It can be recalled that women in public office has been accepted for quite a few centuries, it was not until the 1984 nomination of Geraldine Ferraro that a woman was ever considered for a nominiation to executive office by a major party. The old school argument put forth for why a woman should never be President has always been a women’s emotional stability while undergoing monthly physical changes with the concern that it may coincide with a national crisis. Of course, thanks to President Bill Clinton, it has been proven that, without affecting the nation’s security, a President can continue to function while having oral sex so, changing a tampon and popping a Pamprin shouldn’t cause too much of an uproar, even in times of crisis. How times have changed.

To many, Sarah Palin was like a breath of fresh air in the 2008 election. The problem was that fresh air in politics is confusing. We have become accustomed to a certain type of personality for a politician. The country wanted a change, but with so little time left in the election to really get to know her, the GOP offering us a good looking, gun-weilding, hockey mom for a Vice-Presidential candidate was a mistake. Many people did not know how to respond to the nomination announcement and for many the knee-jerk reaction was to reject her without cause. Unfortunately, it also had us witness the dive in maturity levels for media personalities, hard-core Democrats, and even some Republicans. Even so, Sarah Palin rose above it without one shred of evidence during the election that the situation she was in was bothering her. That, my friends, is a President!

This election, we certainly saw attempts to undermine womens qualifications to lead when, as a political strategy, Sarah Palin’s ability to be a Vice-President while continuing to provide care for her children was questioned. We also saw the media go out of their way to show us, what some of us view as sexist photographs of Sarah Palin, as if good legs and high heels are some sort of detriment to performing the duties of Vice-President. Sarah Palin’s main deficit as a serious Vice-Presidential candiate appeared to be her looks, hence the nickname “Carribou Barbie.” She was given what she was given. What was  she supposed to do, take fashion and make-up tips from Ugly Betty to win the day?  

If we are lucky enough, Sarah Palin will now take the time available to her to build the credentials needed to make a serious run for President and should she wholeheartedly decide to do so, it will most certainly be a race.

Swing States

1.  7:00pm (est)

Virginia and Indiana polls close. 

2.  7:30pm (est)

Ohio and North Carolina polls close.

3.  8:00pm (est)

Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Florida polls close.

4.  9:00pm (est)

Colorado and New Mexico polls close.

5.  10:00pm (est)

Iowa and Nevada polls close.

Analysis:

If Obama is winning two or three swing states early on, by large enough margins, the race will be over sooner rather than later in the night.  If Obama wins at least three of the swing states before the 9:00pm polls close (say Ohio, North Carolina, and Virginia), McCain will have no chance of winning.  McCain needs to win all of the swing states except Pennsylvania and perhaps one other before the 9:00pm polls close to have any chance later in the night.  If McCain does win the swing states earlier on in the east and midwest, the election will come down to Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico whose polls don't close till around 9 or 10pm (est).  All in all, we should know between 8 and 9pm whether the race is close or a blowout.  Just a reminder: a candidate only needs 270 electoral votes to win the election.  Have fun sweating it out!

Businesses need to make money. They need to make a lot of money, that's what allows companies to grow and expand, which is the way new jobs can be created. When a business is flourishing and growing, its high revenue means it gets slammed with super high taxes when things go off of a percentage. This hits so hard to the point where it's not profitable for a business to grow, as they can end up paying a lot more in taxes than they ever make from the expansion. This is where tax breaks come in; bringing the taxes a business pays out reasonable so that they can continue to expand. Taking these tax cuts away stifles growth, which can make a business stagnant meaning no more new jobs, or if the business is smaller, they can even decline if they start getting hit with high taxes, which means jobs disappearing. Basically jobs being lost and no new jobs, which means that families stop being able to pay their bills or shop for things they need and want, which in turn cuts down on business of companies still hanging on, making them decline. Next step is another Great Depression.

Barack Obama's tax plan destroys the American Dream, which is that if you try and work hard enough, anyone can be successful. That is based on motivation, dedication, and plain old hard work. Senator McCain and Governor Palin put it well in their speeches on the issue, that this country is not about spreading the wealth, but spreading the opportunity! Giving everyone the chance to succeed is what is important, it is what drives so many people around the world to want to come to this great country, it is what America is about, the rest is in the hands of those given the opportunity.

Please don't be swayed by a big flashy tax check you might get in the mail. Think about the bigger picture, think about your job, think about your family, think about our country and keeping it running so that we don't drop into another depression. Keep the presidency away from Barack Obama!

