Voting Strategy This Fall

My voting strategy, without specific endorsements (because A: I haven't researched and B: What's my endorsement matter, anyhew?) boils down to Change.

I'm not happy with anyone in Congress, with a handful of the usual exceptions (Ted Kennedy's kept his eye on the ball, for instance. Russ Feingold. John Conyers. Patrick Leahy.) I'd like to name some Republicans on that parenthetical list, but...I'm having trouble thinking of any. Which is sad, because I know there are some. They just don't get the attention.

I'm truly disgusted with Harry Reid. As the Senate Majority Leader, he's been directly responsible for some of the worst legislative compromises of the 110th Congress. He's allowed the Republican party to make a mockery of the process, to stonewall process...and he's done it without so much as a whimper.

GOP: "We are SOOOO gonna filibuster that bill if you try and vote it."

Reid: "Fine, fine...we'll do it the way you want."

I'm paraphrasing and exaggerating...but not by much, sadly.

The long and short? If there's an encumbant, I'm half-tempted to just vote for the opponent out of principle, regardless of party lines.

...I won't do that, however. There are too many issues I worry about--mostly the creep of conservative Christian values into government--to let some guy in to write laws because "They're New." That's not responsible citizenship.

But...it will factor. I'll be giving the candidates a harder look this year, and not necessarily stopping at party affiliation or a single issue. I want people who will govern in Washington, and keep politics to a minimum.

Monica Goodling Says It All With Her Actions

I'm a little behind the times...but this is important stuff.

The situation in the Justice Dept under Ashcroft and Gonzales...pretty much tells me everything I need in order to be disgusted with the Administration and how it's perverted our country's laws and systems.

Here's the Wikipedia entry on Monica Goodling, a conservative Christian woman who faithfully served the Republican Party and George W. Bush for several years. The part of her job we have come to worry about the most is the personnel management she did for the Justice Department.

The first time her name hit public consciousness was during the US Attorney firing scandal. I could go on for hours on that issue, but suffice it to say Ms Goodling was a key player in many of those dismissals, and in the aftermath of trying to control the public reaction. In fact, she refused to testify without immunity when Congress tried to simply get an explanation from the Justice Dept.

With good cause, apparantly. A report on Monica Goodling's hiring practices released on July 28th by the Justice Dept confirmed she had violated federal law by making decisions based on the political affialiations of applicants wives and rumors of lesbianism, among others. It's good have priorities straight.

So yes. Apparantly, ones ability to actually uphold the law took a very back seat to supporting the Republican Party in general and the President in specific. Way to keep the rule of law paramount and the premier, way to uphold the Constitution.

Though really...do we expect that out of Bush anymore?

Right Vs Responsible

I had an epiphany the other day. It wasn't so much a sudden blinding flash of the obvious but the sheet finally falling away from the obvious. Something I wasn't aware of all at once, but something I've been gradually becoming aware of.

It's the simple fact that following the rules doesn't necessarily make one responsible.

A classic real world example of this is calling in "sick" to work. (Note the quotes...I'm all in favor of not working when sick, but simply taking the day off should be a far rarer occurance.) While the rules will probably allow you to not show up, leave early, come late, for many many shifts and get away with it...that doesn't make it ok.

Just because the rules state, "It's ok to be late/absent/leave after an hour with appropriate notice," it doesn't stop your coworkers from getting the shaft. They counted on your coverage they can't replace now. You may be ok in the eyes of the law, so to speak, but you fail at being a responsible person.

On the flip side, sometimes breaking the rules is the responsible option. For instance...you're not supposed to work in another department right now because of the way labor hours are allocated. But they're completely swamped, and the big order isn't going to get out in time without extra help.

The rules in this case would condemn a person from lending a much appreciated hand on a project that ultimately makes money for the company. Following the rules would mean sitting by and watching things go to hell, and last time I checked that's not a responsible action.

How does the apply to news and politics? Well lets think...maybe because the Bush Administration (and multitudes of others in Washington on both sides of the aisle) has alternately taken one or the other approach on their so-called war on terror.

• When the rules clearly wouldn't allow the Administration to do what they wanted with detainees, they set up the prison camp outside jurisdiction of law.


• They tried to rewrite the rules on tribunals in order to make things seem kosher, because if the rules say it's ok then it's ok, right? Ditto on the DOJ memo's authorizing torture.


• The Administration was careful to make sure they followed all the rules to authorize the carnage in Iraq, even though the basis was a net of lies and the aim questionable.

And it goes on and on.

Basically, it takes some good judgement to know when to follow and when to break the rules. It's a sign of growth, of maturity, of wisdom. Time and again, the Bush Administration has failed to make the right call. Now...the nation, and the world, is in one of the worst situations ever for peace and stability.

