In a few days I'll be celebrating my fifty-seventh birthday. As the years go by it has become more and more important to counteract the effects of aging with good diet and exercise. I'll share some of the practices I've developed and am currently following, starting with diet in this piece and exercise in the next.
The three goals I have with diet are focused on getting results concerning the issues of weight, cholesterol and antioxidants. The means to get good results have to be realistic for me, meaning that I can't set a regimen so restrictive I can't follow it. That means I have had to commit most of it to habit, and I have to allow myself some exceptions and treats from time to time to stay sane. I am 5'8" tall and weigh 160 pounds.
Let's start with breakfast. I eat after my morning exercise and shower. My typical breakfast Monday through Saturday includes a bowl of cereal with 1% milk. I like some variety, so I have a rotation of six cereals that I rotate from day to day. I buy cereals without high fructose corn syrup and added sugar. Yes, I have had to read the ingredient labels. I look for ones that have higher fiber content. To save you some time, those criteria eliminate Kellogg's products! My rotation includes Shredded Wheat, Kashi Go Lean, Raisin Bran, Grape Nuts, Wheat Chex and Cream of Wheat. The Chex are a little marginal nutritionally, but as I said, I get a bit of a treat now and then! I heat up the Cream of Wheat on Saturday because I have more time that day, not having to go to work.
I throw six to eight blueberries, three to four blackberries or raspberries and half a banana, cut up into bite-sized slices in there. The berries are great for innumerable vitamins and powerful antioxidant effects. Antioxidants work to prevent the basic biochemical deterioration that is at the heart of the aging process itself. I also have a 12-ounce glass of water and eight ounces of prune juice and another fruit juice. I know that's a lot of hydration, but remember I have breakfast after a good workout. Most of us don't get enough fluids as it is. I'm careful with the fruit juices. I drink 100% prune juice and Healthy Balance fruit juices or 100% orange juice. The Trim brand is good too, but our market doesn't carry it anymore. It's easy to buy junk fruit juices that are full of sugar and calories. I read the labels and avoid those.
I also take supplements with my breakfast. The list includes Vitamin C, a B-Complex, Fish Oil for good antioxidant and cholesterol-fighting properties, Oscal with D and Calcium, Glucosamine, and a Centrum Silver multivitamin. Yep, that's six tablets.
On Sunday I typically splurge and have eggs and toast with canola margarine. Sometimes I'll fry some lean turkey to go with the eggs. I continue with the fruit and vitamins.
Lunch at work has become a consistent routine. I have an apple or orange, a 4-ounce Activia lowfat yogurt, a couple of cherry tomatoes, about a dozen almonds and a handful of walnut halves with water to drink. It's low-cal yet high in energy, vitamins and minerals, and promotes the good cholesterol. If I need an afternoon snack I'll have some peanut butter, sometimes on soda crackers (unsalted tops!). Breakfast and lunch have really come to be comfortable and ingrained as habits. That makes the pattern easy to follow.
My keys at dinner are not as regimented, but incorporate some basic principles. I have red meat no more than once a week. Frozen or otherwise pre-prepared meals are as rare as hen's teeth, since they're usually full of fats and preservatives, often including way too much salt. Speaking of which, I do not put salt on anything other than corn on the cob, which I love but have maybe twice a year during the summer. In order to fill up before the high-calorie items I always start with the salad and/or vegetables and always drink plenty of water. In fact, one dinner a week is customarily a salad meal. Potatoes and other starch like rice are OK as long as they're not smothered in stuff like butter and gravy, other than once in awhile as a treat.
