Obama’s campaign must read this site

OK…Probably not. But I write that because I recommended that he ramp up his moderate-conservative rhetoric very soon to compete with McCain, especially since he’s virtually a lock on the Democratic nomination according to some credible news sources. 

Here’s an excerpt from his speech after his whoopin’ displayed in North Carolina:

“The people I’ve met in small towns and big cities across this country understand that government can’t solve all our problems – and we don’t expect it to. We believe in hard work. We believe in personal responsibility and self-reliance.

That last line is like a line out of the Conservative playbook. But soon, his speech goes back Left after sweeping in the moderates by saying:

“But we also believe that we have a larger responsibility to one another as Americans – that America is a place – that America is the place – where you can make it if you try. That no matter how much money you start with or where you come from or who your parents are, opportunity is yours if you’re willing to reach for it and work for it. It’s the idea that while there are few guarantees in life, you should be able to count on a job that pays the bills; health care for when you need it; a pension for when you retire; an education for your  children that will allow them to fulfill their God-given potential. That’s the America we believe in. That’s the America I know.

A great orator. The guy knows how to captivate his audience. Chill bumps definitely. 

Just one concern from the speech as it is juxtapose before you. Obama talks about “personal responsibility and self-reliance”, but shortly after he also talks about a job to pay bills, an open access to health care, money for retirement, and a competitive educational system. 

These are very stark differences. 

Won’t a tax cut give an individual working at a job more financial freedom to pay bills, etc.? And increasing healthcare access will most assuredly increase taxes negating financial freedom if government takes more money from individuals. How about privatizing social security and making school vouchers more prevalent in the U.S.? Will that not complete Obama’s dream? 

Was this speech planned because he knows the nomination is almost imminent, and as stated several days ago, he needs to start toting the middle? 

Hey, so what do you do when your poll numbers are in the toilet?

You try to sink it some more.  

I don’t deny Bush’s attack on a Democratic-controlled Congress. Congress have yet to produce anything of substance since taking over in 2006.  That tax cut (thanks Federal gov’t!) was a bipartisan effort, and a win for the Republicans, not for Pelosi. She can’t be seen as a candidate encouraging more and more tax cuts, but she can be seen as a hero for putting money back into the pockets of citizens with a faltering economy.*

But man, as you read this article further down, you just start cringing, and start to think that Bush has no shame for his already tarnished legacy. “Eh, the heck with it…”

I’m referring to this:

The president also pushed again for priority legislation that has been stalled on Capitol Hill for weeks — a potential free-trade deal with Colombia, and a government eavesdropping bill designed to target communications of suspected terrorists.

Bush also called on Congress to approve a $108 billion war-spending bill for Iraq and
Afghanistan ”without any strings.”

Trading with Colombia, gov’t eavesdropping and enormous spending on the war…
Yeah, that’s what you do. You infuriate the public and have them grow more distant from the political process. 

*And for y’all that want to blame this economic downturn on the current administration is fair, but remember to pass the blame to everyone else starting with then-President Bill Clinton, 2004 Republican-led Congress and now the current Congress.

Pass the Prozac please…

I guess there really isn’t much to this story, but nonetheless, a story worth posting. This article also suggests what the majority of society already thinks about conservatives–that they are cold-hearted bastards, and separately, liberals can not think rationally. 

Conservatives also scored highest on measures of rationalization, which gauge a person’s tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities.

“Our research suggests that inequality takes a greater psychological toll on liberals than on conservatives,” the researchers write in the June issue of the journal Psychological Science, “apparently because liberals lack ideological rationalizations that would help them frame inequality in a positive (or at least neutral) light.

Nothing too new or completely wrong? 

 

Hillary: good planning or cocky politics?

Lately, the two Democratic candidates have been stumping across the nation, specifically in Indiana and North Carolina, because of respective state’s primary votes tomorrow. Two very moderate states.  Both states went to Bush in 2004.

She is starting to sound very moderate with her speeches. This from the AP:

Barack Obama likened Hillary Rodham Clinton to President Bush for threatening to “totally obliterate” Iran if it attacks Israel and called her gas-tax holiday a gimmick as he tried to fend off her challenge ahead of two pivotal Democratic primaries.

Clinton, in turn, stood by both her comment on Iran and her tax proposal as she gave chase in Indiana and North Carolina to the front-runner for the nomination.

Is she saying this because she knows the landscape of North Carolina and Indiana to be very moderate…

OR is she doing this because she thinks that she already won the nomination and this is a back-handed way of trying to win the middle that McCain is gunning for right now?

If the latter, then shouldn’t Obama ramp up the same rhetoric? Whoever wins the nomination in July/August must compete with McCain for the moderates. Maybe this is good strategy by Hillary and Co.

Plus, she’s telling the moderates, “Hey, I’m not as left as Obama, and I’m not as right as McCain.” But if she does, isn’t she losing some of her base? 

Just to spice up your knowledge a bit more:
Funny statewide political landscape though for North Carolina.

