Chelsea Clinton has been active in her mother's campaign for president, spending a great deal of time on college campuses and talking to young people. She has been very careful and thoughtful with her words and has thus far been able to stick to the issues and steer away from personal questions. I believe that she has given the American people a new look at her and what she is now, an intelligent, professional, confident woman.
We saw that again the other day, but with just hint of annoyance when she was asked a question dealing with her father's affair with Monica Lewinsky.
A student at Butler University in Indianapolis, Indiana asked her about the criticism of her mother that how she handled the Lewinsky scandal might be a sign of weakness and that she might not be a strong enough candidate to be the president.
Chelsea's reply, "Wow, you're the first person actually that's ever asked me that question in the , I don't know maybe, 70 college campuses I've now been to, and I do not think that is any of your business."
The answer to me doesn't seem to make since in relation to the question. According to the student, a reporter for the University newspaper, he did not ask the question to cause trouble, but to give Chelsea an opportunity to demonstrate her mother's strength. The student said that he is a Clinton supporter and thought the scandal only showed Hillary's strength.
I understand that Chelsea is not the one running for office and she can refuse to answer any question that she wants to, but I also think that she had to know that at some point this would be brought up. She has always lived in the spotlight, although it was a very well guarded spotlight (one thing the Clinton's did right) and this was a huge event in her father's presidency.
That might have been a question better saved for Hillary, but if she is going to put herself out there, Chelsea will have to face some uncomfortable questions and I'm not totally sure that she gave the best answer that she could have.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
"Jeremiah Is My Pastor, Is A Good Friend of Mine"**
**(as sung to the tune of Jeremiah Was A Bull Frog on the Rush Limbaugh show)
Subtitle: And We Thought Mitt's Religious Convictions were Scary.....
I have been trying to write this post for almost 2 weeks now. To say that I have suffered from "Blogger's Block" would be an understatement. I have written and rewritten many times and I think that I have realized why I couldn't seem to get the words out. I have wanted to write a really negative, hateful post about Jeremiah White (Barack Obama's long time pastor and spiritual advisor), but I just could not get the right words out, but as the week has progressed and we have heard both Hillary and Obama make comments, I can write a much more positive (maybe neutral) spin on things.
There has been a lot of recent negative press around the Obama camp recently due to some of his pastors comments pulled from some of his sermons. The remarks were awful, whether they were pulled out of context or not, they were bad, there is no excuse for some of them. Obama however tried to put them in perspective and it really made sense to me. Obama said recently that we should look at it this way: The man (Jeremiah White) has preached at least 3 sermons a week for over 30 years (that is about 4680 sermons for any of you non math people) and the media has taken the worst of those 30 years and pulled out sound bites making him sound like a monster.
Again, I am not defending White or his words, but there would be very few preachers (with the exception of Pete of course) who could preach 4680 sermons in 30 years without offending someone, especially if their words were taken out of context.
I don't agree with what he has said, I don't agree with him preaching politics from the pulpit (which by the way, is against the law due to separation of church and state), but put this way, it does smooth it out a little bit.
I was also proud of the way that Obama reacted, by speaking out and even condemning Pastor White for certain comments including the comments about the US governments treatment of African Americans. He did not tiptoe around it or just look the other way, but he met it head on and reacted to it.
I can't say however that it does not concern me that this man, who obviously has so much hate and anger focused on white people and the US government, is the spiritual advisor for the man who very well might be the next US president. I believe that this could cause major race issues if Obama is elected and continues to look to Pastor White as an advisor. It is also confusing that Obama has been such a leader in a movement to get people united and to break down race problems and then he still stands with Pastor White.
I believe that Obama may have to come to a decision about this. There might not be a way to have his cake and eat it too with Pastor White.
Subtitle: And We Thought Mitt's Religious Convictions were Scary.....
I have been trying to write this post for almost 2 weeks now. To say that I have suffered from "Blogger's Block" would be an understatement. I have written and rewritten many times and I think that I have realized why I couldn't seem to get the words out. I have wanted to write a really negative, hateful post about Jeremiah White (Barack Obama's long time pastor and spiritual advisor), but I just could not get the right words out, but as the week has progressed and we have heard both Hillary and Obama make comments, I can write a much more positive (maybe neutral) spin on things.
