is occasionally known as Mister Faust, an alleged singer-songwriter,
is the writer and "artist" of The Home World, a web comic,
is the guy who used to blog a lot about writing (it's all gone now, sorry),
is an infrequent haunter of community theater stages,
is associate producer of a show called Random Acts of Music,
and is someone who went to high school in Wyoming, college in Oklahoma, and now lives in Ohio.
If the person you're looking for doesn't meet these criteria, then this isn't the him you're looking for.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
If I Ran The Zoo
On the radio station I wake up to, the morning show team was talking about the practicality of holding the election on a weekday, when people had to work. They pondered the idea of holding the election on a weekend or making voting day a holiday (The Junior Senator from Illinois advocated taking election day off - but wouldn't that actually bring out more Republicans?).
This made me think of all the things I'd do differently if I were to retool our way of electing officials. Here's what I've come up with over the last few years...
States Must Continually Verify Voter Registrations It's ridiculous for Voter Registration Organizations (ACORN) to overwhelm states with new additions to the voter rolls (Ohio) so close to an election. The strategy is surely to let some questionable ballots slip through. We have the technology to make keeping voter rolls clean an ongoing process. Voter registration should also be an ongoing process. It's foolish to wait until things are in full swing to try and clean house. It should be kept clean from the start.
A Short Season Campaign 08 has managed to drag on for two years. Yeah, that's right. It was 2006 when the Junior Senator and Miss Hillary started sparring with a handful of other Democrats for the nomination. This has caused a lot of burnout on both sides of the aisle, and it also keeps Senators, Congressmen, and Governors away from their duties.
So how about: no talk of running for office until October of the year before the election. Any potential candidates then have 90 days to debate and raise money. There's a two-week primary period during which the respective candidates are chosen. Then another ninety days, and then the election. An election cycle with the end clearly in sight - talk about a way to keep voters motivated!
Polls Forbidden Polling would be forbidden from the beginning of the Election Cycle until the new President took office. Why? Because they're an inexact science no matter how careful the pollsters allegedly are with their sampling, making them utterly useless other than as propaganda for one side or the other. They also can instill overconfidence in one side and burn out voters, especially when the election cycle runs as long as this one has.
I've been watching election polls since Ford v. Carter, and even worked as an exit poller for ABC News one year. I can tell you how the polls will run every election year:
2 Years Before The Election: Any Democratic candidate would beat any Republican candidate.
1 Year Before The Election: Democratic frontrunners would beat any Republican candidate.
Six Months Before the Election: The Democratic frontrunner would beat the Republican frontrunner.
After the Democratic Convention: The Democratic candidate would beat the Republican frontrunner.
After the Republican Convention: The Republican candidate would beat the Democratic candidate. But that's what is called a "convention spike".
Two weeks after Republican convention to Two weeks before the Election: The Democratic candidate has experienced some slippage, but maintains a commanding lead.
One Week Before the Election: The race has become close, very close, but the Democratic candidate maintains the lead.
Election Eve: It's a statistical dead heat! Who can call it?
After the election: It's a shocker! The Republican won! Who could have known?
By eliminating polling, you would also force media outlets to report on the candidates themselves rather than falling back on a stale old platitude ("A commanding lead in the polls") to carry their reportage.
No More "Get The Vote Out" Voting is a right, but it's also a civic duty. It's kind of like serving in the military in that respect. If someone doesn't want to vote, let them not vote. They will surely get the government they deserve. And let's face it, there are some people who shouldn't be voting - and there's something fundamentally dishonest about putting a pen in their hand and marking an X if they don't understand what they're doing. Likewise loading people on a bus and pointing them toward the polls.
This is not to say if someone cannot get to the polls they don't deserve a ride. Let's get people who want to vote out there. I just think it's wrong to truck warm bodies to polling places and encouraging their votes with a hot coffee and a Baby Ruth bar. Doesn't that smack of the Draft to you?
The Purple Finger This is my favorite thing to come out of the Iraq war - the pictures of people leaving the polls, proudly waving their ink-stained fingers. That, friends, is what we fought for. And we should do that here.
That's right. Forget the red, white and blue stickers for your lapel. Dip your finger in a well and get a true symbol of your patriotism. Besides discouraging voter fraud at the point of contact, it gives you a chance to harass those who didn't vote for the week it takes the ink to wear off of your finger.
