We need a third party

On October 19th I early voted. For one of the first times in my voting history I voted a straight Democratic ticket. Beyond President, Senators and Congressmen (both national and state) I had no clue who I was voting for. I was voting against a party. So I looked seriously for other options.

New Mexico has in the past been host of a relatively strong Green Party. And I have voted for them in local offices. This election they did not seem to be running any candidates. There were six people running for President. I have a friend that is an advocate of the Libertarian candidate Johnson.

Sadly our current campaign laws and financing make it impossible for a third party to compete. And given the huge division between the two parties we now have we need a third party. Badly. If for no other reason that to make our two party system pay attention to itself and realize how very much they have turned off a large proportion of the populace. While that bile is still lurking in our mouths we need to get serious about campaign reform. No longer than 100 days and no more money spent by a candidate than twice the annual salary of the office they are campaigning for. And definitely no out of state or out of district funds.

A third or fourth party candidate could compete viably in a campaign under such restrictions. And the American people would benefit from having more choices. How many of us are truly red or blue, Jesus or Darwin like the illustration. I think of myself as a centralist more than liberal or conservative. I admit to some believes that are far right (not beyond Attila the Hun but out there) and others that are as far left. But I am not Christian (and the more fanatic the fundamentalist become the more that is true). And while Darwin's work was ground braking current science is proving him wrong in some instances. Like it may be survival of the fanciest and not the fittest. Scientific theory is a moving target. Quite literally were earth sciences are concerned but that is another blog.

I believe in my right to carry a gun, and in the right for same sex marriage. I think the US is not a Christian nation and would fight to defend that. And contrary to my blog friends that did not vote for either of the major party candidates because they did not mention Global Warming, I seriously believe it needs to be a campaign issue. But because of our entrenched two party system the only topics that get heard are those that are important to five or six swing states that because of the Electoral college matter more than the one citizen one vote principle. We are a republic and not a democracy.

If there is good news in this election it is that it has made some people truly upset at the sad state of affairs. We could end up with a Mormon Theocracy if Romney wins or a totally broken Republican party if Obama wins. Frankly I am for the latter because it gives us a real chance to end the Red State/Blue State civil war.

Either way we are going to have a large group of people very upset about the sorry state of politics in the United States. Read up on Article V conventions. Let's change the path we are taking.

Obama to hit the White House Running

The pace of the world especially in the dire straights we are in does not allow for a lot of time to celebrate or for Obama any time to grieve the death of his grandmother. He is busy naming his team and setting his agenda (about as difficult as herding cats). I was overjoyed to see he is going to repeal some of GW's executive orders if not all.

Meanwhile I have been swinging from giddy to stunned that it really happened to going through political blog withdrawal. Seems I am not the only one. All my friends seem to be continuing to read the op ed pages available on the internet. I was reading Sails blog this morning and she cited an editorial by Frank Rich. I found the following paragraphs where he describes the morning after really spot on for me:

Our nation was still in the same ditch it had been the day before, but the atmosphere was giddy. We felt good not only because we had breached a racial barrier as old as the Republic. Dawn also brought the realization that we were at last emerging from an abusive relationship with our country’s 21st-century leaders. The festive scenes of liberation that Dick Cheney had once imagined for Iraq were finally taking place — in cities all over America.

For eight years, we’ve been told by those in power that we are small, bigoted and stupid — easily divided and easily frightened. This was the toxic catechism of Bush-Rove politics. It was the soiled banner picked up by the sad McCain campaign, and it was often abetted by an amen corner in the dominant news media. We heard this slander of America so often that we all started to believe it, liberals most certainly included. If I had a dollar for every Democrat who told me there was no way that Americans would ever turn against the war in Iraq or definitively reject Bush governance or elect a black man named Barack Hussein Obama president, I could almost start to recoup my 401(k). Few wanted to take yes for an answer.

So let’s be blunt. Almost every assumption about America that was taken as a given by our political culture on Tuesday morning was proved wrong by Tuesday night.

And aren't we thrilled that Obama and the voters of this United States (no longer divided into red and blue) did prove us wrong. I admit to a definite negativity about the possibility of democracy winning out in the United States. I thought it very ironic that we were "exporting" democracy while erasing it here in the United States with executive orders that allowed its citizens to be spied upon, vanished to Gitmo, marginalized by labeling us terrorist sympathizers, the list goes on. Or was going on, but it looks like our President-elect plans to change that all the minute he takes office.

Republicans Split?

