Presidential Race 2008

Yur Social Conscience: Presidential Debate (Round 3)

2008-10-17T11:50:00.002-05:00

Dear America,

The final Presidential Debate was held October 15, 2008 at Hofstra University in Long Island, New York and moderated by Bob Schieffer who I just recently learned is a long time fan of McCain. Click the link to see a video of this http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/15/final-debate-moderator-sc_n_135038.html I just find it so interesting how such a small world it can be at times J Out of all of the people they could have chosen as a moderator, they chose one who has clearly and publicly favored McCain. Couldn’t they have chosen someone who didn’t have a documented and publicized history of favoring either candidate? The format of the debate was yet again a bit different from the proceeding three, this time with the candidates sitting down and talking more to each other. It was more conversational, although I must admit I did fall asleep towards the end of it. Sorry, that’s what being a graduate student and working at the same time can do to you. But here’s my take on what I did see, and you all can fill me in on the rest.

Quite honestly, I’m glad that the debates are over. The issues started to seem a bit redundant, almost like beating a dead horse. But the pressure was on McCain to illicit the “wow” effect to listeners in order to redeem himself in the polls. I think he tried too hard to go for that effect. He mainly tried to do so by making attacks on Obama, which wasn’t a surprising tactic at all coming from him. But what was surprising to me is the way he attempted to relate to the middle class in this debate by constantly referring to Joe the Plumber. He doesn’t really care about Joe. And if you’re out there Joe, I hope you’re reading this. All you are is just a tactic McCain is using to desperately try to regain the lead, just as he did with Palin. Read the brief article by following this link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/17/mccain-aides-search-for-n_n_135534.html Only now when McCain trailing in the polls does he try to convey a concern for the middle class. What about the rest of the time he’s been in this race? Was the middle class on his mind then? If they were, it wasn’t apparent in his speeches and rationale behind his proposed policies. And I feel that his mention of Joe the Plumber was selfish and a direct exploitation because it was obviously not sincere.

Another thing that interested me in the debate was how Obama spoke of a need to “spread the wealth around.” McCain certainly did not like that notion and immediately stated afterwards that “We don’t need to spread the wealth around.” Ofcourse, you may not see a need to spread the wealth around when the grass is greener on your side of town. He stated in times of economic hardship, why should we raise anyone’s taxes? Allow me to explain. Here’s why we should McCain:

Lack of health care & an increase in uninsured Americans
Lack of jobs & increased unemployment
Lack of funding for social welfare programs with an increased need for those programs
Hunger & poverty
And the list goes on and on. Need I say more?
With McCain’s statement of “Why raise anyone’s taxes” he was suggesting a concept of fairness. It seems as if he was trying to say that in these hard times, we shouldn’t be trying to increase the tax burden on anyone. But get this McCain: “New statistics from the Internal Revenue Service show that the highest-earning 1% of taxpayers in America make 22.06% of all income reported to the government. That's almost twice the 12.51% of total income earned collectively by the lowest-earning 50% of workers. Yes, 1.4 million taxpayers claim 22% of income earned while 68 million share just 12.5%.” (MSN Money, 10/3/08). I’m sure he already knows that since it’s likely that he and his lovely wife Cindy are among that 1%. So, I ask, is that really fair?

I’m not criticizing anyone for being wealthy. But I just ask that the wealthy realize that everyone is not so privileged. And because they have been blessed to not have to live in poverty they need to accept the fact that there are Americans who need help and they may inevitably have to carry a bigger burden. That’s just life. People don’t ask to be poor. But it’s obvious that McCain doesn’t feel like the better off members of society should do anything to help those who aren’t so well to do. Statistics show that 14.9% or 89,239 Tennesseans live below the federal poverty level. How will they ever be able to break the cycle of poverty if the wealth is never spread around? We would continue to have institutionalized poverty where no matter what the individual does he/she will never be able to get ahead because of a lack of opportunity, flawed institutional systems, and an insensitive government. Caseloads in my agency alone within the past 5 months of families, children, and individuals in need of assistance have steadily increased. But we have still had to endure budget cutbacks. We need help. We need change.

I admired how Obama was able to stick with the issues and not waste our time talking about squabbles and he said/ she said crap that McCain obviously likes to keep bringing up. I’m just glad the talking is over and now its time to for us to act by voting on our next President. In Nashville, early voting started on October 15 and will go through October 30. And ofcourse the big day for everyone is November 4. I have a list of early voting site locations and hours of operations for anyone who needs them in the Nashville area. Just ask. For me and many others, this vote is especially important and 400 years in the making. Happy voting! And whether you support Obama or McCain, just make sure to let your voices be heard!

In closing, I ran across an article on the final debate and was reading through the comment posts underneath the article from people all over the world who are watching this election just as closely as we are. It's extremely interesting to read what they think of all of this in places far away from us around the globe. I've copied and pasted their comments below. Enjoy!

____________________________________________________________________

If Obama wins, republican voters will be sorry. But if McCain wins the whole world will be sorry.
jack , London, UK

No knockout? I'd say McCain was knocked for six. He looked old & shaky & when he put Obama on the spot, Obama batted him out of the field. McCain needed a game changer. He got one. The game is now all but over. Choosing Palin was probably his biggest mistake. Negative campaigning finished him off. Will Harris, London, UK

It amazes me how people crying "Obama is a socialist!" have no clue what the socialism is (e.g. Joe the Plumber, McCain, Palin etc.). Obama is as much a socialist as Pope is a communist. He just believes that rich people should pay more taxes than poorer people. McCain/Bush believe in the opposite. Greg Tomashevsky, North Andover, USA

To accuse Obama of being Socialist inclined is absolutely ridiculous. Pray, can't we find better words to color a man who most likely will take the US to the next dimension of democratic prosperity? Obama is a delight to watch. optimistically,his era will bring delight to the US and the world. Paul Aboh, Abuja, Nigeria