New Voting Day: April 16th This should be a no-brainer. Not a solid date, of course, since they move the date your income taxes are due if April 15th falls on a weekend. But the day after they are due should be the day we go to the polls. I told this idea to my wife and she said, "If we did that, nobody would ever be re-elected." What a shame, right?
Wait Until the Fat Lady Sings Without exit polls and projections, people on the left coast would be spared from vote-discouraging projections (this was supposed to be "fixed", but projections have been creeping back in of late). Also, states would be free to count the votes without worrying about some reporter's deadline. It could probably all be done in one night, but if it takes two weeks to get it counted right, hey...
Instant Transition So you've won the election! Congratulations! Now you have to wait three months while you grab headlines with word of your "transition team" and speculation on your cabinet appointments. I like how the British do it. If you're on the losing end of the election, your lease at Number 10 Downing Street pretty much ends the next day. Make the switch within a week to give the President a chance to sign his controversial pardons. This would also put an end to three months of miscellaneous lame duckery.
One 6-Year Term The President shall serve only one six-year term. That way he or she can do the job without losing focus during the re-election process. Besides, shaving two years of lame duckery off the end of most Presidential seconds term instantly improves their record. For example, Iran Contra happened in the last two years of Ronald Reagan, and Monica Lewinsky happened in the final two years of Bill Clinton. How would their respective records look without those stains? Even Nixon would have fared better - no re-election worries, no Committee to Re-Elect the President - which, besides being responsible for Watergate, was unfortunately acronymed as CREEP. Now you can look back on that whole China visit thing without wincing!
Also, there shall be no talk of changing the rules for a second term, just like it annoys me when people talk about third terms for popular Presidents. I was against it when they talked about doing it for Reagan, and I was really against it when the talk was the same for Clinton. And mark my words. If the Junior Senator wins and doesn't get routed out of office in 2012, there will be talk in 2016 of pulling the plug on that messy constitutional restriction.
So that's my take on election reform. Eight short months from the time the candidates announce to the time a new President takes office. That's how it should be in a perfect world - well, my perfect world, anyway. There's still lots of other things I need to work on, like that whole messy fundraising thing, the stuff that McCain-Feingold either compounded or didn't seem to do anything about. But that's something for another day. Or another election cycle.
It's not just that I disagree with Barack Obama's policies. I don't trust him to be President. I think there are flaws in his character that are going to present very real problems for us in the future.
And just for the record, there are Democrats out there - Joseph Lieberman comes to mind (okay, I know he's currently an Independent, but he's a Democrat at heart) - whose policies I mostly disagree with, but whose character I would trust should he take the seat in the Oval Office. Just like there are some Republicans whose policies I agree with, but whose character I wouldn't trust to take the same chair (like Newt Gingerich).
So here's a look at why I don't trust The Junior Senator from Illinois. Wherever possible, I tried to use the most neutral source I could find. But let's face it, folks. Some of this stuff just ain't being covered by NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN...
1) Senator Entitled
I don't have any documentation for this. It's an intangible. I believe that Barack Obama feels he is entitled to be President, that it is his destiny. This could be because he has started to believe his own press... I don't know. Just look at his rise to fame, and the way he decided to run for high office after just a couple of months as the Junior Senator from Illinois.
And yes, we have had a President who had these same feelings. His name was Bill Clinton. While his administration wasn't the national nightmare some conservative pundits predicted, he installed enough odd characters as advisers and appointees that even Gomez Addams reached for the Quaalude bottle. John Kerry was the same way. He felt it was his legacy, his time. The problem with Kerry was that he had no idea of what to do when he got there. Bill Clinton at least had ideas. Unfortunately, they all belonged to his wife.
Barack Obama has ideas. Many of them concern me.
When it comes to President, the entitlement mentality is out in my book. I agree with Robert Heinlein - the person who should be President is one who doesn't want the job. Another reason to like Condi Rice.
2) Senator "That Happened A Long Time Ago"
Every political candidate has skeletons in their closet that they have to deal with. I think a mark of a candidate's character is how he or she deals with it when the mud starts to sling.
