124. Black Friday brings out the worst in people

My wife and I have taken to the "Black Friday" idea. Three years running, we saved nearly all of our holiday shopping for the day after Thanksgiving. We have had mostly good experiences, as we enjoy getting up at 4:00 a.m. to the trails of advertisements we reviewed the day before. I actually appreciate the excitement and the energy of the day.

The customer service of the stores this year was appreciatively friendly and helpful. Perhaps a focus of the difficult economic times, stores seemed fully staffed with associates that were more than willing to be of assistance.

I also enjoy the interaction with people, who for the most part were also kind and courteous. Besides making room in aisles and holding doors, we had, on more than one occasion, people who had overheard our conversation point us in the right direction- whether it was where something was located in the store or if another store had a better deal.

We had our "Christmas" lists, store advertisements, and a list of when each store opened and the things they had that we might be interested in. This year, we went to Kohl's, Lowe's (twice), Sears, JC Penney (twice), Home Depot, Circuit City, Target, Office Max, Wal-Mart, Michaels and Best Buy. We really only purchased the "sale items," while also using the occasion to pick ourselves up those "good deals" for around the house.

Although our experience has been good overall, it does not mean that everything goes perfectly. There are indeed, "those people" who act like "Black Friday" is the only day they are permitted to leave their cages. As a "liberal," I make a lot of excuses for people, often focusing on circumstance rather than the responsibility of their actions. It is somewhat fair; I do factor in environmental and socio-economic factors in considering the opportunity for people to succeed.

However, I never concede laziness or rudeness. Even under the direst of circumstances would I have a difficult time justifying the behavior of those that act as though the rules, or even common human decency, do not apply to them. It seems that under the excitement and anxiety of "Black Friday" or, really, anything to do with money, this behavior can reach unacceptable levels.

We have indeed met the occasional shopper who runs ahead of the line to grab a shopping cart or pushes through to get a sale item. This year, my wife kindly noted to someone who had parked in reserved parking, that in fact, it was not reserved for them. Which, of course they knew, and responded that, "she (my wife) was jealous that she did not think of that and to mine her own business." That was the wrong thing to say to my wife, who then offered an ethics and etiquette lesson to the lazy and rude shoppers.

But, our typically good experience is not always the case, as most of us have heard the ridiculousness that has accompanied some "day after Thanksgiving" sales. Another absurd event happened this year, when a 34 year old Wal-Mart worker was trampled to death by nearly 2000 shoppers when he was trying to open the doors to the store. Several others were injured while trying to help the victim, including a woman who was eight months pregnant. Not to be deterred, reports indicated that the "savages" rushed past the individual and began shopping- seemingly without concern.

There is something wrong in society when people lose their minds over the prospect of saving a few dollars, or getting that perfect toy for their kids. We see the same behavior in times of crisis. While some people are willing to make the sacrifices to help others, there are others still that will abandon all civility for a cheap tank of gas.

Perspective is a powerful idea, one that undoubtedly changes over time- as we grow older and we incorporate the experiences of our lives. One of those perspectives is that my integrity and class shall never be compromised to save a few dollars. I am not proposing that I am above ever acting improperly, we all have our moments, but I can assure you I will never trample someone to get a discounted big screen television. It hardly seems to represent the spirit of the holiday season.

123. Bailout argues against capitalism

In Planned Parenthood of Southern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992), the court wrote of imposed substantial limitations on legislation limiting economic autonomy in favor of health and welfare regulation in Lochner v. New York. It notes that these limitations were overruled in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrisk, but that, "In the meantime, the Depression had come and with it, the lesson that seemed unmistakable to most people by 1937, that the interpretation of contractual freedom protected rested on fundamentally false factual assumptions about the capacity of a relatively unregulated market to satisfy minimum levels of human welfare.

The bailout, which reared its ugly head right smack in the middle of the presidential election, left a lot of blame on the table. Just who was responsible, and why should taxpayers foot the bill? Was this the result of deregulation, greed, and reckless risk-taking? Or, does the blame flow further down the food chain- such as unemployment and irresponsible home buying? Furthermore, with huge budget deficits and a war costing 10 billion per month, where is this money coming from?

Is this a case of socialism, that oh so dirty word, bailing out capitalism? If the lending institutions do not get the bailout, what impact would that have had on the credit markets- and the ability of Americans to get loans to buy houses and cars? And, if Americans cannot get loans, what impact does this have on the already hurting housing market and the struggling auto industry?

It is easy to see the spiral...for if industry struggles, then more people lose their jobs and more loans go unpaid, and more homes are foreclosed on. Where does it end, if not in another depression?