So now we'll see if the American voter has noticed. We'll see if they've learned. We get to watch in November as they decide the fate of Congressmen and Senators who failed in their duties to oversee the President and provide a check and balance. We get to see if they've learned to cut through the political foam that comes from a candidate's mouth and determine their real character.

We get to find out if we the people will again be represented in Washington. If responsibility will again take precedence over being "right."

Hope?

I've had a series of conversations in the past few weeks about the Presidential election. The usual, "Oh, yeah, well, who you gonna vote for?"

I decided a while back that my vote is probably going towards Obama. He's more of a course correction than McCain. And...could there be something else to it? I mean, that whole campaign slogan of Obama's?

The whole...hope theme?

Typically, when I'm discussing the election, I try to keep it cynical. I don't want to appear swept up in crazy passion, or making an emotional decision. "They're ALL politicians," is a refrain of mine.

But I should admit it. Obama does give me hope. Hope that he won't be just another politician. That things might actually start to improve. Energy is contagious, whether it be negative or positive. That guy is dumping a whole lot of positive energy on things, and I can't help but like it.

I like how he doesn't side step many issues. How he acknowledges obstacles and challenges. And then goes on to say, "We can handle that." Almost like it's all just a secondary concern. Like he's keeping his eye on the prize, not ignoring the badness but not focusing on it either.

I like that.

Back in the Saddle Again?

One of the things that annoys me lately, in a totally irrational way, is the way Time magazine is doing Presidential Election coverage.

Picture it: A normal TIME cover. The art. The titles of key articles. All normal, well and good. But then, two of the articles will definitely be a point/counter point written by McCain and Obama.

Part of me goes, "Wonderful. We need to know what they're thinking on issues like the war in Afghanistan."

Another part goes, "Why the hell do they get to babble about this? I read TIME for expert insight."

Yet a third part: "It's just campaign rhetoric in print. They aren't saying anything they'll actually act on. Which means they're wasting paper that could be printing useful insight."

So while I like to see the candidates' positions getting put out there to a demographic that is at least semi-informed on the topic, I'm worried about their stances being confused with news and informed analysis.

Or am I just feeling ornery?

...And Now for Some News...

No Drugs for Depression

Senate Blocks Energy Bill (The best part? The Dems added the ammendment about off shore drilling that the GOP wanted, and they STILL filibustered)

Separation of Church and State

Mike Huckabee has some good points. The weight loss thing is impressive. I've heard his tax plan is actually on the level. Anyone who can be an executive of a state has to be a capable, functioning human being, and I respect that.

But.

This little blurb on his website says it all. "My faith doesn't influence my decisions, it drives them."

Huckabee says a lot of things on that page that are hard to disagree with. He throws in a line about being a steward of the earth. He talks about how the 1st Amendment says religion shouldn't be preferred or prohibited. But the fact he talks about religion and politics mixing at all fills me with a dull dread.

I am not comfortable with a Christian President, just as I wouldn't be comfortable with an Islamic President. Nor would I be comfortable with an Atheist President. Historically speaking, heads of state who make state decisions based on the Bible have really made a mess of things. We are a secular nation of secular laws (mostly. Why can't I buy beer on Sunday morning?). I don't want anyone's faith being allowed to change that.

Jimmy Carter is an incredibly religious Southern Baptist. I didn't know that for years. I admired him as a President and for his work post-Presidency without ever having religion enter into it. Did his faith factor into decisions made as President? Of course! Did he take instructions from the Bible and other Christian teachings? I don't think so.

The fact Huckabee is so popular among heavily Christian voters is a mark against him in my book. Those were the same people who voted Bush into office. The fact he is running on a platform that implies faith-based governance offends me.

Separation of Church and State. It's the concept that makes us not Iran.

...And Now For Some News...

Bush's Final State of the Union Address Tonight, from NPR.

Mormon Leader Dies at Age 97, from NPR.

New Unrest in western Kenya, from BBC.

Egypt Tries New Tactics to Seal Gaza Border, from BBC.

AC Units Not Safe From Scrap Thieves, from WCBE.

Busy Week for Ohio Legislaters, from WVXU.

Your Ohio Primary

ok...so I've moved to a whole different end of the state. That's kinda disturbing on some levels...but not, on others. But I'm still in Ohio, so thankfully many of my links are still valid. Changing them is the next big project I have.

But today, I wanna look into the primary. When it is, who can vote, etc etc. Let's go consult Google.

By a round-a-bout way, I found this handy dandy schedule. This guy has some pretty nifty graphics, so it's a bit better than my postage. Not a bad site on the whole...go check it out!

This tells us that Ohio has a joint primary (both Democratic and Republican parties hold primary elections the same day) on March 4th. This is after super-Tuesday, so it makes our primary even more irrelevant than most...kinda sad.

I believe the best way to investiage the how-tos of a primary is through the Ohio offices of the parties...so lets go back to Google.

