Where the hell have I been? So much has been happening, and I haven't posted a thing. A big thank you to Verizon DSL for keeping me offline for nearly two weeks. I have no idea how I'm online right now. I have a service appointment for Thursday, but I thought, what the heck, I'll try to log on just to see what happens... and it worked. I'll wait to see if I can get on again tomorrow before I cancel that appointment...
So, the magniminous Jay Leno gave all the candidates for California governor the same opportunity for exposure that he's given to buddy Arnold (the big candidate Arnold, not the little candidate who played Arnold on TV), or did he? Candidate Dan Feinstein explains what went on bette than I ever could, but basically, Jay assembled about 90 of the "others" in his audience one night for the sole purpose of making them all look like idiots. And then to complain the election is a "circus."
If I hear one more damn pundit say this is a circus, I'm going to have to kill them. Can't these "professional" broadcasters come up with something more original, or newsworthy, to say? I don't blame my fellow civilians who use the circus metaphor - it's been forced on them so many times by the opinion setters that they may actually think that this is an insite. Lower standards for a dumber America.
The "big five" had a wonderful bash of a debate last week, with scripted answers to pre-announced questions, including scripted insults being flown across the table. Only Camejo and McClintock rose above the "circus-like" atmosphere (I read somewhere that circus' are like that) and refused to get into the name-calling. The candidates on the furthest right and the furthest left stood by their principles, while those in the middle (including the pretendo-populist millionaire pundit) duked it out publicly. Good point of the debate: at least the scripted questions forced them to comment on a few issues of substance, such as proposition 54.
Did I insult Ms. Huffington in that last paragraph? I'm sorry if I did. I wouldn't want her mad at me. Let me just be clear my less than praising comments for her are not meant in a condecending manner (unlike the rude comments made to her in the debate by Arnie and Cruz). I'm only referring to her current change of position regarding the need for an independent progressive candidate in the race.
She formerly insisted that the Democrats and Republicans were equally guilty in our state's current crisis. At the start of her campaign she said that if it got down to the wire, and it looked like she couldn't win, she'd get out and throw her support to Camejo, the Green party candidate. Camejo, for his part, made a similar pledge to support Arriana. Now, when the excrement is hitting the fan, she's ready to drop out of the race and put her (limited) support behind Cruz B., who a week ago she considered the enemy.
A candidate who claims to stand for independence and principles, who then chooses political expediency and dealmaking, is not a true progressive. Cruz promised to back her campaign finance reform initiative, so she'll give him her (few) voters. Probably also on her mind is her ability to still get access to big-name Demos for her punditry once this is all over. I hate to say it, but I never fully trusted her campaign to begin with.
Ahh, but that's all old news already. I'm sorry if this post has lots of typos and spelling errors, but I don't know how long I'll be able to stay online before Verizon screws me again - so - without any proofing, I'm hitting the post button - I hope to see you again soon....