Barack Obama's approach is to deny any kind of relevance because the skeleton in question is from a past so deep that it doesn't count. Witness how he deals with a couple of recurring sticky wickets:
Bill Ayers:
Acorn and Bill Ayers:
With Barack Obama, what happened in the past, stays in the past. Unless you're John "Keating Five" McCain or Sarah "Troopergate" Palin - in which case, bring on the legions of lawyers.
3) Senator Wealthspreader
If it looks like a duck, has feathers like a duck, and quacks like a duck, you have socialism. Also note how, in recent days, the average Joe who asked this question has been reviled by the MSM. That's another charming trait of Mr. Obama's that we'll discuss later. In the plumber's defense - no, he doesn't make $250,001 a year - but the business he wanted to buy does, and that is what will be hit with taxes. Doesn't have a license? Since when do you need a license to own a business? If I had the money, I could buy a law practice or a hospital and install myself as CEO, right? A license might help me run it, but if I have business acumen... hmmm. Better buy the business for my son instead.
4) Senator Spineless
One of the things that for me defines a true leader is their willingness to take a stand on things that might not be popular. Say what you will about George W. Bush, he has stood up for what he believed in, as opposed to his predecessor, for whom the answer was found blowin' in the polls.
Has the Junior Senator from Illinois taken any difficult stands? Apparently not. He was too busy keeping his record clean so he could run for office and fulfill his destiny.
Re: the second example. Somebody should have explained to the Junior Senator from Illinois that this is one of those questions where a Presidential candidate needs to take a stand. Instead, he wussed out while giving an answer at Saddleback Church - in a building full of people who probably weren't going to vote for him anyway.
5) Senator Dissent Suppressor
The Junior Senator seems to have a problem when people speak out against him. So legions of lawyers, followers turned vigilantes, and Democratic colleagues turn up the pressure. Gosh, it's a good thing that nobody ever says anything bad about those facists John McCain and Sarah Palin.
If this is how the Junior Senator behaves, he must have an awfully thin skin. If that's the case, why did he go into politics?
Even thought I've long been a Global Warming skeptic, any chance they had of winning me was lost when members of the movement started using similar tactics - like when the Weather Channel honcho said that Meteorologists who didn't believe should lose his or her license.
Last I checked, we still had a First Amendment.
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
6) Senator Messiah
Here's a ringing endorsement from Louis Farrakhan, President of the Nation of Islam. I'm not talking about any potential character issues Farrakhan has. Rather, listen to what he is saying about the Junior Senator.
And here's a clip that I find just plain creepy. I know it's not intended that way - but the fact that it's out there gives me pause. I'm not going to comment further. Draw your own conclusions.
Maybe it's the fact that I'm a Christian. Maybe it's the fact that the Junior Senator says he's a Christian. I don't know what brand of Christianity he subscribes to, but my brand would make me very uncomfortable if someone called me "Messiah" or "The One", sang in my honor, or made something like this. In fact, if someone did, I would ask them to please stop. I don't know what the Junior Senator thinks about stuff like this. But maybe that's the problem. We don't know.
In conclusion, maybe that's part of the whole problem with Barack Obama. We don't know who we're getting. He's covered so many of his tracks that he's a cypher of sorts. And what is out there, as you have seen, does nothing to make me want to give him my trust. Or my vote.
Barack Obama is promising to bring change if elected. Now you can experience Obama's brand of change first-hand, before you vote, to see if you like his policies. All you need is a Monopoly game. It might not be easy or fun - but it will give you a real taste of things to come!
THE BANK
There is no banker in Obamapoly. Instead, the player who distributes the money to players is called The Government. The player who is the government does not play like the other players, but is still able to accumulate property and conduct business, as specified below.
THE RULES
Play proceeds mostly as normal, with the following exceptions.
1) Players should keep their money in three piles. The Old Money, which is what they have accumulated on previous turns; New Money, which are funds taken in since last passing Go; and Tax Money, which is 10% of the value of the player's property, houses and hotels.
2) When players reach Go again, they may not pass it. Instead, they must stop on it and wait for other players to catch up.
THE GO PHASE (APRIL 15th)
Once all players are stopped on Go, the following things happen.
