The Inaugural Salmon Marathon

The below is an essay I wrote the day after the Salmon Marathon. It's not short, so consider yourself forewarned. One of my running clubs put it in their newsletter:

I arrived in Salmon for the first annual Salmon Marathon, from Boise, on a gorgeous
Friday afternoon. The drive into Salmon was especially nice, provided the beautiful
weather and the valley view of the rugged Beaverhead Range’s Sacajawea Peaks. The
day that followed would provide me with a spectacular marathon experience, blending
the beauty and folksiness of a small town marathon, with the organization, fun and
culture of a marathon substantially larger.

Salmon is a smaller town, with a population of approximately thirty-three hundred
people, nestled in East-Central Idaho, about two hours from Missoula, Montana. Being a
smaller town, Salmon presents all of the wonderful experiences one comes to expect from
a place of Salmon’s size. After a warm and enjoyable packet-pickup experience, at
around noon, I went to find a nice Chinese food restaurant, to load up on rice for those
pre-marathon carbohydrates.

As I’d arrived in Salmon with plenty of time, I decided to get directions so I could drive
and preview the marathon’s course. The nice folks running the pickup directed me to
Tendoy, Idaho, which was where the start was located. Their instructions were quite
simple, “Follow Main out of town, it becomes “twenty-eight,” you will come to Tendoy,
from there, turn left. On your right is the school house; that is where the start of the race
is.”

As I drove up Highway 28 to the small town of Tendoy, every car or truck coming from
the opposite direction introduced to me something I’d not seen since my younger years,
growing up in Sherrard, Illinois, “the farmer wave.” If you’re not familiar, a “farmer
wave” is the ubiquitous response exhibited by passing folks in rural settings throughout
this country. It can be as simple as popping the index finger up from the steering wheel
of one’s truck. What was most delightful was being caught by it off guard, and then
striving to preemptively catch passersby before they could beat me to the punch. Perhaps
it was right there I began to feel enjoyable nature of what the Salmon Marathon would
come to offer. Of course, packet pickup was well organized and friendly, but it hadn’t
yet hit me that I was going to run the marathon in such a special place filled with warm
and friendly folks.

After I returned to Salmon, I went to my hotel room at the Stagecoach Inn, which was
strategically located across from the bus pickup and race’s finish line. I sat in my room
for several hours catching up on phone calls and trying to stay off my feet. Laying out
my race wear and pinning my number to my shirt. From there, I left for St. Charles
Catholic Church in Salmon, which was where the race-sponsored pre-race pasta dinner
was to take place.

As one can certainly imagine, the dinner was full of jovial folks, all of whom were
excited about the marathon and its smaller town setting. I met folks at the dinner from
Upstate New York, Utah and San Mateo, California. Like marathoners in every pre-race
dinner, there was a fun exchange of marathon stories from around the States and other
parts of world. It’s challenging to adequately express the fun and rustic nature of dining
in the place where Salmon’s Knights of Columbus meet, provided that church halls or
basements are too often the locations for such things. Of course, from a marathonperspective,
too often there are more than 10,000 racers, which logistically conflicts with
one local church or public hall opening their doors for every tier of racer to sit down and
dine together. This was again where the smaller nature of the Salmon Marathon, with its
limit of 250 racers, expressed its advantages.

Like the church hall at St. Charles Church on Friday night, Saturday morning, all of the
racers met for the busses to drive us to the start line, from the same place where the
packet pickup was located. The busses to drive us to the race start were school busses,
which provided for roughly twenty-two miles of conversation with fellow racers. Upon
arriving at the school, to our surprise, doors to the one-room Tendoy schoolhouse were
opened, and we were told to go into the school to wait for the 6:45 a.m. start. After
entering the school, the race volunteers and organizers asked us to take a metallic starsticker,
and attach to the map the location from where we came. Then, we were to write
on the posted piece of poster paper our name and city of origin. It was there, in the
comfortably warm school room, I learned that those from out of the state of Idaho
received in weeks prior letters from school children in Tendoy welcoming them to
Salmon and their school in Tendoy. Again, the wonder of the small town experience was
sweetly evident.

At around 6:40 a.m. my fellow racer Luke and I headed out to acclimate to the near perfect
start time temperature of roughly 45 degrees Fahrenheit. It was a little chilly, but
in the perfect way, the kind for which we knew we’d be thankful once the race started.
As we stood there Kathy Gatens the friendly and energetic race director gathered all of us
for the convocation to kick off the race. There a local pastor led us in a pre-marathon
prayer, and Kathy introduced us to a patient at Whitewater Therapeutic the program
which the marathon benefited. The young woman told the racers how she had benefited
from the program, which was all the more sincere and heartwarming, taking further the
wonderful and caring feel the racers had leading into the marathon. To conclude the prerace
convocation, we sang to a racer from Boise, whose birthday was the next day,
“Happy Birthday,” and then we were off to the start line.

The marathon, because of its smaller size was gun-timed, which didn’t leave any
concerns. As the gun went off, we began running, and a good portion of the racers took
off in quick order. The race was on “Old Lemhi Road” for the majority of its length.
Old Lemhi is a gravel road with reasonable amounts of gravel and dirt, likening it to a
trail run, which didn’t leave anyone, with whom I spoke, discouraged. Portable
bathrooms were located at approximately every other mile, which was nice. The race
started prior dawn, but magically, as though it was planned, as racers progressed up the
road, the sun came up and shown the beauty of the high mountain desert in which we
were running. There were ranges on both sides of the valley in which we were running,
and the range to our left, the south side, began showing its dawn color, the perfect reds
and greens one sees in Salmon’s surroundings.


What was equally impressive was looking to the left at dawn; around mile two, we saw a
mule deer grabbing some grass in the far off field to the left of the course. Not far after
that, around mile three, many of the racers caught a glimpse of a moose also tending to its
dawn activities. Taking this further, while I’ve never run a marathon with a course like
this, there was also the pleasure of receiving a chorus of moos and whinnies, as we
passed pasture and ranches, running down Old Lemhi.


There is the component that sounds quite rural about that, but at the same time, there
were wonderful residents of Salmon and local farms out to cheer for us sporadically
throughout the course. Of course, from the race’s logistics there was adequate hydration
and toilets throughout the course, but amongst all of the crowds there, there was a chorus
of nice women standing at the gates of a ranch, around mile fourteen, waving American
Flags, singing “God Bless America.” It was difficult not to attempt to sing along with
them, as I threw my hand over my heart at the sight. Of course, keeping with the spirit of
the marathon and the wonderful people of Salmon, crowds gathered in spots throughout
the course. In spite of the town’s smaller population, there was no shortage of
community support from the people of Salmon, or the marathon’s volunteers.