There has been a lot of recent negative press around the Obama camp recently due to some of his pastors comments pulled from some of his sermons. The remarks were awful, whether they were pulled out of context or not, they were bad, there is no excuse for some of them. Obama however tried to put them in perspective and it really made sense to me. Obama said recently that we should look at it this way: The man (Jeremiah White) has preached at least 3 sermons a week for over 30 years (that is about 4680 sermons for any of you non math people) and the media has taken the worst of those 30 years and pulled out sound bites making him sound like a monster.
Again, I am not defending White or his words, but there would be very few preachers (with the exception of Pete of course) who could preach 4680 sermons in 30 years without offending someone, especially if their words were taken out of context.
I don't agree with what he has said, I don't agree with him preaching politics from the pulpit (which by the way, is against the law due to separation of church and state), but put this way, it does smooth it out a little bit.
I was also proud of the way that Obama reacted, by speaking out and even condemning Pastor White for certain comments including the comments about the US governments treatment of African Americans. He did not tiptoe around it or just look the other way, but he met it head on and reacted to it.
I can't say however that it does not concern me that this man, who obviously has so much hate and anger focused on white people and the US government, is the spiritual advisor for the man who very well might be the next US president. I believe that this could cause major race issues if Obama is elected and continues to look to Pastor White as an advisor. It is also confusing that Obama has been such a leader in a movement to get people united and to break down race problems and then he still stands with Pastor White.
I believe that Obama may have to come to a decision about this. There might not be a way to have his cake and eat it too with Pastor White.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
And The Winner Is......Nobody!
(Subtitle: What The Heck Is A Super Delegate?)
At the conclusion of the final primary (June 3) we will not have a democratic winner. Unless someone drops out of the race, which is highly unlikely, neither Hillary or Obama will have the necessary 2025 delegates needed to be named the democratic presidential candidate. Currently Obama is leading with 1614 to Hillary's 1482. With only 217 delegates left in the final 6 primaries, nobody will be a clear cut winner.
That leads us to the super delegates! What are super delegates you ask? Basically, super delegates are the big wigs in the Democratic party who represent about 20% of the total delegates and in some cases make the final decision as to who the democratic candidate will be. To be a super delegate a person would have to fit under one of these categories:
At the conclusion of the final primary (June 3) we will not have a democratic winner. Unless someone drops out of the race, which is highly unlikely, neither Hillary or Obama will have the necessary 2025 delegates needed to be named the democratic presidential candidate. Currently Obama is leading with 1614 to Hillary's 1482. With only 217 delegates left in the final 6 primaries, nobody will be a clear cut winner.
That leads us to the super delegates! What are super delegates you ask? Basically, super delegates are the big wigs in the Democratic party who represent about 20% of the total delegates and in some cases make the final decision as to who the democratic candidate will be. To be a super delegate a person would have to fit under one of these categories:
- Recognized Member of the Democratic National Committee
- Democratic President and VP (if applicable)
- All Democratic members of the House and Senate
- Democratic State Governors
- Former Democratic Presidents
- Former Democratic VPs
- Former Democratic Leaders of the Senate
- Former Democratic Speakers of the House
- Former Democratic Minority Leaders
- Former Chairs of the Democratic National Convention
That number could vary from year to year, but this year there are 795 super delegates (not including Florida and Michigan which would bring the number to 842). In 1968, many democrats believed that a primary only system diminished the role of party leaders and started working on a way to involved seasoned members of the party in the system. The super delegate system, used for the first time in 1982, was also designed to act as a check on ideologically extreme or inexperienced candidates and to ensure that the party nominated the best candidate. Until now, the super delegates have never faced a situation where there is no clear cut winner and where they will be asked to make the final decision.
So far, Obama has 212 Super Delegates who are publicly endorsing him while Hillary has 248 (actually she has 247 since supporter Spitzer has quietly left the NY governor's mansion......). While this shows a small lead for Clinton, the actually endorsements don't mean much since the party rules state that super delegates are bound only by their consciences when placing their vote.
Like I said before, no one has ever really cared about the super delegates and who they would vote for. There has always been a clear winner until now. This has fueled debates on how super delegates should vote. Some say that they should follow the party rules and vote on how they feel, while other say that they should vote according to the popular vote (which currently stands at Obama with 13,280,770 and Hillary with 12,577,044), and still others claim that it is an outdated system that undermines the American public.
Regardless of how many times the experts hash it out, the party rules allow super delegates to vote how they choose. There will not be a clear cut winner in August. It will be very interesting to see how things turn out and all eyes will be on the super delegates.
