A response to J.C. Kendall

Curmudgeon Musings from the “Corporations” to the rest of you.  (by J. C. Kendall on Google+)

1. We are not your enemy. Your enemy is whoever causes you to think that our success is an accident, or that we just got lucky, and that we did not really earn it. It is a distraction, an encouragement to look at us, while they rob you and your children blind. 


There are many enemies in this system. 

2. The reason for Corporate Tax Structures separate from Individual Taxation is a tacit admission that what we do benefits society. Corporations provide jobs that pay into the tax base, not steal from it. Corporations are an economic engine, not a drag on the economy, which is why states and other nations fight for us, offering incentives and tax breaks because they know that what we do is beneficial overall. 

"that what we do benefits society" - academically this argument should be right. But maybe we should have a system where if you don't then you don't get the special tax breaks and/or subsidies. There are many corporations that poison our water and air and (sometimes) food. Some corporations are not employing that many people and move more and more jobs out of the U.S. Industry is the economic engine, not corporations. You may argue "same diff", but there are flaws in your argument. 

3. You could take all our money, all our property, everything we have, and not be able to fund the U.S. for more than a few months. This is a fact. With our businesses, our jobs, and revenue gone, then what? You gonna tax breathing? 


No, I suppose not. Don't give them any ideas. 

4. In the same way that not everyone who is poor is a criminal, the same goes for us. We have our bad apples, but those our Individuals, not businesses. The way that Corporations are tagged as criminals would amount to suggesting that everyone who lives in Detroit is a felon. Neither is true. 

No not all corporations are criminals. However, the people that are criminals are accountable for their actions. I am just concerned that corporations should be accountable for what they have done.

5. No matter how much you tax us, it is you, who will ultimately pay. The U.S. used to have a thriving luxury ship building industry. The U.S. decided to slap a tax on Luxury Yachts, as a means to add more revenue to the coffers. Ship builders simply closed up shop and moved to other countries where they, and the jobs they provided, were welcomed with open arms. That industry is lost to the U.S. forever, as are the jobs. The U.S. lost money overall. A Corporation is not a charity. We are not in business to give away money. We are in business to make a profitable return to our shareholders. What is taken from us will be charged to YOU, one way or another. If we cannot do that, we will stop doing business, and the jobs we provide will go away. Make your choice. 

No argument.

6. Corporations do not have souls, hearts, compassion, or feelings. Stop expecting it from us. If we claim compassion, it because it is a good sales pitch vs our competition. We exist to make money via providing a service or value to a select audience. Unless we call ourselves “Non-Profit, trust me; we aint. That does not make us evil, any more than an Eagle swooping down on a fish and pulling it out of a lake. It is simply what they do. Making money is not evil. Not giving it away is not evil either. Wanting to use our money to invest and expand, and ultimately create more jobs, is not evil either.

No they do not have "souls, hearts, compassion, or feelings" - but maybe they could act a little ethically? The Quaker business leaders of the chocolate industry (read Deborah Cadbury's Chocolate Wars) were able to incorporate the two.

7. Suggesting that we owe you something for nothing is as evil as it gets. We pay taxes too. More than you do. Maybe not directly, but add up the revenue from those we employ, the permits we buy, the energy we buy, and the markets we fund, and you will find that we pay more than “our share”. 

Something for nothing? In what way? Corporations get a playing field slanted in their direction, better access to representatives. 

8. Because we have a stake in the operation of the nation that taxes us, the Supreme Court has decided that we get a say with respect to voting and the support of elective candidates. The term “Taxation without Representation” applies here. We have as much right to support or reject those who would determine our futures as you. Want us to stop? Fine, stop taxing us. Bitch and Moan all you want, it is in the Constitution. 

The problem with citing "taxation without representation" is that it's a flawed argument. You have better access to representatives than the actual electorate. Additionally, a corporation is not a citizen. It would be one thing if the different stakeholders were doing the supporting of the candidate. It's when it's done in the name of some "corporation" that I take issue. 

9. When we succeed, you succeed. Do you know what a COG is? A COG is an acronym for “Cost of Goods” , or in short the cost of doing business. When our costs go up, those costs are passed along to you. Did you think we would just eat it? Nope. If Gas prices go up for shipping those Strawberries to your local grocer, well guess what? You are going to pay more for that Strawberry, dude. Don’t like it? Don’t buy it. It really is that simple. 

No argument. 

10. If you are an educated individual, none of this should bother you in the slightest. The above are facts, period. If this does bother you, it is because you have been sold a bill of goods by some politician who believes the best way to win your vote, is to pit you against us. The point is, the very laws that allow for Incorporation, protect us from YOU. Our responsibility is to operate within the law, not to make you happy. If our members break the law, we want them punished as much as you do. They do us no favors by inviting increased scrutiny of our operations. 

I think the main reason many are "bothered" by this is the fairness issue. Americans are big on fairness. You are taught from day one that as long as you play by the rules you can do anything: be an astronaut, be President, etc. That is my problem too. I believe in the free market. 


"If our members break the law, we want them punished as much as you do." - Really? Are you sure? Massie broke safety regulations, were they held accountable? How about all the companies that used the derivatives and contributed to the housing and subprime markets to destroy the economy? Were they punished? This is my biggest complaint with corporations. They can destroy people's lives, they can destroy the air and water, they can drag down our economy, but they are not punished. 
11. The largest set of investors in corporations are PENSION FUNDS. Hurt us through legislation, and you hurt yourselves, your families and your futures. Pension Funds invest in corporations because we provide a safe and steady growth opportunity for their capital. Tax us more, they get less. They is YOU. Get it? 

Sadly, very few Americans have access to a pension. I don't know the actual figures. But it seems to me that unless you are a union member or one of a diminishing number of people, most people don't get a pension.

I wrote this, because frankly, I’m growing tired of the meme of the “Evil Corporation”, because we are mere entities, and not designed to give a rats -ass about your day. We have jobs to do for those who invest in us, and who buy our products or services.

I responded to this because I am tired of the us or them meme. There are people in the middle. People who through no fault of their own that are destroyed between the two.

We follow the law. If you don’t like the laws, vote for those who can change them, just like we do with our dollars. Its legal. You get a voice, Unions get a voice, and thererfore WE get a voice. Easy, peasy, lemon squeezy. 

You follow the law? Good. I'm more concerned with those that don't. I get a voice because I vote. My voice should not be a so quiet compared to a corporation who has no interest in jobs, clean air, clean water, etc. Unions are there to represent the wishes of their members (workers and their families). Corporations are interested in dollars and their profit margin. Slightly different.

If you chose to reply, please do so on the above, and not with irrelevant feelings about Corporations. If you dispute an assertion, come with it. If you cant, don’t bitch at me for saying something you don’t want to hear. In short, debate it. 

Come at me, BRO! 

P.S. Off-Topic comments will be blasted from the thread. Do it twice, and you get blocked. Let’s have a fun, lively debate. It aint personal, so let’s keep it that way. 

-J.C.

Paul Krugman is right (again!)

Paul Krugman's recent column (dated Monday, June 4, 2012) was excellent. But I shouldn't be surprised. Mr. Krugman is a voice of sanity in this incredibly insane world.

In this column, he discusses a couple of points that I have felt all along (though I am not nearly as eloquent as he is).

First:

Republicans claim to have the answer: slash spending and cut taxes. What they hope voters won't notice is that that's precisely the policy we've been following the past couple of years. Never mind the Democrat in the White House; for all practical purposes, this is already the economic policy of Republican dreams.

Exactly.  I have always wondered why they were so vociferous in their complaints about how extreme this President was, how he was dragging us into socialism, how he was destroying our great country. Was it because he wanted to pass healthcare reform? (And did pass a watered-down version of it.) Was it because his name was so foreign? Was it because he was black?

Because, as far as I can see, apart from HCR, I can see a Republican President having much the same policies.

Secondly:

So the Republican electoral strategy is, in effect, a gigantic con game: It depends on convincing voters that the bad economy is the result of big-spending policies that President Barack Obama hasn't followed (in large part because the GOP wouldn't let him), and that our woes can be cured by pursuing more of the same policies that have already failed.

This is the main point for me. The President has spent so much of his time over the past four years trying to reach out to the Republicans that many people haven't seen the opposition for what they are really doing. This country is having a serious economic crisis and what has the Republican strategy been since Day One of the Obama Administration? To make sure he was a one-term President. They are so focused on the political priorities, they forgot that they were sent there to represent the American people. They are sacrificing our well-being, for their political futures.

