Blogging For Kicks

Listening to Mike Barnacle on MSNBC this morning was confusing at best, totally infuriating at worst. He and the others on the show, Mika Brezynski(sp?) and Joe Scarborough, were talking about whether Hillary’s remarks about Martin Luther King and President Johnson were racist, and whether they would adversely affect her chances of getting the black voters to choose her. Of course they’re still ranting about how racist it was, except for Mika, who seemed to be more openminded about it. Mr. Barnacle, however, went into a rant that went something like “…who put the pen in Lyndon Johnson’s hand so he could get a bill to sign? Martin Luther King did!” Ok……but I seriously have to differ with both his statement and the whole racist attack on her.

First of all, Martin Luther King was an impressive speaker, as anyone who ever listened to him can attest to. He could move you with the simplest statements, and when he really got going, he was magic to listen to. I have no doubt his “I Have A Dream” speach was the impetus for most of the Congressmen and Senators who ended up voting to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Bill, and he deserves full credit for that. I believe he actually changed the hearts and minds of people all over this country with that speach, also. But Hillary is right: Lyndon Johnson’s pen is what gave us that bill, and there’s nothing racist about that statement. Anyone who says there is has to be looking for something else to derail her campaign with, as it takes a very great stretch of the imagination to turn what she said into a racist sentiment.

Mr. Barnacle’s rant, while seeming very heartfelt and sincere, was so far off the mark as to be almost laughable. First of all, MLK didn’t put the Presidential Pen in Johnson’s hand, Lee Harvey Oswald did. Had he not killed President Kennedy in Dallas, thereby putting that pen in the hands of then Vice President Johnson, Kennedy would have been the one using it, and he also would have signed that bill. Thanks to Mr. Oswald, however, the task fell to Johnson. Had there been any other President at that time, there is no way of knowing whether the bill would have been signed into law or not, but the chances would have been diminished, quite likely. All the speachifying in the world would not have mattered, eloquent or not.

Second, what Hillary said in no way resembled racism. She simply stated the above-stated fact that President Johnson is the one who put that bill into action. She was correct in what she said, she wasn’t trying to diminish the effect of MLK’s beautiful speach, and she certainly wasn’t trying to imply it was white over black in that area. She simply stated the facts. The intent was simply to show that great words are wonderful, but it takes action and the ability and willingness to provide that action to get the job done. Barack Obama says wonderful things, he conjures up dreams of what could be, but that’s not enough to make it so. He doesn’t have the experience and the know-how to get the things done he keeps talking about. Hillary, however, does, and she can.

She is well-respected by the other members of the Senate and House, as evidenced by the statements of even her Republican “adversaries”. She can and does work with members of both sides of the aisle to get the things done that need to be done, and she has earned the respect and admiration of all she’s worked with. Yes, I know that sounds inpossible, but it’s true. Republicans who’ve worked with her on bills, or watched her work, have nothing but good things to say about her and her abilities as Senator. She has a much better chance of reaching bi-partisan agreements than any of the other candidates, Democrat or Republican…except maybe John McCain. He can cross the aisle sometimes, but he’s a little crotchety while doing so. Anyway, Hillary is the one who can do more than just talk about what what needs to be done, she can actually get it done because of her bi-partisan connections, and unless there is a major change in Congress, that’s what will be needed to get anything done.

Just look at what we’ve gotten the last 12 years or so. Yes, Bill Clinton could get Republicans to side with him under the right circumstances, but most of the time they were fighting him so hard he couldn’t do anything, and even when he’d sign a bill into action, they’d simply vote it down. And Bush….he had everything he wanted for his first four years, but once the Democrats took over, things got a little touchy. They would pass bills we need, and he would veto them out of hand. It didn’t matter how good they were for the country, if he didn’t like them (or more specifically, if his big-money backers didn’t) they were dead in the water. We need better than that. We need someone who can work both sides of the aisle and actually get us the legislation we need to lift us out of the swamp of a bad economy, a war we can’t seem to end, and the increasing hatred of us from even our best friends. We need Hillary.

