My favoritist president ever announced that he will sign an executive order creating the White House Council on Women and Girls. This council will ensure that federal agencies consider how their policies and programs impact women and their families. That sound you hear is my reproductive organs cheering. Here is what he had to say on it:
My two favorite parts (although the whole speech was spot-on):
"When a job doesn't offer family leave, that also hurts men who want to care for a new baby or an ailing parent"--Do I smell reform of the Family and Medical Leave Act?!?!
"When there's no affordable childcare, that hurts children who wind up in second-rate care or spending afternoons alone in front of the television set." Universal daycare? I can haz universal daycare?!
I can't believe we have a president that actually gives a shit about women. Incidentally, we used to have a council just like this...until Bush disbanded it in 2001, along with a council on racial issues. This surprises exactly no one.
Valerie Jarrett will chair the council, a super-duper smarty pants who grew up in Iran, got her BA in psychology (a woman after my own heart) from Stanford, and a JD from University of Michigan Law School. She is currently a Senior Advisor to Obama.
Best part of the speech is the end: "Alright, so I'm gonna go sign this thing. Thank you very much." Man, that guy gets. shit. done.
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
A president you can be proud of
The president's speech tonight was inspiring. It felt so much different from Bush's addresses. I feel like with Bush, all I heard was rhetoric and patriotic phrases, with no real meat. If Bush's speeches were a salad with a nice dressing, Obama's speech was a fucking turducken with bacon on the side.
I found out that I am getting a tax cut on April 1. I learned that people who have lost their jobs (my mother potentially included in that group) will get extended unemployment benefits and health care. I learned that we won't just throw this money to the wind and cover our eyes to where it ends up (like some bailouts I could mention). I found out that our new government is making a lending fund to provide the auto, education, and small business loans that have ground to a halt. I learned that banks will receive assistance, but will be held accountable for where that money goes. I learned that we would have health care reform by the end of the year, and that the government wants the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. And I learned that this education would be made affordable. I learned that our government wants to remove the troops from Iraq, and raise pay for soldiers.
You know what I would learn from Bush's speeches? I would learn that there wasn't really an economic crisis, that the Iraqis pose a threat to our national security, and that terrorists lurk around every corner. I would learn that the wealthy individuals and corporations in this country deserved more federal support than the middle and lower class. I would learn that I didn't need to know where my tax money went.
On a side note, what a totally awesome nod to his wife in the beginning of his speech. I'm pretty sure she mouthed "I love you" to him. Commence swooning.
Outside of political news, I've been out quite a bit lately and subsequently have been too exhausted/drunk/hungover to blog. But I do have stories. I went to a bar with a friend that's in the style of a speakeasy. You make reservations at 3 pm the day of, and when you get there, the door is located in a secret door in a phone booth inside of a hot dog shop. It was small and cozy, and had not even 30 seats. The prices were right, and you could chow down on hot dogs from the adjoining shop (avocado and sour cream hot dog!).
Then, last night I went out to help a friend celebrate a visiting friend's birthday. We were in a small dive bar that we frequent, and who should walk in but Elijah Wood! After much giggling and nervousness, I walked up to him and tapped him on the shoulder:
"Are you Elijah Wood?"
"Yes."
"My name is Phoebe, and it is a pleasure to meet you." (firm handshake)
"It's a pleasure to meet you too."
Then we asked him for a picture, and he happily obliged. Whadda guy. He even put his arm around me for the picture! SQUEAL!!! And I don't care what anyone says: Elijah Wood is ADORABLE. His eyes are so blue....he gives me a nerdgasm. I can't say as much for the entourage that was with him, though (that's right, hobbits apparently have entourages). They were all scowly and possessive. Pretty high and mighty for a group that's only hanging around the guy for status.
Then we left him alone, and proceeded to have a damn good time.
Below is the picture. Blog-safe, of course ;)
I found out that I am getting a tax cut on April 1. I learned that people who have lost their jobs (my mother potentially included in that group) will get extended unemployment benefits and health care. I learned that we won't just throw this money to the wind and cover our eyes to where it ends up (like some bailouts I could mention). I found out that our new government is making a lending fund to provide the auto, education, and small business loans that have ground to a halt. I learned that banks will receive assistance, but will be held accountable for where that money goes. I learned that we would have health care reform by the end of the year, and that the government wants the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. And I learned that this education would be made affordable. I learned that our government wants to remove the troops from Iraq, and raise pay for soldiers.
You know what I would learn from Bush's speeches? I would learn that there wasn't really an economic crisis, that the Iraqis pose a threat to our national security, and that terrorists lurk around every corner. I would learn that the wealthy individuals and corporations in this country deserved more federal support than the middle and lower class. I would learn that I didn't need to know where my tax money went.