**Note to my die hard Republicans out there - there is no super delegate system in the Republican party, I am not ignoring you, it just doesn't exist. **
Uh, Mitt, Could, Uh, Would You Be My Wing Man?
Well, just when you think things can't get any stranger.....I heard through the grapevine a rumor that is spreading through political circles that John McCain's decision is already made and has been made for sometime. That would mean his recent statements about forming a search committee and picking advisers to help him decide who the #2 man in the Republican party will be come November is all a farce. This rumor brings yet another level to a campaign year that has had more twists than any I can remember during my lifetime.
If you haven't guessed by now, it is rumored that John McCain wants Mitt Romney as his running mate. I have very mixed emotions about this. If you are an avid reader of mine (thanks Dad, Lindsay, and Pete - you guys keep me going!), then you know that Romney was my man. I would have gotten the yard sign. That said, I still don't know that I can cast my vote for John McCain - I feel that strongly about him. My first reaction upon hearing this was disbelief and a little disappointment. I just couldn't believe that Mitt Romney would stand beside John McCain. They just don't seem to have the "buddy" factor that you expect to see with running mates. I don't see them holding hands overhead and giving each other victory hugs. I was reminded however that Kennedy and Johnson were not exactly best friends either and they were victorious.
This does answer some questions however about Mitt's sudden and unexpected departure from the primary campaign and his subsequent silence since then. I had high hopes of another Mitt run in 4 years, but if this rumor plays out, we could see him in the White House in 7 months. Mitt could be a good choice for McCain. His economic expertise would be imperative to get the US back on track financially and he has youth on his side when compared to McCain whom some wonder if he could even survive the pressure of the presidency due to his age. He also brings back some of the conservative members of the party who are not McCain fans.
Would the McCain/Romney ticket be enough to fight the democrats? Latest polls show that McCain would have a better chance at beating Hillary than Obama and that could make a difference when the super delegates cast their votes in August. Things seem to be changing daily and I would believe almost anything at this point.
Would the McCain/Romney ticket be enough for me? Wow, just when I was starting to come to terms with myself going to the dark side. I honestly don't know right now. Granted this is only a rumor and we don't yet know who he will run with, but it would shake things up. I am still concerned that McCain does not offer enough change with health care, social security, the war, and home land security to make me comfortable, but with Romney as a team mate, I would feel better about the way the economy was headed.
What am I going to do?????????
If you haven't guessed by now, it is rumored that John McCain wants Mitt Romney as his running mate. I have very mixed emotions about this. If you are an avid reader of mine (thanks Dad, Lindsay, and Pete - you guys keep me going!), then you know that Romney was my man. I would have gotten the yard sign. That said, I still don't know that I can cast my vote for John McCain - I feel that strongly about him. My first reaction upon hearing this was disbelief and a little disappointment. I just couldn't believe that Mitt Romney would stand beside John McCain. They just don't seem to have the "buddy" factor that you expect to see with running mates. I don't see them holding hands overhead and giving each other victory hugs. I was reminded however that Kennedy and Johnson were not exactly best friends either and they were victorious.
This does answer some questions however about Mitt's sudden and unexpected departure from the primary campaign and his subsequent silence since then. I had high hopes of another Mitt run in 4 years, but if this rumor plays out, we could see him in the White House in 7 months. Mitt could be a good choice for McCain. His economic expertise would be imperative to get the US back on track financially and he has youth on his side when compared to McCain whom some wonder if he could even survive the pressure of the presidency due to his age. He also brings back some of the conservative members of the party who are not McCain fans.
Would the McCain/Romney ticket be enough to fight the democrats? Latest polls show that McCain would have a better chance at beating Hillary than Obama and that could make a difference when the super delegates cast their votes in August. Things seem to be changing daily and I would believe almost anything at this point.
Would the McCain/Romney ticket be enough for me? Wow, just when I was starting to come to terms with myself going to the dark side. I honestly don't know right now. Granted this is only a rumor and we don't yet know who he will run with, but it would shake things up. I am still concerned that McCain does not offer enough change with health care, social security, the war, and home land security to make me comfortable, but with Romney as a team mate, I would feel better about the way the economy was headed.
What am I going to do?????????
