Pooka Politics

Reality Check

2008-12-09T23:08:00.005-05:00

I read two of the most disturbing and shocking stories today. I was dismayed, appalled, and in disbelief. What was so shocking, two highly publicized stories involving abuse of both power and privilege.

To start with the hopefully outgoing governor of Illinois, Blagojevich, I need to remove the word honorable from his title. In a nutshell he brazenly thought he could "sell" the vacant senate seat formerly occupied by our PE (president elect). He also has been alleged to to have threaten the executives at the financially troubled Chicago Tribune, to fire editors who often criticize the governor. What I think the most telling thing about how ludicrous his actions have been, he was recently quoted as saying he was unconcerned about reports of the corruption investigations that have swirled around his administration since at least 2005 and have swept up 14 other people.“I don’t believe there’s any cloud that hangs over me,” he told reporters at the factory. “I think there’s nothing but sunshine hanging over me.”

Sunshine, well it must not be very pretty where he is now having been taken in handcuffs by the FBI earlier today. If he is found guilty, he doesn't need to be sentenced, rather he should loose every right provided to him as an American. He was willing to trade in on the freedoms of others. No right to vote, no right to free speech, none of it. All so you and your wife could have some financial gain. You were elected to serve-being governor is not a free ride, politicians who behave this way take away the honor, integrity and ethics which are the cornerstones of elected officials. Where did we go wrong?

The other story is more shocking for its tabloid value; John Thain CEO of Merrill asked for a $10 million bonus for this past year because of his work merging ML with BoA, and only loosing the company $11 billion! Wow! He must also really think the sunshine is over him. This is obviously a shocking request on so many levels. The good news is as I publish this post, he has apparently now rescinded this request to the ML board of directors. A good rule of thumb for any executives, you probably should not receive a bonus in any year where your company has suffered major lay-offs, large profit losses, and most importantly if you are receiving Corporate welfare from the government or China, or is that the same thing these days?? Ok for another post.

My final thought here is this, one major theory in the Wage/Gender inequity equation is that men will always ask for what they want, ask for more money, bonuses, promotions; where most women tend to feel they will be compensated fairly and timely. When was the last time you heard about a female CEO asking for a larger bonus?

I can't help but think, as I have been during this massive financial crisis-- what if it were women and not men in these business and political roles?

My first Comment

2008-11-12T16:36:00.002-05:00

Yeah! I finally have my first reader comment, as I had hoped from a friend with a very thoughtful opposing view to my post. I appreciated it so much I wanted to post it as its own post.

**As a McCain supporter and reader of your blog, I too am upset about some of the outrageous reactions by both McCain supporters AND Obama supporters. The quotes from the Philadelphia Inquirer are unfortunate and I'm sure were immediate heart-felt reactions to the election recorded that evening. Most of those Americans probably woke up the next morning and could agree that history was made and be proud of the record-breaking election-day turn-out. On the other hand, please remember that if McCain had won the election, we would have seen quotes from Obama supporters that would would be equally or even more disturbing. Many people devoted a lot of time and energy to this election and their immediate reactions should not be construed as long-term cynicism across the board.

One final point I would like to make is that I am perfectly happy paying my fair share of taxes, but I'm not supportive of having one income bracket pay exponentially higher taxes while others get tax breaks, especially in our current economic situation. Obama's "spread the wealth" philosophy is what is at issue here and hopefully will never be implemented within America. As you mention in your blog, since we have a deficit, shouldn't all Americans be responsible for digging us out of debt, not just those that happen to make over $250K?

If you want to be upset fine, but there is a lot to be proud of

2008-11-05T18:03:00.004-05:00

In reading through the news today, I have come across many comments of McCain supporters, some are very disturbing. Most I find to be a little humorous, even over the top. I especially like the ones that a few of my friends have used, regarding cutting checks directly to the American people in an effort to cut out the middle man. Obama’s plan, is only a plan, who knows how it will really turn out. Taxes are one of those things that we know will go up. No matter who is in office, we have a deficit and the first two ingredients to makign the deficit disappear are increase taxes and cut spending. In the grand scheme of things, somehow or another all of us, from all spectrums of the earnings scale including corporations will need to give a little to help out our economy. Politics, the market, it is cyclical, nothing that is done in 2009 can’t be un-done. I don’t make enough money to be impacted by the $250,000 and I also live in NJ, where federal income tax is the least of my problems. So go ahead my conservative folks (the fiscal ones, the republican ones, and the ones making over $250,000), make your jokes, but in the end I know that everyone one of you can appreciate the major milestone in American history of electing the first African American to the White House.

My real concern are the comments that make statements about how he will handle the war, our troops and veterans. I think any rational person knows that an immediate withdrawal is not in the plans. He does support our troops, and wants to significantly improve healthcare for wounded soldiers and veterans. Something the current administration has been seriously lacking. Most comments and people I have heard make these references, do appreciate and applaud the people of this country breaking down yet another barrier.

What I can get past or understand are the comments about the US going to hell; Obama being the anti-christ or a terrorist. Here is a quote from the Philly Inq that particularly startles me;
"I'm not going to sugarcoat it. I'm scared. Just the idea of Barack Obama as president of the United States scares me. It does not embody the idealism I grew up with and am passionate about. We're Americans. We're resilient. We'll bounce back. Our government's idiot-proof. There's nothing he can do that we can't fix in the end."

I was shocked and stunned when I read this. What ideals exactly did this guy grow up with, the ones about only one race can get ahead, where people don’t help their neighbors, would rather see someone suffering in the streets then not be able to max out their credit cards so they can try to keep up with their neighbor they don’t want to help. Yes, we are Americans, and are resilient as seen by surviving the past eight years, but certainly the government is not idiot-proof, if it were we would not be in the crises we are currently in. I am not sure where this guy lives, so he is scared, scared of what exactly? I have seen this line used over and over again by McCain supporters. Ok, you make a lot of money, work hard and should not have to give up more than do right now, I get it, I don’t agree but I get it. Maybe you are concerned for the wars and our troops, absolutely so am I. But what I think is really at the heart of comments by people who say they are scared, or think Obama is somehow going to ruin this country. Those are the ones, who are just trying to say, I cannot vote for a black man. Instead they should at least appreciate and celebrate what happened last night, not because you support Obama, but because you are proud to live in a country where a person, regardless of race can make it to the highest office in the nation.

We are all lucky to live in a country where we are granted the right to say what we want. Be proud of your country and it citizens for speaking out and breaking barriers; if you want to be a loser, just don’t be a sore one. John McCain went out last night which as much dignity, respect and resilience as he had at the start of his journey and througout. Respect him, and respect what an amazing first for this country and the world! Nothing is out of reach!

Barack Wins, We Win!

2008-11-04T23:39:00.000-05:00

Are Feminists Liberal or are Liberals Feminists?

2008-10-21T19:56:00.003-04:00

Can you be politically conservative and be a feminist? Or does being a feminist automatically mean you are politically liberal. I recently saw a blurb, in reference to Sarah Palin on SNL, which if you have not seen the opening skit, it was funny. THe line i read said that one reason McCain picked Sarah Palin was to attract conservative feminists. I sat and thought about that for a minute, I don't think I have ever met a person who identified as a Feminist and also conservative. Republican maybe, but not conservative. What are some if the Feminists ideals - Feminism is the belief that women should be equal to men. What about specific issues that the Feminist agenda is associated with; Reproductive rights, equal pay, access to health care and childcare, women having the choice to work in or out of the home or both. So far most of these ideals, which appeal to me as a liberal, are more of the liberal and Democratic agenda.

Let's talk about the Gays...

2008-10-01T22:22:00.003-04:00

There are so many things that Ms. Palin says in her interviews which make me want to reach through the computer and ask her WHY???? WHY?? The latest has been her assertion that homosexuality is a choice. When asked how she feels about homosexuals, her line is that for those people who CHOOSE to live that lifestyle, that is their choice. NO, it is not a choice. Of course this is from someone who doesn't believe in teaching evolution. Where did we get so far off, that science and biology have become unnecessary. Sorry Ms. Palin, it is not a choice, who would choose to live a lifestyle in which you are constantly treated as a second-class citizen. Not given full rights to live with a partner, that same-sex couples enjoy. It is about the privilege as much as the responsibility of choosing to live your life with someone, what choice is there is being gay? The choice to constantly battle for your freedoms, protections, respect? The choice I see, is in those brave enough to come out to themselves, their families and friends. Just to add insult to injury, she pulled the good old, well one of my dearest-closest friends has chosen to live her life "that way". Really, good for you! She can't actually say the word gay or lesbian.

Mental Health Parity is almost here!

2008-10-01T21:57:00.004-04:00

For those of you who don't know what this is, personally it is one of the more important pieces of legislation that has been bouncing around for the past few years. In short form, it means that for any group health insurance plans, benefits for treatment of mental health and substance abuse must be the same as benefits for all other health treatments. Typically health plans limit the number of visits to a mental health provider, cap the number days for in or out patient treatment for substance abuse and mental health issues. It would basically be like your insurance capping the number of sick visits you could have in any one year, or number and length of hospital visits. Ok, this is not to get into that hospitalization days are capped, and yes I do not always agree with that.

This is huge change in the paradigm of how mental health and substance abuse treatment is viewed. For one thing, as most people who suffer with or know someone with a MH or SA problem, it is real, it needs medical treatment and care. Also, many of these "problems" are considered lifestyle issues, not taken seriously, or generally swept under the carpet. It is and can be a very difficult thing to admit to yourself, and then once you do, and try to get treatment, you are stopped because your health insurance plan doesn't have mental health coverage. However, if you had high blood pressure, or pain in your chest, you better believe you would have unlimited access to utilize your health benefits. What is so different between the two? Nothing really, both have physical symptoms, both lead to loss of work potentially, you could die from both. So why is the access to treatment so different?

How about substance abuse issues. Again, a person reaches the point, however they got there, that they have a problem that needs medical attention, or it could potentially slowly destroy their lives. Not allowing access to treatment or having a low number of maximums days for treatment, would be akin to only providing a cancer patient with half the required chemo treatments necessary. Finally, my other big issue is that many diseases or illnesses are often difficult to place in the health vs mental health category. Often insurance companies, because mental health benefits are so less, place illness like anorexia and bulimia in the MH category. Again, we put these people, mostly women, in a position where treatment is not available, and they suffer. Often many patients that fall into any of these categories, slowly loose their lives, work, family, roof, all of it. Health insurance in the US is far from perfect, there are many things that need to be done to improve it. But if the House passes the bill Friday, Mental Health Parity will be real, one step closer to acknowledges these are real health issues with far reaching consequences if left un-treated or under treated.

Whoa, I will get out of network benefit coverage again!

Can I have a Bailout too??

2008-09-24T14:24:00.002-04:00

Well not really, unlike the federal government, I know how to manage my finances, don’t borrow more than I can afford, properly vet where I am borrowing from; consider the paying myself first a rule, and have savings in anticipation of what could happen. Unlike the Federal government, I am a single person, which means, I only have my income, and I would never ever dream of asking my parents for money! Not the Feds, they seem to think they can borrow from the very folks who provide them with their income in the first place!! That is like receiving an allowance, spending too much and then going back to your parents for a 20 year advance. Actually, it may be more like borrowing money from your children’s accounts, but you don’t have children yet.

Here is my feminist thought on yesterday and today’s hearings. Wouldn’t this all be different if there was at least one woman at the table and more than a few on the Financial Services House Committee, 13 of the 69 members is women, about 5%*. To date there has never been a female Secretary of Treasury or Chairperson of the Federal Reserve Bank. Women are typically the CFO’s of their families, and very conscious of the fluctuation of the market, where they shop not Wall Street. The actual market can be a better indicator of exactly what is happening in the country and world financially. I believe a woman would have raised the red flag many, many months ago. I think the collapse of Bear Stearns, should have really put us into a panic, but most of Wall Street and the feds just kept their heads in the sand. The other big difference between men and women, we would be much quicker to hold people accountable and make clear the deadlines, requirements, and potential consequences.

Hello Wall Street and CEO’s you are all taking a big time out! I have a friend who after her daughter is finished with her time-out she gives her a hug. The time out is not meant to make her children feel bad, but to understand that if they act-out, don’t follow the rules, they need to think about what they did to get into a Time-Out in the first place. Well the citizens are not MAD, the government is not MAD, I am sure when we are on the other side of this crisis we will be able to have hugged-it-out. But Wall Street and their leaders need to seriously think about what they did in first place to financially bring this country to its knees, and what plans they have to make sure it does not happen again.

Another close friend, a Marine Pilot, also uses the time-out philosophy to explain to his young children why daddy needs to travel to another country for extended periods of time. There are bad people that need to be put into Time-Out. This comment is not meant to start a conversation of the wars overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan, just an example of using the time-out philosophy, pretty simple, Time-Out.

In the case of the Wall Street CEOs I would be remiss if I did not touch on one major cornerstone of the fight ensuing in Congress and the Senate over this $700 billion bailout package CEO compensation. I really could go on about this, but wanted to end with this item from the Congressional Committee of Oversight & Government Reform back in March of 2007;

CEO Pay Continues to Rise Dramatically. Executive pay is increasing rapidly and dramatically. The CEOs of the 500 largest American companies received an average of $15 million each in 2006, a 38% raise from 2005. And the gap between CEOs and other workers is also increasing. In 1980, CEOs were paid 40 times the average worker. Today, they are paid 600 times more.

Representative Henry Waxman is the King of time-outs!

* total the number of women serving in the 110th Congress, 70 out of 435, 6%.

Don't forget we still have not Ratified the ERA

2008-09-18T23:29:00.006-04:00

Yesterday when I heard that NOW was finally announcing their support of a Presidential candidate, Obama-Biden. NOW typically waits until later in the game announce who they are supporting, but they are still one of the most important ant influential PACs representing Women's voices.

I was reminded that the ERA was still pending, since 1972! This proposed yet unratified amendment to the US Constitution guarantees rights to all Americans regardless of sex. Yup, women still are not protected under the constitutional law as a matter of our gender. Its 2008 people! Why does this continue to be such a difficult amendment to pass, it has been reintroduced in Congress every year since 1982. This is not a partisan issue, this is an American issue, one that we cannot forgot. It has definitely been left to collect dust, the longest standing proposed amendment still outstanding with only 15 states needed to ratify.

Abigail Adams first broughtit up to her husband John in 1776, freedom for women, and he jsut laughed at there mere thougth of women being treated as equals to their husbands. Then in 1923, Alice Paul, introduced the first version of what woudl become the equal rights amendment; "Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction."

So who is against the ERA?? Well a few theories are that women would be required to register for the draft just as men currently do, and would have to serve in combat just as men, and also that the ERA would also remove laws that specially protect women, such as labor laws in heavy industry. You know what, I am pretty sure even with ERA passing, the men that run our government will think of ways to keep us form comabt, even though participation of women in the military has reached almost 20%, plus the number of females working for private contractors. Considering all of those women are mostly being deployed overseas and having to take on more dangerous assignments, as gunners and protecting the convoys. My company, the largest defense contractor in the US (I know, i have heard it before....) has lost two employee's as contracotrs supporting the current war efforts. They both worked in Afghanistan, and were both women, single mothers. They were willing to sacrafice beign home with their kids to make good mone yto support their families.

Of course women are going to take on more and more roles that were more typically male-centric, but we want to and we can take on these more challenging and often dangerouswork. Or we don't have to, that is the wonderful thing of choice, we can do what we want!! But as long as we are willing to take on these roles, why can we not be protected under federal law? In another post I will get into the ecomomic inequalities in the workforce, but note here.

I will end with this thought, what if women no longer held positions of leadership, deferred to their husbands, lived at home until they got married, and basically had no opinions. What would this world look like, and would we all really want to live in it??

How much do education credentials really matter?

2008-09-18T23:25:00.002-04:00

Think about the following, we are voting for the CEO and Asst CEO for the US, not an entry-level position for a recent college graduate, or even a manager position.

Bush went to Yale and has trouble constructing a sentence. That noted, check this out...

McCain graduated the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis in 1958. (Much like Bush, his father and grandfather also went there, thus making him a "legacy"). His final class rank was 894 out of 899.

In 1982, Palin enrolled at Hawaii Pacific College but left after her first semester, transferring in 1983 to North Idaho College and then to the University of Idaho. She attended Matanuska-Susitna College in Alaska for one term, returning to the University of Idaho to complete her Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism, graduating in 1987. So that is four or five colleges (depending on how you count the two stints at U. of Idaho). Took her 5 years to graduate with communications degree. Scuttlebutt is that she was invited to leave Univ of Idaho the first time, went to the Alaska juco to get the ol' grades back up, then went back to that fine institution in Idaho to finish.

Barrack Obama has a B.A. in international relations, 1983, from Columbia University. Also, a J.D. from Harvard Law School, where he was Editor of the Harvard Law Review. I've also read that he was "President" of the Harvard Law Review, rather than Editor. Editor is more prestigious (at least where I went). Incidentally, his wife is also a Harvard Law graduate.

In 1961, Joe Biden graduated from Archmere Academy in Claymont, Delaware[3 and, in 1965, from the University of Delaware in Newark,[5] where he double-majored in history and political science.[3] He went on to receive his J.D. from Syracuse University College of Law in 1968, and was admitted to the Delaware Bar in 1969.

So, you are scanning resumes to chose the next CEO of your company. Obama is surely the top candidate here (looking solely at education). McCain's Naval Academy degree is impressive, no doubt, but nearly last in the class sounds like this is someone who got in "somehow" and either did not belong or was a terrible under achiever. Of the four, he might get an interview.

Biden attended better than average schools. He has a law degree, which is an accomplishment. Being admitted to DE bar is very impressive since it is the toughest place in the country to be "barred". He gets an interview for sure.

Palin's resume goes in the trash, no? Her education sounds like that of a party girl, or someone who is not too bright, or someone who has a hard time finishing what she starts. No matter how you slice it, she is not a good candidate for CEO.

Ignorance is no Excuse

2008-09-18T23:13:00.003-04:00

A friend recently told me one of her favorite quotes, " Excuses are tools for the ignorant". Well I think there are way too many examples of both Governor Palin and Senator McCain to prove that quote as true. Does McCain really know the difference between Mexico and Spain, or is it all just the same to him, so much for foreign policy experience.
Transcript of Radio Interview, McCain being asked about meeting with the President of Spain, Rodriguez Zapatero of Spain, should he be elected.

Items suggested by Friends, Must Read

2008-09-16T23:34:00.006-04:00

Saying you are no longer interested in a pork barrel project, after the option has expired and been thrown out, really means that you wanted what you could not get. Not that you did not ask for the bacon and pork roll in the first place. I smell scrapple, or as a close friend says, " I really don't want to eat anything with Crap in the name", well neither do I.

Fact Check: McCain misstates Palin earmarks record

This is an example of the double-talk that I think we are all sick of. People, the same rules apply to everyone, what happened to regardless of Race, Sex, Age, Sexual Orientation, Religion, & Politics.

Is it really about the Lipstick?

2008-09-16T22:12:00.002-04:00

I have had enough, I have had enough of hearing about the pathetic ads, well I don't actually see them because A-I have a DVR and B-I live in NJ, apparently so blue that neither of the candidates really bother to visit. I have had enough of the lipstick talk, and YES McCain did make the comment first, in Iowa on 10/11/2007 he was referring to her health care plan as putting "lipstick on the pig, but it's still a pig." He actually stole the phrase, it is the title of a book by a former Bush/Cheney/Rummy protege, Tori Clarke. She is the former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs under the Donald. Coincidentally, the book is actually about Spin in Politics. Which is what the media, and everyone continues to do, spin the same old boring story. Give us something new, please anything.

So no, it was not a slight on Sarah. Is everything really about her? Serioulsy.... get over it!

Since I am on the topic of Lipstick, Lipstick Jungle will be back Wednesday 9/24 at 10 PM.