I don't have anything great to say this time--just that I'm scared to death. John McCain is winning in the polls. He is actually in the lead. How is that possible? Are they real or is there that big of a media conspiracy? I guess I just thought there was no way McCain could actually win, but apparently I was wrong. Does anyone know anything about this anomaly?
If John McCain wins this election, then you can just go ahead and put a fork in American democracy. It's over. There is no good or rational reason to believe that McCain is going to do anything other than what Bush has done, and Bush enjoys some of the lowest approval ratings in the 20th century. Yet somehow Republicans and Independents are still willing to elect this guy...hey assholes, ever heard of buyers remorse? I apologize for the language, but this is incredible. It's like watching a dog eat his own vomit because he's too damn dumb to remember why he threw it up in the first place.
I'm sorry but if this continues I'm leaving. I can't live through another 4 years of cronyism and do-nothing politics. And it is just goddamn depressing. Maybe that's not the right attitude, but like I said, if McCain wins there is no more democracy, because it means that Americans are too dumb and/or too confused by a fourth estate (the media) that increasingly resembles People and the National Inquirer to vote for their best interests. It means that "drill, baby, drill" beat out change, hope, and feeling positive about other people. It means that playground politics and he-said, she-said sound bytes are more important than addressing real issues such as energy, health care, and foreign policy. It means that intellect, knowledge, and problem solving don't matter--AND I'M A FUCKING TEACHER!!! If John McCain wins this election it means that I don't matter, and if that's the case, I'm going to take my talents somewhere I do.
Monday, September 15, 2008
If you like Bush, vote for McCain
Lately I've been hearing a lot of small little snippy "he-said, she-said, they did, they didn't" type of stuff about both sets of presidential and vice presidential candidates. The problem with this is that it dilutes the issues that are really important in this election, and becomes a distracting buzz that can be difficult and frustrating to deal with. This email is meant to cut through all of that, and provide the reader with a clearer picture of what this election is really all about.
Essentially everything boils down to this: if you like what president Bush has done, you should vote for John McCain. If you don't like what president Bush has done, you should vote for Barack Obama.
For example, if you think that we should continue to spend $2 billion a week on the war in Iraq, then you should vote for John McCain, who has no plan for troop withdrawal according to his website.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2006/09/28/cost_of_iraq_war_nearly_2b_a_week/ (link to article with 2b estimate)
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/fdeb03a7-30b0-4ece-8e34-4c7ea83f11d8.htm (John McCain's website with his plan for the war)
Please remember that when you make your decision on this issue, we have so far spent about $600 billion on the war, and long term estimates by pulitzer prize winning economist, Joseph E. Stiglitz, puts the total cost at around $4 trillion when it is all said and done. The congressional budget office puts that number between $1 and $2 trillion. If spending between 2 and 4 trillion dollars on the war in Iraq is OK with you, then you should vote for John McCain.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/19/washington/19cost.html (link to article)
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/03/19/business/20080319_COSTS.html (link to graph)
And FYI, I did search the wall street journal as well, but was unable to find any relevant articles on the war's cost. Also, remember that our current debt stands at 9.4 trillion, and that our trade deficit is 62.3 billion dollars. If this is OK with you and you have no problem with that, then vote for John McCain.
http://useconomy.about.com/od/fiscalpolicy/p/US_Debt.htm (national debt)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=avmDj_C7d8IU&refer=home (trade deficit)
If you are satisfied with the fact that total spending on health care was $2.3 trillion in 2007, or $7600 per person, then you should vote for John McCain. Total health care spending represented 16 percent of the gross domestic product in 2007--if that's just fine with you, vote for John McCain. His proposals for health care reform are similar to Bush, and his plans to bring competition to health care markets will do nothing to reduce the amount of money spent on the administration of care, or to pay top corporate lawyers salaries to deny their clients coverage.
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml (health care facts)
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm (John McCain's health care proposals)
Finally, if you are comfortable with the erosion of our civil rights, the intrusion of fundamentalist religious causes into the judicial arena, and the establishment of bigotry in the U.S. constitution against gays and lesbians, you should vote for John McCain. It is all right on his website.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm
Again, if none of this bothers you--if this type of agenda sounds like a good idea, then you should certainly vote for John McCain--at least you understand and support what you are voting for--and it is likely that Barack Obama is not the candidate for you.