Consumer advocate, Ralph Nader firmly believes that this is the case of socialism rescuing capitalism. "The bailout was so frantic, so ultimatum-laced, so open-ended, so absent of criteria or standards . . . that it was clearly socialism bailing out capitalism," said Nader. I have written for a few years now that capitalism, as much as we wish it were not true, needs to be regulated. Free markets, in their purity, make absolute economic sense. However, in reality, in a world of lobbyists, corrupt CEOs, unethical corporations and the demise of labor unions, there needs to be some sort of government regulation. It is deeply unfortunate, but greed pressures the economic markets to the point of, as we have seen here, near collapse.

It is not just the financial markets, it is, as I have also argued for the last few years, the corporate incentive to placate shareholders at any cost- which is often American jobs. It is impossible to continue to send good jobs overseas, to save labor costs and avoid environmental regulations, and not believe that it will not have an effect of Americans' ability to pay back loans and make their mortgage payments. Capitalistic economic systems fail when corporations, through political relationships, are afforded legislative loopholes to exploit a global market- yet are subsequently rescued when they fail. Nader also views the bailout as the "collapse of corporate capitalist ideology" and that he emphasizes, "'corporate' because the only capitalism left now is small business. They are the only ones free to go bankrupt."

Adamant capitalist and famous American economist Milton Freedman aptly suggests, "What kind of society isn't structured on greed? The problem of social organization is how to set up an arrangement under which greed will do the least harm; capitalism is that kind of a system." Although capitalists will always find an argument, as the Supreme Court justices recall it, the Depression hurt lots of people, lots of innocent people- because of the lack of legislative regulation. And today, Americans are hurting. We are reaching unemployment highs, millions of people have lost their homes, those that are employed are often underemployed or taking pay cuts, and prices just keep going up. The American people need a bailout, and, and they need their politicians to understand the issues- and history.

122. Campaign was a study in contrasts

It is too remarkable, and I was too invested emotionally, to just move on as though the election is all of the sudden behind me. While so much has been said, perhaps everything has been said, regarding this historic election, I still feel the need for reflection, and to, of course, offer some thoughts.

This election is a culmination of our being as a country for over 200 years. This country, today, should be proud that a majority of voters were willing to look past prejudices, through the scope of history, and elect an African-American president. It was a long and trying election campaign.

It is my feeling that McCain knew early on that he was in over his head. He knew Obama was the better spoken, better educated and more popular candidate. His entire campaign was about shifting the focus- first by selecting Sarah Palin, then by engaging in a negative campaign- which basically admitted that he was the default candidate. His aim was to give people a reason not to vote for Obama- whether it was the pledge of allegiance or the insinuation that he was a socialist. Had he picked a more credible female vice-presidential candidate, he might have pulled it off. Palin was a disaster, for reasons which I have previously written about at length.

The election reached absurdity when "Joe the plumber" became a focus of the republican campaign. What was at first a charismatic attempt to relate to the middle class, a word McCain rarely uttered in his campaign, later turned into a circus show. After "Joe" was exposed as a liar, fraud and individual with some pretty weird perspectives, the McCain campaign should have laid the issue to rest. Instead, they invited him to campaign stops, and Palin entered into long, annoying verses about every "joe" profession imaginable.

Obama, on the other hand, played it smart. His campaign was organized and remained on task- the need for change and the condition of the economy. He did not engage in retaliating with counter insinuations, nor did he overreact to the attacks made on him. When given the chance to strike back at Palin in his third debate about whether she was qualified, he merely suggested that was for the country to decide. He would not give in and give the reason not to vote for him. He remained classy- he had to.

Race was obviously a focus of the election. Since African-Americans often vote democratic, Obama had to increase the number that voted, and, more importantly, he had to gain a significant portion of the white vote. While he never converted some voting demographics, while males for example, he was able to increase the percentage enough to win the election. And although there were pockets of the country and some of McCain's crowds, that were ugly and more representative of 1850 America, it was feared that it might have been much worse.

Today, there is much work to be done. Free of the campaign dissection, I think Obama will be an even stronger and more divisive leader. However, we are all accountable for our country. The country does not change simply because we voted for change. It is time to take responsibility for our actions- to be educated and informed on the issues. We need to make the effort to contact our elected representatives to express our opinions- and then hold them accountable for their votes. We need to donate our time and money to others suffering under the current economic conditions. And, finally, we need to be responsible parents and citizens, and expend that extra effort that can really change a country.

Other election results:

Thumbs up: Proposition 2 in California passed, a major initiative in the requirement that animals that exist simply for food, or lay eggs, have a moment of decency in their lives- such as room to turn around in their cages. It is not nearly enough, but it is a start. And granted, it is progressive California, but it does send a clear message that people will not accept animal abuse in exchange for profit.

Thumbs down: A few more states worked to pass gay-marriage amendments. It remains, in my opinion, a pathetic endeavor to control the lives of others. In 100 years, people will look back at this discrimination as we look back to a time when African-Americans and women were not permitted to vote. In fact, maybe, just maybe, in 100 years, they will be celebrating the first openly gay American as president.