Concluding the marathon into town there was an enjoyable length of downhill, which
lead onto Salmon’s streets. From there, the course wound over to the park near Idaho
Adventures, where the busses picked us up. As I ran down to the park, where the chutes
were located, a group of young women cheered for me, “Go Matt!” I looked at them
quite puzzled, and one responded with a smiling “Don’t worry, you don’t know us.” It
was tough not to both be flattered and chuckle at that component of the race. As I ran
into the chutes, the entire park was full of racers just having finished and spectators, all of
whom cheered me through the finish. Again, the theme of this smaller marathon was
consistent throughout the race.


It is all too easy to continue to write about how nice and kind the people of Salmon were
as volunteers and spectators, but the part that provided for enjoyment of that experience
was just how well the race was run. Kathy Gatens, the Race Director, and her group of
organizers, planners and volunteers, along with the police and fire fighters of Salmon put
on an event that was a continuous display of proper advance planning. Certainly, the
racers and people of Salmon were blessed with gorgeous weather for the race, but much
of that comes down to planning for the right date, based on the location.


Following the race, at 5 p.m. the town had a party at the cleaned up park, where the finish
line was located. At the party, racers were provided free access, whereas other patrons
were charged for admission. There were tents from local patrons, some were selling
food, some were advertising their products, and others were selling desserts for
donations, all of which reemphasized the gracious nature of the race, the town, and those
organizing the event. From there, a terrific bluegrass band, New South Fork Bluegrass
played a wonderful set of bluegrass music, both their originals and covers of classic
bluegrass musicians like Bill Monroe. With many from the town having volunteered to
help out with the marathon, there was a wonderful cross-section of families with parents,
grandparents, and young children dancing to the warm sounds coming from the band.


As some new friends of mine and I were standing a talking during a break in the music,
the Race Director Kathy walked by us, and we stopped to thank her for such a wonderful
race. I found myself saying to her, “Congratulations for planning such a wonderful race.
We all love the idea of running a marathon with a small number of participants in a
smaller city’s environment, like Salmon’s, but there are typically consequences choosing
to run a smaller city’s marathon, due to lack of planning or organization.” As Kathy
stood there grateful for the compliment, I said, “Kathy, this marathon was the perfect
blend of a smaller city’s atmosphere and the terrific planning you put behind it.” I felt
comfortable speaking on behalf of all of my fellow racers saying that, as I’d not heard
one person say something to the contrary. If one is looking for a small marathon, one
with limited participants, on a faster course with optimal conditions and planning, I
would immediately have to refer them to Salmon’s, as it was all of the above. I am quite
grateful I heard of it when I did, and registered. I am sure as word gets out about this
year’s marathon, future marathons in Salmon will be tougher entries to gain.

-Matt Johnson 14-September-08

Bill – Waiting until after the Jewish Holiday?

I guess this sums it up. If you comb back through the Matty blog, you can see my open letter during the primaries. I feel like much of what Clinton is bringing to the table right now is a bag of sour grapes… Maybe it’s just me….

You're a “Maverick” – An Open Letter to Senator McCain

Senator McCain,

While this might not be the last letter you’ll see from me, I felt I needed to write you one after last night’s debate performance. As a candidate for President, I found your performance rather lacking. As I sit down to write this, I’ll try to conjure the reasons I didn’t think much of your performance. From there, perhaps you can modify your performance this next debate.

First, Senator McCain, you need to look at your opponent when you are debating him. It was rather maniacal that you couldn’t find the strength to face Senator Obama during your debate. We first saw this when you were debating Mitt Romney, and it seemed rather odd then as well. This time, however, it seems to be a continuation of a part of your manner, which leaves many concerned about how you would face world opponents.

I know that seems like a bit of unimportant minutia, concerning the fact you don’t face opponents during debates, but it arouses concerns about your temperament. We are all cognizant of your sacrifice for our country, and please know I’m not discounting that. However, if your temper or anger for an opponent prevents you from facing them eye-to-eye, for fear you might appear angrier or lose control, perhaps you shouldn’t look to take on the role of President of the United States.

Temper is not something unique to you; I know that. For instance, temper was something for which Bill Clinton was known; however, Clinton could face his opponents during debates. From my perspective last night, during the debates, it looked as though you were ashamed of your positions, or you were in trouble with your opponent. That didn’t show the grace many of us would like you to have.

On another note, your use of the word “Maverick,” it has to go. Sincerely, the rate at which you and Governor Palin say the word makes it sound to be a manufactured sound-bite. It’s as though your campaign did lots of polling on the qualities in the past the public liked in you, which has left your running mate and you reiterating it endlessly. Honestly, your use of the word has taken away its power, and left it more like a sound bite than a characteristic for which some might admire you.

For every part of your “Maverick” nature, you’ve continuously voted along with the worst President in our history. This is the same President who led us into war under false pretenses, and permitted torture both in Guantanamo Bay and abroad, through our military or through third parties. For all of this being a “Maverick,” your support for President Bush has simply meant that you’ve been a “Maverick” advocating or voting on behalf of someone making horrible management decisions for our country.

In short, if your idea of being a “Maverick” means what your record over the past eight years has been, I think I’d prefer to have someone else take the role of President of the United States. At the moment, your role does not provide me any comfort or hope in the face of what we have on the table.

What Economists Say

http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/john.cochrane/research/Papers/mortgage_protest.htm

With great pleasure, I am posting what my dear friend Peter just sent to me. In so doing, I realize I was perhaps not as clear during my first post on the topic, so I’ll clarify things a bit.
I am not for Paulson’s bailout – I like Dodd’s version better, if there is one
I don’t know that it needs to be right this second;
However, I think it should come sooner rather than later
I do think action is required, not necessarily right now, but at some point
I do think there are socio-economic ramifications to this, which need to be taken into account before anything is firmly done

To the link that is attached, I like the petition, and far be it for me to speak better on economics than those signatories. I do not, however, believe that our economy in this instance should live and die by the free market. I say that for the following reasons: one, our market does not exist in a vacuum; two, the problem was not created in a vacuum; three, there are ramifications beyond simple profit and loss.

The petition argues not against government intervention. It argues instead for the following: “we ask Congress not to rush, to hold appropriate hearings, and to carefully consider the right course of action, and to wisely determine the future of the financial industry and the U.S. economy for years to come.”

I just wanted to clarify. I erred not stating clearly enough; therefore, conflating the Bush administration's move with things that should be done.

“Bailout” – How Are You on It? Me, I am for it!

I am averse to the word “bailout,” it’s too pejorative. We need to examine this as the government investing in our nation’s solvency, thereby, saving our country and the world from Recession.

Why do I support this Economic Rescue?

Here’s the quick and dirty: watch J.P. Morgan buy Washington Mutual, and watch them thrive. Congress should move along with an economic rescue package similarly.

Why does the purchase of a failing bank work for JP Morgan? Well, like Bear Stearns, there are assets both firms hold, it’s just that their management blew too many calls.
Certainly, there is a short-term loss absorbing Washington Mutual, but the flipside to it is that Washington Mutual as JP Morgan, upon restructuring, holds enough assets to be a recoverable asset. Above and beyond that, the purchase of Washington Mutual allows Chase to move into the West, which means that I can consolidate back to one major bank (I opened another checking and money-market account here in Boise at another bank, mostly so I didn’t have to pay ATM fees).

