Gimme My Money- The Passing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

As a practitioner of employment discrimination law this act, signed today by President Obama, is a huge thing so I had to blog about it.

In the simplest of terms, the Lilly Ledbetter Act (aka Fair Pay Act) is like an amendment of the Equal Pay Act which stated that one gender, particularly women, cannot be paid less for the same job as the other gender. The Fair Pay Act turns over the Supreme Court case of Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber which stated that the time limit for pursuing a claim of pay discrimination begins on the date the allegedly discriminatory pay decision is made (time of hiring) and does not begin anew with each paycheck. Ms. Ledbetter had been working with Goodyear for 19 years before she received an anonymous letter explaining that she was making less than her male counterparts. Therefore, it was too late to bring a lawsuit, with there only being time limitation of 180 days from time of the pay decision to make a complaint.

In reality, who knows within 6 months of a new job what other coworkers are making? If we knew, there would be a lot more lawsuits/complaints. The Act changes the 180 day limitation from each new discriminatory pay check not from the first. It also covers race as well as sex.

I was listening to Barbra Miculski on the radio this morning discussing this act (she was one of the drafters of the act) and I am really hopeful that Acts like these will really start bridging the gap in pay. Miculski stated that black women make 67 cents to every white male dollar for the same job, black men make 72 cents, white women make 77 cents. With statistics like these one can only imagine that with the passing of this bill, lawsuits will be increasing.

And with that threat of lawsuit, employers will be very careful of how they make pay decisions and probably reevaluate some of the decisons they have already made (I smell raises for some people). If you're paying Billy 60,000 dollars to to practice law as a starting salary, you better give the same pay to Jessica or be able to document why.
Hurray for change!

Polimercialism?

Did I make this term up? If so, no copying, I’m TM ing it.

Obama bracelets

Obama dolls.

Obama Tshirts

Obama earrings

Obama watches

Heck even Malia and Sasha now have Beanie Babies made after them (and I must say their cute).

I wouldn’t be surprised if we see Michele be the next face of Carol’s Daughter.

But with all this commercialism for a political figure and family are we getting too involved in the hype?

Are we making the man a legend before he can sign a piece of legislation.

Although at the time of this writing he did sign to close down Guantanamo bay (I’m a yea for that).

I worry.

Obama is but a man but if we get caught up in the idea that he is going to make water into wine everyone’s going to get hurt.

Obama’s win meant hope on many levels. And I’m sure all those watching were hopeful that our economy would get better, that our world relations would improve and that our own personal goals would no longer be blocked by racism.

I must say that Obama being inaugurated made me fully feel like I was in the “future”.

I always thought the 21^st century would be more futuristic. Flying cars and robot helpers (yes blame the Jetsons) and while that stuff is in development even ipods, blue tooth and touch screens wasn’t enough for me.

Nope, a black president meant the future to me. Meant we are finally getting somewhere.

Racism is not dead.

Our economy is far from healed and other countries still raise a suspicious brow towards us but I can’t help but feel that the door is open now for us to get things right.

The key word being “us”.

I’m just hoping that all the tears people had on inauguration day, all the obama dolls and posters won’t cloud the truth that one man can’t do it alone.

And for all the bad that Obama has inherited from the previous administration, one historian had it right, that the presidents most remembered are the ones who did well in crisis.

Think Abe Lincoln and the Civil War. Roosevelt and the Great Depression. JFK and LBJ and the civil rights movement. Heck, even George Washington and the war for independence.

One day, one can only hope, Obama will be remembered more for what a great presidency he had during a tough time than just the fact that he was the first black president.

Did he Seriously Call Him a House Negro?

Okay, yet another a negative reaction to Obama's win from Al-Quida. The article isn't that long but to highlight, the number two leader of Al-Quida (an Islamic terrorist group) is unimpressed with Obama's win. He quoted some phrases from Malcolm X's speech pertaining to house slaves and field slaves. He called Obama ,along with Condi Rice and Colin Powell, house negros. He stated that Obama's support of Isreal shows that he is an ememy of Muslims and called for American Muslims to not believe the Obama hype (well not in those words but you get the picture).


So okay, I have to pause and say I am a bit surprised that this terrorist dude (don't much feel like using his name) even knows about Malcom's statements regarding this and knew how to use it (although I don't necessarily agree). It always surprises me how far the history of America's race relations travels but then again if I knew about South Africa's strife then why not others know about us?


Still, I hope other more sane Muslim countries are willing to give Obama a try.


