Wow. It's been a long time, hasn't it? Well, you know how it is: life is what happens when you make other plans. I've been surely preoccupied with "life". As it is, most of my "legion" of fans here also manage to keep up with me offline so they haven't missed much. As for the rest of you, now that the political dust has mostly cleared, it will be easier to share my thoughts.
In some ways, I am not surprised that Mitt Romney has emerged as the unofficial but presumptive nominee...but in other ways I am. On the one hand, he was the rare choice that would attract the center-right and independents that those chasing the Tea Party or other hard line conservatives would eschew during primary season. Considering he's gone from establishing universal health care as Governor of Massachusetts to proposing to dramatically downscale if not shutter HUD and the Department of Education as President, he has shown to me that he is adaptable to any situation. Whether that is good or bad, I'll leave that up to you. On the other hand, I have to give credit to the Republican Party, with its considerable base of Southern Baptists and Evangelicals for narrowing the field down to not only a Mormon but two Catholics (oh, and Ron Paul, I guess.) Or perhaps I should just credit the fiscal conservatives on that one.
At this point, I should issue an apology of sorts. There was a discussion I once posted - although darn if I can find it - about the prospect of voting a Mormon into Presidential office. My thought then was that because what I saw as overwhelmingly conservative principles were contrary to my generally center-left views, I would not be able to find enough common ground to support a Mormon President. But then I was reminded of Harry Reid, a Mormon Democrat....and he's far from the only one . Not only that, I've read more about Mormons who are on a sliding scale of accepting some articles of faith while questioning others. So basically, people are still people and there are more nuances than I was aware of.
That said, I'm still not voting for Mitt. I might have been able to grit my teeth through four years of seemingly centrist and fellow Mormon John Huntsman.
As for President Barack Obama, I'm still somewhat underwhelmed with his record but, as clearly stated above, the alternative doesn't inspire me. Depending on who one talks to, either the President refused to create or honor various compromise opportunities with the GOP-controlled House and the barely Democratic Senate...or vice versa. In essence, it appears that my prediction of the return of gridlock reminiscent of Bush's last two years has unfortunately come true. Signs seem to point towards more of the same in the near future.
The judiciary branch may not necessarily be of help, either. At the risk of sounding like a parody of the President, let me be clear: Corporations are not people...or at least not all of its people. If you're talking about a small business of perhaps one hundred or less, then I could see how each manager and subordinate could have a vested interest in their mutual success. But when you are talking about the typical larger corporation, where downsizing and outsourcing have become key components in "strategy" and the lines between permanent and temporary employees become ever blurrier, perhaps the only people that a corporation represents are its top executives and those that aspire to join or replace them. I don't think George Soros or George Clooney should have any more control over politicians than the Koch Brothers or the Walton Family. The (Corporate) Citizens United decision needs to be overturned. I'm hopeful that swing-voter Justice Anthony Kennedy will agree.
Friday, April 20, 2012
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
It's Like He Read My Mind...
I would share my thoughts on the leaders in the GOP Presidential nomination race...but this article sums it up better than I could.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Summer Breeze...Makes Me Feel (Not So) Fine...
After seeing some of the changes on the blog of a dear friend whose occasional political musings I respect (even if they're "wrong" *snicker*), I realized that I need to once again play catch-up myself. Fortunately, I think it should be relatively easy to sum up my thoughts on the summer political season.
Both former New York Congressman Anthony Weiner and media mogul Rupert Murdoch "screwed" the public with their self-serving actions. Whether one is progressive or conservative, a public or private citizen, greed and egoism apparently does not discriminate.
Usually when a deal is struck in Washington and no one is happy about it, I feel then it must be a good compromise. However, I don't think I would apply that to the debt ceiling agreement. Although I do concede that Federal spending needs to be cut, I also believe there was a missed opportunity regarding higher income/net worth households and corporations. Granted, progressive aspirations to reverse the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts may have had unintended consequences on some of the middle class. However, increasing tax revenues on households earning above, say, one million dollars would have had made a huge difference in closing the Federal deficit.
Perhaps the one saving grace is that if the newly-appointed bi-partisan "Gang of Twelve" does not come to a more specific agreement on spending cuts and tax revenues by December, an automatic trigger goes into effect that cuts defense spending, a sacred cow for conservatives and strict constitutionalists. Personally, I don't know why the spending cut portion of the $1.5 trillion couldn't be spread out percentage-wise through all of the Federal budget, even the holy grails of entitlement Medicare and Social Security. I suppose that would have been too "easy"...