1) Players give their Tax Money to The Government. If they do not have tax money set aside, the government may collect 20% of any monies on hand or seize property to cover the debt.
2) Players must also give The Government 10% of their Old Money.
3) The Government then looks at the New Money collected by all the players. The player with the most New Money becomes "The Top 5%."
Let’s say on April 15th, the situation looks like this:
Player 1: $150 Player 2: $200 Player 3: $70 Player 4: $50
Player 2 then becomes "The Top 5%."
The Government then collects half of the New Money from all players. The amount due in our example would look like this:
Player 1: $75 Player 2: $100 Player 3: $35 Player 4: $25
Thus, the players are left with these amounts and The Government collects $235. The Government now "spreads the wealth around" and gives the remaining 95% of Americans a "Tax Cut." The amount given to each player should leave them with the same amount of New Money that "The Top 5%" has left. Looking at our example:
Player 1: $75 + $25 = $100 Player 2: $100 + $0 = $100 Player 3: $35 + $65 = $100 Player 4: $25 + $75 = $100
The "Top 5%" of course, receives nothing.
If not all of the monies are redistributed, The Government keeps what is left over. In our example, having redistributed $165 of the $235 collected, The Government may now pocket the remaining $70.
Having completed the Go Phase, players may now collect $200 and continue play until reaching Go again. Begin with the player who was the poorest before April 15th.
MORE RULES
3) If a player does not have enough money to pay another player Rent, he or she may petition The Government to intervene. The Government may do this by a), dictating a fair price for rent that the player can afford, or b) subsidizing the player's rent by paying it out of Government funds (formerly "The Bank").
4) A player never leaves the game because of Bankruptcy. A player who has lost everything may petition The Government for a Bailout, after which The Government pays their rent for the remainder of the game.
ENDING THE GAME
Obamapoly ends when:
1) The Government runs out of money, or,
2) The Government owns all of the property on the board, or,
3) All Non-Government players quit in disgust.
DETERMINING THE WINNER
Everyone wins. It is more fair that way.
HOUSE RULES
Do not use any house rules when playing Obamapoly. They are not fair.
My daughter occasionally posts what she calls "Conversation Collages" on her blog or Facebook page. I've long thought that was neat, and thought that was something I'd like to do, but I don't have her ear for statements which sound interesting when taken out of context.
I'm old school. I tend to pick up comments that sound interesting when taken in context of the moment. Although some of the things that catch my ear work pretty well out of context.
I'm not trying to copy my daughter here... but I did, while cleaning off my desk, find a list of things I'd made of things I've overheard since the beginning of the year. I thought I'd share them now.
Walking through the aquarium, Mall of America, St. Paul, MN.: "Ewwww. It smells like fish in here."
In the men's room of same: "Time to wash your hands, sport." "But I didn't touch my wiener."
Walking out of a museum showing dramatic plaster casts of victims of the Pompeii eruption - several humans and a dog: "That poor dog."
A young boy playing church before church started: "Turn to Psalm 52. It's a song." (sings) "Happy birthday to you, you belong in the zoo..."
A colleague at work, acknowledging my recent craving for fish: "Maybe we should get some fish on Monday instead of Friday. That would make us Reverse Catholics."
On the phone to a government agency, navigating an automated menu: "For state information, press one. For federal information, press two." (I press two) "You pressed two. If this is correct, press one."
Unfortunately for the ex-running back, this was a bridge too far, the straw that broke the camel's back, one toke over the line... pick your metaphor. Over the weekend, Las Vegas jury threw the book, their chairs, the judge's gavel, and whatever else was in reach at Simpson.
Now there are whispers that, in spite of extraordinary efforts to insure a fair trial for The Juice (500 potential jurors were screened prior to the trial), that there was perhaps a little payback involved in this trial. Maybe so. But if true I can't really feel bad about it in light of O.J.'s virtual (not to mention crass, tasteless and utterly cruel) "confession."
At least in Nevada they were able to find 12 smarter people than there were in Brentwood, California - the ones who turned their back on forensic and scientific evidence to base their verdict on an advertising slogan.
The Purple Finger This is my favorite thing to come out of the Iraq war - the pictures of people leaving the polls, proudly waving their ink-stained fingers. That, friends, is what we fought for. And we should do that here.
