Ryan, Debi, and Toren Cragun's Blog

I caught this article in the NYTimes yesterday about the corruption and excess of the New York state Senate under the rule of Republicans over the last 40 years. Here’s an excerpt:

They [Democrats] recently realized there are some 75 employees working at the Senate’s own printing plant, a plain brick building on the outskirts of Albany. On Long Island, they found a small television studio, which had been set up — all with public money, with two press aides on hand to help operate it — for the exclusive use of Republican senators to record cable TV shows. Democrats also came across what they are calling the “Brunomobile,” a $50,000 specially outfitted GMC van, with six leather captain’s chairs (some swiveling), a navigation system, rearview camera and meeting table. Joseph L. Bruno, the former Senate majority leader who was recently indicted on corruption charges, traveled in the van after his use of state helicopters sparked a feud with the Spitzer administration. Then there are the parking spots, always at a premium near the Capitol. Democrats had been given roughly one spot per senator — there were 30 Democrats last year — and guessed there were perhaps double or even triple that controlled by the majority. Instead, they have learned, there are more than 800.

Now, before you say it, let me cut you off and say it: I’m guessing Democrats, if left in power for 40 years, may have a tendency to do similar things. That’s certainly possible and I won’t deny it. But the main point of this post is not just to rail against a bunch of Republican state senators but to make a larger argument about how the political parties seem to view government. I’m not an expert on politics, of course, so this is just my two cents, for what they are worth…

It seems like the fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats want to use government to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor while Republicans want to use government to redistribute wealth from the poor to the rich. Republicans seem to see government as a personal piggy bank, open to be raided whenever they are: (1) in power or (2) in hard times. Otherwise, Republicans seem to want government to stay away from businesses and keep them unregulated.

Now, as most readers of the blog will know already, I’m not a fan of the current Republican mentality. It really is, fundamentally, about making the rich wealthier and out and out greed. So, here’s what I’m suggesting: If you’re a Republican because you are a fan of small government (which is what Republicans have often claimed) or because you are a fiscal conservative, become a Libertarian. I disagree with Libertarians on a lot of issues, but I don’t think they’re generally as hypocritical as Republicans. Libertarians really do want to shrink the size of government and really would do it. Republicans just say they do, but end up growing it to enrich themselves and their friends. If, however, you’re Republican because you are a social conservative (oppose abortion, etc.), then you should start your own party: The Christian Socialist Party (or maybe The Religious Socialist Party). Your key issues should be social issues, like abortion, gay rights, etc. (again, of course, I’m going to disagree with you). But you should also side with Democrats on some key issues, like helping the poor (considering that is a teaching of most religions). This way, religious conservatives can vote their conscience: they vote socially conservative, but are also pro social welfare. Republicans simply use social conservatism to get the religious to vote in ways that help enrich them. If you’re a Republican because you are a social conservative, you’re a tool of the wealthy and greedy!

In short, it’s time for the Republican party to die. It’s been used as a tool for the last 40 years or so to basically make Republicans wealthy. And, well, look where that has gotten us: growing unemployment, falling home prices, and an economic crisis like we haven’t seen since The Great Depression. If you’re a Republican for any reason other you want to personally enrich yourself via government, you need to get out of that party and pursue your real agenda.

President-elect: Barack Hussein Obama!

A sociology colleague of mine sent me the following email last night.  I know I’ve been more political than usual lately (for obvious reasons), but I’m hoping this is seen as more sociological than political, even though it is politically biased:

Subject: What if…

Obama/Biden vs McCain/Palin

What if things were switched around?…..think about it.  Would the country’s collective point of view be different? Could racism be the culprit?  You decide… Ponder the following:

• What if the Obamas had paraded five children across the stage, including a three month old infant and an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter?
• What if John McCain was a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
• What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
• What if McCain had only married once, and Obama was a divorcee?
• What if Obama was the candidate who left his first wife after a severe disfiguring car accident, when she no longer measured up to his standards?
• What if Obama had met his second wife in a bar and had a long affair while he was still married?
• What if Michelle Obama was the wife who not only became addicted to pain killers but also acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
• What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
• What if Biden couldn’t complete a coherent sentence and didn’t have a clue regarding any national or international policy issues?
• What if Obama had been a member of the Keating Five?  (The Keating Five were five United States Senators accused of corruption in 1989, igniting a major political scandal as part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s.)
• What if McCain was a charismatic, eloquent speaker?
• What if Obama couldn’t read from a teleprompter?
• What if McCain had been a professor of constitutional law at a prestigious university and Obama had been a politician his whole career?
• What if Obama was the one who had military experience that included discipline problems and a record of crashing five planes?
• What if Obama was the one who was known to display publicly, on many occasions, a serious anger management problem?
• What if Michelle Obama’s family had made their money from beer distribution?
• What if the Obamas had adopted a white child?

You could easily add to this list. If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are? This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and  minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.