Of course, in the case of the Federal Government shoring up mortgages, there are risks. On the other side to that, the risks of doing nothing far outweigh the risks of the Federal Government owning Real Estate (that outcome being the worst case). Right now, all of this paper money going around, if shored up by the Federal Government will keep the credit markets buoyant. No one I know is 100% liquid. In some respects, if not many, most I know use credit cards. Some may keep them paid off as regularly as possible; nevertheless, there is that smidge they have outstanding to a creditor. That’s not excluding all of those in the US with mortgages, car loans, businesses buying other firms, etc… In short, doing nothing could cause a catastrophic collapse of the credit market.

Okay, our government has failed us, in both their lack of regulation and allowing too much buoyancy in the market, both with loose capital irresponsible government spending. That’s to be sure. This coming November, please don’t forget the party 100% responsible for six of the last eight years. Does the Democratic Party share some responsibility for Fannie and Freddie? To be sure, but this ball started rolling about eight years ago, and it kept rolling unhindered right up to 2006.

Make them pay in November, but let’s not cut over our nose to spite our face. It’s that sort of irresponsibility we need to legislate against in coming years. We need to elect those that will effectively do that. Those responsible for this, they will pay with their loss of office or CEO positions, but we don’t all need to suffer for their mistakes. That is water under the bridge. Like Iraq, we can’t simply run right this second. We need to shore things up, plan for something effective, and then make a graceful departure. The Federal Government could do the same with housing here in the market, if things got worse. Even in worst case scenarios, there aren’t fewer people needing homes, there will always be value in homes in the US. That value might be reduced, but then, if the government restrains itself in their liquidation trickle, they can control that value. From a free-market perspective, it sounds dicey, but it’s better than the other way things could go.

The Future's Eyes, What They'll Hold

It was tough to come home from my run last night, and not sit down to write about thousands of things. Of course, looking at the post I put up, just before I went to bed, we could probably see this coming.

First, I respect Libertarianism, but where were all of the “Conservatives” these past eight years? Not doing anything about this credit crisis will amount to a global recession. Let’s not do that team! I’ve seen Ron Paul’s berating Bernanke, but sorry Congressman, you’re missing the point. I don’t see one economist amongst your crowd speaking against our government’s attempt to salvage credit. No, it’s hindsight twenty-twenty Libertarians who didn’t do a damn thing to stop or block six years of Republican economic policy domination, from 2000-2006, which put us in this mess.

As I type that I think to myself how these past eight years will be looked upon in history books. For one, we didn’t learn from the gas crisis of the 1970’s. Detroit and American drivers returned to buying expensive gas-guzzling cars, which became the status quo.

I recall writing emails, back when I lived in Memphis—with nearly everyone driving SUVs, how immature and short-sighted that choice of auto was. As a revolt, while in Memphis, I bought a Subaru. I look back at twenty-two year-old Matt with a smile, and find myself grateful for the indignation.

Okay, I digress. We have historians looking back at our less-than-thirty years’ repeat of one set of mistakes. What’s the next set of mistakes? Is it similar to cheap credit and loose monetary policy of other decades, e.g. the 1920’s? Hmmm… While in our history books we see pictures of flappers and J. Gatsby, we know that it was people continuously living above their means.

I wonder if fifty-to-one-hundred years from now people will look back on people taking out loans for homes they couldn’t afford and cars they couldn’t afford, thinking, “What were those people thinking? It’s not as though they were the first people on Earth to live above and beyond their means, but how did they get so caught up in doing so? My goodness, what a bunch of idiots they were!”

Take that same classroom of juniors in their high school’s American History class, and then throw in the Iraq war. “Wait, wait, wait, we invaded Iraq under the guise of “WMD,” and they didn’t have any? The White House knew of this, and helped fabricate additional ‘intelligence’ to aid their case with the US and the World? How they were not impeached, and how we did not get out of the Middle East sooner, just baffles me! Especially considering the President before was impeached for, what, hooking up with an intern?!

I would love to hear someone else’s interpretation of how the future will look back on the seven-and-a-half years preceding this post. It’s a shame we were so easily duped.

McCain's Campaign

I'll probably find myself writing more on this tomorrow; however, it was something that was on my mind. Right now, McCain's campaign is exhibiting the ineptness and incompetence that the current White House has shown over the past eight years.

Sincerely, W was handled from the minute Rove decided that he could turn HW's affable son into a President. Right now, we now have John McCain, playing the same game as Bush has for as long as we've known him. Sincerely, the way this campaign is going for Senator McCain has two possibilities: one, he has made some horrible managerial and strategic decisions, which has run his campaign into the ground; or two, he has submitted to his handlers, who with or without him have put him in this horrible position. Neither of which speak well for his possible presidency; we simply can't afford a third term of this level of incompetence.

In all of my discussions or disagreements with friends on McCain, I have yet to hear a policy position they take in opposition to Obama. Every discussion descends into a platitude about his professional career being in Chicago, his history as, among other things, a community organizer, or something correlated to his father being of foreign birth.

Please, someone reading this provide me a stated policy position McCain has in contrary to one of Obama's that demonstrates his appeal for being the next President. Consider this the gauntlet, because I have yet to see one policy-based argument that serves as a stunner.

If someone simply states "Chicago Machine Politics" or "Illinois Government Corruption," to that I will note the S&L scandal or "The Keating Five." In neither case were the two candidates convicted of anything, nor were they defeated by their primary opponents based on these items, respectively.

From a policy-perspective, please tell me how McCain is better on the Economy, Iraq, Iran, and Health Care or otherwise. I've not yet heard any delineation from McCain, respective to the status quo, while at the same time, it's tough to find us in worse shape fiscally or diplomatically.

The nice part of things at the moment is that the newness of McCain's Campaign's August distraction has worn off, and the desperation of the move and its poor implementation are being represented loud and clear. Do we want someone who manages their campaign this poorly running our country next year? I certainly hope not, and by the latest shift in polling, I suspect I'm not the only one.

Campbell Brown - Great Blog - Had to Share

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/25/campbell.brown.financialcrisis/index.html

I thought Ms. Brown summarized and articulated the feelings of many of this country quite well. It's my hope that Congress passes the "Bailout," they pass Christopher Dodd's bill, which offers Paulson funds to do what he claims he wants to do with the $700B, but takes away his immunity, among other things. What's wrong with some accountability? Clearly, we've seen a great deficiency of it over the past eight years.

Jake, This One Is for You

While we can battle about McCain temporarily pulling out of the race and how political of a move it is, it’s too much fun pointing out your VP candidate’s worship with an African Witch Hunter (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl4HIc-yfgM). Perhaps this Witch Hunter could come and help kill off the dastardly witches that have run us into Iraq and run the Economy into the ground. Perhaps if McCain and Palin were elected we could have Thomas Muthee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Muthee) come into the White House to help save us from the likes of Mama Jane. To think Reverend Wright caused such controversy. Yikes – this is a little too bat-spit crazy—it’s a good thing she’s a hockey mom.