On the flip side, this comes out around the same time Isreal is backing out of the UN World talks on Racism because they believe the focus will be biased and mostly on the treatment of Palestineans (Muslims) in Isreal. Which is a shame because the focus should be more balanced so that every group feels comfortable to talk. This issue is too big world wide to have people not all come to the table. As an aside, for reasons I don't know for sure, the US (who is also considering backing out of the talks) has always appeared to have sided with the Jewish community in Isreal ( a forever long battle over land that I could not even begin to try to figure out the right ones and wrong ones). I haven't looked into why but I'm sure it does nothing to aid in our relationships with Muslim dominated countries.

Obama wins and hate crimes rise: Who's surprised?

For all the talk of Obama's win meaning race relations have changed there is hidden talk of what this new "change" means for those really not ready to let go of the America's racist past.
I had to post this Yahoo article in it's entirety but if you don't have time to read it I did high light some sections of interest. From talk of sucession to the increase in those joining hate groups Obama's win will keep the government on thier toes in more areas than they thought. My feelings: sadness. It's really time to move on and get this country past the idea that race defines everything. Oddly enough the article quotes that some southern whites feel that the nation their forefather's built has now been stolen from them. *Sighs* Now you know just a little of how it feels to be Native American in this country. Not to mention that the alleged forefather's didn't build anything on their own. This land is, afterall, "our land and made for you and me" as the song goes. Won't they have many strokes, should they still be alive, when in 2040 they find themselves part of the minority in this country. Change is good. But, you can't please everyone and I saw...screw 'em. Hey, they can always immigrate to Mexico...

After Obama's win, white backlash festers in US

By Patrik Jonsson Patrik Jonsson – Mon Nov 17, 3:00 am ET

Atlanta – In rural Georgia, a group of high-schoolers gets a visit from the Secret Service after posting "inappropriate" comments about President-elect Barack Obama on the Web. In Raleigh, N.C., four college students admit to spraying race-tinged graffiti in a pedestrian tunnel after the election. On Nov. 6, a cross burns on the lawn of a biracial couple in Apolacon Township, Pa.
The election of America's first black president has triggered more than 200 hate-related incidents, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center – a record in modern presidential elections. Moreover, the white nationalist movement, bemoaning an election that confirmed voters' comfort with a multiracial demography, expects Mr. Obama's election to be a potent recruiting tool – one that watchdog groups warn could give new impetus to a mostly defanged fringe element.
Most election-related threats have so far been little more than juvenile pranks. But the political marginalization of certain Southern whites, economic distress in rural areas, and a White House occupant who symbolizes a multiethnic United States could combine to produce a backlash against what some have heralded as the dawn of a postracial America. In some parts of the South, there's even talk of secession.
"Most of this movement is not violent, but there is a substantive underbelly that is violent and does try to make a bridge to people who feel disenfranchised," says Brian Levin of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. "The question is: Will this swirl become a tornado or just an ill wind? We're not there yet, but there's dust on the horizon, a swirling of wind, and the atmospherics are getting put together for [conflict]."
Though postelection racist incidents haven't posed any real danger to society or the president-elect, law enforcement is taking note.
"We're trying to be out there at the cutting edge of this and trying to stay ahead of groups that are emerging," says Special Agent Darrin Blackford, a spokesman for the Secret Service, which guards the US president.
"Anytime you start seeing [extremist propaganda] floating around, you have to be concerned," adds Lt. Gary Thornberry of the Oklahoma Highway Patrol, a member of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force. "As far as it being an alarmist situation, I don't see that yet. From a law enforcement point of view, you have to be careful, because it's not illegal to have an ideology."
After sparking conflict and showdowns in the 1990s – think Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Oklahoma City bombing – white supremacist and nationalist groups began this century largely splintered and powerless. Though high immigration levels helped boost the number of hate groups from 602 in 2000 to 888 in 2007, key leaders of such groups had died, been imprisoned, or were otherwise marginalized.
But postelection, at least two white nationalist websites – Stormfront and the Council of Conservative Citizens – report their servers have crashed because of heavy traffic. The League of the South, a secessionist group, says Web hits jumped from 50,000 a month to 300,000 since Nov. 4, and its phones are ringing off the hook.
"The vitriol is flailing out shotgun-style," says Mr. Levin. "They recognize Obama as a tipping point, the perfect storm in the narrative of the hate world – the apocalypse that they've been moaning about has come true."
Supremacist propaganda is already on the upswing. In Oklahoma, fringe groups have distributed anti-Obama propaganda through newspapers and taped it to home mail boxes. Ugly incidents such as cross-burnings, assassination betting pools, and Obama effigies are also being reported from Maine to Alabama.
The Ku Klux Klan has been tied to recent news events, as well. Two Tennessee men implicated for plotting to kill 88 black men, including Obama, were tied to the KKK chapter whose leader was convicted in a civil trial in Brandenburg, Ky., last week, for inciting violence. The murder last week in Louisiana of a KKK initiate, allegedly killed after trying to back out of joining, came at the hands of a new group called Sons of Dixie, authorities say.
"We're not looking at a race war or anything close to it, but ... what we are seeing now is undeniably a fairly major backlash by some subset of the white population," says Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Report in Montomgery, Ala. "Many whites feel that the country their forefathers built has been ... stolen from them, so there's in some places a real boiling rage, and that can only become worse as more people lose jobs."
In an election in which barely 20 percent of native Southern whites in Deep South states voted for Obama, the newly apparent political clout of "outsiders" and people of color has been unnerving to some.
"In states like Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama, there was extraordinary racial polarization in the vote," says Merle Black, a political scientist at Emory University in Atlanta. "Black Americans really do believe that Obama is going to represent their interests and views in ways that they haven't been before, and, in the Deep South, whites feel exactly the opposite."
But for nonviolent secessionist groups like the League of the South, the hope is for a more vigorous debate about the direction of the US and the South's role in it, says Michael Tuggle, a League blogger in North Carolina.
Mr. Tuggle says his group isn't looking for an 1860-style secession but, rather, a model that Spain, for one, is moving toward, in which "there's a great deal of autonomy for constituent regions" – a foil to what is seen as unchecked, dangerous federal power in Washington.
"To a lot of people, the idea of secession doesn't seem so crazy anymore," says Tuggle. "People are talking about how left out they feel, ... and they feel that something strange and radical has taken over our country."