Stuff like chips and sodas have disappeared altogether. When they're not around they're not even a temptation anymore, and I don't miss them, even though I used to be a Diet Coke junkie. I confess I have taken lately to frequently having a little square of dark chocolate after dinner. It does have antioxidant effects, and that's all the rationalization I need, there! And it helps to allow yourself to go out at least monthly or have a splurge meal once on the weekend. Few can stick to a fairly strict pattern without a break now and then without getting frustrated and chucking the whole thing, and I feel that's a main reason most diets fail. I've been doing this for a few years though, and am very happy with it. I feel better, get sick less, and have seen improved blood tests and energy longer at work.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Local Election Endorsements for November 8
After extending invitations and holding candidate interviews, the Tulare County Democratic Central Committee has made its local candidate endorsements for the November 8 election. The recommended candidates for Visalia City Council are Amy Shuklian and Raymond Macareno. The recommended candidates for Visalia Unified School District Governing Board are Lucia Vazquez in Area 6 and Lita Reid in Area 7.
Visalia City Council members are elected at large throughout the whole city. Since three seats are up for election, voters will be able to cast three votes, and the top three vote getters in the six-candidate field will be elected to four-year terms on the Council.
Amy Shuklian is an incumbent council member and the Vice Mayor of Visalia. She has a deserved reputaton as an extremely hard worker and is known for her openness. Amy got her start advocating for a dog park and recreational facilities, and has helped bring both to fruition. She has never missed a Council meeting, and is known throughout the area for her accessibility and effectiveness in working together with city, county, state and federal agencies and electeds to get things done for Visalia. Always attentive to the voice and concerns of the people, she intiated a monthly open house where she makes appointments and meets with citizens to hear and help with their issues. Amy well deserves a second four-year term.
Raymond Macareno is currently a service center Director and the former Executive Director of the Tulare County Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Raymond combines a strong service ethic with a knowledge of the needs of small business. As such, Raymond would provide a voice and sounding board for communities that currently are not represented on the Council, particularly in the Hispanic community. Raymond's multifacted talents and experience merit his election to the Council.
Lucia Vazquez is running unopposed in Visalia Unified School District Area 6. The School Board has for the first time gone to area elections, and Lucia will be representing a heavily Hispanic and low-income area that has not had representation before. A Consultant and Researcher for Proteus, Inc., Lucia is not content to rest on her laurels as an unopposed candidate. She is running a vigorous campaign to get her name out and meet her constituents. She believes that education is the means up the ladder for today's youth as it was for her, and feels that parent outreach and involvement is a key to fostering an attitude of success. That is something she intends to work hard on.
Lita Reid is our choice for the School Board in Area 7. Lita has a proven record of community involvement and the commitment to make a difference. She is a practicing attorney and was a longtime newspaper editor. She realizes the constraints current budgetary realities impose, but has a systematic approach to keeping funding where it will have the most impact, in the classroom. Her dedication to the education of the whole child, rather than simply teaching to standaridized tests, marks Lita as worthy of support.
Visalia City Council members are elected at large throughout the whole city. Since three seats are up for election, voters will be able to cast three votes, and the top three vote getters in the six-candidate field will be elected to four-year terms on the Council.
Amy Shuklian is an incumbent council member and the Vice Mayor of Visalia. She has a deserved reputaton as an extremely hard worker and is known for her openness. Amy got her start advocating for a dog park and recreational facilities, and has helped bring both to fruition. She has never missed a Council meeting, and is known throughout the area for her accessibility and effectiveness in working together with city, county, state and federal agencies and electeds to get things done for Visalia. Always attentive to the voice and concerns of the people, she intiated a monthly open house where she makes appointments and meets with citizens to hear and help with their issues. Amy well deserves a second four-year term.
Raymond Macareno is currently a service center Director and the former Executive Director of the Tulare County Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Raymond combines a strong service ethic with a knowledge of the needs of small business. As such, Raymond would provide a voice and sounding board for communities that currently are not represented on the Council, particularly in the Hispanic community. Raymond's multifacted talents and experience merit his election to the Council.
Lucia Vazquez is running unopposed in Visalia Unified School District Area 6. The School Board has for the first time gone to area elections, and Lucia will be representing a heavily Hispanic and low-income area that has not had representation before. A Consultant and Researcher for Proteus, Inc., Lucia is not content to rest on her laurels as an unopposed candidate. She is running a vigorous campaign to get her name out and meet her constituents. She believes that education is the means up the ladder for today's youth as it was for her, and feels that parent outreach and involvement is a key to fostering an attitude of success. That is something she intends to work hard on.
