Add a Random Quote generator to your site. Visit Quotedb.com

Google

Search LLB's Blog
Search WWW

A Google search of this blog will not pick up protected entries.

Calendar

««May 2008»»
SMTWTFS
    
1
2
3
4
5
6
78910
11121314
15
16
17
18192021222324
25262728293031

Access/Read Protected Entries

Last protected entry: 03/22

Instructions on applying for access

Apply for Access

Read Protected Entries

Those with access to protected entries will receive an automated email when a new protected entry is posted

Hit Counter

Total: 978,571
since: 16 Jul 2003

Blog Status

  • 4 yrs 43 wks 5 days old
  • Updated: 17 May 2008
  • 1,058 entries
  • 2,682 comments

Quick Poll

This week's quick poll is slightly different in that you'll be submitting a form with your response. Still, I'll compile the results for posting next Friday. The question? What's that frivolous high ticket item on your wish list you want more than anything else (sorry...it can't be a mansion or a Ferrari). Please use this form to submit your answer.

What was begun as an online journal of the books I read evolved...or maybe it devolved...so that it also now features:

  • Behind the scenes goings-on at All About Romance from my perspective (mostly based on my personal feelings - okay, it's a personal pity party).
  • Occasionally More and more my non-cyber life (including family and items in pop culture that capture my interest, which is just about everything).
  • Topics I've gone over ad nauseum in commentary at AAR, including the nature of reviews and online behavior.
  • Sharing part of my life with you is a two-way affair. All I ask from you is: Please do not violate my trust.

    Some AAR-related material is restricted, as are some personal postings. To access restricted entries, click here for instructions, then click here to apply - if unsuccessful, click here for an online form to fill out and submit (the form can be used to send me blog-related email as well). You must keep blogged material from the restricted section off AAR. Anyone violating this rule will lose access to protected entries. You only need to enter your password once (it's a cookies thing).

    Remember, this blog is not part of All About Romance. Comments or questions regarding blog content must not appear at AAR.

    Recently Finished

    Mailing List

    Below you'll find the blogs I visit, broken out in my own odd little system of categories.

    My RSS Feeds








    A Heavy Heart

    posted Wednesday, 5 March 2008

    Although I've ravenously read and privately discussed the presidential campaigns throughout the last months, I've been quiet here. After voting in the charade that is the Texas Democratic primary, though, I'm going to share my views in a hopefully succinct manner, after which I don't plan to write about it for some time.

    Yesterday at Cuppacafe I read that Walt (Alison Kent's husband for those who are interested), who clerks a precinct in a heavily Republican area (although we live in different parts of Texas, I also live in a heavily Republican area), had written about the experience Democrats in Texas must go through to have their vote counted as presumably, your vote counted in other primary states. As a result of reading his blog, I got so fired up that I decided to devote today's blog to the topic.

    When I came home from voting yesterday, I didn't feel good, and that's not the way a citizen of the U.S. should feel after exercising the most basic of rights guaranteed in our Constitution. Here's why I felt as I did: For my vote to have counted as equally as somebody voting in another part of the state, I would have had to live in that other part of the state...and I would have had to vote not once, but twice. And how is that one-man-one-vote?

    Both my husband and I have degrees in politics and government; he graduated with special honors for his degree in government from the University of Texas while I have a B.S. in political science and a masters in public administration, both from Southern Methodist University. So we invariably talk politics a lot in our house. We don't agree on most of what we talk about, which can be frustrating, but this year we are more or less in lock-step. That may be a first, but it's not necessarily anything to write home about since I think both our votes yesterday were throw-aways.

    Years ago, in my younger and more political days, I attended pro-choice rallies, escorted women at Planned Parenthood, and even became an alternate delegate for Michael Dukakis at the Texas Democratic State Convention (incredibly boring, btw, and made worse in that the actual delegate wouldn't give up even a moment for me to get onto the floor). But since just about every candidate I've ever voted for lost, with the exception of Bill Clinton, some of my enthusiasm waned as the years went by. So when my husband asked if we were going to caucus last night - a toughie considering we were expecting a long-distance hour-long phone call at roughly the same time - I told him no, that while it would be cool to actually be on the same side for a change, it was wrong that we needed to go in that we'd already voted.

