Women and Aging and Politics

I have begun to volunteer at a local community radio station [KBOO] and will be involved in the programming for International Woman's Day on March 8th. Although first observed in the United States, it has become pretty unknown here...You can read about the day here: http://www.internationalwomensday.com/default.asp.

At the brainstorming meeting we all put in thoughts as to the day of programming and how it might proceed. Many topics had to do with the fact that women are most often the caretakers of children, family, aging parents, pets, etc. But when women age, they are relegated to nursing homes where they are attended to by underpaid women in under staffed facilities and basically forgotten.

Back in October I was on a program at the station discussing Women and Power. I won't repeat my comment her as it was an hour long show. But my basic premise is/was that women have power which is why men have trouble allowing women to express that power and feel a need to suppress ALL women.

In the USA we have fewer women in government that most other nations. And from my point of view the women in power feel they have to act like men in order to retain their power. So they do not help in the ways that women are best at and that affects the aging of women in our society.

This discussion on Women and Power will continue on January 25 - this coming Friday at 6 PM PST [on KBOO]. You can listen via radio if in Oregon or online anywhere in the world by going to http://www.kboo.org and clicking listen live at the top of the page.

I will talk about our current election scenario as we have a woman running for president and she is subjected to all manner of nasty comments, the death of Bhutto, aging and lack of power - and as listeners call in, other topics will be generated.

Happy 2008

We are now "officially" into the primary voting season.

Yes - we will still get non stop coverage of all primary candidates but those numbers will decrease over time.

Now that Iowa caucusing is over and done - well except for the spinmeisters and cable noise incessantly analyzing the fallout - we look ahead to New Hampshire and on?

Living in a late primary state - we vote in May - it is a bit discouraging to feel that some parts of the country will have little impact on the presidential primaries...unless it' s still pretty much a tie and then we late states will be seen as prime targets for all the media go-round.

After this election, we need a sane discussion on how to do presidential primaries. Not this craziness we are having with several states moving theirs up into January to be on record as first or second - because they are the ones who want to have the biggest impact.

Not that I have anything against Iowa or New Hampshire - but why these two states are the ones to give the press a reason to dub the "winners" and "losers" I don't know. I'd rather the voting population take back that choice. Why should the media be the ones who get to say who is "viable" - as that is based solely on money raised - not votes. And of course those with the most money get the most media attention and so the cycle of media control over our elections continues.

I recall when the League of Women votes ran the debates. Think of it! A non-partisan entity asking real questions of ALL candidates. How have we reached a position where the media outlet running a debate even gets to tell candidates they can't come because they are not viable and then does not ask questions of those candidates who ARE there?

The whole debate scenario needs a fix along with fixing the primary mess.