However, if you would like to see real health care reform, an energy policy that involves more than simply "drill, drill drill," a plan for the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq, and a plan for the economy that would cut taxes for middle class families, then you should vote for Barack Obama. It is all right on his website.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
So to conclude, the question of who to vote for this fall is very simple: if you like what Bush has done, then you should vote for John McCain. He has plans to carry on a similar administration. If, on the other hand, you would like to see a change of policies when it comes to issues like the economy, health care, Iraq, civil rights, and energy policy, then you should vote for Barack Obama. When talking politics with friends I encourage you to simplify the conversation in this manner. It is simple, accurate (according to both candidate's websites), easily stated, and really not all that controversial. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Essentially everything boils down to this: if you like what president Bush has done, you should vote for John McCain. If you don't like what president Bush has done, you should vote for Barack Obama.
For example, if you think that we should continue to spend $2 billion a week on the war in Iraq, then you should vote for John McCain, who has no plan for troop withdrawal according to his website.
http://www.boston.com/news/
http://www.johnmccain.com/
Please remember that when you make your decision on this issue, we have so far spent about $600 billion on the war, and long term estimates by pulitzer prize winning economist, Joseph E. Stiglitz, puts the total cost at around $4 trillion when it is all said and done. The congressional budget office puts that number between $1 and $2 trillion. If spending between 2 and 4 trillion dollars on the war in Iraq is OK with you, then you should vote for John McCain.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/
http://www.nytimes.com/
And FYI, I did search the wall street journal as well, but was unable to find any relevant articles on the war's cost. Also, remember that our current debt stands at 9.4 trillion, and that our trade deficit is 62.3 billion dollars. If this is OK with you and you have no problem with that, then vote for John McCain.
http://useconomy.about.com/od/
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/
If you are satisfied with the fact that total spending on health care was $2.3 trillion in 2007, or $7600 per person, then you should vote for John McCain. Total health care spending represented 16 percent of the gross domestic product in 2007--if that's just fine with you, vote for John McCain. His proposals for health care reform are similar to Bush, and his plans to bring competition to health care markets will do nothing to reduce the amount of money spent on the administration of care, or to pay top corporate lawyers salaries to deny their clients coverage.
http://www.nchc.org/facts/
http://www.johnmccain.com/
Finally, if you are comfortable with the erosion of our civil rights, the intrusion of fundamentalist religious causes into the judicial arena, and the establishment of bigotry in the U.S. constitution against gays and lesbians, you should vote for John McCain. It is all right on his website.
http://www.johnmccain.com/
Again, if none of this bothers you--if this type of agenda sounds like a good idea, then you should certainly vote for John McCain--at least you understand and support what you are voting for--and it is likely that Barack Obama is not the candidate for you.
However, if you would like to see real health care reform, an energy policy that involves more than simply "drill, drill drill," a plan for the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq, and a plan for the economy that would cut taxes for middle class families, then you should vote for Barack Obama. It is all right on his website.
http://www.barackobama.com/
http://my.barackobama.com/
http://www.barackobama.com/
http://www.barackobama.com/
So to conclude, the question of who to vote for this fall is very simple: if you like what Bush has done, then you should vote for John McCain. He has plans to carry on a similar administration. If, on the other hand, you would like to see a change of policies when it comes to issues like the economy, health care, Iraq, civil rights, and energy policy, then you should vote for Barack Obama. When talking politics with friends I encourage you to simplify the conversation in this manner. It is simple, accurate (according to both candidate's websites), easily stated, and really not all that controversial. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
As few of you know, I have recently become a huge a huge Colin Cowherd fan. His show, "The Herd" is aired on ESPN Sports Radio everyday from 6am-10am. He's an Oregon native and as some of you may remember he used to be the sports anchor on KATU. The appeal of listening to "the Herd" is that Colin is able to transcend the realm of sports by very insightfully relating events that happen on, off, or around the field to real life. He usually begins his rants with "often in life..." and then goes on like a proud father teaching his sons a lesson with a pipe in his mouth and the evening newspaper in his lap. His show is classy, he doesn't tolerate nonsense, and he dispels common myths, misnomers, and mob mentality as a matter of course and principle--and he does it with style. Lighthearted, humorous, self-deprecating, "the Herd" is something I look forward to every tired morning before and on my way to work. Until today that is...until today.
