The Voice of Reason

Democrats and Republicans are more alike than they think.  Let's look at two different issues with the parties holding equal (yet opposite) views:

Social Security

Democrats:  It's fine, we just need more $$ to insure it.

GOP: We need to take it in a different direction, or there will be nothing left when our children and grandchildren grow old. 

Oil/Energy

GOP:  It's fine, we just need MORE OIL to keep the prices down.

Democrats: We need to move in a different direction less dependent on (& ultimately free of) oil, or there will be nothing to draw energy from when our children and grandchildren grow old. 

Personally, I agree w/ the GOP on Social Security, which by all figures that I've seen will have a problem once the boomers start to live into their 90s.   This affects me personally as a Gen Xer, as I watch a fair amount of my paycheck disappear into this chasm of retirement account, wondering how much/if any of it that I'll actually see.

I agree w/ the Democrats on the energy debate.  I don't know how much oil is still buried w/in the earth, and I don't know for sure how much global warming is caused by the oil we are burning....but why NOT find a cleaner (and ultimately MUCH CHEAPER) source of energy?  The U.S. should take the lead and create better technology.  We import everything else nowadays, how about creating something of value that only we can make for a change? 

Am I the only one who DOESN'T follow party lines issue for issue?  I know I'm not, but some of you "regulars" are so predictable, it's ridiculous.  You know who you are.  Keep letting the parties decide your stance on, well, everything, and we'll continue to watch them dominate the political world to the point where logic and common sense are thrown out of the picture altogether. 

Some nameless person in these blogs has said MANY TIMES that Cuyahoga County is being run into the ground by crooks in office.  I---oops, I mean, that person, said that when one political party runs the entire show, checks and balances go, well, unchecked and unbalanced.  Little "secrets" are pushed under the rug, and since nobody in office wants to find dirt on their cronies, they don't.  Convenient, eh?  This isn't a slam on all Democrats; a county run entirely by Republicans would probably have similar skeletons in its political closet. 

I confess:  I was the one (among others I suppose) who called the Cuyahoga County government officials corrupt.  I suppose everyone who accused me of being a neocon mouthpiece will now apologize, right?  I'm waiting........but not holding my breath. 

Remember the Cuyahoga County Motto:  

"Just shut up and vote for the 'D!!'"

Seeing the local campaign signs spring up reminds me of a set of laws that I'd like to see passed:

1) No campaign signs posted more than 45 days prior to an election.  The current crop of local signs would meet that requirement with no problem, but there are a few Presidential ones starting to appear, and the Primary here isn't even until next Spring!!

2)All campaign signs must be removed by the Saturday following an election.  That gives everybody four days to do a task that entails all of thirty seconds.  There are still places by the highway where you can find Bush/Cheney and Kerry/Edwards signs from 2004....What an eyesore.   Neighborhoods look so much cleaner without all the cluttter.

3) You can advertise on TV and radio all you want, but any political ads more than 45 days prior to an election cost double the normal advertising rate.  Any ads more than 60 days prior cost triple.  All stations would be required to show proof of these rates through receipts, etc.  Free speech is free speech, but enough is enough when it comes to these ads!!  The final week before an election is almost exclusively political commercials; watch for yourself if you haven't noticed this before. 

The political season is something I love and hate.  It's fun to watch campaigns unfold and get excited about voting, but the campaign overload has got to be one of the major factors that turns so many citizens away from the whole process. 

Agree?  Disagree?   

I probably learned this in college as a Biology student, but I've forgotten it if I did.  I'm wondering what the ideal conditions are for vibrant fall colors.  I've heard from some "elder" family members that warm, dry days and crisp nights are best.  Is this true, or does a moderate amount of rainfall help brighten up the leaves?  I don't know why I care, but I was wondering.... 

Surely one of you weather folks has the answer, or maybe a random reader will know. 

Thanks!

Feel free to take part in my "Reverse Presidential Primary."   I've read too much from bloggers about how great all the candidates from their party are, and how terrible the candidates from the opposing party are.  I've decided to turn this around a little bit and hope for some non-partisan positivity for a change. 