On a side note, what a totally awesome nod to his wife in the beginning of his speech. I'm pretty sure she mouthed "I love you" to him. Commence swooning.
Outside of political news, I've been out quite a bit lately and subsequently have been too exhausted/drunk/hungover to blog. But I do have stories. I went to a bar with a friend that's in the style of a speakeasy. You make reservations at 3 pm the day of, and when you get there, the door is located in a secret door in a phone booth inside of a hot dog shop. It was small and cozy, and had not even 30 seats. The prices were right, and you could chow down on hot dogs from the adjoining shop (avocado and sour cream hot dog!).
Then, last night I went out to help a friend celebrate a visiting friend's birthday. We were in a small dive bar that we frequent, and who should walk in but Elijah Wood! After much giggling and nervousness, I walked up to him and tapped him on the shoulder:
"Are you Elijah Wood?"
"Yes."
"My name is Phoebe, and it is a pleasure to meet you." (firm handshake)
"It's a pleasure to meet you too."
Then we asked him for a picture, and he happily obliged. Whadda guy. He even put his arm around me for the picture! SQUEAL!!! And I don't care what anyone says: Elijah Wood is ADORABLE. His eyes are so blue....he gives me a nerdgasm. I can't say as much for the entourage that was with him, though (that's right, hobbits apparently have entourages). They were all scowly and possessive. Pretty high and mighty for a group that's only hanging around the guy for status.
Then we left him alone, and proceeded to have a damn good time.
Below is the picture. Blog-safe, of course ;)
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Thanks for telling me what to do with my body
I REALLY wish that shoe had hit Bush the other day. And by "shoe" I mean "bullet," because I came home from work to this news:
The idea that this bill "protects the conscience" of medical providers is bullshit. If you aren't comfortable with the idea of prescribing/distributing birth control or performing abortions, DON'T GO INTO THAT PROFESSION. I can't get a job driving an ice cream truck and then refuse to hand out ice cream on the grounds that I'm against childhood obesity. Doctors, nurses, and pharmacists shouldn't be allowed to keep their jobs if they aren't willing to DO THOSE JOBS. They don't deserve protection for failing to provide adequate medical information and care for women. This action, like so much of Bush's administration, is absolutely unconstitutional. The government is endorsing religion by empowering people to impose their religious views on the rest of us. No one should have the power to impose their religiously-driven morals on others who don't share those viewpoints.
It is neither reasonable nor fair to expect women to travel elsewhere to receive these services. There are so many places in America that are served by a single pharmacy or doctor's office. And not everyone in those places has the money, resources, or insurance coverage to find another doctor or pharmacy. Furthermore, if you are a young person growing up in such an isolated place, how would you even know what information you are lacking if your doctor won't even discuss issues of birth control or sexual health?
Ironically, I bet every single one of the people who receive "protection" from this legislation have no problem with issues of men's health. Go into any pharmacy that refuses to sell birth control and ask to see how many bottles of Viagra they stock. This entire school of thought is the product of a religious patriarchy that inherently values the health and well-being of men over women.
It's up to the Obama administration to undo this travesty and allow women full control over their bodies and health. Obama, I had so much hope for you. Please don't let us down.
The Bush administration today issued a sweeping new regulation that protects a broad range of health-care workers -- from doctors to janitors -- who refuse to participate in providing services that they believe violate their personal, moral or religious beliefs.
The controversial rule empowers federal health officials to cut off federal funding for any state or local government, hospital, clinic, health plan, doctor's office or other entity if it does not accommodate employees who exercise their "right of conscience." It would apply to more than 584,000 health-care facilities.
They finally did it. Bush and his cronies finally passed legislation that allows medical employees to deny women information and resources critical to their reproductive health. It effectively ensures that women are no longer secure in the knowledge that their medical provider is doing all that they can to help them. It means that medical personnel can deny women access to abortions, birth control pills, even information about sexual and reproductive health.
The idea that this bill "protects the conscience" of medical providers is bullshit. If you aren't comfortable with the idea of prescribing/distributing birth control or performing abortions, DON'T GO INTO THAT PROFESSION. I can't get a job driving an ice cream truck and then refuse to hand out ice cream on the grounds that I'm against childhood obesity. Doctors, nurses, and pharmacists shouldn't be allowed to keep their jobs if they aren't willing to DO THOSE JOBS. They don't deserve protection for failing to provide adequate medical information and care for women. This action, like so much of Bush's administration, is absolutely unconstitutional. The government is endorsing religion by empowering people to impose their religious views on the rest of us. No one should have the power to impose their religiously-driven morals on others who don't share those viewpoints.