On a final note related to one of the other proverbial hats I wear...apparently the US is loosening its restrictions on visiting Cuba under the premise of cultural tours. This would add to the educational(?) travel packages as well as family visits by Cuban-Americans that are already permitted. While some say this action should not have been taken, I have also read commentary that the US Government is hypocritical since we allow travel into - let alone do business with - fellow Communist China, paper democracies such as Russia and Venezuela, and less-than-benevolent kingdoms such as Saudi Arabia. I believe there is substance to each point of view.
On the one hand, the major difference between Cuba and the other countries I referenced is that the latter countries allow their citizens to leave the country. (Whether there are positive/negative incentives for Chinese citizens to eventually return home is another subject.) On the other hand, I would personally not want to visit any of these places unless/until human rights issues, particularly the ability to travel outside one's borders, are resolved. I hope that I can avoid being put in a position that does not intersect with my business.
Both former New York Congressman Anthony Weiner and media mogul Rupert Murdoch "screwed" the public with their self-serving actions. Whether one is progressive or conservative, a public or private citizen, greed and egoism apparently does not discriminate.
Usually when a deal is struck in Washington and no one is happy about it, I feel then it must be a good compromise. However, I don't think I would apply that to the debt ceiling agreement. Although I do concede that Federal spending needs to be cut, I also believe there was a missed opportunity regarding higher income/net worth households and corporations. Granted, progressive aspirations to reverse the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts may have had unintended consequences on some of the middle class. However, increasing tax revenues on households earning above, say, one million dollars would have had made a huge difference in closing the Federal deficit.
Perhaps the one saving grace is that if the newly-appointed bi-partisan "Gang of Twelve" does not come to a more specific agreement on spending cuts and tax revenues by December, an automatic trigger goes into effect that cuts defense spending, a sacred cow for conservatives and strict constitutionalists. Personally, I don't know why the spending cut portion of the $1.5 trillion couldn't be spread out percentage-wise through all of the Federal budget, even the holy grails of entitlement Medicare and Social Security. I suppose that would have been too "easy"...
On a final note related to one of the other proverbial hats I wear...apparently the US is loosening its restrictions on visiting Cuba under the premise of cultural tours. This would add to the educational(?) travel packages as well as family visits by Cuban-Americans that are already permitted. While some say this action should not have been taken, I have also read commentary that the US Government is hypocritical since we allow travel into - let alone do business with - fellow Communist China, paper democracies such as Russia and Venezuela, and less-than-benevolent kingdoms such as Saudi Arabia. I believe there is substance to each point of view.
On the one hand, the major difference between Cuba and the other countries I referenced is that the latter countries allow their citizens to leave the country. (Whether there are positive/negative incentives for Chinese citizens to eventually return home is another subject.) On the other hand, I would personally not want to visit any of these places unless/until human rights issues, particularly the ability to travel outside one's borders, are resolved. I hope that I can avoid being put in a position that does not intersect with my business.
Friday, May 20, 2011
A Little Spring Cleaning
As I’ve been busy with other online and offline ventures, I apologize to the millions upon millions of you who have undoubtedly checked in daily with this blog daily hoping for an update on my musings. Your “patience” has finally been rewarded! LOL Needless to say, while my own world has been busier these last few months, so has the geopolitical world been even more hectic. I’m going to try to distill my thoughts down so I don’t end up creating a novel.
We Got Him. And of course by “him”, I mean Osama bin Laden. While I don’t celebrate his death, I do recognize the initially symbolic victory – and eventually, a very significant coup of information – our country achieved in finding him. Certainly this is not the end of terrorism; but beyond demoralizing al-Qaeda, the US has gained a treasure trove of information that could benefit our efforts tremendously. Back inside the Beltway, those who accused of Obama of being “soft” on terrorism were proven otherwise.
You’re Fired! I used to have a fair amount of respect for Donald Trump, despite his outlandish bravado and shameless self-promotion. I have enjoyed watching “The Apprentice” series – the original not the “celebrity” version - and as a fan of both Atlantic City and Las Vegas, I hoped his ventures in each of those towns there would be successful. I also looked on with curiosity to see how he would present himself as a potential Presidential candidate. While I expected him to be a fiscal conservative, I thought he might surprise people with a moderate social message. Never would I have imagined that the surprise would be that Trump would take the “birther” issue and make it a centerpiece of his quasi-campaign. As a result of that action, I have lost all respect for him. I seriously doubt that I will ever again watch any of his programming - including Miss America - or patronize any of his properties.