By Harrison Campbell

I read in newspaper about Barack's ex-teacher recalled that her student, Barry (his name in Indonesia), in a writing lesson wrote that he wanted to be a president. President of which country? Some years a go, as an Indonesian child, I had never had any thought to be a president. Firstly I am not a native Indonesian, secondly I was growing up under President Soeharto regime. He was so powerful and led Indonesia for 32 years. During his era it was almost impossible for other man to replace him as president. As Barack is not an Indonesian native either, it is also impossible for him to be an Indonesian president. The only possibility for him to fulfil his idea is to be the president of United States of America.

Barack wrote in his autobiography that he lacked the "certainty of the tribe." Perhaps he struggled to give himself the right identity under his black skin but was raised by his white grandparents. As a black man he did not experience the brutal racism in the poor black ghettos of Bronx (for example) because he grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii. By settling in a black neighbourhood in Chicago, became a member of a black church and married a black woman, Barack self-consciously choose to associate himself with black people.

People might think that another Clinton was needed to end Bush's leadership. But Hillary Clinton was blocked by a freshman senator. The name of the freshman senator, Barack Hussein Obama was not familiar for Americans. Even his name is associated with American's enemies: Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Washington Post published an article entitled "Osama is on the run while Obama considers to run." After Osama Bin Laden's 911 and Iraq's Saddam Hussein, the last thing people want is to send someone with the name Hussein Obama to the White House.

Unlike John McCain who was a war hero, Barack Obama is a foreign name. Unlike John McCain or George W. Bush, who were born in prominent wealthy families with powerful fathers, with all the privileges and connections, Barack Obama born from ordinary family. His father left him when he was only two years old. His personal story has touched many people. He was raised by an ordinary family, earned scholarship and living his American dream. The rise of Barack Obama to be an extraordinary public figure in America is a constant reminder that people still believe that in America everybody has an equal chance to pursue a better life. Perhaps people do not always have equal talent, but in U.S.A. all should have an equal opportunity to develop their talent. The hero like John McCain who is white competes fairly and equally with the son of unknown ordinary Kenyan immigrant says a lot about U.S.A.

Whatever happens in 4 November 2008, we are watching history in the making. This is a story that Americans will tell their future generations that everything is possible in America. During his campaigns Barack has never promised something special for black society, and perhaps things will not be different if Barack wins as a president. At least black kids can certainly say: I can grow up one day to be president. Obama will open the gate of possibilities for many people especially the blacks for many careers. The black will realize that they do not have to look like Ronald Reagan if we want to run for president. Obama inspires the black that they can be an extraordinary kind of guy. It is not a dream anymore that America will live in a society where people will not be judged by the colour of their skin or by their name but by the content of their characters. The journey of Barack Obama will always be remembered as the first black person vying for the White House.

Because he is black, there is something special. Never before in the history of U.S. Presidential Elections that the whole world is nervously waiting for it's outcome. Should Obama win the election there will be extravagant celebration within U.S.A, and around the world, in big cities of Europe like Paris or Frankfurt, in cities of China which favour him, in Iran, U.E.A., Korea, ... from Kenya, the land of his father ... to Indonesia, the land of his childhood.

Where to start....the bridge to nowhere, how she lied on campaign tours, how she refers to the war in Iraq as a conflict mandated by God, being involved in witch hunts, her failed leadership as mayor of Wasilla, setting bounties on animals and promote killings of animals, fired people for personal reasons, scandals, and her refusal to hire any black people. This is just a small list of things that I'll be talking about dealing with Palin. There is so much wrong with her and the things she's done and was involved with that she should not be our VP.

The Wasilla Assembly of God on numerous accounts has allowed Thomas Muthee to preach at the church. Palin, for 20 years, is a member of this church. This church has praised Muthee because "he has established and pastors hundreds of churches in Kenya. When Palin was beginning her campaign for governor of Alaska, she had Muthee pray over her, asking God to make her governor. Her June 8, 2008 speech at her church she said that she believes that Muthee's prayer is responsible for getting her into the governors' seat." On numerous accounts Muthee has led actual old school Salem style witch hunts. Here is one of the many videos about this. This is live from MSNBC.

Palin is closely tied to Muthee who not only believes in witchcraft, but actively battled it. "There was an actual exorcism from witchcraft that was conducted on Palin by pastor Muthee at her extremist church, the Wasilla Assembly of God." As the pastor laid his hands on her he said "In the name of Jesus, every form of witchcraft is what you rebuke. In the name of Jesus, in the name of Jesus, father make away now."

