Real March Madness – Indiana Says No To Leadership & Open Mindedness

Indiana Legislature Tells The NCAA, NFL, NBA, Eli Lilly, GenCon, Amazon, Salesforce, YPO, The Chamber of Commerce and Others to Take a Hike

Really? Is this what we elected a super majority of Republicans to do? Apparently, the leadership decided it made sense to push through the “Religious Freedom Act”. I wrote a piece called “It’s 2015: Where Have All The Leaders Gone?” last week, I had no idea how timely that was. Here is a recent story on the issue.Indiana closed for business

Indiana House OKs controversial religious freedom bill

The basic argument of those in favor of these laws seems to be quite weak. This post discusses the fact that the language is very similar to existing law at the Federal level and in the state. If that is so, why is it needed?

Indiana’s So-Called ‘Right to Discriminate’ Law Appears Very Similar to Existing Federal Law

I have yet to hear or read a strong argument in its favor. This is an issue drummed up by those wanting to drum up issues and make a seemingly principled stand on what other people do in their private lives. The hypotheticals they use like a caterer who does not want to serve a gay wedding are simply dumb. If any business like that really does not want to get someone’s business for any reason, they could simply make their bid not competitive and lose out to others. The idea you need a law to turn away business is the very example of conservatism gone amuck.

One of the more ridiculous arguments for a change in the language put forth was “A House committee last week tried to assuage the concerns of some business interests, including the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, with an amendment that exempts employers from any lawsuits brought by employees under the legislation.” They completely miss the point.

Have any of these people voting for this considered what this legislation actually permits? What if a Muslim shop owner decided their religion prevented them from serving Christians or Jews? Or Visa versa? Under the language of this legislation, that would be permitted wouldn’t it? How about another example, where a restaurant owner believes adultery is against their religion and refuses to allow people they suspect of committing it to dine in their establishment based on their religious conscience. How about couples living together in sin, unmarried, against the teaching of an owners religion. Who gets to decide? The idea that small government conservatives would put into place a framework for the state to arbitrate these questions strikes me as worse than counter intuitive.

And while I do not agree with much of what passes for journalism on MSNBC, this story was well done on putting this in perspective nationally and why this fight is not only wrong but in the end will cause damage to Indiana and ultimately will fail – Why ‘religious freedom’ laws are doomed

The bottom line is why do we have such an activist state government that feels it necessary to make a law like this? Starting with Governor Daniels and continued under Governor Pence, the state has done a great job of attracting businesses and rebuilding the economy in spite of the ridiculous headwinds from Washington. Indiana has a great track record in this regard, especially relative to its neighbor states of IL and MI. So why risk that momentum and progress now?

Consequences:

The big table top game convention that brings 56,000 people and $50 million to the State and is Indianapolis’ second-largest convention, is threatening to relocate its massive late-summer annual event to another city if Gov. Mike Pence signs the controversial “religious freedom” bill into law added in a letter to the Governor “Legislation that could allow for refusal of service or discrimination against our attendees will have a direct negative impact on the state’s economy, and will factor into our decision-making on hosting the convention in the state of Indiana in future years,” GenCon CEO Adrian Swartout said Monday in a letter to Pence.

GenCon threatens to exit Indy over ‘religious freedom’ measure

The Backlash to the Anti-Gay Backlash: “Religious Freedom” Bills Fail, As More People See What They’re Really About

My question is: how long can an organization like the NCAA or a company like Eli Lilly or Amazon who keeps expanding here stand by and do business as usual in such potentially hostile environment to their employees, customers and constituents. Many of my CEO friends around the world in Young Presidents Organization (YPO is a group of over 22,000 CEOs with a combined $6 trillion in revenue and 15 million employees) have been sending messages to the effect of “REALLY Smoke, what kind of state do you live in?” In the case of Arizona, Governor Jan Brewer vetoed similar legislation when confronted with the uproar of the NFL (and Super Bowl pullout) and the business community. Governor Pence, do you think we are immune to this? Do you think you are standing on principle? If so it is the wrong one.

How long until the NFL pulls the combine? How many NCAA tournaments do you think we will land going forward. Oh and by the way, what great timing Legislature to put Indiana in the national spotlight during March madness.

