As we enter into the final phase of this election season, the voters can hardly wait until the campaigning is done. Most citizens are not knowledgeable enough about a state budget to know whether Dino or Christine knows best, all we know is the ads never stop. This year has been extra long since the presidential campaigns started last year. Who knows who is telling the truth in the campaigns? I don’t think most of us care anymore.
Political campaigns are all about getting your candidate elected. We have become desensitized to the words used in the ads because we know they don’t really mean anything. Political campaigns are not about facts and ideas. We all know politicians that sit in our living rooms and tell us one thing and then turn around in their elected job and do just the opposite. The only ideas they seem to have are about how to twist the facts.
When Joe Biden was running against Barack Obama, he said some pretty negative things about Obama. When Hillary Clinton was running against Barack Obama, she said some pretty negative things about Obama. If you were a Democrat trying to figure out who to support for President, you heard some scathing criticisms of Obama from generally credible leaders. We look to our credible leaders for guidance.
Then when it was clear that Obama was the Party nominee, all those criticisms were retracted. Were they mistaken before when they were comparing themselves to Obama? “You should vote for me because I am for this and Barack Obama is not.” “I have experience with this and Barack Obama does not.” “I am qualified to lead this country and Barack Obama is not.” Which is it, “I was mistaken before when I characterized him as being unfit for the job.” or am I mistaken now for flip-flopping and telling you “he is the absolutely best qualified person for the job.”?
Politics allows two or more people to perpetrate vicious acts upon one another one day and invite the same people over to the house the next day for a barbecue without regard for the rhetoric. How are citizens supposed to understand the messages contained in that behavior? Either a guy is qualified or he is not…. Except in politics?
We have elected presidents with varied levels of experience. All of them managed to muddle through. Certainly some did it better than others. It is clear that no person can be absolutely prepared for the job of President of the United States prior to being elected to the job. There is no training program. We narrow the field of “big egos” by looking at previous voting records accomplishments in office, personal statements and who supports them currently.
What I look for in candidates is experience, character and ideas.
Even though he supports conservative issues, John McCain has a record of pitching ideas that are frequently not consistent with his Party Caucus. He has shown a willingness to look at ideas that serve a cause first and their origin second. Sometimes the good ideas come from his own party and at other times they come from the other party. In his speech at the Republican Convention, he talked about good ideas on both sides of the aisle and how important the ideas are and not who gets credit for the ideas. That was important to me.
Partisan ownership of ideas seems to be the stumbling block in politics and government today. “If it didn’t originate in our caucus, it is totally unacceptable!”
Presidential elections are about shared values and visions rather than specifics. Voters look for a candidate that they think will deliver on their specific needs without actually articulating what those needs might be. Voters listen to the ads, the debates, the pundits and the candidates looking for that common ground on their issues. When the time to vote comes, they will be selecting the candidate that they feel is most consistent with their vision for the future. After the election we hope for specific ideas that will get us the vision.
Each president inherits the leftovers of the previous administration. Those leftovers shape the actions of the new president.
Circumstances are different for every president and they shape the decisions that become a record of accomplishment or failure. When the Congress is controlled by one party and the President is of the same party, the dynamics between them are different than when they are different. When the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, Bill Clinton’s strategy had to change just as George W Bush had to adjust when the Democrats reclaimed control in 2006. Jimmy Carter was unable to act decisively even though he had a Democratic Congress that Ronald Reagan was able to work with.
If you are for bigger government, vote for the Democrat. If you are for smaller government, vote for the Republican. Even though Bush has “gone off into the ditch” with government spending for the military and security issues, Republican philosophy at most levels of government champion the “less is more” ideal.
We have to choose who our President will be from the two choices, but we can apply the general rule of thumb. D’s are for bigger government and R’s are for smaller government.
Obama is for bigger government and McCain is for smaller government. Beyond that it is all political posturing.
After the election the players that lose will still have their old jobs and the winner will invite them to the White House for a barbecue and all will be forgiven. Hey, nothing personal.
Posted on September 23, 2008 at 1:37 am in Political commentary, Snohomish County Political Commentary | RSS feed
|
Reply |
Trackback URL
No Loss for Words
What’s It Gonna Be, D or R?
by Steve DanaAs we enter into the final phase of this election season, the voters can hardly wait until the campaigning is done. Most citizens are not knowledgeable enough about a state budget to know whether Dino or Christine knows best, all we know is the ads never stop. This year has been extra long since the presidential campaigns started last year. Who knows who is telling the truth in the campaigns? I don’t think most of us care anymore.
Political campaigns are all about getting your candidate elected. We have become desensitized to the words used in the ads because we know they don’t really mean anything. Political campaigns are not about facts and ideas. We all know politicians that sit in our living rooms and tell us one thing and then turn around in their elected job and do just the opposite. The only ideas they seem to have are about how to twist the facts.
When Joe Biden was running against Barack Obama, he said some pretty negative things about Obama. When Hillary Clinton was running against Barack Obama, she said some pretty negative things about Obama. If you were a Democrat trying to figure out who to support for President, you heard some scathing criticisms of Obama from generally credible leaders. We look to our credible leaders for guidance.
Then when it was clear that Obama was the Party nominee, all those criticisms were retracted. Were they mistaken before when they were comparing themselves to Obama? “You should vote for me because I am for this and Barack Obama is not.” “I have experience with this and Barack Obama does not.” “I am qualified to lead this country and Barack Obama is not.” Which is it, “I was mistaken before when I characterized him as being unfit for the job.” or am I mistaken now for flip-flopping and telling you “he is the absolutely best qualified person for the job.”?