Yes We Can- Yes We Did- Yes We Must...

Oh so many things going on in my head right now and I don't want to ramble so I'll be organized!

Obama Won- First Black President!

If there are any young people out there still thinking that the "man" is keeping us down and we can never reach our dreams, stop it now! Now, I'm real enough to know that this doesn't mean racism is dead. I work in civil rights law, unfortunately (but fortunately I have a job) prejudice is keeping me employed. However if this isn't a major step in the rethinking of America what is? Obama got more votes from white America than even Gore or John Kerry did.

And while I admit, I was late to the bandwagon and was initially a Clinton supporter when she lost I had no problems with moving on and doing my part to help change come. And so did many Americans. I waited in an hour and a half line to vote and I would have waited much much longer for this vote! People were crying and others screams of joys as they voted. This was powerful!

The Reaction

When my mother woke me up to tell me he won (I refused to follow and be mislead by the media still healing from the Gore v. Bush wounds where I went to bed with Gore the projected winner and woke up with Bush!) I turned on the TV and many channels were showing the black reaction. People in tears (including Jesse Jackson and Oprah). I started tearing up as well at the possibilities this meant. I hope this places some type of change on the black community and how we treat each other and achieve success.

But this isn't just a black triumph, after all he couldn't have won with just our vote. He got most of the Hispanic and young vote. And as Solidad Obrien pointed out last night, this vote was a clear indicator of what our world is to become in 2050 where minorities as a group will be the majority in this country if we work together. Obama got the majority of the minority vote and that helped him win. The most recent number I've heard so far as to the percentage of the white vote he received was about 44% so it's clear to understand the power of the vote to other minority groups, something it appears McCain (who did a very humble and positive speech last night) might have took for granted.

But all his supporters were joyous as I flipped through the TV stations and saw the diversity in the crowds all over the country and world (people were jumping up and down in Paris, London, Japan, Kenya!). I live in a mostly white neighborhood in the city with a make up of mostly young art students, gay men, young professionals and wealthy people. From about 11-1am last night (at least until I fell asleep) I heard car honkings and cries of joy through the streets. This win transcends color. How encouraging.

Yes We Must

Obama's speech indicated that change hadn't finished and we must all sacrifice a little to help. I'm fine with that. I only hope others understand that change won't come overnight and it won't come easy. I can't help but feel he'll be judged a little stronger than past presidents but I'm hoping people are patient and give him a real fighting chance.

I also hope he has the best security ever invented. I'm talking, protective snipers on roofs, hidden body guards in the audience, bullet proff windows. Heck if he could walk around with a force shield on I'd feel better. Somewhere in the back of mind while watching him on stage last night with no body guards with him, I couldn't help but worry about some fool assassinating him. Even before he won there were plots on his life. Let's hope/pray/wish that this time our history will be different and better.

Now I'm going to go listen to some Sam Cook "Change going to come"

A life changing vote

I heard this on the radio this morning and had to share/comment if you didn't hear about it.
A woman by the name of Amanda (forgot the last name) who was born in 1899 and the child of a slave just voted yesterday at the age of 109. Can you imagine all that she has lived through? From the immediate effects of slavery, to Jim Crow to MLK to the possibility of a black president?

I would think she never imagined in her life time and the type of injustices she has surely seen that she could imagine an election such as this!

