Politicians not doing their jobs

The other day I decided to take a look at the two candidates' voting records and I was surprised to find that they frequently don't show up to vote when congress has a decision to make. In the current congress McCain has been absent around 60% of the time and Obama has been absent about 50% of the time. I really can't understand how this is tolerated. How many people can not show up to work over half the time they are supposed to and keep their job? These two politicians were chosen by the people of their states to represent them in decisions made by the government. If they don't show up to vote then those people are not getting fair representation. I decided to see if this was common so I looked up my two congresswomen from California, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein who have been absent 5.6% and 2.7% or the time respectively. When I've mentioned this to some of my friends I've been told that they've been out campaigning so that is why they have missed votes. I don't think that is justification. That is basically saying that if a career opportunity comes up they can neglect their current job in order to pursue it. The big question here would be, do they still get paid for being a congressman while they are campaigning? And if they lose the election do they simply return to finish their term as congressman? Either way I am surprised candidates never get called to account for this, I think it can be a testiment to their work ethic and a certain degree of not realizing or valuing the significance of their job in our goverment.

On a somewhat similar note, I am tired of feeling like when I go to vote I have to pick the lesser of two poor options. Maybe one of these days the two party system will start to break down and we can get some outsiders in to bring a different vibe and a different experience base into our countries leadership. I would be very quick to vote for some big business leaders to change things up a bit (i.e Jack Welch, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett).

How do you feel about politicians not doing their jobs? Any ideas on a better way to find candidates?

My Survivor Strategy

I was watching the premiere of Survivor and it seemed like the same things started happening that happen on every other season of that show. Some people butt heads right away. Some people are quiet and go unnoticed. Some people immediately form alliances. Some people who you think will be horrible competitors do well, and others who look strong or competent for the challenges are really losers. Every time I watch this show I can't help but think about my strategy.

If ever on the show Survivor I think I would approach it as follows. I would encourage the team to have open sharing time around the fire each day to discuss what's been going on and how the team is doing. I would encourage people to share with the group who they would like to vote off and why so that the team could discuss it and have a decision before we show up to tribal council so there are no surprises and we have some team unity with everyone on the same page. I realize this could potentially create conflicts but I figure it is better if we work those conflicts out publicly rather than with secret meetings down by the lake. If these conflicts errupt beyond control I am confident that I could keep myself in a position to serve as a sort of moderator of the discussion or a mediator to help resolve the conflicts. My challenge would be to keep myself from getting wrapped up in the arguments. Through this strategy any secret alliances that were going on would likely come out, the team would know how we all stand with each other, and we could more easily move on and focus on the next competition after some one gets eliminated. I would also bank heavily on my ability to dominate in the challenges. From the challenges I've seen on the show I don't think I would every be in the position of the person who doesn't contribute or holds the team back.

That's just my idea for strategy. I like the challenges in Survivor but the whole sleeping in the wilderness thing wouldn't be my favorite experience so its not necessarily at the top of my list of reality shows I'd like to compete on.

What's your strategy? And what do you think my chances would be if I used mine?

Jury Duty

Well I just finished my first experience with being on a jury last Friday and it was a very interesting experience.

I wanted to get out of it but the defense attorney didn't feel the need to ask me if I wanted to be on the jury so I had no chance to say "no thanks" (he asked other people this question and they all answered "yes").

Some people gave answers that indicated they obviously wanted out of jury duty. Like one guy, who said "the defendent looks like he probably has an evil side". But I couldn't bring myself to lie or misrepresent who I am, and apparently I am desireable as a juror.

Once the trial started it was really interesting as well as intense and I felt compelled to give my full attention to every detail. The charges were: a criminal threat to kill or cause great bodily injury, threatening a police officer or public official, growing marijuana, using an electronic device to send messages with the intent to harrass or annoy. Those aren't the exact works but a summary of the charges. I found myself anticipating the points the lawyers were going to make with their questioning as well as critiquing their tactics. It was really interesting but also very stressful given the significance of my job as a member of the jury. It really wasn't fair to make light of anything and not give the case my full consideration. So I took it very seriously and wracked my brain to make sure I was making the right decisions when I gave my vote for the verdicts. Some of the jurors seemed to have their minds made up completely as soon as we entered deliberations, some were on the fence, and some seemed to be willing to just go along with the group. I was on the fence and found myself annoyed by the other two groups.

Ultimately we found him guilt of charges 3 and 4, not guilty of charge 2, and we were split on the first charge so it was a mistrial on that one.

Afterward we got to talk to the attorneys more casually about the case and it was interesting to hear their true views and what they thought of the case. They were also interested to hear about our deliberations and what points or evidence we had the most discussion about.

All in all it was an experience I'm glad I had but I just wish the court was more efficient with their time. We started each day at 9:30 though we usually let in 10-45 minutes late every day. We would take a 15 minute break around 10:30. Lunch was from 12:00 to 1:30. We would have another break at about 2:30 and we were always done by 4, usually earlier. Lots of time was wasted in my opinion.

oh yeah, and lastly, the defendent's name is "I am the Beast", how's that for interesting.