There are many videos of evidence, straight from her church of this. Its part of the proof about how out of touch Sarah Palin is with not merely mainstream American politics and culture, but how far from mainstream of modern-Christianity she is.

Let's talk about the national embarrassment called the bridge to nowhere that Palin supported from day one or should I say until she found that it would benefit her more if she gave up that dream. This bridge that Palin backed/supported was to connect Ketchikan to Gravina Island that had 50 inhabitants. This was to cost the federal tax payers 398 million dollars because of some people complained about the 15 to 30 minute ferry ride and a small $6 fee per car.

"This bridge has become an object of national ridicule and a symbol of the fiscal irresponsibility of many in congress toward the money that is entrusted to them." Sarah Palin fought for the bridge to nowhere instead of allowing part of the federal money to go to New Orleans for hurricane relief. What a very selfish person. But finally after people in congress told her how she would still be able to benefit from this if she gave up on the idea of the bridge, she had supported. They told her that 75 million would go to Louisiana and the rest, 148 million, would go to Alaska for road projects. This once priority project in Alaska was soon abandoned and they, Alaska, benefited even more from it.

Palin initially supported the bridge to nowhere, but lied several times during campaign tours about not supporting it... Like this for example she said during her acceptance speech for to be the VP pick for McCain, Sarah Palin said that she supports reforms that end the abuse of earmark spending by congress and she opposed federal funding for a controversial bridge to a sparsely populated island. She lied in her nationally televised speech about supporting the bridge along with several other times during her campaign tours...what else is she going to lie about?

Even though she publically stated that she supports reforms that end the abuse of earmark spending, she lied and her record proves it. An example was while mayor of Wasilla, 1996-2002, she hired a Washington lobbying firm that helped secure $8 million in congressionally directed spending projects known as earmarks.

Moving onto the troopergate investigation. Walter Monegan, who was the public safety commissioner in Alaska was fired by Sarah Palin due to his refusal to fire a state trooper who was the ex-husband of her sister. Mr. Monegan has a clean record and didn't do anything wrong and was fired for personal reasons by Mrs. Palin. She abused her powers as governor and denies any wrongdoings. Do we really want someone who abuses power while in office being our future VP? I don't think that we want a liar having such political power. Not to mention, Palin had fired the Wasilla police chief, John Glass, because he was trying to clean up drinking and concealed weapons in the town. Oh yeah, and she fired the Wasilla Library Director because she refused to ban books that Palin and her friends or associates found objectional. Ridiculous Palin, just ridiculous.

Palin has squandered over $400,000 of state money on propaganda to support aerial wolf and bear hunting. She gives a $150 bounty on the severed left leg of a killed wolf. She supports the continued slaughter from the skies by trophy seeking serial killers of mammals. Here is a video you should view.

Also view this website. Palin also opposed protections for Salmon from mining contamination. She's sued the Govt. to stop listing polar bears as endangered. She also believes that the feds shouldn't list the Beluga Whales as endangered. This woman is vile and disgusting. She has no care about the environment nor for the animals that live in it.

Most people don't know about the other bridge to nowhere. It's called Don Young Bridge or Don Young Way. Republican Don Young was able to get earmarks of $600 million for Palin to build. Why would he do such a thing? The catch is that Rep. Young's son-in-law, indicted senator Ted Stevens and three other notables own property that will increase when the bridge is built. Her push for the bridge was to cut commute time from 34 minutes to 24 minutes.

In the mean time the Beluga Whales are on the endangered species list and Fish and Wildlife Services are concerned that the whales will be wiped out if the bridge is built. It should be no big surprise to hear that Palin is fervently trying to get the Beluga Whales removed from the endangered list in order to get the bridge built.

And let talk about Ted Stevens for a moment before moving on to another topic. Sarah Palin was heavily involved with disgraced Senator Ted Stevens who is currently under investigation. She raised large amounts of money for him in a company called "Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service, Inc." They also appeared in commercials together to highlight his endorsement of Palin. See here. The video has been removed from Palin's website due to her recent position as VP for McCain. The video can be found on YouTube if you want to see it...

Palin's relationship with Ted is one of the more complicated aspects of her position as John McCain's running mate. Ted Stevens was indicted in July 2008 on seven counts of corruption. Before he was indicted, she met with him to make clear she did not abandon him politically. He was quit helpful in her run for governor with bringing in a last moment endorsement.