Conservatives Against Close Mindedness

Yes, one can be a conservative and be completely opposed to this kind of legislation and behavior. In fact, it is the opposite of true conservatism. This is government intervention at its worst. I’m a long time supporter of conservative causes and of many Republicans, who cannot reconcile this. For example, I whole-heartedly supported the Indiana legislative takeover led by Mitch Daniels and others that was mainly about fixing the education system in Indiana. The fact is the Teachers’ Union had a lock on the legislature and a group of like-minded business people and conservatives got together and supported state legislative candidates and made them competitive for the first time. This led to the current makeup of the legislature here. And there are many good things that have come out of that takeover. That said, this is not one of them.

In fact, it makes me want to put a fund together of like-minded people to knock off the knuckleheads who voted this legislation into law.   While I’m glad the Democrats (and 5 brave Republicans) all voted against this, I certainly don’t want to see the teacher’s union back in control preventing all kinds of experimentation and change in our troubled education system, but I also don’t want to see the current crop of “leaders” in place. Is there not a sensible center? How about a group of fiscal conservative, libertarian minded folks who can knock off the current group and create the kind of government that this state and its people deserve?

Who is with me?

Supporting the “Religious Freedom Act”:

Voting Yes:

Republicans: Arnold, Aylsworth, Bacon, Baird, Behning, Borders, Bosma, Braun, Tim Brown, Burton, Carbaugh, Cherry, Cook, Cox, Culver, Davisson, Dermody, DeVon, Fine, Friend, Frizzell, Frye, Gutwein, Hamm, Harman, Heaton, Judy, Karickhoff, Koch, Lehe, Leonard, Lucas, Mahan, Mayfield, McMillin, McNamara, Miller, Morrison, Morris, Negele, Nisly, Ober, Olthoff, Price, Rhoads, Richardson, Schaibley, Slager, Smaltz, Milo Smith, Soliday, Speedy, Steuerwald, Sullivan, Thompson, Torr, Truitt, Ubelhor, VanNatter, Washburne, Wesco, Zent, Ziemke.

Democrats: None.

Voting No:

Republicans: Beumer, Clere, Eberhart, Kirchhofer, Saunders.

Democrats: Austin, Bartlett, Bauer, Charlie Brown, DeLaney, Errington, Forestal, GiaQuinta, Goodin, Hale, Kersey, Klinker, Lawson, Macer, Moed, Moseley, Niezgodski, Pelath, Pierce, Pryor, Riecken, Shackleford, Vernon Smith, Stemler, Summers, Wright.

EXCUSED (not sure why you can be excused from something like this) Dvorak, Harris, Huston, Lehman, Porter, Wolkins.

At the very least, the businesses that choose to not serve Gays or Muslims or Jews or Adulterers or whatever this bills proponents and the supposed beneficiaries of it are really after, should be required to place stickers that get applied to the front door of their establishments and to be put on an easy to find list on the web. Those who think this is some great move to respect individual’s religion don’t get to have it both ways – The ability to discriminate based on your conscience AND the ability to remain anonymous. You may well choose to not serve someone out of your religious conscience under this law, but we don’t need a law to choose not to do business with you.

 

3/29 UPDATE: Well its been quite a week and Indiana has taken a beating on the national and international stage. Based on everything I’ve read including the law itself (here), this explanation in the Weekly Standard and a balanced analysis in the Star (here) and this lawyers blog post (here) among other things, I stand by my remarks above.   One thing I’ll add, the fact that similar laws exist around the country does not mean they are right.  There are so many laws on the books that may have made sense at one time or another, but today make no sense.  The attempt to balance an individuals right to practice their chosen religion with the basic right to not be discriminated against is not difficult in my mind.  No one has the right to discriminate for any reason.   Governor Pence, that was the right answer on today’s  This Week show with George Stephanopoulos.

Aside from that, the shear political ham handedness of the Indiana Republican leadership (who I supported and elected) is breathtaking.  Every lead in to the Final Four this weekend will have this issue front and center (assuming the NCAA does not pull it at the last minute).  The damage being done economically and reputationally to our state will take many years to overcome. And why?  What compelling reason or case was there that drove this?  You who practice politics for a living, have no excuse.   The damage to my business, my friends, and to my state of over 25 years gives me a high level of motivation to work to get you out of office.

