MY CLASSMATE THE PRESIDENT

…a ‘No Kings Day’ reflection…

 

This song of the schoolyard bully is really very sad

He earned lots of infamy by simply being bad

 

He’d push his way through other kids, sneer at them as he’d pass

But no one had the guts to cross this big pain in the ass

 

With impunity he’d needle kids and throw his weight around

Trip up the unsuspecting and laugh when they hit the ground

 

He always drove the fastest car and clutched the prettiest girl

Brag about his conquests after every single whirl

 

He ridiculed the exchange kid, at school for just one year

We’d always hoped that foreign kid would knock him on his rear.

 

     And there-in lay the problem with which we’d not contend

We’d looked for someone else to stand, our honor to defend

 

The fact is really simple as has always been the case

To confront to a vile bully one must meet him face-to-face

 

But that simple tenet is oft tossed out due to angst and fear

Easier is always: “Step aside, make his path clear”

 

So because we all allowed it, junior tyrant had his way

No one displayed the courage to stand up to his sway.

 

     On graduation evening there were many in the crowd

And I and many classmates received accolades aloud

 

But when the bully crossed the stage, the cheering it did stop

It typified the adage about hearing a pin drop

 

He slunk off in the darkness, no one else to push around

Until I’m sure, he stumbled on the new group that he found.

 

 

Fifty years have come and gone as quickly as a flash

Our class did meet and reconvene, our history to rehash

 

The bully did not make our fest, but he didn’t give a fig

In the interceding years, it seems, he’d found a better gig.

 

     To the horror of his classmates, he’d became our President

Ensconced inside the White House where he wouldn’t pay the rent

 

His bully-ness did not subside, in fact it grew and grew

And though he was our President, he was still the creep we knew

 

He pushed right through our statecraft norms said he was much smarter

Than those who’d paved the road to peace with treaty and with charter

 

He took to subjugating folks with skin of different color

And deftly used the tools he had to divide each from one another

 

He gloried running roughshod over laws from sea to sea

And truthfulness and righteousness and basic decency

 

Surrounded by like-minded folks or those with none at all

He pushed our hallowed nation near a precipice to fall.

 

     But time does what time always does and soon his days were through

We looked at one another not quite knowing what to do.

 

         

A Presidential passage is not a thing to cheer

But somehow this was different, relief exhaled far and near

 

A few of us decided we should go attend the wake

We’d do it out of honor for our alma mater’s sake.

 

     The chapel was but empty as we peeked inside the door

Footsteps of fellow mourners didn’t scratch across the floor

 

The crypt to which they rolled his mass was deep and dark and cold

And soon he’d be forgotten like a story never told.

 

     ‘Twas sad indeed but sadder still is this dogged phrase complete

If  his legacy stays unshared, damned history will repeat.

 

 

Let’s not forget the tragic life that brought such pain and pall

And redouble fearless efforts to encourage good for all.

 

     Looking back, by backing down when he was just a kid

We underwrote the awful things he ultimately did

 

If one of us had glared him down then picked him up with song

Perhaps he’d have found the beauty in simply trying to belong.

 

     Our nation thrives on good will and our care for one another

In joining hands with those disdained – embracing like a brother

 

So hold with your friends those needing love, the sad misunderstood

For only in so doing will this land be truly good.

© 2025

Church of the Open Road Press

CHANGING OF THE GUARD – A NECESSARY NEXT STEP

…because you don’t want your future in my hands…

The view from the mid-point of my seventh decade looks pretty bleak some days.  From where I stand, it appears we have a less-than-competent President backed by an ineffectual Congress all paid for by interests whose love of money outstrips any love of country. (Please note: Some friends may see things differently than I do and that’s entirely okay because that’s how it works in America.)

The other day I counted up the number of letters I’ve sent to the President, members of his administration and leaders in Congress. 211. (Every single one, by the way, has been copied to my social media page.)  I’m fairly certain none of these missives get to the Donald, but there may be a folder somewhere in DC with my name on it.

Still, there’s more I can do, and I’ve decided to do it.

Our little town has a fledgling Democratic Club which I have joined.  It is a small group that hopes to have a positive impact on local issues such as homelessness, water security, zoning/business development, parks and many other things.  Additionally, the group vets candidates for local elective positions – the starting point for folks who may be crazy enough to one day occupy a seat in the state legislature or even Congress.  Conversations we’ve had over the past several months have been engaging and enlightening as well as frustrating and, at times, a bit depressing.  Still, participation makes me feel as if I’m more than simply the person who rants from the sideline (which I still do).

One common concern in our meetings is the apparent lack of engagement of younger folks.  The group acknowledges that the non-retired among us have more limitations on their time and, likely, more immediate family responsibilities.  But, it seems to us that a dozen or so old farts sitting around a room talking about the pros and cons of those individuals wishing to hold local office must be tempered by the reality that the future rests no longer with us, but with a generation of still-working moms and dads.  Indeed, the future belongs to them.

The late House Speaker Tip O’Neill sagely noted that “all politics is local.”  

With that in mind, if your community has a Democratic (or Republican) Club, or an “Indivisible” group, or a Central Committee (all California counties have one for each major political party), consider joining.  You’ll find yourself interacting with other engaged citizens, many of like mind and many who may offer you a broadening, food-for-thought different perspective.  Back in the day, as a fifty-five-hour-per-week school administrator, I found time to serve on my county’s Central Committee. It was refreshing to have a seat at the table with good people who didn’t happen to be educators.

Participation may involve as little as two hours a month but that two hours can be invaluable as you help shape your community’s future by plying your unique knowledge and experience in a venue different from that of your employ.  

Some folks will say that the two major political parties are lost-cause mirrors of one another.  THIS is how you ensure that they are not.  Be advised, however:  If you’re not careful, that two hours could grow to something more.  Note that former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano (later Secretary of Homeland Security) began her political career as president of her homeowner’s association, which on, NPR’s Wait! Wait! Don’t Tell Me! she referred to as “the worst job I ever had in politics.” 

We can all be part of a more positive tomorrow – not just us old farts.

So: Teacher-buddy, realtor, barista, letter carrier, truck driver, administrative assistant, and/or friend from any walk-of-life: Think about where you might invest just a couple of hours in your community’s – and your country’s – future. And please give this some final thought some final thought:  

You can’t possibly want your future in MY hands.

 You want it in your own.

© 2018

Church of the Open Road Press

THE SEA RANCH CONUNDRUM

The Sea Ranch is a several thousand-acre development of gracefully designed homes set above ocean cliffs or nested deep in the coastal woods.   

It used to be a center for logging activities supporting San Francisco’s growth, then sheep property.  Some evidence of that ranching heritage still remains.  California’s Highway 1 – one of the world’s greatest motorcycling roads – ask anyone – bisects the development.  For a ten-mile stretch, small, well-maintained private roads reach into the prairie grasses that top the coastal rim, and amongst those grasslands are ribbons of houses most people I know could not afford to own. 

The Sea Ranch was going to be a modern coastal community located between Marin County’s wealthy enclaves to the south and Fort Bragg’s gritty, working-class outpost to the north.  There’d be grocery stores, hotels, galleries and recreation – all placed on this windswept tableland west of the San Andreas Fault and east of the Pacific.  It would be a play land for the affluent who could, in essence, have it all with them as they left it all behind. At least that’s my rudimentary understanding of it. 

At the time of The Sea Ranch’s origins, private coastal properties could change hands – change from ranching to subdivisions – change from open range and to privatized beaches and bluffs – without much oversight, coordination or discussion of opportunities gained or lost beyond those monetary.  Enter the California Coastal Commission whose existence owes itself to the threat of a widespread locking up of our coastline.  Visionary one time Sonoma County Supervisor, the late Bill Kortum lead a charge suggesting that the coastal expanses belonged to the citizens.  Excess, as it was proposed, needed to be curtailed in the interest of access. 

Many times I have traveled this section of highway thinking how great it would be to stroll along the tops of the bluff with that on-shore breeze whipping at my face.  Signs warned me off in all but a handful of designated access routes to specific postage stamp sized beaches.   

Now, however, because I dropped about a grand on three nights in a beautiful house only steps from the shoreline, I can access over fifty miles of trail with views stretching nearly to the Golden Gate, nearly to Cape Mendocino – the lower 48’s westernmost point – and, one imagines, nearly to Hawaii.  Not bad.

The conundrum is this:  When the land was privately held, cattle or sheep ranchers fenced and gated miles of the coast between highway 1 and the bluffs.   

Riding along on the BMW or Guzzi, I never considered parking at a wide spot, squeezing through the rail fence and traipsing across private property in order to glimpse a section of rocky coastline or roiling sea.  Why, then, should I be upset that a development of privately held homes restricts my access?

I know the answer to this, of course.  The Coastal Commission had it right.  Their argument that the coastline belongs to all and that access is for everyone is just in a socialistic sense.  Perhaps not so in a corner of the world where private holdings bring esteem and demand respect. 

Nevertheless, the kibosh was placed upon such urbane development and a more modest, but certainly quite upscale plan evolved: 

A clubhouse, some preservation of historic buildings, tended and groomed trails and CC&Rs.

From the porch of my mine-for-three-days home I determine that not much could be better than sipping a piping cup of Point Arena’s locally roasted coffee while the morning unfolds before me. 

Buzzards roost nearby. 

Swallows flit here and there. 

A grazing doe slips past. 

I can always hear the sea’s murmur punctuated by the distant bark of harbor seals and the occasional screech of a hungry raptor. 

This is a place where you can take that book you’ve been meaning to read with depth, the one that takes all your best and most focused concentration to fully appreciate, and although interrupted only momentarily by a kit fox carrying off a hapless vole or field mouse as he scampers between your house and the next, finish the book in a deep and satisfying manner.  (Mine happened to be Ian McEwan’s 2005 morality play: Saturday.) 

Later, I watch the afternoon breeze pick up, worrying and bending the coastal prairie grasses to its will. 

Members of the non-migrating herd of deer will soon be out for their evening forage.  Edward, the lab mix, will see them and downshift into his predator mode from behind the picture windows. “Can’t I just have one of them?”  “Sorry, Ed, No.”  The Sea Ranch is a pleasant, controlled place, “and you must be on a leash at all times.” 

The sun sets and the winds calm and the sea air floods the house through the home’s open windows, inviting us out for a moonlight stroll. 

Perhaps there’ll be harbor seals again tonight.

Yeah.  I like this.  But I’m not sure about the fairness of it all.  I think I’ll need to secure this rental for a few days in October, and again in February – perhaps yet again this time next year – to further research my feelings on the matter.

o0o

Accessing “The Sea Ranch”:  Located on California’s legendary State Route 1 about midway between Tamalpais Valley where it leaves US 101 in Marin County and Leggett, north in Mendocino County, where it rejoins it, there are several engaging routes linking the coastal highway with 101.  Get a good map or atlas and explore.

Rental information is readily available.  We secure ours through http://searanchrentals.com/

© 2016

Church of the Open Road Press

EXHIBIT 1: THE LOVE OF MONEY

Plastic shopping bags are little more than a convenient non-necessity.  The discontinuation of their production would not negatively impact the general populous.  There are other ways to haul our groceries home.

The plastic bag industry’s business model centers on the production of something we don’t need, creates refuse issues in communities and along our highways, and results in demonstrable plastic pollution far out at sea.  But because “2,000 California jobs would be at stake” if it passes, “for the sake of our state’s fragile economy,” the ban must be defeated.  Their lobby’s job killer argument demonstrates poor grasp of the term fragile and a sensationally clear disdain for the environment. 

To further argue: “This is not a big issue in my district.  It’s not like I get phone calls from people encouraging me to ban plastic bags…” as did my local state senator, simply means some in the legislature lack the ability to assume a leadership position on something we could all do without. 

Methinks my senator could better serve his constituency as a leader rather than a shill.

© 2013

Church of the Open Road Press

SO YOU WANT TO BE ON A SCHOOL BOARD. WHY?

…Holding Fast to the Personal Agenda

Here are some common reasons for pursuing a position on a local school board:

1.     The superintendent needs to be fired.

2.     I want to ensure that my kid gets the best education possible.

3.     The schools need fixing.

4.     I want to cut waste, fraud and abuse.

5.     This will be my ticket into the political arena where I can run for county supervisor, the assembly and, maybe, statewide office.

6.     I want to take care of the students and the folks we pay to take care of the students.

            There is a correct answer.  Yet, too many candidates for Trustee positions either don’t know the correct answer or, once they assume office, forget why they’re there.

Here’s a closer look at the varied rationale for seeking a seat on the Board of Trustees:

1.            The superintendent needs firing.  A Board Member friend I know opines, “The most important – in fact the ONLY important – thing a Board does is the hiring and firing of superintendents.  "But,” he adds immediately, “Trustees must do their homework about both the disconnect between the current administration and the needs of the students and the establish with as much surety as possible that the new supe can meet the needs better than the old guy did.”  It is painstaking and time consuming.  He adds, perhaps cynically, perhaps realistically: “At best it’s a crap shoot.”

            So you’ve got the perfect superintendent.  Now what are you going to do? 

2            I want to ensure that my child is offered the best education possible.  From that follows:  I will get my child into the classes of the teachers with the best reputations; I will have an avenue to be in the classroom monitoring that teacher’s work with my child; I will have access to the school site’s leadership so that my complains/concerns can move to the front of the line.

            A former Trustee and bicycling buddy tells me: “Once you become a member of the Board, you give up being a parent.”  Sage advice.  Ethical Board membership means Trustees do not throw their weight around on the school site or in the classroom.

            In practice, absent a quorum of members at a calendared Board meeting, a Trustee is elevated to the position of citizen with all of the privileges and limitations that any other citizen has.  Able and competent administrators will protect teachers from irrational demands of expectations of favorable treatment from parents who happen to be trustees just as they would protect staff from the unreasonable expectations of any parent.  Courageous educational leaders lose their jobs all the time because of this.  But it is the right stand to take.

3            The schools need fixing.  Yes, they probably do.  Unless “fixing” is simply replacing one unfavorable practice with one less favorable – not research based, not data driven, not practiced in buildings with similar demographics but better results, then the correct way to effect change is to engage in a collaborative process involving stakeholders with multiple points of view because of the varied experiences they bring to the table.  A Trustee really can have but one point of view and one set of experiences to guide him or her: his or her own.  In order to create measureable growth in a sustainable manner, a Trustee demanding a specific change or a particular program will only serve as a speed bump in the fast lane toward progress.  Better that the leadership takes input from the entire public and the educators engineer the change.  Trustees can scrutinize a recommendation and evaluate the information, data or process by which the recommendation is achieved – they can even participate as an individual member of the public on a specific committee – but the effective Board member will not demand some different outcome simply because he or she can.

4.            Waste, fraud and abuse: if we repeat it often enough, it becomes a false truth that can drive policy.  Are there instances of these three mismanagement stooges?  Certainly.  Are they the prevalent way of doing business?  Probably not.  If they are, the Board should taken action.  If the Board does not, the voters should by firing the Board.

            The truth of the matter is that school districts are highly legislated, adjudicated and regulated institutions.  Budget requirements are clearly defined.  Audits are frequent and rigorous.  Personnel actions are governed by labor law and education code provision, not Board action.  Curriculum material decisions are seriously limited – for better or for worse – by a state screening process.  There is little opportunity for local malfeasance.  And when malfeasance rears its unprofessional head, savvy boards take care of bid’ness by holding Superintendents accountable.

            “But you read about malpractice all the time in the paper!”  Remember the adage “If it bleeds, it leads.”  Along those lines: Schools following the rules do not make news.  In the scope of the decisions made in 1,000 different California school districts and many times that may California school sites, the percentage of bad-apple decisions is remarkably low.  Run for a Board on a platform of eliminating waste fraud and abuse and you’ll likely find yourself twiddling your thumbs quite a bit.  Or ill-advisedly meddling in items one, two or three, above.

5.            This is the ticket to my political future.  Because you what?  Twiddled your thumbs on a school board for four or eight or twelve years?  Sorry, if you’re not dedicated to the following, please find another avenue…

6.            I want to (1) take care of the students and (2) take care of the people we employ to take care of the students.  

Ding.  Ding.  Ding.  Ding.  Ding.  Ding.

            Through a maze of procedural, budgetary, experiential and, yes, political considerations, this is what educational leaders do and this is what School Board members need to ensure happens.

© 2013

Church of the Open Road Press

WHO IS TO BLAME?

If corporate (or, some would argue, Labor Union) big money can buy elections by making up facts and spreading fear and misinformation in campaigns for or against candidates and issues, does that say something negative about the big money – or does it speak to something worse about the electorate? 

If, collectively, we don’t have the time or inclination to separate truth from campaign rhetoric, we cannot blame big money.  The blame rests with us.  Voters can only be “tricked” when they don’t pay attention to the facts.  And if we are being tricked, perhaps we are just too busy or too disinterested to be effective members of a participatory democracy. 

