It's All Over - and it's Just Beginning

The results from Florida are in, and we now 'officially' have a winner, if there was any doubt outside Fox News headquarters that President Obama has won the election.

The final tally, shows Obama winning the popular vote, 61 million and change to Romney's 58 million and change. The electoral vote count, with Florida's 29 in the Blue column, stands at 332 - 206.

In his concession speech on Tuesday, Mitt Romney offered the following:

The nation, as you know, is at a critical point. At a time like this we can't risk partisan bickering and political posturing. Our leaders have to reach across the aisle to do the people's work, and we citizens also have to rise to occasion.

Pundits and historians are trying to figure out why, when as Romney indicates we need leaders to reach across the aisle, we chose to maintain the status quo in Washington -- Republicans entrenched in the House, Democrats in the Senate, and Obama in the White House.  I think it's really pretty easy to understand -- just ask Tip O'Neill:  All politics is local.

When we vote for our representatives and senators, we're voting to have them do good things for us back home, to bring money back in return for the taxes we pay. For the most part, we have a very narrow focus on our own backyards first, then the larger issues of state government and finally Washington, in ever-expanding circles around us. 

And when we're asked if we have a positive or negative view of those we have elected, we like to think that 'our' representative is doing a good job, but it's the rest of them - particularly the leadership -that are horrible.  To me this is obvious; we saw it in the ads in the race for the NY-24.  Ads run in support of Ann Marie Buerkle mentioned Nancy Pelosi, as if any one in this district gives a hoot about her.  Ads in support of Dan Maffei, who won, sometimes showed John Boehner and others in the House leadership.  Regardless of which side it was, when mentioning any of these names, it was obligatory to sneer.

Rather than worrying about why we did what we did, why people voted the way they did, we would be better serviced if we focused on something else Mitt Romney said in his farewell:

We look to job-creators of all kinds. We're counting on you to invest, to hire, to step forward, and we look to Democrats and Republicans in government at all levels to put the people before the politics.

Hear, hear.   We need people to get with the program, as Americans defined it on Tuesday, and put people before politics. I have never agreed with Mitt Romney more.

Are You Better Off?

UPDATED:  The election was called for President Obama tonight, before 11:15 PM Eastern time, which is surprising in and of itself. 

The President won the expected states, including New York, California,  and Pennsylvania, a state that the Romney campaign spent a lot of time and money on at the end. 

He also won Michigan, Wisconsin, and Massachusetts, the home states of the Romney/Ryans. He won New Hampshire. And he won Ohio, in large part because of Romney's missteps on the auto bailout.

In the end, regardless of why voters did what they did, we have a lot of work to do.

My original post:
I know my vote for President has already been counted, so to speak, as New York is solidly a blue state, based on the overwhelming number of Dems in our major cities. Because of them, we don’t have the distinction of being a ‘key state’ like Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, or tiny New Hampshire, with its critical four electoral college votes. 

New York is so safe that I’ve only seen a handful of ads for the top contest, and I think if there hadn’t have been for Hurricane Sandy, or whatever you want to call her, we might not be seeing any Romney or Obama ads at all here in Syracuse.

All of the pundits have spoken; the polls have been taken; the editorial endorsements have come out; and now, finally, I get my say as to whether we're better off now than we were four years ago.  Here's some thinking on that:

• When Barack Obama took the oath of office in January 2009, the Dow Jones was at 8279.63.  It closed yesterday (11/5/12) at 13,112.44. 
• The first unemployment figure reported during the Obama administration was 8.3% in February 2009.  It got as high as 10%, when we were in the worst of things, and it’s now 7.9%.
• The Consumer Confidence Index was at 38. It’s now at 72.2.

When Barack Obama took office, Osama bin Laden was alive, and we had no idea when we would be bringing our troops home from two wars. 

Before March 2010, when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was passed, we had no idea - not a clue - about how we were going to tackle the problem of the uninsured in America, which is an embarrassment for the world's greatest democracy.

We had "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"- formalized discrimination - in the military. And we had the banking crisis, and the housing crisis, and the auto industry crisis.

And now? Listen, I don't pretend for a second that we're in a perfect world, that we got everything what we hoped for when Obama was elected.  Certainly I wish he could have done more (Simpson Bowles financial reforms, elimination of waste and redundancy in federal programs, and so on), and in some cases I wish he had done less (Solyndra). 

The unemployment rate is not great, clearly, but it's improved even without Congress taking action on the President's jobs bill, and even in the face of the loss of several hundred thousand government jobs (a cornerstone of the R's smaller government plans at the national and state level).  

I certainly wish he could have done more with Congress, even though as we all know, the Republican mantra, (spoken publicly by Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell but shared by the rest of them) was  "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

Well, I disagree. I don't trust Mitt Romney, because I don't think he really believes in anything, other than his own success. I think he's a successful businessman - he's obviously got a lot of money  - who plays by the business rules that are geared to help ensure businesses succeed, regardless of the impact on people.  I don't believe he has any real intention of changing the rules on businesses, other than making them weaker, when in some cases - not all - they should be stronger.  I also don't want a president who has signed any pledge for any organization, including Grover Norquist's anti-tax pledge. 

I don't know what his convictions are, because they change all the time, and so I doubt he has courage regarding them.

I don't believe we should completely throw caution to the wind when it comes to the environment, climate change (regardless of how it's caused), and how we use federal lands, which belong to you and me. I get the feeling that Mitt Romney would be perfectly happy having a picnic next to an oil rig in Yellowstone Park -- but that's not my vision of America.

I do not believe half of Americans perceive themselves as victims; I don't believe in redistribution of wealth from people to corporations, and I don't believe in extreme corporate welfare any more than I believe in extreme people welfare. I do not believe that corporations are people too. I am not better off with that thinking, that I can see so far.

Rather, I happen to think that America is better than kids being entitled to 'the best education their parents can afford'; that we are better than marriage discrimination; that we are more than our employment figures. I believe that we are more than the wars we fight. I believe we're better than people having to work until they're in their 70's to collect their retirement benefits.

I happen to think that we are part of a larger global community, not only militarily but in every other way, and we need to continue to be part of that larger picture if we are to be successful, if we're to remain the beacon of hope for the rest of the world. I also think we're better than a Mitt Romney administration.

Are we better off than we were four years ago? Yes, I believe we are,  and I believe that if President Obama gets reelected, we will be better off in four years than we are today.

The Election Eve Post

I am a firm believer in exercising my right to vote; I can't remember missing an opportunity, even in the primaries, even in the non-presidential years. I'm sure it's a Dad thing, something I learned from him early on -- register, enroll in a party, and vote. It's just what you do. And running an Election Eve message is what I do on veritable pastiche.

On the eve of Election Day 2012, I wanted to take this opportunity to encourage everyone to do their civic duty and vote. I will be voting tomorrow at yet another new polling place; we've been consolidated with other jurisdictions and so instead of just strolling three doors down the street, we're going to head off down the block, around the corner, hang a left, and cast our votes at the American Legion. 

We have very important choices this year, at the local, state, and national level. Syracuse is running out of money; New York, even without the ramifications of Hurricane Sandy, has many issues (among them figuring out what to do about her major cities running out of money); my congressional district is replaying a very contentious battle we just went through in 2010; we didn't like it then, and we don't like it now. And of course, we have the big decision on what our future should look like on a national and world scale, the choice between President Obama and businessman Mitt Romney.

At least in some races, anyway, my choice is easy. But even if they're not easy, I plan on making informed choices. I'm voting for the people I think can best help move my city, county, state, and country in the right direction. Hopefully the ones I vote for will win, and will live up to my expectations.  And I'm trying to prepare for the alternative, in case they don't win.
Below is the heart of the message I post each year. Don't vote because I say it's important, vote because it IS important. Here's some motivation, if you need it: 

After some thought, “I have come to the conclusion that politics are too serious a matter to be left to the politicians.” (1) Actually “The idea of an election is much more interesting to me than the election itself…the act of voting is in itself the defining moment.” (2) And why is it that “When the political columnists say ‘every thinking man’ they mean themselves, and when candidates appeal to ‘every intelligent voter’ they mean everyone who is going to vote for them”? (3) 

We know it’s true that “Bad officials are elected by good citizens who didn’t vote” (4), and that “A citizen of American will cross the ocean to fight for democracy, but won’t cross the street to vote in a national election.” (5) Do we still not realize, after all these years, that “lower voter participation is a silent threat to our democracy… it under-represents young people, the poor, the disabled, those with little education, minorities and you and me”? (6) 

After all, “the vote is the most powerful instrument ever devised for breaking down injustice and destroying the terrible walls which imprison men because they are different from other men” (7) and “to make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not just observers. One who does not vote has no right to complain.” (8) And complain we do, after every election, when the wrong guy wins. If only people who actually voted complained, it’d likely be a lot less noisy. 