 

April 4 Update:  An excellent post #RFRA firestorm overview…@CarlyFiorina ​ has it right. “Creating an Artificial Divide in Indiana

Channel Conflict: 3 Tier Battles Heat Up – Stinging Defeat in KY Raises Questions

The headlines and press statements around some of the latest beverage alcohol industry channel conflict are extraordinary and gaining attention across the country.

A new craft brewery is opening up every day, adding to the over 3,000 currently operating in the USA (Brewers Association).   There are 100s of new craft distilleries that have opened up over the past few years with many more in the works (American Distilling Institute). There are more than 7,000 wineries as well (Wines & Vines).

This buds for you

All this growth in new entrants is the result of renewed consumer interest in trying new things. The Millennials have driven much of the new growth and vibrancy. It’s an exciting time in the beverage industry. That said, every large-scale established consumer brand across multiple industries is trying to figure out what to do and how to keep their base, grow it and remain relevant.   Anheuser-Busch Inbev was roundly criticized for their “anti-craft” beer advertisement for Budweise

r during the Super Bowl. As I wrote about, this was them playing the hand they hold and making the best for a giant brand in decline.

These issues are a lot more complex than they appear and have interesting and changing industry alliances. I am constantly asked (last night included) why the laws are the way they are, by consumers and business people who are not from the industry. Here is a brief explanation:

The simple answer is the current legal and regulatory framework in the US is the result of two Constitutional Amendments. The first one was to ban all alcohol aka Prohibition (18th Amendment in 1919). The second one was to repeal Prohibition (21st Amendment 1933). To pass a Constitutional Amendment the Congress must pass it with a 2/3 majority vote in both houses and then it goes to the 50 states and must pass ¾ of the statehouses to become ratified.   A very high bar indeed. Prohibition was a national disaster of epic proportions. However, it was created in response to some significant excesses by the industry and public. A lot of the excesses were blamed on what is known as “Tied-Houses”, whereby the brewers owned the taverns. The drunken excess of many in the public was attributed to the brewers have a direct interest in selling as much beer as possible and controlling the point of consumption. The saying “There is no such thing as a free lunch” came from this era. The brewers would give away free sandwiches at the taverns they owned. Sounds good, but they would salt these sandwiches excessively so that the patrons would drink more beer.

Whether you agree or not that “tied houses” were the root of all evil, this was the majority view when in 1933 the nation’s failed experiment in Prohibition came to an end. Even though it was clear to most that this government intrusion into industry was a disaster, there were still large numbers of anti-alcohol constituents throughout the land. The compromise to get the 21st Amendment passed was to allow each state the absolute right to regulate the sale and distribution of alcohol within its boarders. The 21st Amendment does not have an opinion on tied houses or any other aspect of how the industry does business. The Federal Alcohol Administration Act did spell out specifics on regulations of the industry to insure the revenue and to protect consumers. It did not however, spell out any specifics regarding a “3 tier system”, but rather defers to the 21st Amendment that in turn defers to the states.

IMG_6572

Each state proceeded to set up its own set of laws and regulations.   There are 50 states and 50 sets of laws that while some may resemble each other, none are identical. Layered onto the specific statutes and regulations are the interpretations by alcohol boards or chairmen and the courts.  The most common way in which the states addressed the tied house issue was to legislate a middle tier (wholesaler) to be a buffer between the suppliers and the retailers. This is what is commonly referred to as the 3 tier system. There have always been some states that allowed brewers to own wholesalers, though this was the exception.

In the case of Kentucky’s new law, Anheuser-Busch Inbev has owned distributors there for more than 40 years and had attempted to buy a 3rd. That prompted the wholesalers to attempt to stop them and when other means failed, it ended with this new legislation not only not allowing them to buy the new distributor, but also forcing them to sell their existing businesses. I have no idea of how the courts will view this, but from the sound of it, ABI will not go quietly.

I can’t help but think the latest turn in the 3 tier beverage alcohol industry channel conflict is an example of overreaction that will do nothing but cause further escalation. When one considers all the new brands that have launched and keep launching in beer, spirits and wine and the need for each to find ways to market, it is clear that broad based full line distributors provide a viable route to market for many. All of the main distributors have giant books of brands now, and they serve some very large suppliers and many smaller ones well. In many cases they serve these needs of smaller brands by creating specialty sales divisions. They do not serve every brand well, nor can they. This has created market conditions in most states where a new crop of smaller start up distributors have emerged, primarily handling specialty or craft brands. Where specialty/craft distributors have emerged, they have become a necessary escape valve for small and new brands getting distribution to retail. In markets that allow it, and many states have provisions up to a certain size, craft breweries can self distribute. This is expensive but a necessary option in cases where there are no viable distributors to carry a new brand. Stone Brewery in San Diego and Sun King in Indiana seem to be examples of self-distribution that has been successful. I wonder if this will become more prevalent with spirits as the number of craft distilleries grows.

2015-01-21 11.18.45  IMG_6561The current approach, though ugly at times, has worked to provide a route to market for a thriving craft community.   The pressure to get new brands to market is only going to increase. It is unclear to me where the craft community will end up better off – with strict laws that don’t allow suppliers to own distribution (of any size) or with looser laws that give options. I tend to think most small/new brand will end up supporting a more flexible system, but the bigger brands, that are doing well in the traditional 3 tier system, will support the stricter system.

It may be that there are simply too many competing interests to work out viable solutions to everyone’s satisfaction on these issues. It would certainly be better for the industry if there were agreement as opposed to legal or legislative fights. ABI is a powerful entity as are all the major suppliers. Poking them in the eye with a local legislative win, may end up being a case of winning the battle but losing the war in some ways. It is unclear to me that the KY law actually helps craft brewers or simply hurts ABI or it it even does that. ABI can still control largely the activities of an independent distributor, as they have been able to do, in many other states. What is clear is that this KY battle is not the end to this fight.

It will be interesting to see how this continues to play out. Love to hear your comments or questions. Cheers! Smoke

————————————–

Smoke has worked in all 3 tiers of the industry, built beer wine and spirits distributors, owned a craft brewery, a winery, and multiple craft spirits brands.  He built the leading technology for pricing between suppliers, distributors and retailers. He also represented the WSWA as Chairman & President and the Brewers Association on the Government Affairs Committee.

————————————-

A Former Wrestler’s Open Letter To The International Olympic Committee & Olympic Sponsors. Save Olympic Wrestling!

Dear International Olympic Committee & Olympic Sponsors

cc: Friends of Wrestling,

Your decision today clearly upset a large number of Olympic fans around the world.  While we who are not privy to all of the issues you must grapple with internally, cannot know exactly what led to your decision announced today to drop wrestling from the 2020 Olympic games, it is clear you have miscalculated on at least one front.  To wit, wrestling is one of the toughest sports ever invented and anyone who has wrestled at any level or has been close to wrestling can tell you… wrestlers are a tenacious lot.  In fact, we don’t give up.  The level of protest you can expect from this community will surely come as a surprise to all of you.

There three main reasons why the Olympics will be diminished without wrestling:

1. Wrestling, a truly international sport, has been around since pre-historic times and was an important part of Greek culture when the Olympics got its start –

According to WIKIPEDIA:

In the Ancient Near East, forms of belt wrestling were popular from earliest times.  A carving on a stone slabe showing three pairs of wrestlers was dated to around 3000 BC… A portrayal of figures wrestling was found in the tomb of Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum in Saqqara dating to around 2400 BC.  Another early piece of evidence for wrestling in Egypt appeared circa 2300 BC, on the tomb of the Old Kingdom philosopher Ptahhotep…. Greek wrestling was a popular form of martial art in which points were awarded for touching a competitor’s back to the ground, forcing a competitor out of bounds (arena).  Three falls determined the winner. It was at least featured as a sport since the eighteenth Olympiad in 704 BC. Wrestling is described in the earliest celebrated works of Greek literature, the Iliad and the Odyssey.   Wrestlers were also depicted in action on many vases, sculptures, and coins, as well as in other literature. Other cultures featured wrestling at royal or religious celebrations, but the ancient Greeks structured their style of wrestling as part of a tournament where a single winner emerged from a pool of competitors.   Late Greek tradition also stated that Plato was known for wrestling in the Isthmian games.

When the Olympic games resurfaced at Athens in 1896, Greco-Roman wrestling was introduced. After not being featured in the 1900 Olympics, sport wrestling was seen again in 1904 in St. Louis; this time in freestyle competition. Since then, Greco-Roman and freestyle wrestling have both been featured, with women’s freestyle added in the Summer Olympics of 2004.

2. Wrestling has a tight knit passionate community of participants and followers globally, who greatly value and honor the Olympics.  Wrestling does not have a professional wrestling option as many other sports.  Unlike many other sports, the Olympics are the highest and most important venue for wrestling.  Many other sports have other higher levels (professional ).  All US (and international) wrestlers who got our start after him, grew up idolizing Dan Gable and his perfect performance (no point ever scored against him throughout the games) in the 1972 Olympic games.  I had the privilege of attending Dan Gable’s Iowa Intensive Training Camp back in 1983.

Smoke with Dan Gable in 1983

3.  Wrestlers and their friends have significant influence in today’s society.  It is ironic that the day the IOC chose to drop wrestling happens to be wrestler and greatest US President, Abraham Lincoln’s birthday.  We will use that influence to do anything in our power to change this short sighted decision.  Whether the wrestling greats like Dan Gable or the many others who have gone on to excel in their professional pursuits, we will work together to fix this.  Here are but a few of the well known Americans who wrestled (from the National Wrestling Coaches Association):

U.S. PRESIDENTS

Chester Arthur Calvin Coolidge Dwight Eisenhower

Ulysses S Grant Andrew Jackson Abraham Lincoln Teddy Roosevelt William Howard Taft

John Tyler

 

 

U.S. SENATE

The late John Chafee (former senator RI)

Lincoln Chafee (former senator RI)

Chuck Hagel ( Nebraska )

John McCain ( Arizona )

The Late Paul Wellstone ( Minnesota )

 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Brad Glass

Greg Ganske (Iowa )

Jim Jordon (Ohio)

Jim Leach ( Iowa )

Jim Nussle ( Iowa )

The Late Carl Albert (Former Speaker of the House)

Dennis Hastert ( Illinois ) (Former Speaker of the House)

 

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

Donald Rumsfeld

Frank Carlucci

 

WHITE HOUSE STAFF

Ari Fleischer

George Stephanopoulos

 

ACADEMY AWARD WINNER

John Irving

 

ACTORS

Nate Parker

Mario Lopez

Ashton Kutcher

Tom Cruise

Billy Baldwin

 

BUSINESS LEADERS

Rocky Aoki, Benihana

Scott Beck, Boston Market

James Bigger, Nestlé

Dan Cathy, Chic-Fil-a

Stephen Friedman, Goldman Sachs and Cornell

Ron McGruder, Olive Garden

Edward Rust, State Farm

Arthur Rutzen, Wells Fargo

MILITARY LEADERS

Military leaders

Denny Benchoff

Greg “Pappy” Boyington

Charles C Krulak

George Patton

Al Rushotz

Norman Schwartzkopf

ATHLETES

NFL

Stephen Neal – New England Patriots

Antonio Garay – San Diego Chargers

Davin Joseph – Tampa Bay

Ronde Barber – Tampa Bay

Joe Condo – Oakland

Chris Colley – Washington

Ray Lewis – Baltimore

Lorenzo Neal – San Diego

Donnie Edwards

Kelly Gregg – Baltimore

Bryant McKinnie – Minnesota

David Patten – New England

Adam Vinatieri – Indianapolis

Ricky Williams – Miami

Coy Wire – Atlanta

Roddy White – Atlanta

Ronnie Brown – Miami

Matt Roth – Cleveland

Mike Patterson – Philadelphia

Luis Castillo – San Diego

Jim Nance – New England

Brand Benson – NY Giants

Mike Reid – Bengals

Jeff Richardson – NY Jets

Tiki Barber – NY Giants

Tedy Bruschi – New England

Larry Czonka – Miami

Bob Golic – Cleveland

Mike Golic – Philadelphia

Carlton Haselrig – Pittsburgh

Bo Jackson – Oakland

Matt Millen – Oakland

Warren Sapp – Tampa Bay

Mark Schlereth – Denver

Chuck Noll – Pittsburgh

Curley Culp – Kansas City Chiefs

At the Olympic Wrestling Trials in Indianapolis in 2004

US Olympic Wrestling Trials - 2004 Former Cornell Wrestlers at Olympic Trials 2004

And if I could list all the non-American’s I would.  Wrestling is truly an international sport like few others.

Here is a NPR clip on the Turkish Wrestling response… an example of reaction around the world

IOC, I believe you will listen to reason so long as it is delivered by your sponsors.  These sponsors are global companies most of which are based in wrestling countries as are their customer.  The global partners of the Olympics include (along with their twitter handle):

Coca-Cola   https://twitter.com/cocacolaco

P&G  https://twitter.com/ProcterGamble

General Electric  https://twitter.com/generalelectric

DOW   https://twitter.com/DowChemical

McDonalds  https://twitter.com/McDonalds

Panasonic  https://jp.twitter.com/panasonic

Samsung  https://twitter.com/Samsungtweets

Omega  https://twitter.com/omegawatches

Visa  https://twitter.com/Visa

#saveolympicwrestling

For the Friends of Wrestling:

Here is the petition to re-instate wrestling into the Olympics.. please sign it.

Sign the Petition

If you are really motivated, tweet about it, mention the sponsors on twitter and worst case if we do not get support, take your business to other companies who are not supporting the IOC and this short sighted move.

Thanks and Kind Regards,

J. Smoke Wallin

former Cornell Wrestler, Bayshore HS Wrestler

Freshman Year Wrestling at Bayshore High School

Cornell Wrestling Team 1985

Fiscal Cliff – Lack of Leadership in Washington – calls for a bit of “grace”

In our WISE (Wine Industry Sales Education) class on Public Speaking with world renowned public speaking coach Linda Spillane, we all had to write a short speech.  Anitra wrote and delivered a touching and compelling commentary on the current lack of leadership among our major political parties and politicians.  Our whole group thought it was important and compelling given what is going on in Washington.  Here is her talk… let me know what you think.

 

 

Family Predictions… 2012 Outcomes

So, we don’t do a lot of politics here, but occasionally will weigh in on what is going on or an important event.  Today is one of those important events – the US Elections.  I thought it might be fun to ask around a few of my family members what their predictions are going into today and also share a few thoughts of my own.  You will note I have family with widely divergent views to my own, but in the spirit of this great nation, and the true purpose of debate…  “not victory, but progress” – I share a few of them here with permission:

———

First, my prediction:

Romney wins in a landslide. All those normal folks who were afraid of the drone slinging pres/gov and would not answer pollsters, actually vote their conscience.  That is, for a smaller, less intrusive government led by a moderate smart successful caring  person, who did what he had to do to get the nomination.  The country moderates back to a post ww2 equilibrium of about 20% fed gov spend of GNP and taxes. Balanced.   This fixes the problem. Yes there are some sacrifices re various worthy spending causes.  But alas, my parents retire with full current benefits, and those of us under 50′, buy into a new social pact whereby we know gov is there for a certain amount, but not for everything we need.  The gen x and later generations have to make the hard choices that the free spending baby boom generation of bill Clinton and our parents did not make.  Instead we focus on personal responsibility, hard work and innovation to get us to the place we need to be as a nation.  No more blaming the past or others for our predicament.

There is a complete rethink in academia…. Ayn Rand was right.  Hayek is the new Jay-z.  As a people, we recall what made us revolt from the British empire and create the greatest nation in history. We will remember Ben Franklin.

This will unleash an unprecedented burst of entrepreneurial activity fueled  by the billions and trillions of money on the sides lines during these dark times.   This will create opportunity for all. Women, Hispanic, Black, American Indian, Asian, all of us will benefit as a result.