Here are the rules:

Whatever your political affiliation, tell me who your favorite candidate from the other political party is.  This doesn' t mean that you endorse this person or even like him/her, but just play along as if you had to pick a candidate from that party.   Give as many (or as few) reasons as you wish to back up your choice.

Be true to your candidate.  Don't pick someone simply because your party's candidates could easily beat this person.  Really pick someone you like the most or dislike the least from the other party. 

If you're like me and you don't serve one political party, feel free to vote for a candidate from either or both parties, but be ready to support your choices. 

I guess it's only fair if I start:  

From the three debates that I've seen, I have yet to see many differences between the Democratic candidates.  Most of the actual "debating" has centered around past voting records regarding the Iraq war, so I can't make the most educated of votes, but I'll go ahead and cast my vote for...........Bill Richardson.  What?!  Yep, from what I've seen, he's the candidate that has experience (in New Mexico) pulling up a struggling public educational system, dealing with illegal immigration issues, and so on.   Obama has the "rock star" image going on, but very limited experience at the national level.  Hilary seems to be always changing her views to satisfy the popularity polls.  Something makes me not trust Edwards at all.  He just looks like the good-looking but sleazy trial lawyer who can flash that smile with his fingers crossed behind his back.  Kucinich?  Ha ha!!                 If Al Gore were to run, he'd win my vote, but it doesn't look likely, so Richardson gets the nod.

Republicans:  Giuliani.  I'm not thrilled with any of the GOP candidates thus far, but he's definitely the most moderate Republican on the ticket, taking a left-of-center stance on social issues (gay/abortion rights, etc.) that I think should not be decided by the neocons.  The religious right hates him, which makes me like him that much more.  I like McCain's record as a moderate, but he's starting to play up to the far right, and I think we've had more than enough of their White House puppeteering for one century.    He's like Hilary in his role playing to appease the "base" of the party.  Huckabee & Brownback are too conservative, and Thompson has been toying with his candidacy for too long.    Sorry, Fred, but I don't want a "yes I will, no I won't, I'm not sure" President.  His national experience is fairly limited as well.  Mitt Romney isn't all that bad, but he's a little wishy-washy too.  I have no problem with the fact that he's a Mormon, but he just doesn't do it for me.     

Remember, you're in the voting booth, and there is no candidate from your party on the ballot.  Who do you vote for and why??  

To those of you who like to jump to arrogant conclusions (even some of you "educated" folks on the left): 

LaSalle Parrish District Attorney Reed Walters was elected as and still is a Democrat.  Does this make all Democrats racist pigs?  No.  I've seen A LOT of criticism of this "Racist Republican" DA that may be fair, but is obviously inaccurate regarding his political affiliation. 

It took me one heck of a search to find his actual affiliation, after scrolling through scores of blog sites that all decried his inferred Republicanism.  I had to go through a maze of Louisiana State government websites to actually find it.  The media has no problem pointing out the Democrats calling for the Jena 6 to be pardoned, but they conveniently have left any and all political information about the man at the center of this whole fiasco. 

Do you see why I HATE political parties?  In addition to shooting each other to avoid real change on behalf of the WHOLE populace, they even bring misinformation to the table through the "objective" media. 

Before you bomb me with hate messages, let's look at the situation....

The Tribe's magic number is 2.  We've seen monumental collapses in baseball's history, but if you think the Indians won't win at least one more game & the Tigers won't lose at least one more game, you probably don't bet much. 

The Tigers are essentially competing with the Yankees for the Wild Card.  I absolutely hate anything & everything about the Yankees, and I would like to see them miss the playoffs for 3 reasons: 

1) I'm tired of the AL East always getting the attention as the best division.  This morning, I watched ESPN baseball "analyst" Tim Kurkjian proclaim that the ONLY fitting way to end the AL season would be a Boston-New York ALCS....Excuse me while I vomit on my remote control. 

2) Who would you rather play in the playoffs:  the Tigers or the Yankees??  We're due to beat the Yanks, but don't be so shortsighted as to forget what happens to that team in October, regardless of how shaky their rotation is in the regular season.

