Local Politics

Tee Hee! LOL! I heard the funniest thing today. SW Republicans list as one of their accomplishments increased standardized testing scores! Are you kidding me? Sorry, politcians, you had nothing to do with it. Despite your best efforts in cutting teachers and education programs, the teachers, administration and STUDENTS succeeded. NOT YOU! I feel I have the right to pin the teacher and program cuts on you since you listed those two items as accompishments in your newsletter too. I'm neither a Republican or a Democrat (and I'll tell you, living in this town will drive anyone away from a major party!) I'm just an "interested" party who thinks the politics in this town is out of control. I've been asked to run for positions by both parties and I will never do it. I might run as independent one day or a part of the new party organized in town. I am glad to see some fresh faces up for election this year. Since I'm an equal opportunity critic, I also LOL when I read that some Democrat candidates list their years of service in office as a "plus". Sorry, not a plus to me. We need to shake this town up!!! This is not meant to be personal against anyone, I like many of these people, HOWEVER, it is time for a change.

What Did Barack Obama Do?

Barack Obama was announced today as the Nobel Peace Prize recipient. My reaction was, "Huh?"

Before I begin this rant, let me state that I am neither an Obama Hater, nor an Obama Lover. I am an Obama supporter. I voted for Obama. I still believe that I voted for the best choice available to me. I think we as a society need to strive to keep an open mind. I am frightened by the hatred many people feel toward Obama, however, I am equally frightened by those who seem to "idolize" him. I think both are dangerous because the haters will never see any good and those who idolize him will never see any bad. Obama has the hardest job in this country, some might argue the world. He will do some right and he will do some wrong. We should ALL be rooting for him to do more right....it impacts all of our lives. (All of the above is why I am neither a Repbulican nor a Democrat. I am proud to be unaffiliated. I think the two party system is ruining and dividing our country. A rant will save for later...)

Now, back to the Nobel Peace Prize. I'm not clear on what Obama did to win this honor. I believe his goal is to work towards Peace, but not sure has made an inch of progress so far. So, I researched the Nobel Peace Prize. According to the AP, it is a myth that someone needs to have made progress in peace efforts to win the prize. The AP stated, "...more often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments." So, yes, Obama fits that criterion, particularly the "critical moments" piece. However, I suspect other World Leaders fit this criterion too. Granted, people often call the President of the United States the "most powerful position in the world," so that beefs up Obama's realm of influence on Peace. I would argue we shouldn't think of POTUS as the most powerful position in the world. (We'll save that for a rant to be named later.)

I continued my research. I read the names of the past recipients and why they won. Well, I think the AP statement of "more often" was overstated. Most of the recipients demonstrated specific actions and work that worked towards Peace or brought awareness to global issues that impact Peace. So, I am back to thinking, "Why Obama?" The Norwegian Nobel Committee state he was awarded this honor for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.:" Could they share a list of his "extraordinary efforts." during his Presidency or even since he was catapulted onto the radar screen of the world? I don't believe a few great speeches and an inspiring book count as "extraordinary efforts." I believe he has the potential to make extraordinary efforts on this front, I just think this award might be a few years too early. The nomination deadline for this prize is February 1st. Just adds more mystery to the "Why?"

You might ask yourself, "SwirlGirl, why do you care?" I care because everyday there are people on this planet working toward Peace. As I reveiwed the list of names of Nobel Peace Prize recipients, I certainly saw names that I recognized (Carter, Anan, Tutu, Kissinger, Sadat, Gorbachev, King, etc.) I also saw names I didn't recognize (Aung San Suu Kyi, Joseph Rotblat, Betty Williams, Mairead Corrigan, etc.). I care because I hope someone unknown wasn't overlooked for their truly extraoridnary effort for someone who has the potential to perform extraordinary effort.

POST RANT NOTE: Currently watching Obama's press conference on topic. He handled it well...stated he feels he doesn't belong in the company of previous recipients and sees this as a call to action to build momentum.
ANOTHER POST RANT NOTE: Someone objectively stated on a news show "this feels like a we're glad you are not George Bush award"---it does feel a bit like that. Which isn't right either.

Dave, Dave, Dave

I know everyone has been waiting for me to comment on Dave Letterman's recent "legal" issues. (Tee Hee, like how I pretend I actually have many followers waiting in anticipation for each and every post?)

Before I begin--these are my true ramblings of random thoughts and disconnected rants! So I apologize now if you find it hard to follow!

Some of you may know that Letterman is one of my favorites. He is one of 3 people I choose when people ask "Which famous person would you invite to dinner?" Before I address his recent headlines....let me explain to you why I like Dave so much (which includes an explanation of why I am NOT a Jay fan)

Okay, I've watched Letterman since he had a morning show back in the early 80's. (Prior to him getting the post Tonight Show gig) He is funny. I think many people do not get his humor. Aside from being funny, he has a talent that many talk show hosts lack (JAY), he is extremely adept at interviewing people. He actually listens to people and reacts to them. Yes, there are times when an interview goes off kilter--but usually because the guest is off-kilter (Crispin Glover, Joaquin Phoenix). Surprisingly, his best interviews are with non-Hollywood celeb types. His interviews with Brokaw, Rumsfeld, Clinton, etc. are not to be missed. He really gets to the heart of important issues. Dave truly changed after his heart surgery, I liked him prior to that but liked him 10x more after that. He is a rich celeb who is still in touch with the real world.

Okay, what is my beef with Jay? We all know that Jay was chosen over Dave for the Tonight's Show spot. Lets be clear, this was not Johnny's choice. (Johnny Carson--one of my all time favorites!) I don't really understand how Johnny didn't have final say--but the network wanted Jay. (Similar to how "supposedly" the network wanted Jay to leave his Tonight Show so Conan could attract younger viewers??? I don't buy that one--why would you want the guy who is #1 to leave--doesn't make any sense) Jay may be a funny stand up--but he is HORRIBLE at interviewing people. All questions always come back Jay. Jay, it is not about you, it is about your guest. He may be the hardest working man in show business but I think that is a major flaw for his profession. Too much work, not enough life. Okay, so I used to watch Jay when he had a good guest on (and a show based in CA typically has more access to bigger names). However, I do not watch Jay anymore. When he pontificated 3 years ago about how he was going to be the bigger person and announce his successor so that there was no mystery and no hard feelings like when he was announced and their were hurt feelings (referring to Dave), I had enough. Does he need to bring that up? First, totally different situation. Jay, you never took a day off or vacation so there were no opportunities for guest hosts, etc. Conan was the obvious choice. He consistently seized opportunities to make himself look like the good guy when he was awarded the job as Tonight Show host. I smell a rat when people feel the need to make themselves look good.

The last straw: Jay doesn't want to leave TV. Big surprise. So, he threatens to leave the network and compete in a time slot against Conan. Network says, lets put Jay in prime time. So, all that pontificating about being the bigger person goes down the drain in my opinion. Although they are on the same network, he is competing against Conan! His show is exactly the same format and it is on earlier--people do not have to stay up late. That is so wrong on so many levels. I can't believe Newsweek (or Time) had him on the cover claiming "Jay is changing network television". He changed his time slot folks, that is it.

I know I've digressed, but let me leave you with this thought on the subject: During Johnny Carson's retirement he would call Dave and provide him with jokes for his monologue--he never did this for Jay.

Now to Dave.....
I'm going to have chunk out my opinions on his latest "legal" situation:

• Dave, Dave, Dave....does it disappoint? A little. For me it is disappointing b/c it gives all the Dave haters more ammunition. Is it any of my business? No. As far as his indiscretions, that is a moral issue, he did not commit a crime. I try not to judge others based on my values, especially when I do not have any facts. I can choose not to associate with people b/c they may not share my values, etc. but who am I to judge? (If they break a law--that is different, Mr. Polanski)
• I do applaud Dave for getting ahead of the story. What else could he do right? Well, ask John Edwards, Spitzer, etc. b/c no one advised them to get ahead of the story. That is why they lost so much respect. (Well, Spitzer is in a different category--his hypocrisy lost my respect--he led the charge to stop prostitution--while he was using the services of a prostitute????)
• Ironically, when Stephanie Burkitt appeared on the show during the earlier part of this decade, I used to think to myself "she and Dave would make a good couple" They had the same dry wit.
• Facts--we have little facts in this case. I don't think "we" are owed the facts--but since people are making judgements without facts, I'll throw my two cents in. We do not "when" these affairs occurred and Regina and Dave had "breaks" during that 23 year period.
• National Organization of Women - they stated that Dave has created a "toxic" work environment. They say this based purely on the fact that he dated people that worked for him. I think that his harsh. Sometimes, I think NOW needs to settle. Yes, thank goodness they exist, but like any organized group, originally created with a great purpose, they get lost a bit. So many of Dave's staffers have been with him for 10, 20, almost 30 years. Most people do not stay that long in a toxic environment. Where was NOW when he was dating his current wife Regina (a former staffer) or his previous long time girlfriend (also a former staffer)? Is it okay to date a staffer if you eventually marry them? I think the entertainment industry is different than most--the culture is much different than Corporate America. Personally, I don't think you should date employees, but sometimes it happens. It can happen in a way that is not toxic.
• I think it is ironic that Dave is on CBS, whose CEO is married to an employee. (Les Moonves and Julie Chen). I'm sure when they first starting dating--there was not full disclosure to everyone. Lets face it, when people first start to date, they do not want the world to know--especially when you are in the public eye.
• The lawyer for the alleged blackmailer keeps saying that when we go to trial we will prove Dave sexually harassed employees. Dude, I'm no lawyer--but that is totally irrelevant to your case. Whether Dave did or did not sexually harass employees has nothing to do with your guy blackmailing him. Usually, the blackmailer is right about their accusations, doesn't change the fact that THEY BROKE THE LAW!
• Again, not my business, but I am hoping Dave's indiscretions occurred prior to Harry's birth. Otherwise, my opinion of his character might go down a little.