CNN Tells It Like It Is About Elections

This time, all politics was local – CNN.com.

CNN published an article focusing on yesterday’s seemingly surprising election results which they summed up in four words:  ”All politics is local” – a phrase which CNN credited originally to former Speaker Tip O’Neill.

If you didn’t catch any news last night, incumbent  Governor Corzine lost his re-election in New Jersey to the Republican in spite of the fact that Obama campaigned for Democrat Corzine.  In New York’s 23rd District which is conservative, the Conservative candidate lost to the Democrat.  You will recall the controversy of the Republican candidate being forced out of that race and also out-of-state big-mouths like Sarah Palin campaigning for the Conservative, yet their guy still lost last night.

These results seem surprising only to those who don’t understand the unique character of the American People.  And to those who think that they can bring out political and/or media heavyweights to sell us on a candidate.

The CNN article is well written and makes a very important point.  But will those in Washington be listening?  If those now in Washington hope to stay in power after 2010 and 2012, they might want to carefully consider yesterday’s results and Speaker O’Neill’s insightful words.

It’s time that ALL the politicians in Washington, including Obama, realize that the results in NY’s 23rd District and New Jersey are  NOT unique.  If Washington politicos think that they can roll out big wheels on either side – be it Palin, Thompson, or even Obama himself – they may be sadly surprised by the election results.

Americans are not all the same, and we resent anyone thinking that we are!  We reject being boxed into “right or left” or “liberal or conservative” corners.  The American people are reasonable and can share a mixture of views.  Yesterday’s elections results demonstrate this.  And they also demonstrate something else too:  that the American People are waking up to machinations of big-power politics!  Those who would want to continue controlling Washington may discover that they are voted out or power in 2010 and 2012.

Americans can’t be “sold” on a politician using marketing tactics like famous celebrity endorsements and glitzy ads.  Our votes are not for sale.  Commercials, endorsements, media hype tends to turn us off.  We’ve been disappointed too many times in the past by glossy, glitzy candidates who fizzle out once elected.  We want to know what a candidate is truly for or against, who they are as people, and how strong their character is.  These are traits that can’t be boxed into a glossy PR campaign!

 

 

Let The Race Begin: Pawlenty, Ensign Possible GOP Contenders

Republicans are already starting their dash toward the 2012 White House to try to oust Obama.

Minnesota’s Governor Tim Pawlenty and Senator John Ensign of Nevada look like their trying on their presidential candidates’ hats although neither will yet admit to intentions of running.

This morning, Pawlenty announced he won’t seek another term as governer of the Midwestern state still in contention over its Senate seat between Franken and Coleman.  Yesterday, Ensign visited Iowa, the first state to cast votes (in its caucus) for presidential contenders.

Both people are likable and, though conservative, not overboard to turn off the middle.

The Associated Press: AP Sources: Minn. governor won’t seek third term.

Examiner.com: 2012 race starts with Ensign visit

 

In the O’Reilly / NY Times War, Who’s Right?

It’s not a surprise that Fox’s Bill O’Reilly doesn’t like the New York Times; he considers the paper left-leaning and has targeted it many times throughout the years of his broadcasts both on radio and TV.  But, after last night’s program, in his own words, O’Reilly’s complaint against the NY Times has turned into outright “war” against the venerable newspaper.

O’Reilly’s “war” regards his claim that the NY Times “killed” a story regarding alleged ties between then-candidate Obama and the controversial ACORN group before the presidential elections and that, if the paper had run a story outlining alleged corruption within ACORN, it could have affected the results of the November elections.

O’Reilly’s attack last night against the NY Times came after an editorial in Sunday’s paper by Clark Hoyt who O’Reilly calls an “ombudsman” for the NY Times in which Hoyt briefly refers to O’Reilly.

Who’s right?

Your answer will probably depend on which side you lean more toward.  But to be fair about this, they both are valid in their claims although O’Reilly tends, later on, to jump off into the deep end leaving reality behind.

This beef centers around an interview by the Times that was being conducted with a former ACORN employee, Anita Moncreif, who claimed that ACORN broke the law by having partisan ties with Obama and that ACORN was actually supporting him for president.

To be fair to the Times, they were hesitant to run with the story based only on Moncreif’s claims because of her credibility:  Moncreif, according to the Times, had been “fired” because of misusing an ACORN credit card.

The NY Times did run another alternate story about potential corruption within ACORN from a more credible source.

O’Reilly has blasted the Times for not running Moncreif’s claims, accusing them of conspiring to throw the elections.

While it’s true that it might look better now, in retrospect, if the NY Times had run Moncreif’s story too, and also inserted that her claims weren’t entirely verified because of her credibility issues, O’Reilly is not being realistic in claiming that the Times decided to “kill a story” because they are, according to O’Reilly, “a dishonest publication” who were behind Obama’s election!

The links to both O’Reilly’s and the New York Times are below so you can check it out for yourself and decide.  A note about the Fox link:  go about 1 minute 40 seconds into the 5 /18 video for O’Reilly’s side of this issue.

Fox News Bill O’Reilly Link:

http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/index.html

NY Times Link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/opinion/17pubed.html?scp=3&sq=stephanie%20strom&st=cse

 

Technorati Tags: ACORN,politics,FOX News,NY Times,O’Reily

 

Are We Seeing the End of Two-Party Government?

Senator Arlen Specter is no lightweight in Washington’s political arena.  As one of the Senate’s most senior ranking members, Specter is able to wield power with even-handed temperance and balance.  He has never shown himself to be radical on issues and is not in anyone’s back pocket.

But do the Republicans realize what they lost?  If they choose to ignore what’s happened, or mock his decision – like Hannity did on Fox the other day by calling Specter “Benedict Arlen” – it could be the signal for other more moderate Republicans to also abandon the party, leaving one of our major parties in the hands of a tiny minority of radicals.

In switching parties, Specter brings with him his expertise on a variety of important issues.  Currently he is a member of five Senate committees which include the all-important Appropriations, Veterans Affairs, and Judiciary (of which he was the Republican ranking, or leading, member; a seat which will now be vacant, although Specter will remain on the committee but now on the Democratic side).

Specter’s switch was purely for his political survival.  But what’s wrong with that?  He’s a politician, and a good one.  Why should he give up almost 30 years because his own party has been taken over by a few small-minded people who really have no hope for winning the general populace because of their intolerance and inability to be open to any other views beside their own?

Specter left because Pennsylvania lost its Republican base.  Since his last reelection in 2004, about 200,000 Republicans (moderates) gave up on trying to work within the party and switched to the Democratic party.  What is left of the PA Republicans is a small minority who are religious right-wingers and do not support Specter.

Any one of us would do the same thing, given the same circumstances.

Although there have been comments on the media and Internet that Specter may face challenge from the Democrats in that primary, it is unlikely.  With the support of President Obama and the governor or Pennsylvania, Specter will have smooth sailing in the Democratic primary.

The big question, however, is how other Republican moderates will respond?

Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both from Maine, for example, are moderates.  So far, neither is indicating they will follow Specter’s lead but that could change over time depending on how the Republican party handles this.  Above all, everyone, including the Republican leadership, must remember that these people are career politicians.  They will serve in the party which respects them and which furthers their own ideals.

Snowe is up for reelection in 2012 and Collins in 2014 so there still is time but the Republicans shouldn’t sit on it too long.

If the Republican are incapable of bringing their party back to center, does it mean the end of two-party government?

Let’s hope not because that would be bad for all of us; democracy needs lively debate from opposing sides.  But if the Republican party continues to cater to its far-right minority, it’s likely that it will cease to be a major party and sink into the political oblivion of a very minor, powerless, party.

If that should happen, let’s hope that another party (perhaps an independent party) arises in power to replace the vacancy.

Technorati Tags: election,government,politics,Specter,Arlen Specter

 

Godspeed President Obama

Congratulations President Obama on you innauguration!  And congratulations also to us – the people of the The United States – for overcoming the divisiveness that has separated this nation for too long!

I grew up in the ’60s Midwest and I saw segregation and discrimination first hand – my school, my neighborhood, my teachers were all white; I overheard the adults and, as I got older, argued even with my own father; I saw Selma on TV – and if anyone told me back then that I would be celebrating the innauguration of an African-American President, I would have said, “Dream on!.”

But more than finally getting past racial barriers, we, the voters, have finally made a real choice of a leader who, with our help and support, can get us out of this mess!

It seems to me that after all the years of  bad and, at times, horribly destructive and ignorant leadership, that finally we have a REAL President!  Obama is intelligent; he is also willing to LISTEN TO ALL SIDES of the issues; and Obama – so far – is making good on what he told us he would do during his campaign.  Obama is proving everyday that he really takes the Office and the People of this country seriously.  Rather than just going along with the status quo like some of his predecessors, Obama is setting the pace for open discussion and solutions.  Keep up the good work, Mr. President!

Lao Tzu, the ancient sage, said that “the great leader is he who the people say, we did it ourselves.”  To shouts of “Yes, We Can!” it appears that this time, hopefully, we are on the right track!

 

Um, That’s Obama With a “B”

Source:  New York Times – Opinion

NY Times article by The Editorial Board reveals an apparent (?) “typographical error” in some of New York’s Rennselaer County absentee ballots shocked voters by replacing a “b” with an “s”:

Voters who wanted absentee ballots in an upstate New York County were surprised to see the name of the Democratic Presidential candidate. On the ballot, it read “Barack Osama.”

Major oops or dirty trick?

After the Albany Times-Union newspaper revealed the problem ballots on Friday, the Rensselaer County Board of Elections inisisted that the rendering of Barack Obama’s name was a simple mistake, and insisted that it was included on “only 300 of more than 4,000″ ballots.

“The board of elections acted quickly to correct the typographical error and regrets the error,” the board said in a statement. “The error was not deliberate and the Board of Elections is continuing to fairly manage the upcoming General Election in a bi-partisan and cooperative manner.”

I suppose it might be possible that the mix-up is really an “error” but I highly doubt it; I mean unless the person doing the typing did it in the dark or perhaps the person was illiterate and can’t read the difference between an “s” and a “b” BUT I still don’t think so because if it was some kind of error due to a bad typist:

1. There would have been a lot more errors than just these two letter; and,
2. Proofreading would have and should have caught all typos.

Besides, the “s” and the “b” on the keyboard are, as most of us know, not even next to each other so, no, I don’t think it was so accidental but instead it was someone’s mean-spirited stunt.

If you click on the link below and scroll down to the end of the short Times article, you’ll see in the comments section that a lot of other people think it wasn’t an accident either and, apparently, the County Board of Elections in the upstate New York received lots of surprised and angry calls (see link inside articles block quote above).

Hatefulness is alive and unfortunately well in this election year!

Um, That’s Obama with a “B” – The Board Blog – NYTimes.com

Technorati Tags: 2008 election,2008 elections,2008 presidential,barack,barack obama,campaign watch,democrats,dnc,double standards,elections,elections 2008,john mccain,mccain,media scandals,news,obama,politics,polls,presidential campaign,sarah palin