3)Who wouldn't love to see the Yankees & their fans crying over lost opportunities by missing the playoffs??

If the Indians do their job in this last week or so of baseball, they shouldn't need any help to clinch the Division.  I'm all for bringing the Wild Card to Detroit.

Go Tribe!!

Well, I figured I should make my point before someone chimes in to cry about the jerk in Florida who heckled John Kerry and was ultimately tasered by the police. 

This guy went to the podium in a Q & A session w/ the former Presidential candidate, possibly cutting in front of others in line for questions (according to some reports).  He asked Kerry why he didn't contest the '04 election results, then asked why he wasn't going to push for impeachment of Bush & Cheney, and apparently went on with a question about the Skull & Bones Society, a secret society fraternity that both Kerry & Bush joined at Yale.  The questions were a little harsh, but fair enough I guess.  Being a politician, Kerry either avoided the questions altogether or gave a typical 'round the way answer that doesn't really say much.  ALL politicians have a knack for that. 

Anyhow, the man was asked to sit down, and he ignored the request.  His microphone was cut off, and he began yelling.  He was asked to leave, and refused.  Officers then attempted to escort him out, and he resisted and continued shouting, making the scene that he had hoped to create.  He continued to resist (you can see this clearly on video)as officers tried to carry him out, and he was subsequently tasered by the cops when he wouldn't cooperate, even when tackled to the floor. 

Okay.  Where do I start? 

Everyone has freedom of speech, but these little "Town Hall Meetings," like real town hall meetings, have rules.  You must sit down and wait your turn, and you will be heard.  Protesters, as well as those in suits and ties must follow the same set of rules.  Without these rules, there would be no order, and NOBODY'S free voice would be heard over the others.  This clown, like so many hecklers before him, showed up with the full intention of creating a national incident, and he succeeded.  This whole idea of him being called a "victim" is pure hogwash.  He achieved exactly what he set out to achieve, and now he'll no doubt get to make the rounds of the news talk shows to tell his story of how his rights were violated.  Icing on the cake.  Before you listen to some googly-eyed civil libertarian who will no doubt decry the flagrant violation of his constitutional rights, watch the video for yourself in its entirety, if you haven't already.  That's fairly unlikely, since it's being splattered across every news outlet in the world.  (Mission:  Accomplished)

No matter what your political views may be, heckling someone and disregarding the agreed-upon rules of a discussion will not further your cause; it will damage your integrity if nothing else.  I would love for this guy to be scorned by both sides of the political world, but I know better. 

I'm a die-hard Browns fan, and I don't see how that will ever change. 

Having said that, to all of the airheads out there who have proclaimed that this is the year the Brownies take us to the Super Bowl, take a look at Game 1 to see what this "Championship" team has to offer.  It's only one game, and I'm not even saying that they will be awful this year, but if it isn't obvious that this team has some HUGE holes to fill in their lineup, you don't deserve to make football predictions.  So much for the encouragement of the 3-1 preseason.  Once again, it's proof that there is a major difference when the games count. 

Forgive me for venting, but it needs to be done...

Here's my beef with the Browns in general: 

It's been almost a decade since they returned to the league, and with one brief playoff appearance excluded, they've been nothing short of a league joke ever since.    Teams like the Rams, the Chargers, the Bengals, the Seahawks, and even the Patriots have yo-yoed from the bottom of the league to the top, and some back down and already back towards the top......all since the Browns have been back.   Are we really that cursed w/ the poor draft picks and the injuries, etc., or are we just so impatient as fans and as an organization that we shoot ourselves in the foot by turning the whole system over every couple years??  Something has to give, and the odds say that one of these combinations of management/coaches/players would have created a competitive team, yet we are a perennial "pieces & parts" team  of about 4 or 5 "good" players surrounded by players that AT BEST would rate as "mediocre," and that's being generous.   The coaching has been anything but steady or efficient.  Even the little things like actually challenging calls that really matter and look like credible mistakes  are bungled by our staff.  Not that it ultimately mattered, but we flat-out wasted both of our challenges (and two timeouts) in the first half on calls that obviously weren't going to be reversed.  Romeo should've put that damn red flag away and pulled out the playbook for some adjusting that never really happened.  I don't know who looked worse--Frye or Anderson.  I'm not willing to destroy Quinn before he even gets his feet wet in the NFL (see my comments above about patience), so these two QBs are gonna have to make something happen soon to prevent another coaching blunder that could destroy one of our touted draft picks (sound familiar?).   

My dad lives near Charleston, SC, and, for reasons unknown, he's decided to become a Browns fan this year after 50+ years of casually rooting for the Bengals (We're originally from Columbus).  I told him to stock up on hard liquor, aspirin, and blood pressure meds if he has any.  After  Sunday's game, I think he understands....

Since some bloggers can't seem to figure out how to allow comments in their discussions, I'll open my own discussion on this hero-of-the-left and what he really represents. 

Ramsey Clark, the founder of Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, or ANSWER, is a self-proclaimed socialist who just can't get enough of bashing anything & everything that has to do with the current administration.  Fair enough; whatever floats your boat, but let's take a really quick gander at this guy's recent track record.  Aside from promoting rallies that allegedly call for peace, he volunteered to serve on Saddam Hussein's defense team.  Hmmm....  This man wants to STOP war and promote PEACE, and he wants to associate himself with a man who started at least two major wars and wiped out hundreds of thousands of his own people because of their heritage and/or religious differences???  Sounds a little (okay, A LOT) hypocritical to me.  Remember Slobodan Milosevic, the "Butcher of the Balkans," who decided that parts of Yugoslavia were due for "ethnic cleansing?"   Clark attended his funeral and praised Milosevic.  More hypocricy.   Mr. Clark also visited North Vietnam in the early '70s (1972 I believe) while the U.S. was at war with them.   Don't give me the "free speech" argument [...] on this one.  I don't know if he posed for any pictures near anti-aircraft missiles (the same ones fired at U.S. planes carrying 1 or 2 of America's sons) a la Jane Fonda, but there's quite an odor coming from his portfolio, if you ask me.  I don't care if you're conservative or liberal, the hypocrisy here is blatant.  Any true peace activist should question him about these stances, but most of them are on the same political team, so these "inconvenient truths" are pushed aside, hopefully to be unnoticed by the American public.

If you're a peace activist, good for you.  This guy stands no more for peace than the very administration that he despises, and it's time for someone to uncover his true motives.  If you want to make the claim that he was merely making sure that Saddam got a fair trial, you are purposefully denying truth. If you lie with dogs, you get fleas.   The Bush administration has a record that is FAR from clean, but the vicious direct opposition is just as soiled.  Don't be fooled for a second. 

(Let me have it, Gorbash)

Is there a new policy on this site, or is this just happening to me?  Every time I type a comment, I get a message saying that my comment will be posted within 24 hours, pending approval by the Fox8 moderators.  What gives?   

I have to say, I think the "Delete" option in this forum is a cop-out for the original poster to avoid critical discussion.  My case in point was a discussion by another blogger (initials P.K.; most of his blogs are complete nonsense) in which he made a somewhat derogatory (and very tasteless) remark about black babies being raised strictly by black families.  I called this person out on his rediculous remarks, and he deleted my comments three seperate times.   I didn't call him names, and I was even LESS critical than some of the other remarks in that blog.   I'm flattered that my criticism is apparently taken to heart more than the others', but it really takes away from the discussion at hand.

Is this forum for promoting open discussions, or isn't it?     If everyone deleted their opposition's viewpoints, this would be a very boring place to be.

That's the gist (jist?) of my point.  As far as the example I mentioned, that person is welcome to discuss his actions here (undeleted), but I don't expect him to surface from beneath the muck to do so. 

I just stumbled upon the DUMBEST thing I have ever seen on T.V.   I was channel surfing and stopped at ESPN2, where I thought I was watching the beginning of one of those dumb car insurance commercials or something.  When I realized it was real, I was floored. 