It is neither reasonable nor fair to expect women to travel elsewhere to receive these services. There are so many places in America that are served by a single pharmacy or doctor's office. And not everyone in those places has the money, resources, or insurance coverage to find another doctor or pharmacy. Furthermore, if you are a young person growing up in such an isolated place, how would you even know what information you are lacking if your doctor won't even discuss issues of birth control or sexual health?
Ironically, I bet every single one of the people who receive "protection" from this legislation have no problem with issues of men's health. Go into any pharmacy that refuses to sell birth control and ask to see how many bottles of Viagra they stock. This entire school of thought is the product of a religious patriarchy that inherently values the health and well-being of men over women.
It's up to the Obama administration to undo this travesty and allow women full control over their bodies and health. Obama, I had so much hope for you. Please don't let us down.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Le Femme Obamas
Today I head a teaser for a "news" story on the potential designer for Michelle Obama's inaugural outfit; later, I read a story on Jezebel about what Malia and Sasha will wear. And to all of this I say: WHO THE FUCK CARES? No one ever speculates about what suit Barack Obama will don. No one analyzes the shit out of his tie colors and the crease on his pants. Can we talk about the things Michelle might like to do with her new position in the Whitehouse (And I'm not talking about decorating the fucking Christmas tree)? You know, I never hear it mentioned, but the woman has a fucking career, too. We could talk about how that might play into her future plans? For crying out loud, why don't we write about Sasha and Malia's favorite sports or school subjects? WHO CARES WHAT THEY WEAR?
My point is that the media can not seem to learn that WOMEN ARE NOT FUCKING DECORATIONS. Michelle, Sasha, and Malia are not pretty accessories for the president-elect. They are people. With minds. And one of them has a really fucking awesome career (can I just point out here that while Barack Obama was still a senator, Michelle earned waaaaaaay more than he did? like, over $100,000 more a year?). And there is more substance to them than how they look when they wear clothing. So it would be fucking awesome if the media dug a little deeper (I'm talking to you, Jezebel).
My point is that the media can not seem to learn that WOMEN ARE NOT FUCKING DECORATIONS. Michelle, Sasha, and Malia are not pretty accessories for the president-elect. They are people. With minds. And one of them has a really fucking awesome career (can I just point out here that while Barack Obama was still a senator, Michelle earned waaaaaaay more than he did? like, over $100,000 more a year?). And there is more substance to them than how they look when they wear clothing. So it would be fucking awesome if the media dug a little deeper (I'm talking to you, Jezebel).
Monday, November 3, 2008
Tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow
So sad that Obama's grandmother died the day before her grandson was (most likely) elected president.
First day of work today. I'm so fucking exhausted. But it was good, and most of all I'm pleased that everyone was a fervent Obama supporter. So I think I'll fit in.
Tomorrow is the day that everything changes.
First day of work today. I'm so fucking exhausted. But it was good, and most of all I'm pleased that everyone was a fervent Obama supporter. So I think I'll fit in.
Tomorrow is the day that everything changes.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
And it seems so plausible
This douche-hole from Minnesota is claiming that he and Obama did some blow back in '99, and then had hot, steamy homo sex in the back of a limo. He says that he will submit to a polygraph to prove it, and some site is offering a load of cash to record it and to reward him if he passes.
I bet this guy has a backwards "b" on his ass, too *insert eye roll*
Really, no one should be giving this guy any attention. The claims are outlandish, that much should be obvious to anyone. He hasn't got any sort of proof, and even a positive polygraph isn't proof enough, as anyone with good self-control can easily pass them.
But the reason I'm giving him attention is that I think his claims illustrate some very sad things about our country. His "scandalous" accusations involve two things: Drug use and homosexual behavior. What kills me is that these were obviously formulated to be the "worst" things that could be said about a candidate. He didn't come out and claim that Obama raped a child, or that Obama once beat his wife. No. Obama's a GAY. And a DRUG ADDICT. OH MY GOD WHAT IS THE MORAL FIBER OF THIS COUNTRY COMING TO. Now if that Arab gits elected, he surely will spend his time in the Oval Office, smokin' crack and havin' the butt-sex, y'all.
Being gay is not some sort of disease or negative behavior or devastating event. It's just how some people are. Consenting sex between two adults doesn't hurt anyone: not them, not you, not your family or your marriage. And it shouldn't be an insult, let alone a DEAL BREAKER for the presidency.
And drug use? Drugs aren't the best, mmmmkay? But guess what? Lots of people do drugs. And those people are actually okay. They aren't all homeless "welfare queens", or negligent parents, or pregnant teens or irresponsible members of society in general (as the War on Drugs would have you believe). Clinton did drugs. Bush DEFINITELY did drugs. Obama already admitted that he smoked the reefer. Hell, I did a bunch of drugs in college, and I still got into a top PhD program. So they aren't great to do all the time, but sometimes a little dabbling here and there isn't going to hurt. But what gets me is that this guy specifically said that Obama did crack-cocaine (while this guy just had some plain old blow). Allow me to translate that accusation for you: "Oh, look at the black presidential candidate! I associate crack addicts with black men! It only makes sense that this black man would also do crack! You don't want a crack-head in the white house, do you?"