Lita Reid is our choice for the School Board in Area 7. Lita has a proven record of community involvement and the commitment to make a difference. She is a practicing attorney and was a longtime newspaper editor. She realizes the constraints current budgetary realities impose, but has a systematic approach to keeping funding where it will have the most impact, in the classroom. Her dedication to the education of the whole child, rather than simply teaching to standaridized tests, marks Lita as worthy of support.
Monday, September 5, 2011
In Observance of Labor Day
Happy Labor Day, everyone! We celebrate Labor Day both to pay tribute to the dedicated work done by American workers and to commemorate the improvements in our quality of life won by the steadfast efforts of the American Labor Movement. The first Labor Day was celebrated on September 5, 1882 by the Central Labor Union in New York City. By the time Labor Day became a national holiday in 1894, it was already being celebrated in thirty states. As you enjoy the day off today, don't forget to think a moment or two about the sacrifices made throughout the years to win the pay, rights and benefits that even non unionized workers today enjoy.
One of the earliest focuses of Labor was workplace safety. In 1904, 27,000 American workers were killed on the job just in transportation, manufacturing and agriculture. In 1914 35,000 died in industrial accidents and 700,000 were injured--and that was in a population only one-third that of the United States today. Particular incidents such as the horrific Triangle Shirtwaist fire of 1911 galvanized the people and finally moved protective legislation. In that disaster 146 workers, mostly women, burned or leaped to their deaths from the eighth, ninth and tenth floors of a New York high rise. Without running water, fire escapes or fire extinguishers, with the doors locked and the fire department's ladders not reaching past the seventh floor, the tragedy was inevitable. 100,000 marched in support of workplace safety regulations and the politicians finally had the courage to overcome employer resistance.
The Populist and Progressive Parties of the 1890s and early 1900s stood for the rights of union membership and collective bargaining. They campaigned for the 8-hour day, railroad, banking and telecommunications regulation, health and safety protections and a minimum wage. Though both parties eventually went defunct, virtually their entire programs were eventually adopted, much of them co-opted by the Democrats and Republicans. They endured violent assaults that killed many workers in such strikes as that at the Homestead Steel Mill and Pullman Sleeping Car Company.
Such standard practices as lunch breaks, weekends, overtime and holiday pay, vacations, health benefits, worker's compensation, health and safety standards and enforcement and even the concept of national immigration restrictions owe their existence to the organized labor movement, which is nothing less than the democratic action of workers banding together to support humane treatment, due process and a just compensation in repayment for the value they add to their employer's bottom line.
In these times when once again large employers and conservative politicians are trying to roll back the benefits common people have won through years of struggle, give a thought or two on this Labor Day to the workers down through the years who risked their jobs, safety and sometimes even gave their lives for the pay and working conditions most of us now enjoy.
One of the earliest focuses of Labor was workplace safety. In 1904, 27,000 American workers were killed on the job just in transportation, manufacturing and agriculture. In 1914 35,000 died in industrial accidents and 700,000 were injured--and that was in a population only one-third that of the United States today. Particular incidents such as the horrific Triangle Shirtwaist fire of 1911 galvanized the people and finally moved protective legislation. In that disaster 146 workers, mostly women, burned or leaped to their deaths from the eighth, ninth and tenth floors of a New York high rise. Without running water, fire escapes or fire extinguishers, with the doors locked and the fire department's ladders not reaching past the seventh floor, the tragedy was inevitable. 100,000 marched in support of workplace safety regulations and the politicians finally had the courage to overcome employer resistance.
The Populist and Progressive Parties of the 1890s and early 1900s stood for the rights of union membership and collective bargaining. They campaigned for the 8-hour day, railroad, banking and telecommunications regulation, health and safety protections and a minimum wage. Though both parties eventually went defunct, virtually their entire programs were eventually adopted, much of them co-opted by the Democrats and Republicans. They endured violent assaults that killed many workers in such strikes as that at the Homestead Steel Mill and Pullman Sleeping Car Company.
Such standard practices as lunch breaks, weekends, overtime and holiday pay, vacations, health benefits, worker's compensation, health and safety standards and enforcement and even the concept of national immigration restrictions owe their existence to the organized labor movement, which is nothing less than the democratic action of workers banding together to support humane treatment, due process and a just compensation in repayment for the value they add to their employer's bottom line.
In these times when once again large employers and conservative politicians are trying to roll back the benefits common people have won through years of struggle, give a thought or two on this Labor Day to the workers down through the years who risked their jobs, safety and sometimes even gave their lives for the pay and working conditions most of us now enjoy.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Perry's Extremism on Full Display
A few days on the campaign trail have served notice that Texas Governor Rick Perry is about as extreme a right winger as it is possible to be. Since he is the current leader for his party's nomination in the polls it also shows how far toward the nutty fringe a Republican has to go these days to win the GOP primary electorate. One would think that some of these positions ought to make it exceedingly difficult for him to win a general election should he be the Republican standard bearer in 2012, as I believe he is likely to be.
Perry shows his antipathy to modern science by characterizing evolution as, "just a theory with a lot of gaps in it," and pollution-caused global warming as a "hoax" ginned up by a worldwide conspiracy of meteorology nerds. Rejection of the fact and data-based universe is apparently an article of faith in Republican ranks these days. It's hard not to wonder what such a stance would have on America's ability to compete in global technology should this latter-day know-nothingism penetrate into the pinnacle of leadership of the nation itself. Either Perry does not believe in science when it conflicts with his prejudices or he is prepared to babble nonsense in order to tell the ignorant what they want to hear. Neither alternative provides much comfort to the prospect of a Perry presidency.
The Governor is also adept at reading things into the Constitution that are not there. He has written in his book "Fed Up," published in 2010, that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional--not just that he disagrees with them, but that the Framers in 1787 somehow banned these programs. To refer to these most popular of federal programs as "scams" and "Ponzi schemes" does take guts. One can only imagine the effect on the senior citizen vote after a few months of publicity of these views.
He repeats the conservative canard that the Constitution was written to "limit government," and protect "states rights" when any eighth-grader can tell you it was to increase federal power over the states after the weakness and disunity of the former Articles of Confederation. His statement, referring to Texas, that, "When we came into the union in 1845 one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that" has exposed either his revanchist Confederate sympathies or a willingness to play to a constituency disposed to dismember the United States--a rather blatant violation of the Presidential oath of office, by which he would, if elected, swear to defend the Constitution "against all enemies."
He has topped these antics off by threatening Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, (originally a Bush appointee, by the way) with accusations of treason and veiled intimations of violence "we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas," if he should deign to differ with Perry on monetary policy. This bull in the china shop buffoonery is what apparently captures the imagination of Republican voters these days, as Perry stands at the head of the current opinion polls. It is not, however, what will win a majority of voting Americans in a national election.
Perry shows his antipathy to modern science by characterizing evolution as, "just a theory with a lot of gaps in it," and pollution-caused global warming as a "hoax" ginned up by a worldwide conspiracy of meteorology nerds. Rejection of the fact and data-based universe is apparently an article of faith in Republican ranks these days. It's hard not to wonder what such a stance would have on America's ability to compete in global technology should this latter-day know-nothingism penetrate into the pinnacle of leadership of the nation itself. Either Perry does not believe in science when it conflicts with his prejudices or he is prepared to babble nonsense in order to tell the ignorant what they want to hear. Neither alternative provides much comfort to the prospect of a Perry presidency.
The Governor is also adept at reading things into the Constitution that are not there. He has written in his book "Fed Up," published in 2010, that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional--not just that he disagrees with them, but that the Framers in 1787 somehow banned these programs. To refer to these most popular of federal programs as "scams" and "Ponzi schemes" does take guts. One can only imagine the effect on the senior citizen vote after a few months of publicity of these views.