Found the following interesting article this morning while browsing the web for political news:

The New York Post's Page Six reports that at a recent gathering of Republicans in mid-town Manhattan the other night, opinions were running almost universally against Sarah Palin:

NEW York Republicans are not too thrilled at the idea of Sarah Palin as their vice presidential candidate. The other night, private equity firm New Mountain Capital held a debate between James Carville and Karl Rove at Stone Rose in the Time Warner Center. When the moderator asked the 200 Republicans in the room how many were comfortable with Palin becoming president if something were to happen to John McCain, "only one man raised his hand," an attendee reports.

But here's the thing: If you convened a similar meeting of Republicans in Manhattan, Kansas, chances are they'd be in favor of Palin by a similar margin.

I believe Mike Murphy was the first to point out that Sarah Palin would be a "polarizing" choice, though he was talking about her impact on the general electorate.

But Palin has obviously ignited a split within a portion of the GOP as well. There are some Republicans - generally speaking, the upper class elites who live in the DC-NYC corridor - who are simply aghast at Palin and see her as a "fatal cancer" on the party.

But it's clear that the rank and file of the Republican party - generally speaking, the middle class folks who live in red states and don't have a problem shopping at Wal Mart - are smitten with Palin (judging by how they've been flocking to the rallies) in part because they see her as one of their own.

It has me wondering with McCain's age and iffy health issues and now Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama if there will not be other Republican defections in the voting booth.

There has been a lot of talk about the Bradley effect and whether people that publicly say they are voting for Obama will will let their secret racism carry the day inside the privacy of the voting booth. But now we have the possible Palin effect. Will a lot of Republicans in the west and east be unable to face putting Palin a heartbeat away from the Presidency? Let's hope so.

Ooops!

Presidential John McCain says he slipped up when he said in an economic policy speech that he was going to lessen our dependence on foreign oil when elected so "...we do not have to send our sons to war."

Many of us have been saying for some time that this war was about oil and the Bush administration has denied that ad nausea. It was about Saddam and Weapons of Mass Destruction. Saddam is dead and the WMD never existed.

The other argument about going to war was to make the Iraqis free and democratic and beyond an initial election or two that has not happened while the democracy in this country takes a major nose dive because of the war on terror and our need to water board and spy upon our own citizens.

And Iraq was going to pay for this war with its oil reserves. A little seen news story reported that they have a large stockpile now and could pay for the war to give them their freedom. Or rebuild what the insurgency has destroyed. But they don't.

But I think the largest ooops in this whole McCain sound byte is that it was not given much air time. Not the kind of air time we gave the Obama elitist statement and not nearly the air time given to Reverend Wright. Whether it is the truth (and many of us think it is) or a senior moment (another) by an aging candidate it is important that the American people hear this and any prolonged analysis of it. But the media remains largely mum.

If it is a misspeak it is probably no big deal unless you lump it together with all his other misspeaks and the fact that he gets irate when called on them. It looks like we are running for the highest office a senile old man with a bad temper. Just as if we lump together all the slips of the tongue and "remembered it wrong" of Hillary's which make her look like a person always going for the convenient lie. Or all the times GW has leaned on the podium and slurred that it is the fault of Congress that his stubborn, egotistical cowboy diplomacy isn't working.

So CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and PBS how about some honest analysis out there and don't just sweep the next "ooops, you caught me" under the table. And make no mistake: It is a war for oil which we don't seem to be getting.

Are we racist and sexist? Yes.

I listened to parts of Obama's speech or racism yesterday and thought what I heard was well put together. I have no doubt, however, that there are people that think he is wrong. I don't.

After years of living in the south I moved back to my beloved New Mexico because of the cultural mix here. I remembered that the native Americans, Hispanics, and Anglos got along great. I also immediately noted I hated the word Anglo. Research into my roots shows an ample amount of black Irish (Moors). And it bothered me that the Indians and the Hispanics get to make such a big deal about what they want to be called but I don't get a choice. I even hate those little boxes on census forms and applications. Went through a period of checking Other.

I moved to Questa where my husband and I were at the time only one of three "white" families and I got to experience "reverse racism." When Marc and I came to a splitting of the ways, in part because of the difficulty of living in that community, I moved to a largely "Anglo" community. Not because of the racism but because of the sexism.

Men seem to forget that women still do not have equal rights. The Equal Rights Amendment for women was never passed. The constitution of the US declares blacks as equal but not women. Sorry, Hillary. We still earn less, have to fight harder for better jobs, and are the following spouse where relocations are concerned. But that is just with the white male majority of this country. Make that fundamental Christian and women are suppose to wear skirts, follow their husband's dictates in all things, and home school the children. But any women into the Hispanic culture of say Questa and you will find she is considered owned by her husband to do with as he sees fit. Fine if he is a benign dictator. Not so fine if he considers discipline corporal.