Well the clear result is it re-energized his base. Attacks, once again (to my surprise and delight) backfired. Gini - How wonderful that we live in a country where the right combo of work, time, opportunity and luck has led you to your success. Do we not want said opportunity for all Americans? Patrick, Philadelphia, USA

If Obama becomes President, then every self-appointed victim group in the US will be looking for handouts and reparations. Derek, Taunton, UK

I have to say this: I know how I feel being here in the States, watching this thing go down like a bad comedy sketch. It frightens me that folks around the globe seem to have more common sense about this election than my neighbors. Thank you all for your comments. Please keep us in your prayers. susan, kansas city, usa

At last Senator McCain got his message across. If sitting and smirking with arrogance while the Republican candidate spoke, then Obama won!! I beg to differ. Socialism just does not work. It looks good on paper but it doesn't cut the mustard. God hep the folks if the Democrat fools the population Prudence Eely Bond McGuire BA, LONDON, ENGLAND- UK

I do not remeber this country (USA) being founded on socialistideals. No I remeber that it was founded as a Republic with Democratic ideals. I think Obama has forgotten this as most of his policies have the stench of pure socialism. Robert, El Paso, Texas, USA

The debate proved to me that what you see is what you get. Obama is calm and intelligent, focusing on the issues and how to fix them as President. McCain seems flustered and afraid of losing as if this election was a board game. The process is like a game, but the position afterward is serious. Rick, The Falls, WI, US

I'm watching the very well respected daily Rasmussen Polls, and the USA Today multi-poll tracker, and the gap is in fact narrowing again and near the margin of error. Though Obama is looking good, if I were a Democrat I wouldn't crow yet. Remember Kinnock at Sheffield (His pal Joe Biden does!) Paul Freeman, London, England

I have heard the word "maverick" constantly used by McCain/Palin during this campaign as a positive. Someone close to me mentioned that another interpretation of the word could be "Loose cannon"! Imagine if these words replaced "Maverick" each time it had been used in their speeches..... peter , vancouver, canada

I'm not basing my vote on debates but on the experience, character and integrity of John McCain. I have never been polled by any of the pollsters and I have voted in every presidental election since Reagan ran against Carter. I have never based my vote on who looked or sounded better in a debate. Kathy, Kansas City, USA

McCain is a Bush puppet, Palin just shows what bad judements he'll make, and I laugh when he calls himself a "maverick" he is a career republican politician who for the last 20 years toed the party line, thats not being a maverick! Time for a change, a democratic change.
Gary Hack, Forest, Va., USA

Sorry Leigh, but a 100% of the moose population support Palin's election to Washington - because if she's there - then there life expectancy will be greatly enhanced. And if she loses then they'll ... odtaa, Richmond, UK

I am a American taxper with my own company. I work a long week. I do not understand why I should pay more in taxes so as to give more benefits to those who do not make an effort to work. Nobama - I shall vote McCain and Palin Gini, New York City, USA

McCain and Pallin are just wannabe angry manipulative people go Obama go

Adam Carson, London,

If it comes to which candidate is making more sense and talking less nonsense, Obama has come off better. He also seems more reasonable, sincere and trustworthy, despite McCain's considerable credentials. stephen, Sydney, Australia

OK. So we have Joe The Plumber ahead on 48%...Obama at 44%...McCain dead-in-the-water at 3% - blaming Joe The Plumber and Sarah Palin for sabotaging his campaign. Also of signifance, an overwhelming 97% of Alaskan Mooses say they won't vote the Palin ticket.
Leigh vernier, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Even if it looked like McCain would make a better president than Obama, no sensible independent would vote for him and risk leaving Palin in charge.
Richard, Edinburgh, Scotland

No knockout blow from McCain, more a series of missed blows and a few that hurt him more than Obama. While both candidates may prove, ultimately, to be much of muchness (the differences between them now may or may not come to frutiion over 4 years ) McCain has shown terrible judgement Paul, Tokyo,

I feel sorry for the American people. Obama will liberalise the entire USA if he get ti office, and McCain will simply bankrupt the States with unjust wars.
Collin Brown, Cotgrave, Nottingham

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4952771.ece

Yur Social Conscience: Presidential Debate (Round 2)

2008-10-08T11:55:00.002-05:00

Dear America,

The second of three Presidential Debates was held October 7, 2008 at Belmont University here in the great city of Nashville, Tennessee and moderated by Tom Brokaw. The format of the debate was a bit different. This time, it was held in a town hall format where questions were chosen from the audience and from online. Also, the moderator asked some of his own questions as well. So, what did you think? Personally, I liked the format of the debate better than the others. I felt as if it gave the American people a chance to ask great questions and let the candidates know the issues that matter to us. My favorite question of the night came from online and asked the candidates “What don’t you know, and how are you going to learn it?” My second favorite question came from the audience and stated something along the lines of: How can we trust either of you with our money when both parties got us all into this? This is a legitimately good point and something I must admit that I wondered early in the election. But I put my cynicism aside and came to the conclusion that we will have to trust someone. In light of all of our country’s economic troubles, from my general conversations it seems like a lot of people are like bitter lovers in a new relationship who unconsciously view the new spouse in a negative light because of the last one’s mistakes. I understand that you have to know where you’ve been in order to know where you’re going, but we have enough negativity going on right now and don’t need to add cynicism to the list. I definitely can understand how one can feel this way, but we have to start with a clean slate and move on with the person who we feel can help us from here on out.

Overall, in my opinion McCain lost. He seemed so much more interested in referring to his track “record” and taking shots at Obama than making sure he thoroughly and thoughtfully answered the questions. He didn’t seem sincere at all and appeared to use his time answering the questions as opportunities to recite his speeches. That extremely selfish. Oh, and might I add he was very boring. In particular, his attacks on Obama are getting really old. While he was so busy making his speeches instead of answering the questions, he didn’t mention the middle class once. Obama stated after one of McCain’s responses that “the straight-talk Express lost a wheel.” I definitely agreed with that.