I hope the Obama camp’s attempts to paint her as a racist blow up in his face. I hate when something that has nothing to do with anything gets blown all out of proportion, distorted into something it never was meant to be, and used to trip up a really good person. The whole Viet Nam thing with John Kerry is a perfect example, and even now he is painted as less than the hero he truly was in that war because of the Bush campaigns need to tar him with enough filth to keep him from winning. It’s not only hurtful to the one being attacked, it’s an embarrassment, or should be, to all those who actually believe the hype and allow it to shape their opinions about the person being assaulted. I truly hope people will see this for what it is and turn the tables on these people. After all, we expect these kinds of attacks from the Republicans, not from other Democrats. But then, we have been very good at eating our own young over the years. Ted Kennedy…..Howard Dean……John Kerry…even Al Gore, to a certain extent. We have to stop doing that and work to get the best candidate nominated. We have very little hope for the future if we don’t.

Woke up this morning - thank God, I guess - and turned on the news. That was my first mistake. This day isn’t going so well, it seems. First they found what they think is the body of the pregnant 19-year-old Marine that’s been missing for around a month, and she was burned and buried in the backyard of the man she brought charges against for raping her. Seems the neighbors wondered why there was so much burning going on back there a while back, and why so many buzzards were hanging around it. One even said he lent the guy his shovel. Can you imagine what those folks are feeling like today? And God help her family, who had to have been hoping for a better outcome than this. Yesterday the pundits were saying they’d learned she was still alive and had simply taken off. It has to be hard for them today.

Next came the story that Barack Obama was coming home to Chicago for a rest, and the plane he was on clipped the wing of another plane on the runway (or somewhere close), waiting to take off. Luckily no one on either plane was hurt, but how scary does that have to be for him? I’m not planning on voting for the man, at least in the primaries, but still, that had to have been a hard time for him, and I sympathize with what he must be feeling. I would probably be too scared to get back on a plane any time soon. Well, to be truthful, I’m too scared to get on a plane at any time, but that’s neither here nor there. Thank God he escaped serious injury.

There were more children killed in a house fire, a couple of “local” murders, the continuing downward spiral of the stock market, and more turbulent weather back East. And to top it off, although not on a level with the other stories, it seems Hillary still can do nothing right where the reporters are concerned. The woman just can’t win. She has been called cold, hard, and calculating because she sticks to business, talks about her ideas for a Hillary Presidency, and goes on to the next stop. Not enough humanity, they say. Not very likable. Well, after a few months of hard campaigning and thinking she was probably going to do well in Iowa, she came in a close third after Obama and Edwards. Close, but not close enough, according to the newspeople. So, later, at a Q & A session in New Hampshire, she let her emotions show, even getting dewy-eyed at a question that seemed to be made out of concern for her. Who could blame her?

Well, apparently, the Republicans, the newspeople, and John Edwards, that’s who. And they’re still on her about it, swearing it was all a put-on performance. Now, I don’t know about you, but after spending a few years of hearing people say I wasn’t strong enough to be President, that women are just too weak, and doing all I could to show everyone I most certainly was strong and not prone to emotional outbreaks, breaking down in public would not be something I’d be eager to do, even a very small breakdown. No, people, that lady had no intention of leaking tears, as evidenced by the way she fought to keep it under control and keep on going. She sucked it up, got control of herself, and moved on, with nothing more than dewy eyes to show for it.

The pundits this morning were opining as to how it was all a put on, how she’s trying to show the world she has a softer side - which, according to them, she really doesn’t - and it’s only to gain more sympathy, since it seemed to work so well in NH. But did it really? According to Frank Luntz, certainly not a Democrat supporter in any way, the signs were there that everything wasn’t written in stone, with Obama sweeping NH like he had Iowa. And when you look at the numbers, Obama got pretty much the percentage of votes they’d all said, with 36%. The pollsters all showed him between 35 and 37, so they were right about him. What they all ignored, however, was the 12 to 15% of voters polled who hadn’t made up their minds. It seems most of those broke for Hillary, for whatever reason. It wasn’t the polls that were wrong, it was the reporter’s interpretation of them….or the lack of it.

Anyway, I think that after seeing she could actually show herself to be a thinking, feeling human being without being ousted from the race for all time she simply decided she doesn’t have to wear the Superwoman suit she’d been sporting all along. And besides, most presidents have teared up and even outright cried at least once during their terms, so why should she be looked down on if she does the same? It makes no sense, and neither do the constant jabs at her, no matter what she does. Yes, I support Hillary Clinton, and I want her to become President. I don’t have many years left to see a woman finally make it into that office, and I’m doing everything I can to make sure she does it, because I feel she’s extremely qualified and capable, and she’ll do a great job of getting us back on track, both domestically and internationally. And let’s face it - I love underdogs.

Wow, what on earth happened yesterday? To hear the news people and the pundits tell it, Hillary was all but dead in the water, while Obama was walking on it, and it was all over but the shouting. Low and behold, once the smoke cleared, Hillary won New Hampshire, and everyone was stunned. Will wonders never cease?

Now, I don’t know what happened, either. All I know is, all the polls showed Obama leading Hillary by double digits going into yesterdays New Hampshire primary, but it was evident once the results started coming in that they had all been wrong. Now, that’s not a new thing, remember 2000 and Presidential election that gave Florida and the Presidency to Gore, only to yank it away later and give it all to Bush? Polls aren’t sacrosanct by any means, but there are usually one or two that go against the majority and get it right, or nearly so. This time, everyone missed it, even Clinton’s own pollsters.

I heard Dan Abrams talking today, and he said the most intelligent thing I’ve heard in all of the hoopla since it became clear what a mistake had been made: don’t pay attention to the news, the pundits, or the polls, because no one knows what will really happen until it happens. Smart guy, that Abrams fella. I know I’m not going to pay attention to any of that any more. They’re not going to fool me again!

I have to admit, I watched Hillary’s votes add up and thought it was nice to see, but it surely wouldn’t last. My grandson came through, saw the tally, and said “Hillary’s winning!”, to which I replied “Yes, for a minute.” I was sure the percentages would change at any minute, putting Obama firmly in the lead, and only hoped she’d hold on to second this time. As the evening went on and her lead continued, staying anywhere from 36% to 40% until it settled at 39% and stayed there, I became more and more incredulous. I simply couldn’t believe it would last, because everyone had her down and out all week. It did last, tho, and she hung on to win. Well, good for her!

Obama wasn’t very happy, although he did give a great speech. I was struck by the fact it didn’t seem much like a concession speech, and thought that was a bit high-handed of him, but considering his haughty remark about her likability in the debate the other night it wasn’t that surprising. I want to like the man, I really do, because I think he will make a good President a few years down the road, but he’s making it hard for me to do that. His attitude bugs me, his seeming sense of entitlement, that the job is his because he says it is, etc. Hopefully this will straighten that out, give him some humility, and I can go back to being impressed by his oratory skills once again.

Another thing I don’t like is how he and Edwards can unload on Hillary, getting as mean-spirited as they like, and it’s fine. However, when she stands up and fights back, everything thinks she’s horrible to picking on Obama. Of course, no one complains about Edwards being attacked, but if she says anything about Obama that isn’t glowing praise, she’s just wrong. I say, turn about’s fair play. If he’s going to make statements about her ideas that are provably wrong, she has the right to correct that and point out where he’s wrong about things. That’s not attacking him, it’s not mud-slinging, it’s simply debating the issues, her point against his. It’s part of a good debate, after all, and it’s up to us to research it to find out which is correct. At least that’s the way it’s supposed to work. That’s the way I decide who I want to vote for.