I was considered a witch in Questa because I carried a gun into the forest on walks, and had the nerve to actually irrigate our fields. A single white woman that was my friend was considered a whore (punta) because no other woman would live alone without a man. On the Navajo Reservation the men ride in the cab of the pickup and the women in the back regardless of weather. No camping cover either. Even the dogs get front seat. In short, to this day, a woman's status in the United States defers to the status of her husband and the sub-culture to which he belongs. Would Hillary have gotten as far if Bill were a garbage collector? I don't think so.

We (the educated middle class and above) are all making noises about how wonderful it is to have a black man (hey, at least half white) and a woman run for the office of President of the United States. But come election day it will be the white males that will walk into the booth, and their wives voting as they have been told, and McCain will be our President. The third term of the Bush Presidency. We will still be in Iraq, the economy will still be in the pits, New Orleans will still not be rebuilt and Sexism, and Racism will be even more rampant because our dream of a New America was not realized.

If we are lucky there will be no rioting in the streets, women will not move out on their husbands, and we will be bought out by a benign country. Or we could try getting our shit together before that happens. You can only fix what it is you admit is broken. It probably is time for some honesty among the citizens of this country. We are here because we tried to pretend we were all equal before the law and each other. We aren't. Or that racism only goes one way. It doesn't.

I have to applaud Barack Obama for finally speaking out on this issue. We have swept it under the rug for entirely too long. We need to cast aside our differences and unite not only to end the repression of this current administration but to battle those problems facing the United States and the world that have no race or sex or religious boundaries. We are humans and we live on this planet together.

What are they thinking?

Obama made it clear last week that he was not open to taking the Vice-President slot. Why should the second place candidate offer the second place spot for the front runner as he put it. It is probably the only logical thing that happened in the political race this week. Geraldine Ferraro proved again that a woman in high office is maybe not a good idea. I'm a woman so do not shout sexism here. At this stage in our history women that fight to he top can be Barracudas, so maybe it not our time yet.

Course I think we have also seen evidence why self-proclaimed men of God should not run for higher office. And maybe with both him and Geraldine we have seen that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is heady times for both women and blacks. They are being taken seriously and unfortunately they are opening mouths and speaking before they think, and giving fodder to the white males supremacy folks.

People are accusing Obama for not shooting back at Hillary attacks, but I find I like that. It invalidates her remarks in a way that repudiating them does not. I don't know about Barack but I find myself in shock at some of the things that come out of the Hillary camp. "What in hell is she thinking?" Or is she thinking. I don't think Geraldine thought before engaging mouth. Or did Obama's former spiritual leader.

Still the candidates are not their friends and associates. And should they be painted to the same broad brush. But is it worse to have a campaign employee speak without direction or with direction? Is it worse that Geraldine ignored Hillary's directive about public remarks or that she followed Hillary's desires - direct or otherwise.

If you saw the movie Becket with Peter O'Toole as King Henry and Richard Burton as the Archbishop you will remember the scene where the King launches his lords off on a mission to kill his old friend. History is divided as to his intent. Did he just say the wrong thing at the wrong time or did he know what his words would create.

We have had too many years of open month and insert foot. And I frankly am in favor of a thoughtful individual that considers his power and his words and takes neither for granted. The more I see Obama under fire the better he looks. And I am inclined to take a negative view of those firing negative and mean-spirited salvos in his direction.

Those running for our top office in the United States are suppose to be our best and brightest. And they should show that they can surround themselves with a staff that reflects that same criteria. So let us get with it folks. Think.

Don't look at me. I'm lost.

I did not have a lot of time to devote to this yesterday but I did try and watch some of the political pundits make sense out of the March 4th primaries. You remember, those were the ones that Hillary had to win by large margins to stay in the race?

That seems to have changed. She got Ohio which once again had a voting irregularity. I am thrilled about that because Ohio and it's constant voting irregularities has taken a lot of attention off my state of New Mexico and the graveyard vote. She barely squeaked by in Texas primaries and if they ever finish the count (here again I am thrilled with this glitch because no one is looking at New Mexico and how long it took us to count after our super Tuesday caucus) Obama may well have won that one. They split Rhode Island and Vermont. But Hillary seems to be declaring that this all showed buyers remorse and she is the horse to back.