And not just on a racial front, she was a woman and women did not receive the right to vote until about 1920 so she lived through disenfranchisement to the (hopefully not) possibility of a female vice president, not to mention a democratic presidential campaign where the top candidates was a woman and a black man. What a real life progression for her!

I believed that in my lifetime I would see a minority or female president but I thought I would be much much older. On the show, the DJ said the smallest children of today will only know, at least for the first four to eight years of their lives, a minority president or a female vice president. The hope is that they see that and truly believe that anything is possible and hopefully to be more tolerant of one another.

I can only hope what having a black president would do for the image of the black man. People in our generation didn't have an MLK or Malcolm or WEB Duboise and so forth to look up to. Our biggest successes were athletes and rappers (even the respected actors like Morgan Freeman or Denzel Washington or Don Cheadle don't have the kind of clout that Diddy or Micheal Jordan has). This effects what our young aspire to be (speaking in generalities). What would it mean to have the most powerful black man be president? Would this make a difference, if even a small one, on the black, particularly male, youth? Hopefully we will get a chance to see...

VOTE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*get's off soap box*

Scare Tactics

I’ll try to keep my rant to a minimum but I will preface my concern with this: if you are an Obama supporter, you must show up at the polls on Tuesday November 4th and vote, long line and all. Heck, if I can stand in a line in the dark, cold, rain for a sale at Wal-Mart after Thanksgiving, I sure can stand in a line to vote for the next president of the United States!

Anyway, I say all that to say, yes Obama is in the lead but what really counts is if all his supporters show up and vote. And democrat supporters aren’t as fierce as the republican supporters. And these republican supporters have no problem with speaking out for their McCain/Palin ticket, even if some of the things they say are angry and racist. He’s been called everything from “that one” to a socialist and he’s taken it all in stride.

He’s facing threats against his life and his fans have faced false charges of assault (less we forget the moron who made up the claim that a ‘b’ was carved in her face by Obama supporters to the two skin heads plotting to take him along with 100 other black people out, to the man whose Obama/Biden sign was defaced in front of his home).

This election should transcend race but in the face of a possible win for Obama, the fight has changed and some people are grasping at their most basic weapons- hate. McCain alleged he would fight a clean campaign but he hasn’t encouraged his supporters to nor has he done so himself. And perhaps Obama will pull out all the stops in his thirty minute segment tomorrow on TV, no one’s perfect but some of these attacks against him are a little personal and unfounded. Showing some republicans can’t hold it together when the chips are down. Obama’s cool demeanor is admirable and had McCain had such a demeanor and his supporters as well, perhaps he might be doing better (that and if he actually chose a running mate that had some weight outside of being a fashion icon- I must admit her wardrobe rocks, but she’s not running for Ms. America).

And before us Obama supporters get too comfortable, remember Bush v. Gore, Obama needs to have that electoral vote (which so far he has) apparently the popular vote isn’t enough. And then there is the media’s hype that some Obama supporters, particularly white supporters, might get stage or rather vote fright and decide they really just can’t vote for a black man. I’d really like to think better of us. If America is still stuck on this mentality I’m not sure we can really grow for the better but this election will surely help define where we’ve gone or not gone in our race relations.

Finally, all the hype about the long lines (in some places people waited up to 9 hours!) to vote, don’t get scared off- pack a back pack with some necessities, tag team and go with some friends and make an event of it- just go and do what you gotta do. I have no plans on waiting out there that long to vote but you better believe I will if I’m surprised and my usually tame voting site has a line a mile long. I’ll call my job and tell them I’ll see ‘em when I see ‘em!

As an aside- I haven’t seen them yet but am very pleased to see that Comedy Central has given David Allen Grier his own Daily Show type series Chocolate News and CNN (wow!) gave D.L. Hugely his own version called D.L. Hugely Breaks the News. Reviews for both are mixed but I’ll have to take some time to watch them both and check them out. If you’ve seen either let me know!

Why can’t some body bail me out?

I’m knee deep in student loans which, after my rent, is the largest bill I pay monthly and although my salary is nice I’m still feeling the stings of my debt and shake my head at some of the not so great financial choices I’ve made. This in turn affects how much money I can give to charity and for gifts. So, can the government help me out? No?

Hmm, so what if I was knee deep in my large companies debt of my making and although I make millions upon millions of dollars a year, I can’t get out of it. This in turn effects the policies I put forth to my customers who are now paying dearly for these polices and bad financial choices I’ve made. Can I get some help now? Yep!

Right or wrong, this is what the public understands the issue to be and they are mad as hell about bailing out the CEO “fat cats”. The problem remains, however, that if we don’t bail them out we all will suffer. Then there is the partisan politics being played. Let’s break this down, shall we, on my extreme laymen’s knowledge of finance.