He repeats the conservative canard that the Constitution was written to "limit government," and protect "states rights" when any eighth-grader can tell you it was to increase federal power over the states after the weakness and disunity of the former Articles of Confederation. His statement, referring to Texas, that, "When we came into the union in 1845 one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that" has exposed either his revanchist Confederate sympathies or a willingness to play to a constituency disposed to dismember the United States--a rather blatant violation of the Presidential oath of office, by which he would, if elected, swear to defend the Constitution "against all enemies."
He has topped these antics off by threatening Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, (originally a Bush appointee, by the way) with accusations of treason and veiled intimations of violence "we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas," if he should deign to differ with Perry on monetary policy. This bull in the china shop buffoonery is what apparently captures the imagination of Republican voters these days, as Perry stands at the head of the current opinion polls. It is not, however, what will win a majority of voting Americans in a national election.
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Time for a Big Jobs Program
President Obama announced he will be coming out with a jobs bill after Labor Day. Here's hoping it will be something really big, because that's what the country needs. Incidentally, it would also be good politics for him too.
To start with, it's long past time we had a big jobs push. The fight over the debt ceiling that lasted most of the summer was a distraction from what most of the American public was interested in and what the economy really needs. The original stimulus from 2009 stabilized the free-fall but now has largely run out. This latest round of Republican-pushed budget cuts, to take effect sometime in late November, will do nothing for jobs. Spending cuts do not produce jobs; to the contrary, in order to institute them jobs will have to be cut. That's been the problem as job creation has stalled the past few months: modest gains in the private sector have been offset by downsizing in the public sector.
No doubt there will be some tax credits for companies that fill new positions in Obama's plan, but he needs to go farther. The principal reason hiring is slow is because consumer demand is weak. Consumer spending is 70% of the U.S. economy. Corporate America has been enjoying strong profits of late by cutting jobs and boosting productivity. Indeed, 96% of the top 500 companies were profitable over the past 12 months. They are sitting on an estimated 2 to 2 and a half trillion dollars in cash. American companies produced 1.0 million jobs in America in the pat year but 1.4 million overseas. The reason is that with high unemployment, skittish lending and hesitant buying patterns, demand is picking up faster overseas than here. Source for this paragraph. The solution? We need more jobs here, more money in the pockets of American consumers.
Since private business is not doing it, not only incentives but direct government hiring ought to take place. Many have called for a big push on infrastructure construction for part of this program. You can expect an "infrastructure bank" to be part of the Obama proposal in September. That is a good idea and ought to be done, but I feel his proposal ought to go farther. We have 8 million people out of work. Consider that directly funding 1 million jobs at $35,000 a year would cost $35 billion. When you consider a year of the war in Afghanistan costs three times that much or that the yearly deficit is expected to be over $1.2 trillion (thirty times that much) that amount is a relative bargain. If Obama were to propose opening up 2 million jobs right now for $70 billion it would have an electrifying effect on the unemployed and the economy. And for you fiscal hawks, it would only add 6% to the yearly deficit. Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich has a ten-point plan for jump starting employment that makes a lot of sense. It includes a mix of tax and regulatory changes and direct government actions. Take a look at it here.
There is certainly plenty for 2 million people to do. Everything from classroom aides to neighborhood cleanup to weatherizing buildings to transportation maintenance to the huge backlog of postponed work at National and State Parks to care for the elderly--there are a host of productive things that need doing, would help the country, would restore a sense of purpose and hope in the lives of the unemployed and would return $70 billion of buying power to the economy.
It would be good for the President politically too. Would the Republican-controlled House of Representatives refuse to go along? Almost certainly yes. Their preference is Hooversim; do nothing and hope for the best. The contrast between a strong program to directly provide millions of jobs juxtaposed with further excuses for more inaction could only work to Obama's advantage in next year's elections.
To start with, it's long past time we had a big jobs push. The fight over the debt ceiling that lasted most of the summer was a distraction from what most of the American public was interested in and what the economy really needs. The original stimulus from 2009 stabilized the free-fall but now has largely run out. This latest round of Republican-pushed budget cuts, to take effect sometime in late November, will do nothing for jobs. Spending cuts do not produce jobs; to the contrary, in order to institute them jobs will have to be cut. That's been the problem as job creation has stalled the past few months: modest gains in the private sector have been offset by downsizing in the public sector.
