IT'S OVER

Lowlight on election day?  The older man at my polling place who answered his wife when she offered him her cheat sheet "Oh, I just vote no on everything."

Highlight of my election day? My 19 year-old calling me while on the way to vote. She wanted to ask me about some of the initiatives on the ballot to see if she understood them correctly before voting.


Here's hoping our young voters remain involved, informed and passionate about democracy.

CAN ELECTIONS BE BOUGHT?

It sure seems more clear than ever that bombarding people with misinformation and distorted reality can turn them away from common sense and even their own experience.  Brainwashing, if you will.  And having a whole lot of money available to put that message into constant rotation on TV and in other high visibility places means that your message becomes their belief.

In Wisconsin, Scott Walker held on to his office - he outspent Democrat Tom Barrett by more than 7-to-1. And that doesn't take into account the tens of millions of dollars that Republican Super PACs poured into the state - estimated at between $75 and $80 million.


The Tea Partiers and the GOP think it was a great victory.  I think it is just sad that more people can't see what is happening, stand up to it and get educated about the issues on their own.

YOUR FIST IS HITTING MY FACE

rep·re·sent·a·tive   /ˌrɛprɪˈzɛntətɪv/ Show Spelled[rep-ri-zen-tuh-tiv]
noun
1. a person or thing that represents another or others.
2. an agent or deputy: a legal representative.
3. a person who represents a constituency or community in a legislative body, especially a member of the U.S. House of Representatives or a lower house in certain state legislatures.

I have had a bee in my bonnet on this issue for a long time.  It seems like it is coming up more and more frequently, and not just because it is an election year.

When we elect someone to office, it is their responsibility to then represent us.  I know that each election has a winner and a loser and that the losing side deserves some consideration when it comes to their point of view.  The concept of "majority rules" is meant to keep both sides working to have their points of view debated and weighed during elections and the "side" that wins is the one which gets the most consideration when positions are taken.

What I see developing more and more is elected representitives making decisions based on their own religious beliefs, on what is politically expedient or what they think will make them electable in the future.  So when I see these polls indicating that 67% of Catholics and 64% of other voters think the President's birth control coverage requirement should stand, why are we still talking about this?  What leverage should there be when the will of the people, the desire of the voters is to support the President?

Why are the elected officials of this country even meeting with the Catholic Bishops Council?  Beyond their individual vote and the sway they may hold over their church members, what other say should they have in the governing of our country?  None.  If they want to become a political force, then they should give up their non-profit status, pay their way and join in the fray.  Otherwise, their constituency is their own membership - which is certainly not the entire country.

When John F. Kennedy was running for President there were a lot of people against him because of his Catholic religion.  They said they didn't want the country run by the Pope.  Yet just these few years later we are being forced to fight off  religious intolerance, whim, mandate, threat and  prejudice at every turn.

As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said, 'The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins.' Rights must be limited to claims of freedom to do anything which does not violate the freedoms of others.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one.  If you don't believe in using birth control, don't use it.  If you believe homosexuality is a sin, don't have sex with someone of the same sex.  If you don't believe in evolution, teach your children what you do believe and let the science teachers teach what they know.  Your right to believe in what you believe and practice your beliefs doesn't bother me until you try to foist it on me, my family, schools and the rights of others in this country.

IS BUSINESS ALWAYS THE "BAD GUY"?

I was really disappointed with some of the things President Obama had to say in his post election press conference this morning.  As usual, the administration is acting like the changeover of some congressional seats is some kind of mandate from "the people" that everything has to be different.  It makes me mad.

One of the reporters asked an excellent question.  He asked what the administration was going to do to get business on board with job creation when they are just holding on to big profits and not spending or hiring, at least not in the US.  Which is true according to an analysis by Robert Reich, former US Secretary of Labor.  Reich points out that the Fed's "job program" is designed to keep interest rates low so businesses will expand, exports will increase and consumers will refinance their homes. 

But what is really happening is that businesses are sitting on nearly 2 trillion dollars of cash.  They are not using the cash to add jobs because they know consumers can't afford more goods and services.  Businesses are using the cash to  expand capacity abroad, acquire other companies and invest in labor replacing technologies.  Cheaper money allows them to do more of the same.  So the profits of businesses are higher, they are paying lower and lower taxes, if any, and they are not boosting US employment.

 And what is President Obama promising?  To be a bigger booster of American businesses.  He said he thinks business is too often being painted as "bad guys".  “The most important thing we can do is to boost and encourage our business sector and to make sure that they’re hiring.”



Now I don't mind at all if this means small to mid-size businesses who don't have the influence and write-offs that the big guys have.  But it is clear that big business and banks don't intend to be good citizens.  They are out for short term profit and the country be damned.  They say they can't operate profitably within regulatory guidelines, then spend billions on lobbyists and experts who find ways to get around them.  They soak their customers, provide shoddy customer service and more and more of them are treating their employees poorly.

So pardon me for not having sympathy for big business feeling like they are being painted as the "bad guys"  because, quike frankly, for a lot of years now, they have been working hard to earn that reputation.  It is time for that old label of good corporate citizen to come back into play.  And for American businesses to step up and play their part in the recovery of the economy.

WHY YOU SHOULD CARE ABOUT THE CA SENATE RACE

For me the picture says it.  The sleek, multi-millionaire candidate who can write check after check to fund her own campaign and say anything (true or not) to discredit her opponant. After being fired from her CEO job she took a $28 million severance package.  HP, once considered one of the most employee friendly, ethical companies in the country is still paying fines from the kickback scheme to get in on government contracts engaged in while Carly Fiorina ran the show, a failed merger, fluctuating stock value, a spying scandal and thousands of  US jobs sent overseas.  Fiorina has been characterized as "as self-centered, she also fell short as a moral manager" in a study  printed in  Entrepreneur Magazine.

Then there is scruffy little Barbara Boxer in her ill fitting suit.  She has been in public service for much of her life.  She is a California Liberal, supporting marriage equality, reproductive choice, environmental issues including keeping green industries in the US rather than overseas, biomedical research, education and more.  While she has stood up against the wars in the Middle East, she did not refuse funding for the troops and their welfare.  She is a humanitarian and can not be faulted in the least for her ethics or charged with self-interest.

So while the candidate will represent California - the Senate makes decisions which affect the entire country.

Which would you rather have in office?

THE SHOW MUST GO ON ( and assorted mixed show biz references)

When I was a kid, a lot of the movies were about kids "putting on a show" as an answer to their problems. Seems like the McCain campaign thinks along the same lines.

When the Dems had a successful and uplifting convention, he pulled Sara Palin out of a hat -TA DA! He she got lots of attention which began to lag as the economy took center stage.

Let's put on a show! I'm going to run back to Washington and save the day - forget that pesky debate. And even better - I'll pretend that this effort to work out a new economic plan was MY idea, when, in fact, Obama called me first." (Twisting his handlebar mustache and chuckling.) McCain turned up a couple of days later and the negotiations immediately fell apart. Bravo!

Then he added to the suspense of the third act by pretending he may not go to the debate - oooh. What will happen next? It appears he went in for some off-off-Broadway interpretation of a debate. His acting method was to pretend he was ALONE on the stage.

Now, like an frustrated, aging Margo Channing - his campaign has admitted that they can't win on the issues, so they will attack his younger rival's character. We need to fasten our seat belts, we're in for a bumpy 29 days.

I admit, I am not the only person to see the melodrama here, conservative columnist George F. Will wrote:

McCain's approach to politics is "always operatic, pitting people who agree with him against those who are 'corrupt' or 'betray the public trust,' two categories that seem to be exhaustive -- there are no other people."

Operatic!! Wow, the next debate should be a really, really big show.