Tag Archives: Politics

Moderation

On Sunday, January 22, Bob Schieffer did a commentary on definitions during his 30 minute Face the Nation program. Earlier in the program, he spoke at length with South Carolina primary winner Newt Gingrich. The commentary did not reflect on Speaker Gingrich but was about politics.

Schieffer discussed the labels used in politics: moderate, liberal, conservative. I sat laughing as I readied to go for a run. Schieffer pointed out that moderate, by definition, may actually be what the nation needs or is really looking for in a president. Conservative, despite many who are called that using the word moderate as a derogative term, is defined as moderate in point of view.

What one word is used in both politics and health care, yet with extremely different meanings? Moderate or moderation. Do we not want to eat those rich foods in moderation? Yet, it seems we do not want – according to the recent name calling during the GOP primary process – a presidential nominee that is moderate in point of view.

If a candidate can communicate a moderate point of view on most issues, my guess is that will appeal to more people that a democratic or republican point of view on issues.

http://cnettv.cnet.com/av/video/cbsnews/atlantis2/cbsnews_player_embed.swf


What To Blog About?

This post has been weighing on my mind.  When I started blogging at Yahoo! 360, I didn’t write all that frequently.  When I moved to WordPress, I started writing more often.  There have been days when I have put up three or more posts – short but still.  Then, Yahoo! announced 360 was closing.  There was no import so I started moving posts over manually.  An import was finally made and I imported all my posts.  Some came as duplicates but I think I finally, one day, managed to get all the duplicates down.  So this post, this rambling is my 1000th blog entry.

I wondered.  Should I write about something going on in my personal life?  Should I post the next in the series I started last week about our senses and memory?  Should I write more about my journey to a healthy lifestyle?  Should I write about some of the issues from the State of the Union?  Should I write about other issues that are near and dear to my heart?  Should I do a review?

I did a lot of writing yesterday.  Some writing was for work.  Some writing was personal.  I wrote out an apology and practiced – yes, I said practiced – it so I would not forget anything I wanted to say.  It reminded me of a friend who prepares diligently for job interviews.  I wanted the apology to be perfect.  I forgot most of what I had written when face to face with the person to whom I was apologizing.

So what is my 1000th post going to be about?  It is going to be about writing for my blog.  That is truly ironic.

I write all kinds of things here in my blog.  I noticed, as looked through to pick a post from each month last year for my best of 2009, that I have gotten away from writing about news and politics.  I want to get back to that.  I noticed that I wrote about a lot of great things I did last summer and fall.  I want to continue that.  I noticed that I write a little about my life – though usually through the looking glass of mother.  I want to do more of that.

I also want to continue to write about our senses as mine seem to be developing anew.  Maybe they have always been there – of course, they have always been there – but I am discovery their connection to memories anew.

I am off to get ready for a weekly meeting of Moms.  We call ourselves the Lonely Moms’ Club as, with most of us anyway, we have our children in school and are not employed in a 9-5 type job.  We get together during the school year once a week for breakfast.  Maybe  I will even write about that some day.


Women in Politics

As I have said many times, I am a huge fan of “The West Wing.”  That show is the first place I ever heard of Emily’s List as CJ Cregg – Alison Janney’s character – had worked with the group prior to working in Hollywood.  Emily’s List is all about getting pro-choice Democratic women elected to office.  You can read their mission on their web site.

 

Today I was reading an op-ed piece in The Boston Globe. The authors of the piece hold that a “critical mass” of females in politics would help greatly influence discussions on public policy.  That “critical mass” is rather high, 30%, especially if you live in Massachusetts as there have only ever been five women elected to statewide offices.

 

Two summers ago, during the 2008 presidential primary season, I was reading an article in More magazine.  While I cannot find the article online, I can summarize it.  It talked about why all the power brokers in politics were men – because they contribute to political campaigns.  Women do not.  Not only do we not support fellow females who are running – and I do not advocate supporting someone just because that candidate is female, we do not support any campaigns.  This means that in an arena where cash is king and contributions buy you power or at least a bit of an ear with someone in a campaign, women are falling behind.

 

Unfortunately, the truth is that when women fall behind so do the issues women care about – women’s health care issues, education, family issues, and equal pay for equal work.  These issues are not exclusively female or woman issues.  Everyone should care about each other’s health.  Everyone should care about education and its escalating costs.  Everyone should care about family issues – from sick leave to be with ill children to paid parental leave.  Everyone should care about equal pay for equal work as we all benefit from equality, don’t we?

 

Should politics interest you, I suggest a few pieces for reading along with the links in the beginning of this post.


Political Madness

I use to write blog entries about March Madness having nothing to do with collegiate basketball.  That was way back when my daughter was playing Region 1 soccer and March meant the start of a travel season that easily saw our team traveling about 1000 miles one way to games.