Thursday, Colin began on a rant that he often trots out and that I don't really agree with--the old siding with the muckety-muck argument. Cowherd really enjoys sucking up to big business, executives, and CEO's, and though I disagree, I generally just ignore it and let it pass--there's no way I'm going to agree with everything someone in talk radio says (after all, it is a cult of personality), and in any case the rants are usually short lived anyway.
But today the rant took a turn for the worse. It also took a turn for the ignorant and the anti-intellectual. Cowherd said, and I'm paraphrasing here so bear with me, he said that, "it's easy for the 40 year-old Starbucks guy with a ponytail and an exotic snake at home to vote for Obama, but when you own a business and Obama's going to raise taxes to 39%, it's not so easy."
Obviously, there are a number of things wrong with Colin's statement. First off, I'd argue that $12 an hour, 40 year old Starbucks guy has a lot more to lose in this election than business owning, vacation house, trophy wife, dockers wearing CEO guy, considering that John McCain has no plan to address our health care problem, our energy or economic issues, and plans to privatize social security. It also makes democrats look as if we're a bunch of wierdos who are out of the mainstream, and while we certainly have our share of the wierdos, at least they're generally peaceful and well educated, unlike the gun owning crazies and fundamentalist Christians on the right. Moreover, considering that the economy is failing and that we're in a recession, trade deficit, and budget deficit due to nearly three decades of conservative economic policies (I include Clinton in this), it would seem to me that business owning CEO guy has a lot to lose as well if McCain is elected.
But all of that doesn't bother me as much as one simple fact: the President has no power to levy taxes. It is right in the Constitution, article 1 section 7. Presidents are credited with tax cuts because they often propose them and sign them into law. Bush, for instance is hated by liberals for his tax cuts, but they were in fact passed by a Republican congress, not Bush himself.
My confrontation with a townie
Now that Barrack Obama finally has the Democratic nomination, I was ready to sit back, enjoy life, and wait for the good times to start rolling. Unfortunately, the vacation was short lived as I ran into several older gentlemen that believe McCain would become our next president. "Ha," I laughed, "that's a good one--can I buy you a beer?" When they said no, I knew they were Republicans. We proceeded with an argument on politics, and here's how it went: Me--facts, Them--that sounds like a left wing conspiracy, Me--more facts, more strategy, Them--left wing, Me--what does that even mean?, Them--?, Me--what has Bush done that is so great?, Them--Bush isn't even a right wing guy, Me--?, Them--that sounds like a left wing conspiracy...
Well, at this point I challenged them to a debate, and asked for a crowd to join me to decide the winner. Unfortunately they declined, however, I did glean some incredibly valuable information from these gentlemen. The first is that the right wing argues that any progressive talking point (health care, energy policy, Iraq, etc.) sounds "just like something a left wing extremist would say." At the same time, they say that there are normal democrats out there, but that the media is so far left because of control that comes from the far left extremists, that normal democrats don't get to have their say. If you are not laughing yet, you should be. Obviously, this Republican talking point is an attempt to categorize mainstream American opinions as far-left, thereby marginalizing them. The trick is to ask these folks what mainstream democrats believe in, or even, what they believe in...if they are anything like the people I met, they won't be able to tell you anything--in fact, this question will fool them, because they've been trained for so long simply to hate other people and ideas, that supporting something is a totally foreign concept.
The other thing to do is to play dirty. I know that being Democrats, you are probably not inclined to stoop to this level, but let me remind you of a few things: the Republican party exists because white Southerners are still pissed off that LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act (in short because of lingering racism going back to slavery), conservative Christians don't want to support a pro-choice agenda, and rich people vote for their own best interests (its easy to afford health care, high gas prices, and inflation when you have millions). Republicans represent the worst, most selfish, ignorant segments of American society, and will stop at nothing to win an election--even if that means cheating and belittling our Constitution and/or our Democracy.