With McCain being as old as he is and with a good chance of him passing during his possible term of presidency or having cancer or Alzheimer's, Palin would be president. But I have to ask, is it alright for a possible future president to have such views and be raciest? I think not. The president, of all people, should never be raciest. I bring this up because Sarah Palin refuses to hire any blacks. There are about fourteen black leaders in Alaska who have filed complaints because she would not hire them, and her reason she gave is that she does not want to hire black people.

People criticize Obama for trying drugs as a child and also for sleeping with another man. What about Palin? Palin smoked marijuana when it was legal under the Alaska law. Also you don't hear people talk about Palin's lesbian experience in the parking lot of West Anchorage High School in 1982. What makes it right to keep this stuff hidden but can banter Obama for quit similar mistakes? It's wrong, and people better look into their political candidates they support because they think they are so great, before pointing fingers.

Should I even mention affairs? Both Palin and McCain have taken part in such acts. McCain had cheated on his first wife. Palin slept with her husband's business partner.

Where does Sarah Palin stand with alternative energy? Palin vetoed legislation for wind and solar energy and is securely in the pockets of big oil companies. Besides, Palin's husband works for British Petroleum. She's willing to do whatever it takes even if it means killing off animals to do so. "When Sarah Palin talks about taking on the oil industry, she means getting them to drill more and cough up more cash for Alaskans. This is a put Alaska first policy; not a put America first policy." Palin continues to make Alaskan oil the centerpiece of her campaign.

Also what about her per diem? It is not fair that Palin charged the state of Alaska for herself, her daughter, and her husband while working at home. What if we all done that? Palin used a government allowance to charge the state for more than 300 nights spent at home and spent another $43,490 on travel for her children and husband. Why should people pay for Palin to basically live in her house and for her family to travel? I can see the point since she seems to be milking the taxpayers for the most she can get. But it's not right for her to get away with doing as she pleases.

She also said that she sold the corporate jet on eBay. That is another lie that came out of her mouth. She actually sold the jet to an Alaskan businessman at a $600,000 loss. It was never sold on eBay like she claims. Why can she just keep lying to us? And the best part is all you republicans out there who support her just turn a blind eye to this and other issues that she either lied or misused her power in...

Should I even bring her child into the picture? I think I will, so you know what kind of person she is... when you know that you are having a child with Down's Syndrome, you don't delay medical care when your water prematurely ruptures and you certainly don't take a flight home from Texas to Alaska. Delivery of a normal infant at 7.5 months is very touchy and involves the child to stay in the NICU for awhile, and when combined with Down's Syndrome it becomes even more grave. Sarah Palin knowingly endangered her 5th child's life to fly home and left a premature, high needs infant to return to work three days later. Either scenario raises relevant concerns about her ethics and judgment.

Not to mention her failed attempt at Lt. Gov. in 2002 and her years as Chairman, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2003-3004; Chair Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission; and Vice Chair, National Governors Association Natural Resources Committee. These are all positions she was appointed to by the very same politician who later pushed her out and against whom she ran on a platform of ending corruption. I smell a rat.
This country is taking a scary direction since people have been supporting Bush, McCain, Palin. Sarah Palin lacks political experience, is a disgrace to the female race, a lying redneck evangelical, and a horrible irresponsible mother. She's anti choice, a servant of the oil companies, denies global warming, abuses her political power, get pregnant in her mid 40's knowing well the risks and bringing a Down's Syndrome child into term. Top it off, she abandons the infant after three days and goes back to work. She also enjoys making a public spectacle of her daughter. She is pregnant and not married and is the laughing stock of the media. The list goes on...

How does it work that it's not against their religion to have pre-marital sex but it's against their religion to have an abortion even in cases of rape, Down Syndrome or teen pregnancy? Also what kind of Christian religion does she believe in? Last time I checked Creationism isn't a denomination of Christianity. She sees creationism as perfectly acceptable and that it should be taught to children in all public schools. She advocates the teaching of creationism as an alternative and equally viable theory to evolution. I don't know about you, but I definitely don't want my future children to be taught such nonsense.
Also do we want Sarah's husband, Todd Palin, to stick his nose in our country's affairs? He's done it on numerous accounts while his wife is governor of Alaska. I like this description that someone wrote about him... "Todd Palin, this unholy false promise keeper kind of wrong-headed and smug lying head of household, and arrogant holier than thou, too good for the United States member of the Alaskan Independence Party, and also a bully hiding behind his wife's apron strings coward, whose religion simultaneously teaches him he and his church are the most special Christians of all while at the same time teaching him he is forgiven for all the transgressions his church implies it is okay for him to commit, needs to do prison time."