Monday, March 10, 2008
Dream Team Nightmare
The dream team might be a thing of the past before it even starts. The press has been buzzing lately about a dream team democratic ticket (I'm sure they got their idea from me, since I have been talking about this for a long, long time!) with Hillary and Barack as running mates. Hillary actually began talking about this by stating that she would strongly consider Barack Obama as a running mate if she wins the nomination.
To the average citizen that sounds like she thinks highly of Obama and thinks that they would serve well together. To Obama however, it sounded like just another political move. At a rally today, Obama questioned why the second place candidate would offer the first place candidate a VP position. He said that he believed that Hillary was only trying to gain the support of the undecided voters, making them think they would be able to get that "Dream Team Ticket" next November. That makes a lot of sense.
We all know who I voted for, so I will not repeat those words, but if I had believed that voting for Hillary would bring a Clinton-Obama ticket in the fall, I probably would have made my final decision before walking into the polling place. It would have been much easier anyway.
Obama also questioned why she would put him in that position when she doesn't think he is qualified to be president. He pointed out that as VP, he could be called upon at any moment to take over the office. Another good point from the Obama camp. However in Hillary's defense, no president picks their running mate with the assumption that they will die in office. Running mates are chosen primarily because they have something that the Presidential candidate needs to make a complete team and to beat the other party in November. Like I have said before, there is no doubt in my mind that a Hillary-Obama team would be stoppable. What she has, he doesn't and what he has, she doesn't.
I really hope that if Hillary does win the nomination and offers the VP to him, that Barack will accept. I think that the two of them could do a lot of good together. However, if Barack wins the nomination do you think he will ask Hillary to be his running mate? How would that work? I would watch my back, the Clinton's have made people disappear before..........
To the average citizen that sounds like she thinks highly of Obama and thinks that they would serve well together. To Obama however, it sounded like just another political move. At a rally today, Obama questioned why the second place candidate would offer the first place candidate a VP position. He said that he believed that Hillary was only trying to gain the support of the undecided voters, making them think they would be able to get that "Dream Team Ticket" next November. That makes a lot of sense.
We all know who I voted for, so I will not repeat those words, but if I had believed that voting for Hillary would bring a Clinton-Obama ticket in the fall, I probably would have made my final decision before walking into the polling place. It would have been much easier anyway.
Obama also questioned why she would put him in that position when she doesn't think he is qualified to be president. He pointed out that as VP, he could be called upon at any moment to take over the office. Another good point from the Obama camp. However in Hillary's defense, no president picks their running mate with the assumption that they will die in office. Running mates are chosen primarily because they have something that the Presidential candidate needs to make a complete team and to beat the other party in November. Like I have said before, there is no doubt in my mind that a Hillary-Obama team would be stoppable. What she has, he doesn't and what he has, she doesn't.
I really hope that if Hillary does win the nomination and offers the VP to him, that Barack will accept. I think that the two of them could do a lot of good together. However, if Barack wins the nomination do you think he will ask Hillary to be his running mate? How would that work? I would watch my back, the Clinton's have made people disappear before..........
Are You Smarter Than A History Teacher?
We really like the game show hosted by Jeff Foxworthly, Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader. If you are not familiar, adults try to answer questions based on what children who are in the 5th grade and below would know. Ready to assist these adults are a team of 6 5th graders who are right 99.9% of the time. Moral of the show? If you want to know facts about subjects long forgotten, ask a kid. In my case I asked my good friend Heather who teaches kids history.
There has been a lot of debate in the media about Bill Clinton and his eligibility to be the vice president. Everyone had settled on no and then it came back up again as a possibility, but Heather cleared it all up for me the other day (and in an understandable way too!)
A person can serve no more than 10 years as president whether those years are finishing a term for a deceased or removed president or terms of his own or a combination of both. For example, a VP could finish up to two years of a deceased or removed presidents term and then serve two four year terms of his own. If a president was removed or died in the beginning of his term and the VP served over two years, he could only serve for one four year term of his own. President Clinton served two four year terms so he would be unable to serve as VP since he might be called upon to serve more than two more years, putting him over the 10 year limit. Does that make sense? Most would find this a relief although Bill just having access to the living quarters of the White House as "First Husband" makes me a little uneasy. (Yes to anyone who is interested, since George Bush Sr. only served one term as President, he could serve with McCain.........HA!)
So thanks Heather for clearing this up. Maybe she can help us make sense of the Super Delegates.......although, at this point I'm not even sure the Super Delegates can make sense of themselves!
