I was completely wooed last night by Barack Obama. He’s like a political rock star.

He says everything I want to hear. When he speaks I feel like I believe his intentions are where they are supposed to be. He shares my values.

Truly, I believe his plan is the best one economically. He’s a long-term thinker. I’ve no interest in short-term profits – I’m interested in long-term economic thinking that looks at the country as a whole and focuses on the middle class.

I was converted completely during his speech.

I was moved. Heartened. I “drank the Kool-Aid.” He speaks to my soul.

I like being called to my higher self. I like the country being called to its higher self.

I ate it up.

Then after Barney ended CNN came on they were talking about Sarah Palin, 44-year-old female Governor of Alaska and mother of five children, being John McCain’s Vice President.

Sarah Palin VP would muddy the waters for me.

I’m emailed Michelle at Scribbit – who blogs as a mother from Alaska – to find out more about this woman. Here’s what Michelle says about her own governor:

Oh we just woke up to the news, they been buzzing with speculation here for weeks the possibility of this happening.

Image source: www.johnmccain.com

Post from: Blisstree

Barack Rockstar (McCain’s VP a Woman?)

If there is one event I would have liked to see at the Democratic National Convention it is the Emily’s List Gala. Yes, even more than Barack’s speech.

You can see a moving photo album of the event here.

Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama sat among all the female Senators and Congresswomen with their supporters on the 80th Anniversary of Women’s Right to Vote.

Even if you didn’t vote for her – I hope there was a place in your soul that was sorry Hillary didn’t win. A place in your heart that wanted a woman to bust through the glass ceiling instead of fill it with 18 million cracks.

I honored the 88th Anniversary of the 19th Amendment (August 26, 1920) – establishing my personal right to vote – by making a $100 contribution to Emily’s List.

Emily’s List puts women in office.

Look Hillary would have been great. I would have cried tears of joy. Really. I would have been so happy for my daughter to see that.

But, there are others. Other women who can have the power to write law come election day. Women who are running for Senate and the House of Representatives who represent, you and I, and our uniquely feminine economic struggles.

We need women to look at every law and say, How is this going to impact women and their families? Is this policy good for everyone or just you? and vote accordingly. Emily’s List helps them get into office.

Join me in celebrating the anniversary of our right to vote by donating to Emily’s List and helping female candidates get elected to the United States Senate and the House of Representatives.

When Women Vote, Women Win!

Post from: Blisstree

Honor Suffrage 88th Anniversary

Top-Down Economics is basically what we’ve been doing since Ronald Reagan’s infamous Trickle-Down Economics.

The theory goes like this - if you give corporations tax breaks and they make big profits they will choose to be generous with their employees, increasing their pay and benefits. This helps the economy overall.

Bottom-Up Economics works exactly opposite. That theory goes like this – if employees are paid more and their benefits are great they are more productive and more creative, thus making the company more profitable and competitive. The more profitable and competitive the company is the better for our overall economy.

I’ll juxtapose two companies everyone knows so you’ll get a clear idea of how each policy effects YOU and then you can decide whether you think top-down or bottom-up is best for your family and better for the over-all economy.

I’ll use Wal-Mart and Google and I’ll use layman’s terms.

Wal-Mart is currently the largest retailer in the entire world. Right now. Despite everything you hear on the news about how terrible our economy might be Wal-Mart isn’t really hurting.

According to The International Herald Tribune, Wal-Mart’s Net income rose 4 percent to $4.096 billion for its fourth quarter ending Jan. 31, 2007, from $3.94 billion a year earlier. That’s in one quarter (3 months) - not one year.

Now I’ve heard that when Sam Walton was alive he operated with the notion that he should take care of the employees who work so hard for him.

But, today Wal-Mart, with all its profits is ALSO one of the biggest users of our welfare dollars because it chooses not to pay its employees enough to eat food and live in shelter.