The Republicans' actions do not bear close scrutiny. Remember how often they say that Obama was the reason our credit rating was downgraded? Think back to that time, what happened? The Republicans were refusing to raise the debt ceiling. Congress was gridlocked. That was when the credit rating was downgraded. A creditor could care less how much debt you're carrying. They just want to know that you'll make the minimum payment. It's in their interest for you to have more debt. They make more money that way.

The rest of Mr. Krugman's column was excellent. He explains why austerity is a mistake. (Other reading from Mr. Krugman on this was in the British newspaper, The Guardian, on Sunday, June 3, 2012.)  He explains why we aren't Greece, we're 90's Japan.

I will leave you with Mr. Krugman's closing line:

For that, in the end, is the best argument against Republicans' claims that they can fix the economy. The fact is that we have already seen the Republican economic future — and it doesn't work.

Just an idea...

One of the biggest problems in our political system is the money. I don't care which way you lean - right or left - I think we can all agree on that. But how can we fix it? Many countries have a restricted political season. (Quite a bit shorter than ours.) We could do that. I'm not sure if that would help. (Though it would make life a lot more peaceful.)

But one of the biggest problems I see is that our elected officials don't seem to actually dedicate their entire term to "public service." We all know that most will try to line their pockets and help out their donors. But, beyond that, there is the problem that the last 25-50% of their term is devoted to fundraising and politicking. What if we erased that problem?

How?

Make a system where they cannot serve two subsequent terms and no fundraising until they are out of office. Think about it. Would your employer let you take time off from work to raise money to try and get your contract renewed?? Now, I know there are a lot of obstacles to this. And I don't believe it would work unless ALL states followed it.

I remember in the 90's when they passed term limits and all that. We lost one of our Representatives who was Speaker of the House. Everyone thought that the guy they elected in his place would get that position. (Yeah, right. Too bad all voters don't have to pass a basic government quiz.)

But basically, the system could work. I also think you could make it so there was no limit to how many times a politician "served". He just couldn't serve two terms in a row.

Any thoughts??

Life on the Internet

Well, here I am typing on my notebook, reflecting on recent events. I am typing this in the basement of my parents' home as my dogs try to telepathically tell me it's dinner time. I started to think about the place of the internet in my life.

I use it to get news, to track what books I've read, to track my exercise, to listen to classical music and British comedy, and to communicate with others. It helps me keep abreast of breaking news. And I use it for social intercourse. I really don't have any friends in the neighborhood. And I don't get out much as I don't drive.

I use G-Mail, Google+, and Twitter. I love discussing books, politics, and Mariners baseball. I use it to communicate it to fellow Latter Day Saints and fellow liberals. Some of my favorite issues are women's rights, separation of church and state, stopping animal cruelty, social justice.

I really love discussing some of these issues on Google+, Twitter, or blogs. As long as these conversations don't get abusive, I love exchanging ideas. However, I must not be very good at getting my thoughts across. Many times I'm accused of being insane (because I'm Mormon) or a bigot (because I dislike fundamentalism and Israeli behavior towards the Palestinians). Sometimes I feel I should just stop.

Should I become just an internet observer? Or is it still safe to be a participant? Any thoughts out there? Any suggestions???

Truth, Justice and the American Way

When I was a kid, I used to watch the old Superman series with  George Reeves. At the end of the opening credits, we were always told he fought for "truth, justice, and the American Way." More and more these days, I reflect back on this. I know it may sound trite or cheesy, but it really does some up my personal and public belief.

I believe that everything I believe in can be summed up in those three subheadings. Whether it is my political leanings or my faith, it really comes down to that. Lately, I have gone a lot of tweets from both sides of the spectrum and it has started to really amaze me. I seem to be sort of in the middle. Although, I do vote Democratic and have consistently since the first George W Bush election - I seem to lean to both sides and not really match the profile of each.

So, I get messages from the right claiming I am a godless, socialist/communist who wants to take away America's god given freedoms. On the left, I am deluded and crazy for belonging to a cult (religion). This really is not helpful. I know that it is hard but I believe that we should try to limit our criticisms to the issues. 

For example, the cases of Ann Romney and Michelle Obama. I see horrible criticisms of both. Some of the accusations are incredibly mean-spirited. 

These ladies are standing by their husbands and supporting them. As well, as raising children, in an atmosphere of political campaigns. They really deserve our respect. Even the politicians themselves, deserve a small amount of generosity. Their politics may not meet your standards, you may consider there positions as morally bankrupt, but that is not excuse for bringing a man's personal faith into it. Or criticizing how he was raised. 

