Is it possible to live too long?

You know I do a lot of complaining about things like the "No Child Left Behind Acts". The implication in such a political statement is that there were/are actually teachers out there whose whole purpose in life is to leave children behind. I don't believe that, I really don't. The job just doesn't pay that much to have that kind of political motivation. Let's face it, teaching is a calling, and those who don't do it well disappear after 2-3 years. You have to really really want to do it to last beyond.

But I've said all that and more too many times. So what prompted me to write today? Well, I'm analyzing things. It is very true that each year I find more and more typos in magazines, newspapers, and books. I find more and more mistakes in textbooks. Nothing drastic, nothing that will change a person' life. Just little things that make me feel a bit creepy. Like, maybe that's what prompted all this No Child stuff. [That's another whole issue. I bet the people behind the act either a) have no children and/or b)have no children in public school. But I digress again.]

But the truth is, typos are not the fault of education. It's the fault of magazines, newspapers, and book publishers. They simply do not hire people to be editors anymore. Not true editors. Oh, I'm sure someone has the title. But they aren't paid enough to do the actual work that's involved. At least that's what I always thought.

Which brings me to what prompted today's tirade. I borrowed a book from the library. It's 4 years old, and says right across the cover #1 New York Times Best Seller in big enough letters. I guess it's okay to mention the publisher - Harper Collins. I'm going to read the book, because my bet is the author is a lot smarter than the editor. But what started me to thinking about getting upset about this whole thing is something written across the bottom of the cover. Before I blurt out what's bugging me, I must also say this is NOT a funny book. It is, in fact a political history book. I don't want to call out the title, because I sincerely do not want this to be associated with the author, who is someone I respect.

So, here goes. Right along the bottom edge of the front cover, centered, it says: "Written by the author."

I'm starting to think I've lived too long. Also, I'm wondering why this bugs me and no one else?

The truth about the "rebate"

A rebate is usually made when you are overcharged for something to begin with. Very common in industry.

Now, I'm not saying taxes are not too high, but dang it, we have a deficit. Not my fault, I admit; but it's still true - largely due to some big mistakes by the entire government. I blame Congress for not stopping Bush from the get-go. We shoulda never went to Iraq, period. The constitution makes it clear - only the Senate can declare war. But, then, we don't elect people who believe - or even know the constitution. We elect people who sound cute.

These guys all sound cute when they're offering us a "rebate", like there's lots of $$$ hanging around. Few are speaking out, but at least one guy in congress made the foreign press (bbc news):

"We have to remember that every dollar being spent on the stimulus package is being borrowed from our children and our children's children," said Republican Senator Judd Gregg, who voted against the bill."

Amen, Senator Judd. And why didn't he run for President?

Super thoughts on a Tuesday

Should be focused on Mardi-gras, but I'm not.

Never came back to say this, but I gave up on Ron Paul after digging deeper into his website. Guy appears to be a super-racist, and has no real ideas toward getting rid of the insurance companies. I love his views on education, however. No one else is eve close to being honest about the mess Washington has made.

So, today we end up with three folks. No contest for Hillary. There's no way I'd vote for her, simply because she's like Bush - unbending. Once she's made her mind up, that's it - everyone else is the enemy.

The other two. Well, I couldn't vote for McCain at this point because it will give us four more years of Bush policies, especially toward Iraq. He's a huge supporter (and I'm willing to bet huge recipient of campaign financing) of the people who profit mightily from NCLB. That sickens me. His health care stuff is weak. There is good things, tho. I can picture that he'd be wiling to learn, and once the campaign is over he might be able to look at facts through better eyes (no $$$ floating in front of them). He does seem that honest.

Obama. Seems really smart - doesn't let on any deep thoughts about how he's going to change, or what he's going to change. That's kind of scary in a way. If he would come out and say something real, he'd probably end up turning off 1/2 of his supporters. That makes it hard for those of us looking for someone real. From what folks who know him have said, he sounds like he could be my kind of candidate - someone willing to take on one issue at a time, and represent the people of the United States, not the few who have this insane desire to get even richer. Part of me is cynical - the guy wouldn't be where he is today if he didn't make a promise to several of those people.

I had a friend ask me why I won't run for office. Simple. I think politicians should be honest, and represent the citizens of the country. I can't bring myself to honestly represent some of the views of a lot of people I talk to. I'd be voting my beliefs, not theirs. That would be dishonest. I know that this is true of everyone - does Bush really think he's rep[resenting the people of the United States? Naw, he's not that stupid. He represents those few people that got rich from NCLB & the war. He's happy that they're happy, and I'm sure there's a pocket someplace where he's found extra weight in his own wallet. But I can't do that. Just seems wrong to do that to a country you truly want to believe in.

So, which of the three front-runners is like that? Well, probably all are in someone's pocket. Too much money floating around for them not to be. But, which one has the fortitude to say no to the deep-pocket folks if it goes against the common sense of America? I hope the answer is all three.

If Hillary could learn the art of compromise the way her husband was able to, perhaps I'd lean that way. Of course, I am completely unable to forget Waco.

If McCain could let us know that he's willing to turn education back to the educators, and give Iraq back to the Iraqis, then I'd lean that way.

If Obama would say anything about anything, I'd be more than happy to lean his way.

In the meantime, I'll be searching for a third party candidate. Libertarian, Green Party, Socialist Party, Beach Party, I really don't care. If I can't find one of these three guys to represent me, I'll vote for any third party, even if they don't sin. I've done that may times, and have been asked why - the answer is simple. The top guys do not represent me, and the little guys can't make it to the ballot next time around unless they get a few votes. I'm more than happy to see that ballot fill up with alternative views. That's democracy. I know, we're not a democracy, we're a republic. Don't yell at me. But since we're insisting that other countries practice democracy, wouldn't it be nice if someday we could?