Thursday, November 13, 2008


Almost a no brainer. Governor Bill Richardson is clearly qualified and has the relevant experience that other contenders lack. Obama wants a diverse cabinet. And doesn't he "owe" Richardson for his endorsement (over his friend Hillary) and Hispanics for their votes?

Breaking News Friday 11/14 It looks as though Hillary Clinton may well be in line for this position. This trumps all other selection predictions. I favor this "Team of Rivals" appointment. It carries some risk of agenda tensions, but she brings so much to the table that the reward is worth the risk.


Some states have just adopted bans on gay marriage, including the influential stae of California, which overturned its court's constitutional opinion and showed a preference to protecting chicken over people. It seems appropriate to repost my long-held views posted here several years ago.
So -


(preliminary material omitted)

The solution - take marriage off the table. Get the body politic out of the marriage business

Let marriage be the private commitment that it really is. Those who wish can choose marriage, and label it as such, in accordance with their faith, spiritual values, ethics, or other personal beliefs. It may or may not be church or religion-related; that depends of the tenets of the religion and the wishes of the couple.

On the other hand, the state should have nothing to do with the institution of marriage. Its concern should only be civil union and the regulation of the legalities of formation and dissolution, basic rights and obligations of the parties, and economic benefits attendant to the union. The state's role as protector of children remains unchanged.

So change the words, get the state completely out of the institution of "marriage".


As both of my readers know, I am a very inconsistent blogger, sometimes posting no more than once a week. There are a couple of reasons for this. I have nothing original to say or it seems that the opinion is so self evident that there is no need to comment.

Falling in the latter category is the treatment of Sarah Palin by her fellow Republicans. Now, she is not my favorite politicians, and her views are anathema to me, but she is quite appealing and has accomplished a great deal. For her handlers to reveal instances of limited knowledge that were uncovered in prep sessions is reprehensible. She did nothing to embarrass the campaign with these statements. The privacy of internal prep sessions should have been respected.

I think that Palin is probably quite smart and I suspect that much of the knowledge limitation stems ftom a poor early education, which she never overcame by reading extensively. What these unwarranted disclosures do reveal, however, is the incompetence and indifference of those who chose her as the vice presidential, nominee.


Lieberman opposed the Democratic candidate, campaigned vigorously for the Republican nominee, and repeated slurs against Obama.How much more would anyone have to do to justify expulsion or similar punishment?

The Bush administration rarely held anyone accountable. Let's not be the same. Hold this man accountable for his actions.


WOW! He won!

Because Obama was so cool, calm, and collected, they said he wasn't tough enough to win. But after he won a grueling battle against the Clintons for the nomination, we knew better.

As a leading member of what my daughter calls Old Codgers for Obama, I worked the polls for 7 hours yesterday. In this overwhelming Republican part of NC, I may have met all 5 of the Democratic voters. Most voters were polite, decent, and courteous, but several of them were overtly racist For those few, I remind them of the black police officer from Philadelphia named Tibbs in the movie "In the Heat of the Night" To those, Barack Obama could say:

"Just call me Mister President"

A lot of joshing from all the Republican poll workers there, most of it good natured. Many of these seemed most worried about a huge increase in government hand outs, no doubt influenced by false claims from the McCain campaign. To those I explained (from an NPR commentator):

"He's going to take your money - and your money, and your money - and use it to subsidize the purchase of wedding cakes for gay marriages."


Admiration and Outrage. I have unbounded admiration of those who, in early voting this year,
have stood in line for 3, 6, or up to 10 hours in order to exercise their right to vote. They, and those who may have similar waits in the general election, demonstrate true dedication to democracy in America.

But such extreme waits are an outrage. How many are discouraged from voting by long lines, or physically unable to endure them? Here we are, supposedly the greatest democracy in the world,
placing unnecessary impediments to the exercise of the basic right of voting.

Cannot the country of the internet, space exploration, google, military might, and innovation figure out how to make it easy to vote? Certainly, some of the problems come from political misfeasance, but most of them stem from indifference, inefficiency, an insufficient funding. We can employ more innovative techniques such as mail voting, internet voting, and weekend election days. But the least we can do, and must do, is provide the funds, trained personnel, and number and variety of polling locations to provide our citizens a reasonable way to exercise the basic right to vote.