    Here's how it works in the Texas Democratic primary: The primary is open, so that you needn't be a registered Democrat (or Independent) to vote, but how much your vote counts depends on whether or not your precinct went Democrat in the previous presidential election. Also, the primary isn't an end to it all; there is a caucus after the poll closes, with the delegate count similarly allotted.

    I grew up in California and know a lot of people in other states. To vote in a primary, they simply go and vote (and where I grew up, voting was at a school or somebody's garage. It was never in a church, which is where I go to vote. That alone is enough to set me off...and it has before on this blog, so I'll not get into that one again). Now, it's true that delegate allocation in California isn't the most straight-forward, but at least voters are not required to prove their worthiness as voters by coming back to vote again. Why isn't once enough?

    Of course, that's not the only reason why I came home yesterday with a heavy heart. I think we Democrats are well on the way to showing once again that we can pull defeat out of the jaws of victory. If any party can, it's us. I'm thrilled that a brilliant and powerful woman is running, and feel proud that a brilliant and charismatic black man may win the nomination. Unfortunately, the Republicans hate Hillary more than anyone but Bill, and to be honest, I worry that even though the U.S. is more sexist than racist (woe to black women everywhere!), racism - or a bullet - will do Obama in at the end. Leaving us with a man I might have voted for eight years ago, but who now has caved in to the religious right, caved in on torture, and will be an even older man in a year than the 71 years of age he is right now.

    I didn't know who I was going to vote for until Sunday, when my husband and I sat at Starbucks and went over the whole "Obama never held oversight hearings on the national security subcommittee he chairs" story. At that point I decided that no matter the hope - and the fresh view he brings to things (look at his modern view on renewing relations with Cuba, as opposed to Hillary's old-fashioned view, which remains in lock-step with a view held since the 60s) - I didn't see enough "there" there. True, he'd run a better campaign, which didn't reflect well on Hillary's ability to manage, but after eight disastrous years of Bush, I think we all know that a strong political campaign means diddly when it comes to actually leading a nation.

    Then too, I'm angry about the sexism that plays/played a role in the press's coverage of Hillary's campaign. Just this morning I read in Maureen Dowd's Op Ed piece in the NY Times that "Hillary doesn’t make it look like fun to be a woman." Granted, Dowd was quoting somebody else, but about what man would that phrase ever have been uttered? "Obama doesn't make it look like fun to be a man." Huh?

    I hope I'm wrong in believing the lowest common denominator will win out in the end. Frankly, I'm starting to think a parliamentary form of government might be able to actually get things done, as opposed to the gridlock we've had since Newt and his merry band of mooks came into power in 1995.

    But that, folks, is another topic.

    (BTW, I debated about whether or not to make this blog entry password-protected. In the end I decided against it. If that pushes away people on a different part of the political spectrum, so be it.)

    TTFN, Laurie Likes Books

    links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit




    1. CindyS left...
    Wednesday, 5 March 2008 10:10 pm

    Can I just say that your voting processes make my head hurt. I went and read the article at Cuppacafe and I was left wondering what the hell a caucus was. It wasn't what I *think* I learned in school.

    I watch The View (hey, no throwing things) and I was shocked when Elizabeth (resident Republican) talked about going to vote and having a paper without her candidates name on it. WTF? Up here every candidates name is on the voting slip but then again, I guess your parties are just trying to figure out who their delegates are.

    Okay, leads to a question - 1. do you vote in November? 2. Do you have all those who are running for president on the ballot?

    Basically, up here you register to vote. You don't have to pick a party and a vote is a vote period. When we are voting for the prime minister, my vote is equal to everyone else's. It's when they set up the cabinet that population and percentages come in but, if the prime minister wins by a landslide then most of his party has been voted in. It's when he (I'd like to say she also but I don't believe we've had a woman run) just scrapes in that the cabinet is usually split.