Politics allows two or more people to perpetrate vicious acts upon one another one day and invite the same people over to the house the next day for a barbecue without regard for the rhetoric. How are citizens supposed to understand the messages contained in that behavior? Either a guy is qualified or he is not…. Except in politics?
We have elected presidents with varied levels of experience. All of them managed to muddle through. Certainly some did it better than others. It is clear that no person can be absolutely prepared for the job of President of the United States prior to being elected to the job. There is no training program. We narrow the field of “big egos” by looking at previous voting records accomplishments in office, personal statements and who supports them currently.
What I look for in candidates is experience, character and ideas.
Even though he supports conservative issues, John McCain has a record of pitching ideas that are frequently not consistent with his Party Caucus. He has shown a willingness to look at ideas that serve a cause first and their origin second. Sometimes the good ideas come from his own party and at other times they come from the other party. In his speech at the Republican Convention, he talked about good ideas on both sides of the aisle and how important the ideas are and not who gets credit for the ideas. That was important to me.
Partisan ownership of ideas seems to be the stumbling block in politics and government today. “If it didn’t originate in our caucus, it is totally unacceptable!”
Presidential elections are about shared values and visions rather than specifics. Voters look for a candidate that they think will deliver on their specific needs without actually articulating what those needs might be. Voters listen to the ads, the debates, the pundits and the candidates looking for that common ground on their issues. When the time to vote comes, they will be selecting the candidate that they feel is most consistent with their vision for the future. After the election we hope for specific ideas that will get us the vision.
Each president inherits the leftovers of the previous administration. Those leftovers shape the actions of the new president.
Circumstances are different for every president and they shape the decisions that become a record of accomplishment or failure. When the Congress is controlled by one party and the President is of the same party, the dynamics between them are different than when they are different. When the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, Bill Clinton’s strategy had to change just as George W Bush had to adjust when the Democrats reclaimed control in 2006. Jimmy Carter was unable to act decisively even though he had a Democratic Congress that Ronald Reagan was able to work with.
If you are for bigger government, vote for the Democrat. If you are for smaller government, vote for the Republican. Even though Bush has “gone off into the ditch” with government spending for the military and security issues, Republican philosophy at most levels of government champion the “less is more” ideal.
We have to choose who our President will be from the two choices, but we can apply the general rule of thumb. D’s are for bigger government and R’s are for smaller government.
Obama is for bigger government and McCain is for smaller government. Beyond that it is all political posturing.
After the election the players that lose will still have their old jobs and the winner will invite them to the White House for a barbecue and all will be forgiven. Hey, nothing personal.
Rate this:
Share this:
Related
Posted on September 23, 2008 at 1:37 am in Political commentary, Snohomish County Political Commentary | RSS feed | Reply | Trackback URL
4 Comments to “What’s It Gonna Be, D or R?”
September 29, 2008 at 6:34 am
If you are for cowshit in your hamburger meat vote for the Republican.
If you are for e.coli in your spinach vote for the Republican
If you are for stinking polluted air vote for the Republican.
If you are for putrid, chemical laden polluted water vote for the Republican
If you are for overseas sweatshops using child labor to make your golf shirts vote for the Republican
If you are for cheap imports and toys that poison our children vote for the Republican.
If you are untested and unsafe drugs so that Big Pharma can make billions and billions vote for the Republican
If you are for gas guzzling unsafe death trap vehicles vote for the Republican.
If you are for oil companies raping the American public vote for the Republican.
If you are for suppressing new energy technologies like solar, wind and biodiesel so your oil buddies can squeeze the very last nickel out of Americans vote for the Republican.
If you are for war mongering and endless war and no-bid contracts vote for the Republican.
If you are for turning our children into cannon fodder for oil vote for the Republican.
If you are for stripping us of our constitutional rights vote for the Republican.
If you are for denying women the right to control their own bodies vote for the Republican.
If you are for fascism and believe that corporations have more say than US Citizens vote for the Republican.
If you are for racism, hate, greed, hypocrisy and a state-sponsored religion vote for the Republican
September 29, 2008 at 12:17 pm
That criteria (D = bigger government, R = smaller government) hasn’t been true for a long time now.
For proof of that, take the first six years of the Bush presidency. We had a Republican controlled House, Senate, and executive branch—and our deficits and debt soared at a rate faster than anytime we’ve seen since World War II. There was no decrease in spending, just a decrease in tax rates that favored the fabulously wealthy far more than the vast majority of good Americans, and the ham-handed axing of programs that didn’t fit with the GOP’s self-righteous busybody ways.
This wasn’t merely Bush himself, or the entire administration: the GOP at large is to blame for this ridiculous free-for-all on the nation’s finances.
Frankly, I’ve been hearing more rational reserve from the Democrats in Congress in the last eight years. It seems that if you want some level of financial responsibility, personal freedom and a less invasive government, you should probably consider voting Democratic for a while, at least until the GOP starts living up to its own ideals rather than being embroiled in a such a vast, lying hypocritical orgy that would make even the worst Pharisees of Biblical times say, “Oh, hey, that’s a bit over the top, don’t you think?”
Clinton, for all his faults, at least started turning the financial hemorrhage around, and by the time his presidency ended, the public debt was coming down. By the end of W’s term, that debt will be flirting with a 250% increase. In eight years.
Now, try saying “Rs are for smaller government” with a straight face this time.
September 29, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Bush and McCain wanted to give away $700 billion with no strings.
Sorry. Just not gonna happen.
September 30, 2008 at 4:20 am
You forgot to mention the vitriol going on between the *Republican* candidates before they finally settled on McCain. The trash-talking wasn’t a Democrat-only thing.