My View by Sandra

and other stuff . . .

How many bipartisans are needed to screw in a lightbulb?

flagThe answer is that it takes just one bipartisan to screw in a lightbulb. It means nothing. I needed a leader and went with this one. I wish I were more clever.

I am registered as an Independent. It doesn’t mean that I vote for the Independent candidate of the Independent party. I feel I can truly be bipartisan (or, simply put – neutral), a term that’s used often in politics, but not practiced very much.

I am extremely naive when it comes to politics. Each issue is different, so I read up on it (and/or watch the pundits thrash it out) and make my decision on that.)

When I was a child and would hear horror stories about Nikita Khrushchev, I would sit and write him letters asking him to stop scaring us so much, be nice and please try to be friends with President Eisenhower. I never mailed them. It just seemed that it would be such an uncomplicated thing to do.

This new bailout bill that was signed yesterday confused me somewhat.

First of all, President Obama is really new. You can’t say too much is known about him, but I’d like to be cautious. The one thing I wasn’t keen about was seeing him trying to get the bill signed quickly. There seemed to be a sense of urgency. I kept thinking that if I were out buying a house or a car, and the sales person kept saying adamantly, “sign it, naw, you don’t have to read it. Trust me”, I would think that was naive and foolish. The representatives who were voting on this were voted in by the people and they’re OUR representatives. Ummm, didn’t we recently have several who had to bow out of important cabinet seats because they forgot to pay their taxes, didn’t pay their taxes or did something else wrong? Didn’t one of our past Presidents lie to the American people. I bet two or so years ago, Bernie Madoff had a lot of trust from his investors who had put their life savings in his hands. We know now this wasn’t a good decision. How many times had he perhaps told them to trust him and sign quickly?

The fawning over President Obama has me befuddled (I love that word). It bothers me that some are so over the top about this guy, they just can’t think straight. I even heard the other night that women are daydreaming about sleeping with him, and I don’t mean they want to do a sleep over in the Lincoln bedroom. Even if I believe everything he says or does, I have to keep my distance and level-headed thinking because so many seem to have given that up with their rock star adoration. I find this extremely scary. I think some of us have to keep our feet planted on the ground and watch what he does before we throw our underwear at him.

Okay, now to my original thoughts about bipartisanship. From the recent activity with this bailout plan, it seems that the Democrats all voted for it. So, that makes them bipartisan? Wasn’t there just one or two who didn’t agree with it? Wouldn’t true bipartisanship mean that they would vote for what they, themselves believed in? So, because they all voted for it, wouldn’t that make them all partisan? Then the Republicans didn’t vote for it. But, three Republicans did vote for it. My assessment is that those three are the only ones who took a bipartisan stand. Sometimes when I’m watching CPAN, I wonder why they go through the entire roll call when all they have to do is mark the Democrats voting one way and the Republicans voting the other.

Another problem I have is that most from both parties didn’t even read this before voting. Let’s hope, for their sakes, that there isn’t a little clause someplace in the middle of it that says all members of the Cabinet, Congress, Senate and House of Representatives have to be honest. They must pay their taxes on time, stay faithful to their wives, keep their hands out of the till, represent the people first – and all lying, cheating and even murder (yes, one senator basically did do that a long time ago) are out of the question. For our sakes, wouldn’t that have been a good clause?

And my last topic is that I’ve heard some negative things about those who express their views on talk radio, on t.v. and by writing books when they don’t agree with President Obama. It’s been said that they should give the President a chance. But, if they stopped looking for discrepancies, wouldn’t we all be in trouble? I think it’s excellent that we do have watchdogs who examine everything that’s being done. I think it would be extremely stupid if we didn’t have these people and let them express the other side of issues. I would like to see some bipartisan (there is that word again) news coming out. Wouldn’t it be great to listen to talk radio hosts who took each event and discussed it without choosing a side?

If you’re sitting there shaking your head wondering which planet I’ve arrived from, remember that I did say I was naive about politics. Or, am I?

February 18, 2009 Posted by | Favorite Sites, Politics | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Joy Becomes Joyless on The View

j_behar.jpg

I created this blog to be able to ‘participate’ in the “hot topics” portion of the The View – via blog. It seemed like a fun thing to do. If you notice, I very rarely say a word about the show. I originally thought it was a casual, over coffee discussion show with helpful tips, some politics, fun guests and some entertainment. When Sherri Shepherd came aboard, I thought it would be even more fun because of her sense of humor. And Sherri still is fun. It’s just that if I want something heavier, I’ll go to CNN, FOX, and MSNBC to watch those who know a lot more about what they’re talking about than Joy Behar.

Joy Behar is known, among other things, as a comedienne. I don’t think she’s very funny. I’m not a terribly political person. I’m registered as neither a Democrat or a Republican. I want to vote on issues and candidates rather than party.

I do find that when the “girls” (cough) of The View discuss politics, it’s terribly lop-sided. I would prefer to have a good, fair discussion. I did laugh the other day when Bill O’Reilly was on and after an exchange with Joy Behar, she mumbled something to the effect of “I guess whoever is loudest wins”. I thought that so amusing because that seems to be her way of trying to win.

Joy is evidently for Hillary. Great, that’s her choice. But she appears to be using The View as a showcase for Hillary. Everyone else gets acid remarks from Joy, including the other Democratic candidates. Joy snarls, rolls her eyes, gasps and tsk tsks constantly throughout the show. She’s rude to the guests who she doesn’t agree with. It’s as though she’s trying to create problems rather than honestly discussing them. She doesn’t seem to want to find the answers.

She has basically called the Republican candidates, “the Klan” and she says that Dick Cheney is scary. I’ll tell you who is scary – Joy Behar. Yesterday she came up with her theory that prayer can distract medical discoveries. People have cancer, they pray, nothing happens. I think those who do pray and who believe in the power of prayer, find her insulting and . . . scary. I feel she would prefer to pray to Al Gore, not God. She doesn’t really make sense. She comes across as biased, not very funny, rude and arrogant. I read someplace where she has a Master’s degree and as someone said, a good example of why a college education isn’t everything.

When Joy speaks, she seems to think she’s right and all should believe it. I’d like to see the show toned down more and have it be more fun. I get embarrassed for them when Joy is outwardly rude to those who come on as guests. I just thought of what she reminds me of … a bully. A foul-mouthed bully with no manners.

November 15, 2007 Posted by | My View | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Who Wants to Run the Country? – Realty Show!

160829004v6_240x240_front.jpg

Realty shows. That seems to be all that’s on TV these days. Every time I think I’ve seen the last new idea for one, another is advertised – some sillier than the previous one.

I’m not saying I haven’t gotten hooked on a couple. I missed the first season of Dancing with the Stars, but got so hooked when I did start watching – in the middle of the second season – that I was calling in to cast my votes for my favorites and then was almost jumping out of my chair when my choice won. By the 3rd and 4th, I was even worse.

I watched The Surreal Life and Big Brother for a couple of episodes each, but I tried to not land on any channel featuring a realty show – even for a second – knowing how addictive they can be. Okay, I have a confession, I did watch Torie and Dean Inn Love last night. Corny, and I surely wouldn’t want cameras following me around constantly, but I was entertained. I’m sure these people don’t really act like they do on the show — in real life?

I started thinking about what could be left in the reality world. I came up with a few.

Kid Nation has been taken. I haven’t seen it, and without facts, I have to say that one sounds very scary. Perhaps it’s been built up much more than it should be.

I came up with another one that might be fun – “Who wants to run the country?”

The way it works:

there are two sides. We’ll call one the Blues and we’ll call the other the Reds. On the Blue side we start off with a huge number of contestants. To make it more entertaining, we include a female contestant, a black contestant and we have a “richer than most” contestant who enters the contest by getting points against him because of his $400 haircut.

The contestants line up and … well, we could have them debate and just watch them pick each other apart while they brag about themselves and everything wonderful they’ve done. In between the debating and boasting and nit-picking, we send them out to various states to meet the … let’s call them ‘citizens’ who will decide which contestant they prefer.

The Blue’s all try to get each other eliminated so they can win for the Blue side. And – the Reds do the same thing. Similar strength trials, debates, and touring the states are also happening with the Red team. Perhaps a Mormon, a former POW and a divorced guy could be interesting Reds contestants. It would make it more colorful. In the rules it also says that contestants would be allowed to join in even after the game has begun. Perhaps having an actor join the Red team would make it more fun and tilt the boards a bit.

Everyone gets in on this – the networks and cable news programs could have discussion groups trying to pick each contestant apart so they’ll get eliminated. They could have contestants create ads that they pay for and that would make the networks and cables some big money to keep them interested.

Contestants could be lied about, everything from their pasts brought out to seem as though it were important, and mudslinging could earn points or it could eliminate the contestant from the show. After the citizens have declared a winner for the Red side and one for the Blues, then each of the victors would be able to choose a contestant either from those who they ripped apart in the first part of the game or a new contestant. Then there would be another season of pulling out all punches for the citizens to find a winner from the two final contestants and their buddies. The theme for this part would be “anything goes”. It could be as dirty as possible, the contestants can use their own money and also get donations to try to convince the citizens that they should be the final choice.

Drugs, having gay children, jail terms, religion, employees, racist remarks, criminal activity, childhood activities, ex-lovers, fraudulent business schemes, family and friends – no subject is off limits.

This show could run for several seasons. And if one side seems to be falling behind or some horrible fact is found about a contestant – no matter what – the other side could be blamed for all of it and points could be taken away.

This is great. I’ll have to figure out some catchy name for it and also a great catch phrase – something that will resonate as well as Trump’s “You’re Fired” or Paris’ “That’s Hot”. And then I’ll have to figure out how all the points can be counted without any problems … That might be the hard part.

August 16, 2007 Posted by | My Designs, Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment