Before the debate, listening to the pol. analysts on CNN discuss the Ayers issue, I began to wonder why, if McCain honorably thinks Ayers is such an important point to bring to the nation's attention, he didn't do so earlier - like 2 years earlier... Why now, with 3 weeks left and him trailing double-digit behind Obama, is he choosing to bring up this "so very important" issue as Palin puts it - that he is pallin' around with terrorists. Not one terrorist, but multiple terrorists. You might think he regularly attends Al-Qaeda planning meetings, with a rifle in his hand, screaming "Jihad!".
Despite the absurdity of the Republicans tactics and Obama's lead in national polls, I am still worried about this election. A doctor from Ohio said over the weekend that those who dont work vote Democrat and those who pay taxes vote Republican. I didn't want to enter into an argument with him, since he is a relative, but that's the sort of simplistic reasoning that worries me. If taxes were the only issue, I should most certainly vote for McCain, based on annual household income. But I am voting for Obama/Biden because I believe that there are many other aspects in which the Democrats and Repubs differ.
More after the debate....
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
The Election - 20 days to go
Palin seems to have infused the McCain campaign with a helluva lot of negative energy!! The whole guilt by association thing - what the hell was McCain thinking associating himself thus with the Palin brood? They have no money, no influence, no brains, no education, no class and no ethics to speak of. They are the kind of people that marginally scrape by in life, through sheer ambition and a total disregard and even disrespect for all things intelligent. These are the sort of people who live day-to-day - act now, think about consequences later. There is little that cannot be hushed up and glossed over. They also seem to think its unfair to be asked to pay a price for their actions. Of course, they have been consistently building their net worth in the process.
Added to all that is the screechy , shrill, high-pitched voice that spews nonsense continuously.
I am so happy to hear that Obama has millions more in campaign funding than the Republicans.. Maybe this will teach them a lesson or two on how it feels to have to make choices day to day with limited resources.. and will help them understand what millions have to cope with every day in their lives.
The 3rd Presidential debate's on in less than 2 hours - I have a migraine but that will not stop me from watching it, of course!! Will post tomorrow on what I think of the debate..! !
Added to all that is the screechy , shrill, high-pitched voice that spews nonsense continuously.
I am so happy to hear that Obama has millions more in campaign funding than the Republicans.. Maybe this will teach them a lesson or two on how it feels to have to make choices day to day with limited resources.. and will help them understand what millions have to cope with every day in their lives.
The 3rd Presidential debate's on in less than 2 hours - I have a migraine but that will not stop me from watching it, of course!! Will post tomorrow on what I think of the debate..! !
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
The Election - 21 days to go
An article in Huffington Post reaffirmed my thoughts on economic inequalities that I posted yesterday and added more meat to the argument. I think I will get a copy of Larry Bartels' "Unequal Democracy".
Sarah Palin continues to get on my nerves. As the election draws closer, her blouses are getting tighter and her skirts shorter. Her hair is getting sexier too. I guess as McCain trails in the polls, she's willing to play the part to secure the votes of all those men who "sit straighter" hearing and seeing her speak:-) I do not think Palin has the same experience as Obama because of the following definitions of the word "experience" according to Mirriam-Webster:
direct observation of or participation in events as a basis of knowledge
b: the fact or state of having been affected by or gained knowledge through direct observation or participation
a: practical knowledge, skill, or practice derived from direct observation of or participation in events or in a particular activity b: the length of such participationexperience in the job>3
a: the conscious events that make up an individual life b: the events that make up the conscious past of a community or nation or humankind generally
4: something personally encountered, undergone, or lived through
5: the act or process of directly perceiving events or reality
By these definitions, what does Palin have experience doing? How has what she has done so far in her life contributed to a betterment - of herself, and those around her and of the community-at-large that she has governed? Experience comes from learning from mistakes, learning how to do something better and from wanting to know more - that is, realizing as you gain more knowledge, you also gain more ignorance. Experienced people tend to be humble as a result, and know what they don't know. Also, experience should enable you to be an expert on what you have experienced. There should not be contradictions or scatterbrain logic stringed together in incomprehensible acts of terror against the English language.
So what is Palin's experience? Energy? She has repeatedly misquoted facts and figures on how much of the country's oil is produced by Alaska etc. She does not come across as an expert at all in interviews or during stump speeches. I have not seen another person who claims to be an expert - which I would use cautiously since to claim to be an expert is a HUGE claim - and then fall so flatly on their faces every single time!!!
She should shut up, but unfortunately she has to campaign. I feel sorry for the rest of humanity who has to endure this horrid, wretched, cheap and stupid woman for another 21 days. or god forbid, another 4 years!!
Obama has the experience that comes from "THINKING". He's thought through his strategy, his career, his life and his values. He's written two books - eloquence of speech can only come from eloquence of thought. Whether or not someone thinks Obama would make a good President, I implore that they not compare him with Palin - that's just weird. its like comparing Einstein to ...to... Palin , i am at a loss and cannot come up with anyone I know that's stupider.
