When were the Liberals in Charge?

One of my pet peeves is the notion that there was time that liberals were in charge and were running this country, and all the problems in this country stem from that imaginary time period. What balderdash! This is evident in the attempts to pass any kind of meaningful health care reform. Every time the Democrats have been in charge in the last forty years, their so-called majority has been jeopardized by it's big tent nature. Blue dogs, or conservative democrats have been more effective in blocking reform than Republicans. That's been true under Carter, Clinton and Obama. Whatever was accomplished had to be filtered through their contaminated water hose. It's true that all three Democratic Presidents had some conservative tendencies, but it was with any faintly liberal legislation that they had the most trouble.

So, please, my right wing friends, if you want to hate liberal thought, go ahead. But PLEASE don't use real American History of the last forty years to try to proof out some Liberal Golden Age. Just plain never happened!

Naked and In Bed

I'm trying to figure out how to get more people to my blog. So why not add the most popular search word to the beginnings of my titles, and end with the old fortune cookie chestnut?

It would work something like this:

Naked Global Trinity In Bed
Naked Chattin' with Saxby In Bed
Naked Carnies vs. Rubes In Bed
Naked Michigan Ramblings In Bed
Naked O Happy Franken Day In Bed!
Naked Pallin' with Palin In Bed
Naked Celebrity Preservation In Bad (Wow! Naked AND celebrity - top 20 fer shur!)
Naked Electoral Fantasies In Bed
Naked! Remember where you were in bed?

Do y'all think this will help?

Remember where you were?

I started to post on Facebook where I was during the moon landing, and then ask others where they were, when I realized the majority would either have no recollection or tell me they weren't even born yet. So I'm posting here instead!

The summer of '69 I was fourteen. My family owned a Holiday Rambler travel trailer, and we were at the Holiday Rambler national trailer rally at Eagle Rock Canyon in Wyoming. The area we were in was rocky and moon like, with no trees. We were were surrounded on all sides by mountains. There were people there from all areas of the United States. We had a little black and white TV that we put on a picnic table outside of our trailer, and watched it in that moon like setting, gazing in awe with all these people from everywhere, everybody participating in the magic of that moment. It was one of the most spiritual, impactful experiences of my life.

Please feel free to post your experience, on this or other important moments in time when you realized how connected you were to the world and universe at large.

Electoral Fantasies

We stand on the brink on the brink of losing the health care battle once again. And this time, it doesn't seem to be the Harry and Louise ads that's stopping it. Sure, the vast amounts of advertising dollars spent by the lobbyists are sufficient to throw an ugly smokescreen over it. And it doesn't help with CNN and other network's skeptical and negative reporting. But I think this time the real problem lies with a handful of blue dog legislators who seem to owe more allegiance to their large corporate contributors than they do to the people that elected them. The American people want health care reform. They may get confused about the specifics, but they know this...they want access, they don't want to be denied care, they don't want to go bankrupt to save a family member, they are tired of ding constant battle with a profit-driven system.

So how could health care reform (with the absolute necessity of a public option) be in such jeopardy. Because our electoral has driven a disconnect between our lawmakers and the legislation they support. There are many important things that can be done to reestablish the connection between lawmakers and their constituents. Campaign reform, including greater restrictions on large donors and lobbyists, has it's place. So does more uniform and verifiable voting procedures. Freer access to the media, with blocks of time granted to major candidates is a necessity. But none of this may be sufficient to reconnect the voter to the value of his vote.

I vote in south Georgia. I'm a strong progressive/liberal voting in one of the most reactionary districts on the planet. For me to find a voice that will even listen to me, I have to adopt out of state. Since there is no chance for a progressive to win here, progressive voices are NEVER HEARD. Bless Howard Dean and his fifty state strategy, but it was only the first step.

What I propose may be fantasy, but I really believe were it to be adopted it would re energize and reengage the voting population.

PROPOSITION ONE: Elect the President by majority vote. Make the ballot qualification procedure uniform across the United States, allowing major parties AND independents opportunity to compete for President. If no one garners a majority of votes, have a run off after a three week campaign. The President's major loyalty needs to be to the American people and American interests more than political party, and this would ensure that a candidate who could garner a majority of votes would become President. Independents might do well because most Americans aren't really one party or another, but want someone who can work with all groups and get things done. I would keep the present two-term term limits.

PROPOSITION TWO: Each state should elect a Senator every two years. That means increasing the size of that body from 100 to 150, each state having three Senators. Senators should also be elected by majority vote, but each state could determine how that would be done, including perhaps instant runoff voting. I would limit terms to three. That's eighteen years! It's been embarrassing to watch people like Lieberman and Specter act like they should be entitled to remain Senators forever. This keep the Senate as a deliberative body, but increase voter's input and helps prevent someone from becoming a thirty-plus year's lobbyist's friend.