Paul Ryan. I will give Congressman Ryan credit for coming up with a relatively comprehensive, if still somewhat vague plan on how to address the budget. I don’t agree with the premise of turning Medicare into a voucher program as I doubt that health insurance companies will hold their inevitable rate hikes to a level equal to that of an increase in voucher funds (assuming the latter would even be supported by Ryan and Company). I also don’t trust that state government would use the Medicaid block grants for the use that they were intended. Just look at the results of the 1998 tobacco settlement. This is another case where I don’t believe charity would be able to make up the difference. And asking the disabled and elderly to pull on their proverbial bootstraps is unrealistic, to say the least.
I do give Rep. Ryan more credit for suggesting the closure of corporate tax loopholes. If his concurrent suggestion to also lower the corporate tax rate would result in the country receiving at least the same amount of revenue we are receiving now, I might be convinced to support it. However, I sense an effective permanent tax cut. Ultimately, I believe the country needs to both reign in spending and increase the share of taxes that higher net-worth individuals and higher-profit companies contribute. How to minimize the impact on middle-class households and smaller businesses is the trillion-dollar question.
Gingrich “Newtered”.While the thrice-married, former House Speaker shot himself in (or tasted) his foot on "Meet the Press" by suggesting that Congressman Ryan’s budget was “conservative social engineering” not unlike what he felt Obama and the Democrats were proposing, I give him credit for speaking the truth as he saw it. It’s unfortunate that he didn’t have an alternative to share or else he may not have found himself backpedaling almost as soon as he left the stage. Gingrich won’t win, but at least, unlike Trump who has also tested the Presidential waters frequently, Newt finally had the guts to dive in the pool…even if he apparently hit his head on the diving board.
Romneycare. Not unlike fellow Massachusetts resident Senator John Kerry’s infamous flip-flop with his vote to fund the second Iraq war, former Governor Mitt Romney supported a version of universal health care in his state before expected Presidential candidate Mitt Romney expressed regret of his decision. I do think Romney is a smart businessperson with more humility (and better hair) than Donald Trump. I think he would be excellent in a Cabinet position. However, I don’t think enough religious conservatives will be able to look beyond their anti-Mormon prejudice to vote him in as President. It’s really a shame since, as the GOP playing field currently stands, I believe that Romney has the best shot of attracting moderates.
President Obama. He’s not perfect. I still wish the economic stimulus package supported a New Deal-type plan that would have focused on revitalizing struggling inner cities and rural communities. He’s had to create or maintain uneasy alliances with countries whose human rights records are far from exemplary. Many of his ambitions are now being held in check by the majority Republican Congress. However, notwithstanding my comments about Romney, I don’t think there is a strong enough challenger to beat him in the upcoming elections. As many conservatives said circa 2004, “you don’t change presidents in a time of war”. And we are indeed still at war; in fact, we are now in (at least) three wars including our secondary albeit significant role in the Libyan civil war. Following his leadership in the demise of bin Laden, it will be difficult for any of the present and presumed Presidential candidates in the GOP to convince enough Americans that it is time to change course. A better strategy would be to figure out how to win back the Senate. That's not to say that I hope for that to happen any more than I wish Obama to lose the election…but there’s my free advice to Karl Rove and Friends.
We Got Him. And of course by “him”, I mean Osama bin Laden. While I don’t celebrate his death, I do recognize the initially symbolic victory – and eventually, a very significant coup of information – our country achieved in finding him. Certainly this is not the end of terrorism; but beyond demoralizing al-Qaeda, the US has gained a treasure trove of information that could benefit our efforts tremendously. Back inside the Beltway, those who accused of Obama of being “soft” on terrorism were proven otherwise.
You’re Fired! I used to have a fair amount of respect for Donald Trump, despite his outlandish bravado and shameless self-promotion. I have enjoyed watching “The Apprentice” series – the original not the “celebrity” version - and as a fan of both Atlantic City and Las Vegas, I hoped his ventures in each of those towns there would be successful. I also looked on with curiosity to see how he would present himself as a potential Presidential candidate. While I expected him to be a fiscal conservative, I thought he might surprise people with a moderate social message. Never would I have imagined that the surprise would be that Trump would take the “birther” issue and make it a centerpiece of his quasi-campaign. As a result of that action, I have lost all respect for him. I seriously doubt that I will ever again watch any of his programming - including Miss America - or patronize any of his properties.
Paul Ryan. I will give Congressman Ryan credit for coming up with a relatively comprehensive, if still somewhat vague plan on how to address the budget. I don’t agree with the premise of turning Medicare into a voucher program as I doubt that health insurance companies will hold their inevitable rate hikes to a level equal to that of an increase in voucher funds (assuming the latter would even be supported by Ryan and Company). I also don’t trust that state government would use the Medicaid block grants for the use that they were intended. Just look at the results of the 1998 tobacco settlement. This is another case where I don’t believe charity would be able to make up the difference. And asking the disabled and elderly to pull on their proverbial bootstraps is unrealistic, to say the least.