Oh my god, I can see the McCain rallies now. On top of the disgusting racist diarrhea that has been spewing from their mouths (This week I heard: "I think he's gonna put a turban on, and he's gonna go into the White house, and we're all gonna be shot"), now we're going to have gems like "He's a FAG. And a CRACK HEAD. A GAY CRACK-HEAD TERRORIST."
I could turn this into a rant into how this country openly discriminates and harasses gays, or how the War on Drugs is unnecessarily overcrowding our prisons and costing us excessive amounts of taxpayer dollars. But really my main concern here is that these two "insults" were the most devastating accusations that this fellow could conjure. My main concern is that this reflects how backwards much of this country is in terms of moral priorities. These same people will talk all day about how homosexuality is the scourge of the earth, but won't blink an eye when a girl in a short skirt gets raped (she was asking for it, after all). Or when they beat their children (spare the rod, spoil the child, y'all. Gotta learn 'em somehows). Or when impoverished families continue to suffer because our government won't provide them with healthcare, childcare, or a good education (they're poor because they're all lazy drug-addicts, obv).
The people who talk the most about morality and claim to have the highest sense of morality always seem to be the people with the most warped idea of morality. The things that they seem to care about the most seem to be the things that, in reality, matter the least. And it seems that those people are always pushing their warped views into our government. So we get laws that reinforce these subjective notions of morality (anti-sodomy laws, bans to gay marriage, overly-zealous penalties for drug use). And we DON'T get laws made on the things that really matter (proper protections for victims of abuse, quality health-care for everyone, adequate educational funding for all public schools and children).
8 days.
I bet this guy has a backwards "b" on his ass, too *insert eye roll*
Really, no one should be giving this guy any attention. The claims are outlandish, that much should be obvious to anyone. He hasn't got any sort of proof, and even a positive polygraph isn't proof enough, as anyone with good self-control can easily pass them.
But the reason I'm giving him attention is that I think his claims illustrate some very sad things about our country. His "scandalous" accusations involve two things: Drug use and homosexual behavior. What kills me is that these were obviously formulated to be the "worst" things that could be said about a candidate. He didn't come out and claim that Obama raped a child, or that Obama once beat his wife. No. Obama's a GAY. And a DRUG ADDICT. OH MY GOD WHAT IS THE MORAL FIBER OF THIS COUNTRY COMING TO. Now if that Arab gits elected, he surely will spend his time in the Oval Office, smokin' crack and havin' the butt-sex, y'all.
Being gay is not some sort of disease or negative behavior or devastating event. It's just how some people are. Consenting sex between two adults doesn't hurt anyone: not them, not you, not your family or your marriage. And it shouldn't be an insult, let alone a DEAL BREAKER for the presidency.
And drug use? Drugs aren't the best, mmmmkay? But guess what? Lots of people do drugs. And those people are actually okay. They aren't all homeless "welfare queens", or negligent parents, or pregnant teens or irresponsible members of society in general (as the War on Drugs would have you believe). Clinton did drugs. Bush DEFINITELY did drugs. Obama already admitted that he smoked the reefer. Hell, I did a bunch of drugs in college, and I still got into a top PhD program. So they aren't great to do all the time, but sometimes a little dabbling here and there isn't going to hurt. But what gets me is that this guy specifically said that Obama did crack-cocaine (while this guy just had some plain old blow). Allow me to translate that accusation for you: "Oh, look at the black presidential candidate! I associate crack addicts with black men! It only makes sense that this black man would also do crack! You don't want a crack-head in the white house, do you?"
Oh my god, I can see the McCain rallies now. On top of the disgusting racist diarrhea that has been spewing from their mouths (This week I heard: "I think he's gonna put a turban on, and he's gonna go into the White house, and we're all gonna be shot"), now we're going to have gems like "He's a FAG. And a CRACK HEAD. A GAY CRACK-HEAD TERRORIST."
I could turn this into a rant into how this country openly discriminates and harasses gays, or how the War on Drugs is unnecessarily overcrowding our prisons and costing us excessive amounts of taxpayer dollars. But really my main concern here is that these two "insults" were the most devastating accusations that this fellow could conjure. My main concern is that this reflects how backwards much of this country is in terms of moral priorities. These same people will talk all day about how homosexuality is the scourge of the earth, but won't blink an eye when a girl in a short skirt gets raped (she was asking for it, after all). Or when they beat their children (spare the rod, spoil the child, y'all. Gotta learn 'em somehows). Or when impoverished families continue to suffer because our government won't provide them with healthcare, childcare, or a good education (they're poor because they're all lazy drug-addicts, obv).
