Undecided?

Undecided voters again. There seem to be a lot of them. In the 3rd straight presidential election in a row there is a large section of undecided voters. Undecided? Undecided? Seriously?

Just like in 2000 and 2004 these two candidates and their running mates couldn't be further apart. Are these people really undecided? There is no way that you can be confused about the differences they stand for. Are they trying to look more thoughtful or smarter? If so, why do they always say "I haven't heard anything in detail about (some topic that has been discussed)." or "I'm still waiting for them to tell me what I want to here." yet they can never state what it is they want to hear.

The thing that is most interesting about the undecided voters, is that the Democrats lose when these undecided voters show in considerable numbers. Democrats are very talented at losing Presidential elections they should dominate, much less win. They are 0 for 2 against a 'C' student.

The Democrats have tried long and hard to lose this election. Starting with the primaries, Clinton's extended run and accusations of being cheated out of the nomination. I managed to not write then about how I was yet again watching Democrats snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Since the convention they have surprisingly played it all out rather well.

It will be very interesting this Tuesday. Everything says the Democrats should win. They have done everything right while the Republicans have done damn near everything wrong. It has all the makings of a Usual Suspects conclusion.

United They Stand?

I just think it would be a really great if Obama and McCain (maybe even Biden and Palin) would do a PSA spot for the Gustav cause. They each have done their own to encourage donations. I think that a spot done together would realy be powerful to show how important it is to come together at times like these.

The Presidential Race: Now In the Crapper

Ignore my previous post. Today's events made it 100% crappola. I don't exactly know what happened today in the political race, but clearly the "vision" is far from a reality. We can meet back here in another 50 years to see if things are any better.

This Presidential Race: A Success (so far)

So I sit here watching some news channels regarding the primaries tonight. As usual, the polls, predictions and pundits were all wrong again. McCain is alive, Romney is still not loved, Obama is electable and Clinton is clearly not done.

With only 4% of the states reporting I am declaring this presidential race is a success (so far). The success I speak of regards two candidates in particular. The country is deciding between Presidential candidates and among them are two people who represent those who have not previously had serious potential to hold this position. People would ask me about my thought on Clinton and/or Obama. My answer was that one or both need to have a successful run at the nomination and possibly the White House. It was very important that they could have a serious campaign that is respected by the voters, the news and the country. If America could seriously consider these candidates on the issues, then moving forward the race and sex issues could get put below the issues of the candidates.

Right now, it is looking like that could be well on its way to accomplishing that task.

I was concerned initially that this might not be the case. All the "Clinton is too divisive..." and "we/I just don't like Clinton" comments seemed unnatural. I seriously felt it was the setting of a foundation to present an early alternate excuse for the fact that people didn't like her being a woman. With Obama, the cover story was about as opaque as plastic wrap. "Is he electable?" peppered with the periodic "articulate" and "clean" statements leaves no confusion about what the underlying issue was.

After Iowa and New Hampshire I am seeing the discussions on main stream new channels discussing primarily the issues and tactics of the candidates. There is the discussion of race and sex with regard to voting patterns, but nothing too far outside of normal discussions. (fyi: Lou Dobbs just made my previous statement false.)

For now this process is a success. It is still unclear if it will remain that way but this does shine hope on the future of open access to the office of the President.

As with any path of change in society, the steps were taken well before this moment by others with much less success. If you view this new landscape as a success you have to recognize those who went before and allowed the questions of sex and race with regard to Presidency to even be considered on some level.

The short list would be (in reverse chronological order):

Geraldine Ferraro - ran in 1984 as Walter Mondale's Vice President. The first serious potential for a woman to actually hold a spot that put her a heartbeat away from the oval office. The United States overwhelmingly voted against that but it was seriously on the table. This path would be continued 4 years later by Patricia Schroeder who ran for the Democratic nomination.

Jessie Jackson - made the first truly serious (but not the first) bid by an African American for a Presidential nomination in 1984 Democratic race. "America's not ready for a black president" was the common statement, but it put the concept in play and it's sting, like Ferraro's, would ease the pain for his successors. The worrisome moment in this campaign was when he won the popular vote of the 1984 North Carolina Democratic primary and was not awarded the most delegates which instead went to the person who finished second in the primary voting. (wtf?)

Shirley Chisholm - ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1972 after becoming the first African American woman to be elected to US Congress in 1969. While she was not the only woman vying for the presidency that year, her's was the most notable and put both sex and race on the table to discuss amongst ourselves.

Important Note: as admirable as these people may be for what they did to open doors, do remember that they are all still politicians which makes them all bad people at their core. :-)

You simply have to do this!

22
I can only assume this means I can be a Kindergarten teacher.

My Car Has the Coolest Stupid Feature

I have a VW Touareg. Please know that I don't roll like that. I scored a killer lease deal aided by my driving less than 1000 miles a month and the fact that I was willing to take the one that the owner's son had at college for 3 months. During that time it had been rear ended and later keyed down both sides. They fixed both, took $30 more a month of the already crazy good lease deal and gave me 15k miles a year instead of the standard 12k. It's been two years and I only have driven 19k total, so I have a helluva road trip to plan in the next year.

My car has a bunch of features. Almost all them are dumb and unnecessary. The important thing is that one of the dumb features is a very good thing. On my airline like dashboard of indigo lights, exists a button labeled "REST". I didn't know what it was for. I wondered about it for a about a year before I conceded that this is the first car that would require my reading of the manual.

"REST" stands for "Residual Heat". (wtf?) Here's what it does:

1. Drive somewhere
2. Park somewhere. Preferably someplace that you are just "running in for a bit" like Starbucks (not impressed yet?)
3. Turn off your car.
4. Hit the "REST" button (ready for the magic?)
   

The climate control turns on even though the car is off. The car is using the heat from the engine to continue keeping the car warm. It will do this for 30 minutes or until the battery drops in voltage. While I always thought this was dumb, I have succumb to the woosie boy pleasure of returning to a still warm car.

What if all cars had this feature? I assume they eventually will. Maybe there would be a reduction of cars outside of coffee shops and post offices that are running that quiet engine hum solely to allow their owners to return to a warm car after getting a latte or their mail. I wonder how much fuel that would save. Now that I think about it, coffee doesn't take that long. Why are they running their car anyway?

You are Rich! (yes, i am talking to u)

At my job there is a vending machine. That machine takes dollar bills. Once in a while, I put in a dollar to get a package of Pop Tarts. Brown sugar if they have it, otherwise I defer to Blueberry Frosted. If not the Blueberry Frosted, then nothing. The only other choice is Strawberry Frosted and morally, I can't go there.

Once in a while of the once in a whiles that I put a dollar in for a Pop Tart, it hits me. Someone somewhere else in the world works all day for this same dollar. I don't think of this every time I use a dollar, but sometimes. I certainly don't think I am better for being able to frivolously spend a dollar on Pop Tarts. I certainly don't think those someones are worse for earning a dollar after a day of hard work. I simply take notice of it. I don't know where that puts me. We are just in different situations that have led us to where we are.

Honestly, I never considered this much until I moved to where I live now. I live in Vail Colorado. Vail and its neighboring areas are not like "normal." In this neck of the woods an 754sqft 2 bedroom, 1.75 bath ground floor (or below) unit is running a minimum of $320,000.

In this area of America's strip of top ski resorts we are surrounded my multi-million dollar duplexes and single family homes. Here you have to specify single family when you refer to a home. Of these muti-million dollar (as much as 25m) ski in/out, 3000, 4000, 5000, 12000 sqft abodes, more than 70% are lived in less than 6 weeks a year. You read that correctly. These are 2nd, 3rd and 4th+ homes. When we get over 1 million, most of the people are not in them. Sometimes they may not visit for as much as 2yrs or more.

As you can imagine, this irks some of the year round fodder population. It doesn't bother me. The way I see it, as long as they didn't steal the money, they are free to do with it what they wish. That said, I am sometime around friends at dinner and such who bitterly describe the lavish activities and possessions of the uber rich that exist in our locale. They describe these people with what is mostly disdain and a clear feeling of unfairness. (many feel it's "unfair" regardless of their own blatant mishandling of their finances)

Earlier this year at one such dinner, I decided to share my vending machine moment.

"We here at this table are still the richest people in the world by global standards. Everytime I pull out a dollar, which is nothing to 'us', somewhere else in the world, people work all day (and longer than 8 hrs) for that same dollar. Therefore to much of the world, 'we' are those same 'rich' people."

I basically felt like I was being a dick right after saying that. People did agree. I didn't mean that we were better or worse. I hope it gave that brief perspective that people around the world could easily talking the same way about us American's with our $90,000, 3 bedroom, 1 bath mansion in rural Nebraska. You didn't steal your money either, so it doesn't feel good to be talked about in that manner.

That is only the minor point or setup of this blog entry. The point of this is that while money can be and is tight, you can still make even a small effort to reach out to others. Kiva.org is an online organization that disburses micro loans to small business owners all around the world. Micro loans are the genius Nobel Peace Prize winning solution by Dr. Muhammad Yunus.

If a small business person in Africa, Asia, South or Central America needs a business loan of $300.00 (yes only $300) you can sign on for $25.00 of the loan. Once 12 people loan $25.00 each, the $300.00 loan is distributed to eh remote person by a non-profit organization in their area. It is a business loan, not charity. They pay back the loan with interest. The interest goes to the non-profits to keep the system going. The lenders get the original amount back after the loan has been repaid.

Why don't these business owners get a regular loan? It costs a bank almost as much in processing and paperwork to give a loan of a few hundred as it does to give a loan of thousands. Banks understandably opt for the higher profit levels of standard large loans.

You can learn much more at Kiva's FAQ page.

I actually choose the people I would invest in by their proposed plan. I evaluate it as if it is a business I would've invested in. $25.00 is not much. You can come up with $25.00 at least once. It is likely you can find something that you blow $25.00 on and can skip at least this one time. Remember that these people actually have a real business because they had the vision and courage to start it. They, like any other business, need business loans to grow but are cutoff from the standard finance options available to us. A loan of several hunderd dollars to some of these people is the equivalent to a $50,000 or more loan to you and I. Once the loan is repaid, you may cash out or loan to a new business.

Keep in mind that helping does not always have to mean money. Habitat for Humanity is a volunteer service that I think is great for homeowners and future homeowners. You get to go into a house that is being built for a person in need. While you show up every once in a while, the future recipient is often there a majority of the construction days. It obviously helps the recipient but if helps you too. Maybe you are not into the warm and fuzzy feeling of world healing as a payoff. With H4H, you get to be a construction worker for a day. You are working alongside real construction people who guide and oversee what you do. Think of it as an apprenticeship. You volunteer and now you will learn how to install wood flooring, install electrical work, work with drywall, install doors and any number of things related to home construction. These things will be handy when you want to do them in your own home.

Do good for others while learning skills that will save you tons of money. A.K.A. "Win Win"