There is an association called USARPS, which stands for "U.S. Association of Rock, Paper, Scissors."  There's a judge that stands in between 2 contestants, who slap their hand 5 times, making their "play" on the 5th slap.  You know the game; Rock beats scissors, scissors beats paper, paper beats rock.  To make it even dumber, there were spectators cheering wildly, and 2 commentators talked it up like this was some amazing skill that these folks have practiced every day for most of their lives, and their voices got all worked up as if this was a national obsession.  One of the commentators was Trey Wingo, a sports reporter who I actually had respect for up until now.  They showed pics of these guys behind the stage getting their "game faces" on, and they even came out of a commercial break with tips on "special" strategy moves.  Is ESPN really that desperate to fill air time?  First, it was Texas Hold 'Em, which I actually can watch when I'm in the right mood.  Then, they started showing competitive eating contests, which are stupid and disgusting IMO, and NOT athletic demonstrations in my book.  This, however, has got to be the worst.

I know how a few of you feel about this already (and I'm sure you'll chime in to shoot this down!), but I was wondering how the "general populace" of this site feel about  surveilance cameras on the city streets like the ones in Britain.  These cameras captured the images of at least two of the suspects who have since been arrested for planting those car bomb "duds" in London.   Some countries (Singapore comes to mind) have cameras EVERYWHERE, even in public restrooms!!  I wouldn't go that far, but I think that cameras on the street would certainly be a deterrent to those who might be committing certain types of crime, especially violent crimes.   It's not a cure-all, but it would certainly help in closing some open cases, therefore getting more of the cretin off of the streets and making the community safer. 

Such a plan would not be cheap, but some (if not all) of it would be saved by police departments who would have a new tool for fighting crime. If the cops could stop someone before he/she strikes over and over, then they're saving money by not investigating case after case brought about by the same criminal.   If Cleveland is willing to shell out big bucks to stop the EVIL red light runners, why not try to prevent or solve muggings, kidnappings, assaults, vandalism, etc.?   Plus, there's little doubt that people would feel somewhat safer knowing that cameras were watching the sidewalks, so the economic impact in the city could be very positive as well. 

I haven't been living under a rock, and I know the ACLU would never let it happen here (Criminals have a right to attack old ladies in private, you know), but I wonder how many would like (or hate) such a proposal.  

Here's where the two-party system shows its hypocracy and ineffectiveness.  Most of us figured that Scooter Libby would be pardoned by President Bush at some point.  He wasn't quite pardoned, but his sentence was commuted to allow him to avoid jail time.  Democratic legislators and Presidential candidates jumped right out with their prepared speeches (prepared weeks ago, shortly after Libby was convicted, I'm sure) expressing outrage over this.  I'll be the first to say that this IS croneyism, or whatever you want to call it.  It's certainly not exclusive to other administrations, though.  Just about every President pardons a lot of his "buddies" in his last couple days in office in what I can only describe as a big "Up Yours!!"  to the American judicial system.

As outrageous as this practice is, it's not the main point of my post.  It's been going on as long as there have been Presidents, and it surely will continue as long as it's legal.  My point is that politicians' hypocracy and lies shows so well in these situations.  Republicans tried to pass this off as the proper thing to do, even though it may not be popular.  The GOP candidates have to be fuming underneath it all, but they can't say that, even though it would make them look a lot more trustworthy, in my opinion.  Democrats are acting outraged, even though they're probably high-fiving one another behind the stage, as this gives them another bullet in the arsenal.   They've been waiting with baited breath for the moment that Libby was emancipated, and now they've got their wish.  If you think ANYONE (on either side) cares about the Valerie Plame case itself, you're wrong.  This is all politics, from the disclosure itself up to this point, and both sides have to put on the "justice" act to further their party's cause. 

The question is:  Are the parties so mafia-like that everyone must follow the rules to protect the honor (cough!) of their "family,"  or is this whole plot being written like some WWE cage match?  OR, are politicians so dumb as to not really know their own game?  I could have predicted every bit of this story, once the allegations started flying.  We know how each player will use his/her cards, and yet the pols involved acts surprised and shocked with their opponents' moves.