No doubt there will be some tax credits for companies that fill new positions in Obama's plan, but he needs to go farther. The principal reason hiring is slow is because consumer demand is weak. Consumer spending is 70% of the U.S. economy. Corporate America has been enjoying strong profits of late by cutting jobs and boosting productivity. Indeed, 96% of the top 500 companies were profitable over the past 12 months. They are sitting on an estimated 2 to 2 and a half trillion dollars in cash. American companies produced 1.0 million jobs in America in the pat year but 1.4 million overseas. The reason is that with high unemployment, skittish lending and hesitant buying patterns, demand is picking up faster overseas than here. Source for this paragraph. The solution? We need more jobs here, more money in the pockets of American consumers.
Since private business is not doing it, not only incentives but direct government hiring ought to take place. Many have called for a big push on infrastructure construction for part of this program. You can expect an "infrastructure bank" to be part of the Obama proposal in September. That is a good idea and ought to be done, but I feel his proposal ought to go farther. We have 8 million people out of work. Consider that directly funding 1 million jobs at $35,000 a year would cost $35 billion. When you consider a year of the war in Afghanistan costs three times that much or that the yearly deficit is expected to be over $1.2 trillion (thirty times that much) that amount is a relative bargain. If Obama were to propose opening up 2 million jobs right now for $70 billion it would have an electrifying effect on the unemployed and the economy. And for you fiscal hawks, it would only add 6% to the yearly deficit. Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich has a ten-point plan for jump starting employment that makes a lot of sense. It includes a mix of tax and regulatory changes and direct government actions. Take a look at it here.
There is certainly plenty for 2 million people to do. Everything from classroom aides to neighborhood cleanup to weatherizing buildings to transportation maintenance to the huge backlog of postponed work at National and State Parks to care for the elderly--there are a host of productive things that need doing, would help the country, would restore a sense of purpose and hope in the lives of the unemployed and would return $70 billion of buying power to the economy.
It would be good for the President politically too. Would the Republican-controlled House of Representatives refuse to go along? Almost certainly yes. Their preference is Hooversim; do nothing and hope for the best. The contrast between a strong program to directly provide millions of jobs juxtaposed with further excuses for more inaction could only work to Obama's advantage in next year's elections.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Perry's Entry is GOP Game Changer
The entry of Texas Governor Rick Perry into the Republican presidential field is a game changer. I rate him as odds on to capture the GOP nomination and face President Obama in 2012.
The dynamics of the Republican race are relatively simple. Mitt Romney is the early front runner. He appeals to the business community and the more moderate elements of the Republican coalition. The question to be settled is who will be the more conservative standard bearer to challenge him?
The Iowa Straw Poll, on the strength of some 4,800 votes, vaulted first-place finisher Rep. Michele Bachmann into contention as a prime challenger to Romney. Libertarian and isolationist Congressman Ron Paul finished second. Nobody else farther down the list, which included Tim Pawlenty who dropped out of the race based on a third-place finish, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, John Huntsman or Newt Gingrich has any kind of realistic shot at the nomination.
So it will be Bachmann and Perry who battle it out for the anti-Romney mantle. Both are far right-wingers who appeal to both Tea Party fiscal zealots and evangelical social issues voters. In this contest Bachmann excels at firing up the base with red meat rhetoric. But she will, I believe, not be able to overcome Perry's edge in gubernatorial experience and the kind of country folksiness so valued as authenticity by Republican voters. And make no mistake, Perry is nearly every bit as conservative as Bachmann.
Once the primary season begins Bachmann will likely win the Iowa caucuses. Then Romney will probably take the ensuing New Hampshire primary. In a practical sense, both will need those victories to remain credible. But then Perry will take the South Carolina and Florida primaries on friendly Southern turf and be off to the races. Wins there will take the air out of Bachmann's campaign and leave Perry one on one against Romney. Perry will prevail because in the final analysis Romney is simply not conservative enough for today's Republican electorate. The party veers farther rightward every year and Romney is, in their mind, still tied to the moderate policies he agreed to as Massachusetts governor.