“Putting My Campaign on Suspension”

I have to admit, I find it a little humorous that McCain is putting his campaign on suspension to go back to Washington and avoid this Friday’s debate. Why? Matt, this crisis is dangerous for our economy! We need all of Washington in session, able to vote on the bailout package!

Okay – well then, by all means, should McCain, a patriarch of the economy go back to Washington to attempt to look Presidential in the face of a crisis that was caused by everyone but those deregulating banks, real estate and Wall Street over the past eight years! What is the worst that could happen for McCain? He announces his intention to suspend his campaign, and go back to Washington in the face of his declining poll numbers, so he can look more Presidential! “I am a man of importance! My poll numbers have descended, which means I can’t get anything out of being on the stump! Rather than do that, I am going to symbolically stop campaigning in a losing campaign to look presidential by going back to Washington!

It’s a good thing McCain is putting all of this on hold! Maybe if things aren’t working out for him, he doesn’t get the October surprise Bush is striving for on his behalf, and the economy is still bad, he can put the election in November on hold as well! Yeah – it looks to me like capitalization on bad news for the Economy…

The Internet’s Workaround for Pop-Ups

(a current rolldown ad)

(a cartoon making fun of "old" PopUps)

Is it just me, or is it frustrating how web designers have come up with the content roll down to workaround the pop-up blockers our web browser developers have put together? It’s quite frustrating, as there wouldn’t have been such developments if people were happy to be affronted with advertising content. It reminds me of the TiVo did to commercials on Television, and how there was balking at it. It makes one wonder, why do brands risk making their brand annoying? Would it not simply make more sense to produce the best product based on value, and proceed with that? Of course, based on the assumption that the market drives such behavior, clearly, there is success in it. That’s simply too bad. This post was brought to you by Matt – he’s smart.

Jake’s Comment Begs an Interesting Question

Yesterday, my friend Jake wrote a comment about my posting of a pro-Obama forwarded email on this here Blog. Jake’s comment, please see the comments in the below blog, notes that all of my postings for the past few weeks have been around McCain’s running mate decision, with the exception of my marathon. That led me to a thought: why is it that she became so noteworthy? Is this an advantage to McCain’s campaign?

Let’s talk about advantages to McCain’s campaign: one, the economy hasn’t been in the gutter this bad since 1991-92; two, we are in an unpopular war fought based on a myriad of lies promulgated by an administration which is exceptionally more secretive than ever—McCain supports this war; three, the positions of the Republican Party on social matters run below average on poll numbers. All of these things added together, it seems to make sense to distract the public from the substance of McCain’s policy positions.

McCain’s policy positions, while he has taken contrary positions in the past, ultimately are his own, and they have led us to where we are today. Right now, when faced with what we have, from political, economic, and militaristic perspectives, the American Public looks down their nose. Alas, a few weeks ago during the convention in St. Paul, a nice looking woman was put in front of the American public to refresh McCain’s campaign’s image. This worked, and indeed this Governor from Alaska did attract a lot of attention, some would argue—this guy included, that this was due to the fact that we knew little about her. These first few weeks have become a discovery section, and there was enough juice about her life in Alaska, we couldn’t help but knock down McCain’s selection choice – largely predicated on playing to his party’s base.

Isn’t that just it? McCain’s policy positions are disagreeable to 72% of the American Public, and his age raises concerns. By bringing in some new blood, which is not so readily deconstructed, like Romney would have been, McCain has diverted attention from his shortcomings. Right now, McCain’s campaign is doing the same thing Bush’s campaign did in 2000 and 2004, which was divert the public from the substance of policy positions, and focus the public on something else—something fascia and remote. If the only way a party can win is by playing games about personalities rather than policy issues, clearly, they are lacking something.

Of course, when it comes to those discussions, let’s not forget the Keating Five and the first Mrs. McCain. Were McCain the Democrat in this race, we’d have heard about those two items ad nauseum. It’s too bad. I just hope this time it won’t work like it did the last two times to put someone so incompetent in office.

The First Forward I've Received in a Long Time, which Makes Sense

Subject: I'm a little confused...
I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....

• If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents and a single mother, you're "exotic, different."
• If you grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.
• If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
• Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick. *Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable. *Attend 5 different small colleges before finally graduating, you're well grounded. *If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer with a constituency of over 100,000 people, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
• If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.*If in those 4 in Washington you were able to author about half a dozen major laws (working with fellow Democrats and Republicans) and have 4 pass and signed, you don't have enough experienced.
• If you serve 22 in the Senate, authored less than half a dozen laws and have only one signed (the McCain Amendment prohibiting torture in the armed forces which he, himself no longer supports) you're qualified to run the country.
• If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian. *If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, then left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.
• If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
• If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system, while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.
• If your wife is a Harvard graduate laywer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
• If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
  OK, much clearer now....
  

Why vote Barack Obama?
His work as a community organizer provided him with a profound understanding of what real people need from their president. At the Republican National Convention, in which the theme was service, Republicans mocked Obama's willingness to put his country first. Obama. See Obama's response to the disrespectful Republicans.
McCain is bad for our foreign policy! He may have experience, but is it backed by a thorough understanding? Both he and Governor Palin have chiseled out an image of them leading America with absolute confidence, and have said time and time again that they would not blink to push that red button, but confident as they are, would it be an educated decision? It's been duly noted that McCain lacks enthusiasm for the details that the other senators, Obama and Hilary Clinton included, are quick to pick up. Time and time again he has been profoundly mistaken on foreign policy decisions, most notably on his recent tour in the Middle East, mistaking Sunni and Shia, sects that fundamentally do not get along. And he doesn't do it just once, he does it five times!! He's a "warrior who is dumb about war.As the Chairman of the Subcommittee of US Foreign Relations on European Affairs and through his voting record in the Senate, Barack Obama has repeatedly been right on Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and supports our troupes, even after the war's ended, and he always has!
He wants to provide affordable healthcare and cut taxes for working Americans, taxing only those who make over $250,000. He would also eliminate taxes for seniors making under $55,000 per year.
McCain will overturn the historic Roe vs. Wade decision. In this respect, McCain exemplifies the contradiction that exists within the "sanctity of life" defense in which the majority of Republicans use in the same breath as "abortion," but according to Gallup, 80% of Republicans are also staunch advocates of the death penalty. There is quite a double standard. And how is wanting to protect the life of a mother not a reflection of the belief of every American - that life should be cherished and preserved?
As we all know, and are humbled by, John McCain was physically tortured for years during his service in Vietnam. We expect John McCain to hold a firm stance against such dehumanizing practices, however McCain has been swayed yet again to align with his party and now supports waterboarding. In fact, he seems to be changing his mind or confused on his stance for many other topics as well: click here to see. An exception being his stance on gay marriage. He's still against that.
Republicans like to note that Obama marks present when it comes time to vote, but what they don't tell you is how much more Obama gets done. The Library of Congress makes this information available at http://thomas.loc.gov/. Searching the list of bills/resolutions in the current congress (111th), Obama is listed as a sponsor or co-sponsor for 130, McCain is listed for 38. Search of the 110th congress came up with 660 bills/resolutions that Obama sponsored or co-sponsored, compared to McCain's 252. In the 109th congress Obama sponsored 579 bills/resolutions to McCain's 337. In the past three congressional sessions that adds up to 1,369 bills/resolutions sponsored or co-sponsored by Obama compared to McCain's 627 during the same period. Obama is over twice as productive in the Senate as McCain. Imagine what he could do as President!

