Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry


I haven't made a political post in a long, long time.

I'd make one now, except just thinking about it depresses me. I was not happy about the results of the midterm, needless to say... and I am even less happy, if possible, about this "compromise" that Obama has made with the GOP on taxes. From where I sit, it smells more like capitulation than compromise. Give a lot, get almost nothing.

Obama is the most intelligent president we've had since Jimmy Carter... and, sad to say, he is looking more and more like Jimmy every day. A good man, but not a good leader. At least not so far. He doesn't seem to have the stomach for a fight. We need another FDR, another JFK, another LBJ. NOT Jimmy II. (And, yes, I know, Obama has accomplished some important stuff. But so did Jimmy. Camp David accords, remember?)

Yeats was writing about his own time in "The Second Coming," I know, but sometimes I think he was prescient:

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

And could that rough beast whose hour has come round at least be... Sarah Palin?

No, please. Tell me that's just a bad dream. Somebody wake me up.



Dec. 16th, 2010 05:51 am (UTC)
Re: ummm no
This is a great point. Both parties do support larger government and it would be unfair to say they both do not. A lot of the dissent comes from semantics of "Big Government". I did not hear a lot of conservatives complaining about the expansion of government in regards to the USA PATRIOT(Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001) Act which is singularly the most invasive government act in modern times. I need not remind anyone that the great champion of the party that claims to be for less government, George W. Bush signed this bill into effect and signed it into law in 2006 as a bill after its sunset in 2005.
Also because I am not myopic as most Americans seem to be, I clearly remember that the recession and its subsequent bail out began under the Bush administration. I also clearly remember prior to the 2008 election, Bush, McCain, and Obama meeting and making agreements that a bailout package had to be made. The extent of the differences in money to be spent between parties was less than 10% monetarily. To this day sane economists agree that allowing all the corporations in trouble including the automobile industry to go under would have been catastrophic as compared to what the country actually endured. And without digressing too much, it is in no way comparable to the Great Depression because of all the fail safes that have been placed in our system since the 30's.
Back to my original point, at any time we wish something done, like making sure toys do not carry a certain amount of lead or keeping terrorists from blowing things up or making sure roads are travel worthy for the holidays or providing health coverage to fellow citizens not currently covered, we are expanding government. Conservative leaders only seem to have a problem with expansion when laws or organizations are being created that ask the wealthiest individuals as well as corporations to help the funding of these desired projects. These wealthy entities throw tantrums because it might cut into their profits and "golden parachutes." The richest one percent, whether it be individuals or corporations believe they are pillars of the community just by being extremely wealthy and this sense of entitlement should exempt them from being taxed appropriately even though they most often benefit from the programs just as much as the average person. Even more ironically their wealth is derived when the country as a whole is doing its best and our country is always doing its best when they are making their appropriate contributions tax-wise and not simply existing.
I think in good taste I would point something out to these entities in a way that Littlefinger might: It would be better to be taxed 50% on a billion dollars than it would be to taxed 10% on 500 Million dollars. Again though this is contradictory to what the richest one percent and the conservative party supports because they can't get their minds over the fact that they will be paying a higher tax rate even though they would be netting a larger profit.
And when we focus completely on civil rights issues, I challenge any conservative to make claim that their party has done more to protect and enhance these rights than the Democratic Party has in the last 50 years. I would begin my argument by again referencing the biggest infringements on these rights in modern times, the USA PATRIOT Act.
Not to mention a large number of conservatives in my personal experience our either overtly racist and homophobic or they at least hint towards it "ipso facto" in the policies they support. This underlying racism is applicable to our relations with Mexico. Our policies towards our southern neighbor are exploitative and deplorable. We wish to make use of cheap labor in booms and repatriate when we have no more use of them; ie the Braceros Program of the 20th century. "Land of the Free" if you are rich enough to afford it.


George R.R. Martin
George R. R. Martin

Latest Month

April 2018


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner