This writer has refrained from broaching the subject of the Bush/Kerry runoff until now but I promised myself this month would be different. Who to vote for? That is the question voters who have been bombarded with trivialities must ask themselves in November. Frankly, neither candidate is even remotely suited to be president of this great and glorious nation but we need to choose one anyway. When I am required to lend my support to a particular faction I not only consider its leader but the leader's backers. Lets look at what type of people are supporting our two hopefuls.
Undeniably, Kerry has the support of most of the leaders of western European countries, all of eastern Europe, most of the Arab world, and all of the communist east. At home Kerry has the solid support of the far left including the influential Hollywood crowd, network media outlets and the liberal press. Add to these the environmentalist, the trade unions, the feminist organizations, alternative sexual preference crowd, abortion rights groups and pacifists, there forms a clear picture of who his backers are.
Bush, on the other hand only seems to be supported by to major groups - mainstream America and American businesses both large and small.
All these different groups have different reasons for their presidential candidate preference, they are all, including the very broad main stream America category, special interest groups - that is to say, they see personal rewards if their candidate wins. I have a special interest too. When all is considered, there is no doubt I personally align myself with the type of people that seem to be backing Bush. What do I care if the rest of the world doesn't like Bush, they are not Americans. What do I care if the spoiled brats in Hollywood or those running the media want Bush to loose. I see myself as an ordinary American who wants to keep my American dream, my family values, my personal and religious freedoms, and my quality of life. Finally, whichever candidate my enemies want to win, I will be choosing the other.
What do you think?
Always digging deeper
I was interested in an Associated Press report that Memphis is considering collecting a payroll tax from anyone working within the city limits. The idea is to milk the city worker that lives in suburbia to help solve the city's financial woes. Only residents of Memphis will have the chance to vote on the measure in a referendum. It is likely that city dwellers will leap at the opportunity to squeeze suburbanites so if it proves constitutional there could be a new trend set for Tennessee municipal governments. Watch out Bradley County, I'll wager that Mayor Tom Rowland, and Cleveland City Manager Joe Cate, are feverishly rubbing there hands in anticipation.
What do you think?
The committee tree
A legal notice appeared in the September 1st, Cleveland Daily Banner, one that maybe sheds light on why local government has been allowed to grow out of control and how public business is slowly being removed from view by the use of tier after tier of committees and boards. This particular notice concerned a mysterious Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC). The purpose of the meeting was to review and recommend the 2005 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) - whatever that is - for adoption by the Blythe Metropolitan Planning Organization Executive Board (MPO.) The MPO is responsible for transportation planning and transportation resource allocation within Cleveland's urbanized area. You can forgive yourself for being confused because that seems to be the whole point of structuring tiers of anonymous and un-elected people to dispense pubic funds to wherever and whoever they please, without public oversight while at the same time keeping within the law. Millions, upon millions of public money is spent locally this way yet we never see positions on these grant spending committees and boards advertised to the public. The point is that the citizens elect people to be responsible charges of the public purse, yet this responsibility is surreptitiously delegated to a select but un-elected few. I have a hunch that here lies the reason why the good ol boy business network is so prosperous and why ordinary commercial enterprises struggle at a disadvantage. Using this method it would be possible to legally channel public funds into private hands without a public outcry. Nah, that couldn't happen in Cleveland.
What do you think?
Garbage, not junk.
City Manager Joe Cate, has suggested using the legal weight of government against scrap recycler/junk yard owner Charles E. Harris because his junk is spilling on to county owned property. Spreading your junk is not popular especially with city governments anxious to improve the appearance of their towns. But, as with most occurrences in Cleveland, things are sometimes not always as they appear. Hill Street, where the Harris business is located is also the home of the Cleveland Animal Shelter and a number of older but nice residencies. What is surprising though is that hardly a stone's throw from the junk yard is, or was the old city dump. So, Cate is outraged over Harris' junk on city property yet almost next door is city property full of garbage. Doesn't make sense does it? Maybe there's another reason why Cate is so keen to clean up next to Harris. I wonder what it could be?
What do you think?
"What do you think" Continued
Website Survey Results