PROPOSITION THREE: The House of Representatives should be greatly expanded in size, perhaps to triple or quadruple it's current number. Sound frightening. Well, it's supposed to be the people's body. Even tripling the number does not restore the ratio of representative to constituent that was originally envisioned. As far as costs, it's the staff size that's expensive. If they were a shared staff structure, that would help alleviate that. But the bottom line is...nobody said democracy should be cheap. This increase would allow for a proportional representation system. Instead of a district voting for an individual, it could vote for a slate of candidates representing a political party or philosophy. This could be done statewide, or by selected districts. Or some could be elected by district, and some statewide. It would mean that, even though I might represent only a third of the voters in Georgia, I still might have a representative, a voice in congress. What better way to re-engage the voting population than to give them hope that their vote could MEAN SOMETHING. I would limit terms to ten years - it is supposed to be the people, after all, not permanently entrenched bureaucrats.

I welcome comments of all kinds. I have so far been a failure in attracting people to this blog, but I will not stop trying.
If anyone has any suggestions in that regard I would also welcome them.

Celebrity Preservation

In the media circus that surrounds Michael Jackson's funeral, it is hard to reach out and grab what is significant, if anything. It is easy to condemn all the hoopla surrounding it, and I have not been shy in my disapproval of a rubbernecking media. I have no idea what Michael Jackson was or wasn't in his personal life, but I am sure, like Elvis and Marilyn before him, these sordid details will consume many for years to come.

Even that, is an ephemeral concern. There was a show I saw recently on The History Channel called The Secrets of the Founding Fathers. It was interesting, and may have shed some light on some things, but in the long run, it is not what the Founding Fathers are known for. They are known for the documents that shaped this country's destiny.

So, in a hundred years, what will Michael Jackson be known for? What makes any celebrity endure? It is their works that endure, not their lifestyle, not even their performances. Will anybody be singing his songs a hundred years from now? Will they be considered "Michael Jackson" songs? Will we remember him, like we do Shakespeare, Beethoven and Mark Twain? Historians and others may be able to preserve the colorful personalities for us, but it is by their works they shall be known.

In this regard, one of the harsh realizations I have come to, is how ephemeral the acting profession is. You would think with the advent of film, certain actors and actresses would be watched and adored for generations to come. But I fear that is not the case. Footage and effects look old, remakes supersede the original, there is less interest in actors you cannot fantasize about really meeting.

I'm open to discussion, and here's the question...what artistic performers and creators from the last half of the 20th century do you think will still be watched and appreciated in the last half of the 21st century? And remember, it's the general public I'm talking about, not just historians and enthusiasts. Please, please comment.

Alison and My Dad

This is a picture we took while we were in Michigan last week. It is of my wife, Alison, and my father. His name is Eugene and his 87th birthday was Monday, June 29th.

UPDATE:  Today (June 29, 2012) is my Dad's 90th birthday!  Will be posting new pictures soon!

Pallin' with Palin Prediction!

I have an important prediction regarding Sarah Palin. She will not run for President......as a Republican. She instead will build an independent political movement that will slowly break from the Republican party and use as a base to run for President in 2012. This may come as a new independent party, or she may absorb already existing parties, such as the Constitution Party, remnants of the Reform Party, and/or other parties. I can't say how successful this effort will be. I do believe she has the sense of destiny to become President, but her skin is too thin to be battered in a series of Republican primaries. So why not skip the middleman and go straight to the end game?

This is predicated on the supposition that her scandals are not so severe that it would alienate her Christian right base. So far they've shown an incredibly high tolerance for her missteps, ethical lapses and Jerry Springer-ready family. The coalition she is trying to build reminds me most of George Wallace, but with an even more intense religious edge.

At best she may carry the Wallace states plus a couple others like Idaho and Alaska, It depends in part on her performance, but also on who the Republicans pick as their nominee. They are going to have a serious battle between the hard right and the bat-shit lunatic crazy far right (sorry - Republican moderates have already left the building). Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, Gov Huntsman - these and their like would increase her base. Newt Gingrich might be a draw. Mike Huckabee could cut into her effectiveness. None of this should be interpreted that any of these people have a very good shot at winning the presidency.

I have seen varying comments as to why she resigned, many suggesting she is readying a presidential run. But I don't know of any stating flatly that it will be a third party run. So, remember, you brave few who actually read this blog, you read it here first!