that got us into this war, and that we will be paying for for generations to come. There is nothing more powerful that having good diplomatic standing and a reputation as a good guy. There is nothing worse than being hated by the entire world because we've fucked up a country and made the worldwide terrorism problem worse.



So, no matter what your persuasion is politically, or what candidate of either party sounds good to you, look into what their platforms are now, in this cycle, and look at what they are saying.
If you are a republican or even just like McCain or any other the other clowns in that freak show, you're on your own over here. There is a ton of information out there, and its up to you to figure out what the proposed policies are beyond your impressions of the candidates, (locally, here is some of it.) Good hair or having been in a prison camp does not make for a great president, or even a passing one. A general feeling of liking or disliking someone doesn't pass for knowing what they are going to do at this critical juncture. Keep in mind also that anyone who wants to be president at this particular juncture is either half crazy or some kind of true believer. It is up to us to know which and of what before we go in the voting booth, or the folding table that we get here in CT now.

Regarding the democratic front runners, Rachel Maddow does a great rundown in the audio on the RIPCoco player from 01-16-08; The Differences Between the 3 Dem Frontrunner's. This goes beyond the woman vs. race vs. white guy line that we keep getting. These candidates are very different in how they would govern, and anyone who doesn't know the differences between them needs to look into it. A synopsis of Rachel's explanation of it might go like this:

Hillary Clinton is the candidate of change from within. She thinks that it is enough to have a Democrat back in the White House. She wants to work with corporations and within the structure of the government, as it is now, to create some programs that address the problems of the country. She is a party player and believes that lobbyists and large corporations deserve to be heard on the same level as regular citizens.
On the war, she wants to get us out, but foresees being in militarily for a long time and having a presence there via our embassy. She seems to want to reserve judgment on what exactly will be done until she gets into office. Even as she says that she will end it, it seems like there are no hard numbers forthcoming, except for a plan to begin within 60 days of taking office. There is alot of talk about our strategic interests in the region and fighting terrorism, but it sounds alot like the Bush agenda. Like most of what I hear from her, this position isn't really stated clearly; like, she has a plan but its not fully formed yet.

John Edwards is the candidate of change by force and power. He wants to turn the system upside down and try to return it to a more equitable distribution ideal. He sees the system as being in such a state of disrepair that it really needs to be changed. Edwards entire career has become one of working for the middle and lower classes and trying to right the wrongs that come about when unregulated capitalism is allowed to go wild. Edwards wants to re regulate the deregulated big businesses, (and particularly the insurance industry,) that Reagan was so sure would regulate themselves if the government just backed off. Hows that working? Its not! And the result has brought out the basest of human frailties and cruelty that anyone could imagine.
Edwards On the war: He wants to start to withdraw troops and get us completely out of the country within 9 months. He would order an immediate drawdown of 40,000 to 50,000 troops, and continue until we are out for all intents and purposes, leaving 3,500 to 5,000 troops to guard the embassy and humanitarian workers. He wants to keep sending the vetoed supplemental funding bill , with the timetable for withdrawal, back so that Bush has to veto it over and over, (this is an idea I like, because maybe the American people will start to look at what exactly is going on, and maybe we can make a record of this so that future generations know that this was Bush's war and his prerogative to stay there this long.) He wants to engage in diplomatic talks with all the countries in the region and hold peace talks. He also wants to continue to help Iraq train its forces. This plan still has a ways to go, in my opinion, but it does have that concrete withdrawal which will bring things to a head pretty quickly and lets the country stand up and figure out its leadership one way or another. The likely chaos that will ensue is not worse than dragging this out and having a slightly lesser level of the same over more months...it has to be done one way or another because we are clearly making things worse by being there.

Barack Obama is the great communicator candidate. he believes that only through communication and unification will this partisan country resolve it's differences and get anything done. Beyond that its a little unclear as to what exactly he will be able to do that is all that much different than Edwards. One thing is for certain, he is new and inexperienced, and he is sliding towards the center as this thing goes on. I would like to see more concrete plans from him. Pretty words don't mean much anymore.
Obama on the war: he seems to have a 16 month plan that involves bringing home 1-2 brigades per month, and not leaving a permanent base...that is, unless Al Qaeda build a base there...then its all out the window. One interesting thing is that he feels like we never finished the war in Afghanistan; its unclear if he wants go back there and finish or just keep strategic outposts in order to strike Al Qaeda when necessary. My opinion is that he may find that drawing down so slowly is more dangerous to the troops left behind and draws out a situation that may need to become chaotic before it reaches its own level.
And firewater always seeks its own level.





Products of the week:

Rapturewear (What will YOU leave behind?) is a real company...so I'm not suggesting actually giving them money. But some of their products are just too good not to share. Behold a sampling of their T-shirts!:


c/p Brilliant at Breakfast