That, or we’d have to believe big money wins because it supports that which parallels the will of the people.

© 2012

Church of the Open Road Press

AMERICAN CULTURAL TRAGEDY: THE DECLINE OF MUSIC IN SCHOOLS

Item:

Line 49 - Band/Music - Eliminate or support by parent donation only [School District Trustee Minutes]

Item:

...music has been cut to the bone at the elementary and junior high school levels; without those schools feeding the high school, there is no program…  [Newspaper Article]

Item:

…no new students will be admitted to the music education program at Chico State in the fall.  The music education option, which aspiring teachers take, is being suspended.  [Newspaper Article]

Item:

…because every dollar has to count, some educational programs that we value, such as music, will draw the short straw.  [Newspaper Editorial]

As a kid who picked up at tuba in seventh grade and never fully put it down, I have been asked to join in the campaign to upend Chico State’s decision suspending the music education program (that's the program that prepares folks to teach music in schools) for the upcoming academic year.  Sorry, I can’t.  Administrators were left with few options.

A Chico Enterprise Record article reported that only 24 students are currently enrolled in the Music Education option at CSU, Chico.  Of those, about 20 are slated to graduate in June.  That number is in dispute.  But what cannot be disputed is that the university administering an undergraduate program for only a handful of students doesn’t pencil out.  So, as crappy as the decision is, it may be the only decision that could be made.

Why?  Recall the laws of supply and demand.  The more widgets a factory can manufacture, the cheaper the widget becomes.  However, when demand for the widget wanes – think buggy whips – it doesn’t matter how cheaply they can be made, there is not market and therefore no need.

Am I comparing dedicated music teachers with widgets or buggy whips?  Not intentionally.  But examining the trustee minutes and the two newspaper articles above, it is clear that the market for music teachers is in - how shall we word this? - decrescendo.

My e-flat tuba from 7th grade

That is ironic, because here’s what we know about music education:

·      Kids involved in music perform at higher levels on standardized tests.

·      Kids involved in music report that they have a greater sense of belonging to a community.

·      Kids involved in music are less likely to engage in gang activity or criminal endeavors.

·      Kids involved in music are more likely to attend and graduate from four-year colleges.  (And individuals who graduate from college earn higher salaries and thus, repay the tax dollars invested more than those who do not graduate a post-secondary institution.)

There’s very little bad that can be said about offering music as part of a comprehensive educational program Kindergarten through twelfth grade.  Except for one thing: 

You can’t test music by filling in bubbles.

If you can’t test it – if there is no measurable result – then there must be no value to it either to the students who must be simply wasting their time in band, to a society which clearly must not benefit from the arts and to taxpayers who demand measurable results for every penny sent to any government entity.

Still, as citizens we are loathe to see any programs we support end of in the ditch along side the highway to austerity.  We demand music, athletics, drama, vocational education, science labs, small class sizes, special education programs, gifted programs, and high test scores for all.  Beyond schools, we insist upon police protection, fire protection, safe roadways, foolproof telecommunications, clean drinking water, adequate sewage treatment, parks, playgrounds, swimming pools, safe air traffic, and, of course, national security. 

We just don’t want to pay for ‘em.  The historic roadmap out of recession has nearly always involved government spending – either treasury dollars or borrowed dollars – on infrastructure and other programs in order to prop up employment and get money circulating through the economy.  Taxes on this recirculation help to retire the debt.

But currently, a tiny, powerful few [an example might be a group known as ALEC] are whipping up a boisterous and willfully ignorant minority – they only need a third of the electorate in states like California – to slam the door on exactly the type of economic policy that would steer us out of the doldrums.  They do this by moving the target of angst from government largesse to government debt to public pensions to a socialist, Kenyan president to whatever wave they can ride until the wave is proven false.  Furthermore, in whining about the "size of government," they force teachers, firefighters, police and other tax contributors out of the work force and into the enlarging pool of those needing government assistance.

The result?  Among many: no money for music in our schools and no need to train the music teachers of our future.

We get what we pay for.  Right now, we are paying for membership in the community of third world nations.  And who is among the losers?  For one, the kid who misses the opportunity to pick up a tuba in Junior High and carry what he learns through a satisfying and productive life.

Resources: 

What ALEC says about ALEC:  http://www.alec.org/

What others say about ALEC: http://alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed

© 2012

Church of the Open Road Press

ELECTION WITH NO PUBLIC DEBATE: WHO LOSES?