Public Outrage
We don’t get help when we fail (however, when I fail the economy doesn’t fall apart).
Yet, this is exactly why thousands of people called the white house to protest the passing of the 700 billion dollar bailout. Why help the greedy who make profits of up to 80 million dollars a year!!!! I mean, perhaps, had they been willing to cut their salaries their companies wouldn’t be in such dire straights. Further, the economy and the people facing foreclosure wouldn’t be slipping off of a proverbial cliff. The idea of helping companies whose CEO’s are living large is repugnant to the public.

We are told that this plan MUST happen to help us all but we aren’t really clear why and why no other alternatives work. We are further enraged that the rich CEOs aren’t paying some price for this. Why aren’t they putting their salaries in the pot to help things out? They can afford one less house or car!

The Bailout
If we don’t bail them out we are told the economy will suffer. The situation is similar to saving the life of a murder so that we can use his skills to solve similar crimes (Silence of the Lambs?). If we don’t help these Wall Street companies we can’t make it. Now I’m all for the new regulations and I think the innocent employees at these companies shouldn’t be put out to pasture but the pubic needs reassurance that this is the only way to help us, that it won’t happen again and that there was absolutely no other way (with a detailed explanation of why nothing else worked).

Partisan Politics
As long as John Q Public hates the bailout plan the politics will continue to be played. John Q Public is also known as the voter. And if you are a senator/house member up for reelection do you want your voters upset at you? No. You want to go with what they want and that is a no go on the bailout so you vote their way. You also point fingers at the other side to help you out (anyone hear McCain’s useless rant about Obama and other democrats causing the failure of the bailout? Which is clearly odd to me since 67% Republicans voted AGAINST the bailout! One speech by Nancy Pelosi shouldn’t change their minds- get some tougher skin!)

So What Should Be Done?
Don’t ask me, I don’t know a darn thing about economics but I think the government needs to realize that the public is wising up (or at the very least mistrustful and mad as hell) which leads to no more soothing parent like words to a child like public. We demand some real answers and explanations. For any plan to work and for the pubic to shift, politicians need to understand that we are listening not just staring with mouths gaping open and eyes glazed. We have the Today Show, MSNBC, CNN and even the freaking Colbert Report to break things down to us if we don’t get quite what the politician’s are saying. So work it out- the public is watching!

Money on My Mind

Okay, I usually try not to talk money mainly because I'm a novice to it all. I read Suze Orman and other financial gurus and follow their advice as much as my pockets will allow. But all of this financial news I am bombarded with on a daily basis is finally wearing me down. I'm actually wondering now if putting my money in the old school shoe box account is starting to make sense, however, threat of fire or burglery is preventing me from taking such a drastic step. Yet I see why people are considering it. See, even though your money is insured (well up to about 100 or 200k per bank, and not account, and Lord knows I don't have anything saved even close to that to break a sweat) you got to wonder how our money would really be paid back to us if we're in a deficit and bailing out all of these big companies out of big debt.

And I don't care what the republican's say, if tax payers are helping out Fannie and Freddie Mac and AIG then how are taxes not going to rise? This is an extra expense! I'm no financial maveric but the thought seems logical to me that with a new debt so to speak, comes a higher payment. Like you purchase a new item on your credit card, the monthly bill goes up. So my train of thought would believe that if we have some new companies to pay for then something's gotta rise that we pay on a regular basis which would be taxes.

And I'm all for a higher tax on the rich and less so on the middle and lower classes. Typically the middle class always feels the brunt of it. We don't make enough for it not to matter and we make too much to get any incentives or real breaks. Republicans don't favor higher taxes on the rich, who are not the majority, because they state it will hurt the economy. My assumption is this is because if the rich start feeling the burn they will cut back on spending thus hurting our whole capitalist set up. But I have to say if the middle class, which I believe I believe is the majority, stops spending as much due to higher taxes/costs then wouldn't that hurt the economy even more?

The reality is, as long as the middle class suffers and as a results deminishes by finding themselves on the lower class living, the greater our country will suffer. If you check out any third world country you will notice one big factor, a small or lack of middle class. The middle class is the backbone of any thriving society so shouldn't we be treated with a little more respect?

It's a hope that this is like our usual recession (and I mean usual, our capatalist set up makes for a recession at least every decade) and it will end in the new year. But realistic finanical advisors are relating this to a financial storm of the centry. We haven't yet hit Depression crisis but we are well past a usual recession. This one might see us into 2010. So maybe I'll be holding off on my big Europe trip to see where this economy goes.

Tina Fey as Sarah Palin on SNL- Funny!

Tina along with Amy Polher as Hilary Clinton did a great job. Had to share!

I'll do what I want to do!