Of course the questions of most interest to me where those most pertinent to myself, my family, and my client population. A question was asked along the lines of: What sacrifices will you ask the American people to make to get us through these economic hard times? McCain responded by stating that he will eliminate earmarks and recommend a spending freeze across the board except for vital programs (which of course included the military). In Layman’s terms, he’s basically saying that we will continue to spend $10 billion a month in Iraq and keep adding to their surplus and our deficit while much needed programs (like those that serve the poor, low income, and middle class) continue to suffer from shrinking budgets with increasing needs. For instance, the state of Tennessee alone had to let go hundreds of employees due to a decrease in the state budget. Various agencies and programs had to figure out how they would continue to function effectively and efficiently and still meet the needs of their clients with a drastic decrease in employees. Is McCain proposing more of this madness? One of the things Obama said that he would do is to double the Peace Corp so that young people interested in serving can do so which would lessen the burden of other groups.

Another insightful question asked was whether each candidate felt that healthcare was a privilege, right, or responsibility. McCain stated that he felt as if it was a responsibility but was nervous about government mandates. Obama stated that he felt as if it was a right and that as rich as this country is this right should be available to everyone. He stated that the government should be involved in this issue because there is a need to crack down on insurance companies cheating their people or setting up in certain states due to that particular state’s lax regulation.
One thing I particular like about Obama is his ability to relate to the less fortunate, lower, and middle class. He stated that America gave him the opportunity to get a world class education made possible by scholarships even though he came from modest means with a low-income mother on Food Stamps. He stated that if our country keeps going at the rate we’re going, then we can’t expect to be able to pass those same opportunities on to our children if changes aren’t made. Without these opportunities, what would our country be? How would there ever be a chance for those who have nothing to one day have something if they aren’t given the opportunity to do so? McCain stated that we don’t know what will happen in the future, and that is definitely true. So in God we trust because only He knows.

YUR Social Conscience: The 1 & Only VP Debate

2008-10-06T15:01:00.006-05:00

Dear America,

The only Vice-Presidential Debate between Gov. Sarah Palin (R) and Sen. Joe Biden (D) was held on Thursday, October 2, 2008 at Washington University at St. Louis and moderated by Gwen Ifill. For those of you who were fortunate enough to watch it, what did you think? Overall, I thought it was very interesting. I found Biden to be passionate, honest, experienced, and knowledgeable. It’s too bad I can’t quite say the same thing about Palin. To me, her whole speech seemed so very cliché, as if she was just regurgitating lines she had been previously spoon fed. In all honesty, I can probably sum up the beginning of all of her responses in the entire debate to: “Let’s talk about energy.” “McCain is a maverick.” “When I was Governor and Mayor of Alaska…” “….put bipartisanship aside….” I found her responses to be ambiguous, vague, unclear, and most of time it was obvious she wasn’t knowledgeable enough to answer the specific question asked so she would just divert her answer into talking about something she knew well, which was either “energy” or what she did in Alaska to avoid answering. When the moderator asked her about mortgages and taxes she would talk about energy. When asked about foreign policy, she would talk about energy. When specifically asked to address McCain’s past history of his support of deregulation and his current position opposing it, she refused to and instead chose to talk about what she did in Alaska. In my opinion, she was quite hilarious.

Biden, on the other hand, most of the time answered the question asked of him. I guess that's the thing with politicians. It can be hard getting a straight answer out of any of them. But he was much more clear and concise. I was most interested in the questions asked of Biden that would relate most to me and my clients. When asked why people making $250, 000 would be taxed, he stated that it’s only fair because the middle class is struggling with no break in taxes. And when Palin tried to counteract that by stating that this would effect many small business owners, Biden shut her down by stating that indeed it would not because 95% of small businesses make less than $250,000 a year. There is definitely no arguing that point. I believe that this would be very beneficial to the poor. In this country, 1 in 6 households have zero or negative net wealth so why should they be taxed more severely than those holding the majority of the nation’s wealth (The State of Working America, 2008)? The NY Times (2002) once stated that “lack of income means you don’t get by; lack of assets means you don’t get ahead.” And many of my clients aren’t even able to get by not to mention getting ahead. Biden also stated that under Obama’s plan, the wealthy will pay no more taxes than they did under Reagan.

Another aspect of the debate that was of particular interest to me was the topic of healthcare. The 2 candidates have very different views on what this should look like for Americans. The Urban Institute did a wonderful analysis of both candidates’ healthcare plans. If you want a more detailed description of them than what I am providing here, please check it out at http://www.urban.org/ They can sum it up so much better than I ever could so here are snippets from their analysis.

“The McCain health care plan represents a philosophical advance over many other health care proposals, principally in its commitment to redistributing the current tax exemption for employer-based health insurance. However, the plan raises more concerns than it addresses. The plan would
1. provide a refundable tax credit that is more valuable to low-income workers than the current tax exemption for employer-based insurance, though the credit is not adequate to make coverage affordable for many;
2. make insurance coverage less accessible and affordable for those with high health care needs;
3. increase coverage among the currently uninsured through the non-group market but reduce the number already covered by employers, leaving about the same number of people uninsured; 4. have a high budget cost, at least in its early years.

In brief, McCain’s proposal would dramatically change how many Americans obtain health insurance coverage, make coverage less accessible for those with health problems, have a high budget cost, but have little effect on the number uninsured.”
McCain’s healthcare plan would be disastrous for the poor, low-income, and middle class and would do absolutely nothing to help increase the number of insured Americans. In essence, it would just be a pointless restructured way for those who already healthcare to keep receiving it.

So, let’s see what the Urban Institute (2002) says about Obama’s plan.
“Our general assessment of the Obama plan is that it would
1. greatly increase health insurance coverage but would still leave about 6 percent of the non-elderly population uninsured, compared to 17 percent today.
2. substantially increase access to affordable and adequate coverage for those with the highest health care needs, including those with chronic illnesses, by spreading health care risk broadly;
3. significantly increase the affordability of care for low-income individuals; and

4. reduce the growth in health spending through a broad array of strategies.

In short, Obama’s proposal contains the basic components necessary for effectively addressing the most important shortcomings of the current health care system, that is, limited coverage, inadequate risk pooling, and high-cost growth.”

From what I gather from the Urban Institute, neither plan is perfect and nor did I expect them to be. But it’s clearly obvious which plan is better for ALL citizens of this country, and that’s Obama’s. I just don’t understand why this is so hard for some people to comprehend. The research is right there for all to see. Healthcare gaps are one of the many things that hit those in poverty the hardest, and those who don’t have it are more likely to not seek health services until the situation becomes a crisis (Nashville Poverty Symposium, 2008). The U.S. Census Bureau (2007) found that 800,000 Tennesseans are uninsured which is more than the entire population of the city of San Francisco! Obama’s health care plan would help alleviate this concern for the poor not on in this state but across the country. I’m sure a lot of Republicans can’t even fathom not having health care. Do they know what its like to not be insured? To need to go to the doctor but you delay or don’t go at all because you simply can’t afford it? I really don’t think so.

Another interesting point was on the topic of the climate. Palin was asked what she thought the causes of the climate changes were and did she think they were man made. Her answer was pathetic. She went on to state that she didn’t think that the changes were man made, and she didn’t want to talk about the changes in the climate but would rather talk about we’re going to do about them. Biden came back with a vengeance by stating that the changes are definitely man made, and if you don’t understand the causes you won’t be able to find a solution which are my sentiments exactly. How can you talk about what you are going to do about a problem without talking about what’s causing the problem in the first place?

Next was foreign policy. Palin kept driving home the same old tired point as her buddy McCain by trying to establish Obama as unpatriotic because he voted to cut off support to the troops. But Biden pointed out that what both McCain and Palin keep failing to remember is that McCain voted the EXACT same way because it involved a timeline, in which we all know he is opposed to. Biden stated that we need to give more attention to Afghanistan instead of all of it to Iraq where we currently spend more in 3 weeks there than we have in 6 years in Afghanistan. Biden also stated that “this administration’s policy has been an abstract failure.” I agree as I’m sure both Democrats and Republicans would as well. But why is it that McCain and his constituents seem to have such a hard time comprehending that? Similar to what they tell substance abuse victims in treatment, the first step is admitting that you have a problem. McCain could use that advice because he needs to honestly admit that we have big problems here and the policies of the current administration nor his policies (which are very similar in detail) will solve them. It’s a HUGE problem when we’re spending $10 BILLION a MONTH in Iraq when they have a $80 BILLION SURPLUS compared to our $11.3 TRILLION DEFICIT (including the Bailout Mess). Have we been duped by Iraq?

I must say that I did enjoy the debate. But so far, both debates have just reinforced positions I already held on certain issues and definitely did not change my decision in who I will vote for. What about you?

Oh, I almost forgot. If you are in the mood for a great laugh, check out this link to Saturday Night Live's take on the lastest debate. Be sure to scroll down at and check out some of the previous videos on the Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates as well. They are all equally hilarious!

http://tv.yahoo.com/saturday-night-live/show/194/videos/10037417

Yur Social Conscience: This is Powerful

2008-10-01T09:01:00.001-05:00

Check out this link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al_y3g77ZsA

YUR Social Conscience: Presidential Debate (Round 1)

2008-09-29T14:03:00.002-05:00

Dear America,

Now that we’ve seen the much anticipated first Presidential Debate, what do you think? The first of three Presidential debates was held this past Friday in Oxford, Mississippi at the University of Mississippi and moderated by Jim Lehrer. Much of the media view the debate as a tie between both McCain and Obama. I agree. According to the LA Times, Polls taken since Friday also show that the debate has given Obama a slightly wider lead over McCain. When asked who they thought offered the best proposals to solve the nation’s problems, polls show the Obama was chosen over McCain. Polls also showed that even though McCain is still seen as more knowledgeable, particularly in the area of foreign policy, Obama demonstrated that he is definitely ready to be President and has the ability to lead this country. I agree here as well.

From watching the debate, Obama shined in the first half of it when the discussion was on the state of the economy, the working class, families, children, and education. Obama appeared more knowledgeable on issues that affect families on “Main Street.” When asked about Wall Street, he voiced his support for the Bailout plan with the additions proposed by Democrats (mentioned in my last blog post). He stated that ordinary citizens have been struggling way before the Wall Street crisis so we need to start paying more attention to Main Street as well. Obama was cool, calm, collected, articulate, focused, and his sincerity was apparent in my opinion. Obama also stated that McCain believes that the market can solve everything, which we have seen is not so.

Then McCain had his chance to shine towards the second half of the debate when the conversation turned toward foreign policy. I don’t understand why foreign policy dominated most of the debate. I understand that it does need to be addressed, but given the current state of our economy, I would have assumed that issue would have taken up most of the discussion. McCain seemed as if he could talk about foreign policy in his sleep, but quite frankly, it almost put me to sleep. Not that foreign policy isn’t important, it just isn’t my forte. I started to wonder if McCain was running for President of the US or for one of those foreign countries he spoke so eloquently of. I am more concerned with what’s happening here now.

When electing our leaders, most of us go with someone who will be representative of our issues. It’s obvious that Obama is the candidate who has more concerned with the populations served by my agency: low-income/middle class men, women, and their families, children. I have not really heard McCain address the elderly population outside of veterans. Obama stated that he believes that the economy can grow from the bottom up, unlike McCain who believes in trickle down economics that obviously aren’t and haven’t been working. Wikipedia states that trickle down economics are “the economic-political argument that the increases in the wealth of the rich are good for the poor because some of such additional wealth will eventually trickle down to the middle class and to the poor.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics How dumb is that? If anyone out there reading this has an income below the federal poverty line or is middle class, please post and let me know how often the wealth of the rich trickles down to you and your family. Clients served by my agency have yet to feel the “trickle.” If anything, the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer. I’m pretty sure social service agencies and organizations, including my agency, feel the effects of a shrinking budget while needs increase more than they feel the effects from trickle down economics. McCain criticized Obama stating that he is calling for an enormous tax increase, and Obama quickly corrected him stating that if you make less than $250k a year (which includes me, my clients, and a lot of the general population) you won’t see a tax increase. This is one reason why Republicans oppose Obama so much because a big majority of the party is either wealthy, business owners, or both and would be subject to tax increases under Obama’s plan! So, as for the debate…one down, two to go.