    Okay, way too much political talk from me ;)

    I was stunned the other day when I was talking about the US elections with friends and it was unanimous that Obama would probably be assassinated if elected. The thought hadn't even crossed my mind. I'm guessing I live with rose coloured glasses.

    As to who I would vote for (and I can't) I would want someone with tough as nails experience and who knows how to get things done. I hope for peace for your country.

    CindyS


    2. jenner2 left...
    Wednesday, 5 March 2008 10:25 pm :: http://kristiej.blogspot.com/

    I agree with Cindy - that seems like a pretty convoluted way to vote for me too! It's interesting (and scary) sitting up here knowing that how Americans vote affects the entire world. Without getting to political though - the world seems a whole lot scarier a place now then it did 8 years ago.


    3. Gwen G left...
    Thursday, 6 March 2008 10:36 am

    How frustrating, Laurie. I'm hesitant to express my opinions about the candidates as everyone is so passionate and partisan and honestly I don't want to make anyone angry. Its been a truly complicated, emotional election that has pushed all of my buttons. It has not been boring. At first it was so exhilirating, joyous and thrilling to have a woman and black person running for President. Remember how positive it was in the beginning? But it slowly turned sour for me amidst the negativity and it all made me a little cuckoo and angry. I've stopped watching Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Chris Mathews and Keith Obermann every day. It was making me depressed. I'm worried about the Democratic Party being able to unify around one candidate and go on to beat McCain. BTW, I respect McCain's wartime service but I've never forgiven him for that nasty joke about Chelsea Clinton. I've never heard him apologize about it. One indication of how angry and negative this election has become - I had a sign up on my door touting my choice for President and one of my neighbors (I think?) tore it down!


    4. Laurie Gold left...
    Thursday, 6 March 2008 2:19 pm

    LOL, Gwen...I've never had the guts to put up a sign on my property. I knew when my next door neighbor - whom I liked a great deal - had a bumpersticker reading "It's a baby, not a choice", that to do so would not be a good idea. I can't seem to help myself from watching the coverage - and continuing to read it. What I think might be best is this, but it will never happen: Have Obama run for president with Hillary as his running mate. I'm starting to see her as a "bridge" to the future, and she could be the hatchet-woman Obama needs, and the person who implements while he could lead. I can't see it working in reverse, but regardless, it's pie in the sky thinking and will NEVER happen.

    Cindy and Kristie, U.S. political campaigns are ALWAYS convoluted...did you ever hear of a lovely little thing called the Electoral College?

    TTFN, LLB


    5. clsneed left...
    Thursday, 6 March 2008 2:56 pm

    UGH! Don't get me started about the electoral college, Laurie. I'm still bitter about the 2000 "election."

    I think that the Obama/Clinton team would be fabulous, for the reasons you mentioned, but I can't see it happening either. Too bad. I am becoming worried that we are making what should be a shoo-in election for the Dems much harder than it should be. But we're good at that. When I went to my caucus in Jan. I was reminded of that old Will Rogers quote: "I don't belong to an organized political party - I'm a Democrat." ;-)


    6. Gwen G left...
    Thursday, 6 March 2008 4:01 pm

    Laurie, I would love an Obama/Clinton ticket. As a sometime News junkie, I don't know how much longer I can last. I especially miss Keith, Anderson and Chris. I haven't even let myself watch "The Daily Show" or Stephen Colbert. I miss Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich. I even miss the Huffington Report and The Nation. This kind of All or Nothing approach to things is what gets me in trouble every time! But I was alarmed at how it was affecting me.


    7. Laurie Gold left...
    Thursday, 6 March 2008 4:24 pm

    Cheryl -

    Yeah, I avoided mentioning 2000...it's still a raw thing for me.

    Gwen -

    It sounds like what happened to me after Sept 11, and what my daughter and husband wouldn't allow to happen to me after Katrina. They imposed a news ban, and I appreciate it.

    TTFN, LLB