There has been a lot of debate in the media about Bill Clinton and his eligibility to be the vice president. Everyone had settled on no and then it came back up again as a possibility, but Heather cleared it all up for me the other day (and in an understandable way too!)
A person can serve no more than 10 years as president whether those years are finishing a term for a deceased or removed president or terms of his own or a combination of both. For example, a VP could finish up to two years of a deceased or removed presidents term and then serve two four year terms of his own. If a president was removed or died in the beginning of his term and the VP served over two years, he could only serve for one four year term of his own. President Clinton served two four year terms so he would be unable to serve as VP since he might be called upon to serve more than two more years, putting him over the 10 year limit. Does that make sense? Most would find this a relief although Bill just having access to the living quarters of the White House as "First Husband" makes me a little uneasy. (Yes to anyone who is interested, since George Bush Sr. only served one term as President, he could serve with McCain.........HA!)
So thanks Heather for clearing this up. Maybe she can help us make sense of the Super Delegates.......although, at this point I'm not even sure the Super Delegates can make sense of themselves!
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Cereal Tastes a lot Better Than Words for Breakfast
I am eating my words this morning. I really did not believe that she could do it, but Hillary Clinton stopped Obama's winning streak with wins in Texas and Ohio yesterday ensuring that she will remain in the race and determining that the decision for the democratic candidate will go all the way to the convention.
I, like millions of other Texas cast my vote yesterday. Upon entering the church where my precinct was assigned to vote, I slowly made my way to the democratic table voicing to the women behind the table (fortunately not from my small conservative church) that this was my first time to vote in a democratic primary and signed in. Unfortunately, for the next two years my voter's registration card will proudly proclaim that I did indeed vote in the democratic primary - there is no easy way to deny it. On the ride to the polls I debated once again in my head what box I would be darkening. My name is Kim and I voted for Hillary. There it is out in the open. I am among the millions who voted for Mrs. Clinton. This was not an easy decision. Even as I was filling out my ballot, I was cheering for Barack. I really like someone who can unite the masses and create excitement among the public for a formally unexciting task such as voting. I think that Obama has a gift for bringing people together and for giving people hope. I do think however that Hillary has more experience and will make better decisions for our country. That is why I picked her.
The fight continues on. I think in the next few weeks, Barack will be asked to answer some really tough questions about specific plans and I hope he will do a good job. Hillary has picked up some much needed wins and it is still anyone's game at this point.
On the other side of the coin, John McCain will eat lunch with the president today and is expected to gain Bush's endorsement. McCain has a tough road ahead though, as he must find a way to unite the Republican party and gain confidence among conservative voters. This along will be a full time task.
I, like millions of other Texas cast my vote yesterday. Upon entering the church where my precinct was assigned to vote, I slowly made my way to the democratic table voicing to the women behind the table (fortunately not from my small conservative church) that this was my first time to vote in a democratic primary and signed in. Unfortunately, for the next two years my voter's registration card will proudly proclaim that I did indeed vote in the democratic primary - there is no easy way to deny it. On the ride to the polls I debated once again in my head what box I would be darkening. My name is Kim and I voted for Hillary. There it is out in the open. I am among the millions who voted for Mrs. Clinton. This was not an easy decision. Even as I was filling out my ballot, I was cheering for Barack. I really like someone who can unite the masses and create excitement among the public for a formally unexciting task such as voting. I think that Obama has a gift for bringing people together and for giving people hope. I do think however that Hillary has more experience and will make better decisions for our country. That is why I picked her.
The fight continues on. I think in the next few weeks, Barack will be asked to answer some really tough questions about specific plans and I hope he will do a good job. Hillary has picked up some much needed wins and it is still anyone's game at this point.
On the other side of the coin, John McCain will eat lunch with the president today and is expected to gain Bush's endorsement. McCain has a tough road ahead though, as he must find a way to unite the Republican party and gain confidence among conservative voters. This along will be a full time task.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Rock The Vote
Well, today is the day. If Paris Hilton's comment on MTV, "Voting is HOT!", didn't move you to get off the couch and go to the polls, I don't know what will! As I prepare to make my mark, I have a good idea who will gain my support, but it could still change. My husband has already been there and remarked at how long the line was at the democratic table vs. the cobwebs growing on the Republican one. However, as I have said before, this year breaks beyond party lines and has forced open-minded American's to look hard at the issues and forget their party pulls to vote for someone who will make America better. That better American starts by each person voting today.