Things Not Acceptable for which to Charge

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/21/palin.rape.exams/index.html
Reading the article in the paper today, about Palin’s town, while she was mayor, charging women for rape-kits in opposition to state legislation fighting the practice is about as disagreeable as possible, to say the least. I have to admit, from a victim’s perspective, the idea of being charged for a component of the investigation is among the most absurd and horrific things I’ve ever heard.

I understand that Palin is on record not being aware that women or their insurance were being charged for their rape kits. However, provided this was a topic of the legislature and in the news in Alaska, during her term as mayor, methinks that she probably pondered the issue, and investigated it.


I can also imagine that, like ambulance fees being charged to a person or their insurance, it was internally justified as something, “the insurance will be probably paying for this, in most cases.” I am going to make another assumption, based on the way investigations and interactions with Police following the report of criminal activity; I don’t imagine women are being told upfront they’re going to be charged. No, instead, I think it’s as the article shows it, one received a bill after the fact with that $1000 charge. They receive the bill or the Explanation of Benefits from their insurance.

From personal experience, just receiving an explanation of benefits from one’s insurance company, for the charges for an ambulance that took them to the hospital in a medical emergency predicated on criminal activity, leaves one shocked that something so basic and not to the victim’s fault could be assigned to the victim. Fortunately, in the State of Illinois, there is victim’s compensation, which would have paid for that charge in arrears, if insurance didn’t pick it up. Nevertheless, sending a victim through that rigmarole is unimaginable, particularly in the case of something as brutal as rape.

What this tells me about Governor Palin is:

1. If she was not aware of this, she was not detail-oriented, nor was she a victim’s advocate;
2. If she was, but thought it was “okay,” she has a deficient morale compass
3. As one who is anti-abortion, even in cases of rape or incest, she has no empathy or perspective on women’s health issues or perspective on victim’s rights.

In summation, to think that anyone would think it was okay to charge victim for the investigation of a crime, in any capacity, needs to be removed from their position. It’s simply not acceptable, nor is it something that anyone should support. I hope she has to answer this in the public domain, not through a public relations representative. That’s among the most horrific policy stances I’ve ever seen.

Sitting in Coffee Shops

That is something I do more often than perhaps anyone should bother. I write that as here in Boise, I sit in Dawson Taylor next to two lovely young women, both of whom have nice strawberry blond hair. One is a nursing student; the other is working on getting her PhD in writing at USC. What’s nice is sitting near them falling into conversation; however, the challenge at the same time is not talking to them too much. One doesn’t want to be annoying to those which they would like to see again on friendly terms.

Of course, then it is that those nice enough to allow one to join in their conversation, without disapproving or frustrated looks, find the work that had them previously occupied. To be sure, being self-entertained is a primary motivator for bringing the laptop to the coffee shop.

Of course, then we can be reminded that we showed up here at the coffee shop with a laptop for a reason in the first place. Yes – that’s right, there is work to be done.

Speaking of Liberal vs. Conservative…

What’s quite amazing is how the AM radio conservatives of the past thirty years have turned “Liberal” into a pejorative word. It’s impossible to hear a political discussion, and not hear the word “Liberal” used in a context meaning something unfortunate or negative. Those who’ve claimed a “Liberal Media Bias” are the same individuals who make “Liberal” so negative.

Let’s see what we can do to disassociate this word with terms so negative. I am sure Derrida or Wittgenstein would have something to say on this. I digress, these days, when I hear the word “Liberal,” this is what I think. The United States is a “Liberal Democracy.” Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, John Locke and Thomas Jefferson were all Liberals.

If the above four were Liberals and William F. Buckley is a conservative, I’ll take the former. Of course, this recent administration has been a betrayal of Buckley’s movement, which is to say that even those who argue on behalf of the Bush Administration, Cheney, Hannity, Limbaugh, McCain and Palin are opposing the political party’s legacy principled for which they singed up.

In short, being “conservative,” isn’t what it used to be, and I’d rather be fiscally conservative with our treasury, which means I’ll probably be voting the other direction than the GOP this year. My goodness…

Less Government, Less Regulation and Libertarianism

It’s quite fascinating moving out West from “Back East,” even though Chicago is clearly the Midwest. What is sometimes fascinating is the persuasion for Goldwater-era conservativism, which the GOP hasn’t seen since the 1968 convention.* I run into Westerners all the time, which advocate for smaller government or “less government,” because they don’t like the “tax and spend Liberals.”

Let’s dispel a few myths, under both Reagan, Bush I and Bush II, we’ve run up an enormous deficit, in favor of irresponsible tax cuts, with large expenditures on Defense. The point is simple, voting for a Republican is like voting for someone who will give you a Ferrari, but throw it on your credit card. Ultimately, it needs to be paid for, but whom or how is it going to be paid? Oh, and in the meantime, the world’s confidence in our currency disappears, dropping our ability to trade with other countries. That’s not being “fiscally irresponsible.”(Ironic tone intended). Rather than “Tax and Spend Liberals” it should be “fiscally responsible Liberals.”

Then one has those same “conservatives” arguing against social welfare programs, or the expense of them. More often than not, when I hear someone arguing against such programs, there is a racial or socio-demographic undertone. In essence, not helping out those in need, but criticizing them for their background, poverty, or the country where they were born, that’s simply fascism. Moreover, it doesn’t represent the angels of our better nature…

Yes, okay, not to have that battle everyday, what’s even more humorous is listening to the argument that somehow the Republican Party owns Christianity. Re-reading the New Testament, those on the far Right, particularly the “Religious Right” sure seem an awful lot like the Pharisees, etc… I find it quite odd that those who profess such great faith do so while continuously exposing their hypocrisy.

Okay – there is Iraq—enough said. If one is a conservative, fiscally or otherwise, why are they going to start unnecessary wars in far away lands expending treasure for reasons, which weren’t good enough the eleven years prior?

Hmmm… Let’s see – oh yeah – it’s a good thing we de-regulated banks, mortgage brokers and Wall Street. “They don’t need regulation!”

