As Citizen Voices Bloggers, we agreed to appear on These Days periodically, as part of the job description. For this week's segment I was "encouraged" to go out into the community (my neighbors, co-workers, etc,) to find out how people were feeling about the presidential race, take an informal poll, and report my findings as part of the Wednesday morning show.

Asking people you know about their political beliefs is kind of like asking them about their sex life.  It can feel invasive, and being a private person myself, (at least I was before I got this blogging gig,) and since my neighbors and I have maintained a respectful avoidance of this subject... them with their McCain/Palin signs and me with my Obama/Biden signs, I didn't want to scratch the illusion of tolerance by actually talking to them.  So I did the only reasonable thing... I coped out.

In the spirit of non-scientific inquiry, I got in my car and drove as far away from my neighbors as I could, looking for random victims. I sampled opinions at the community gym, (where both TV's are usually tuned to Fox), Farmer's Market, Dog Beach, a hair salon, and a political forum.  I sent emails to friends, colleagues, and relatives.   Some of my face-to-face contacts at first declined to answer my questions, but when I said "okay", and started to walk away, they usually followed me to tell me what they thought anyway.

The first day of polling was not good news. I encountered a large number of people who had (1) not registered, (2) not paid attention, (3) said they would ask other people or their church how to vote, (4) didn't know anything about the issues. I heard excuses like "I have kids, I have to work, I don't have time to read the paper."   Seems like raising kids might be one of the premier reasons to care about who will run this country in the coming years.

I often overlook local election issues in favor of presidential races and state propositions - and my guess is, many people do the same. Despite receiving a "Voting Guide for Republicans" in the mail each election, I do my research on the issues rather than blindly fill out my ballot with the guide's recommendations. (I do wonder sometimes how many people use political party guides as command rather than recommendation. My recommendation is do a little research on an issue or don't vote on it at all.)

But researching local candidates is often tedious. Here in Vista, we are electing Vista Unified School District governing board members. And I do care - aside from working towards being a public school teacher myself, I may one day have children in the Vista Unified School District - but even after looking over candidate bios, I find few meaningful ways to distinguish the candidates.

Elizabeth Jaka is a "community volunteer" who seeks to "provide quality educational programs that will give our children the tools they need to succeed in the 21st century." Sounds great! Steve Lilly is a retired educator who wants to see "increased student learning" and assessments that "provide teachers and principals timely data on student performance" (what a concept - tests that indicate performance). Also noble! Angela Chunka wants to give students access to the latest technology and close the achievement gap - no argument here! Stephen Guffanti and Eileen Fernandez want to see students reading and writing English at grade level - a no-brainer, right?

Last night's presidential debate was decidedly... unenlightening and boring. Although the town hall format could have brought something new to the table, the game remained virtually unchanged. McCain had a tough job to do, as he entered the debate nine points down in the polls by some reports. Many Americans are now scrutinizing Obama more closely in light of the view that he is the more probable future president, and this is something McCain could have capitalized on - but he didn't, at least not as much as he could have. Both candidates presented their positions rather well, but this is old news - especially when Obama seemed to avoid directly answering questions in favor of steering the debate towards prepped talking points. Important issues came up, but the responses given could have been directly taken from campaign speeches. In what turned out to be a highly conventional debate, we heard the candidates reiterate their positions on health care, taxation, Iran, Russia, and energy. There remained much divergence and some agreement. The economy and current economic conditions were understandably a time-consuming focus.

But despite the need to address the economy in light of significant changes that have taken place since the last time the candidates faced off, I think Tom Brokaw could have made some more interesting decisions regarding question choices. When citizens, and not journalists, are given the opportunity to ask the questions, fascinating issues are bound to come up - and we can get a unique insight into our politicians' characters and lives. In this debate, however, if you agree with Obama's positions, you probably felt like Obama won; likewise, if you went into it a McCain fan, you more than likely believed him to be the winner (case in point: both the FoxNews on-screen poll following the debate and the Drudge Report online poll declared McCain the winner). Did it do anything for the undecideds? I've made up my mind, so I can't be certain, but my guess would be that it didn't do a whole lot in terms of issues.

But maybe the spotlight wasn't on the issues. Maybe the goal was to see the next president being, well, presidential - a goal both candidates succeeded in. Obama was comfortable, said things a lot of people want to hear, and presented himself as empathetic. But as McCain repeatedly brought up, it comes down to rhetoric versus record. So keeping that in mind, and in light of this rather promising debate format that failed to live up to my hopes, I've assembled a list of my own questions, specifically for Senator Obama. Some of these contain issues that I wish McCain had brought up, and some require more than a two-minute response, so poor Tom needs to stop looking at the timer.

I've become very interested in academic performance at local public schools, primarily due to my teaching credential program. Last week, I stepped onto the campus of a middle school in the San Diego Unified School District to observe a seventh grade social studies classroom. Anticipating my first truly "urban" school experience, I braced myself for some of the challenges described in my textbook. Twelve-year-olds wearing gang colors. Unruly kids disrespecting their teachers. Eighth graders reading at a third grade level. Despite attending the school made famous by Dangerous Minds, I do not feel that I had ever experienced this.

Instead, I entered a classroom with kids seated quietly at their desks, working on a warm-up activity in which they hypothesized some of the causes of the fall of the Roman Empire. And the great majority of them seemed not only engaged, but to be coming up with reasons that demonstrated higher-order thinking skills and a deep understanding of historical events.

Does this experience point to the success of San Diego schools? Does it demonstrate that unlike the typical urban school described in my textbook, the school I visited suffered none of the challenges commonly present in the public schools systems of metropolitan areas? Contrary to research and popular belief, was this class of 36 proof that a smaller student-to-teacher ratio is not necessary?

Unfortunately, no.

In light of the excitement and anticipation surrounding Hillary Clinton's speech at this week's Democratic National Convention, some may have missed the short address delivered by Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, a few hours earlier. In her short oration, Richards praised Barack Obama's commitment to women's health care and admonished his opponent by pointing out that the presumptive Republican candidate "voted against real sex education, against affordable family planning and, if elected, John McCain has vowed to appoint Supreme Court justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade."

She has little to worry about. Roe v. Wade is here to stay and come mid-November, I suspect we will all be referring to her preferred candidate as president-elect Obama. Nevertheless, Richards brought to mind an interesting question: aside from being generally pro-choice and believing that the issue of when life begins is above his "pay grade" (that certainly doesn't leave the rest of us any hope of understanding the issue, especially when he starts earning a president's salary), what do we know about Obama's position on abortion? The most revealing way to answer this question is to take a look at the senator's voting record.

Planned Parenthood is right in endorsing Obama as the candidate who will stand by the organization's principles, most notably, a woman's right to choose. He has repeatedly shown his support for the expansion of abortion rights by, for example, voting against bills that would prohibit tax funding of the procedure. This is in spite of stating at the recent Saddleback Faith Forum that he would like to reduce the number of abortions that take place in this country. But perhaps most disturbing is Obama's record on partial-birth abortion.

Despite the colorful pictures hanging on the walls, there is a bleak feeling in the front office of my son's elementary school these days. Teachers and staff, including the principal, received the dreaded pink slip two weeks ago. There is a feeling of uncertainty and frustration in the air. Easy smiles and laughter have been replaced by worried looks, anger and criticism. Approximately 188 Carlsbad Unified School District employees recently received their termination notice for the 2008-2009 school year due to our California budget crisis.

Governor Schwarzenegger has asked that Proposition 98 be suspended in order to cut $4.8 billion in education funding. If passed, class-size reduction could be eliminated in first through third grades and in the freshman year in math and English. Other proposed cuts include music, science, social science, art, theater, second language, librarians, nurses, and even full-time principals.

Voters passed Proposition 98 in 1988, which was supposed to prevent our government from cutting education during economically weak times and provide a minimum protection for education funding. In 2004, however, the legislature passed a suspension of Prop 98 for the first time by a 2/3 vote. This is what they're proposing to do again this year to solve the state deficit of over $15 billion.

My wife was laid off in December, right before Christmas. 

She has been looking for work for three months now. She just now found a possible lead. So, imagine her anger when she sees Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in TV commercials on encouraging people to move to California to work.

Right now, California is ranked fifth in the country as one of the WORST states to find work in.

And yet our governor wants to bring MORE people into the state -  thus taking what few jobs there are away from those already living here!

A California appeals court last week has ruled that parents without teaching licenses cannot home school their children. Wait a second. What? That decision becomes
Binding on the courts and counties that comprise the Second Appellate District, which are Los Angeles, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura, on March 28. The other five District Courts of Appeals in
California don’t have to view the