Sarah Palin continues to get on my nerves. As the election draws closer, her blouses are getting tighter and her skirts shorter. Her hair is getting sexier too. I guess as McCain trails in the polls, she's willing to play the part to secure the votes of all those men who "sit straighter" hearing and seeing her speak:-) I do not think Palin has the same experience as Obama because of the following definitions of the word "experience" according to Mirriam-Webster:
direct observation of or participation in events as a basis of knowledge
b: the fact or state of having been affected by or gained knowledge through direct observation or participation
a: practical knowledge, skill, or practice derived from direct observation of or participation in events or in a particular activity b: the length of such participation
a: the conscious events that make up an individual life b: the events that make up the conscious past of a community or nation or humankind generally
4: something personally encountered, undergone, or lived through
5: the act or process of directly perceiving events or reality
By these definitions, what does Palin have experience doing? How has what she has done so far in her life contributed to a betterment - of herself, and those around her and of the community-at-large that she has governed? Experience comes from learning from mistakes, learning how to do something better and from wanting to know more - that is, realizing as you gain more knowledge, you also gain more ignorance. Experienced people tend to be humble as a result, and know what they don't know. Also, experience should enable you to be an expert on what you have experienced. There should not be contradictions or scatterbrain logic stringed together in incomprehensible acts of terror against the English language.
So what is Palin's experience? Energy? She has repeatedly misquoted facts and figures on how much of the country's oil is produced by Alaska etc. She does not come across as an expert at all in interviews or during stump speeches. I have not seen another person who claims to be an expert - which I would use cautiously since to claim to be an expert is a HUGE claim - and then fall so flatly on their faces every single time!!!
She should shut up, but unfortunately she has to campaign. I feel sorry for the rest of humanity who has to endure this horrid, wretched, cheap and stupid woman for another 21 days. or god forbid, another 4 years!!
Obama has the experience that comes from "THINKING". He's thought through his strategy, his career, his life and his values. He's written two books - eloquence of speech can only come from eloquence of thought. Whether or not someone thinks Obama would make a good President, I implore that they not compare him with Palin - that's just weird. its like comparing Einstein to ...to... Palin , i am at a loss and cannot come up with anyone I know that's stupider.
Monday, October 13, 2008
The Election - 22 days to go
Should people on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder be left to fend for themselves? Should the argument be that since in a democratic, free economy, each individual is free to make their own choices, people who have not risen up financially simply haven't made the right choices for themselves and therefore do not need our empathy or special intervention?
Well, I've been thinking about the ideological differences between the Democratic and the Republican parties on the middle class issue and poverty. The Repubs feel that prosperity will trickle down - this might be somewhat true, but to what extent does it trickle down, and how much does it permanently and positively impact the poor and the less privileged to enable them to actually rise up to the level of the rich? I am not so sure... Whereas the Democratic ideology of starting from the bottom has a double advantage - it does not substantially or materially diminish the wealth of the rich, while also enabling systemic change from below - Like what Obama proposes - education, sex education/abuse awareness in schools, tax cuts for the middle class, health care reform, creation of new jobs in manufacturing and construction - jobs that cannot be outsourced easily etc.. Obama also admonished America for getting used to spending beyond our means - I have been waiting to see when one of the candidates would be brave enough to actually tell the middle class and other Americans that they must shoulder some of the burden of responsibility - cannot just blame the Congress or the Government or Wall Street.
It might be socialistic if you view it as taking from the rich to give to the poor. But you could look at it another way - education in all aspects from the ground up has the potential to reduce crime, sex education has the potential to reduce unwanted teen pregnancies, higher self-esteem to understand when someone is subjecting you to abuse, and providing that safety net that its Okay for a child to raise alarm when bad things happen to them. Knowing that you have access to reliable healthcare and a steady paycheck gives you peace of mind, confidence, and happiness and more love than loathing, more tolerance and less anger. With such potential positive impact, would it be only the poor and the middle class that would benefit?
Would the wealthy not benefit from a generally happier and at-peace-with-the-world population in this country? Would they not benefit from less crime and more responsibility?
In that sense, I really do not think such an ideology implies taking from someone to give to others. I think it means taking from someone to increase the size of the pie, so that ultimately, everyone gets a bigger piece. Viewed from this perspective, I do not think its wrong.
Well, I've been thinking about the ideological differences between the Democratic and the Republican parties on the middle class issue and poverty. The Repubs feel that prosperity will trickle down - this might be somewhat true, but to what extent does it trickle down, and how much does it permanently and positively impact the poor and the less privileged to enable them to actually rise up to the level of the rich? I am not so sure... Whereas the Democratic ideology of starting from the bottom has a double advantage - it does not substantially or materially diminish the wealth of the rich, while also enabling systemic change from below - Like what Obama proposes - education, sex education/abuse awareness in schools, tax cuts for the middle class, health care reform, creation of new jobs in manufacturing and construction - jobs that cannot be outsourced easily etc.. Obama also admonished America for getting used to spending beyond our means - I have been waiting to see when one of the candidates would be brave enough to actually tell the middle class and other Americans that they must shoulder some of the burden of responsibility - cannot just blame the Congress or the Government or Wall Street.
It might be socialistic if you view it as taking from the rich to give to the poor. But you could look at it another way - education in all aspects from the ground up has the potential to reduce crime, sex education has the potential to reduce unwanted teen pregnancies, higher self-esteem to understand when someone is subjecting you to abuse, and providing that safety net that its Okay for a child to raise alarm when bad things happen to them. Knowing that you have access to reliable healthcare and a steady paycheck gives you peace of mind, confidence, and happiness and more love than loathing, more tolerance and less anger. With such potential positive impact, would it be only the poor and the middle class that would benefit?
Would the wealthy not benefit from a generally happier and at-peace-with-the-world population in this country? Would they not benefit from less crime and more responsibility?
In that sense, I really do not think such an ideology implies taking from someone to give to others. I think it means taking from someone to increase the size of the pie, so that ultimately, everyone gets a bigger piece. Viewed from this perspective, I do not think its wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)