I think it merely shows that when she and the Clinton political machine (Remember Chicago and Mayor Daley? He was good because while he ran things New Mexico was only number two on dirty politics) get rolling on fear mongering they can do it better than the Republicans. I had such hope but clearly that counts for nothing. The Clinton's will snatch the election from Obama and I will be forced to back Hillary if I do not want a third term of George Bush with his stand in, John McCain.

All of which leaves only one question: Where did we go wrong? I wish it was as simple as a wrong turn in Albuquerque. But I greatly fear it was in having hope and once again trying to trust in the process of Democracy. I know it is not a democracy. I know the political system is broken. I know that relief organizations founded to help the poor and uninsured in the Amazon are now doing relief work outside Cleveland. But for just a tiny little minute there I had hope. Damn, I was doing so well without it. I wonder if the Iraqis feel the same?

I thought this looked familiar

At one point yesterday, deep in the throes of cabin fever, I found myself staring at CNN's coverage of the political campaign and asking myself what was so familiar about all this.

Yes, it is another presidential campaign and despite all the promises to the contrary by various horses in the race they have not changed it. There is I thought, thankfully, more debate and more airing of views then there has been in the last two of these fiascoes. But when a candidate feels behind they still start slinging the mud. And enough of it seemed to be flying through the air yesterday that I just wanted to duck under the table and hide.

That is when it hit me about what was so familiar about the whole presidential primary theater. I whipped out my copy of Alice in Wonderland and felt immediately comforted. After all that isn't real is it? Poor Alice. All she is trying to do is get back to solid ground where they rules of her childhood . . . well, ruled. There are no Cheshire cats with silly grins remaking themselves every state, or paths to the convention that are erased by some new pundit with a clean sweep of the situation. And there is definitely not a Mad Hatter's tea party right?

As I watched the Mad Hatter pour tea I was reminded for some reason of former President Bill Clinton. And Hillary came to mind when the dormouse pops up out of the teapot. The March Hare just has to be John McCain. And I am of course Alice. We are all Alice. Trying to make sense of this strange musical chairs type party with riddles that have no answers and no opportunity to actually sip our tea and make our own decisions.

And from here on in the movie and the book it gets worse. There is the Queen of Hearts with off with their heads. Hmmm. Maybe Hillary is her. Sometimes. And Bill is the apologetic little king. Then in the scene in the rose garden Obama has to be Alice. Off with his head because he has defied the queen. I am probably the flamingo in this part.

Well, to make a long and silly blog shorter I recommend you re-watch Disney's classic film of Alice in Wonderland. It does make the whole political landscape a great deal clearer. I am just not sure that is a good thing.

Is this our last chance for a woman president?

Now that my tax preparation is over I can get back to paying attention to the political races. We seem to have sunk from the silly season to the dirty season in the few days it has taken me to gather up my expenditure records and order them for my CPA.

Strange things have been happening. McCain says he had no idea who was introducing him. Or what the loose cannon was going to say. That would not be the politic thing to do. It is my understanding that everyone that speaks for a candidate is thoroughly vetted and told expliciatly what they can and cannot say. So he said what they told him to say so John could look grand with his apology? Maybe.

And frankly how involved is a candidate with his middle name? He didn't have an option at the time. Here here are a lot of Jesus's and even a few Jesus Cristo's but I am not about to assume they are willing to die on the cross. And New Mexico was the land of hippy communes so we have a plethora of Stars, Moons, Crystals. Have their parents ruined any chance they have of running for president in the future? My middle name is Marie. Would I be associated with the French Marie Antonette should I chose to run for public office?

But the one slimy campaign tactic which upsets me the most of late is that this is our one and only chance to elect a woman as president. And if we do not vote Hillary in now we will never get another chance to vote for a woman. This seems to be forwarded through many Hillary supporters as why all us women should support her and not Obama. Sorry but I just don't buy that. Not voting for Hillary does not mean I am against having a woman as president. Just this woman at this time.

I don't like that we are getting two for one. I think the world has changed a great deal since Bill held the office. And I believe too much of her energy would be taken up by shooing Bill out of the room. Hillary also has a few of the negatives I don't like to see in a woman in power - be it CEO or President. She can be shrill and domineering. There are times the derogative word Fishwife springs to mind.

And I wanted a woman as president because I thought they would bring a greater sense of humanity and compromise to the office. I do not see either of those qualities in Hillary. Especially since she is willing to let her campaign play the sex card. And she let Bill play the race card. She just does not reflect my values. Or the values I would like to see in a President of this country.

A Return to Hope

I was channel hopping last night. I was really watching CBS with NCIS but I was also interesting in American Idol in small doses and wanted to catch the results of the Beltway Primaries. In one of my hops I caught part of Barack Obama's speech on hope.

