Long Election Season

It is only January 2008 and the election isn't for another 10+ months. Ouch!

Clearly the "season" is way too long and expensive. Forget the money (that is hard to write) for a second. We have been listening to debates and commercials already for 7 months. Fred Thompson dropped out recently and pundits said part of the problem was he started too late.

What? The election is in November - how can he be too late? Fred, like all of them and the whole process are way too early.

The reasonable and sane thing to do would be to follow a timeline something like this:

1. June 1 of election year candidate announce they are running for Democratic, Republican, or other party nomination. Other being Libertarian, Independent, etc. If the person is sitting on the fence, they are out of contention.
2. Primaries or caucuses (closed primaries, by the way) in July/August of an election year. For tradition sake, let Iowa go first with its caucus and New Hampshire with its primary. After that, bundle them by region. Have a state from north, south, east, and west bundled up and have their primary about every 5 days. Try to make the number of delegates available on any given day about equal, or as close as possible.
3. September 1-5 have the conventions to kick off their campaigns, create momentum, etc.
4. September and October would be for campaigning full steam for the November election.

To those who say you can't have a meaningful election in this short of time, I say "bull____!" This is not meaningful material we are witnessing right now in these "campaigns". England calls an election and in 4 weeks or so they hold the election. They have been around for thousands of years so I think we can survive using a 6 month "season."

Listening to people who don't have that much meaningful stuff to say for 1 1/2 years is simply not reasonable.

Tax Rebate

I'd love for my wife and I to get $1,600 back from the U.S. Government. I am sure we would use it more wisely than the broken government would.

Exactly how does the nation pay for this rebate? Aren't we swimming in red already after the ridiculous amount of money spent in Iraq?

I guess it would be reasonable to think that at least the $1,600 they send to my house will not be squandered in Iraq. For the record, I will save some and spend some.

Packers!

It is reasonable to admit that my prediction in my earlier blog was wrong. Go Pats!

Game temperature in Green Bay - Minus 3 degrees - now I remember why I don't live in "God's Country" anymore.

Frozen Tundra

Go Packers! Go Favre!

Playing for the NFC championship on the Frozen Tundra of Lambeau Field is very reasonable. Welcome the New York Football Giants to God's Country.

Packers 24 - Giant 17

Congress and Baseball

First, I love baseball. After the strike, I didn't watch much until Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa had the home run battle which resulted in both going past the Roger Maris record. It was fun and apparently fueled by HGH and or steroids. Looking back, I don't even know how I could have missed that.

Now congress is again spending time looking into the steroid issue in baseball. Senator Michell's report is the impetus and congress apparently wants in on the action. Personally, I think they are just filling time.

Don't misunderstand me - I want steroid and HGH and the next fashionable cheat agent to be banned from all sports - but congress has better things to do.

I can think of four things right now that they should be working on in Congress. They are:

• Immigration - we are going to end up with 50 sets of tough laws because they refuse to act
• "Its the economy, stupid!" We are headed in the wrong direction because of a huge deficit, poor mortgages, and a global economy in which we don't compete all that well.
• Higher Education remains waiting for reauthorization. This should have been done in 2006 but remains without closure.
• Our dependence on oil. They set these goals for gas mileage and emission levels so low and then say they want to do it in 20 years or so. We won't be able to breathe by then. Sweden set a goal and then got it all done in a few years. The Swede's are fine people but do they really have more talent than the U.S.?

So congress, "get to work on real issues. There are plenty more pressing than Baseball/steroids." That would only be reasonable.

Primaries

I think this primary season is very strange. First you get the powerful Iowa Caucus. Then comes Wyoming for the Republicans and nobody even covers the event. Then we get New Hampshire which seems pretty straight up except that no media or pollster actually predicts the winner.

On to Michigan where apparently the Democrats didn't actually give away any delegates. Huh?

When one person wins, the media says that is it and they will be the winner. Not really. Momentum is apparently only good until the next primary.

South Carolina is coming up but not for the both parties. Apparently they need a week in between events.

Where is Rudy? Florida I guess. Where is Thompson? South Carolina maybe. Why wasn't Barack in Michigan?

So many reasonable questions.

Iowa again

What I didn't say in my previous post it that it is encouraging that Barack Obama won in Iowa and by such a substantial margin.

It isn't that I am likely to vote for Obama, but I am pleased that a state composed of 95% whites voted for a black man and in a highly visible manner. Perhaps we are finally turning a corner in this country. That would be wonderful.

We shall see how the primary season goes, but at least the first step has been taken. Now, if only Colin Powell would run for the Republicans.

Iowa

Have you ever been to Iowa? It is a beautiful place in its own simple way. The people are genuine and seem to be hardworking "salt of the earth" types. This is good because these are some very powerful, if humble, folks.

In my 47 years I have never watched the Iowa Caucus' before. Because CNN had wall-to-wall coverage, we were able to see right into the cafeteria meetings. What I found interesting is:

• Democrats only allow candidates to come away as "viable" if they have 15% support of the people in the cafeteria, indicated by people standing in their corner (literally)
• Republicans simply count up the percentage and don't worry about viability.
• Each participant basically stands up in front of his neighbors and visibly shows who they are supporting for the nomination. Talk about democracy!

Now, if you are an Iowan supporting McCain and you are walking to the McCain corner and you only see 3 people, all Vietnam Vets that you know personally and they aren't "quite right" any more, do you keep walking? Or do you take a turn for Huckabee's corner?

Interesting dynamics. Think about this: apparently quite a few young folks participated for the first time (good) and they really went for Obama. 95% of Iowans are white, and a high percentage are Evangelical Christians. Yet, when these young folks went in the cafeteria, they saw a good size crowd building in Obama's corner. Did they join the crowd because they didn't want to seem like a bigot or did they join because they saw the popular beautiful people standing in the Obama corner or did they think Obama the best candidate? Maybe it is because they like Oprah!

Whatever the answer, Iowans flexed their power. It isn't that they predict winners all that well, but they dictate who gets to go forward and compete. Hopefully they are standing in corners based on who they think is a good candidate so that all that power isn't wasted.

It would be completely unreasonable for Huckabee/Obama to win or have Dodd and others have to drop out of the race because Obama's corner seemed more popular with one's neighbors and with Oprah.

Ex-Employees

What is going on with ex-employees trying to get their former employers in trouble? I suppose they see themselves as some sort of public servant saving the community from big bad employer. Usually it is nothing more than an ex-employee being pissed that they are just that.....ex.

If the ex-employee is turning them in for dumping acid in the local river - good for them. I guess they should have been saying something while they were employees as well.

What ex-employees don't seem to understand is that it is the remaining employees who ultimately pay the price. Many of these remaining employees are considered friends to the ex-employee. It is so nice that the ex-employee is helping their friends.

In the old days, even 20 years ago, people who lost their job went quietly on their way and then went out and got a new job. Now they walk down the hall wearing it like a badge, making everyone except the boss feel crappy. Then they apply for unemployment, call their lawyer, and generally make a pain of themselves. Shut up and get to work. Think of it as keeping hard earned dollars from the creepy lawyers.

That isn't to say people are aren't discharged from jobs for nefarious reasons. Clearly they are. However, what is gained by running around making regulatory hell for the employer? Nothing. Other people just lose their jobs or miss pay raises etc. because the employer is spending time and money defending themselves from these selfish, self-righteous jerks.

In the end, the employer is rarely hurt permanently and the remaining employees pay a big price. What is reasonable is for people to go on their way, hold their head up high, have some dignity and try not to screw their friends on the way out.