As a final thought, look at the candidates educational backgrounds:

Barack Obama:

• Columbia University- B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
• Harvard – Juris Doctor(J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

Joseph Biden:

• Universityof Delaware- B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
• Syracuse University College of Law – Juris Doctor(J.D.)

vs.

John McCain:

• United States Naval Academy – Class rank: 894 of 899

Sarah Palin:

• Hawaii Pacific University- 1 semester
• North Idaho College- 2 semesters – general study
• University of Idaho- 2 semesters -  journalism
• Matanuska-Susitna College- 1 semester
• University of Idaho- 3 semesters – B.A. in Journalism

Education isn’t everything, but this is about the two highest offices in the land as well as our standing in the world.  You make the call.

(Ryan again…)  The interesting thing about this election is that, had John McCain not turned toward the Republican base, this would have been a much tougher call in my opinion.  McCain had a record of breaking with Republicans on a number of issues that made him more of a moderate.  Obama is also running as a centrist/moderate, just on the other side (liberal vs. conservative).  But in order to get the support of his party, McCain has given up his Maverick ways and pandered to the Republican base, alienating many along the way.

Last thought… Debi and I had to pick up a few items from Sam’s Club yesterday.  Our Sam’s Club is in South Tampa.  The quickest route from University of Tampa to South Tampa is via Bayshore Blvd., which is a beautiful area, but also the wealthiest part of town.  Here are some home valuations courtesy of Zillow.com:

As we drove Bayshore Blvd. we saw dozens of campaign signs.  Take a guess who they were for?

Of the probably 50+ signs we saw, only 2 were for Obama/Biden.  The rest were for McCain/Palin.  And one of the Obama/Biden signs was on the most rundown house we saw.  The take home lesson: A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote for inequality and wealth concentration.  The wealthy know this.  I just wish more poor and middle income people would realize it.

Anyway, even if you don’t agree with my politics, please read up on the issues and the candidates and vote.  What good is a democracy if over 50% of eligible voters choose not to exercise that right?  Our politicians reflect the views of a minority of the population, and that shouldn’t be the case.

Apparently the University of Tampa is the place to be right now.  John McCain is making his second visit to the UT today.  Though, of course, John McCain doesn’t actually want to talk to students or faculty.  He’s talking to the bigwigs at MacDill Airforce Base and other local business leaders.  It’s some “security” pow-wow.  Debi was able to sneak into the last one, though no one really got to ask questions.  I’m guessing today’s meeting will be pretty much the same.  I wonder why McCain doesn’t have Sarah Palin talking with the bigwigs at MacDill…

On Monday we also had Brian Moore of the Socialist Party on campus to speak to students.  Strangely, he called and invited himself.  I was the only faculty member who showed up.  His talk was during one of my classes, so I took my entire class to see him.  When we showed up, we doubled the audience (from 15 to about 35 with my class).  Alas, Brian Moore did himself no favors.  His initial talk was fine, not spectacular, but when it came time for him to answer questions he crashed and burned.  He couldn’t answer most of the questions students asked.  He ended up trying to have them answer their own questions.  It was pretty disappointing.  I hate to say it, but if the election was between McCain and Moore, I’d vote McCain.  Actually, I take that back, I’d write in Bill Gates.  Sad…

I know I’ve only posted about Sarah Palin of late and not talked about what’s going on in our lives. But I figure talking about Palin is far more interesting than telling everyone we are working long hours and not doing anything exciting.  I do have a couple of papers that should be coming out soon, but I’ll post more about those when they are available.  Until then, here’s another shot at Palin…

Palin gave a talk this morning in Clearwater, which is just over the bay from us.  We didn’t go (I didn’t know she was coming), but the news coverage was pretty funny.  First up is this article that said they expected 10,000 to 12,000 people to show up.  Turns out the number was closer to 4,500, small enough that a random Obama supporter riding his bike near the event decided to attend because there were no lines to get in (he didn’t convert as a result of attending).  The Palin campaign also controlled the event to the smallest detail.  Take, for instance, the pro-American signs taken away from this group of eighth-graders because they were not supportive enough of Palin.  Or the fact that the press was unable to actually talk to any of the people who showed up at the rally but instead were kept in a press tent and forced to stay there in order to avoid any “bad press” that may result from interviewing Palin’s supporters.

But my favorite story about the Rally was this description of a 10-year-old fan named Reagan.  Reagan said her two favorite people are Sarah Palin and Hannah Montana.  Certainly I’m biased, but maybe the basis of the appeal of Sarah Palin to Reagan is the same as the basis of the appeal of Hannah Montana to Reagan: she’s cute, speaks at a level 10-year olds can understand, and she’s popular with the press.  What I’d like to see is a Sarah Palin vs. Hannah Montana debate.  Ten-year-olds could ask all the questions.  They could then vote at the end for who won based on the following characteristics: (1) most understandable, (2) cutest, and (3) best suited for President of the US.  I figure they could host it on the Disney channel…

Who would you like to see Sarah Palin debate?  Here’s a .png of Palin with an invisible background that you can use to drop her into photos with potential debate partners.