It quite frankly brought tears to my eyes for a whole wealth of complicated reasons. First, it has been entirely too long since I had any hope that the United States could be saved from the path it has been led down. Hope was first fostered in my during the Kennedy years and was totally decimated by his cruel death. Let's face it there was nothing inspiring about Nixon unless you were in league with the dark side.

The Clinton years re-kindled some of that Kennedy era hope but Bush totally trashed it. Bush was not just the death of hope but the death of the middle class dream and our country as a shining example of hope. And it was the death of public speaking; replaced by the five second sound bite generally trashing someone else that does not agree with him.

So when I chanced upon Obama's address last night I lingered. I remembered when I first saw him deliver the nominating speech at the Democratic convention. And I was spell bound by his message of hope for not merely the young people of this country but all of us who have lost hope. I was so enticed with what he was saying that after they cut away to McCain I went to CNN's website and watched Obama there.

Up to this point I really did not have a dog in this hunt. I wanted a Democrat over all else and I really did not care which democrat it was quite frankly. And when it got down to Hilary and Barack I found myself split. Part of me really wanted to vote for a woman for president but she kept failing to totally enfold me into her camp. Just when I thought I could rally around her she would act shrill or peevish or send Bill out to do the dirty work. And while she is capable of public speaking she always seems a bit over rehearsed.

Maybe last night I just wanted to believe in something or someone so bad that I was going to fall for the first image thrust before me but I think not. It was a good speech and quite well delivered. I am thrilled this morning that he leads in delegates. But I am very scared the political machines of Clinton and McCain will again crush this fragile flower of hope. That would be so sad.

Much Ado About Nothing

Senator Edwards won my primary vote last night when in the midst of the mudslinging between Barrack and Hilary he called for it to stop because, "all this is not getting health care for children." Here, here. Or is it Hear! Hear!

The egotistical, egomania, my way or the highway was what got us into this mess our country is in. And we do not need another person at the helm of this country who is so driven by their own ego that they will fight over petty issues on national television. I would not vote for either of them unless they were the only person able to dethrone Bush.

Sorry! I really had to get that off my chest. I have seen two year olds in sand boxes behave better. I was really writing this blog about a question I received from a friend on the previous blog: What can we do? WRITE. About any issue that concerns you.

Write your state and federal representatives, write your newspaper, write a blog, write the national news media. The computer makes this so easy with the old control C/control V functions. My e-mail contacts include Lou Dobbs of CNN, my US Representative, my US Senator, the Governor of this fair state, letters to the editor for the two biggest newspapers in New Mexico, etc. Mind you they want their own letters. Cannot CC everyone. And a couple of my representatives what it done on their websites but with autofill and paste this is not difficult either because I have bookmarked their sites.

Our lawmakers will roll along and do their own thing until they are aware they are being watched by people that can vote them out of office. Letters and phone calls on legislation can reverse the progress of a vote. I am not sure it can change the direction of a political campaign but I am determined to try because as it stands in both parties I just want to scream: Stop the boat I want to get off. I will swim to some foreign shore.

Give Me a Break

Another title for this blog could be: They lie to you all the time. And of course I am talking about politicians. Didn't they promise a kinder and gentler campaign process?

Sorry, but having a husband or political action committee do your down and dirty comments and ads is not a kinder and gentler campaign process. And just because we have gotten used to ignoring the whispered side effects at the end of a drug commercial does not mean we don't hear the, "this commercial has been approved by. . ." at the close of an obnoxious campaign ad.

The disturbing part is this is just the primary. And I get the feeling the candidates are shooting themselves in the foot. Usually we wait until the main campaign to dig up the dirt but we seem to be doing this for the opposing party. AND I do not believe any candidate when he says he is unaware of a commercial a PAC is running against his opposition. And just why would I want someone to be President of this country and leader of the free world when he cannot even keep his own supporters in line? Ignorance is not bliss in this case; it is ignorance and stupidity.

I am just so embarrassed by the whole process. All those mother phrases spring to mind like Play Nice, Potty Mouth, etc. Just go home, go straight home, do not pass the White House. And send your parents out so I can talk to them about how they raised you.

The only candidates I can exclude from this condemnation are those no longer running like Governor Bill Richardson. Nice guys finish last I guess. Even Evangelical Huckabee is not innocent of throwing the first stone. And Obama is no longer Mr. Nice Guy. I really do not want to vote for any of you. Grow up and act like someone we would want to put in our highest office.

Until then I am really tempted to just say no. None of the Above