YOU, The American Taxpayer, “paid a total annual welfare bill of $2.5 billion for Wal-Mart’s 1.2 million US employees in 2003,” according to Inside the Leviathan by Simon Head.
“Less than 40 percent of its employees [had healthcare coverage] in 2003 and 2005—substantially below the average for other large employers and direct competitors; In 2005, a Wal-Mart worker with a family of four would have to pay health care costs equal to 30 percent of their income before receiving most benefits, according to The Center for a Changing Workforce report on Wal-Mart’s use of our Medicaid and SCHIPS tax money.

“Five percent of [Wal-Mart's] Associates are on Medicaid compared to an average for national employers of four percent. Twenty-seven percent of Associates’ children are on such programs, compared to a national average of 22 percent. In total, 46 percent of Associates’ children are either on Medicaid or uninsured.”

Wal-Mart regularly lobbies Congress to NOT raise the minimum wage on the grounds that it would infringe on corporate profits. It also regularly lobbies Congress so that it won’t have to provide health coverage to its employees. McCain says lowering their tax obligation will improve the economy.

It will improve Wal-Mart’s economy because their employees can only afford to shop at Wal-Mart and we’re paying for their employees’ food stamps and healthcare – but will it improve YOUR economy?

My question is – at what billion or trillion dollar mark is Wal-Mart going to feel it has “enough profits” to take care of its employees expenses’ rather than leaving the burden on us – middle-class tax payers?

Conversely, let’s look at Google.

Google, from everything I’ve read, operates from the idea that its employees are the most creative and productive when they are financially secure with great pay, great benefits.

With great pay and great benefits none of the burden is on the tax-payer to pay for fundamental necessities and they have enough money to spend anywhere they like. That’s fantastic for the economy and the tax payer.

Google doesn’t lobby Congress to maintain the minimum wage below the poverty level, because they don’t see any benefit to paying their employees minimum wage. They believe they get the most productivity and creativity out of their employees by paying them more money.

Google even allows employees 20% of their worktime to work on independent projects. Why? Working on their own projects, checking their email, designing the church newsletter or the their kids’ soccer schedule breeds creativity and Google knows they will benefit economically from that.

Benefits abound at Google: They have free gourmet health-conscious cafeterias – hungry employees can’t think. They take care of those pesky chores and time sucks like car washes and oil changes, hair cuts, they pay $500 for takeout food for the first month after your family welcomes a baby, they have a gym, masseuse, a laundry mat, child care and doctors onsite to make their employees’ lives easier.

Google regularly tops the #1 charts for best places to work, including Fortune Magazine’s AND regularly tops the charts for growth and profits – which, is great for everyone’s overall economy – not just theirs.

Look around – does it look like Google’s bottom-up policy’s are hurting their bottom line or increasing it?

Why does Wal-mart not pay their employees enough to live?

Because we, the middle-class taxpayers, let them.

In political science both top-down and bottom-up economic theories have creditbility.

But, in real life – which one makes most sense in the way it’s playing out in our current economy?

This election when we’re talking about the economy and taxes it’s really going to come down to this question – do you want to pay for Wal-Mart to make profits and simultaneously refuse to pay their employees enough to live on?

Vote for John McCain if you think that’s our country’s best bet.

If you think Wal-Mart’s tax margins are “good enough” to start imposing some regulations on how little they are allowed to pay their employees then vote for Barack Obama.

When we raise the minimum wage, require corporations to offer family medical leave insurance and institute universal health insurance that takes families OFF welfare and THAT saves us taxes.

Would you rather be in the “middle” of a top-down or a bottom-up economy?

Which world do you want to live in – a Google World or a Wal-Mart World?

Post from: Blisstree

Top-Down v. Bottom-Up – Economics 101

Did you watch the Democratic National Convention last night?

I watched LIVE with Momocrats and Twitter on my laptop. It was so much fun.

You should join us tonight. Some of those Momocrats are actually at the convention so you can hear what the emotional reaction of the delegates is and what kind of signs they’re handing out.

You can follow my Twitter feed over there on the sidebar.