In 1960, Richard Nixon and Jack Kennedy sat face-to-face for the first televised presidential debate.  Nixon was said to look nervous and his five o’clock shadow didn’t help.  Kennedy was charismatic.  Being only eight years old at the time, I can’t relate the substance of the debate, but I do recall that Kennedy was declared the winner that evening. 

In every election cycle we are told that the country is at a turning point – a critical crossroad.  2012 is no different.  Nationally, we are slowly crawling back from a monster of a recession and we are winding down two bloody forays into Middle Eastern and Central Asian politics, while necessary domestic programs are going unfunded, schools and infrastructure are crumbling and college kids can no longer afford to attend.  And, of course, too many people are still out of work.  There is plenty to debate.

California’s newly formed Sixth Assembly District encompassing parts of Sacramento, El Dorado and Placer Counties, is a microcosm of America.  Yet no debate is happening.  Why? 

Ms. Gaines

There are three candidates from the two major political parties vying for voter approval in the 6^th AD.  Specifically, the Republican incumbent, Beth Gaines, is facing both a Republican challenger and a Democratic challenger.

Mr. Pugno

The Republican is Andy Pugno, an attorney closely associated with California’s Proposition 8 – the constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage.

Mr. Bronner

 The Democrat is Reginald Bronner, a Naval veteran with experience in high-tech business development, sales and marketing.

The El Dorado County League of Women Voters scheduled a candidate form but was informed by the incumbent that she could not attend due to “a conflict in schedule.”  In Placer County, Sierra Community College in conjunction with the League of Women Voters and the American Association of University Women attempted to schedule a forum and was met with similar response.

Ever since Nixon / Kennedy, debates have devolved into events centered more on style than substance, more on cool than resolve, more on pitch lines and sound bites than solutions.  And, like cynical fans at a stock car race hoping for a fiery collision, commentators guide viewers to those points when a candidate imploded rather than when someone offered, with sparkling clarity, a viable path forward.  Who’d want to subject him or herself to that?

One can only speculate as to why local candidates in a competitive political race find it inconvenient to debate.  Certainly, witnessing what happens to candidates in nationally televised forums must give one pause.  But local races – where, as Tip O’Neill famously said, “All politics is” – are not glitzy mud-wrestling affairs arranged to for spectacle.  Rather, local forums are those councils where the public can hear the candidate and respond in a manner unfiltered by a network’s point of view. 

So perhaps the no-debate ploy is about something else.  Perhaps it is about rigid ideological views that do not really offer solutions to the issues facing the district and the nation.  Perhaps it is about views that cannot withstand thoughtful scrutiny of an opponent.  Perhaps it is about sharing views one doesn’t truly hold in his or her heart.  Or, perhaps the candidate indeed has a dental appointment that just can’t be rearranged.

Enter the individual who wishes to have a substantive discussion on the issues of the day: the one who understands that a vast and moderate middle exists in America, the one who believes that joining hands in more productive than standing ideological grounds.  Without a forum for debate, how are voters to determine which candidate can dig deeper than simply repeating platitudes or signing vacant pledges?

It does seem that those shunning the debate are happy to purchase air time on local media and to place placards throughout the district thinking that voters will pull the lever for the one who has greatest “name recognition.”  To their credit, tapping signs into the ground is a safer bet than going face-to-face with someone who can articulate plans to reemploy thousands, refocus government spending priorities, promote education and foster growth in the region.

Curious, ain’t it?  The bottom line is this:  When there is no forum for discussion of the issues, the only loser is the voting public – a public that should demand better from those holding office.

o0o

Note:  Absent a robust one-on-one-on-one debate, perhaps the next best venue for determining the stances of those running for office is provided on the Internet through their official campaign websites.  Here are links to those for Ms. Gaines, Mr. Pugno and Mr. Bronner.

http://www.bethgaines.com/

http://www.andypugno.com/

http://bronner4assembly.com/blog/

A little scratching around on these sites will tell us what the candidate wants us to know.  If the website has an “issues” button, that’s a pretty good place to start.  Understand, however, that a campaign website is a safe place for anyone to express anything without being subjected to public scrutiny or direct challenge.  For that to happen, folks need to meet face-to-face.  And we need to watch.

© 2012

Church of the Open Road Press