121. Get beyond race and negativity

I cannot say that I am much of a Howard Stern fan; he does what he does and though he has done the same thing for many years- if people continue to be entertained by him, so be it.

However, he recently made a point by having one of his reporters interview people in Harlem. The interviewer asked people whom they supported for president- of which most, not surprisingly, favored Barack Obama. His point, however, was in the follow-up questions in which he asked if voters supported certain Obama policies and his choice for vice-president that were, in fact, those of John McCain. In other words, the reporter would ask if Obama supporters approved of his stance on pro-life, continuing the war in Iraq and selecting Sarah Palin as his vice-president. The supporters were, over and over, clueless, enthusiastically endorsing policies that Obama did not, himself, support.

It is a fair point, and it works both ways. Obviously there are those that are voting for Obama simply based on race, because he is black. Conversely, there are those that will not vote for Obama for exactly the same reason. The same applies to Sarah Palin. Many support her only because she is a woman, and there are probably some archaic beliefs among us that women should not be in a position of power.

All of these viewpoints are pathetic.

Increasingly, McCain and Palin, and their supporters, have made a similar appeal to American prejudices and fear- attempting to link Obama to terrorists, through affiliation and by emphasizing his middle name (Hussein) at every opportunity. Thus, not only does Obama suffer from the prejudices of race, he must also defend the insinuation that he is Muslim, and a dangerous Muslim at that.

The impact is clearly felt among white males, who do not show the same support for Obama as other groups. Furthermore, of additional concern for Democrats in this regard is the polling, known as the Bradley effect. As noted by Mark Blumenthal, "what pollsters fear is that in the context of a survey interview, some respondents may fail to tell the truth about their preferences due to some "social discomfort" arising from Obama's race." In other words, the fear is that some, in particular white males, will claim that they support Obama, as not to appear racist, but, under the comfort of the privacy of a voting booth, will choose McCain. Author John Grisham, rightly so I believe, suggested that if Obama were white, he would be leading in this election by double digits, perhaps 10-15 percent over McCain.

The obsession to some singular ideas extends to "hot button" issues, such as abortion. Many people vote for Republicans for one reason- their views on pro-life. This decision is, of course, a Supreme Court decision, and George Bush has already attempted to stack the court in hopes of changing it. It is fascinating, actually frightening, how many people are obsessed with the idea that Democrats (and Obama specifically) are "baby killers." Interestingly, when Palin was asked if there was an inherent right of privacy in the Constitution, the basis for the Roe v. Wade decision, she said she thought there was. Huh?

It is obvious, from all of these ideas, that there is much of the country that will vote the way they do, simply based on prejudices and biases. I look around my neighborhood, and the Republicans still support Republicans, even if it is obvious to most independents that Palin is grossly unqualified to serve as vice president, let alone the absurdity (but reality) that she could be president. A large segment of our population has lost its objectivity. Republicans vote for Republicans, Democrats vote for Democrats, blacks vote for blacks, women vote for women.

Furthermore, any objectivity is hypocritical. Consider Palin's "folksy" speech, with her "darn rights," the dropping of the "g" in many words- as well as her winks and "shout outs to third graders" Ask yourself, if you are a Palin supporter, if you would tolerate the same behavior from Obama. What would you say if he spoke in African-American slang, asking, "what's up dawg?" and giving a "hollar" out to his "homies in the hood"?

The recent attack on Obama by Palin and the McCain campaign is shameful. Frankly, if it was my party, I would be embarrassed; however, Republican crowds seem to be enjoying it- begging for more attacks, shouting "terrorist" and "kill him." The personal attacks and insinuations, specifically designed to appeal to prejudices and biases, are dishonorable and desperate, and I have a new lack of respect for Palin- even if acting as an "attack dog" is somehow part of her job as a vice presidential candidate.

This country needs to grow up and become informed. An educated and tolerant America would ignore such an appeal to prejudice- making these tactics obsolete. I am so tired of the negative advertisements, exaggerations, and misstatements. The report I am watching today from North Carolina reveals that McCain's advertisements are 100 percent negative; Obama's 34 percent. Again, if Americans were more informed, political parties, on both sides, would not resort to such strategy. The truth is that it works all too well, and politicians will continue to rely on American ignorance.

I like to think that, eventually, people get what they deserve. I spent eight years criticizing Bush, and with embarrassing approval ratings, both political parties attempting to distance themselves from his policies, and the condition he is leaving the country- he will have to live with his legacy of failure. McCain and Palin have gone almost exclusively negative, and while I cannot predict the outcome of the election, I can only hope their arrogant and reprehensibly offensive behavior will eventually come back to haunt them.