 

I was thrilled today to see that Ken Rudin is giving us political junkies our own version of March Madness.  Not that I haven’t filled out a bracket or five – all with the same results which I know defeats the purpose – but this is a bracket that I can get into.  It is March Madness as only NPR can do it – the 2012 Republican Presidential Primaries.

 

So suck up the fact that your upset in the Big Dance didn’t happen today when Butler fell to LSU.  Don’t worry if your bracket has Northern Iowa going all the way.  Click over to NPR and fill out a totally different bracket here.


The New Yorker Cover

July 21 The New Yorker Cover

July 21 The New Yorker Cover

While it seems that the cover of the July 21 edition of The New Yorker is causing quite a stir, I think that it will unfortunately overshadow the article about Barack Obama’s political beginnings.  While reading the online fifteen pages, I am drawn to the fact that Obama has played in the dirt of Chicago politics.  I am also struck that this “outsider” to Washington and to politics is not all that much of an outsider.  Every move he has made since first interning in Chicago during summers at Harvard Law School has been been made with the Presidency of the United States in his mind.  While he has written a book that basically says he is not “into” politics, he wrote it while lining up his first political run.

Like the caricature on the cover or not.  Know that the New Yorker is a reknowned liberal publication.  Dig deeper.  Read all 15 pages of the article.  Get to know the way this man who may be the next President thinks.  Get to know that he is as much a politician as anyone else in the campaign. 


Phil Gramm does not speak for …

… John McCain.  John McCain does not speak for me.  I have to say that I have been waiting for a politician to decide to tell the American people something that they need to hear and that they do not want to hear.  While Gramm’s comments on Americans being whiners is not quite what I was looking for, it is a start.

The mortgage crisis is not a problem caused by Washington.  The mortgage crisis is a problem caused by whining.  People, Americans whined it was hard to get a mortgage.  They felt that almost everyone should be able to get one.  They complained to Washington.  To prevent Washington from becoming involved in the mortgage industry, the industry attempted to defend itself by lowering its standards.

The mortgage crisis is caused by consumer stupidity.  How many people making $45,000 a year can afford a house that is valued at a quarter of a million dollars?  Most people should realize that those two figures, even if housing is the only debt you have and who in the US would fall into that category, do not reconcile.  But no, the consumer decided to forego any intelligence on his or her own part and agreed with the mortgage originator.  The problem then comes that truthfully the consumer cannot afford that high a mortgage.

I am fully behind Phil Gramm.  He has a good head on his shoulders.  He knows the economy, which he has proven over his years of federal service as first a Democratic Congressman, then as a Republican Congressman and as a Republican Senator.  He has a PhD in economics.  He has taught economics and he has consulted on economics.  I wish it were a politican who was running for office that would grab the third rail and tell us the truth but any politician telling us that we are whining is correct.


The “Race” Card is Played

Of course, there are those out there who will say I have no right to talk about race.  I grew up in a town that had two black families and they weren’t looked on as black.  I am white, Anglo-Saxon.  But, now that the card has been played in the presidential campaigns, I am going to talk about it in the context of Barack Obama’s speech yesterday.

In case you missed the speech, you can find it YouTube or on his web site.  I strongly suggest you watch it, not read it. 

The words were wonderful.  My problem comes with the presentation.  Unlike all of his signature speeches given to date on the campaign trail, this was not given in a huge arena with screaming throngs of fans.  It was given in a large, sit-down setting.  Obama was not standing in the round, but on stage behind a podium.  He was not flanked by high-profile supporters, but by US flags.

The setting was presidential but the words were not.  Yes, those who currently supported Obama thought the words were wonderful.  Those of us a bit more skeptical didn’t.  I saw a man that did not seem at ease with what he was saying.  Unlike his normal speeches, he seemed hesitant and utilized teleprompters.  I am not saying that using teleprompters is a weakness.  I am saying it is not “Obama”-like.  

The speech did not whip the listener into a frenzy like his normal speeches do.  Why not?  Why is it that, when talking about something that goes to the core of who the candidate is, the candidate seems stiff and uptight in delivery?

I don’t look at Barack Obama as the “black” candidate.  I look at him as a candidate.  There is something in this particular delivery of this particular speech that causes me, as a skeptical voter, to give pause and think again about whether this man is really presidential material.    


MSNBC-Cleveland State Univ. Democratic Debate

First, I was annoyed that the debate was set to start at 9 pm.  I had not slept well the night before and was really hoping to be asleep by 10 pm.  That in mind, I got all set to watch the 20th debate on the democratic side of the presidential nomination process.

I had about a quarter of a bag of jelly beans, a fresh bottle of water and my trusty notebook and red pen so I situated myself in front of the television set after making sure that I was recording One Tree Hill.

