CLARK KENT'S INBOX October 17th

Sorry for getting this out late (and for not replying to everyone's comments in a timely manner) as I learned yesterday afternoon my ATM and credit cards got jacked. What a mess, but thankfully it's fixed now. I'm running about a day behind and will be playing catch up this weekend. I know, excuses, excuses.

How many watched the debate? How many flipped the channel half-way through to Paris Hilton's New BFF? Either way, I wouldn't judge you. "Lois" and I caught the second part of it and were having fun enjoying the Twitter comments on the bottom of the screen. I get a kick out of Lois when it comes to the election, not that I don't respect her opinions. She does keep informed on issues so she's not just talking trash. What makes me laugh is her vocal reactions and her strong stance on Gov. Palin.

Sitting on the couch watching the candidates talk, or listening to sound bytes on the news, Lois rarely can sit there without bolting forward, and making a comment in a demonstrative fashion. Usually it's something to the effect of, "That's bullsh#@!" She could easily be mistaken as having turrets syndrome, or even an angry football fan reacting to a bad call. I've had beer and nachos spilled on me more than once in these situations.

Lois, also has some strong views on the Republican VP candidate. I've become keenly aware of the amount of work she has on a given day, based on what she says when she walks through the door in the evening. "Did you know Palin only has an IQ of 98?" or, "Guess what. Palin scored below a 900 on her SAT's." Once Lois has shared all her findings, it's only then that I get a kiss and hug (No, one ever asks how my day went - pouty lips). If it's not obscure facts pertaining to the governor's attendance record in elementary school that I hear, then it's an onslaught of emails sent throughout the day with links to Palin's spoofed MySpace profile or flow charts depicting the nominee's thought process in answering debate questions.

Not being able to help myself, I sometimes egg her on by playing devil's advocate. "But Honey, Palin represents us Joe/Josephine-Six-Packs (I'm going to work that into every Friday post until the election, doggonit), and she's a mom who understands you like no other candidate in history?" I sound as innocent as a six-year old on Sesame Street. This immediately sparks a heated response on par with a televangelist's railings about a fiery judgment and the need for donations. Yes, we're a regular old George Burns and Gracie Allen we are.

I jest, but as I said before, she truly is intelligent with test scores and attendance records that far out-distance Alaskan governors. Lois works for Matt Simmons. If you've never hear of him, he's probably one of the most key figures in the oil industry today. Yesterday, he held a get-to-know-you lunch with some of his company's associates to include Lois. During the session he went around the room for introductions and then opened it up for each person to ask a question. In true reporter-like fashion, Lois want to hear Mr. Simmons' thoughts on both Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain's stated energy plans. He then explained in detail the fallacies of both plans concluding that Obama's was naive, but McCain's was exceptionally naive. The three minute summary Lois relayed to me outlining the arguments, we're factual, and just plain common sense (if you'd like to hear it, I'll put Lois on the phone).

There are two points I'd like to make in my drivel. Lois and I essentially agree concerning our choice of candidates (I'm just a stinker), but I've noticed a great deal of hostility in the blogoshere (and elsewhere), stemming from people's extremely polarized positions on their choice for President. What has always baffled me is the mindset some people have in believing a their vicious tirade against someone with a diametrically opposing point of view is miraculously going to win that person over. I've never seen a referee reverse a call after the guilty player punched him in the face. The same principle applies here. If you want to write in Ralph Wiggum for president (see below), fine by me, but don't verbally abuse someone if they question it. I guess I'm of the opinion, that those that appear as zealots for their cause sometimes undermine the credibility of the cause itself.

My other point is this. Politics is politics. No matter who you plan to vote for, right now each presidential hopeful is just that, hopeful. They are going to say whatever they need in order to appeal to voters, which means making promises they can't keep or are impossible to achieve. Using the energy policies as an example, according to Mr. Simmons, with McCain's proposal of increased drilling the ability to build new rigs is not feasible because no one will lend money to construct them, and there are few, if any new drilling sites even being explored beyond what already exists. The Obama position is admirable, but to build the number of nuclear power plants promised over the next decade isn't feasible either because of the time it takes to do this and the lack of materials and resources required of such an undertaking.

In this election, more than any I can recall (except maybe Carter/Reagan), the American people's expectations are so high that the winner will lead them out of our current state of affairs. I believe that will happen, it's just a question of how long it will take. The realities are, however, that even if their choice takes charge, those expectations will not be fully met. Politicians make promises, but when the dust settles, they will bend to the influences of their party, and they will compromise on some initiatives in order to gain the support needed to pass other initiatives. I don't mean to sound cynical, but this is how the balance of power works these days. My hope is that not too many people will become disillusioned when promises are broken, or when change doesn't occur fast enough.

I've rambled enough, but I would like to know you're thoughts (and I will respond, sorry again).

Why do you think people are so defensive in their political positions?

Am I overly cynical in my opinion about the candidates delivering on their promises?

Okay, on to some stuff that's a little more fun, like this little photo I was sent. I'm not necessarily trying to make a statement with it, but who thinks to liken the candidates to different versions of trains? Made me laugh anyway.

Naturally, I'm drawn to anything making light-hearted commentary on the housing situation, so when I saw this hilarious segment on the Colbert Report, I was rolling.

Based on my earlier posts expressing my appreciation for Canadian Health Care (read here and here), I'm adding a new regular feature for the InBox where I'll post the latest examples of ads and emails I've received. It's called... Canada's Concern For My ED!

Hmmmm? Not quite sure what they're trying to convey to me? Any ideas?



And finally....

I have an entire list of blogs to feature, and that list is growing weekly. This week I wanted to talk about Writer Dad. If you haven't already been reading his posts, then frankly, you are missing out. His writing covers a range of relevant topics from fatherhood and family to blogging and social concerns. Writer Dad, aka Sean, and his wife (see her blog, Namas Daisy) have been running a preschool for some time, but have made the decision to move on to pursue writing full-time. Already Sean, has authored a innovative concept of children's books called Wee Books. This same out-of-the-box thinking is evident in his unique perspectives on conventional topics. What I enjoy is his mature writing style that fluidly conveys emotions in a manner readers instantly connect with. There is an almost Zen-like quality that has a calming effect as you breath in the thoughts expressed in his posts. Take time to get to know Writer Dad. It's worth it.

Enjoy your weekend. God bless you, Plumbers of America!