OK, the bailout plan went down in flames.

Let me get one big misconception out of the way: the proposed bailout would NOT have allowed people to live in their houses and pay no mortgage payments. (I heard that gem in Ri Ra) It was NOT the people who were being bailed out.

As I explained in my blog post on Friday, the plan dealt with bailing out banks, mostly New York and foreign banks with branches in the US that had the poor judgment to buy mortgage derivates. These banks bought lots of this stuff, but their smart MBA trainees could have told them that:

1) Housing prices in certain parts of the US cannot go up at 15%-25% a year without retreating someday, leaving people with a house worth much less than their mortgage

2) If you give people 100% mortgages with no credit check, many of those mortgages will fail

So, how many of those Trillion dollars of derivatives are bad?

Absolutely no one has any idea.

Our Portland mortgage is probably in a derivative package because we refinanced in 2004, and since we have never missed a payment, it may be classified as good; the so-so mortgage in the package is thus called because several payments have been late, but does the existence of a weak or failed mortgage with a good and a so-so mortgage make this derivative without value? Hardly.

Banks hold these derivatives as assets and collateral against which to borrow and then lend massive amounts of money. Seemingly to down play the credit crisis, the Press Herald ran an article Saturday proclaiming that people still were getting car loans; the credit crisis is not YET about car loans (but WILL be if not contained).

The crisis right NOW is about massive loans called commercial paper and lines of credit that make the American economy function.

Last week, Maine DOT was unable to auction $50 million in transportation bonds because no one was lending that much at a normal rate. Maine was offered 9% on the bonds instead of the normal 3.9%. There is talk on the web about large corporations that cannot buy supplies and make their payrolls because many depend on short term loans to tide them when they have cash flow problems such as when customers pay slowly.

Derivatives are structures meant to reduce risk. If the "bad" mortgage in the package fails, the so-so and good mortgages would still give the derivative value. The banks bought derivatives knowing THIS risk. Thus, the banks should NOT be rewarded for their folly for failing to see the weakness of the housing market. Banks should act like any other player in the stock market, and, since they cannot sell these derivatives, the banks should hold this paper to maturity.

The true crisis in the economy is liquidity -- the banks holding the derivatives cannot use the derivatives as assets and collateral to make the economy run.

Secretary Paulson originally framed the liquidity crisis by proposing a buyout of the derivatives, and the Congress walked in lockstep with that concept. The result was a public uprising on both the right and the left.

Congress needs to do what it failed to do over the last 10 days; it needs to consult the top economics in the US and the World -- no economists were consulted as of Sunday -- and Congress needs to THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX.

LIQUIDITY CAN BE RETURNED TO THE MARKET WITHOUT

BUYING THESE VOODOO INSTRUMENTS AND WITHOUT

THE GOVERNMENT REWARDING THE BANKS' INVESTORS

My solution: the Federal government should authorize the Federal Reserve Bank to LEND up to $700 billion to banks IN THE US holding these derivatives at an interest rate that is slightly higher than the normal rate. Banks would be required to use the mortgage derivatives as collateral for this loan. They would have to hold these derivatives to maturity or replace them with an asset of equal value.

This simple action is guaranteed to instantly return much of the needed liquidity to the US market with no complicated Federal ownership of mortgages, banks, etc. There would be no smell of socialism.

Finally, two things:

1) The Federal government needs to return to the problem of the sub-prime crisis by dealing with people who bought houses to LIVE IN and freeze their resetting Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs) for 12 months. This will allow the homeowners the time to change to a traditional 30 year mortgage. The Feds should not rescue people who bought houses, condos, etc. to flip.

2) The stock market must be re-regulated. Banning naked short selling in any stock is absolutely essential; continuing the current ban on all short selling of the basket of financial institutions and troubled institutions is also essential.

3) The mortgage market must be re-regulated. The transparency of financial statements that resulted from the enforcement of Sarbanes-Oxley must be extended to complicated financial instruments such as derivatives and the more than $45 trillion of credit default swaps.

Peter B. Hayward

Copyright © 2008 Peter B. Hayward. All Rights Reserved

All of my Press Herald blog entries

A Maine Armchair Philosopher blog

Join me for daily tweets at twitter.com/pbh444

Permanent web address for this post

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/blogs/phpost/033589.html

*

Prosecutors considering whether to retry Robert LaPointe on manslaughter charges will likely wait to see what sentence he gets in November for boating drunk, in a crash that killed two people ... He has no criminal record, but the state will ask the judge to consider his driving history, which over a period of 22 years includes 22 speeding convictions, four convictions for failing to stop for a police officer and two license revocations for being a habitual motor vehicle offender, according to Massachusetts state records.

Source: http://pressherald.mainetoday.com ...

Click here to view a larger image ...

It is estimated that there will be more than 6 million foreclosures in the next few years.

I want to make one thing perfectly clear from the outset: the bailout plan as originally proposed by Secretary Paulson was not to help homeowners who were in danger of losing their homes in the subprime mortgage crisis. The Paulson bailout was aimed at rescuing the Wall Street institutions that hold the mortgage derivates.

Paulson (and now much of the Congress) want to do this because derivatives were purchased as assets to increase the banks' liquidity, but with the value of the derivatives now BELIEVED to be unknown, the banks cannot use these as collateral. Thus, the credit markets are freezing up.

And what is a derivative? Once upon a time when I was young, a bank made a mortgage and "owned" the house, receiving a monthly stream of payments. The more mortgages it made, the more income, the more it could turn around and use the money to lend out again.

However, to reduce the risk of bad mortgages, clever investment bankers bought from banks good, so-so, and poor mortgages, packaged them in units with maybe 1000 good, 1000 so-so and 100 poor mortgages, and offered this package for sale. Sometimes, this package was sliced into manageable dollar amounts, but was still comprised of good, so-so, and poor.

For all the hype, Wall Street is always not moved by technical analysis or deep knowledge. Instead, the market is moved by naked emotion, by the herd instinct. Witness the wild swings this last week as Wall Street reacted to each rumor about the progress of the bailout and the Dow went up and down 100s of points. 99% of the individual Dow stocks have nothing to do with the derivative crisis.

Six weeks ago, Wall Street decided these derivatives were worth little. Economists had known that the number of poor or bad mortgages were growing, but NOBODY had or still has knowledge of the true value of the derivatives. Wall Street's emotional opinion and the subsequent naked short selling caused the downfall of AIG (which guaranteed the value of these derivates).

Paulson is not trying to help Joe and Mary whose ARM is resetting and whose mortgage payment will go up by $1,000s. Instead, he wants to buy these derivatives, which he calls "toxic," so banks can have more money to lend to business, for car loans, for more mortgages, etc.

We have been side tracked by Paulson from the debate that went on last year in Congress about relief for home owners like Joe (freezing their ARM payments for 2 years, etc). That legislation would have made the derivatives whole again.

Finally, Paulson's, and now Congress' plan to purchase the derivates begs the question: what will the banks sell the derivatives for? If the banks sell the derivatives to the government at fire sale prices, the liquidity returning to the bank will be little. If the government pays the bank close to the original price of the derivative and makes the bank almost whole, the government will NEVER make any money when it resells these sliced and diced securities.

My suggestion to solve this crisis is two pronged and will appear on Tuesday..

Peter B. Hayward

Copyright © 2008 Peter B. Hayward. All Rights Reserved

All of my Press Herald blog entries

A Maine Armchair Philosopher blog

Join me for daily tweets at twitter.com/pbh444

Permanent web address for this post

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/blogs/phpost/033470.html

*

Recently, I worked in the mortgage industry for a couple of years. During that period I watched soaring growth in the "Sub-prime" section of the industry, although the company that I worked for did not offer such products.

Today I watch leaders of the Treasury and Federal Reserve urge a "bailout" for those companies who succumbed to the siren song of the "Sub-prime" market, who accepted "bundles" of these high-risk loans and then used these loans as a basis to create "securities", assets that diminished at breakneck speed as the housing market tumbled.

There is plenty of blame to pass around.

Yes, there were undoubtedly predatory lending practices by unscrupulous mortgage brokers and lenders who did not thoroughly advise buyers of the dangers involved in products that produced unattainable monthly payments in a relatively short time after low initial costs.

And indeed there were borrowers with limited assets that they knew would never enable them to meet the escalating costs of future payments and are now simply walking away from their debts.

Of course there were eager politicians eager to pressure lending and financial institutions to provide mortgages for risky applicants under the doctrine of "fairness" and "everyone is entitled to have their own home" and to threaten penalties for businesses who did not agree to subsidize their pandering to some voting groups.

If one does some research, political cause and effect can be traced back for more than a decade and through several administrations. Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank, respective leaders of the Senate and House Banking Committees, have done little to head off this collapse, refusing time and again to pursue efforts brought before them to increase regulatory oversight. Other members of the House and Senate have received major campaign contributions from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other financial institutions on a regular basis for many years.

Does this indicate widespread corruption? I believe so. And a notable tendency by all parties in Washington to avoid making the necessary changes to financial policies that continued on the path toward disaster.

Over 90% of mortgage holders make their payments on time. Should these responsible taxpayers be the ones to pay for the greedy mistakes made by politicians, some financial institutions, lenders and irresponsible buyers?

Personally, I view with deep suspicion and distrust the current proposed solution backed by those same politicians and bureaucrats whose actions have mired us in this mess. Corrective legislation should not be rushed through, but instead reviewed carefully with close attention paid to ensure that businesses and individuals who have greatly profited from this gross mismanagement will not receive additional largess.

I am definitely not in favor of this kneejerk buyout plan. To give upwards of $700 billion to a system that created this abomination is the height of folly. To correct the problem will require thought and planning # and probably some form of Federal (our tax dollars) support. Remember this in November.

I plan to check the Congressional voting record of those running for Federal office this election to determine their involvement, if any, in this charade.

We need leadership and fiscal responsibility in Washington, not pandering and uncontrolled spending in an attempt to cover up greed and corruption on a mass scale.

Want the best pizza in Portland? Go to Micucci's (on India Street), and walk to the back where Stephen Lanzalotta and his family preside over the ovens. It's not fancy, and there are no options. It's just plain and simple good. People vote with the feet, and often there's a line waiting for the next one to come out of the oven and its five minute mandatory wait. You can even eat it there, and help yourself to free coffee.

I work nearby, and too often walk across the street to indulge in this treat. Today I found something new awaiting me on the tables -- a sign saying "Please Pay First".

Evidently some people have been eating their pizza and just walking out without paying. That's shoplifting, plain and simple, and it's wrong in any venue. But to rip off Micucci's -- one of our best local community stores -- seems unthinkable to me. You can watch Steve and his family going through the whole process, and can see how much work goes into that delicious slab that's for sale.

I can't fault Micicci's for putting up those signs. They're not in business to give away food. Their prices on most items are already lower than at other stores, the quality is unsurpassed, and if one item seems too expensive we always have the option of not buying.

Portland lost something. I don't know what it would take for those signs to come down. Meanwhile, their presence is a reminder that integrity does not always prevail in our fair city.

I'm not fed up with taxes. But I'm clearly fed with with "Fed Up With Taxes", who've placed more signs on our median strips than any candidate. If one sign doesn't convince me, will 101 signs have more of an impact?

It's the season of sign pollution -- in which each candidate or issue group tries to display more signs than their rivals. Frankly, I view it as an insult to our intelligence. Instead of spending their limited campaign funds to produce issue-oriented material, that might give us reasons to vote for them, they bombard us with a name, and perhaps a slogan, but nothing more.

Of course, I don't like taxes, and the slogan "Fed Up With Taxes" does resonate with me. Like most of you, I've imaged the pleasure of paying less. But the agenda of that group represents a horribly regressive program. I guess their hope is that I'll count the signs and not read further to find out how they will turn my discontent into constructive or destructive action.

Tom Allen! Yes, I know he's running for office, and I could write here about why he's my choice. But what I see on the street is simply: Tom Allen, Tom Allen, Tom Allen, Tom Allen, Tom Allen, Tom Allen ... I could repeat this story for each candidate -- those I would support, and those I vigorously oppose.

I respect and admire Tom Allen -- what he does, and what he says. He's out there with a solid and well informed message and program, and a track record that I admire, and lots of integrity. He shouldn't need hundreds of signs with just his name ... but, evidently, in our electoral climate he does. Just like mud season, we have sign season. Frankly, I found more comfort seeing him at the vigil for James Angelo. Tom Allen wasn't on the program, and wouldn't grab headlines. But clearly he wanted to be there. That was a statement that mattered much more than his name recognition signs.

Can't the candidates show respect for us, address us with meaningful dialog, and leave our city looking like a city instead of a convention hall?

It sounds too good to be true: Ships come in Portland Harbor, silently unload their cargo of oil into the storage tanks from which oil flows into the pipeline, and money flows back to our local economy.

And, no, it's not true!

Last night my wife was awakened several times by the noise of tankers unloading their cargo. Many times I've been kept awake. We live on Peaks Island; the ships are docked at South Portland. What's going on?

Evidently there are several ways to unload oil from the tankers that land here, and one often preferred (by the pipeline company) is to pump compressed air into the ships' tanks. This displaces the oil. It's this strong flow of compressed air pushing the oil that makes a very loud rattling sound. Atmospheric conditions determine how the sound carries. Sometimes we hear it as if it were right outside our house.

I've spoken to the president of the pipeline company, who was most accomadating. But still, the noise continues. Many times I've spoken to the night dispatcher at the pipeline company, and received promises that the noise level would go down. Sometimes it does -- a little. I've received promises of a call back from the technical people at the pipeline, but no calls have come in.

Who regulates this? Is it a local South Portland issue, a regional issue (the noise is heard in parts of Portland), a matter of interstate commerce, or a matter of foreign commerce. I don't know, and, so far, have not succeeded in pushing the right button to get the noise turned off.

I expect that the cost of reducing this noise -- either by using another unloading technology, or by reducing the flow of compressed air, is one that the pipeline company would prefer not to incur UNLESS CITIZENS RAISE THEIR VOICE. There's no reason why the pipeline company, with its unloading operations, shouldn't be able to become a good neighbor.

September and October are my two favorite months.

When I was in the military and spent years away from Maine, I would always try to schedule many of my vacations here during the early fall.

The hustle and bustle of summer are past, the rigors of late fall and winter are yet distant and we still have good weather and a wonderful added menu of activities to enjoy.

It is time for country fairs where we can examine exhibitions of local agriculture, animal husbandry and creative skills ranging from baking to needlework to photography. There is also harness racing, midway attractions and many special events at each fair that most likely can please nearly every taste in entertainment.

Fall sports are in full swing at every level with participation available from grade school to college-level, providing weekend recreation and entertainment for sports-lovers and proud parents.

At the same time, the ocean is still bright blue and the beaches are less crowded, as are hiking trails, state and local parks and highways. And in just a short time we will be treated to the spectacle of the brilliant display of fall foliage.

Hunting season begins next month and will bring out-of-state folks here to participate while utilizing local stores (Hello, Cabela's!), hotels and restaurants.

Many of my delivery customers have mentioned to me that they enjoy this time of year since visitors tend to be older and more sedate, appearing to pursue what Maine has to offer more sedately than the summer crowd, who seem to be in a hurry to enjoy as much as they can as quickly as they can..

The tourist season, by the way, shows no evidence of being a disaster because of the slowing economy. Not the best season ever, but hardly the worst. Augusta, of course, is bemoaning the loss of revenue in areas such as the gasoline tax (people seem to be conserving by driving less, can you imagine….?).

There are times, during our daily trials and tribulations, when it is easy to overlook the wonders of our special place called Maine.

And then there are times to slow our pace, look around and enjoy the blessings that are here for us if we take the time to notice them

Last Thursday the Addison Woolley Gallery held an evening program for photography collectors. Speakers included the publisher of "Photo Review", a respected newsletter from Philadelphia, and our own Susan Danly, one of the curators at the Portland Museum of Art.

Who came? Most of the audience were photographers, in search of collectors who might buy their work. (Confession -- I'm one of those, and have exhibited at this gallery.) Also in the audience were a number of other gallery owners, some of whom had co-sponsored this event. I could count at most a handful of actual collectors.

Addison Woolley has become one of Portland's best venues to see contemporary photography (and other media) by local artists ... but the group attending that event had more artists than art buyers. What's wrong wrong with that picture?

Portland may have a vibrant arts producing community, but the arts buying community appears to be no so vibrant at all. Perhaps there's a better market for painting and sculpture. Photography appears (incorrectly, I must add) to be more technical, more mechanical, more subject to infinite reproduction -- and collectors may be weary of treading into this rapidly changing territory.

Of course, a market place does not exist with only sellers. Who are the potential buyers, and what will give them the confidence, the knowledge, and the willingness to help get the arts economy moving more vigorously?

A "blog" like this is not only for broadcast. It's a space for discussion. So please join in.

We live in a world of names. We are taught the names of things as soon as we learn to listen and speak. Cat, shoe, cloud, and milk are words we know and agree upon. But by changing the context or use of a word we can create a different feeling, perhaps even a strong emotional response. For instance someone called "Catty" will react differently from someone referred to as the 'Cat's Meow".

I've been called lots of names. My real name is Elizabeth Ann Throckmorton Kellett. Sounds pretentious, right? In another time, I might have been referred to as a Blue Blood. In fact the family castle still exists in England, though I've never been there and was raised by my widowed mother in a modest suburban Jewish neighborhood. She struggled to make ends meet after the death of my father and we were hardly wealthy. So I was never called Rich Bitch, though I was referred to as Four Eyes, Tomboy and One-of-the-Twins. We weren't Jewish either, and that never seemed to matter until the day I told a friend's mother that my mothers' family came from Germany. After that, my 'friend' referred to me as 'Jew Killer'. She didn't seem to care that my family had actually come from Germany in the 1700s and had nothing to do with the Holocaust. She never spoke to me again.

So names can identify you but also create a false sense of who you actually are. I am a woman, mother, white and a naturalist. Can you picture me in your mind? What about if I said I was a meat-eater and a crack shot? Now picture a diabetic cancer survivor with one kidney, a bad back and high blood pressure. Does the image change?

I am more than a name and more than what you may think I am. So are you. That's what makes life so interesting. After all, we breathe the same air, we eat and sleep and love. I may like red and you may like blue. I may like to read and you may like to play video games. Perhaps you pray with your eyes closed and I pray while I hold my breath. Does it really matter? That doesn't make me right or you wrong. Or make you evil and me holy. Our differences are what make us alike and names meant to divide us will only bring hate and misunderstanding.

Ultimately, we want the same things - good food, clean water, safe homes, and opportunities for our children. Labeling others and name calling will let you make assumptions about your neighbors that may or may not be true. So give them a break and the benefit of the doubt.

I say celebrate your differences and look at the other side. Let us work for the good of all and realize we each represent the best of the best. Don't judge someone based on their skin or gender, place of employment or house of worship. Look beneath their political views and avoid labeling and naming others. Calling someone a "Lefty" in a derogatory manner is as offensive as calling someone a Redskin or a Faggot or any other disparaging name. Listen to yourself and how you label and judge others. You may learn to be less judgmental and open up to new friends and alliances.

United we stand - divided we fall - a saying that is as true today as ever.

Often the news accounts of an event that I attended reasonably reflect what I actually experienced. But for the vigil last night, honoring the life of James Angelo, and calling out for peace in our city, that was not the case at all.

There was a spiritual power to this event, a sense of rootedness, and an incredible beauty. James Angelo, I learned, was not just any young man -- although the death of any person would be tragic. He was a jewel of the Sudanese community in Portland, a mentor to many younger people, an inspiration to all around him. Having decided to become a policeman, and then a lawyer, he had taken a job as a security guard as a step on this journey.

We started hearing songs like Amazing Grace, that were so familiar to me, and hauntingly beautiful Sudanese music that was completely new. Looking around me I was truly surrounded by people of all colors, many backgrounds, all clinging to America as a home, and wanting it to be the America of their dreams -- of our dreams.

We heard stories about James Angelo's life, and about the lives of many of his relatives ... people who left their war torn country seeking peace and quiet, and who found a true welcome here in Maine. In the tones of their voices, I could hear reverence, deep thanks, anger, pain, and fear. The police chief's promise to find James Angelo's killer or killers gave comfort, but that's a promise that needs to be delivered.

The TV images and text suggested an unruly gathering, and a family torn apart by grief. What I saw was a large, orderly and peaceful crowd, and an extended family grieving with great dignity. Of course there was pain. But relatives had come from as far as Michigan to offer support, and to share in their grief.

As for that American dream -- it may have been suspended for part of our community. As one speaker reminded us, children should bury their parents, and not the other way around. And while the particular rituals of grief may be different in different cultures, the depth of pain, and the need for people to join together is absolutely the same. I felt privileged to be able to be present at this event.

The death of James Angelo is both a personal tragedy, and a community event that might have brought us closer together, but that requires action and not just concern.

I was but a young boy when JFK was assassinated and so I cannot join the ranks of those who always remember what they were doing at the time, but I can tell you exactly what I was doing when the first plane hit the twin towers. We were discussing this at work the other day and this seems to be the "remembrance" of our generation. Each person in the room told exactly what they were doing at the time.

There are a few instances of "never forget" throughout each generation of history. I hope my children will be able to bypass theirs but I fear it won't happen.

We must remain always vigilant to protect our shores from all quarters but at the same time we must remember that our individual freedoms are more important than our collective protections. I am often concerned that a collective cry of "save us" sometimes drowns out the thought of "from what?"

An attack from outside our borders or from hostile elements within our borders is always a possibility and unfortunately I have no doubt that another will occur at some time and could perhaps make 9/11 look small in comparison. We must, as a society, remain always alert to what happens around us both locally and around the world to try to lessen the chance or severity of such an attack.

While we watch for attacks on our country and our society it is necessary that we always remember what our country was founded for. Think of your freedoms and rights. Think of our constitution. Take the time to actually read the Declaration of Independence. Write your politicians and become involved in your family, your community, and your country. Protect yourself from both attacks from outside and the whittling away of your rights from within.

Always remember.

I have been privileged in the past few weeks to have the opportunity to serve my community by helping the United Way of Mid Coast Maine in their annual fund drive. I am known as a Loaned Executive and have been "donated" by my employer for the 11 week campaign. I spend my days helping the United Way organize and run their campaign by visiting local employers and individuals to solicit contributions to the community fund of the United Way.

Your local United Way chapter is locally run and funding decisions are locally made by a volunteer board. They have Impact Areas that they fund in an effort to reach long term solutions to needs in the community. Many local programs receive United Way funding. United Way is proud of the low overhead of their program so most of the money goes to solve problems in your community.

I hope you will join me in making a donation to the United Way. Many employers allow payroll deduction which allows simple weekly donations. In this time of great need in your community, you can help yourself by helping others. Live United.

I am so pleased that John McCain has become an agent of change. This is a great change for him. He began his candidacy by ridiculing Obama for his policy of change then McCain found that Americans are tired of the status quo in Washington and guess what? John McCain changed to become an agent of change himself. Every man reserves the right to change his mind, right?

A recent Republican advert on TV slams Obama for a remark about putting lipstick on a pig but McCain is just changing his own position because he thought it very acceptable when he made similar remarks in regards to Hilary Clinton several months ago. Change is good.

Who is a Republican and perhaps a better question is "Exactly what is a Republican?" Is George Bush a Republican? You wouldn't have thought so at the "Republican" Convention when it was with a great sigh of relief that the McCain campaign accepted the story that Bush wouldn't be able to talk in person at the convention after all. It seems that the "New" Republicans didn't want their "Old" leader to taint their platform with his presence. Embarrassment is the word. This is a change - perhaps a good change. We are all embarrassed by the performance of the Republicans over the past 8 years and any change to the party can only be an improvement. Let's hope that we don't have the opportunity in 4 more years to explain how we are still embarrassed by the Republican Party. We need to make a change.

I still don't know what the platform of the Republican Party is. This is not a change. We need some change here. They now have an interesting VP candidate but they don't know or haven't admitted where the party stands on the issues. The sex of the VP is a change but the platform isn't. What gives here?

Change is good -change is needed. Real change and not the change of McCain changing from ridiculing change to embracing it. I want John McCain to change. I want him to tell me where he stands on the issues. Maybe he can just take Obama's platform and make it his own then call it the Republican platform of change.

I generally don't pay much attention to political conventions. I view them as preaching to the choir, an opportunity for the faithful to gather and stroke each other and, to paraphrase, "an orgy of sound and fury signifying little".

But I must admit that, to me, developments over the past ten days have lent an importance to the Presidential race far outdistancing the usual impact of most past Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

I refer, of course, to the selection of Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice-Presidential nominee.

Before the conventions I was reasonably certain as to whom my Presidential vote would go, but certainly this new wrinkle has made a great difference in the way that I perceive the election contests.

Initially, I was surprised at the instant, vicious, unfounded attacks launched at Gov. Palin. Many of the accusations, although immediately and eagerly reported by liberal portions of the media, were quickly refuted and reluctant retractions issued. However, as the days passed even more extreme attempts to discredit her have flooded the internet and other news outlets.

If choosing this particular individual was a planned move to inject more life into the political process, then I believe that the planners have succeeded beyond their most ambitious expectations.

Not since Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas were nominated to the Supreme Court can I remember such a frantic character assassination campaign by the left. Again, somewhat surprising considering the efforts made to portray the woman as a "nobody" or an inexperienced "hick" from a backwoods state (remind anyone of the charges leveled against a certain Arkansas Governor?)

Then again, this particular nominee was recently described as a "polished politician" by Vice-Presidential aspirant Sen. Joe Biden and she does not appear reticent about claiming center stage and returning fire against those who attack and attempt to demean her. The content of her speeches seems to have struck a resounding chord with a significant portion of the electorate.

Gov. Palin is no helpless, ill-prepared shrinking violet and it seems obvious that the left is frantic over what to do about this very visible perceived threat to their plans to rule America. I would suggest that their hasty and ill-conceived smear campaign will win them little, if any ground.

Ideally, political campaigns would feature the presentation of ideas and potential solutions to the problems confronting our country. Pointing out differences in the theory and application of these concepts and the ability of the candidates to lead in their implementation is not only acceptable but necessary to help voters make their decisions.

"The politics of personal destruction" seems to me to be an unnecessary distraction. Unfortunately, this particular tactic is extremely subjective in description and is often regarded by members of both parties as easily justifiable.

There is now a significant and visible difference between the political philosophies of the two sets of candidates vying for the leadership of the nation.

All of this might just be enough to convince me to watch the upcoming debates between Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.

Politics is nothing if not entertaining. This is what you want your national leaders to be , right? I don't watch much TV but I had the pleasure of seeing a few minutes of the Republican National Convention and watched Sarah explain that the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull is the lipstick. Now, I am a hockey dad and know quite a few hockey moms so my immediate reaction was to say to my wife "Which one wears the lipstick?" My wife didn't have an answer and Sarah didn't provide the answer and so it goes with the lady who could be the next after next President of the United States. No one seems to have an answer.

I admit to being confused as to John McCain's choice for a running mate. Although obviously articulate, Sarah seems to have essentially no qualifications to assume the presidency and that is exactly what she would be doing if McCain is elected then suffers some debilitating medical condition or worse.

I am still waiting to hear some issues discussed by the Republicans which might change my position but so far this has been a quiet front. The campaign seems to be "Let's trot out Sarah to balance John who we all know is a cold fish and see if her charisma will carry the day." Issues are a nonissue to McCain and the Republicans.

The three most important things in this presidential race need to become;

Issues, issues, issues.

Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong.

Today was the first day of school in our area and I watched as the neighborhood children boarded the morning bus. Memories of the hectic and exciting first day jitters came flooding back as I remembered the school days of my own two now-grown children. I thought of the struggle to mesh our work and school schedules, and the critical after-school babysitters. My husband and I balanced the conflicts of scout meetings, sports activities, the kids' social calendars, work, school meetings and the building of our own house and gardens.

It was a wonderfully difficult time in our lives and sometimes we failed miserably. We struggled to buy school clothes and pay a sitter. But we ate a homemade dinner together every night and we were there for our kids and their friends.

When my children were babies though, I was a stay at home Mother. I wanted to welcome them into this big, bright world and watch them smile and sleep and grow. Being a Mother is the most important job in the world, even more important than the vice presidency. Motherhood is a commitment to the child and humanity, to nurture and sustain a contributing member of society.

Perhaps a Mother with five children, including a tiny 5 month old handicapped child and a pregnant unwed minor daughter, should be spending more time with her family and not trying to be a partner to the ruler of the most influential country in the free world. Ultimately, either her family or the country is going to get short changed, and I don't think I want to see which one it is.

I recently had the pleasure of catching up with a young friend.

She had moved to Massachusetts nearly a year ago to pursue hopes and obtain opportunities that she believed were not available here in Maine. Unfortunately there are times when plans, due to any number of unforeseen circumstances arising, fail to progress as one had anticipated.

For those of us who are older and have a lengthy resume of life's trials and tribulations to draw on, unfulfilled dreams are a fairly common fact of life. For someone young and taking their first sprint toward independence dashed hopes can be a traumatic experience.

My young friend has encountered some speed bumps in her road and after careful consideration was even considering returning to Maine to take up where she had left off. But her reflections have led her to alter some of her goals so that they conform more to her current analysis of where she wants to go with her life.

Therefore, she explained to me, she has decided to "give Massachusetts more of a chance" and to make some adjustments in her life.

"Or", I thought to myself, "to give the intelligent and talented young woman that I know the opportunity to grow and achieve".

I may not ever be able to tell her how much admiration and respect I feel for her. She is dealing with an unsettling stew of disappointment, anxiety and self-assessment, but has made mature decisions and retained her optimism and ambition. What I can do is offer praise for her resolve and ongoing support as she works her way toward reaching her goals.

There are several young people whom I know who have followed a similar path, moving from one geographical environment to another where they feel that their chances to achieve their goals are more likely. In some instances, they have overcome significant odds just to be able to take that first step. But indeed they are taking that step and they are prepared to study, learn, work hard and sacrifice. They are beginning to place great value on their independence.

Perhaps they may accept the offered support and advice, from time to time, from an old goat who has made his share of mistakes and cares enough to want to share knowledge painfully gained with these young adventurers. I most sincerely hope that at least they will continue to share their developing lives with me. They provide me with hope for the future.

May God bless them as they face the many paths and choices that constitute the individual journey that each of us must complete. Hopefully they will come to accept and understand that they can always choose to never have to make that trip alone.