Yur Social Conscience: Bailout Madness

2008-09-24T14:55:00.007-05:00

Dear America,

Everyone has heard by now about the crisis that occurred with Wall Street. A lot of people probably thought that they would never really need to be concerned with what’s going on in Wall Street outside of the stock report shown on the local news that we barely paid attention to. At least I did. Now, I’m finding myself wondering more about Wall Street than I have ever cared to. I have (and I’m sure many of you have too) wondered what happened to get our economy into this mess to begin with. Well, that question has an answer that is multi-faceted and many factors go into play that are beyond me. But some basic things that occurred can be explained. So, let’s begin shall we.

Now, I’m a very simplistic person and so my explanation will reflect that. Back in March of this year, the feds rescued Bear Stearns, the US’s 5th largest investment bank, from collapsing by shelling out $30 billion of taxpayers’ dollars. The feds’ rationale for doing so was because this huge company held a lot of contracts that they thought would no longer be honored if it failed, which would as a result been catastrophic to our economy. Now in our current month of September, stating that this has not been a good month for Wall Street or our economy would be a terrible understatement. The first sign of trouble again was when the feds had to take over two of the nation’s largest mortgage companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Then a week later two financial giants that had been around for over a century, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers literally went broke. Merrill Lynch saved themselves by allowing Bank of America to buy them out and Lehman Brothers went bankrupt. And let’s not forget American International Group (AIG). It has been said that the main reason, in simple terms, why these companies were in hot water is because they took too many excessive risks and made too many bad business decisions.

So, now the American people must pay for their mismanagement.

The feds have proposed a massive bailout plan for these companies that will include a high price tag of an estimated $700 billion (of taxpayers’ dollars might I add). All of the details of the plan have not been finalized at this time. But CNN does confirm some of the details proposed by the current administration. Bush’s plan calls for the feds to purchase risky assets from financial companies for the next two years, hold on to them, and then sell them for a profit. It is hoped that by bailing these companies out, they will be given the opportunity to clean up their balance sheets which would allow them to lend again and supposedly benefit us all. Democrats specifically propose as additions to Bush’s plan that that the feds should not be allowed to buy up troubled assets for the next two years, that the feds should have more of an equity stake in the companies it rescues, more help for Americans facing foreclosure, stricter government regulation, and a decrease in the bonus pay for the major executives of those companies being rescued. And inevitably, this would increase the nation’s deficit from 10.6 trillion to 11.3 trillion starting the next fiscal year on the 1st of next month. One member of Congress has advocated that the bailout should be paid for by increasing taxes on the incomes of those making over $1 million a year. Sounds good to me, but I highly doubt if that happens. It has been said that this bailout will be a risky venture with no clear guarantee of success, but it has also been said that inaction is not an option if we want our economy not to go under which would have effects similiar to the Great Depression of 1929. And that would truly be catostropic.

What about my clients? With a great deal of our national budget already going toward the military and less towards social welfare programs, it seems like the American people will be the ones left suffering… especially the poor. Tennessee’s home foreclosures rose 66% over a two year period from 2005-2007. Contrary to popular belief, there are those who live in poverty that do live in their own home. About 25% or 3,868 families in the Nashville area own their own home and would be particularly affected by the bailout (we all will be affected). If the Democratic proposal additions are passed along with the bailout plan, it may help alleviate the suffering of this bad situation by also helping out homeowners and putting measures into place so that the likelihood of this event reoccurring is lessened. Many people have also wondered who will “bailout” the American family when this mess takes it toll on them. Who will bail us out when the effects of this start to be felt at its hardest? Some of us have also wondered how the government can come up with a way to squeeze out billions now but would not have probably ever have done that for social welfare programs. And anyone who works in the area of social welfare and non-profit know that having to face annually decreasing budgets are usually a major concern repeatedly as the need for these programs keep increasing. The phrase “In God we trust” on the back of our currency couldn’t be more true because, in my opinion, anyone that puts their complete trust in our nation’s supposed leaders and government is delusional.

Yur Social Conscience: McCain....More of the Same

2008-09-16T16:40:00.005-05:00

Dear America,

Amidst all of the controversy surrounding Palin, ofcourse it wouldn't be fair if we didn't spread the love on over to her buddy McCain. Below is a email that was sent to me by a family member about the Good Ol' Boy himself and talks about the former Mrs. McCain. Most of this stuff I already knew, as I'm sure some of you probably already know as well. But just I'm posting it just in case. It can be argued that politician's personal lives shouldn't be the focus of our attention (we Democrats argued that very same thing with the Lewinsky situation concerning our pal Clinton), but since Clinton wasn't spared McCain won't be either, lol. The letter is below for your viewing.

Also, while I have your attention....it was breaking news today on CNN that Palin has chosen that she will likely not cooperate with investigations surrounding her firing of the cop who refused to fire her ex-brother in law. Some republians have also chosen to challenge the investigation in an effort to block it. Now, Palin is not legally obliged to cooperate. But in the very beginning she did state that she would cooperate. CNN also made it a point to emphasize the words "not likely" and stated that this does not mean she is saying she will not cooperate. But my thing is this, why the change of heart now? What is she hiding? Obviously something. And to me, "not likely" to cooperate is painfully close to saying she will not be cooperating. Oh, well....here is the letter about McCain. I will be interested to hear what you all think!

Subject: Carol McC ain [Former Mrs. John McCain] A MUST READ
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 04:47:42 +0000
First wife out of sight, how shallow can one man be? [ Carol McCain ]

McCain likes to illustrate his moral fiber by referring to his five years as a prisoner-of war in Vietnam. And to demonstrate his commitment to family values, the 71-year old former US Navy pilot pays warm tribute to his beautiful blonde wife, Cindy, with whom he has four children, But there is another Mrs. McCain who casts a ghostly shadow over the Senator's presidential campaign. She is seldom seen and rarely written about, despite being mother to McCain's three eldest children.

She was the woman McCain dreamed of during his long incarceration and torture in Vietnam's
infamous 'Hanoi' prison and the woman who faithfully stayed at home looking after the children and waiting anxiously for news, but when McCain returned to America in 1973 to a fanfare of publicity and a handshake from Richard Nixon, he discovered his wife had been disfigured in a terrible car crash three years earlier, Her car had skidded on icy roads into a telegraph pole on Christmas Eve. 1969. Her pelvis and one arm were shattered by the impact and she suffered massive internal injuries. When Carol was discharged from the hospital after six months of life-saving surgery, the prognosis was bleak. In order to save her legs, surgeons had been forced to cut away huge sections of shattered bone, taking with it her tall, willowy figure. She was confined to a wheelchair and was forced to use a catheter.Today, she stands at just 5'4 "in and still walks awkwardly. with a pronounced Limp. Her body is held together by screws and metal plates and at 70, her face is worn by wrinkles that speak of decades of silent suffering.--For nearly 30 years, Carol has maintained a dignified silence about the accident, McCain and their divorce, but last week at the bungalow where she now lives at Virginia Beach, a faded seaside resort 200 miles south of Washington, she told The Mail on Sunday how McCain divorced her in 1980 and married Cindy, 18 years his junior and the heir to an Arizona brewing fortune, just one month later. "My marriage ended because John McCain didn't want to be 40, he wanted to be 25, You know that happens...it just does."

In 1979 while still married to Carol- he met Cindy at a cocktail party in Hawaii. Over the next six months he pursued her, flying around the country to see her. Then he began to push to end his
marriage. Some of McCain's acquaintances are less forgiving, however. They portray the politician as a self-centered womanizer who effectively abandoned his crippled wife to play the field' They accuse him of finally settling on Cindy, a former rodeo beauty queen,for financial reasons. Ted Sampley, who fought with US Special Forces in Vietnam and is now a leading campaigner for veterans' rights said "I have been following John McCain's career for nearly 20 years. I know him personally. There is something wrong with this guy and let me tell you what it is--deceit."

When he came home and saw that Carol was not the beauty he left behind, he started running around on her almost right away. Everybody around him knew it. Eventually he met Cindy and she was young and beautiful and very wealthy. At that point McCain just dumped Carol for something he thought was better. "McCain is the classic opportunist. He's always reaching for attention and glory. After he came home, Carol walked with a limp. So he threw her over for a poster girl with big money from Arizona and the rest is history." Ross Perot, a billionaire Texas businessman, and a former presidential candidate, who paid her medical bills all those years ago, now believes that both Carol McCain and the American people have been taken in by a man who is unusually slick and cruel-even by the standards of modern politics.

Yur Social Conscience: The Truth About Sarah Palin

2008-09-15T09:23:00.007-05:00

Dear America,

Please read the letter below. It was passed along to me by a co-worker who stated that this letter has been circulating over the internet. Some of you may have already read or heard about it. If you would like to go to the link where I retrieved it, be my guest....http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/about-sarah-palin-a-letter-from-anne-kilkenny/741/ ,but I have provided for your easy access below. The letter was written by a resident of Wasilla, Alaska (Palin's home town where she was both Mayor and Governor), and this person claims to have known her. She allegedly exposes the real Palin. Hey, I just give you the information. It's up to you to decide how you want to perceive it. I personally think there is truth to it, but I guess I can be a bit biased. But to each his own.

Anything listed in bold AND in parentheses below are my comments not those of Ms. Kilkenny. Also, a great friend suggested this link to an article in Newsweek about the investigations, past and current, surrounding Palin:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/158738 This article positively confirms some of the allegations mentioned in the letter below. Some of you aren't too fond of reading long passages....I know, I know. But please be so kind and read both the article and the letter. Brace yourself, because this is going to be another long one but very well worth the read. So, for those who haven't read it yet, without further ado....

A note to all by Anne Kilkenny

Dear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in common: their gender and their good looks. :) You have my permission to forward this to your friends/email contacts with my name and email address attached, but please do not post it on any websites, as there are too many kooks out there . . .Thanks, Anne
[Note by web_admin: This was already posted on Washington Independent comments area and was meant by the author to be read by many, but readers need sourcing...the NY Times has talked with Anne since.]

ABOUT SARAH PALIN: I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the residents of the city. She is enormously popular; in every way she’s like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a "babe". It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months. (This was confirmed true by CNN Presents: Sarah Palin Revealed which aired this past weekend). She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby. (There were rumors circulating that Trig was actually her daughter, Bristol's, son but these were untrue).

She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym. She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things outthere" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit. (Now is that right?) Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin’s kind of job is highlysought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month orso in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans. Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters. She's smart.Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had given rise to a recall campaign. Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a “fiscal conservative”. During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation(1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren’t enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million.

What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn’t even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. (Also, confirmed by CNN's special). She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing. While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once. These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city. As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state. (Confirmed by CNN, every resident received a check). In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's surplus, borrow for needs.

She’s not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideasor compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren’t generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren’t evaluated on their merits, but on the basis of who proposed them.While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. (Once again, this was confirmed by CNN's special. Also, interviewed in the special was one of Palin's fellow Republican colleagues in the Alaskan government who worked closely with Palin but was not very fond of her for certain reasons. She stated that Palin was not approachable, failed to return phone calls, was not open to hear the ideas of others, and stated she didn't agree with Palin's tactics). City residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrewher termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the Librarian are on her enemies list to this day. Sarah complained about the “old boy’s club” when she first ran forMayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. (or they chose to voluntarily resign) At the City and as Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the State’s top cop (see below). As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla’s Police Chief because he “intimidated”her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support. She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn’t like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her.When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: (confirmed by CNN) one of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job which paid $122,400/yr, (confirmed by CNN) she was complaining in the press about the high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as agutsy fighter against the “old boys’ club” when she dramatically quit,exposing this man’s ethics violations (for which he was fined).

As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrelpolitics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the “bridge to nowhere” after it became clear that it would be unwise not to. (CNN showed footage of her publicly supporting the bridge before she was elected, then later withdrawing her support). As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grand stand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservan tshe had gained a reputation as “anti-pork”. She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal conservative (Confirmed by CNN).

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her “Sarah Barracuda” because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be madepoint guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her. As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as “AGIA” that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum. Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National WildlifeRefuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned “as a private citizen” against a state initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State’s lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior’s decision to list polar bears as threatened species. McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be aheartbeat away from being President. There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she. However, there’s a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.

CLAIM VS FACT
•“Hockey mom”: true for a few years•“PTA mom”: true years ago when her first-born was in elementaryschool, not since•“NRA supporter”: absolutely true• social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconsitutional) •pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it.•“Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation•“Experienced”: Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.•political maverick: not at all•gutsy: absolutely!•open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.•has a developed philosophy of public policy: no•”a Greenie”: no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.•fiscal conservative: not by my definition!•pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.•pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents•pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla’s history.•pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works in a union doesn’t make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS? First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. (If you've followed by blogs, does that term sound familiar?) I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny +Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations. Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "Bad things happen when good people stay silent". Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that’s life. Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's attempt at censorship. Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

CAVEATS
I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase inspending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor) from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are swamped. So I can't verify my numbers. You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000", up to 9,000. The day Palin’s selection was announced a city official told me that the current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to 2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90’s.

Anne Kilkenny
August 31, 2008

Yur Social Conscience: I Did Yur Homework For You

2008-09-10T09:55:00.000-05:00

Dear America,

In my last post I spoke about issues and how important it is to know what they are. Traditionally, both the Democratic and Republican parties have contrasting issues, and what issues we generally identify with usually determine what party we affiliate ourselves with. This is how most people determine what party they give their allegiance to. Of course, you do have some who choose parties based on somewhat irrelevant facts like gender, race, their family’s affiliation, etc but we’re not talking about those people right now. So, to remind us of what where these parties stand, I did a little investigating and decided to post it here to make the vital information you need to know this election year available all in one place. Here’s what I came up with.

Let’s talk about the Grand Ol’ Party (GOP) first. Yup, those Good Ol’ Boys. I guess in some aspects, Democrats have a love/hate relationship with Republicans. You can’t live with them (although at times we wish we could), but you can’t live without them. They are the 2nd oldest active party in the country and obviously aren’t going anywhere so we need to know just what they’re all about. Another blog had great info on the GOP that I’ve summarized (http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=eric_schultz). This is going to be a long ride so get comfortable.

Republicans support a government with limited government regulation in favor a free economy (mainly for the sake of their businesses).

They stand firm in the belief that judges shouldn’t legislate from the bench.
McCain mentioned this in his speech at the Republican National Convention. This means that judges should only carry out whatever legislation has been handed down to them by Congress and not alter its meaning in their rulings. But if you really think about it, this is hard to do. When legislation is handed down, it is usually done so in extremely vague and broad language because it is expected to cover lots of different people and situations that could possibly arise. So, it’s broad because it can’t be specific. At that point, it’s up to the courts (and judges) to interpret the meaning of the legislation and apply it to the cases before them. So, sometimes it may be hard for judges not to legislate from the bench when they have this vague policy to adhere to and a very specific case before them.

They believe that the less fortunate can be best dealt with on a local level and that the government should shift accountability of this population to local organizations and agencies that can meet their needs better.
As much as I hate to admit it, this can be true in some aspects but not in totality. Republicans would favor privatization of all social welfare programs for the less fortunate. And that would be disastrous for the poor. You see, privatization may work depending on the program, the skill, knowledge, and priorities of the people implementing it, and how organized and well equipped these local organizations are to handle these social problems on a totally widespread basis. You can’t just drop this huge load of serving all of the needs of indigenous populations on local and state organizations and communities without any help from the government at all. That would completely overwhelm them. And in order for privatization of services to be successful, the people of the community have to be involved, self-reliant, and organized to be able to handle it. But with the right programs and the right people involved it’s not impossible. This would work better through a collaborative effort between both the feds and locals, not with total responsibility shifting from the former to the latter.

On the other hand, partial privatization could occur as well. Republicans have talked about doing that with Social Security. Do you remember that controversy while back? They proposed to make SS partially privatized where instead of it being completely funded by the government through payroll taxes they wanted to make it funded by part payroll taxes and part personal accounts. We’re not even going to get into that.

They oppose universal health care commonly found in other countries and would rather have personal/employer provided health care in addition the Medicare and Medicaid provided by Uncle Sam.
McCain also mentioned this as well when he stated “the government shouldn’t stand between you and your doctor.” Well, if our Third World counterparts can’t even manage to have clean, running water for all but can afford universal health care where all citizens are insured then I’m sure the wealthiest nation in the world (us) should be able to. Millions of Americans who don’t qualify for Medicaid and Medicare are without health insurance. It’s an epidemic that the government can and should do something more about.

In some other countries, everything is free for their citizens: health insurance, college, and they have a better version of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) than we do. For those of you who don’t know, FMLA is the legislation that grants qualifying employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for the birth or adoption of a child, a serious illness of the employee, or the serious illness of an employee’s immediate family member. Our FMLA has strict guidelines that must be met to qualify such as length of time with the company and number of company employees and is unpaid. Other countries have a similar legislation in place that allows leave for up to 3 years for the birth of a child and is paid. I guess it has a lot to do with the priorities of the people in power. They view a parent being able to stay home and tend to their child during the most critical years of the child’s life without the loss of income as a high priority. Our government doesn’t.

