First off, I do appreciate the comments. I’m glad to say we now have a new record for comments to a single blog post, finally surpassing the breaking the news that our vet was a playboy playmate. :-)
Let me also state up front one thing -- I will readily admit that I don’t follow much politics. And I’m sure to be corrected a number of times on things I bring up, which I am more than happy to hear and think about.
It is with that, that I need to ask some questions. Bets, you want less government programs and legislation, freedoms to “choose the paths of our lives,” and for the feds to get out of our personal lives. It then seems curious that you would, I guess, support candidates who want to pass sweeping legislation on personal issues like Choice, and who want to discriminate on marriage rights for different groups of people. Aren’t these the kind of personal freedoms you mentioned? Or maybe you meant “other” freedoms? And perhaps states or communities can manage things better -- let’s take public schools in Portland, They’ve got problems -- schools are being closed, programs (P.E., music, art) are being cut, teachers laid off, we have HUGE numbers of kids in the classrooms, and we have one of the shortest school years in the nation. Is this a federal problem? If this is a state or local problem, maybe they can’t do such a great job? Help me understand what you mean by less government and more freedoms in light of these examples.
Dad - People have found it easy to say we don’t want to pay for more government programs. However, I wonder what your position is on increasing defense spending by $500 billion every year since 2003? Do you mind paying for that? I can appreciate lower taxes, but the Government giving money back to us in the form of hundreds of dollars cash doesn’t fund schools, doesn’t fund social security, nor medicaid, nor any other "system" you mentioned. Do I want higher taxes? Of course not. McCain wants to start taxing my health care premiums just so he can give me a “tax credit” if I choose to get my health insurance on the open market. I just don’t see it happening.
Let’s also be clear -- Obama isn’t without frustrations either. There’s no WAY he can get his healthcare plan funded by the proposals he has. Like every presidential candidate before him, there’s no way he can accomplish everything on his ticket. What Obama represents for me is an opportunity for change. Not change for change’s sake, but change in a more progressive, open-minded, accepting way that embraces all people of this country. Yes, that means redistributing things differently than republicans typically like. This boils down to fundamentals, and I wouldn’t expect us to agree on those things.
But it’s fun to discuss... :-)
Ford shoots down latest rumor of a Fiesta RS
5 years ago
8 comments:
Yoder...I want to hear your imput! Andrew needs some help! You are very insightful...get the comments coming.
First, I support both a right to choice and gay marriage. How, you may say, can you vote republican?! Although these are "hot button" issues that they make a HUGE fuss over while campaigning, they don't seem to be big issues after the election. Frankly, I think people would freak if they ever made either of those real, and they'd have a hell of a time passing them in the house and senate. At the state level, I think it matters. That's why I like Arnie :)
I may be wrong about this, but I really don't think that this pres. is going to seriously make progress on either issue.
As far as schools are concerned, yeah, I think it is a fed problem. It's not just in Portland. Public schools are forced to teach to the test now, so that means less extra curricular, more test! A teacher friend I have says that she only has time to read one novel in a whole year of class because of test regs! That is absurd! Now, maybe if we had vouchers, the schools would actually have to compete for their students and capitalism could work her magic.
Another thing is that there is no denying that McCain is more moderate than Obama. As much as I like Obama, he does have one of the most liberal, party-line voting records in the Senate. Frankly, it's a bit frightening when one so rarely says "no" to his party. McCain has said "no" many times; he's paired up with dems on certain issues...heck, the extreme right hates the guy, and that's a good sign.
Maybe this post only shows that I am reluctant to vote for either candidate...but, alas, I can't waste my right. So I hope I'm more convinced some way before the elections actually get here...
Ah, I love a good debate.
I agree that abortion and gay marriage are merely "hot button" issues that usually don't move outside of campaigning, but with three potential Supreme Court appointments for the next President, I think gambling on Roe Vs Wade being repealed is truly not worth the risk. The inaction on hot button issues is largely due to the stars not aligning and those appointments put things far too close to alignment.