It doesn't matter what you think or who you decided to vote for, but it is every Americans duty to vote. We can only live in a true democracy if people take advantage of this right. To not take part in a free society is to turn your back on the men and women who fight and die to ensure that our country stays free. As I watched months back, many Iraqi's stand in lines to vote, knowing that their lives were at risk to do so, I realize how blessed I am to be in a country where I can help choose my leader without risking my life or facing persecution for whom I choose.
The only thing that matters is that each person votes from his or her heart and whom they truly believe will make America better. Everyone is entitled to decide for themselves and no one should be criticized for their decision. So get out there and ROCK THE VOTE!
It doesn't matter what you think or who you decided to vote for, but it is every Americans duty to vote. We can only live in a true democracy if people take advantage of this right. To not take part in a free society is to turn your back on the men and women who fight and die to ensure that our country stays free. As I watched months back, many Iraqi's stand in lines to vote, knowing that their lives were at risk to do so, I realize how blessed I am to be in a country where I can help choose my leader without risking my life or facing persecution for whom I choose.
The only thing that matters is that each person votes from his or her heart and whom they truly believe will make America better. Everyone is entitled to decide for themselves and no one should be criticized for their decision. So get out there and ROCK THE VOTE!
Sunday, March 2, 2008
It Is Not About The Party
I have said several times in this blog that it is not about a party right now, it is about who is going to be able to get things done in our country. I suppose that I have been hard on the Republican party, but that has been our leadership for the past eight years. There was a new comment and I am going to respond to pieces of it.
"There are, the last time I looked three branches to the federal government. The Executive Branch which is what everyone is talking about is being pulled into realms that never were a part of that branches duty. The legislative branch is the branch that has the responsibilities for ensuring Domestic Tranquility and the only way for that to happen is for them to get out of the way of the entrepreneur and their ability to move the economy forward. The president sets out broad goals and it is the responsibility of the congress to work together to achieve those goals and maybe even come up with a few of their own. No child left behind was the brain-child of one President Bush and a reach across the isle to Ted Kennedy. Want to blame someone for it failing blame the congress for failing to see it thru, they had the responsibility for funding it."
I agree that the different branches have very different jobs and very different duties. I do believe however, that as commander-in-chief of the country and leader of his party, the president has the responsibility of uniting the country. Just like any leader of a country or business, the success or failure of that country or business ultimately is the responsibility of the president. It has been tough for President Bush with a recently democratic-run house, but the blame cannot be on congress alone. Like congress, President Bush has refused to compromise or to meet congress in the middle, both the President and Congress have stubbornly refused to get together on issues. The House doesn't like Hillary and I don't seem them bending over backwards to support her, they don't really favor John McCain either. They are rallying around Barack and that could be an advantage to him if he was to step into an administration that would support him and come together for American.
The president is also in charge of not only the military as commander in chief but also foreign policy to which he has done a fine job along with his very capable and diverse staff. We were hit on 911 but what led up to that attack, 8 years of the man whose wife people want to put back in there and he will be there also. His failed leadership of riding the Reagan economic wave and prayerfully the american people electing a Republican lead congress saved the economy for a while. But then the democrats took over and look at what Bush inheritted, remember the recession right before 911? Remember the investigations into the Clinton Administration for cooking the books and how it stopped because of 911? And we want this type of mentallity back in the white house?
I also agree that the Bill Clinton administration was a disaster and one of my fears of Hillary becoming President is the fact that he comes with her, but Bill, as all presidents do, walked into an office full of left over "Regan baggage." The Regan years were good years on the surface, but underneath it was Reagan who started dipping into the surplus of the Social Security Funds that have lead to the state we are in today. It might have been gravy during the Reagan years, but he left a lot to clean up, just as all presidents do. The lead up to 911 was not all during Clinton's watch, it started long before that with easy access across borders and a judicial branch that refused to support immigration laws.
"...... the Senate and have failed to do anything for me except fight with one another. I say throw them all out and start fresh with a bunch of folks who have some common sense. "
"There are, the last time I looked three branches to the federal government. The Executive Branch which is what everyone is talking about is being pulled into realms that never were a part of that branches duty. The legislative branch is the branch that has the responsibilities for ensuring Domestic Tranquility and the only way for that to happen is for them to get out of the way of the entrepreneur and their ability to move the economy forward. The president sets out broad goals and it is the responsibility of the congress to work together to achieve those goals and maybe even come up with a few of their own. No child left behind was the brain-child of one President Bush and a reach across the isle to Ted Kennedy. Want to blame someone for it failing blame the congress for failing to see it thru, they had the responsibility for funding it."