Life will be grand.  🙂

———-
Now my Dad’s – Luke Wallin
———-

“The president is re-elected by comfortable margins in the popular vote and the electoral college.

The senate and house remain as they were.

In the coming year many republicans copy the strategy of “say anything.” However, it doesn’t work. This causes PhD dissertations to be written on why it worked for Romney but not for others. When the first of these works comes up for oral defense, a faculty member points out that “it didn’t work.” The thesis is rejected and all the others are quietly tossed as new topics are floated.

Chris Christie leads the party back toward moderation. This brings a war with the Tea Party, backed by the Koch brothers. Karl Rove backs Christie. Outcome too close to call.

The NRA HQ disappears in a flash of light.

Somebody said they thought they saw a drone.

What say you?”

———-
Now my oldest son, Skye Wallin
———-

“I predict a narrow Obama victory… almost certainly a victory in Ohio.

But he certainly could lose and I don’t pretend that it’s out of the realm of possibility.  Indeed, with the hurricane disruptions of voting in NY, NJ, CN, Obama may lose the popular vote and still win the College.  I hope this isn’t the case.

If Obama loses, it will be a sad thing not because he’s the greatest president, but because it will make cynics out of his supporters and cynics out of the citizens of the world who witness America fire the young man they chose to rescue us from the most catastrophic presidency in history.  People like to say that after 4 years, you can’t blame Bush anymore.  Well, I blame a lot of people and two parties, but Bush changed the world forever and wrecked a lot of things with draconian, expensive policies.

If Obama loses, it says that Americans really don’t have an ounce of patience and give up on promising individuals.  Barack still has lots of potential… after 4 years, I think he has learned what works, what doesn’t, and will approach governance more forcefully in the second term.  What kind of people are we to not even give him the chance to succeed.  As the economy improves, as the occupation of Afghanistan winds down, and as the recovery in Sandy-effected territories gets underway, what kind of sense does it make to fire the Commander?  With all the legislative nonsense that has occurred of recent, I think people blame Obama way too much–Congress is to blame for the vast majority of our problems.

With respect to foreign policy, Obama acts with a restrained neo-conservative strategy full of violence but less stupidity.  He is a scholar of the world with empathy, but unafraid to fire missiles and send in the SEALS…and go to war.  He has adopted responsible Republican tactics, so any argument that he’s soft on terror is entirely cynical and political.

WIth respect to the Supreme Court, it goes without saying that a more liberal court is a good thing.  If you are socially liberal, you understand that the Court is where those decisions get made at the end of the day.  Romney will nominate a smart, but potentially draconian conservative justice with lasting implications for civil rights and other important topics.

In the end, these men are not all that different and to assume there is a fundamental divide just isn’t true.  THe question is, do we fire our guy after his first try?  Just as things seem to be improving?  Or do we throw it all away and let Romney take the credit for someone else’s leadership?

Again, Obama wins Ohio.”

———-
Whatever your views, if you do not exercise your right to vote you really do not have much of a basis to argue about the outcome.  When all is said and done, I do hope as a country we can try to come together.  That does not mean abandoning ones principles just for unity.  It does however mean, finding ways in which, given the realities of a divided and diverse nation we can come focus on the big problems that need big solutions.  Stop politicizing everything and everyone.  Our nation cannot continue on its current trajectory and expect to maintain or grow our standard of living, our standing in the world or create opportunities for the next generations.  Stop pretending we can leave “as is” the social programs put in place in a different day and age when in fact they cannot continue as is.  That is not political.  Stop spending more than we take in.  That is not political.  Possible?
———
There a people out there who are indeed thinking along these lines. I recommend checking out Dave Maney and his recent piece in the Denver Post, and this CLAYTON M. CHRISTENSEN – NY Times piece “A Capitalist’s Dilemma, Whoever Wins on Tuesday”
———
Back to the family, exercising our duty as citizens, this morning at 6am at the polling station in Carmel, IN – Anitra and my oldest daughter Sierra (who got to vote for her first time today).  Pretty cool.
  
Well that about sums it up.. the family disagrees.  Do any of you have family members this divergent?  I may add more family predictions here as they trickle in.  Stay tuned…

«

%d bloggers like this: