"Something has to change, and soon, or else the problems regarding unemployment rates and our economy will get out of control. The feds need to step up and take unemployment as their responsibility instead of making this issue an afterthought." From Unemployment Woes Continue.
What a thoroughly liberal approach to the problem. This post sounds like a watered down version of what any Democrat would say in response to the current situation, adding nothing to the conversation. Have you considered the effects of any of the solutions you are hinting at? Any move the government makes will only send our nation further into the widening pit of debt we're already mired in. Do you think that will reflect well in the polls this December?
Have you considered that the government might not be as powerful as we'd like it to be? What can they do, really? What solution can Obama pull out of his hat that hasn't been thought of, that doesn't have as many downsides as upsides? America is in a bad spot, assuredly. Unemployment and debt are high, confidence in our president is as low as ever, and few legislation is passing regardless of the widespread liberal majorities. But is the answer really to blame the rich and the politicians?
I'd challenge you to think outside the box a bit and consider what really is to be done. The world's a messed up place: there are no easy solutions to problems as big as an economic depression. Liberals don't have it figured out and neither do Republicans.
Monday, August 9, 2010
American Partisanship
America is strongly based on a bipartisan system of government. Ever since the declaration of our independence, there have been two or more main schools of thought on how the government should be run. And, typically, each American has his or her own (strong) viewpoint on which party is superior.
I myself, being brought up in a southern Christian home, was naturally brought up conservative in all aspects of politics. But the more I learn about politics, the less I like about conservatism, liberalism, libertarianism, and all other political ideologies. Clearly, there is not one correct way to run our American democratic republic. Each party has held the presidency for more than a decade, and each party has held a super-majority for a time. And yet neither party was able to convince enough Americans to let them hold their advantage for long.
You may say that this is because corruption creeps into any political system which holds power for too long (and you'd probably be right), but I think the issue is deeper. Not only is neither party correct about how to run the nation, but no one is ever going to figure it out. I'm a devout pessimist when it comes to politics: I believe that sinful, broken mankind is never going to figure out how to rule itself.
But don't get me wrong, I like America's bipartisan system. The steady swing back and forth between the parties helps to even out each party's own weaknesses and evens out the flow of the political system. History has many examples of dramatic flops when a nation swings too violently towards one end of the political spectrum or the other. As long as our bipartisan system holds, I expect the demise of America to be steady, though inevitable.
I myself, being brought up in a southern Christian home, was naturally brought up conservative in all aspects of politics. But the more I learn about politics, the less I like about conservatism, liberalism, libertarianism, and all other political ideologies. Clearly, there is not one correct way to run our American democratic republic. Each party has held the presidency for more than a decade, and each party has held a super-majority for a time. And yet neither party was able to convince enough Americans to let them hold their advantage for long.
You may say that this is because corruption creeps into any political system which holds power for too long (and you'd probably be right), but I think the issue is deeper. Not only is neither party correct about how to run the nation, but no one is ever going to figure it out. I'm a devout pessimist when it comes to politics: I believe that sinful, broken mankind is never going to figure out how to rule itself.
But don't get me wrong, I like America's bipartisan system. The steady swing back and forth between the parties helps to even out each party's own weaknesses and evens out the flow of the political system. History has many examples of dramatic flops when a nation swings too violently towards one end of the political spectrum or the other. As long as our bipartisan system holds, I expect the demise of America to be steady, though inevitable.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Response to: NAACP not invited to the Tea Party?
Darian, I'd like to respond to your article, NAACP not invited to the Tea Party?, especially in regard to my own article, Tea Party Racism. I would definitely agree with you that the Tea Party socioeconomic statistics are pretty damning. There is clearly a bias towards whites in the Tea Party, and, judging by the statistics, in conservative movements on the whole.
Yet despite the hidden racial prejudice present in the Tea Party, I believe their intent is to comment on and create change politically, and not simply to expose their racism. As Michael Gearson wrote in the article I expounded upon in my own article, "In the long, tense months until the November congressional elections, a little sanity will be needed [from members of the Tea Party]." If they want to have any kind of impact on American politics, they have to put aside their racism, and maybe even confront it within themselves.
Yet despite the hidden racial prejudice present in the Tea Party, I believe their intent is to comment on and create change politically, and not simply to expose their racism. As Michael Gearson wrote in the article I expounded upon in my own article, "In the long, tense months until the November congressional elections, a little sanity will be needed [from members of the Tea Party]." If they want to have any kind of impact on American politics, they have to put aside their racism, and maybe even confront it within themselves.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Obama: the post-race president?
During Obama's election campaign, there was talk of him being the post-race president, or the one who would end the racial tension in America. People vividly shared their excitement about how a black American president meant the mess from slavery was finally over. But I ask, if American racial tensions were really over, why would we be excited about a black president? Isn't the whole point of anti-racist agenda to enforce the idea of equality?
As stated in my previous post, Tea Party Racism, "Clearly, the racial tensions have not been eradicated with the election of an African-American president, but really, who thought they would?" Racial tensions are as bad now as they have been for the past several decades, and maybe even worse. Has anyone noticed a decrease in news stories devoted to racism? If anything, the news has been more flooded with the issue of race with the election of our half African-American president. He has chosen to increase his publicity by promoting his heritage.
If we really want to prove that racism in America is dead, we have to show that we really truly don't care about people's skin color. People who vote for Obama because he is African-American are in my eyes just as racist as those who refuse to for the same reason. Let the man be judged on his policies and his ethics, as any other candidate is, and not by his race. This is America, aren't we all supposed to be created equal? Obama is not the post-race president. Racial problems are still rampant across America, and his presence in office is doing nothing to stem the flow.
As stated in my previous post, Tea Party Racism, "Clearly, the racial tensions have not been eradicated with the election of an African-American president, but really, who thought they would?" Racial tensions are as bad now as they have been for the past several decades, and maybe even worse. Has anyone noticed a decrease in news stories devoted to racism? If anything, the news has been more flooded with the issue of race with the election of our half African-American president. He has chosen to increase his publicity by promoting his heritage.
If we really want to prove that racism in America is dead, we have to show that we really truly don't care about people's skin color. People who vote for Obama because he is African-American are in my eyes just as racist as those who refuse to for the same reason. Let the man be judged on his policies and his ethics, as any other candidate is, and not by his race. This is America, aren't we all supposed to be created equal? Obama is not the post-race president. Racial problems are still rampant across America, and his presence in office is doing nothing to stem the flow.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Tea Party Racism
Michael Gerson wrote an article today in the Washington Post, Signs of sanity from the Tea Party, about the Tea Party movement's response to the racism of some of its members which have recently caused them some bad publicity. As a former speech writer for President Bush, Gerson has the political experience to speak authoritatively about this third-party movement to the Post's broad audience.
The Tea Party, says Gerson, has incurred some of the wrath from liberals who like to blame Obama's unpopularity on racism in America. The recent firefight originated when the NAACP approved a resolution calling out racism in the Tea Party movement. Tea Party members and sympathetic conservatives lashed back, accusing the NAACP of blatant partisanship and even asking the IRS to reconsider the NAACP's tax-exempt status. Other Tea Party members merely accepted the accusation. Mark Williams released a shockingly racist parody which subsequently got him expelled from the Tea Party organization as a whole. Clearly, the racial tensions have not been eradicated with the election of an African-American president, but really, who thought they would?
The Tea Party has responded fairly well to the ruckus, calling Williams' post "clearly offensive" and taking actions to publicly condemn racism in the party. In addition, the NAACP admitted that the Tea Party movement as a whole is not racist. Gerson's stance on this commotion is that the Tea Party is showing "small but significant signs of sanity." He says this is essential for the well-being of the party, especially with so few months left between now and the November election. He also made the statement that African Americans "have suffered provocations throughout American history that make the complaints of Boston's original tea party movement seem trivial in comparison." Gerson says their reactions are not only appropriate politically, but simply decent.
I agree with Gerson that this show of sanity for the Tea Party is an important step for them as a movement. Third-party movements have nearly always been short-lived. The political system in America seems always to tend towards a dual-party system, never more or less. Thus, the eventual hope of the Tea Party is only to gain enough support and cause enough racket for one of the mainstream parties to change. Once the Tea Party gains enough support, either the Republican or Democratic party will inevitably mend their ways to allow the amalgamation of the Tea Party supporters into their group. That, or the Tea Party will die out from being too extremist. The deciding factor in the fate of the Tea Party and what they stand for will be how well they present themselves to the American public, and how many voters they can rally to their flag. Showing some sanity towards issues of racism is an important step towards that end.
The Tea Party, says Gerson, has incurred some of the wrath from liberals who like to blame Obama's unpopularity on racism in America. The recent firefight originated when the NAACP approved a resolution calling out racism in the Tea Party movement. Tea Party members and sympathetic conservatives lashed back, accusing the NAACP of blatant partisanship and even asking the IRS to reconsider the NAACP's tax-exempt status. Other Tea Party members merely accepted the accusation. Mark Williams released a shockingly racist parody which subsequently got him expelled from the Tea Party organization as a whole. Clearly, the racial tensions have not been eradicated with the election of an African-American president, but really, who thought they would?
The Tea Party has responded fairly well to the ruckus, calling Williams' post "clearly offensive" and taking actions to publicly condemn racism in the party. In addition, the NAACP admitted that the Tea Party movement as a whole is not racist. Gerson's stance on this commotion is that the Tea Party is showing "small but significant signs of sanity." He says this is essential for the well-being of the party, especially with so few months left between now and the November election. He also made the statement that African Americans "have suffered provocations throughout American history that make the complaints of Boston's original tea party movement seem trivial in comparison." Gerson says their reactions are not only appropriate politically, but simply decent.
I agree with Gerson that this show of sanity for the Tea Party is an important step for them as a movement. Third-party movements have nearly always been short-lived. The political system in America seems always to tend towards a dual-party system, never more or less. Thus, the eventual hope of the Tea Party is only to gain enough support and cause enough racket for one of the mainstream parties to change. Once the Tea Party gains enough support, either the Republican or Democratic party will inevitably mend their ways to allow the amalgamation of the Tea Party supporters into their group. That, or the Tea Party will die out from being too extremist. The deciding factor in the fate of the Tea Party and what they stand for will be how well they present themselves to the American public, and how many voters they can rally to their flag. Showing some sanity towards issues of racism is an important step towards that end.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Best (and worst) of Blog Titles
In an attempt to lighten the mood early on in this clearly politically charged class, I've decided to make some judgements on the titles of my classmates' blogs.
Best: Firelight World Review
Worst: Righty Wrongy, Lefty Safety
Most interesting: America's National Treasures
Least interesting: Justin's Govt 2305 Blog or my own, Luke's US Politics
Cheers!
Best: Firelight World Review
Worst: Righty Wrongy, Lefty Safety
Most interesting: America's National Treasures
Least interesting: Justin's Govt 2305 Blog or my own, Luke's US Politics
Cheers!
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Obama Switches Focus to Economic Growth
This week, the Obama administration has made a switch on its stance on dealing with the deficit. Whereas they previously had been tackling the problem with a conservative approach of spending less money, they are now discussing moving more towards the Keynesian approach of spending more money to spur the economy into growth.
Gerald Seib writes this week in the Wall Street Journal (link below), "There are obvious political reasons to shift the conversation to growth. Simply put, both stimulus and deficit-fighting have become politically problematic." Though economists might say that Obama's stimulus plans have provided relief from this recession, voters aren't convinced. And of course this presidency wants what every first-term administration wants - a second term.
Mr. Obama is pursuing this new strategy by increasing spending on solar energy plants and also by renewing efforts to increase overseas trade with China, Russia and South Korea. Only time will tell if this new strategy helps either to alleviate the recession or to get Mr. Obama re-elected.
Gerald F. Seib's Article, Tapping Reagan's Growth Theme.
Gerald Seib writes this week in the Wall Street Journal (link below), "There are obvious political reasons to shift the conversation to growth. Simply put, both stimulus and deficit-fighting have become politically problematic." Though economists might say that Obama's stimulus plans have provided relief from this recession, voters aren't convinced. And of course this presidency wants what every first-term administration wants - a second term.
Mr. Obama is pursuing this new strategy by increasing spending on solar energy plants and also by renewing efforts to increase overseas trade with China, Russia and South Korea. Only time will tell if this new strategy helps either to alleviate the recession or to get Mr. Obama re-elected.
Gerald F. Seib's Article, Tapping Reagan's Growth Theme.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)