I agree that the different branches have very different jobs and very different duties. I do believe however, that as commander-in-chief of the country and leader of his party, the president has the responsibility of uniting the country. Just like any leader of a country or business, the success or failure of that country or business ultimately is the responsibility of the president. It has been tough for President Bush with a recently democratic-run house, but the blame cannot be on congress alone. Like congress, President Bush has refused to compromise or to meet congress in the middle, both the President and Congress have stubbornly refused to get together on issues. The House doesn't like Hillary and I don't seem them bending over backwards to support her, they don't really favor John McCain either. They are rallying around Barack and that could be an advantage to him if he was to step into an administration that would support him and come together for American.
The president is also in charge of not only the military as commander in chief but also foreign policy to which he has done a fine job along with his very capable and diverse staff. We were hit on 911 but what led up to that attack, 8 years of the man whose wife people want to put back in there and he will be there also. His failed leadership of riding the Reagan economic wave and prayerfully the american people electing a Republican lead congress saved the economy for a while. But then the democrats took over and look at what Bush inheritted, remember the recession right before 911? Remember the investigations into the Clinton Administration for cooking the books and how it stopped because of 911? And we want this type of mentallity back in the white house?
I also agree that the Bill Clinton administration was a disaster and one of my fears of Hillary becoming President is the fact that he comes with her, but Bill, as all presidents do, walked into an office full of left over "Regan baggage." The Regan years were good years on the surface, but underneath it was Reagan who started dipping into the surplus of the Social Security Funds that have lead to the state we are in today. It might have been gravy during the Reagan years, but he left a lot to clean up, just as all presidents do. The lead up to 911 was not all during Clinton's watch, it started long before that with easy access across borders and a judicial branch that refused to support immigration laws.
"...... the Senate and have failed to do anything for me except fight with one another. I say throw them all out and start fresh with a bunch of folks who have some common sense. "
I agree, give me some new choices. The American people have spoken, in some states anyway, and these are our choices, so I am trying to make the best of what we have. John McCain has been one of the leaders of disagreement with the republican party and he doesn't even stand for most of the Republican values. I truly believe that if he is elected, we will be no better off in the next four years than we are today. I know that Hillary has made a campaign about "talking about change is just talk", but John McCain has not even talked about change.
"Katrina was the failure of a democratically controlled state and local government that failed to use the money given to them in the proper place. They failed to evacuate a town that had been warned of the levee's failing in the face of a cat three huricane and they got hit with a cat five. He bares the load for that failure, not the federal government. The federal government could only watch as those who were in charge fail to do their job and the common sense factor never kicked in. Why? Because we created that society, totally dependent on others for everything.
I agree that the brunt of Katrina falls on Ray Nagan, but within hours of the local government failing, the federal government should have stepped in. In the US, we do not let our citizens sit in the heat for days without food and water. I don't care if the people are elderly, homeless, poor, rich, black, or white, we don't watch as they suffer. The federal government has the authority and responsibility to protect and save its citizens. The state of LA made a lot of mistakes, but George Bush had the ultimate authority to send it troops to restore order and bring supplies and he had the ability to get them there fast. The local government failed to use the money correctly? The people failed to take personal responsibility and get out of the city? That does not give the federal government an excuse to stand by and let people die.
We do live in a society of non-responsibility. I agree it is a problem and I don't have the answer for that. A complete revamp of the government aid system would be a great first step, but no one, not Barack, Hillary, or John McCain, has a plan for that.
If we put democrats in the white house that is exactly what will happen. A society that is dependent upon the federal government, that's socialism and I don't want it. I want them to get out of my way and out of my pocket so I can achieve."
So go and achieve. A democratic president will not hinder you. But what about the people who have never been given a break. Outside of the perfect Republican world, there are millions of middle class Americans who work very hard, but cannot provide health insurance for their families either due to cost, availability, or eligibility. These are the same people who pay a higher percentage of taxes than people who make three times what they do. The system has been vamped for the wealthy and the poor. At this time the democrats are providing some answers and hope for those in the middle. I wish the Republicans had a choice that would do the same, but they don't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