Ready? OK. So the strategy is to go ahead and play the race card. Not because it is unjustified--precisely because it is--you see, the right wing is going to try and start manufacturing all these bogus stories about Obama's lack of experience, his this, his that, reverend Wright, etc, etc. The point is that most, if not all of these claims are going to be total BS that is meant to give racist Americans "legitimate" reasons not to vote for Obama. Call them on it. Tonight, one of the guys I was arguing said that Barrack, "was a nobody, a nothing." I asked him what he meant, and in the middle of his tirade, he uttered the n-word. Good night, game over, TKO. The bartender asked him to leave and he walked out with his tail between his legs. Call them out on their racism...because many Republicans are racist. Pull the race card on them. Play to win. This election is critical to the future of our country. We need Barrack in the oval office.
Well, at this point I challenged them to a debate, and asked for a crowd to join me to decide the winner. Unfortunately they declined, however, I did glean some incredibly valuable information from these gentlemen. The first is that the right wing argues that any progressive talking point (health care, energy policy, Iraq, etc.) sounds "just like something a left wing extremist would say." At the same time, they say that there are normal democrats out there, but that the media is so far left because of control that comes from the far left extremists, that normal democrats don't get to have their say. If you are not laughing yet, you should be. Obviously, this Republican talking point is an attempt to categorize mainstream American opinions as far-left, thereby marginalizing them. The trick is to ask these folks what mainstream democrats believe in, or even, what they believe in...if they are anything like the people I met, they won't be able to tell you anything--in fact, this question will fool them, because they've been trained for so long simply to hate other people and ideas, that supporting something is a totally foreign concept.
The other thing to do is to play dirty. I know that being Democrats, you are probably not inclined to stoop to this level, but let me remind you of a few things: the Republican party exists because white Southerners are still pissed off that LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act (in short because of lingering racism going back to slavery), conservative Christians don't want to support a pro-choice agenda, and rich people vote for their own best interests (its easy to afford health care, high gas prices, and inflation when you have millions). Republicans represent the worst, most selfish, ignorant segments of American society, and will stop at nothing to win an election--even if that means cheating and belittling our Constitution and/or our Democracy.
Ready? OK. So the strategy is to go ahead and play the race card. Not because it is unjustified--precisely because it is--you see, the right wing is going to try and start manufacturing all these bogus stories about Obama's lack of experience, his this, his that, reverend Wright, etc, etc. The point is that most, if not all of these claims are going to be total BS that is meant to give racist Americans "legitimate" reasons not to vote for Obama. Call them on it. Tonight, one of the guys I was arguing said that Barrack, "was a nobody, a nothing." I asked him what he meant, and in the middle of his tirade, he uttered the n-word. Good night, game over, TKO. The bartender asked him to leave and he walked out with his tail between his legs. Call them out on their racism...because many Republicans are racist. Pull the race card on them. Play to win. This election is critical to the future of our country. We need Barrack in the oval office.
Obama's so dangerous I just peed my pants
I have some really, really important information for you about Barack Obama, so listen up. First off, if he's elected, he's going to raise your taxes. By 50%. He's also going to give Iraq to Al Quada, because he feels bad about the war. Oh and if that's not bad enough, there's more. Since Obama is also a racist, who hates white people, if elected, he's going to enslave all European Americans to amend for slavery. Then he's going to take all of the houses of the white people and invite illegal immigrants to come live in them, declaring to the white people, "You just got screwed, Hacienda style...bitches!" After that he's going to disband the military and turn over the security and control of our country to the Black Panthers, arming them with light sabers, who he's going to use to kill all the members of the house of representatives, the senate, and the supreme court, Anakin Skywalker style. And yes, they are going to kill the younglings. Then he's going to hold the biggest interracial porn shoot ever, with the white female slaves mind you, on the white house lawn, and he's going to force Steven Spielberg to film it, calling it "Encounters of the Black Kind." He's also announced plans to establish worship of the Dark Side of the force as the state religion, and to immediately use all of NASA's researchers to begin searching for Clingon warships. Once he has allied the Clingons and the Black Panthers fighting force, he's going to invade Europe, using the white slaves as human shields. After he's conquered Europe, he's going to use all of the US and Europe's Nukes to try to destroy the sun, because he's always hated tanning. Then he's going to escape to another galaxy with the Clingons, leaving us all to die of starvation on a dark and desolate planet. His final words will be, "How's that for Change...bitches!"
Just thought you should know.
Just thought you should know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)