The debate starts and my lights start to flicker.  I decide that, even though the 17 year old is still on the phone with his girlfriend, I will get up quickly and turn off the computer and any extra lights that are still on.  I make it to the living room – my home is not all that big – and the flicker is enough that the computer shuts itself down.  Now, I am concerned so I boot it back up and then shut it down normally.  The lights continue to flicker.

I settle back in to watch and Clinton is in the middle of some statement – I am not sure if it is an opening or in answer to a question from Brian Williams – regarding health care and the mailers that went out from the Obama campaign.

My 13 year old comes in.  He swears that the transformer diagonally across the corner from the house sparked badly.  We still have power.  He goes back to bed.  Clinton continues about health care and slamming home the differences between her and Obama.  In comes the 13 year old again.  There are all kinds of flashing lights outside the house.  I get up, missing more of the debate, and find he is right.  I cannot tell what has happened but it does look like everyone has power.  It looks like there are police and emergency vehicles.  Cars coming down the hill we live at the bottom of are not allowed to turn right.  The road going left is rather ugly looking.

I head back to the debate.  I did watch all of it but was not impressed.  I started taking notes but gave up after the last commercial break.  It did nothing to impress me and I was not thrilled with it, though I do believe that MSNBC asked harder questions and kept control better than either of the most recent CNN debates.


CNN-Univision Texas Democratic Debate – Part 2

I know I said I would finish my thoughts on Thursday night’s debate yesterday but, as usual, life gets in the way.

Another big topic, but not one with any surprises in it, was immigration.  Clinton strongly reiterated that there needs to be a pathway to to legalization for those in our country illegally.  She also said that more compassion needed to be used when raiding business locations as we are not a country that just throws people out leaving children to come home and find Mom and/or Dad sent away to another country.  She would work on legislation for comprehensive immigration reform, including a pathway to citizenship, within the first 100 days in office.

Obama basically reiterated the same point of view.  He added that the country as a whole needs to tone down the rhetoric on this topic.  We need stronger border security and need to fix the legal immigration system so people are not waiting too long to get into our country and they do not attempt to enter illegally.

On the topic of a border fence, something both voted for in 2006, both say they believe this physical border needs to be revisited.  Clinton called the Bush plan counterproductive as it splits land, including the University of Texas in Brownsville.  She believes that the federal government needs to listen to those who live along the border.  Some of the border can be protected through more technology and more personnel instead of a physical barrier.

Obama agreed that local communities needed to be consulted about a physical border fence.  The Bush administration has not been good at listening.  There needs to be a process to deal with this problem that is well publicized and done in conjunction with comprehensive reform.  He also took this time to insert that he feels those who are here illegally, but were brought into the country as young children when they had no real say in the matter, need to be eligible for aid for higher education. 

Both were then asked, in light of the increasing number of Hispanics living in the United States, what the downside is to becoming a bilingual nation.  Clinton responded that it is important to be bilingual but that English should be the common, unifying language of our country.  English is an important part of the American experience.

Obama says that everyone needs to learn English as it is what binds us together as a country.  He took this opportunity to point out that we need to get rid of No Child Left Behind and its focus on standardized tests so as to help support the education of those who are native English speakers.

Both were asked to comment on truthfulness and giving others credit for quotes.  Neither admitted to doing anything wrong and both took this opportunity to hit on their basics from stump speeches.  Clinton discussed the talk versus action theme and that actions speak louder than words.  Obama took the opportunity to discuss inspiring  the people to get involved in their government – a topic similar to required volunteerism which is not something I think will fly in the US.  He discussed a $4000 credit towards higher education in exchange for nationnal service but I am not sure the US has the money for this or the capacity to track and administer it.

When questioned about their non-support of the surge in Iraq which seems, by all accounts to be working, both tried to take the limelight away from the military success and put it on the lack of success in the Iraqi government stepping up to the plate.

We have all seen, unless we live under rocks, the ending of the debate so I will not go into it again.


Austin is Tonight

I so want to quote a Blake Shelton song about Austin.  But the statement is not that I still love Austin but does Austin – and the rest of Texas – still love Hillary.

I am sitting here wishing that I could have designed the site for tonight’s CNN/Univision/Texas Democratic Party debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.  This needs to be a debate – not a gathering around the proverbial kitchen table.  The set needs to include normal debate items.  Podiums would be a good start in my mind.  Who likes to be able to reach out and touch the opposition as you are saying they are all fluff or inexperienced?  Maybe a few professional boxers and the people in the MMA (isn’t that where they cage fight?) but not the normal politician.  Now I realize that the American people, according to every pundit out there, do not want the normal politician but I, for one, want the normal debate.

I want podiums with space between them.  I want the two candidates to take a swipe or two at each other.  I want to see the differences between the two of them, not the love fest that was Los Angeles.

What will happen tonight around the “debate table?”  I can’t wait to find out.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,870 other followers