The people who talk the most about morality and claim to have the highest sense of morality always seem to be the people with the most warped idea of morality. The things that they seem to care about the most seem to be the things that, in reality, matter the least. And it seems that those people are always pushing their warped views into our government. So we get laws that reinforce these subjective notions of morality (anti-sodomy laws, bans to gay marriage, overly-zealous penalties for drug use). And we DON'T get laws made on the things that really matter (proper protections for victims of abuse, quality health-care for everyone, adequate educational funding for all public schools and children).
8 days.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Check this out
After Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama, a lot of people were crying that the endorsement was simply a race issue. These claims didn't sit well with me, but I didn't feel like I could adequately explain why. However, Macon D over at Stuff White People Do saved the day and put into words what I could not. Thanks, Macon D!
If you aren't already, you should be reading SWPD on a regular basis. It's an intelligent and thoughtful blog about what it means to be white in this country, and the ways in which the majority cause suffering among racial minorities (whether they intend to or not). It's a big wake-up call.
If you aren't already, you should be reading SWPD on a regular basis. It's an intelligent and thoughtful blog about what it means to be white in this country, and the ways in which the majority cause suffering among racial minorities (whether they intend to or not). It's a big wake-up call.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Women's "health"
Are you fucking kidding me, John McCain? You just put women's health in QUOTES??? OUR HEALTH IS NOT A JOKE. AND YOU DO NOT GET TO TELL US WHAT IS HEALTH-RELATED OR NOT.
Carrying a baby for 9 months is ALWAYS RISKY. ALWAYS. So, John McCain, who will NEVER HAVE TO CARRY A BABY, we are not fucking walking uteri. I know you and your trophy wife love your damn adopted baby so much, but GUESS WHAT. We are not here to make babies all the time for people who can't have them. That's not how it works. And it's our bodies that get FUCKED UP for 9 months, so if we don't want to do that, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO. And that's PART OF WOMEN'S HEALTH.
Oh and also, you're offended at being called a racist? Maybe you should try NOT MAKING RACIAL COMMENTS. Calling Obama a terrorist is RACIST and that is the end of it. If you think that you're offended, you should try being in Obama's shoes.
Caps lock aside, this was a much juicier debate than the last one. The moderator did a really good job, I thought, of trying to make the candidates answer the questions. I wish they had done that at the VP debate. I'm sorry they didn't mention gay rights at all.
Carrying a baby for 9 months is ALWAYS RISKY. ALWAYS. So, John McCain, who will NEVER HAVE TO CARRY A BABY, we are not fucking walking uteri. I know you and your trophy wife love your damn adopted baby so much, but GUESS WHAT. We are not here to make babies all the time for people who can't have them. That's not how it works. And it's our bodies that get FUCKED UP for 9 months, so if we don't want to do that, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO. And that's PART OF WOMEN'S HEALTH.
Oh and also, you're offended at being called a racist? Maybe you should try NOT MAKING RACIAL COMMENTS. Calling Obama a terrorist is RACIST and that is the end of it. If you think that you're offended, you should try being in Obama's shoes.
Caps lock aside, this was a much juicier debate than the last one. The moderator did a really good job, I thought, of trying to make the candidates answer the questions. I wish they had done that at the VP debate. I'm sorry they didn't mention gay rights at all.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
He's an Arab
This was already posted at one of my all-time favorite blogs, BitchPhD, but this blew me away so much that I had to re-post it here:
First of all, even though he did not handle it particularly gracefully (immediately countering the claim that "Obama is an Arab" with "he's a good family man"? Arabs are not mutually exclusive with good family men), I think this is the single most admirable thing that McCain has done his entire campaign.
Secondly, it is SO FUCKING SAD that McCain's supporters are so nasty that he had to make a speech telling them to calm the fuck down and be respectful of Obama. Because his supporters were screaming things like "Obama is a terrorist!" and "Kill Obama!" at rallies. When you have incited your supporters to such a murderous rage, you have failed. And your supporters have failed as human beings (And I know that I made a joke about wishing McCain would have died in 'Nam, but the key word is "joke." Those people screaming at McCain's rallies aren't joking. Those batshit insane people would ACTUALLY kill Obama if they had the chance. Oh wait. Some neo-nazi meth heads already tried).
If I was a politician, and one day I realized that my supporters were a bunch of Klan members and racist old ladies who think that "Arab" is a dirty word (it's the new N-word!) , I would be so ashamed of the terrible monster that I had created. I would be so ashamed that I would totally re-think every single goddamn thing that I had ever said over the years that caused disgusting wastes of human life to gravitate towards me.
I would think really, really, fucking hard about it.
I would think.
John McCain: Are you thinking yet?
First of all, even though he did not handle it particularly gracefully (immediately countering the claim that "Obama is an Arab" with "he's a good family man"? Arabs are not mutually exclusive with good family men), I think this is the single most admirable thing that McCain has done his entire campaign.
Secondly, it is SO FUCKING SAD that McCain's supporters are so nasty that he had to make a speech telling them to calm the fuck down and be respectful of Obama. Because his supporters were screaming things like "Obama is a terrorist!" and "Kill Obama!" at rallies. When you have incited your supporters to such a murderous rage, you have failed. And your supporters have failed as human beings (And I know that I made a joke about wishing McCain would have died in 'Nam, but the key word is "joke." Those people screaming at McCain's rallies aren't joking. Those batshit insane people would ACTUALLY kill Obama if they had the chance. Oh wait. Some neo-nazi meth heads already tried).
If I was a politician, and one day I realized that my supporters were a bunch of Klan members and racist old ladies who think that "Arab" is a dirty word (it's the new N-word!) , I would be so ashamed of the terrible monster that I had created. I would be so ashamed that I would totally re-think every single goddamn thing that I had ever said over the years that caused disgusting wastes of human life to gravitate towards me.
I would think really, really, fucking hard about it.
I would think.
John McCain: Are you thinking yet?
Monday, September 29, 2008
Damn pinkos
Lucy (welcome to my blog, Lucy!) raised her concerns about electing Obama in my comments. What struck me about the comment is that it sounded a lot like the concerns that my parents have...issues that to me, an unemployed 20-something with a ton of time on her hands, have obvious answers; however, other people are actually employed and do not have limitless amounts of time to research these issues on the interweb while eating Nutella straight out of the jar (if you have yet to try Nutella, I am sorry to tell you that you are living an empty and meaningless life).
So I'm going to address these particular issues in a post, since it seems too involved to attempt on the comments board.
His resume is a little thin and he has yet to tell me HOW he plans to implement CHANGE. I am all for CHANGE, I just want some details.
This is the plight of all politicians, no? The details are always sketchy. Not to mention, the rhetoric is bothersome in that it is of a general nature. To address this topic, you have to ask yourself what change you are looking for. Do you want economic change? Social change? Foreign policy change? Each of these is a complex category, and has to be addressed separately. I think one of the best resources for this is a lil' site called ontheissues.org. You can search by topic or candidate. Frankly, I feel the best gauge of what a candidate will do is what that candidate has already done. Look for their past voting record, declarations that they have made, etc. I agree that it is hard to get a "straight answer" as to what exactly will happen. But knowing his stance on the issues is usually a good indicator.
As for his "thin" resume...honestly, he's a young guy for a presidential candidate, no kidding. But he's been a legislator since 1996, a senator, since 2004, he belonged to a law firm specializing in civil rights and neighborhood economic development for many years, among many other things. He's packed a lot of punch into his 47 years. Go ahead, google his career. Wikipedia is a good resource. His resume is only "thin" compared to someone with 30 extra years on him. And if you compare it to Palin...god, don't even get me started. The bottom line is, that "thin resume" stuff is just hype put out by the McCain campaign. If you compared McCain to Strom Thurmond, McCain would look like a political toddler, too.
over the years, I have become less fond of taxes
Ah yes, the taxes. The older we get, the more money we make, the more important that becomes. So the answer here is yes, Obama will raise taxes. But wait! There's more! He's only raising taxes for those that make above $603,403. Do you make that much? Then maybe you should vote for McCain, whose tax cuts benefit that group more than any. The Washington Post has a really simple chart to see where you would fall on the tax cut spectrum. Also, you can go to electiontaxes.com to estimate your personal taxes for 2009-12 under the candidates' proposed plans. The answer may surprise you! Also, I want to point out that if you make enough money to have increased taxes under Obama, it really is nicer of you to share the wealth. One person reaalllly doesn't need that much. And they certainly don't need more tax breaks. That's just how the rich get richer while the poor get...well, Nutella on the couch.
his health care program scares me. Are we getting dangerously close to Socialism with his ideas?
This is a concern that my father has expressed as well. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that Lucy had the unfortunate experience of being raised during or close to the Cold War. There is no reason to fear universal programs like these. They don't make us "communists." They don't mean that we'll all have to wait in bread lines. They don't mean that everything you earn will be taken away from you and divvied up among the workers. I promise. The Republicans just call socialism because they know it will scare you. We have a lot of good socialized programs: The post office, public schools, medicare, social security. Yes, these systems have flaws. So do the privatized ones. BUT. Here's the thing. A lot of people need these systems. Not everyone can afford private schools. Or health care. Or retirement. A lot of people need help. The people who make the most money do "earn" it, but they are often able to earn it because they already occupy privileged places in society. The opportunity to earn money was always presented to them, and they were able to take it. There are a lot of people who do not EVER get the opportunity to earn as you do. They grew up poor, they had uneducated parents, they did not have access to proper health care, they did not have access to a good education. Your tax dollars help those people have access to those things. Those people are not suckling at your teat. They just need some help. We aren't communists for helping our fellow Americans reach their full potential. Helping those people will make the country a far better place, even if it means you take one vacation this year instead of two. Everyone should have access to quality and affordable health care!! And privatizing it ensures that many people are barred from receiving the help that they need. Cancer patients can't get treatment, children die when they didn't have to. Insurance companies do everything they can to avoid paying for treatment costs. I myself do not have healthcare right now. If I discover a lump in my breast tomorrow, do I deserve to suffer and die because I can't afford treatment? If your company went bankrupt tomorrow because of corrupt corporate practices and you got laid off, and then your child needed an emergency appendectomy that you can't afford without your healthcare, does that make you lazy and deserving of suffering? This is a reality for many, many people. It's important to remember that not everyone is as lucky as you are right now.
As I have aged and worked hard for my money, well, I like to keep most of it or at least I prefer to give it to the charities I choose
Giving to charities is wonderful, but it's important to separate taxes from charities. Although tax dollars often do go to what some would consider "charitable causes" (social programs such as funding homeless shelters and early-childhood education initiatives), they go to a lot of other programs as well. For instance, I wouldn't consider the USPS a charity. Furthermore, tax dollars go to many different and specific institutions that absolutely must receive a certain amount of money to operate, and it would be too difficult to rely on the voluntary will of the people to donate that money (I seriously doubt that public schools could keep afloat under such a system. There's that whole notion of "my kid doesn't go, why should I pay?!").
The government doesn't seem to be doing such a 'bang up' job of handling our funds
I agree with you 100%! That's why I'm voting for new government leadership! McCain thinks the same as Bush. Check out his voting record. I believe that as someone with a lot of experience in civil rights and inequality, Obama will do something more reasonable with our tax dollars...aka, actually helping out the Americans who need it. McCain just wants to look out for his own...preserving the status quo of the white, straight, wealthy, and male.
The points Lucy brought up are all valid concerns of many voters. I hope that the links were helpful and cleared up some gray areas. Now I'm off to lick the Nutella jar clean.
So I'm going to address these particular issues in a post, since it seems too involved to attempt on the comments board.
His resume is a little thin and he has yet to tell me HOW he plans to implement CHANGE. I am all for CHANGE, I just want some details.
This is the plight of all politicians, no? The details are always sketchy. Not to mention, the rhetoric is bothersome in that it is of a general nature. To address this topic, you have to ask yourself what change you are looking for. Do you want economic change? Social change? Foreign policy change? Each of these is a complex category, and has to be addressed separately. I think one of the best resources for this is a lil' site called ontheissues.org. You can search by topic or candidate. Frankly, I feel the best gauge of what a candidate will do is what that candidate has already done. Look for their past voting record, declarations that they have made, etc. I agree that it is hard to get a "straight answer" as to what exactly will happen. But knowing his stance on the issues is usually a good indicator.
As for his "thin" resume...honestly, he's a young guy for a presidential candidate, no kidding. But he's been a legislator since 1996, a senator, since 2004, he belonged to a law firm specializing in civil rights and neighborhood economic development for many years, among many other things. He's packed a lot of punch into his 47 years. Go ahead, google his career. Wikipedia is a good resource. His resume is only "thin" compared to someone with 30 extra years on him. And if you compare it to Palin...god, don't even get me started. The bottom line is, that "thin resume" stuff is just hype put out by the McCain campaign. If you compared McCain to Strom Thurmond, McCain would look like a political toddler, too.
over the years, I have become less fond of taxes
Ah yes, the taxes. The older we get, the more money we make, the more important that becomes. So the answer here is yes, Obama will raise taxes. But wait! There's more! He's only raising taxes for those that make above $603,403. Do you make that much? Then maybe you should vote for McCain, whose tax cuts benefit that group more than any. The Washington Post has a really simple chart to see where you would fall on the tax cut spectrum. Also, you can go to electiontaxes.com to estimate your personal taxes for 2009-12 under the candidates' proposed plans. The answer may surprise you! Also, I want to point out that if you make enough money to have increased taxes under Obama, it really is nicer of you to share the wealth. One person reaalllly doesn't need that much. And they certainly don't need more tax breaks. That's just how the rich get richer while the poor get...well, Nutella on the couch.
his health care program scares me. Are we getting dangerously close to Socialism with his ideas?
This is a concern that my father has expressed as well. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that Lucy had the unfortunate experience of being raised during or close to the Cold War. There is no reason to fear universal programs like these. They don't make us "communists." They don't mean that we'll all have to wait in bread lines. They don't mean that everything you earn will be taken away from you and divvied up among the workers. I promise. The Republicans just call socialism because they know it will scare you. We have a lot of good socialized programs: The post office, public schools, medicare, social security. Yes, these systems have flaws. So do the privatized ones. BUT. Here's the thing. A lot of people need these systems. Not everyone can afford private schools. Or health care. Or retirement. A lot of people need help. The people who make the most money do "earn" it, but they are often able to earn it because they already occupy privileged places in society. The opportunity to earn money was always presented to them, and they were able to take it. There are a lot of people who do not EVER get the opportunity to earn as you do. They grew up poor, they had uneducated parents, they did not have access to proper health care, they did not have access to a good education. Your tax dollars help those people have access to those things. Those people are not suckling at your teat. They just need some help. We aren't communists for helping our fellow Americans reach their full potential. Helping those people will make the country a far better place, even if it means you take one vacation this year instead of two. Everyone should have access to quality and affordable health care!! And privatizing it ensures that many people are barred from receiving the help that they need. Cancer patients can't get treatment, children die when they didn't have to. Insurance companies do everything they can to avoid paying for treatment costs. I myself do not have healthcare right now. If I discover a lump in my breast tomorrow, do I deserve to suffer and die because I can't afford treatment? If your company went bankrupt tomorrow because of corrupt corporate practices and you got laid off, and then your child needed an emergency appendectomy that you can't afford without your healthcare, does that make you lazy and deserving of suffering? This is a reality for many, many people. It's important to remember that not everyone is as lucky as you are right now.
As I have aged and worked hard for my money, well, I like to keep most of it or at least I prefer to give it to the charities I choose
Giving to charities is wonderful, but it's important to separate taxes from charities. Although tax dollars often do go to what some would consider "charitable causes" (social programs such as funding homeless shelters and early-childhood education initiatives), they go to a lot of other programs as well. For instance, I wouldn't consider the USPS a charity. Furthermore, tax dollars go to many different and specific institutions that absolutely must receive a certain amount of money to operate, and it would be too difficult to rely on the voluntary will of the people to donate that money (I seriously doubt that public schools could keep afloat under such a system. There's that whole notion of "my kid doesn't go, why should I pay?!").
The government doesn't seem to be doing such a 'bang up' job of handling our funds
I agree with you 100%! That's why I'm voting for new government leadership! McCain thinks the same as Bush. Check out his voting record. I believe that as someone with a lot of experience in civil rights and inequality, Obama will do something more reasonable with our tax dollars...aka, actually helping out the Americans who need it. McCain just wants to look out for his own...preserving the status quo of the white, straight, wealthy, and male.
The points Lucy brought up are all valid concerns of many voters. I hope that the links were helpful and cleared up some gray areas. Now I'm off to lick the Nutella jar clean.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Debate: BAM!
We had a nice little debate party last night, since a dear friend was visiting from out of town. I thought about writing a long-winded analysis of it, and maybe through the miracle of DVR, I will go back and do that later. But for now let's just say that OF COURSE I think Obama was the master debater (insert immature giggling here). But, having a background in the social sciences, I gotta say that what I'm really interested in are social issues, so I suspect I will have more enthusiasm to blog My Big Opinion after debates addressing those things.
For now though, I'll be lurking in Times Square and in other touristy places today, because that is the price you pay when you move to New York and have many out-of-town friends. If anyone cares to share less-conventional entertainment ideas for guests, I'd LOVE to hear them.
For now though, I'll be lurking in Times Square and in other touristy places today, because that is the price you pay when you move to New York and have many out-of-town friends. If anyone cares to share less-conventional entertainment ideas for guests, I'd LOVE to hear them.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Obama in a landslide
Remember the time Howard Dean got his crazy on and right then everyone was like, Yup, this is the end of the line for him. And then Old Howard got into his van down by the river and no one ever heard from him again?
I think last night was that day for McCain. I think that there were a lot of days like this for McCain beforehand, but for the rest of the country, this is the eye-opener. If McCain wins the election after this stunt, then it's rigged for sure. Because there is just no fucking way.
The only thing that will really icing this cake for me is if Obama goes ahead with the "debate" anyway and answers all of the questions by himself. Then I want him to throw down the mic and walk out with his hands in the air. Hell, Obama could punch a baby at this point and I still think he would win.
The polls are all shit (mmm do you think they're polling cell phones for all of the cell-only folks? I bet not. I also bet that that's pretty big demographic they're missing). It's going to be a landslide victory. Seriously. I call it now.
*punches baby, walks triumphantly out door*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