The Ohio Democratic Website really kinda sucks. A lot. They don't even have the March 4 primary listed on their events calendar. In fact, they barely mention the primary at all. They do have a pretty robust information base in general terms, however.

The Ohio Republican Website is flashier, and better and getting their message out, but has even less real info. The national GOP website doesn't look so barren of info, and I was referred to it a few times...but I was looking for information on the Ohio primary. Didn't find it, and the GOP didn't list the primary with their events either.

I'm kinda disappointed in both these groups. Remind me why I'm registered Independent?

Maybe the Ohio Board of Elections? Long story short, not really.

ok, I had to walk away from the computer after 2 hours on this. I believe I saw a lil blurb back on the Ohio Democratic Party's site on their FAQs about registering with a party...their answer was no, but if you vote in a primary that will set your party affiliation. So it resets your registration? Apparantly. I couldn't find anything to clarify it, and I'm just about done.

Now for Some News...

Gaza Barrier Breached, from NPR

Slide May Not Presage Severe Recession, from NPR

Goths with Dog Leash Forced off Bus, from BBC

Iraqi Parliament Approves New Flag, from BBC (this actually does serve practical purpose)

How DO Candidates Get Chosen?

I have a vague understanding of this...but not a full understanding. So I'm going to consult Google for you.



In essence, it's a smaller version of the Electoral College. While the primaries for each party ARE held in the year leading up to the Presidential Election, those really don't officially decide anything. Delegates are chosen from each state, and then THEY select the candidate at the party convention, typically held the summer before Election Day.



The delegate selection process is rather...complicated. It varies by state, and by Party. One of my Google Finds, ThisNation.com, had a pretty solid answer for you. That article also links to a CNN.com report on how the GOP and Democrats did their process in 2004...which is a good read.



For the sake of brevity, the short and simple answer is the primaries serve to pledge some delegates for a particular candidate. They're typically only about half of the delegates that will go to the Convention...there are elected officials (think Governors), Party officials, and others with influence who will be chosen for the state at large.



Most delegates will be pledged, meaning they have to declare for a particular candidate before the convention. It's for this reason winning the primaries is such a key element...although in theory, with a scattered enough race (like this one!) it could be anyone's ball game, on account of unpledged delegates being able to weigh in on just one of three otherwise equal candidates.



So, to recap: The primaries elect some of the delegates to the Convention, and these set of district level delegates will vote for the winner of said primary. PLEO's, or Party Leaders and Elected Officials, will also have a say and are typically unpledged. This allows state delegations to be flexible under changing political conditions. Other delegates are chosen as well, with an at-large distinction, and depending on state rules are pledge or unpledged.



Then they all get together, and have a big party, and somewhere along the way vote for whoever they were pledged to vote for. Or whoever their delegation decides on, if they aren't pledged.



That gets important, because...what about those delegates pledged to Bill Richardson? They're up for grabs at the convention. If Huckabee drops out, all his delegates ALSO become fair game. That's why it may not seem important to vote your conscience in a primary, but...really, it is. Even if your candidate drops out later, a delegate from your district could play a key role in choosing the right candidate, instead of just going to support a media darling.

Now For Some News...

Bush to Announce a Stiumulous Package (Put Together With Congress???), from NPR.

Iran is Not an Immediate Military Threat, says Gates, from NPR.

Bobby Fischer Dies at 64, from BBC.

CIA Names Bhutto Killer, from BBC.

Reds Spring Training Tickets On Sale, from WVXU.

Delta, Northwest Merger Likely, from WVXU.

Ohio Supreme Court Rules on Multiple Sentences, from WVXU.

Find Your Elected Folks, Part 3!

So...thus far, we've found the President, my Congresswoman, my Senators, and the Governor of Ohio. What's next, you ask? Isn't that all?



Excuse me while I laugh. Because we're just getting started.



After this week tho, I plan on shaking it up a bit, don't worry. But for this fine Thursday morning, more elected reps!



Let's look at my State Senator. Or Senators? How does that work, exactly? I dunno...but I know where to start.

1. Go to the Ohio homepage.


2. On the right hand side of the page, you should see a blue box with the Governor's photo on it. Above him, there are some tabs...one of them says "Legislative." Click it.


3. We've got some options. We've got 5 links, one each for the Senate, the House, and the General Assembly, plus one each for Find Your Senator and Find Your Representative. (I'm glad we did this, 'cause I had no idea these legislative webpages were here).


4. I'm going to search for my Senator. Punch in my Zip Code, and I get the scoop on Robert Schuler (this is a neat service!)


5. Just for kicks, let's do my Representative too. Again w/ my Zip, I meet Michelle Schneider.

Go try it...it's fun!

Now for Some News...