North Carolina’s governor, a Democrat (Easley) is a two-term governor. It’s most likely that the Lt. Gov, also a Dem, Perdue, will be elected in 2008, bc of her alliance with Easley.North Carolina has enjoyed a prosperous growth due to Charlotte’s booming in business.
Well…the Republicans are countering with a candidate who was elected as Charlotte’s mayor seven times: Pat McCrory.

Not to mention that Elizabeth Dole, the senior Republican senator, is also up for re-election.

For Indiana, a similar situation is noted.

Mitch Daniels (R) is seeking re-election for Governor.  One of the most charismatic and popular Senator is a Democrat (Evan Bayh).

No guarantees on which color a state will turn in November. 

Are major European cities trending conservative?

This according to Times Online:

Alemanno, a former minister of agriculture, has a colourful past. He was arrested in 1981 with four other neo-fascists for allegedly beating up a student with baseball bats, but no charges were pressed. The following year he was incarcerated for eight months, accused of throwing a Molotov cocktail at the Soviet embassy, but was eventually acquitted. He was also arrested in 1989, this time for trying to block the motorcade of President George H W Bush, and was again found not guilty.

And this according to the Washington Post:

Journalist-turned-politician Boris Johnson was elected London mayor on Friday, capping his Conservative Party’s nationwide stomping of the ruling Labor Party in a rebuke to the leadership of Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

One of rules of thumb, at least in American politics, is that big, metropolitan cities are considered to have a more liberal streak. Liberals enjoy continuous support from these major cities.

But not in Europe? 

Just like my first girlfriend said…

“I didn’t feel it.” 

How do you read this story? Are you a “the cup is half-full or half-empty” person? If the economy grew 0.6%, does that mean we are not in recession anymore, or were we ever in one? 

Or was the sentiment more like: “Screw a recession.  Food prices are high, gas prices are ridiculous and the dollar is tanking against every other currency including Charmin’s two-ply.”

UPDATE: This article by YAHOO! is a tad bit more positive: 

Wall Street shot higher Thursday as investors, while anticipating another dismal jobs report Friday, viewed the rising dollar and falling oil prices as promising signs for the economy. The Dow Jones industrial average soared nearly 190 points to close above 13,000 for the first time since Jan. 3.

Maybe things are looking up…

 

Gov’t at work…er…kinda.

Economically, this does not make sense!

First the article and a couple of quotes to summarize: 

Federal, state and local governments are hiring new workers at the fastest pace in six years, helping offset job losses in the private sector.

Governments added 76,800 jobs in the first three months of 2008, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports.

“Government jobs are an important cushion for the economy when the private sector falters,” says North Carolina State University economist Michael Walden.

Is it just me or did any of you guys curse at first breath when reading through this article?

Don’t get me wrong, I think there are some hires that are necessary to make government run effectively and efficiently.  However, I strongly disagree with the hiring of more federal and state government bureaucracies to help alleviate a faltering economy—an economy that is based on a free market principle.

To hire more government people just to fudge a few numbers in the economic books might be good now, but what happens when those hired start making things in government more inefficient than it already is?

My solution is that government should hire private entities to carry out some of the tasks of public work.  Don’t outsource everything to private companies, but hiring private companies to do some of the work can kill the growth of rising taxes, increase efficiency and help the economy at every level. 

A downside, which is a biggie: corruption.

(In government bureaucracy, if we can scale what normally happens with the operations component, we would want our government to fall in the middle.  If government goes too far left or right, dire consequences are expected.)

<_____________________|_______________________>
INEFFICIENCY                        IDEAL                             CORRUPTION

Politics shortsighted? (again)

Everyone complains about how politics/campaigning are shortsighted. Looking at the landscape such as this article:

Georgia is now 41.5 percent minority. That’s behind Hawaii, Washington, D.C., New Mexico, California and Texas, which already have reached the milestone of majority-minority populations.

To my knowledge, they have been on the rise for the past decade or so haven’t they?

And to much of every Asian American voter’s chagrin, where the hell is our political legitimacy and influence?  I guess the 3.2% that the Asian Americans muster in Georgia is not enough for both major political parties to try woo us.

Yeah, I’ve been beating on this drum for awhile.

It’s not old yet.

It soon will be. 

Globalization is good, right?

So I’ve always been supporter of globalization and open markets.  After all, free trade is supposed to stop wars right?  The U.S. has never gotten into a military conflict with any country that has a McDonald’s or a Starbucks.  It seems though that these days I’m seeing more articles like this one:

Korea will be the biggest victim among Asian-Pacific countries if the U.S. economy slides into a slump due to the subprime mortgage crisis, according to the UN. 

As if Koreans needed additional fuel to stoke the fires of anti-American sentiment…

Let’s hope the new administration can turn the ship around before it’s too late.

Sorry…

but I’ve been very busy as of late. promise will start posting very soon. 

(not that you guys noticed or anything.)