I can't count how many times our President was accused of being a closet Muslim. I don't believe that. He has expounded his faith many times. But, even if he was, so what? I don't remember what part of the Constitution says which religion disqualifies you for the position. Same with Governor Romney. He's a Mormon - so am I! - but it is irrelevant. 

On my walk today after getting several downright filthy attacks on my faith, I realized that how I chose my faith and how I express it publicly comes down to Truth and Justice (and the American Way). That is also how I pick my political stands. It was practically a revelation. When I came to this thought (which nearly distracted me from my audiobook), I realized just how true that was. 

For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.  (Luke 8:17)

Truth and knowledge are very important to me. In manners of faith and religion, one of the reasons I like my church is that they encourage their members to actively seek truth and knowledge. Education is highly encouraged and I would bet that the average person in my congregation has at least a Bachelor's Degree. They spend a lot of time on scripture study. I don't feel I am being indoctrinated and no one is forcing me to obey the Word of Wisdom (no caffeine, no alcohol, etc.), no one forces me to believe that Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God, no one is forcing me to do temple work or wear the so-called "magic underwear."

I have great respect for investigative journalists like ProPublica and organizations like The Innocence Project and Human Rights Watch. They are very important. As former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis stated "sunlight is the best disinfectant." I support organizations that try to expose the truth. Only if we have as many facts as possible can we make the appropriate decision. 

This is why I try to use as many different sources to get information and facts. I generally dislike pundit shows like you see on MSNBC or Fox News. I generally just want the news. Maybe some discussion or analysis by the reporters, with maybe some interviews of experts, analysts, or officials. This is why I like NPR, BBC, PBS Newshour, France 24, On Point with Tom Ashbrook, The Diane Rehm Show, Al Jazeera English, and Democracy Now!. 

I am also a constant reader. I have become attached to my Kindle and my library card. 

I am a big believer that reading makes a better human being. The more a person reads, the more I trust them. Too much these days the Right tells us that books are bad, that smart people are "elitist," that education destroys faith. Education and knowledge and the search for the truth can only help society, not destroy it. 

Remember, the worst regimes are those that restrict their society's access to books. Think the Nazis, the Soviet Union, today's Iran, North Korea, China, etc. 

The Lord is known by his justice; the wicked are ensnared by the work of their hands. 

Psalms  9:16

This pretty much explains my philosophy and my religion. Many atheists and agnostics ask me why I go to church, why I believe. Would God send a tornado to kill families? Would God allow such atrocities? Or they bring up how ridiculous the Creation story is or how I can reconcile the Word of God with scientific discoveries. 

My epiphany today showed me that my belief in God and his Son, Jesus Christ all comes down to Justice. I firmly believe that there must be justice for this world. I cannot accept that people like Hitler, Stalin, and - in today's world - Assad will not be punished for their crimes in this world. I believe that the Bible is - at its core - about justice. 

I may have trouble answering people with quotes from the General Authorities or from the Scriptures. But I am firm in my belief. I know that the Redeemer lives. I know that the Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God. I know that this is the one true Church. I bear this testimony in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Another great quote is from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes: "It is every man's business to see justice done," or as the British statesman and philosopher said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

This is a good description of my personal political stand. Whether it be human rights, gay marriage, social justice, environmental justice, etc, it all comes down to Justice. 

Many people say that social justice is one step to communism. There are others that say that the only way for justice is socialism. They are both wrong. Social justice means giving everyone the chance to be a productive member of society. I believe that we all have right to have access to equal health care. We all have the right to shelter and access to the basic requirements for a productive life. We all have equal rights under the law. We are all the same. We are all children of God. He does not judge us by our appearance, we are judged by our actions. 

Additionally, I think we need economic justice. That does not mean I am against capitalism. I remember once when I was taking Sociology 101 at Columbia Basin College in 1980's, my instructor gave us a proposal. We could either get individual grades or we could get a communal grade. He would average all the scores and give us each all the same grade. I was violently against this. I didn't want my grade - and by extension my GPA - dependent on people that in all likelihood wouldn't even show up. Only one person in the entire glass wanted to try.

But, this does not mean that every kind of social or economic justice is equal to giving up freedom. Many people seem to think this. To me, it means that all of us are responsible for our actions. If what we do harms us or the society, they should have to be punished and/or provide reparations. Think of all that was done in the last couple of years by greed. Yet, most of the people (firms) that participated in the system that nearly destroyed our economy suffered no fines for this.