The point is, the contemporary GOP is about as far removed from the aforementioned components of Barry Goldwater or Lincoln’s ideals—both sides of their favorable history. I thought Ron Paul was interesting, but McCain running for Cheney’s third term, he simply represents a continuation of a party beholden to Ralph Reid, Tom DeLay, Scooter Libby, Jack Abramoff, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush. We currently have the most incompetent White House in our history, a “President” not too interested in his war in Iraq. Not quite where we need to be. The rest of the world knows this and many of our people do as well. It will simply be interesting to see the continuation of spin. I’d like to think most citizens in this country know the old maxim: “Fool Me Once, Shame On You; Fool Me Twice, Shame on Me.”






*The 1968 was Richard Nixon’s nomination, and it was a decided shift from the “Less Government” Republican Party of Western Conservatives, ala Barry Goldwater. Limbaugh and other “conservatives” still espouse this Libertarian vain of the Republican Party, even Reagan promulgated some of it; however, since 1968, the GOP has worked with Nixon’s “Southern and ‘Silent Majority’ Strategies.” These two strategies coalesced around appealing to those dissuaded by hippies from the 1960’s and the Civil Rights Movement in the South. It’s been continued by opposing Roe v. Wade, etc...

Salmon Salmon Salmon - A great marathon!

You know, you run, run, run, run, and finish!
Salmon was amazing! I've written a lot about it, but trying to find a way to trim down the essay for this blog.
In the meantime the results are there, and your Matt has run it. Not the first marathon in which I've participated, but thus far, it was the nicest. Something I said a lot while running the marathon, "I Love you Salmon! Thanks Salmon!"
http://www.salmonmarathon.com/results.html

Blackberry? McCain - You Did?

You knew it was coming, right? I mean how can one not put these two items together, following the recent news that our dear Republican candidate for President, not only was a POW, but he invented "Research In Motion's" Blackberry!

I remember all of the grief Al Gore got for inventing the Internet... Now, with McCain inventing the Blackberry, the US has two high level folks, which are not only politicians, but IEEE inventors! Amazing!

The Begrudging Movement of Big Oil and Pharma

It’s amazing to me, during this election year, just how much we’ve seen from energy companies, pharmaceuticals, and their lobbyists. It’s amazing, as we’ve seen little to anything from them over the past seven hears; however, one can tell there is currently a confluence of factors changing the tide on them. With Energy, we have the outrageous price of petroleum, predicated not off of supply but a substantial increase in demand from those in Asia. As such, companies like Exxon, Chevron, et al are airing advertisements encouraging “conservation,” particularly on items tangential to petroleum’s issues (e.g. one’s thermostat).

Like Oil, there is Montel Williams on commercials on my TV in the morning, talking about PPA busses, “From the Aloha State of Hawaii; To the Free State of Maryland,” which along with another similar industry-sponsored program, providing points like “with my savings I buy shoes.” In both cases, these two industries feel a change in tide, respective to their business models. Only in the face of a potential for change are they now budging to become more consumer friendly and environmentally conscious. Is that not amazing?

Why have we not heard anything for the past seven years? Why now? What is it that’s moved these two industries to react? Is it out of the good of their hearts?

Lake Wobegon - What a Nice Editorial

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped0910keillorsep10,0,7101227.column

Those News-Cycle Playing “Conservatives” Are at It Again

We all know there is a common expression for trying to make something ugly sound better than it is, case and point, the Bush-McCain-Cheney Economics plan. What’s funny is that Obama made a mistake using the word “lipstick” to call it out. Okay – we all know he was referring to “Economic Policy,” but because Sarah Palin used the word “Lipstick,” during her Convention Speech, she now owns the word and any use of it can be aligned to her. This allows the Rush-Hannity’s of the world to say Obama was calling Palin a pig.

Sitting in on the roundtable discussion earlier this week, it went like this:

Team,

“Jobless claims are at Record Highs for the longest time, and we just had to bail out Fannie and Freddie. Folks, they are going to nail us on the economy. Because we can’t lose our base, those making good money, which hate taxes, we need to figure out a way to change the subject.”

“Well, we could start a ‘whisper’ about him being Muslim.”

“No – that already blew up, and has been effectively dispelled. We need to take umbrage at something new. Come up with something good and I’ll make a call to Limbaugh to have him get the rest of the Right talking about how horrible of a person he is.”

“Well, we now have a woman on the campaign, and being a guy, you know he’ll say something that we can align with Governor Palin.”

“That’s thinking; that’s thinking. What did she say that we can have him attacking her? We need something that is particularly women-oriented. With her being against sex-education, Alaska doing poorly for maternity protection, and her being anti-choice, we need to get something to get the Hillary Gal’s behind her!”

“She did make the lipstick comment.”

“That’s right! If he says anything about lipstick, particularly that ‘Lipstick on a Pig’ euphemism—we go bananas! We’ll then control the news cycle, and from there, we’ll change the subject!”

I Can’t Stop Wanting to Comment on McPalin!

Governor Palin’s story gets more and more interesting. I’ll leave the following components to speak on their own.

• While Obama belonged to a Church with crazy-uncle Jeremiah Wright saying absurd tenants of liberation theology, particularly in response to 9/11, Sarah Palin belongs to a church with the following statistics:
  1. Gay people are gay because they don’t pray enough to be straight. A faithful person can pray away their gay! Perhaps if enough people pray for the gay, they’ll all become straight!
  2. Prayer will help Alaska firm up its pipeline infrastructure (I do believe God is involved in miraculous things; however, offering up that for a prayer is like offering up “rain on INVESCO Field during Obama’s acceptance” or “please ensure that Enron’s business stays afloat.”
  3. There is active “speaking in tongues”
  
• Palin beats on Obama and McCain for “earmarks” but hired a lobbying firm to help her town of Wasilla. Beyond that, she was for the “Bridge to Nowhere,” and they have her on video about it! Lying and hypocrisy are two words that come to mind.
  
• I’ll leave something more familial off the table, as I’ve already blogged about it. Let’s just say, I don’t have a lot of respect for her attitude towards Sex Education or belief that Abstinence Education is more appropriate, and should fully supplant sex education

McCain McCain – Not so Much – An Open Letter to John McCain

Senator McCain,

Seeing you last night left me asking so many continued questions about you, which remain unanswered. Rather than dally about how Cindy and all of your children are doing, like usual, I’ll cut to the chase.

Senator McCain, we were brothers in arms back in 2000, when you were running against George W. Bush in the primaries. This was at the same time Rove and his henchmen and women were push-polling voters in South Carolina about you fathering a child of a different race. From there, you opposed Bush’s “irresponsible” tax cuts and ran the “Straight Talk Express.”

Here it is eight years later, and you are the nominee for your party! That is quite an impressive accomplishment, based on the difficulty of your primaries. You John, you were able to continue with your “Maverick” branding, which is a good thing for you. On the other hand, seeing your positions of late, I am wondering if you are drank the same Kool-Aid that led the Republican Party to damage its brand of conservativism.

You know that William Buckley, your beloved Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater are all turning in their graves right now, right? Being as irresponsible with the treasury of the United States, as he was with the checking account his parents gave him for Yale—cutting taxes while at war and never seeing a spending bill he didn’t like, we cannot help but see the policies of this current administration as abhorrent.