"Maybe it will help them eventually become free of the mental illness, avarice, hubris, and general moral depravity, that have consumed them." I agree, he should not be allowed in her office, looking into private matters and he should pay the consequences of it. If he doesn't take responsibility for the things he's done, it's just going to get a lot worse. He has his own job and should not be rummaging around her office for people's personal files and affairs that he wants to place his nose in.

Someone needs to address this issue more... Under the Constitution's 14th amendment, which clearly states insurrection or rebellion against the United States Government disqualifies people from running for government positions. Palin should be disqualified from running; the fact that her husband belongs to and she supported an anti-American group in Alaska makes it plain as day.

I'm sick of lies that spew from Republicans mouths. Everyone seems to forget that eight years ago our country was flourishing and we had a surplus and a balanced budget. Under Bush and the Republicans we have gotten huge deficits, bigger government, more people without jobs, more bankruptcies, more home foreclosures, gas that costs about $4 average per gallon, high food prices, weaker dollar, lower wages and less respect from our allies overseas. Now we are asked to vote for McCain/Palin and they will bring peace and prosperity back to the masses. Please, how can we trust McCain when he can't even answer a simple question regarding the number of houses he owns?

Could it be because he is 72 years old after all or could it be because he wants to avoid the truth because saying that he owns 7 houses show's that he is not like us. Most of us are having a difficult time trying to keep the one house we do have. Or better yet, he is just a liar and will say anything to get elected. Please, let's all wake up and do what's right for America and vote for Obama/Biden. They will bring about the changes that this country needs after these last 8 years of sheer incompetence and waste at the highest level of our government.

Senator Obama was next with some good points. “….Number one, let's focus on jobs. I want to end the tax breaks for companies that are shipping jobs overseas and provide a tax credit for every company that's creating a job right here in America.”  Right, I tried not to buy anything made in China.  That didn’t last the shopping trip.  Even the can of organic soy beans was a product of China.  I use to hear commercials, “Made in America,” not anymore.

“Number two, let's help families right away by providing them a tax cut -- a middle-class tax cut for people making less than $200,000, and let's allow them to access their IRA accounts without penalty if they're experiencing a crisis.”   I’m middle class. That means I get smooched between the lower class and the upper class like the filling in a sandwich. I needed money from my IRA and got taxed more than Bill Gates.

“Now Senator McCain and I agree with your idea that we've got to help homeowners. That's why we included in the financial package a proposal to get homeowners in a position where they can renegotiate their mortgages.”  Yes help me!  Chase Finance could care less.  I felt like this was going to be a good debate.  The candidates were really going to get to the issues that troubled me.  Yes, I was selfish.  I was thinking about myself, not my neighbor.

The debate was moving along nicely.  Senator McCain seemed calm, and even made eye contact with Senator Obama.  What came next started the avalanche, landslide, disaster, etc.  MCCAIN: “No. I would like to mention that a couple days ago Senator Obama was out in Ohio and he had an encounter with a guy who's a plumber, his name is Joe Wurzelbacher, (pronounced whur-zell-BAHK-er).  McCain pronounced the man’s name wrong.  That was the beginning of the end for John and me.  I felt like Senator McCain has trouble relating to more than one person at a time.  I am not sure who he related to in the first debate, neither Obama nor the moderator.  The second debate, he seemed to get personal only with another military guy.  Now McCain is relating to Joe the plumber.  Both McCain and Obama repeated Joe more than 25 times during the 90-minute debate. Iraq came up six times. Economy used sixteen times.  I am not Joe the plumber, Joe six-pack or a hockey mom.

MCCAIN: Well, if you'll turn on the television, as I -- I watched the Arizona Cardinals defeat the Dallas Cowboys on Sunday.  What?  Who cares?  Get to the point.  “….Senator Obama is spending unprecedented -- unprecedented in the history of American politics, going back to the beginning, amounts of money in negative attack ads on me.”  Where has McCain been?  The whole campaign has been negative.  Sarah Palin call Obama a “domestic terrorist”.  The shout of "kill him" followed a Sarah Palin rant on Obama's relationship with radical Chicagoan Bill Ayers.  I don’t believe Palin acted without McCain knowing.  McCain is upset about what Congressman Lewis said.  Go talk with Congressman Lewis.  He’s not at this debate.  It was pretty much all over when the two Senators got to Mr. Ayers, negative remarks at rallies and Acorn.  Acorn? What is that? 

McCain was back to his angry, ranting self.