Think of this in terms of justice. If you had done something comparable, you would be held liable. Additionally, if it weren't powerful corporations? What if it were small businesses? People that destroy people's lives with Ponzi schemes are prosecuted, why not these businesses? Also, the Supreme Court says corporations/companies are people. Doesn't that mean that companies like BP and Massey Mining should be prosecuted for what they have done?

Do you remember Schoolhouse Rock? I do. I loved it. Conjunction Junction, I Am A Bill, they even had one on the Revolution. My image of America, the American Dream, and the American Way is shaped by that I learned in school. I'm sure it's that way for many people. What is amazing is with all the people I went to school with - I don't think two people came away with the same idea about what America is and what its values are. What I took away from school, I believe, has shaped my political beliefs today. I am not the same political creature that I was back then. But, I like to think that our ethics and creeds should be a living thing. It should evolve and grow by incorporating new evidence and information and change with the times and circumstances.

Some basics that I still carry with me:

• the melting pot - the fact that our country only got better with immigration and even depended on it
• checks and balances - our government only really works when no one branch of the government has more than any other.
• all equal under the law

Truth, Justice, and the American Way. Think about it. 

Church teachings vs that "still, small voice"

I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints or a Mormon and many times I have found myself just how good a Mormon I am. I drink coffee daily, I don't pray nearly as much as I ought, I watch R-rated movies on occasion, and I haven't paid my tithing in over 2 years.

But, I do believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, I believe that he saw God the Father and Jesus Christ in the Sacred Grove, I believe that the Book of Mormon is the Word of God, and I believe that this is the True Church.

Lately (and partially due to some statements in the media during this fraught political season), I have been thinking on how the teachings of the Church, the Scripture, and my own personal ethical and moral leanings interact with one another. I came up with a central question: Is it more important to obey Church Teachings or to do what you believe Christ would want you to do or to obey that "still, small voice" in your heart? When that thought came to me I felt that was exactly the point. That I need not feel guilty or uncomfortable at certain conflicts.

Do not get me wrong. I am not encouraging inactivity, willful disregard for Church doctrine or prophecy or guidance from the leaders of the Church. I am just saying that listening to the guidance of the Holy Spirit must be given priority of place. There are several places where I disagree completely with our Church's (and other churches') doctrine and guidance. Many of the presidential candidates like to paint themselves as the "values" or Christian candidates. However, I think they are not. When it comes to the concerns of the day: gay marriage, abortion, contraception, our Israel foreign policy, health care, economics, etc, I believe that our duty is not the declared objectives of the Religious Right.

Christ (I believe) taught us to the following:

• to love God
• to love one another
• to spread the Word

That's it. He did not teach us to force our teaching on others. He did not teach us to force others to do as we do. He did not teach us to remake society in our image. I believe that our decisions should be based on faith, hope, love, and charity. If you follow these simple values, you will always (I believe) be on God's side. If you find yourself supporting or preaching hate or intolerance, beware. Because then (I believe), you are approaching the Devil. 

Some examples of this:

The Environment/Climate Change - God gave us this planet. He charged us with stewardship of this Earth. He expects us to return it to him in good repair. We need to do whatever we can to protect the gifts that God has given us.

Abortion/Gay Marriage - These issues are so divisive and explosive. The things that people say to each other over this issue are very hateful. People need to stop and think. If you are a Christian, wishing people to suffer hellfire and damnation is not what Christ represented. I am pro- both of these issues as a secular matter. What I mean is that I believe that our State is secular and we are blessed because it is. When we persecute others and try to impose our beliefs on all in our society, we are acting like the mobs that killed our Prophet Joseph Smith. We have an obligation to try and educate and persuade others not to engage in such behavior, but I believe that it should not be legislated. 

In the case of abortion, illegalizing it would be more harmful than the actual abortions. In the case of gay marriage, I believe it is a case of "equal justice under the law."

Either government gets out of the business of marriage OR all citizens are entitled to it.

Additionally, I believe that Christians and other people of faith demonize and victimize homosexuals far too much. I have come to believe that homosexuality is not a choice, it is a matter of nature. Perhaps God created homosexuals as a test to the rest of us. God created us all different for a reason. Perhaps it is to test us. To see how well, we took His teachings. He taught us to love one another. He did NOT teach us to love one another - as long as you are of the same sex, race, faith, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status as each other. 

In a recent Huffington Post interview, former President Jimmy Carter said the following:

Homosexuality was well known in the ancient world, well before Christ was born and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. In all of his teachings about multiple things -– he never said that gay people should be condemned. I personally think it is very fine for gay people to be married in civil ceremonies.

Loving one another isn't easy. There are so many things that make us prejudiced about other people. He sent us down here to learn. To learn how to be holy. Accepting and tolerating those with differences is just our first step to loving them. And love, after all, is what it's all about. The pure love of Christ is pure because it is for us all. Not just for those that follow all the rules.

The Economy / Social Services - For some reason, in this country, the idea of socialized anything isn't just considered wrong and a fiscal mistake, but it is considered evil. This seems slightly wrong-headed to me. Socialism is an economic policy and I do not believe that the Constitution dictates how our economy is to be run. 

Applying my moral (and religious) beliefs in this area, it seems to me that the Christian thing to do is to emphasize the individual, not the businesses. Christ helped the less fortunate - the aged, the ill, the young - would He not want us to ensure the security of the least in our society? 

These are just a few of my ideas. I am sure that many would have issue with these. Many of  my Twitter friends are atheists and socialists. I find myself agreeing with them more often that my friends who are members of the Church or other churches. (However, I grit my teeth when my atheist friends demonize those who believe in God.) The best solution is just to keep our Churches out of the government, and to keep the Government out of our Churches. 

A thought on the primary/caucus system...

I want to address this to the Democrats and Republicans and offer them a challenge. Fix this system! As a member of the white majority, I find it appalling that 3 (maybe 4) states get to decide the makeup of the election. It's even more appalling when you look at the makeup of these three states. The presidential race is pretty much decided upon by white protestants. Let's face it the country has moved on from that.

To make sure I had numbers right, I looked up the stats. All race statistics came from the 2010 National Census, the religion came from different polling websites.

Iowa and New Hampshire are both over 90% white, South Carolina is over 62.6% white, 27.9% black. As a comparison, my own state of Washington is 77.3% white, 11.2% Latino, 7.2% Asian, 3.6% black, 4.7% mixed race. The US, as a whole, comes out as 72.4% white, 12.6% black, 16.3% Latino.

When it comes to religion, Iowa is 52% Protestant, 23% Catholic; South Carolina 84% Protestant, 7% Catholic; New Hampshire 35% Catholic, 32% Protestant, 17% none. Washington State is 49% Protestant, 25% unaffiliated, 16% Catholic. As a whole, the country is 51.3% Protestant, 23.9% Catholic, 16.1% unaffiliated, 4.7% non-Christian.

What can be done? Well, something surely. There are a few options. We could completely scrap the system and go to a nationwide system. We could mandate that ALL primary/caucuses should occur on the same date. Both of these are unlikely. In the end, it will come down to the parties. They need to take ownership of the system.

I personally think it is unfair that these three states have all the power. Our history shows that we distrust allowing one faction having too much power. Our Constitution is proof of this. Why have two houses in Congress? One based on population, one based on equal votes for each state. Why have three branches of government set up as equal parts? It is all based on this distrust. The courts were given this power because the Founding Fathers were concerned about "mob rule". The legislature and executive branches have checks on each other because of an experience of kings and parliaments. So why should this system remain in place?

Here are some thoughts I've had. I hope I get comments from both sides to the spectrum. Primaries and caucuses before Super Tuesday (or the first of March) should not be the same every year. The states with a primary/caucus before then should:

• Decide the states by a lottery
• Each time zone should get at least one state primary/caucus 
• Any state with a racial demographic majority higher than the national percentage should not be allowed a primary 

The Republicans say they are a "Big Tent" party and the Democrats pride themselves on being the party of civil rights. If so, they must react to the sheer unfairness of this system. This country was founded on the system of fairness. The Founding Fathers did not find it fair that they were taxed by a Parliament that they were not allowed to send representatives to. We can do no less.

In the interest of demographics, here are mine:

• Race: white
• Faith: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
• Age: 45
• Employment: disabled secretary
• Pets: 2 dogs
• Favorite news source: NPR, BBC
• Favorite sports team: Seattle Mariners, Kennewick Lions
• Favorite sports: baseball
• Favorite author(s): Jane Austen, the Brontes, Clive Cussler, J. D. Robb
• Politics: Economics (liberal); Crime & Justice (conservative); Social policies (libertarian); Foreign affairs (progressive)