Some folks may not vote because they don’t know how to pick the right person. There are a couple different schools of thought on that. On the one hand, some might think that “politics is the art of the possible” (9) while others may subscribe to the thinking that “politics is not the art of the possible, it consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable. And it is true that, the great thing about democracy is that it gives every voter the chance to do something stupid.” (10) Said another way, a “Vote (is) the instrument and symbol of a freeman’s power to make a fool of himself and a wreck of his country.” (11) But that’s OK – “personally, I believe that our American system works as long as you participate in it. You must vote and make your voice heard; otherwise you will be left out.” (12) 

It’s generally true that if you “ask a man which way he’s going to vote and he’ll probably tell you. Ask him, however, why – and vagueness is all.” (13) But voting’s really easy; and “all voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong.” (14) And just about everyone likes to play a game every now and then, right? 

The bottom line is, “voting is simply a way of determining which side is the stronger without putting it to the test of fighting;” (15) “voting is a civic sacrament;” (16) and “the future of this republic is in the hands of the American voter.” (17) If all of that seems like too much pressure, you have an out: “Vote for the man who promises least. He’ll be the least disappointing.” (18) 

 Please, vote. It really does matter, perhaps this year more than ever. If you need information on where to vote, or other assistance, visit Vote411.org.

 (Thanks to these folks for their words of wisdom: 1 - Charles DeGaulle; 2 – Jeff Melvoin; 3 – Franklin P Adams; 4 and 13 – Andrew Lack; 5 - Bill Vaughan; 6 - Nancy Neuman; 7 - Lyndon B Johnson; 8 - Louis L’Amour; 9 – Otto Von Bismarck; 10 – Art Spander; 11 – Ambrose Bierce; 12 - Mari-Luci Jaramillo; 14 – Henry David Thoreau; 15 – H.L. Mencken; 16—Theodore Hesburgh; 17 – Dwight D. Eisenhower; 18 – Bernard Baruch)

Point/Counterpoint: Outside-the-District Contributions

Ellen M. Blalock/The Post-Standard photo

So, at a debate yesterday, all three candidates for Congress in NY-24 were present, a departure from some others where only Ann Marie Buerkle, the incumbent Republican and Ursula Rozum, the long-shot Green Party designate were in attendance.  Dan Maffei, the Dem who lost last time by about as many votes as I have bottles of wine, appeared on stage with them.

(It's off-point, but how uncomfortable does he look in this photo?)

Among the topics discussed was the huge influx of outside money in this race, something that I've long opposed - candidates should not be able to accept outside money, whether from two-legged people or those other 'people' most of us outside the US Supreme Court refer to as businesses, PACs, charitable organizations, and the like.  And yes, I include unions in that last category too.

We're in the middle of a Congressional race with spending reaching the $8 million level, $4.7 million from outside the district, according to published reports.  One reason we're being flooded may be that, according to The Fix, a political blog, this race is the 11th most likely to flip , out of 60 House races the blog identifies as being 'most important' to which party ends up with control.

So when the topic of outside money flooding the district came up, the reported responses were a riot. Maffei, for instance, indicated not to worry, the money has 'no influence' on him, noting:

I am answerable to one group of people, and it's the voters of this district... I do think it's deplorable the amount of money that has come into politics... We've got to get the money out of politics.

Buerkle, for her part, defended the money she's received from 'like-minded organizations she supports', and offered this in reference to those who have supported her:

It's free speech.

And this, regarding outside money for Maffei:

I think the bigger concern should be Michael Bloomberg and the investment he is making in this race.

And finally, this, in response to the question of how the money might influence her:

I think my record speaks for itself.

Ursula Rozum does not accept outside money -- none of the Green Party candidates do.  Rozum recently donated scam contributions from Buerkle supporters to charity. 

I can't picture any of the major party candidates doing that -- if they did, they'd no longer be major party candidates.  But can you imagine the impact these millions of dollars could have in the hands of people focused on doing good work?

Please Don't Take My Vote for Granted

If you are a Democrat running for office, and your district includes my little slice of heaven in Syracuse NY, please don't take my vote for granted.

Obviously we have a tough race at the top of the ticket this year, and I've talked enough about the messy race that's happening in my district, NY's newly created 24th, but there are other races on the ballot next Tuesday, for positions in Albany, Onondaga County and the city of Syracuse as well. If you had been picking up my mail in the past month or so, or hanging out on my fronch porch, you'd never know we were in the thick of election season. I've been basically ignored by all but a couple of people who running for office.

Here are some illustrations:

• I've received more mail since September from Habitat for Humanity, the Heifer Project, and the ASPCA -  several from each -  than I have from all of the candidates, at every level, combined. 
• I've received more offers for life insurance and long term care insurance from AARP - close to a dozen, I think -  than I have solicitations from candidates.
• I've had more knocks on the door from neighbors looking for lost pets  - two - than I've had from politicians looking for my vote; that would be none.
• I've answered three telephone surveys in the past four days - but have not received a single call from a candidate since the general election season began.
• I've been invited to more town halls than Dan Maffei -- and have probably attended more of them than he has.

Compare this to the daily pile of mail that My Sweet Baboo receives; as a registered Independent, he's apparently a much more appetizing target. He's gotten several lovely pieces from Ann Marie Buerkle, from candidates for the State Assembly and a handful of the local races.  Neither of us recall seeing anything for him from Maffei, which is surprising given how close that race is.  

So I have to ask you, Dan Maffei and the rest of the Dems, are you all really so confident I'm in your corner that you won't even ask me for your vote?

Mitt Romney: Trick or Treat?

I had an opportunity to sit down tonight with a cuppa and relax after the flurry of activity that is Halloween night. Scrolling through my Twitter feed, I caught a headline:

I admire a smooth liar, and Mitt Romney is among the best.

Wow. Short, sweet, and to the point.  I clicked through, and found Richard Cohen's column from back in April.  Cohen, an opinion columnist for the Washington Post, had written a very calm, very reasoned article which exactly sums up my opinion of Romney.

But where Romney is different is that he is not honest about himself. He could, as he did just recently, stand before the National Rifle Association as if he were, in spirit as well as membership, one of them. In body language, in the blinking of the eyes, in the nonexistent pounding pulse, there was not the tiniest suggestion that here was a man who just as confidently once embodied the anti-gun ethic of Massachusetts, the distant land he once governed.

There you have it. He's not honest about himself.  This is a man with ice water in his veins, who will say whatever he needs to say to satisfy whatever audience he's speaking to, whether it's supporters or reporters, voters or other candidates, in debates and campaign appearances or, one can only assume, in his own living room. 

He is powerful, as illustrated by his accomplishments; humble, as illustrated by the people who come forward and talk about his humility; charitable and devout, as illustrated by his contributions to his church and faith.

At the same time, this successful, humble, charitable man, this devout man seeks and then proudly accepts the endorsement of Donald Trump? He goes off to North Carolina and prays with Billy and Franklin Graham, seeks and obtains their endorsement, the Grahams who for years maintained that Mormonism was a cult, similar to Scientology, Jehovah's Witnesses, and others? (Notably, the cult reference was removed from Graham's website after the meeting).

Are either of these acts consistent with the devout, humble, charitable persona of Mitt Romney we are supposed to be voting for? Or are these the acts of the businessman persona of Mitt Romney we're supposed to be voting for?  And can they be so easily separated?

I guess I can understand how people can look at a businessman and think, "that's what we need in the White House, we need someone who can balance the budget to get us out of this mess." But in my mind, the President should be more than a person who believes in whatever the person he's talking to believes in, and should stand for something other than whatever the person he's standing next to stands for. and shouldn't pretend he didn't do the things he did to become successful, or that he'd never do them again, or that others shouldn't have the chance to become successful doing exactly the same thing.

Back to Richard Cohen one last time:

Instead, what his career has given him is the businessman’s concept of self — that what he does is not who he is. This is what enables the slumlord to be a charitable man. This is what enables the corporate raider to endow his university. Business is business. It’s what you do. It is not who you are. Lying isn’t a sin. It’s a business plan.

Don't we deserve better?

veritable pastiche Headline News

"Trump Trumpets Record Request; It Blows".   Oh wait. that's not nice. 

"Trump Toots Own Horn, Response Muted."  OK, that's a little better. 

"Donald Trump is a Big Fat Idiot." Oh wait, that's Rush Limbaugh, sorry. 

"Trump's Bombshell a Dud." Yes, that works. 

"Trump All Red, Trumped by Gloria. " Sure, why not? 

"Trump Attempts Presidential Bribe; Arrested; Calls Charges Trumped Up".


OK, this is getting silly.  Anyone want to join in?