Then you have the argument of taxes which is a completely valid point. About 50% of the income of citizens in those countries is taxed. I’m not going to lie, that is high. But that 50% they pay covers close to everything. We have food tax, vehicle tax, property tax, cigarette tax, etc. If you add up all of the small ways we are taxed in the US, it may even be close. How many of us have gotten our paychecks and felt angry that a great portion of it went to taxes?

Another argument could be made that for those countries, it may be imposing unfair taxes on those who don’t utilize all the services offered such as those who don’t have a need to use FMLA or don’t go to college. Even so, they still have their incomes taxed. The same thing happens here in the US though in some way. I pay into the pot for Social Security, as most young working people do, but we all know that it may not be around by the time we get to our golden years.But it all comes down to whether or not our government and the American people want to make those sacrifices for the benefit of everyone.

Republicans state objectives for environmental protection but are against environmental regulations out of fear that it will negatively impact businesses. They have yet to make their position here totally clear.
McCain mentioned briefly in his speech about creating new sources of alternative energy, but I am not hopeful he would do it if elected.

They are against lesbian/gay marriages and rights, racial quotas, and abortions.
Republicans are strict conservatives who pride themselves on their definition of morals and values. They highly favor marriage (not same sex however) before having children and traditionally believe that women should be homemakers for the benefit of raising the family. This is why it was so surprising to me that McCain chose Palin as his running mate. It wasn’t surprising that she was a woman, but that it goes against what his party has traditionally believed as the most important role for women: raising their children. Another surprising fact is that Palin’s daughter is 17, unmarried, and pregnant. And her husband had been arrested about 20 years ago for drunk driving. I truly believe that if this was the track record of anyone in Obama’s camp, the Republicans would be using it as heavy artillery against him as if those things would make him morally corrupt. This makes it clear that they contradict themselves on their own stated beliefs.

They favor capital punishment, gun ownership rights, and a strong military.

Do you remember when Bush was the Governor of Texas when the state was notorious for the death penalty nicknaming him the Texecutioner? And where has most of our budget gone during the Bush administration? To our military and to the war. I’m not an economist, but I have common sense and I would bet that plays a hand in why our economy is struggling. It’s very funny (it’s really not) that Bush has personal investments in oil companies and companies who make war supplies. So every time we have to send troops over, he wins because they need supplies. He has a personal vested interest in Iraq….oil. And who is Bush’s buddy? McCain. And what is abundant in Palin’s state of Alaska…oil. Wake up people!

They say one thing and do another when it comes to foreign policy, and their position here is also not clear. They state goals of democratization of countries being dictated but then actively support dictatorship and oppose elected governments in those same countries.
This was so evident during the so called “weapons of mass destruction” short-lived era of the Bush administration. He said there were weapons, and low and behold there weren’t. Then the focus shifted from the imaginary weapons of mass destruction to Saddam’s evil and the need to liberate the Iraqi people so that they can form their own democracy and independently govern themselves. It seems that once we removed Saddam our country took his place as ruler. When will we get back to the original stated goal and let them be a democracy without us? Haven’t we done enough? People can’t you see that McCain has the same policies and priorities as Bush and he really would be “more of the same.” Bush wouldn’t give a timeline as to when we would pull out of Iraq and McCain is following suit and refusing to give one also. So, why is this going to be a tough race for Obama? It should be a no brainer, right? More to come…..

If you find this kind of material offensive simply leave. This site is not affiliated with or paid for by any political party, nor are we beholden to any special interest groups. We are committed to free speech and satire and will continue to honor that commitment.

Yur Social Conscience: Be an Informed Voter

2008-09-08T08:30:00.000-05:00

Dear America,

Having now watched both the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, I think I’ve given the Republican Party a fair chance to plead their case. And let me tell you, I am NOT the least bit moved nor impressed. I would consider myself to be an extremely fair and reasonable person. Even though I label myself a Democrat, I still take the time to listen to objections from the other side. Social work has taught me not to be unfairly biased toward my own beliefs at all times but to be open to the perspective of others as well. So, that’s what I’ve tried to do. And here’s my take on it.

This election may very well be the most important election in history. Or for those who see that as an exaggeration, I’m sure you can agree that this election could be the most important Presidential race that we’ve had in an extremely long time. I’m honored to be alive to be apart of it. And please believe I will do my darndest to make sure that I’m responsible with my vote. You should too. But you have to be smarter than the schemes and strategies politicians use to get votes. You have to think outside the box and look beyond personality, charm, popularity, looks, personal life experiences, race, and gender. When it comes to electing the next President, people we need to look at ISSUES. Point, blank, period. That’s what your choice should be based on. We need to elect someone who is genuine, without interior motives that we are unaware of, honest, trustworthy, and will benefit our country and its people. WE NEED HELP.

But in order to look at issues you need to know what they are, and for most people that’s where the problem comes in because that actually involves time and research. You don’t need to do a dissertation or anything like that, but just open your eyes and ears and try to stay abreast of what’s happening around you in the world of politics. And research does involve reading, which a lot of folks don’t like to do or feel that it’s too time consuming. So for those people I say, watch it instead of reading it. Honestly, there’s really no excuse.

But like my mama says, “pay me now or pay me later.” For those of you who have no idea what this means read further. It simple means that you either put in the time to research the issues and read up on these candidates (paying now) so that you can use your vote responsibly OR you neglect doing so then either don’t vote at all or end up voting for a candidate you thought had your best interest in mind. Then you end up being stuck with him/her for the next 4 years (paying later) and you find out the hard way that your issues aren’t his/her priority. You owe it to yourself and your country to be an informed voter. And when you gather all of the information you need, I’m pretty sure you’ll agree we need to Barack oh, sorry I meant Rock the Vote (wink)! Stay tuned for further posts!

Darkangel

If you find this kind of material offensive simply leave. This site is not paid for by any political party, nor are we beholden to any special interest groups. We are committed to free speech and satire and will continue to honor that commitment.