I have no idea what will happen in Nevada, South Carolina, or Florida, the next primaries to be fought over, and the thing is, neither does anyone else. Whatever happens, tho, we all need to remember that it’s only just started, there are many more states to go in deciding who our nominee will be, and trying to annoint one person or the other at this point is simply premature. Let’s wait and see who does what before we try to say who’s the winner. We won’t look so stupid that way, at least.

We are hearing quite a bit this political season about whether we should vote for change or for experience. Obama keeps hitting the change button, and his new butt-kissing puppy dog, John Edwards, is parroting it right and left, hoping to stay on the Senator’s good side and be in the running for VP if he wins the nomination. His intentions are so clear they are transparent, and it’s really knocked him down a few pegs in my assessment of his integrity and sincerity. Be that as it may, Obama swears we need change, and he’s the only one who can give it to us.

On the other hand, Hillary and Richardson are hitting the experience button as if they’re hoping to have a treat roll out of a non-exisitant hole. She has “35 years” experience, while he’s got it in everything from Governor to Head of the Energy Commission, to talking foreign leaders into compromising with their enemies. Sounds good, except that when he opens his mouth he’s liable to ramble on to five or six other topics than the one he began to address as he continues speaking. He is very hard to decipher, and his answers never quite seem to address the question he was asked.

Hillary’s experience is very impressive, when looked at with an unjaundiced eye, and seems to make her the logical choice for the Democratic nominee. However, she is still being pelted right and left with specious charges that have all been shown to be false several times over, and there is a seemingly inate dislike of her personally, making it anyone’s guess as to whether she can ever make it to the nomination, let alone the Presidency.

My question here, however, is this: Is change better than experience, and does one necessarily exclude the other? My answer: No on both counts.

Every Democrat in the running for President wants change, as do the largest majority of Americans themselves. Barack Obama doesn’t have a lock on that, no matter how often he says and implies that he does, and John Edward’s sudden conversion to same doesn’t make him an agent for change, either. What neither of them has, tho, is actual experience at dealing with bringing changes about when not everyone is on their side of the question, and dealing with foreign leaders who are not about to simply lie down and let us have our way, no matter how much we feel we’re entitled to that. Hillary Clinton has experience in both these areas, with plenty to spare.

Before I go any further, let me ask you this: If you hated your nose and wanted to change it, would you take a jack hammer and chip the thing off your face, leaving a gaping hole from above your lip to between your eyebrow, use a chisel, needle, and thread to do the job yourself and hope the scar won’t be as bad as the original nose, or call in a skilled, experienced cosmetic surgeon to do the job? I don’t think there’s any doubt about the anwer to that one, is there? We’d all choose the surgeon. So, why would we not choose the person most capable, with more experience than any of the others, to represent us around the world and try to get a better working relationship with all the other countries? It makes no sense, does it?

Ok, Obama is refining his rhetoric, saying the change is in the political area, not anything else. That makes no more sense to me than the other kind of change, tho. Politics runs a certain way, and if it’s derailed, it falls, it doesn’t get stronger. I honestly don’t think there’s a better person in the world to get our allies back on our side again, or help make new allies from old enemies, than Hillary Clinton. The countries and their leaders all have a great rapport with Bill Clinton, and through extension, to his wife, Hillary. How would that not be invaluable in building better relationships with them? What does Obama know of these things? How much experience has he had working with these leaders? Not much, according to his own travel office personnel. John Edwards? Not much, but a little more than Obama. Richardson has experience, of course, but who knows what will come out of his mouth each time he opens it? Haven’t we had enough of the Foot-in-Mouth gaffs over the last seven, almost eight years with Bush? No thanks, give me someone who can answer questions in an intelligent, understandable, and sensible way. Give me Hillary, or give me death. I want to be proud to be an American again, not having to duck my head and wonder what people are thinking when they find out I’m American and simply go mute until I leave. Give me intelligence and experience in dealing with foreign leaders and the hard questions we will have to ask ourselves if our economy is to rebound and take us back to pre-Bush days. Hillary has all that, while the others seem to not know how to put one foot in front of the other most days, let alone how to negotiate with world leaders.

