Sigh. I thought things were going to change for the better, one way or another. Hillary won in Pennsylvania. For the first time in years, I made a political donation and became one of contributors to her $10 million post Pennsylvania cash influx. Days after posting an article about how I was coming to terms with Obama, I was ready for my second wind. Or third. Or whatever. And actually, briefly, I felt the race might become reinvigorated.
So here's the deal. I love Hillary. That's a polarizing statement, I know. I also know that Hillary can be a polarizing figure. Though I feel that she is routinely maligned in the media and by politicos, and commonly the butt of sexist attitudes (overt or institutional), I can understand why some people dislike her. The sad fact is that most of the complaints against her are complaints that could easily be levied against any other--dare I say it--male candidate. She's bossy? She's self-righteous? Claims credit or exaggerates her role in world/political affairs? Gets her facts wrong? I don't know why it is that we've treated her differently than every other male candidate that's running for office. George W. Bush is notoriously stubborn in staying on point and sticking to his agenda. The role of the politician in society is to claim credit for his / her accomplishments. Misspoke? Misstates? Happens to the best--and the worst--of them. Nary a pundit blinked when John McCain needed Joe Lieberman to correct him that Iran was not supplying aid to Al Qaeda in Iraq, a mistake he repeated a few days later.
Well, duh! Who did you think I'd endorse? You know, I think I've done a good job of keeping my political activities out of my blog, but I feel that now is the time to step forward and tell you guys why I feel I am the better candidate.
County Executive: You know, this time around I briefly considered voting for Walker. I know, I'm shocked, too. Let me explain what was going on in my head, because there were several things. In no particular order, first, I think his pseudo-revolution has come, pun intended, full-circle, and the Board of Supervisors has finally regained its sense of balance and independence. That means that our elected supervisors are back to doing what they need to be doing--working on the County Budget and finding real solutions to our problems. No one likes paying more in taxes, but Walker's anti-tax-increase position stand doesn't have nearly the force (morally, politically, or economically) that it once did. Increasingly, he is becoming a relic. The fallout of the scandal that saw his rise has been fading away. Thus, I think that the Supervisors can--and are--standing up to him. That's a good sign. Also, Walker's perceived right-of-center views on a bunch of issues certainly turn me off. But so what? Being a county executive means, literally, being an executive--an enforcer. Most of those policies I'd fear, in my opinion, are not able to see the light of day because his job is not a policy job like most political jobs. It is a non-partisan, largely managerial position. And heck, there's really nothing evil about someone who just wants to save money, right? I mean, that's a laudable goal. That means that we should be able to give someone a bit of a break and look to see what the job is that he's doing. Plus he's got several years of experience under his belt. So why, then, NOT vote for Walker, if I could hypothetically overlook his perceived shortcomings? For me it's simple. Lena Taylor to me appears to be bright, passionate, and motivated. She's also seen the effects of the policies that Walker has implemented, and rightly fears the continual decline or elimination of county services or involvement in transit, parks, the House of Correction and Community Correctional Center. She may be the least experienced, and might not have the executive experience that Walker has, but I think that it's time to try someone new on for size. Let's vote for Lena.
I can't believe it! What a sucky week/month/year it's been for Wisconsin tradition. First, Brett Favre retires--which, if you believe the almost 24-hour news coverage of a choked up Brett Favre tearfully telling his fans he just doesn't have the heart to keep on playing, Wisconsinites have been plunged into a deep dark depression--a cold, grey, athletic, nuclear winter. Thankfully, TV land has plenty of psychiatrists to help us all through our grief counseling. But no sooner did we get past the denial stage in our Green Bay grieving process did we get hit with a double loss: Bowling is leaving Milwaukee. That's right, folks, the United States Bowling Congress is picking up and moving to Arlington Texas to cozy up with a bowling owner's association. The USBC leaving Milwaukee is no different than other near or actual catastrophes to hit the region: Midwest Airlines leaving Milwaukee (sort of), Gen Con leaving Milwaukee (and yes, it still hurts the geek in me) or Miller leaving Milwaukee.