That seems to be Oprah’s motto in response to those pushing to have her ask Palin onto her show. After all, says critics, she’s had Obama on, it’s only fair. But the big O says no more politics on her show until after the elections. People are threatening to protest and some staff walk off her show. They feel if Oprah’s show is really for women then having Palin on the show would be a perfect piece. And it’s only fair to the republican side of her audience.
Here’s my take on it. Oprah has never really done the politics thing before until Obama. She made a public stand that he was her candidate. So already she crossed pass her regular neutrality line. Once that was done did people really expect her to go back to neutral and have Palin on her show? If she’s pushing for Obama, and we know Oprah’s clout, why would she have Palin on her show? It would look almost like an endorsement and might help to sway female voters who were following Clinton.

That is, assuming, Oprah had Palin on the show to display a more human/down home side to her that Oprah has done so successfully for other notables who were booed by the public. For example, Tom Cruise. He came back to redeem himself on her show after the couch jumping incident and I must say, I found him quite charming. And so did a lot of her audience who commented that that appearance changed their minds for the better about Cruise. Obviously, she wouldn’t want to do that for Palin, at least not before the vote. She’s pushing for Obama so making Palin seem great goes against that.

The deal is, no one was making a huge fuss (or maybe I ignored it, I do remember being a little shocked that she even took a side) when she endorsed Obama. The obvious flip side to that meant that she did not endorse Republican by extension that being McCain.

People, if we knew she didn’t endorse McCain, what would be the point of putting his running mate on the show unless she planned to negatively interview her? You know, like when talk show hosts interview murders, rapist, abusers, KKK. They aren’t doing it to make them look good!
If McCain’s committee continues to limit the forums that Palin goes on (to what, protect her? Not a good leader look right there) then they would not endorse having her on Oprah for a negative interview. Their hope would be that having her on Oprah would pull female votes, and Oprah ain’t having it.

Hey, Oprah has more money than she can count. She isn’t worried about loosing viewer ship or subscribers to her magazine. She would still flourish without them both. If she was going to lose out big time, it would have happened right after she endorsed Obama. Any leavers now aren’t going to make a big difference.

She isn’t a political show so she owes no neutrality to the public.

Taking the bait

So McCain chose a woman to be his vice presidential running mate. The act in and of itself is great but I'm not convinced on the motives. She is very young and in my belief less experienced than Obama, an aspect McCain loved to criticize Obama for (she's got 13 years of experience and no foreign policy experience, only two years as a governor of Alaska and the Republicans try to build up her military experience by saying she lead the Alaskan national guard for two years- not convinced). Republicans are hoping her presence will sway some Hilary supporters who were looking to change history with a woman for president. Well this Hilary supporter (and now Obama supporter) is not taking the bait.

Why would I vote for McCain simply because he has a woman VP? I mean, isn't that their sole reason for believing she would help take away possible Obama votes? Palin and Hilary do not share hardly any views. Palin is pro life, pro guns and shares Bushe's failed economic policies. So, again, outside of her sex, why would I vote for McCain? Does he really believe women are that unintelligent that we would fall for the hype? Newt Gingrich said on the Today show that he urged McCain not to pick a typical older white male as a running mate which he points out Obama did. Looks alone should not be the factor in picking a VP. In addition, if we are going on looks, I think Obama's look changes the face of politics enough so I think his pick of Biden, if we're going on Newt's superficial stance alone, was just fine.

Some are worried for Obama's camp because of this change but I'm not. I might check out the Republican convention to get an idea about her. After all Palin was a former beauty queen and Ms. Congeniality. Maybe her personality could sway some voters. But for serious voters, she's going to need more than a smile. She's going to need to distance herself from all the negativity of the Bush administration and show that even though she's young and not too experienced she can pick up the torch should McCain not be able to.

As an aside though, I must say, it is a change in politics if the normal faces are recognizing that voters are now open and ready for new types of faces in our government. There may come a day when the presidential candidates for Republicans and Democrats could both be women and/or minorities.

Vote or Shut Up!

Hilary made me late for work

I hadn't planned on it but got sucked into Hilary's speech at the democratic convention and I must say I think she did a wonderful job. I admit that I was a Hilary supporter so I was nervous about Obama winning. However, I had no problems with jumping ship. I still have my concerns about him but feel something new and fresh in the White House beats the same old same old. How else will we make any positive change? Albert Einstein, I believe, said insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Well, voting McCain, in my humble opinion might be insanity. But enough about that back to Hilary.

My concern has always been that if she lost, her supporters would turn their backs on voting Democrat and if we got full support, political analyst believe Obama could win. I think her speech was great in pushing her supporters to now support him but is a speech enough? I can only hope that we see more of her face in his campaign and that the media stops hyping up any tension the two camps may or may not have. We really need a show of unity.

Anywho, I watched her whole speech and loved it and then couldn't get up on time this morning because I stayed up later than usual to catch it. But I think it was worth it...

