Mentally Replaying: last night's debate


So I caught the debate last night on KCRW and then on TV - CBS to be exact (though I think more stations carried it). I think you can listen to it at KCRW.com.

It was pretty interesting for many different reasons but has *REALLY* brought me to an impasse. I don't like the recall, I think that it's bad policy, and is not, repeat NOT democracy. It's mob rule.

For that reason I was planning on going the standard Democrat route by voting no on the recall and then voting for Cruz Bustamante as a replacement for Davis. I debated not voting for anyone in that section but I figured I may as well since I can still remember the last time we had a gubernatorial vote here I was reading the ballot guide and accidently turned to the page with candidates for Lt. Governor. The first one was Bustamante and since I thought it was the page for Governor I was perfectly ready to vote for him for governor. I figured it out eventually and marked him as my candidate for the office he was actually running for.

In that vote I also reviewed all the folks running for governor and discovered I liked Peter Camejo best.

So last night during the debate I was listening closely to all of the candidates because they reveal a lot more than their own plans for the state. Here's what I've learned:

1. Arnold is a moron.

2. Arianna should be invited to every single debate for office either in this state or the nation, or any other place she feels like.

3. Tom scares the hell out of me. But at least he knows what he's talking about.

4. Cruz has an interesting deep voice and doesn't like Gray much. Oh, and he's extremely well versed in politics (which is different from governance).

5. Peter is the muthafuckin' man!!!!! Preach it brutha, PREACH IT!!!!!!!!!!

1) I can't believe anyone takes Schwarzeneggar seriously. He wasted a lot of oxygen telling everyone that he's pro-business, pro-children, pro-poor people and pro-any other group that came up. But barely gave any indication of what he intended to do to help them. Except, of course, to give great big incentives to big businesses to move to or stay in California.

I've surfed by MSNBC and CNN.com and the polls there show Schwarzeneggar "winning" the debate with more than 50% and Bustamante and McClintock running neck and neck in the teens. Seriously, were these people watching the same debate?

Of course not, they just read the stories on MSNBC or CNN or watched the evening news. Which all noted the sniping Arnold and Arianna got into but never pointed out the actual positions anyone holds except in the most superficial ways. But seriously, quipping that you know what role you have in your next movie for the person who made a dire accusation of how you treat women is indicative of a small, uninventful mind. If Arnold got into an argument in Sacramento with state legislators is it all going to come down to some witty remark? How utterly juvenile.

2) I've thoroughly enjoyed listening to Arianna get into the thick of it on Left, Right and Center (Fridays at 230pm and 7pm on KCRW 89.9FM and KCRW.com). She doesn't step lightly around issues she disagrees with and her debate is a little like a pro-wrestler stepping into a boxing match with a folding chair and flamethrower.

This is why I feel like I can't vote for her. While I simply adore her as a pundit, folks in office have to be mediators as well as enforcers and not playing well with others is a bad thing. But if anyone were paying attention they would have noticed that not only was she sniping at Schwarzeneggar for his misogyny she was also tearing him apart for being simply ignorant of the numbers that make and shape California, of inviting business interests to California with no attention to the recent piracy and collusion of big business perpetrated against California and elsewhere in the nation.

While McClintock and Bustamante - consummate politicians - quote numbers only so often, Huffington and Camejo threw them around like crazy. I don't recall Schwarzeneggar having quoted any numbers. For my part, being able to recall studies, polls, taxes and census numbers in precise detail tells me that you know what you're talking about and that you're paying attention. I know politicians don't like quoting numbers because a) they'd rather issue platitudes and b) "it'll confuse the voter." But I greatly admire the folks who can learn the numbers, decipher what they mean (or come up with a consistent interpretation), and aren't afraid of explaining how their policy is based on the realities around them. Whereas most politicians like to give off the feeling of "trust me I know what I'm doing," independents usually say "these are the numbers, they show we need this and that and I'm going to make sure we get it."

So Arianna's role in the debate was to keep people honest and on the ball. She also shot at McClintock and Bustamante for issues that would not be the best for people. She did interrupt Camejo a couple times, but it seemed so that she could agree with him and take it to another level. I love that in this format she could tear into people's positions and demand that they explain themselves. Not only did they have to explain their platforms, they had to know enough about the situation to make clear that their plan was the best available. Also, this was in a format where they couldn't escape. It wasn't some newspaper editor writing up an opinion column that the candidate could just avoid, it was sharp, pointed jabs in front of a live camera and mics.