• House Approves Spending Bill Tied to Troop Withdrawal (Too bad the Senate will never go for it), from NPR
• Mitt Romney Has Trouble Ahead Because of Mormon Faith, from NPR
• Airport Security Not Very Secure, from NPR
• Bishops Issue Voting Guidelines, from NPR
• Good News, Bad News About Iran, from BBC
• Musharraf Names Interim Prime Minister, from BBC

2007 General Election Results

I know anyone who cares has already found these results, but there they are (and a couple editorial comments) anyway.

Municipal Court District 1 Judge:

1. Dwane K Mallory, 50.25% ; John H Burlew. 49.75%. 11199 Votes Cast.
2. Fanon A Rucker, 100% (unopposed) 6278 Votes Cast

MCD 2:

1. Nadine Allen, 76.53% ; Rosalind C Florez 23.47%. 21269 VC

MCD 3:

1. Ted Berry, 71.76% ; Kendal M Coes, 28.24%. 24245 VC

MCD 4:

1. Julie Stautberg, 100% (unopposed) 19441 VC

MCD 5:

1. Heather Russel, 66.02% ; Greg Cohen, 33.98% 27807 VC

MCD 5 (Unexpired Term):

1. Brad Greenberg, 100% (unopposed). 22056 VC

MCD 6:

1. Richard Bernat, 68.35% ; Lawrence Lindgren 31.65%. 29819 VC

MCD 6 (Unexpired Term):

1. Bernie Bouchard, 66.97% ; Norma J Davis 33.03%. 30552 VC

MCD 7:

Melissa Powers, 100% (unopposed). 16076 VC

Villiage of Marriemont:

1. Mayor: Dan Policastro, 100% (unopposed). 930 VC
2. Clerk-Treasurer: Paul J Tontillo, 100% (unopposed) 938 VC
3. Council (Vote 2): Kimberly Sullivan, 37.70% ; Dennis Wolter, 31.51% ; James H Ferguson, 30.79%. 2085 VC
4. School Board (Vote 2): Marie C Huenefeld, 51.62% ; Denise Walter, 48.38%. 3557 VC

Tax Issues:

1. Mariemont Operating Levy Renewal: For, 72.88% ; Against, 27.12%. 1239 VC
2. Cincinnati School Levy: Against, 58.11% ; For, 41.89%. 66393 VC
3. Mariemont School Levy: For, 56.21% ; Against, 43.79%. 2907 VC
4. Issue 27 (Referendum on Public Safety Resolution): Against, 56.05% ; For, 43.95%. 191391 VC
5. Issue 28 (Mental Health Levy): For, 55.13% ; Against, 44.87%. VC 190304 VC
6. Issue 29 (Senior Services Levy): For, 69.45% ; Against, 30.55%. VC 190783 VC

All taken from the Hamilton County Board of Election's results page. Don't see your election? Probably because I didn't vote in it. Look here.

As for comments...I'm amazingly, incredibly disappointed the public safety levy didn't pass. Voting against that levy was essentially voting against law enforcement and for criminals. The day after it was shot down, the county is already talking about cutting sheriff patrols in Over the Rhine. That's exactly where we need to pulls cops from. I'm predicting some serious crime upswings and further migration out of the heart of Hamilton County.

I'm similarly disgusted by the short term view taken by voters on the Cincinnati school issue. Yes, the district has it's problems. But it's also falling apart, understaffed, and under funded. While we'd love to be able to give money to only good school districts, witholding it from a bad school does immeasurable damage. Watch the size of the city continue to shrink, because the children who go to the public schools are deprived of an education. When you link the effects of an unsupported school district and an unsupported law enforcement community, you get a slum.

That's all I have...except for we had 34% turnout this time around. I think that number speaks for itself.

Election Day

No, no national offices or issues are up for decision today. In fact, in Ohio there aren't even any state issues. But these are the elections when levies are passed or shot down, usually because no one but the advocates come out to vote.

So go vote.

In Ohio, don't forget your driver's license. Yes, you can still vote without it...but provisional ballots only get counted if the normal ballots are too close to call. So make sure you get in the first round fo decision making.

Smart Voter is a wonderful resource if you live in California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, or New York. If you don't live in any of those, Smart Voter will send you to where you can get the info you need (such as voting stations and the ballot, so you know what you'll be voting on). You can also Google "Franklin County Board of Elections" (substituting your county, of course) and you should get what you need. If Google doesn't seem to do it, your state's website should have the election information posted that will direct you to the local organization.

This is the day people don't vote, and then ask later, "When the hell did they raise sales tax?? WHY??" Don't be like that, please. Take your duty as a citizen seriously.

Tomorrow, we'll cover how you can register to vote (in most cases). This week, we'll also go over how to READ a ballot, since I'm pretty sure they try to be difficult. In keeping with the election craze, I'll also update everyone on the results (at least in Hamilton County, OH).

Something to look forward too, eh?