Racial Politics

I know I'm late to the scene, I've been a bit busy, but I had to stop and take some time to comment on some things, namely this New Yorker cover that is supposed to be a caricature of Obama and his wife.

Yes people are talking. Their talking about the racism, the ignorance, the bias. But what are they not talking about? What issue of great importance are they missing? I'll tell you.

How dare they give Michele Obama that jacked up jerry curled 'fro! Has anyone ever scene her sporting that tired do? She rocks a perfectly coifed bob not some side show Bob from the Simpsons crap they did in this cover! How dare they!

But seriously, I've heard the cover is meant to be a satire on all the ignorance being thrown at Obama from his political haters and some ignorant G.Q. Publics. HOWEVER, I am not satisfied. This isn't funny and things are still too sensitive for those stupid enough to believe Michele is a terrorist and that Obama is a follower of Osama and burns the flag to get that this is meant to show how crazy the statements made about Obama are. In fact, it simply looks like the New Yorker is siding with those simpletons and making fun of Obama.

Now the New Yorker may make fun of other politicians but some things get lost in translation when the insult deals with America's fear of terrorist and misguided criticism of Muslims. I say bad timing. Why wait now to do this instead of when he was campaigning against Hilary? Are they fearful he might actually win? Seems people are scrapping the bottom of the barrel to find ways to discredit Obama. No ones perfect so I'm sure you can find something better to pick on than his name, his former minister, his alleged elitism (if he came from the ghetto would he have enough street cred to run the country? Come on this is the presidency not the rap game, and most presidents have come from money, our current one included. Guess this brown person's getting too "uppity"!)

As an aside, did I miss something, why are all the papers referring to Obama as the "presumed" Democratic candidate but McCain gets the full Republican candidate to his name. What's the presumption? Didn't Hilary stop fighting the good fight?

Black in America

On a semi related note, we get another series on Black America by a news program. This time CNN is airing a two part series on July 23-24. Day one focuses on black women, day two on men.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2008/black.in.america/

I'll check it out and see if they do a more detailed review than NBC news did. As long as they don't generalize, I won't be annoyed...

Show Me the Money

So people are starting to get their economic stimulus checks and I wonder- How do you plan to use your $600?


Some financial advisors might say the most personally responsible way to use it might be to pay down some debt, pay bills, invest or put it in your savings account.


But none of these ways will actually help the economy.


The idea is to use that money to buy, buy, buy. But if you are broke, broke, broke putting 600 bucks into a new flat screen tv, a car, jewelry, vacation or a new wardrobe seems a bit financially rebellious.

And then, seriously, after you use it you're right back where you started from except for some with a new debt/expense to pay off!

We still, after getting our one time check, are going to be faced with high gas prices, high food prices, high plane tickets, high gas and electric, high damn near everything! Oh, and then there still will be foreclosure issues, big business bankruptcy and the dollar being worth crap internationally...

This simply seems like a way to put a bandaid on a gushing wound to calm America until Bush gets out of office and then whichever soul takes over is left with a festering sore to heal (gross I know but that's how I feel).

But maybe I'm wrong, I'm no economist, perhaps this will get us back on track (and hey who doesn't like free money?). But if not, our position in this world is going to get pretty ugly...

(illustration from www.austinchronicle.com)

Watch Out Now!

According to the Associated Press and Yahoo News, polls are showing that Republican’s are no longer the underdog for the race for the white house. With all the in fighting with the Democrats, McCain is winning back unhappy republicans, some independents and even some democrats.

The Horror! There is nothing we can do but I believe two things should happen to help the Democrats have a greater chance or get back to where they were months ago. There needs to be a democratic winner soon so that they can start campaigning against McCain. They can’t really afford to wait until the end of the summer when McCain already has a jump and pretty much has allowed Clinton and Obama to do most of the mudslinging for him while he goes, for the most part, untouched. I know Clinton and Obama have made remarks concerning McCain’s suitability as leader but if they keep focusing on each other, more importantly if the media keeps just focusing on their verbal battles against one another, the public will continue to get turned off by them. I’m already now feeling like a kid who has her ears covered while mommy and daddy fight!

The second thing that needs to happen is that who ever loses needs to kiss and make up with the winner to ensure that their supporters don’t run to McCain or just not vote if their democratic candidate doesn’t win. Therefore, if Clinton loses she must make a statement that lets the public know that she fully supports Barak and thinks all those who supported her should vote for him. And she must do this often enough and make it known that he is a good leader in spite of what she said during campaigning and focus on how McCain won’t cut it. Then her supporters, hopefully, won’t run off and refuse to vote or vote McCain in retaliation. Same goes for Barak. Basically the two candidates need to restore their images and chop down McCain’s but that won’t happen if they continue to battle so someone needs to concede soon!