God, we need so much more of that. Since we can't interview the candidates for their future jos, then why not a proxy? Keep it up, girl!

3) I don't have much to say about Tom McClintock. He's intelligent, knows his shit and clearly has a lot of influence working for him. I just happen to disagree with nearly everything he says (though he did promise moments after assuming the office of Governor he would roll back the insane car registration fees).

He's very decisive and strong, which is probably why he's been polling third among the top five candidates. Just... you know... I disagree with his positions.... He's anti-gun control, reproductive rights, gay rights and so on. His solution to the current fiscal crisis would be to slash social services. Even more. *recoil*

4) If Peter Camejo weren't running I'd be happily in the Cruz Bustamante camp. He knows what he's doing, he knows how to carry out mandates, he knows how to allocate money and the biggest skeleton in his closet is money from Indian gaming. Someone explain to me how this is a problem above and beyond accepting contributions from any lobby? (Someday I'll go into how much I dislike the dialogue about special interest lobbies.)

For the first time that I can remember, ever, it's not a matter of going through a slew of candidates and trying to decide on one that smells less bad, but in fact I have two candidates that I can't decide between because I like them both a lot.

Oh and Cruz has a lovely deep voice.

5) Finally. Peter Camejo. I just cannot say enough good things about this guy. I agree with almost everything he said. He has a firm stance on several issues, even the ones that I, in my waffle-y liberalness, hesitate to take a position on. He knew his shit and wasn't afraid to talk about raising some taxes - he pointed out that today the wealthiest 5% of California pay 7% in taxes, while everyone else pays 9%. It's time that they pay their fair share.

He's for universal health care, he's for living wages, he's pro-choice and for labor rights. He was also the only candidate that I can recall speaking for civil liberties and promising to oppose their loss in favor of dubious increases in security.

It is an absolute crime and a farce that he barely even registered as a warm body in the debate, according to the media. And while the Internet polls show Arianna trailing behind Cruz and Tom at roughly 10%, Peter Camejo is coming up dead last with about 6%. Gah. Who watched the damned debate? Certainly wasn't the people voting on the "winner." Every single story I've read on the main news outlets just mentions that he was their never, ever offers any of his quotes. You have to go to the Mercury News (a paper for the Bay Area) to find any media attention for him.

Now, apparently the League of Women Voters doesn't want Camejo to to continue in the debates. I have no idea why. Can anyone enlighten me? It's my firm belief that this state, and indeed the nation needs a greater breadth of political parties. The big two are engaged in an ugly death dance where they slowly become one in the midst of decaying masses of unintersting and uninspired platitudes. Why can't anyone else see this? Why aren't we jumping at the chance to see other people's ideas? The grand old party and boring old party have had their go and their only solutions to new problems is the same tired ideas that created the new problems in the first place.





So, anyway. I walked away from the debate feeling all kinds of warm fuzzies for the left and a candidate that is serious about what he wants for the people. Then I walked back into Reality and read the newsites and realized that Schwarzenegger is still a front runner and that one liners will get you more votes than a sound concept of governance. So I took a look at the Political reality (which is different from real Reality) and noted that I may just have to vote for someone as a "no" vote on someone else.

Gah. I hate that position. I'd much rather vote for someone because I like them and agree with them even if they haven't got a snowball's chance than just going with "the lesser evil." But this time I'm torn. It's not likely that it will come down to just one vote, but the Green party is gaining major ground on the Democratic party (5% of the vote last November) and that could be enough to hand the vote to Schwarzenegger.

In 2000 I didn't see much of a difference between the two presidential frontrunners (ok, Gore had some intelligence, but I still didn't agree with him) and so I voted for Nader and figured if he split the vote (which he actually did, the vote for Nader in Florida would have been more than enough to cruise Gore into the White House with no legal wrangling) then maybe, just maybe the Dems would take that as a wake up call. Of course they kept sleeping until last November and then they spent the last year in the confused stumbling of someone who's half awake. So fuck 'em. I ain't got time for 'em.

But it's not like my vote would be wasted on Bustamante.... Gah. If only California had a system for giving campaign money to partyies who get a certain percentage of the vote, the way the nation does. If Nader had gotten 5% of the vote in the nation, the Green party would be a nationally recognized and funded party.

Anyway. I've wasted too much time here. Have to get back to that Spanish real estate site.