Are you kidding me?

1. Iowa’s thinking of a law that would give all of our electoral college votes to whoever wins the nationwide popular vote? Um, WHAT? Why go vote, then?

2. Iowa’s thinking of making me and nearly every parent into a criminal. For leaving kids in the car. Last night, after rehearsal, I drove home with Genna and had to make a deposit at the bank – their night deposit is inside their lobby. I parked the car and ran the 10 steps to the door, went in, threw it in the box, and ran back to the car. Because it was frigid and windy, and I was only going 10 steps – hardly far enough to warrant the time and energy to get her out. If this law passes, I could have been arrested for that. Nice.

And plus, Obama taking more direct control over the census, which is a little frightening, and now there’s talk of a national bank, which we already essentially have.

PS, I’ve recently been reading/learning more about how very unconstitutional our current monetary system is. I always vaguely, generally knew that moving away from the Gold Standard was Bad in some way, but never really was that interested in it until recently. It’s pretty much expressly against the Constitution to have paper money, particularly paper money not actually backed by gold.

For a while, I was thinking of buying gold. Actual gold, lock it up in my basement gold. Then I decided I was crazy. Now I don’t think I”m crazy any more, but the money we inherited from my mom was in the form of stocks that are kind of hard to unload right now. (I mean we could unload them, but they lost SO MUCH value after she died and before we took actual control over them, it seems like selling now is like locking the barn after the horses have already left, or whatever that phrase is.)  But I’m starting to think that’s a good idea.

Advertisements

5 responses to “Are you kidding me?

  1. More like burning the barn. ;P

    I though leaving kids in the car was already against the law? A couple years back at a bank I saw two babies in the back seat of a car, it was 7 degrees and the car was not running. So I parked blocking teh car and waited. After 15 minutes I called the police. 10 minutes later they showed up and the mom saw them and ran out. That’s 25 minutes that I witnessed. She thought if she got in the car and tried to pull out they couldn’t do anything. I was blocking her in. The thing is, she was right. They couldn’t do anything once she was in the car. Still, it was this scenerio that the law is supposed to address. Kids die from bad parenting.

    The thing is, I don’t agree with addressing little scenerios. Child neglect is one thing. Being 10 steps from the car for minutes is another. Is it subjective or common sense?

  2. From the reading I have done, it would apply to any time a child under 6 is in the car.

    What i’ve been doing when I need to run in someplace very fast – such as to drop off a sewing machine at the shop – if everyone’s happy and it’s cold out, I exit the car, then lock it with my remote, then use remote start to keep the heater on. Locking with the remote activates the alarm, and Wally knows to try to open his door if he needs me. If someone else tries to open the door, the alarm will sound, as well. They stay warmer than they would unloading and loading back up again, and I’m back to the car within 2 minutes.

    Other times I leave them in the car: when I have to go in to pay for gas. once when I needed to take a CD back to the library, sans case.

    No, I agree that leaving young kids in the car for LONG periods of time is bad. But take my bank example from Wednesday – it would have been WORSE for me to have to get her out in that weather/wind than to leave her in the warm car. And not depositing the check was not an option.

    Here’s an article: http://www.kcrg.com/news/legislativewatch/39785017.html

  3. That electoral college law would ONLY go into effect if states that (combined) had at least 270 electoral votes all had approved it.

    Why go vote? Because for the first time you would know for sure that the candidate who got the most votes nationwide would become the president. That didn’t happen in 1876 or in 2000.

    As long as we stick with the electoral college in its current form, we can expect about one out of every 25 or 30 elections to be “won” by the presidential candidate who got fewer votes.

    All our other elections reward the candidate who gets the most votes–period. I assume you wouldn’t want to switch to an electoral-college-type system for choosing the governor or representatives in Congress.

  4. Well, if the point is to do away with the electoral college, then do away with the electoral college straight out. I would not necessarily have a problem with that.

  5. then again, I might. I thought the electoral college was established to protect the smaller states in a presidential election – to make sure that the pres wasn’t picked soley by the large states.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s