Another political update- for the Non politics lovers

UPDATE:- Don't call it a comback- So Hilary won the NH primaries. Was it because of showing a bit of emotion in an earlier speech? Her husband calling Obama out on the fact that he has been able to "skate" by without much angry fingers pointed his way for some not so great decisons/or points of views? Or the fact that female supporters showed up in power numbers to vote their gal in? Who knows but I tell you the fight is not over!

And here is another excellent site to give those undecided a better understanding of where the candidates stand. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/chi-071218candidates-htmlpage-css,0,5808944.htmlpage?coll=bal_tab01_layout

So Obama an McCain are leading in the New Hampshire polls and an emotional Clinton may have her dream defered. Per Mr. Matt Lauder on the Today show, since 1972 the winner of the New Hampshire race has usually been the one to win their parties election. So this may mean Obama may be the Democratic runner for President (although the rest of us still gotta vote next month- don't slack up now (I believe we in MD vote February 12, 2008). As for the republicans, What does McCains projected win in New Hampshire mean since Romney scored in Iowa. Are the republicans in still an any man's game? I know I don't care since I'm not republican and am pretty satisfied with what the democrats have to offer.

In fact, those who identify themselves as Democrats have gone up in the past few months while the Republican identification has gone down. Hmm. Further, Obama is attracting the young vote (much like Bill did) and independents which can always play a big factor (how can we not forget Nader's influence during Dubba Bush's first battle for the white house).

I don't know you guys, this is getting interesting. Now we need to really pay attention to the platforms and think for ourselves.

This little site was interesting too - its a quiz you take to see whose ideals you line up with.

http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

Come on, Ride the Train

Okay, so I am a bit of a politics nerd (hey I got my BA in Political Science!). It seems Obama beat his competition for a grand victory with 34% of the vote. Edwards got 30% and Clinton got 29%. This is a bit tighter than the republican vote where Huckabee got maybe 38% with Romney coming in second with 25% of the vote. I’m not republican so I won’t spend too much time talking about them. But I will say that I for some reason thought Gullianni would show better with his riding the coat tales of 9/11 like Bush. Maybe his personal life interfered. Anywho, the fact that people don’t seem to be voting in fear of terrorism is, to me, a good sign. We can finally look to the overall issues. Huckabee keeps putting his religion upfront in center, again like Bush (and we see how Christian like he is) and although this may attract his Christian republicans polls show that he has a lot of work to do with other groups. Being a Christian in and of itself won’t make you a good leader (in fact, a devout Christian is a better follower but that’s a rant for another time). Anywho enough about the Republicans…

So with Obama winning is this a foreshadow that he will win the democratic vote? How representative is the Iowa vote? Will New Hampshire copy this result? Call me optimistic but if Obama wins the primary I feel Obama wins the election totally. With the independent vote leaning to the democrats and young people taking a major liking to Obama (much like we did with Clinton, although damn-it I was too young to vote then and only got to vote when Bush won, boo) I don’t see a republican in office this time around (she says with major joy). So if he were to win, what does that say about our country? Are we that tired of Republicans? Are we starting to look beyond race and ethnicity (you have to add that in because with a name like Barak Obama in this country, you have to be an open minded person)? Also, why is Clinton not doing as well as expected?

I was actually rooting for her and Obama, either one would be a major statement and both have qualities I respect outside of their political games (she’s tough, he’s likeable). Edwards is nice but I’m not confident that he is a strong leader. I think maybe Clinton isn’t as likeable because she appears a little more cold and calculating. But in a sense, isn’t that what we want in a leader? If she were as nice as the guys, we wouldn’t take her as seriously. She’d be Oprah! And Oprah’s great and everything but she isn’t President material, she’s just too kind hearted for that (yeah, I love Oprah!). So Clinton is in a tough spot where sexism rules. Perhaps if she could show her stuff as someone’s vice president she’d be better off. But I don’t see Clinton as anyone’s second!

So next month when we vote at the primaries for who will represent our political party and later on when the selected democrat and republican duke it out for our votes what will be on your voting agenda? The horrifying decline of the US dollar (now even India won’t take our dollars because of its low worth, people in Europe can go on shopping sprees here because our dollar is worth half of the Pound and I believe close to that with the Euro, and some international models don’t even want to be paid in US dollars anymore), the scary housing market, the high cost of oil and gas (although in other countries like England our prices are still cheap to them), the end of this war, better foreign policy so we can repair the damage that Bush made with other countries, universal health care coverage (anyone see Michael Moore’s Sicko, pretty good, I say if taxes are going up might as well go for a good cause)? I don’t know but I do know is that we were riding the gravy train (is that a saying?) with Bill Clinton and someone better get us back there!