Yes, I want change, and all of the Democratic leaders do, too. But intelligent change, done in a way that works and doesn’t cause more problems for us. We don’ need that at all. Change for change’s sake? No way! Intelligent, fact-based, experienced change that will really keep things running well at home and abroad. We want (and NEED) Hillary.

…aren’t surveys supposed to be questions that ask for your opinions on different subjects or products? That’s what I’ve always understood, but lately it seems surveys are simply schemes to get you to buy stuff. When did it change?

I have been inundated with offers to earn money and prizes for filling out “simple surveys”, and figuring I have as many opinions as anyone else, I decided to sign up for some. I mean, who can’t use a little extra cash these days, right? The problem is, most every one I sign up for ends up taking me to pages and pages of offers for stuff I have no need for, stuff I don’t really care to have, and stuff I couldn’t afford even if I did need or want it. And if you don’t check at least one - sometimes two from column A, two from column B, and two from column C - you don’t get whatever it is they told you that you’d won, or would receive for filling out the survey. How is that not fraud?

I’ve also received e-mails telling me I’ve won a laptop, a free vacation, and even a pair of name brand diamond studded watches, only to find out I have to complete Silver, Gold, and Platinum offers first, or else I’m out of luck. Now, I know that’s fraudulent, that if someone tells you you’ve won something they can’t then turn around and make you perform tricks for them in order to get whatever it is, or else pay “a small service fee”. How do they get away with it?

I have found a couple of survey places that actually do send surveys with questions to answer about certain products and services, etc, but I only get entries into Sweepstakes for those. Well, maybe if I ever got to actually do one I might get paid, but it seems I’m always in the wrong demographic, or the survey’s already had enough respondents, or something of that nature. Needless to say, I never seem to win any of those sweepstakes, no matter how many entries I’ve won and entered, so I have to wonder if those are on the up-and-up, too.

I remember when the old bait-and-switch was illegal, and businesses who participated in them would get in trouble when caught. What’s happened to that idea? Does the internet negate all sense of fairplay and equity? Are they really allowed to scam people right and left with impunity? And what about all these foreigners that send e-mails saying you’ve won millions in lotteries, or you’ve been chosen to receive millions from someone’s estate who has no beneficiary? Why can’t these people be stopped, especially when you contact people who should be able to do something about it? It’s just not right, I tell you.

Yes, I am older, and maybe I’m relying on old-fashioned ideas of right and wrong, but I happen to believe that’s the way things ought to be. No one should have the right to cheat people, lie to them to get their money, and promise one thing but give another - or nothing at all. It is pure-o-D fraud, and needs to be treated as such. These things are so prevalent that it shouldn’t be hard to find and stop them, yet they go on and on, and I have to wonder just how many people really believe it all and lose money because of it. The one that really bugs me at the moment is supposedly from a US soldier who’s battalion found a ton of money in one of Saddam’s old hideouts and decided to keep a few mil. The problem is, he needs someone to receive this money, and then send him his part while keeping the rest. That is so wrong on so many levels I can’t even begin to describe them all, and yet I’ve gotten three of those things from three different people, supposedly. And no one can stop it. Why?

I love the internet. I know that those of you who have never known a world without it probably think nothing of it, just as I never gave a thought to how strange it must have been to my grandparents to drive around in cars or fly across the country in airplanes, meaning they could get hundreds of miles in a few hours instead of a week or more by horse and carriage. It was normal to me, and just another part of life. The internet, however, is a new and wonderful thing, making research into any subject just a matter of punching a few buttons in the comfort of your home or office instead of running all over the place, digging through stacks of books or papers, and traveling all over the world to find what you need - if you could find it.

However, when faced with the increasing fraud and, yes, outright evil that is being perpetrated by so many users of this wonderful medium, one has to wonder just how great it really is. It just seems to have made it easier to do that kind of thing, with a larger audience and a more profitable cash cow for thieves and hucksters. Honestly, someone ought to do something, don’t you think?

Man, I have to say this has been one of the worst years of my entire life, and that’s saying a lot. Both for me personally and the world in general, this year is one that I will happily say “Good-bye” to, and never regret it’s departure.

The year was topped off today by one of the weirdest occurances I’ve heard of, at least where it concerns people I know and love. See, my daughter’s car was totalled today, and it never left her house. It seems an older guy - someone I went to school with, actually - dropped something as he was driving on the opposite side of the street my daughter lives on, and he bent down to pick it up. Simple, right? Well, not so much. He managed to cross into the oncoming lane, kept on going until he hit the parked minivan at my daughter’s curbside, and pushed the car over 20 feet backward, leaving the front rammed into what is left of the engine and several types of fluids from both cars running down the gutter to the storm drain on the corner.

I have no idea how fast he was traveling when he hit the car, but it seems like it had to be more than the 35 mph that’s posted, except when school is in session, when it lowers to 25. Luckily the guy’s airbags deployed and all he got from his adventure was a scrape on his forehead and a slightly bleeding nose, but there was no help for the front end of his car, as it was as mangled as my daughter’s was. The poor guy was so rattled he couldn’t even talk for a while, just mumbled something about getting his stuff before the car exploded. My daughter, an EMT in a past life, tried to get him to stay back and let her ascertain whether he was totally in control of his faculties or not, but he just kept repeating he was fine and he had to get his stuff out of the car.

She was kind of in shock herself, not quite believing she’s just lost her only means of transportation. Once the realization hit her that, had the kids not been dawdling along while getting ready to go shopping, they might very well have been in the car when he hit it, and that gave her a start. Of course, she quickly regained herself and thanked God for her poky kids - probably the first and only time she’d felt that way. Watching the police and several firemen working at keeping any danger posed by the leaking fluids and smoking engine at bay, she just kept repeating over and over “Thank God we were so slow”, mixed with repeated questions of the other guy as to how he was feeling, etc. I have to say, she was more calm than I would have been in her place.

Once everything was cleared up and everyone who didn’t belong there was gone, she began trying to figure out how she’d get a rental car, who would pay, and how. Phone calls to her insurance, his insurance, Enterprise Rent-a-Car, and the police took on a merry-go-round quality, and interspersed with calls from her honey wondering what was going on now and advising her on what she had to do and say, as if she couldn’t figure it out on her own. This was all exacerbated by the fact it’s a holiday and everyone was gone/leaving/just plain not interested in the problem, and trying to get information and advice as to how to go about it all was like pulling teeth from a hen’s mouth. Finally, after all the hoopla was over, I dropped her and the kids off at the car rental lot, waving good-bye as they climbed into their “new” car, ending the saga.

Now, as “disasters” go, this was probably not much worse than a broken leg right before a sking vacation, but for those of us involved, it was absolutely the most appropriate way to say good-bye to this dirty, rotten, stinking year that had started out with so much promise just 12 months ago. It’s like Forrest Gump said so often: “You never know what you’re gonna get”.

As we start this New Year, my hope is that this one will be much better for everyone than the one we’re ushering out at midnight tonight. No more war, no more innocents dying at the hands of those who think they have the right to kill as many other people as possible to get their point across, no more lost homes, no more Acts of God wiping out whole cities, states, and countrysides. No new diseases, no resurgence of old ones, and no lives lost to careless manufacturers or outright sabotage. No more hunger, no more pain, no more wondering how to live from one day to the next…..am I asking too much? Yeah, I guess I am, but….wouldn’t it be wonderful? Happy New Year, Everyone. God Bless and Protect Us All.