As for gay marriage...I think marriage is a religious/spiritual union and the Fed should stay out of ALL marriages. Since that's not the case, I think employers and the Fed need to recognize same sex unions in the same way they do straight marriages. Not doing so is nothing short of discrimination based on sexual preference. I'm sorry, but as human beings in the 21st century we need to be better than that and under McCain this will never happen. For whatever reason the GOP likes to confuse the Constitution and the Bible. The Democratic party on the other hand could make a point and push legislation based on human rights and not the Old Testament.
McCain supports No Child Left Behind, both in voting record and ideals. While NCLB may have had a generally good intent, it's execution has been miserable and children, teachers and schools have suffered. Obama recognizes this and supports reform of NCLB that fixes many of it's current issues. As for vouchers, it's basically a discount to those already paying for private school, funded by tax payers dollars. Certainly this would enable some middle-class families to choose private schooling, but more likely this would lead to greater class segregation and deplete public schooling resources even further.
Comparing voting record statistics is silly. The reasons for various votes, for/against party vary so drastically that little valuable information can actually be cleaned by staring at numbers only. What is more informative however, is actually looking at issue based votes:
- Obama votes Y for S Con Res 18 "Unintended Pregnancy Ammendment." McCain N. Right; teen pregnancy and contraceptive education is a BAD thing. How's that working out for Sarah Palin?
Failed
- Obama votes Y for HR976 "State Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization." McCain votes N. Hmm...somehow I suspect this No vote has something to do with lobbyists and tobacco taxes included here.
Passed
- Obama votes Y for S Con Res 83 "Increase Education Funding Amendment." Take a wild guess where McCain was here. Wouldn't want to close up corporate tax loopholes now would we?
Failed (100% party line voting here when Dems were in minority)
- Obama votes Y for S Con Res 18 "Homeland Security Grant Program Amendment." McCain votes N. Spend $140M to create 1000 border patrol agent jobs? Restore $565M in cuts to vital first-responder programs in the Department of Homeland Security? Oh, that's right, "the best defense is a good offense (that allows private companies and special interests to profit ridiculously, aka our $2B/week war)."
Passed
- S Con Res 18 "Education Amendment." Obama Y, McCain N. Passed.
Etc, etc, etc. Both have voted with/against party when necessary and for political reasons, but there are hard disagreements on core issues that should matter to all people.
Ultimately, politics will always be politics and any sort of change comes in small increments (unless it's the Bush administration and it's change for the worse.)
I love America and I love my personal freedom and for me that means:
- A budget surplus and not a deficit.
- Not to have habeas corpus revoked when fighting a war on foreign soil and NOT American soil.
- Uphold the constitution and pass acts based on facts and information, not fear (Patriot Act anyone?)
- Tax cuts that actually benefit people who make less than $112k/year (taxpolicycenter.org)
I'm all for capitalism but I think there needs to be equality in taxation. When Huckabee said yesterday that he was a Republican because he "didn't want to spend the rest of his life poor," that was misguidance. Republican policy supporting "trickle down economics" is in stark contrast to his statement. While it's true the governments job shouldn't be to rescue the poor, it also shouldn't be to oppress them in some anti-Robin Hood type way. No matter who is in government, you have to work your ass off in this country to make it; I simply believe the government should make sure everyone has equal footing when doing so, regardless of class.
It's for these reasons that I, a registered independent who voted for Bush his first term, will be voting for Obama.
I am thrilled to hear you guys talking political issues. It gives me hope for the future.
Public schools are dear to me. I must comment:
Many schools are seeing academic progress since it started. That is all documented. However, we still have a dismal 75%graduation rate! And more money is being spent that ever. What's up? Surely that can't be Bush's fault too.
Choosing instructional programs on perceived need or intuition is simply too risky, in my opinion. The schools must be able to identify deficits in student learning to chart a new coarse.
Of course, the NEA, is against Bush and NCLF. But I don't agree with that union on most things.
There are a lot of great private schools out there but us middle folks can't afford it. Why not give a bit of relief for choice. However, in your view, I can't understand why we (republicans) want to give parents choice about what school to attend, but not give choice about aborting a kid. That is a mystery to me.
Watch 'accusing' Palin of criticizing. Obama did the same in his speech. Some of her words were taken from what Obama has already said about her and her kids. They were quotes. ALL sides are doing a massive job of it and I dread the next 3 months of it. Casting stones will be the norm. God help us!
"Another thing is that there is no denying that McCain is more moderate than Obama. As much as I like Obama, he does have one of the most liberal, party-line voting records in the Senate."
Be careful about these "most liberal/most conservative voting records" lines that you read. Unless you've checked the Congresspersons record yourself, you're likely going to get some meaningless info. This is because:
1. Who's saying someone has the most liberal or conservative record in the senate?
Congressional bills are not marked with a (Liberal) or (Conservative) identifier. That means someone is subjectivly defining what bills are "liberal" and what bills are "conservative" -- note that there's no middle ground there.
So a bill that has broad bipartisan support and was passed overwhelmingly by the entire House and Senate may still be flagged as a "liberal" or "conservative" bill and held against some candidate later by some anonymous organization doing the tallying.
Also, remember that these figures, coming from different organizations with their own criteria for defining "left/right," also come out every year. In many of these years where they talk about the "most liberal voting record in the senate" - the voting record wasn't liberal at all - because Republicans controlled both houses and there wasn't a damn liberal proposal anywhere in sight! Even post 2006 we have yet to have any serious "liberal" legislation proposed anywhere, so saying someone has "the most liberal voting record" even if it wasn't a completely suspect and arbitrary label, still wouldn't mean much.
You're much better off pointing to specifics of a voting record and saying that is why you consider someone to be "very liberal" or "very conservative." Of course... that would take actual work, which is where the process breaks down for most people. We all like to talk about politics, but only a handful of the especially nerdy actually want to go beyond repeating the last talking point we heard or read in the media and work at it. Most other people have lives. :)
I would offer though, that in that case, you should just listen to us nerds and do what we say. :)
Kidding... back to the serious, if you try to actually look at his votes for yourself, you're not going to find anything on Obama. Because he is not, and has never been "very" liberal. He supports gun rights, is for faith-based initiatives in government, voted for the FISA bill, opposes gay marriage, wants to expand the military --- and his voting record, if you actually look at the votes and seek to understand the bills, is anything but "left."
He is, and has always been, a political centrist. And he is one of the only candidates in my lifetime to talk so openly about reaching across the isles, and working with Republicans because this is one country, not two. He even suggested Robert Gates as possibly staying on as defense secretary, a statement which I liked but which make a lot of my liberal friend's heads implode.
On the issue of freedoms, I do find it difficult to understand why one party favors choice when it comes to abortion, but not when it comes to guns and vice versa. It seems to me that neither party is for free choice, but rather their own agenda. I tend to think that as long as your freedom doesn't unduly interfere with someone else's freedom, they should co-exist.
About the question of military spending, I certainly think there is a limit and I've been there so I know first hand about the waste and inefficiency. But I think that defense is one of the few legitimate roles of government so I'm willing to fund it and do our best to keep the inevitable waste and corruption at a minimum.
I think many other areas could be handled better on a more local level. Education is traditionally a state issue. I think it needs to stay there with lots of local control. It would take a lot to convince me that bureaucrats in Washington DC know more about running Portland schools than Portlanders. And if Portlanders make a mess of it, well it's in their faces. If Washington makes a mess of it, well, they're a long ways away.
On the point about taxing your health care premiums, I think McCain is just trying to get it fair. You currently don't pay taxes on your premiums because you work for a corporation with a health plan. But just try to buy your health insurance like we do. Yep, they tax it. Of course, I don't think either one should be taxed.
"Watch 'accusing' Palin of criticizing. Obama did the same in his speech. Some of her words were taken from what Obama has already said about her and her kids."
Obama hasn't said one word about her or her kids other than to repeatedly say that families should be off limits.
Be careful not to confuse what you here said "out there" somewhere with what Obama has said.
I know this is a dead thread...but I thought this article was especially funny: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-sweeney/theres-no-arguing-with-co_b_126805.html
Post a Comment