The dynamics of the Republican race are relatively simple. Mitt Romney is the early front runner. He appeals to the business community and the more moderate elements of the Republican coalition. The question to be settled is who will be the more conservative standard bearer to challenge him?
The Iowa Straw Poll, on the strength of some 4,800 votes, vaulted first-place finisher Rep. Michele Bachmann into contention as a prime challenger to Romney. Libertarian and isolationist Congressman Ron Paul finished second. Nobody else farther down the list, which included Tim Pawlenty who dropped out of the race based on a third-place finish, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, John Huntsman or Newt Gingrich has any kind of realistic shot at the nomination.
So it will be Bachmann and Perry who battle it out for the anti-Romney mantle. Both are far right-wingers who appeal to both Tea Party fiscal zealots and evangelical social issues voters. In this contest Bachmann excels at firing up the base with red meat rhetoric. But she will, I believe, not be able to overcome Perry's edge in gubernatorial experience and the kind of country folksiness so valued as authenticity by Republican voters. And make no mistake, Perry is nearly every bit as conservative as Bachmann.
Once the primary season begins Bachmann will likely win the Iowa caucuses. Then Romney will probably take the ensuing New Hampshire primary. In a practical sense, both will need those victories to remain credible. But then Perry will take the South Carolina and Florida primaries on friendly Southern turf and be off to the races. Wins there will take the air out of Bachmann's campaign and leave Perry one on one against Romney. Perry will prevail because in the final analysis Romney is simply not conservative enough for today's Republican electorate. The party veers farther rightward every year and Romney is, in their mind, still tied to the moderate policies he agreed to as Massachusetts governor.
Monday, August 8, 2011
Inevitable Fallout from Debt Deal
First the Republicans in Congress took the debt ceiling process hostage. Then they held out for an all-cuts settlement that follows party orthodoxy. During the weeks of negotiations, investors were evidently not impressed with the deal taking shape. The New York Stock Exchange's Dow Jones Industrial Index fell by 1,000 points.
After President Obama signed it on the last day before the deadline, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) declared with satisfaction, "I'm very happy. I got 98% of what I wanted." Obviously unimpressed, the Dow Jones Industrials fell by another 500 points.
Also clearly unimpressed, Standard and Poore's subsequently downgraded the United States' credit rating from AAA to AA+. This is the first time that has ever happened. Today, the first day the Stock Exchange was open after the downgrade, the Dow fell another 600 points.
So, the Republicans devised a settlement their congressional leader considers almost a perfect picture of how they would like to handle the federal budget going forward. And as a result, the value of American equity assets has fallen by about 18% in a month.
Even the business and investment community, frequently supportive of Republicans, recognizes their ideologically-driven approach to the budget for what it is--something that simply doesn't work, couched within a political strategy that reduces governance to gridlock.
Maybe now will come an opening for a realistic, "balanced" approach that fully addresses the problem? One can only hope, and if not, that the public will remember who crashed the bus when the next election rolls around.
After President Obama signed it on the last day before the deadline, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) declared with satisfaction, "I'm very happy. I got 98% of what I wanted." Obviously unimpressed, the Dow Jones Industrials fell by another 500 points.
Also clearly unimpressed, Standard and Poore's subsequently downgraded the United States' credit rating from AAA to AA+. This is the first time that has ever happened. Today, the first day the Stock Exchange was open after the downgrade, the Dow fell another 600 points.
So, the Republicans devised a settlement their congressional leader considers almost a perfect picture of how they would like to handle the federal budget going forward. And as a result, the value of American equity assets has fallen by about 18% in a month.
Even the business and investment community, frequently supportive of Republicans, recognizes their ideologically-driven approach to the budget for what it is--something that simply doesn't work, couched within a political strategy that reduces governance to gridlock.
Maybe now will come an opening for a realistic, "balanced" approach that fully addresses the problem? One can only hope, and if not, that the public will remember who crashed the bus when the next election rolls around.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)