Of course, flipping that on its head, back when you opposed him, you had something going for you, which was nice. Now, on the other hand, here we are eight years later, with an economy in shambles—that’s never been your strong suit, and you are advocating more of the same?! Senator McCain, you have to understand that continuing down this road of spend and spend and spend, without paying for it, like Daddy’s credit card in New Haven, doesn’t make any sense.

Last night during your speech, I didn’t hear a damn bit of difference. We have arguably the worst president in our history, leaving us in a worse global position than when he started, and during your speech last night, I didn’t even hear you state how you were going to change any of it. Your service as a naval officer was most honorable, as were your years in the Senate. On the other hand, you’re a little too old, as your freshness seems to have left you. Without hearing more how you’ll do something different than follow the horrible plan in which we’re currently wallowing, you’re leaving me no choice but to vote for the other guy. It was funny how you alluded to him and your VP pick—she’s prettier than Romney, called on him directly a few nights ago, but in both cases, it just looked cynical.

Sincerely,

Matt

Drilling, Drilling, Drilling

What is it that makes me laugh? It’s every time I enter a political discussion about why Obama over McCain, those advocating the Republican Party bring up drilling. Drilling is the attempt of the Republican Party to command a wedge issue with the Democrats, those who opposed ANWAR. Drilling is the reason the GOP puts Sarah Palin up on stage, and justifies her being on the ticket. This last Saturday, at my running club, a guy with whom I am a friend mentioned, “if they would have done what Gingrich proposed back in ____, we wouldn’t be in this mess.”

Let’s back up for a minute and discuss simple economics. There are two things that affect price, supply and demand. In this case, Supply is the argument for more drilling. The theory being that if there was more oil in the market, it would be worth less per barrel. Okay, in a vacuum, that would be true – ceteris paribus. Of course, what we aren’t in is a vacuum.

What every advocate for drilling fails to mention, when they speak to greater expansion of drilling, is that there has never been such a strong demand for petroleum. China and India, these two little countries in Asia, with a good 35-40% of the Earth’s population, now have middle classes. These two countries’ middle classes now are purchasing cars and driving them. Of course, with their currencies on the incline, and their “demand” for petroleum increased, that throws the market into flux.

As it stands, we have limited petroleum in the United States. Even with further drilling, off shore, right off the beach in California and Florida, or up in ANWAR, our addition to the World Crude Supply would be nominal; therefore, it would do very little to drop the price in petroleum.

Let’s take it from the “Liberal” side of the fence, and talk about conservation of the resource. What if we all used less gas, well, that would help our pocket books, but it would do little to change the price of gas:
“Oil consumption, for example, has been falling in rich countries for over two years. Goldman Sachs expects them to use 500,000 fewer barrels a day (b/d) this year than last. But it reckons that decline will be more than offset by an increase of 1.3m b/d in emerging markets. It predicts China’s demand for oil will grow by 5%.” (Endurance test, Economist, August 21st, 2008)

Folks, no matter how much we drill in addition to that which we do not already drill—in the areas oil companies already can drill, we are not going to cut the price of oil for you and me at the pump. Gas is going to stay expensive, and the Republicans are going to continue to talk about more drilling. Of course, stock holders of Exxon Mobile, et al, gain more value, as do the executives’ salaries increase, when we increase drilling, it has little effect on our price at the pump, while reducing our environmental safety – to drilling I say, “Supply and Demand – it is demand affecting price, not a lack of supply.”

Young Professionals

Today, I was at Boise Young Professionals, which was interesting. I decided to try out the first luncheon, to see if I had interest. I do, to some extent, so I will probably bone up and join. It’s a nice young professionals organization, which is interesting. I am working hard on keeping an open mind towards it, like most things along those lines, which I find a bit pretentious.

Above and beyond that, what was interesting was during their speaker’s main topic. The speaker initially was putting some folks on the spot, which was entertaining, and then he asked a voluntary question from a volunteer about a great business mentor one has had, and what they did. You get the picture.

I didn’t mention Ditto by name, but I raised my hand for the microphone, and mentioned his being an Idaho Vandal*. I went on to speak about how Ditto was a terrific communicator, but not just in speaking or writing, rather he was a great listener. His skills really involved honing in on someone’s ideas and synthesizing them into something quite successful.

The speaker as he took the microphone complimented me on the side, with the mic away.

It’s amazing how some can affect us in little ways, which come up during instances such as that one. Of course, there are great folks in all of our lives, but what is most spectacular is recalling what it was that made them so special, and how it helped make their lives great. Dear friends are about as good as it gets.






*there was an earlier discussion between the Vandals and the BSU Broncos, which is a standing debate here in Boise. It wasn’t anything of substance, except that it was a topic to which most could relate, there in the crowd.

“Attacking” Sarah Palin’s Daughter

I received a text today from a dear friend, one supporting McCain. This friend is a great person, and a very astute individual. As we support opposite sides of this race, we’ve been known to taunt one another via both email and text messages. Today, I received a text from him, giving me grief for stooping low to “attack” Palin’s teenage daughter.

Not knowing whether the text was predicated off of what I shot to him yesterday via text or yesterday’s blog, I wanted to clarify something. In the event I didn’t state this clearly in my blog yesterday, my issue is not with an impregnated teen, or giving her grief. It’s that she comes from a family with a mother espousing a reduction in sex education in favor of abstinence education.

Governor Palin is an advocate of abstinence education, which is something I find too naïve and unrealistic to supplant informative sex education. It’s unrealistic and naïve, and in Palin’s advocacy of it; seemingly, she must have diluted herself into believing that her kids weren’t engaged in sexual activity. That’s just it, isn’t it?

The religious-right have always diluted their policy positions predicated on the instruction of values, which will keep teens from having sex or getting into drugs. Of course, for adults these same values mean full and gainful employment, passing these things on to children, and abstinence from substance abuse and anti-social behavior. Moreover, these values are also predicated on a divorce-free family, a stay-at-home mother and an SUV in the garage. Okay, perhaps the SUV is taking it a bit far, but is it?

The religious right’s promulgating this idea of their “values” saving civilization from itself are all well and good, so long as they do not preach hate or discrimination against those who perhaps have “alternative” lifestyles. Of course, we know better than this, right?

I just cannot yet square how and why we should take these folks seriously. Their policies do not work for them, in their own families, nor have they proven them elsewhere. For this daughter of Sarah Palin’s, a teen, she has the benefit of a mother who is the governor of her state. What about all of the underprivileged teenage women without good sex education or family support? What about these young women? They are told by the Right to have their children, and put them up for adoption, if they cannot afford to tend to them.
Of course, in the meantime, they might not have the health insurance to provide them healthy and good obstetrics. Beyond that, if they choose to keep their child, they would then need to support them, but receive grief from our society for needing assistance (not from the government, per se, but from those that lambaste “welfare moms). Lastly, when the kid is being brought up underprivileged, she or he is more prone to anti-social behavior, and on and on.

The point is simple, because not every teen mother has the benefit of having a family with her parents together, and a boyfriend marrying her, they should not all be subjected to education that clearly does not equip them with the tools to avoid unwanted pregnancy. So I am clear, it’s not to the detriment of this young woman being pregnant. It’s to the stupid naivety of her mother and her mother’s party. To make a simple cliché, they should practice what they preach, and for her daughter, while she might not agree with her mother, clearly she wasn’t in a household where she felt comfortable asking for a prescription for birth control—same story. Maybe Sarah Palin can learn from her daughter, and provide her other children with birth control, rather than leaving them without, rushing into shotgun weddings (as Palin is a big NRA member, maybe it’s a 7mm wedding…)

Let’s See, Other Thoughts from this past Labor Day Weekend

It’s interesting, when talking to an old friend on the phone today, who went to LA for the weekend, what one can state about their weekends, respectively. While one summarizes their weekend’s past itinerary and what it was that was notable; thinking back over this past weekend, much of it was rather standard. I ran my “long run” on Saturday, which this week involved a mere 12 miles. From there, I went over to Java and played around a bit on an Economist, or something. Then I went to the CoOp to buy a few meat dishes for a colleague, her husband and I to eat at dinner on Saturday. Normally, I would prepare those things myself, but since I was taking the dishes to her house, along with some of my risotto, I felt like taking the easy way out, what with their already being packaged.

Dinner was nice, and it was interesting, as my colleague’s husband is a well informed financial professional. Jim’s perspective on today’s issues and the real estate market were quite interesting. My colleague had surgery on her hip, but seems to be doing much better, now that her surgery is several weeks behind her. Her spirit seemed quite up, which is what one hopes; prior her surgery, one could tell she was in pain.

Following from that was Sunday, which was nice. I went to church, like usual, and enjoyed spending time with my friend Betty, and the rest of the women with whom I sit. Betty and I, like usual, went for coffee afterward, and I met a nice women as we were leaving coffee. From there, I went to prepare for a marvelous Built to Spill show for Sunday evening.
Built to Spill played my favorite album of theirs, “Perfect from Now On.” It was masterfully performed, and I left pleased that I was in attendance. I adore Built to Spill, and living here in their hometown, I am delighted when I get to see them, with so many that no something more intimate about them.

Beyond that, yesterday was a nice day of rest. I went to Java—undoubtedly, you’re detecting a pattern, and I made some new friends. Right now, not that this is necessarily uncommon for me, I am in the friend-making business. Moving to a new city can be challenging, and Boise, being a smaller city doesn’t have nearly as much churn; therefore, culturally, the people, while friendly, are not as accustomed to having new folks integrated into their social circles. That is by no means a rule, but is something I have, from time-to-time, experienced.

Waking up this morning, with everyone else in the States off yesterday, was just so nice. It was nicer than vacation, largely because it wasn’t as though there was too much in the way of work being done while I was out. That’s always nice and refreshing, not to come back to a plethora of already started work.
That was it, a great Labor Day weekend.

Keeping Families "Off Limits"

I respect Obama for stating that the campaigns should keep one another’s families off limits—they should. I note that, having watched Karl Rove state on Fox that Obama was going after Cindy McCain, when he made fun of McCain not knowing how many homes they owned. Hey Karl, Cindy’s name wasn’t mentioned once, and to infer from Obama, acknowledging McCain not knowing how many homes he owned, an attack on Cindy, that’s what we call a non sequitur.

Okay, sorry for going a bit tangential. Here’s the gist of where I am going. Governor Palin, being an advocate of Religious-Right "birth control through abstinence," watches her argument crumble with a child having a child while still in high school out of wedlock. Right now, Palin cannot stand on a stage, in an auditorium, in Congress, or in a high school gymnasium speaking about waiting until marriage or until one has graduated from high school.

Governor Palin as VP and McCain as a President would be an administration against sex education, speaking in favor of abstinence education. As a student, in both Jr High and High School, I never sat through a safe sex discussion without someone mentioning abstinence being the only 100% effective prevention of pregnancy and STD’s. With that, a proper education on various means of birth and disease control, following a statement on abstinence, should be the standard with which sex education is provided. To preach abstinence education supplanting comprehensive sex education, for Governor Palin, would now be hypocritical.

That’s the point – while I think we should keep the families off limits, Bristol Palin is proof that her mother’s platform is ineffective and unrealistic. In my opinion, while Obama and Biden should take the high ground, the public should be mindful of what that approach to birth control provides, in a wealthy and successful family. Let us not forget that Bristol Palin is by no means an underprivileged young woman in a rural setting or the inner-city, with less of a chance to successfully raise her child. In my humble opinion, this is quite relevant, and calls into question the GOP’s platform on health education and birth control.

Vanity

Not to be overly vain, but I am guessing the "Juneau" vs. "Juno" pun will be recycled endlessly in the coming weeks. Mark my words - you read it here first! :)

Is Schadenfreude Something So Horrible? Am I bad for feeling it?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.daughter/index.html

As you probably know, by the time you are reading this blog, GOP VP Candidate Sarah Palin’s daughter Bristol is five months pregnant. Bristol is a senior in High School, and she is unmarried. Right now, her plans are to keep the baby and marry the father. From the perspective of one whom feels we should afford all women reproductive rights, I cannot help but giggle a bit at this.

Why? Well, like so many things, it’s a confluence of various factors. For one, Governor Palin and the GOP’s stance on abolishment of reproductive rights are predicated on “Abstinence Education,” or a lack thereof being the root cause of unwanted pregnancy. Of course, Pregnant Bristol most assuredly grew up in a home with an undoubtedly intense amount of abstinence education, being her mother’s religious-right stance on reproductive rights. In the face of that wonderful education on “waiting,” her daughter, one from an affluent family, became prematurely pregnant—being unmarried and not yet having graduated from High School.

From a second point, one can assume that Bristol was reticent to disclose, or perhaps fully kept her sexual activity from her parents. Perhaps that’s not a safe assumption, but one can doubt that her mother would allow for her to proceed with a sexually active relationship being unmarried and still in High School. Predicated on the current administration’s positions on the Birth Control Pill (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hillary-clinton/an-outrageous-attempt-by_b_114064.html), one can assume with McCain holding his hand over his face in response to the same topic, that Gov. Palin feels the same way as Bush and McCain towards reproductive health--even the pill.

Right now, we have an administration, which wants to diminish women’s reproductive rights. We have a party, presidential and vice-presidential candidates, whom run in lockstep with the same policy, one of whom has a teenage daughter pulling her best version of Juno, and not just because she lives in the city of Juneau!

Go for it McCain and Palin, most assuredly every woman I know is going to vote for you because of the gender diversity of your ticket! Is it wrong that I laugh in the face of that?

PS - what's even more entertaining is the thought that McCain's campaign "knew" of this... do we think so? Or did they vet Palin that poorly, or was she dishonest? Hmmm... It sounds as though it's safer to say we "knew," but do we believe that? Honestly?