He lost his focus.  Mc Cain is on video looking like a deer in headlights.  He lost the big Ayers bang when Obama said with whom he associated.  Obama was eight years old when Ayers now a college professor was a “terrorist.” That left McCain saying he didn’t care about an “old washed up terrorist.”   Well John, why are you bringing up this stuff if you don’t care about them?  Why couldn’t you stick with the issues?  As president when you get into talks with not so friendly leaders, are you going to look angry and beat around the “bush?”

Because the stakes are so high, this election has seemed more heated and contentious than ever. As I've more closely followed the election, I've been struck by the amount of hate and vitriol launched at the candidates and their running mates this election season. And it's made me wonder, exactly when did the cultural shift happen that made such cruelty and hate so acceptable in our mass culture?

Sometimes the hate takes a more subtle form, like school kids forming cliques, singling someone out for juvenile reasons, and ganging up on them. For example, making fun of a candidate's hair, dress, age or demeanor is a childish way of debasing them that seems all in good fun...but is it? Think of the onslaught of lampooning Sarah Palin has received in the media, especially Saturday Night Live. Are her detractors who attack her at such a personal level trying to have some good clean fun at her expense, or is the intent to spread hate? It's almost as if some people think Sarah Palin doesn't have any basic human rights at all.

A good example of this is the columnist who wrote that Sarah Palin's baby has Down syndrome because she didn't give her child the proper prenatal care. That's as detestable as the rumors that Sarah Palin's teenage daughter is actually the biological mother of the baby. This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to rumors and hateful remarks about Sarah Palin and her family.

To me, such attacks seem to go far beyond political differences, and can often be dehumanizing. I get the impression that disagreeing with a candidate's views isn't enough anymore for some people; there's a desire to destroy or denigrate that person as well. It's as if a standard is starting to emerge in America: if you disagree with a politician, then anything goes, as far as degrading, hateful personal attacks.

I recently saw a news story about “when mean girls grow up.”And I listened to a story about how “mean girls” in high school (and in particular the ring leaders called “queen bees”) often grow up to persecute and inflict cruelty on other women. This can happen in a lot of different situations, like daycare, an office, where there are power structures and cliques of women. I felt pretty disheartened listening to that, hearing the stories of how women inflict cruelty on other women.

I'm sad to say, it's really become culturally acceptable to do that. It happens when people are angry or insecure or ignorant, or want to feel especially powerful, for lots of reasons. It's not just the women; men behave badly in these ways, too. It feels like it's everywhere right now, a mass intolerance that alarms me. It seems these days that simple disagreement, with boundaries, isn't enough.

So inflicting hate and abuse is happening at all levels in society. It occurs on a private level in the day to day interactions that spread fear and hate. And it can be seen on a national level like we are witnessing with the hate mongering during this year's presidential elections. Have we become a kinder, gentler, more evolved society, or are we going in the other direction?

I've noticed how some people in our society have to destroy or humiliate the object of their dislike, like they don't even have a right to personally exist if they are somehow different, or present an opposing view. It seems to me like it wasn't always this way, and that this condoned hate is an emerging cultural phenomenon of our times.

This was really brought home to me by Sandra Bernhard, who, in my opinion made a shocking and inexcusable statement. She said that Sarah Palin should be gang raped. I was stunned when I heard that statement; I'd always liked Sandra Bernhard as an actor and comedian. But not anymore: I'll never watch Sandra Bernhard's work again. It's the only way I have of saying this kind of hate is scary and not acceptable to me. (I have to give kudos to the women's shelter that dropped Bernhard as a headliner at their benefit because she made these hateful remarks about Sarah Palin.)

If you don't like a candidate or their running mate, vote for the other candidate and their VP pick. It's as simple as that. You can disagree or even dislike them, but they are human beings. It's a political race, and a contest. But as citizens, we are taking things way too far into degrading, dehumanizing personal attacks and things like threats against the well being of our political candidates.

How did we devolve so as a people? That's the question I frequently ask myself during election season. I for one will remember election 2008 for its extreme quality and all the negativity. I'm sickened by Sandra Bernhard's mean spirited personal attack against Sarah Palin. I hope if other people are sickened also they will wake up and want something better. Then we may see a shift away from this emerging culture of hate, towards something more positive for our great country.

So the story runs, a few people are mentioned; perhaps you hear the candidate interviewed – once – on NPR (as if they dropped out of the race the day after). And then we forget about this Third Party nonsense until the next election cycle when someone dusts off the old, worn scripts, and the Libertarians make their return appearance as a useful, quirky space filler on a slow news day.

This morning I decided to vote for Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for President. I did it because I decided that a vote for either of the “major” candidates would be the real waste of my time. Let me tell you why:

I have voted for Democrats in every election since the first year I was allowed to vote, which was 1984. If the candidate was the Democrat, I automatically picked them. If there was more than one Democrat involved, I researched which was likely to cause the least damage and I voted for them. If there were no Democrats, I wrote in something derogatory about the Republican who was about to re-inherit his power without a challenger.

Why did I vote for Democrats? The reasoning shifted around a bit, but in the end it always boiled down to the same thing: The Democrat was not a Republican.

So far as I was concerned, the Republicans’ swing to the far right involved an idea of government I found morally intrusive. Without fail, the Republicans were openly espousing a frightening brand of intolerance born of pandering to the extreme conservatism of the so-called Religious Right.

Nothing of cultural value was safe from these people – they demanded the ability to legislate what art I could see (or make), which books were fit for sharing in a public setting, what ideas were “dangerous” and “un-American.”

They wanted to tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies. They wanted to tell men and women whom they could love and how, and imprison them if they disobeyed or discriminate against them if they did not adequately conform.

They demanded that the land be remade in the image of some vague thing they came to call “Wholesome Family Values.” And they had no wish to bring in this reform by using rational arguments and evidence – they simply wanted to put people into office who would rewrite the laws to suit their tastes and place judges on the bench who would enforce their interpretation of the laws.

In short, they wanted to legislate their personal morality without offering so much as a good explanation as to why I was supposed to think their ethical code made more sense than any competitor’s – that is, aside from the baseless claim they infallibly understand the mind of the Deity.

And the Republicans had this habit of making certain their cronies were served, that their wealthy contributors’ pockets were well-lined with government assistance of all sorts. No, they would not spend money on the poor; instead they redistributed taxes to the rich instead of having an open, honest discussion about just what the responsibilities of a good government might be and the proper use of taxes. Just as many see the Democrats as the party of irresponsible social welfare, I saw the Republicans become the party of equally irresponsible corporate welfare.

To my mind, the Republicans, with the advent of Ronald Reagan, were the more dangerous of the two parties – dangerous to the spirit of The Constitution and the hopes of the Founders. So I always threw my vote to the Democrat – as a protest against everything the Republicans stood for.

I also had a certain conviction: That the Democrats tended to cause less damage when in office than the Right Wing Republicans. My thinking went, since the Democratic Party was an umbrella party, they had a certain incapacity to easily agree about anything or readily cooperate. The outcome was (I thought) government that worked very slowly with little that was very extreme, one way or another, emerging at the end of the day. Liberalism in our country had gone out of favor, so this limited the power of anyone who leaned to the left so far as to be dangerous.

The point is, I saw the Democrats as a “safe” choice. I didn’t vote for their candidates because I liked any of them – I have yet to vote for a politician with whom I feel wholly comfortable or a platform with which I wholly agree. I never picked my candidates on the basis of personality – it was always with a hope that he or she would cause less damage than the Republicans seemed capable of inflicting.

Over the past 8 years, I have found myself increasingly faced with the probability my assumptions about the Democrats were wrong. I watched them roll over and give away our personal freedoms to the Bush Administration in the name of some illusory thing they called “safety”; I watched them help expand the power of the executive branch while surrendering the responsibilities of the legislative branch.

I heard the Democrats complain about the president and his policies, but at the end of the day I watched many of them bow down, unwilling to take a consistently principled stand of any sort on any issue, unable to ask any of the questions that needed to be asked about The Bush Doctrine, about The Patriot Act, about the National ID, about torture. They were pragmatists; their sole objective was to remain in office.

I have just watched a Democratic Congress sit around while the nation’s economy went into a slow motion train wreck over the past couple of years. They took no meaningful action, did nothing worthwhile, seem to have exercised no more oversight on this issue than they have with other issues of national importance.

And then the Bush Administration shoved the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (The Bailout) across their collective Congressional desk and demanded they get out the rubber stamp one more time and sign off on a huge shift of power and a tremendous redistribution of wealth to… a gang of irresponsible wealthy people.

As of today, both Houses of Congress approved this bill and President Bush immediately signed it into law.

I have just witnessed the Democrats and the Republicans cooperate to re-make our government, spend our tax money, lard up the bill with very questionable tax breaks, all without adequate time to examine the proposals in the bill or clearly think out the ramifications that will only become apparent as the months pass.

Certainly we civilians did not have an opportunity to educate ourselves and properly perform our role as holding the first office in a Democracy: Citizen.