Or log onto Momocrats and participate in the LIVE discussion there. PunditMom will be there with all her insight.

Yesterday I posted how my vote was up for grabs depending on what promises each candidate makes to women’s economy.

It would be hard to imagine more pro-women, pro-equal pay, than Biden’s speech last night.

I look back on Bill Clinton with fondness. The 1990s didn’t suck.

Though, I have to say I am angrier at him and his sexual escapades than I was when it was actually happening. Probably because I can see how his behavior impacted his wife’s ambitions. As$#@le.

I didn’t know much about Joe Biden, or his family story, before last night.

What a tear jerker.

Family Values contest: let’s see. . .

John McCain left his first wife, and their children, after she was crippled in a terrible car accident while she waited for him for several years when he was a POW and then married his mid-life crisis trophy bride a month later.

OR. . .

Barack Obama who has been married to one woman the whole time and seems to be a loving father to his two daughters

AND. . .

Joe Biden who lost his wife and one child in a terrible car accident when he was elected to the Senate the first time and took the train back to Delaware from Washington every single day to see father his sons. Then he and his sons all proposed to the new Mrs. Biden, who fell in love with the sons as well as him. And they all married her.

Hello! Which “family values” speech are you buying?

Post from: Blisstree

DNC With Momocrats LIVE

Michelle Obama gave a pretty good speech last night. I like her more now. Not that I disliked her before, but you know my loyalties with Hillary and all that.

Anyone else watching the Democratic National Convention?

They played Stevie Wonder’s Isn’t She Lovely after her speech. It was a tad over the top. But, it was pretty good love fest last night.

Barack Obama was beamed in via satellite from Kanas City (Here he is Live) to talk to Michelle and the girls. I was irritated by this stage production, Do you have somewhere better to be than in Denver accepting your party’s nomination Barack?

My husband, Jeremy, says they do this via satellite bit at every convention to build anticipation. I am too lazy to look it up to prove him right or wrong. I think its stupid.

Ted Kennedy spoke and brought everyone to tears. He talked about the future, not of the Kennedy past.

The pundits were complaining the whole time that there wasn’t enough negativity and criticism for the other party.

One news guy actually said, “I don’t think Democrats have proven they are very good at negative campaigning. Republicans are brilliant at it. They win. Democrats have not shown tonight, once again, that they are good at negative campaigning.”

Dear God let it be true that Americans will see that it’s more effective and better for us to focus on what we do want, the hope, the triumph, our abilities, our strength than to focus on the failings of other people with other ideas in other parties.

Personally, I’m so sickened by negative campaigning that I hope Democrats will hold the course. The fewer mentions of how horrible The Republicans are the better.

Every time people buy into it I wonder why my fellow Americans are so stupid and easily Fear Pressured into doing crap they don’t really want to do.

I’m sick and tired of both parties starting every sentence, “I could be more effective if Republicans would just . . . “ or “I would do something about this if the Democrats would just . . . ”

No more. Take responsibility by making it YOUR problem if you’re elected.

. Taking a rigid, unrelenting stance on issues (abortion, etc) is a really easy excuse to do NOTHING.

If I can manage to respectfully and effectively deal with people who think differently than I, who disagree with me, every day – then I expect nothing less from the public officials I elect.

Every American in this country is sick. to. death. of. negative campaigning. It’s really just a politician loophole, a built-in excuse, to not DO anything effectively.

Anderson Cooper kept criticizing that much of the evening “made boring television” – as if the function of government is to amuse newscasters, pundits, and the audience at home.

This isn’t trashy Realty TV Anderson, its Democracy. Where “The People” govern themselves. They have to do “boring” votes and party business at a National Convention cause that’s how Democracy works. The action of our nation consists of boring meetings and boring votes. Next time, I’m sure cable news will lobby for a “producer” to take over “the made-for-TV event.”

Got Perspective?

Post from: Blisstree

Michelle, Isn’t She Lovely?