I do give Rep. Ryan more credit for suggesting the closure of corporate tax loopholes. If his concurrent suggestion to also lower the corporate tax rate would result in the country receiving at least the same amount of revenue we are receiving now, I might be convinced to support it. However, I sense an effective permanent tax cut. Ultimately, I believe the country needs to both reign in spending and increase the share of taxes that higher net-worth individuals and higher-profit companies contribute. How to minimize the impact on middle-class households and smaller businesses is the trillion-dollar question.
Gingrich “Newtered”.While the thrice-married, former House Speaker shot himself in (or tasted) his foot on "Meet the Press" by suggesting that Congressman Ryan’s budget was “conservative social engineering” not unlike what he felt Obama and the Democrats were proposing, I give him credit for speaking the truth as he saw it. It’s unfortunate that he didn’t have an alternative to share or else he may not have found himself backpedaling almost as soon as he left the stage. Gingrich won’t win, but at least, unlike Trump who has also tested the Presidential waters frequently, Newt finally had the guts to dive in the pool…even if he apparently hit his head on the diving board.
Romneycare. Not unlike fellow Massachusetts resident Senator John Kerry’s infamous flip-flop with his vote to fund the second Iraq war, former Governor Mitt Romney supported a version of universal health care in his state before expected Presidential candidate Mitt Romney expressed regret of his decision. I do think Romney is a smart businessperson with more humility (and better hair) than Donald Trump. I think he would be excellent in a Cabinet position. However, I don’t think enough religious conservatives will be able to look beyond their anti-Mormon prejudice to vote him in as President. It’s really a shame since, as the GOP playing field currently stands, I believe that Romney has the best shot of attracting moderates.
President Obama. He’s not perfect. I still wish the economic stimulus package supported a New Deal-type plan that would have focused on revitalizing struggling inner cities and rural communities. He’s had to create or maintain uneasy alliances with countries whose human rights records are far from exemplary. Many of his ambitions are now being held in check by the majority Republican Congress. However, notwithstanding my comments about Romney, I don’t think there is a strong enough challenger to beat him in the upcoming elections. As many conservatives said circa 2004, “you don’t change presidents in a time of war”. And we are indeed still at war; in fact, we are now in (at least) three wars including our secondary albeit significant role in the Libyan civil war. Following his leadership in the demise of bin Laden, it will be difficult for any of the present and presumed Presidential candidates in the GOP to convince enough Americans that it is time to change course. A better strategy would be to figure out how to win back the Senate. That's not to say that I hope for that to happen any more than I wish Obama to lose the election…but there’s my free advice to Karl Rove and Friends.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Karma Chameleon
I've come to the conclusion that that those conservatives and libertarians who support the Tea Party's message of fiscal restraint will remain bonded as long as conservatives do not start emphasizing their social agenda. Libertarians, who hold diametrically opposing social views, would subsequently break off from the movement. The following article seems to agree with my views, albeit from a more "karmic" approach.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703673604575550243700895762.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703673604575550243700895762.html
Monday, February 14, 2011
A Progressive Tea Party?
Not too long ago, in a galaxy not so far away...
"Imagine a parallel universe where the Great Crash of 2008 was followed by a Tea Party of a very different kind. Enraged citizens gather in every city, week after week—to demand the government finally regulate the behavior of corporations and the superrich, and force them to start paying taxes. The protesters shut down the shops and offices of the companies that have most aggressively ripped off the country. The swelling movement is made up of everyone from teenagers to pensioners. They surround branches of the banks that caused this crash and force them to close, with banners saying, You Caused This Crisis. Now YOU Pay....This may sound like a fantasy—but it has all happened. The name of this parallel universe is Britain."
http://www.thenation.com/article/158282/how-build-progressive-tea-party?page=0,1
Brilliant!
"Imagine a parallel universe where the Great Crash of 2008 was followed by a Tea Party of a very different kind. Enraged citizens gather in every city, week after week—to demand the government finally regulate the behavior of corporations and the superrich, and force them to start paying taxes. The protesters shut down the shops and offices of the companies that have most aggressively ripped off the country. The swelling movement is made up of everyone from teenagers to pensioners. They surround branches of the banks that caused this crash and force them to close, with banners saying, You Caused This Crisis. Now YOU Pay....This may sound like a fantasy—but it has all happened. The name of this parallel universe is Britain."
http://www.thenation.com/article/158282/how-build-progressive-tea-party?page=0,1
Brilliant!
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Being Human
So the other night, the lady and I are watching Piers Morgan's new show as he interviews former GWB National Security Adviser and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. While my lady and I each share an admiration for Ms. Rice's groundbreaking accomplishments as a black woman, I am not as enamored with her political views.
When Piers asked "Condi" about her thoughts about President Obama, she expressed her own admiration for his accomplishments as a black man while respectfully disagreeing with his politics. She went on to describe her conservative beliefs, at one point using the phrase "individual freedom" to which I responded "except, of course, if you're gay."
My lady shot me a look and said, "People have the right to feel how they feel!" I said that was fine but I couldn't help but notice a glaring inconsistency when Ms. Rice and other conservatives apply "freedom" to (mostly) fiscal matters but not to social issues. I later thought to myself again about the "God and guns" dichotomy. While I don't begrudge anyone for exercising their legal rights to feel secure, I somehow don't think that "what Jesus would do" would involve open or concealed carry.
I did concede that progressives can be just as guilty. I noted that there are indeed so-called "limousine liberals" who believe in socioeconomic diversity in theory yet choose not to live that reality in practice. It may even work in the other direction as those at the other end of the spectrum - shall we call them "public transit progressives"? - who give lip service to working together with their more comfortable brethren but may not be so crazy about socializing after hours let alone welcoming them as in-laws.
Madison, Wisconsin and Colorado Springs, Colorado are two of America's quintessential small cities. They are also bastions of progressivism and conservatism, respectfully.
As the state capital, Madison's vibe is no doubt influenced by the presence its government employees as well as the University of Wisconsin. I have read anecdotes about Madison that say city residents people are generally eager to embrace "green living" and gay pride but are naive if not skittish about embracing the relatively low number of poorer minorities.
Colorado Springs is the home of the Air Force Academy as well as the Focus on the Family religious organization. While the support for family values is obvious, I would hazard a guess that the definition of such would not necessarily extend to households that included same-sex parents, parents adorned with tattoos and piercings or families who had a generally progressive view of religion. Budding Air Force officers - if not also any Academy staff - who happen to be gay or lesbian probably are likely not encouraged to live openly, the pending repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" notwithstanding.
Both Madison and Colorado Springs seem to live under a "group think" where those who don't toe the party line (no pun intended) will have a hard time getting along in town, despite claims of open-mindedness or benign values.
People do indeed have the right to their personal and political beliefs. When those beliefs seem inconsistent or contradictory, I suppose that is what makes us human.
When Piers asked "Condi" about her thoughts about President Obama, she expressed her own admiration for his accomplishments as a black man while respectfully disagreeing with his politics. She went on to describe her conservative beliefs, at one point using the phrase "individual freedom" to which I responded "except, of course, if you're gay."
My lady shot me a look and said, "People have the right to feel how they feel!" I said that was fine but I couldn't help but notice a glaring inconsistency when Ms. Rice and other conservatives apply "freedom" to (mostly) fiscal matters but not to social issues. I later thought to myself again about the "God and guns" dichotomy. While I don't begrudge anyone for exercising their legal rights to feel secure, I somehow don't think that "what Jesus would do" would involve open or concealed carry.
I did concede that progressives can be just as guilty. I noted that there are indeed so-called "limousine liberals" who believe in socioeconomic diversity in theory yet choose not to live that reality in practice. It may even work in the other direction as those at the other end of the spectrum - shall we call them "public transit progressives"? - who give lip service to working together with their more comfortable brethren but may not be so crazy about socializing after hours let alone welcoming them as in-laws.
Madison, Wisconsin and Colorado Springs, Colorado are two of America's quintessential small cities. They are also bastions of progressivism and conservatism, respectfully.
As the state capital, Madison's vibe is no doubt influenced by the presence its government employees as well as the University of Wisconsin. I have read anecdotes about Madison that say city residents people are generally eager to embrace "green living" and gay pride but are naive if not skittish about embracing the relatively low number of poorer minorities.
Colorado Springs is the home of the Air Force Academy as well as the Focus on the Family religious organization. While the support for family values is obvious, I would hazard a guess that the definition of such would not necessarily extend to households that included same-sex parents, parents adorned with tattoos and piercings or families who had a generally progressive view of religion. Budding Air Force officers - if not also any Academy staff - who happen to be gay or lesbian probably are likely not encouraged to live openly, the pending repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" notwithstanding.
Both Madison and Colorado Springs seem to live under a "group think" where those who don't toe the party line (no pun intended) will have a hard time getting along in town, despite claims of open-mindedness or benign values.
People do indeed have the right to their personal and political beliefs. When those beliefs seem inconsistent or contradictory, I suppose that is what makes us human.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