Both candidates for president from both of the major parties, being senators, voted exactly the same way on this bill and never questioned it in any meaningful fashion… other than half-hearted swipes against President Bush to score a few points.

So I have had to re-think my vote, which was solidly for Obama. At this point, I have asked myself a serious question: Is my strategy of supporting Democrats against Republicans really doing much more than perpetuating the very situation I oppose?

After this episode in which both parties cooperated to expand the power of the executive branch in unimaginable and unknown ways one more time, I am afraid I have decided the answer to my question is, “My votes have done little more than contribute to the loss of the possibility of any real change in our country’s perilous situation.”

The Republicans and Democrats have written the rules to favor themselves, concentrate all institutional power in their hands. As long as no one opposes them in the name of ideas that vaguely resemble the values that inspired the Founding Fathers, voting for one of them is nearly the same as voting for the other.

Each is more than happy, when hard choices must be made, when crises must be faced, to attempt to legislate their way out of the difficulty. And there will always be hard choices and crises – that is why we have government. But as long as the two parties can count on getting my vote, neither has to radically re-think its motives or really consider anything as impractical as ideas and principles.

They are wasting my time.

So I have decided to vote for the Third Party candidate, the Libertarian, Bob Barr. Again and as usual, it has nothing to do with his personality and charisma. But this time it does have to do with principles. I do not wholly agree with the Libertarian Party platform – but, then again, I’ll never wholly agree with many groups in this world.

But I absolutely agree with them that the Founders created a country based on the idea that no one in government should be allowed to have very much power, because politicians can’t be trusted to use power wisely outside a system of strict checks and balances, and outside The Constitution and the laws. I firmly agree that, ultimately, the most important force in a nation is its citizens, and that it is only by the citizenry choosing to be responsible, educated, and ethical that a just government and a proper society can be created for future generations.

I agree that it is not the government’s business to tell me how to live beyond a certain minimal level necessary to keep peace and promote a proper sort of tolerance. I agree that many things need to be re-examined in our nation, our values, our beliefs – and that politics cannot achieve this. If this is to be done at all, it must be done as free people thinking for themselves, using social, not governmental, institutions to achieve as many of their aims as is possible and reasonable.

Will my vote be wasted? Quite the contrary; I am voting for a better future. I have decided to cast a vote to show I am through playing the rigged game the two major parties have set up for me, the one in which I surrender my will and my judgment and slave away to provide the tax money for whatever “project” or whatever restrictive “law” these people decide to concoct. All while ignoring my letters and phone calls… and yours too, perhaps.

I am casting a vote for a different game – the one the Founders agreed on, the one that respects my value as a rational human, the one that limits, not expands government, the one that keeps theocrats and tyrants of all sorts from improperly affecting the laws. I’m going to vote for the Libertarian Bob Barr, not because I like him, but because I cherish these ideas, and because the Republicans and Democrats don’t care about these things at all in practice, regardless of what they may preach.

Evidently, the Libertarians are asking for an opportunity to show me they will act on these principles. I’m going to support them till they show me otherwise.

There are worse ways to spend your time and vote.

Richard Van Ingram

3 October 2008

The ads come on the heel of the news; Florida will not persecute Rep. Mark Foley, a Republican Florida congressman for exchanging inappropriate e-mails and instant messages with teenaged congressional pages. Foley resigned in 2006, and is said to be using his congressional clout to stonewall the investigation. Is there no one running for election a voter can trust?

Whistleblower Clinton Curtis loses the congressional seat in Florida's 24th district to Feeney in 2006. Curtis ran and loss in 2008 to Democrat Suzanne Kosmas, a former member of the Florida House of Representatives and a small business owner. Curtis filed an official complaint with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC), alleging that Kosmas made illegal and deceptive campaign calls from within the Florida Democratic Party (FDP) offices, on party phone lines. Being honest not too good for political careers?

Why do we vote the way we do? A seemingly honest man that tells the truth can't get elected. So as voters, what are the characteristic we look for in elected officials? I suspect we pick friends, work environment, spiritual advisors, and experts the same way. Do we look for our perception of what we think these individuals are, and not the way they actually are? Are we electing people through celebrity worship syndrome? Do we look for the candidates with the same characteristics election after election, and still expect change?

My other theory is mass media hypnosis. Are we getting subliminal suggestions from all the political ads? It's like when you go to the movies, and become thirsty for a soda or crave popcorn. I know something is wrong when I want chocolate....I don't even like chocolate.

Celebrity Worship Syndrome
Citizen's Guide for Communicating with Elected Officials