On Election Day

It’s finally here – Election Day in the United States of America. Many will go to the polls on Tuesday (including me), while many have already voted. Local board of elections will tally votes and declare winners – meanwhile, as winners cheer and mistakenly declare mandates, others will cry, feel remorse, and bitterly complain about something predictable.

Three things have stuck me about the 2012 campaign. First, either it takes far too long or the candidates and parties have purposefully made it an agonizing process.

Secondly, it is interesting how divided the American voters are these days. There is little doubt that Mitt Romney has not only repositioned himself throughout the election process – even contradicting himself on numerous occasions. Yet, many voters will ignore those missteps, not because they believe in Mitt Romney, but because they have a disdain for President Obama and Democrats.

Thirdly, parties and the people representing them on the ballot are willing to pay an enormous price to get what they want – power! Typically in life, there is the price to pay dishonesty, misrepresentations, distortions – but not for politicians because it’s their way of life -and sadly, one that the people blindly accept.

Columnists George Will compared this year’s campaign spending to the amount of money consumer giant Procter and Gamble’s (P&G) advertising expense. Once again, another bad example by Mr. Will as he tries to justify the benefits of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling. I want to point out one big difference between product advertising and political ads: P&G is bound to the Federal Trade Commission guidelines stating that advertising claims must be true, non-deceptive, fair, and that advertisers must have evidence to support their claims.

Meanwhile, consider the following numbers:

  • President Obama’s campaign spent over $1 billion
  • Mitt Romney’s campaign spent over $1 billion
  • The Democratic party spent over $ 1 billion
  • The Republican party spent over $1 billion
  • Super PACs spent over $1 billion
  • House of Representatives races spending exceeded $1.3 billion
  • Senate races spending $750 million in 34 races

How many hungry would that money feed?

How many clothes would that money help clothe?

How many uninsured would become insured?

How many jobs would it create through investments in companies for expansion?

How many people could it educate?

How many research grants could it fund?

How many first responders could it rehire?

How many shelters could it help?

How much infrastructure could it improve?

… And, this list can easily go on and on, which speaks volumes.

Opinions in the Shorts: Vol. 160

On Politics
Here are fact checks on the last 2012 presidential debate
Annenberg Fact Check
PolitFact
Washington Post Fact Checker
Associated Press
National Journal

By the way, Pulitzer Prizing winning PolitiFact issued two “Pants on Fire” false-statements ratings in the third debate.

A long-time friend of mine is a disrespectful, clueless, partisan hack. The other day he called, made a ridiculous comment, to which I responded, “Don’t go there.” He kept babbling, so I repeated, “Don’t go there.” Because he ignored my genuine request, I hung up the phone. We haven’t spoken since, I’ve “unfriended” him on Facebook, and I watch Caller ID on my phones.

I cannot justify any reason why law enforcement officials (sheriffs. prosecutors and judges) can run for office under a political party banner and/or endorsement.

The race for one of Ohio’s senate seats involves $30 million of outside-the-campaign money where donors do not have to be identified.

This is interesting: a scorecard of President Obama’s promises and a separate scorecard of promises by GOP Congressional leaders.

This is a wonderful 7-minute video about the Electoral College from CBS Sunday Morning.

On This Week’s Headlines from The Onion

  • Thriving Onion Puts Another Print Edition Out of Business
  • Town Hall Attendees Still Standing Patiently Waiting for Their Questions to be Answered
  • Backup Spatula Always Ready to go in case the Unthinkable Happens
  • Study: Human Imagination Capable of Magnificent Things during masturbation
  • Trump Announces He is a Very Sad Man

Interesting Reads

On Potpourri
It’s World Series time. Anyone asking me about team I want to win, and I will answer, “The Reds.” The questioner will explain that the Reds aren’t playing as the series involves the Tigers and Giants, which leads to my answer, “Then I don’t care!”

Now that Blood of Nincompoop is off Dancing with the Stars, I am happily able to concentrate on watching the show.

With another milestone approaching, I wonder who will be the 100,000th visitor to my little corner of the world.

AFA’s Ginger Ale Report
Gosling’s Ginger Beer – On the sweet side, good ginger that lingers, a light cloudy color

Boylan’s Ginger Ale – Slightly better than the mass producers

Jamaica’s Finest Ginger Beer – Too spicy for my taste, but others may enjoy it

Gus Extra Dry Ginger Ale – Light taste all the way around with a pleasant aftertaste

There will be a Saturday Morning Classic Cartoon post this weekend.

Enjoy the music below of Lindsey Stirling. Have a good weekend! In the words of Garrison Keillor, Be well, do good work, and keep in touch.

On Romney: Context and Integrity

I try to watch ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos. GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney was a guest on June 14th and he caught my attention with this subtle exchange with the host concerning a nuclear Iran. As a follow-up to a recent post about context, I decided to check the necessary transcripts.

The Interview
ROMNEY: And one aspect of what the president said may have been well received in Iran, but I think it was poorly received in Israel and around the world. And that’s when — well, actually, he made a 180-degree flip from what he had said during the campaign. During the campaign, when he spoke to AIPAC, he said he would do everything in his power to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon. And then he went to Cairo and said that no single nation should have the ability to deny another nation the right to have a nuclear weapon. That is an 180-degree flip of a dangerous nature. I’m sure it was welcome in many streets in the Arab world and in the world that’s most — include the Persian world, Iran as well. But that’s not right for America. That’s not right for world security.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I believe the administration has said that they believe that Iran could have the right to nuclear power with appropriate safeguards, but not a nuclear weapon.

ROMNEY: We don’t have any question about nuclear power, and that was not the statement that the president made that was most offensive. It was his statement that no single nation should have the ability to deny another nation the right to nuclear weaponry.

President Obama in Cairo
OBAMA: It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America’s interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

A Frank Angle
This is a good example of how people take words out of context in order to apply meaning for their own benefit. Governor, as you continue to keep your name in the forefront for 2012, you must do much better than that to get not only my vote, but the vote of those who decide elections – independent moderates. Then again, maybe you don’t want our vote.