In the off chance that someone will see this who hasn't voted yet... go do it!
And just in case it isn't clear, this blog completely endorses Barack Obama :)
Monday, November 3, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Nothing important
I know I haven't been on here much lately, between class and work and very sporadic campaigning (also a fair amount of drinking) I haven't found the time. But this is just hilarious. Especially if you remember the show from when you were really young.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
More endorsements
Endorsements for Barack have been coming from some unlikely sources lately. Including the son of the famous conservative William Buckley, whose endorsement prompted his resignation from the National Review.
Less surprisingly, there are plenty of VERY smart people that would also like you to vote Obama.
Also, I know that I promised I would let everyone know what new insights I gained about political discourse to help you in your efforts to convince your own jewish grandparents to vote for Obama, but all I really learned campaigning last weekend was that I really need to brush up on my spanish.
Less surprisingly, there are plenty of VERY smart people that would also like you to vote Obama.
Also, I know that I promised I would let everyone know what new insights I gained about political discourse to help you in your efforts to convince your own jewish grandparents to vote for Obama, but all I really learned campaigning last weekend was that I really need to brush up on my spanish.
Friday, October 3, 2008
New Yorker Endorsement
If you have some time, read this endorsment of Barack Obama by the editorial staff of the New Yorker. While I don't agree 100% with what they've said, it's a compelling read and a good motivator to consider voting for Obama if you're undecided and to put more effort into getting him elected if you've already decided.
After this weekend I'll post an advice post for how to convince people to vote for Obama. I've had some experience lately talking with conservatives, undecideds, and idiots and I'll just lay out my personal advice. Tomorrow though I'll be canvasing in WI (the first time I've had time to, damn you ultimate) so there will probably be a story or two to relate.
After this weekend I'll post an advice post for how to convince people to vote for Obama. I've had some experience lately talking with conservatives, undecideds, and idiots and I'll just lay out my personal advice. Tomorrow though I'll be canvasing in WI (the first time I've had time to, damn you ultimate) so there will probably be a story or two to relate.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Who do you want in charge of your economy?
Fine Ty... I'll write something substantive.
IT'S ABOUT THE ECONOMY STUPID!
At least it sure was when Clinton was running, an we look like we're in a whole hell of a bigger mess than we were then so it's more true today than it ever was then. So what I'm gonna do is lay it out there and tell you why I believe that Obama is better for the economy than G.W. McCain is.
Now here, I'm going to break cardinal rule #1 of being a pretentious blogger. I'm going to tell you that I don't know a whole lot about economics or finance. But the thing is, almost none of us really do. There are probably only a handful of people that really understand how the global economy works, and they themselves manage to royally screw it up every once in a while, so we can't even be sure that they know what's going on. And here's the thing, most presidents don't understand all of what is going on either. McCain said it himself "I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated..." And while Obama has proven smarts, he was a professor of law at the University of Chicago, not economics. Clinton, Bush #1, Bush #2, Reagan, none of them came from strong economic backgrounds. I can't off the top of my head think of any that do. Most come from military, law, or state political backgrounds.
The truth is, a country's economic policies are dictated by the people that the president surrounds themselves with. The same can be said about many domestic policies as well as military decisions, but it applies especially for economics. The major difference between the two candidates now is that the people who are advising Obama are from the Clinton era. The people who are advising McCain are the same people who have been striving towards the deregulation that brought about the current economic collapse.
In 2000, Phil Graham, the same man who called America a "nation of whiners" was instrumental in writing and passing legislation that allowed mortgage lenders to pass their loans on to others. If you're familiar with the mortgage crisis, then you'll know that it was the ability of lenders to package and then sell overvalued loans that led to the shit-storm that we're currently in. This crisis came about because of that and other deregulatory practices. Realizing this, McCain is now in the news talking about the need for more regulation. But it rings hollow when you look at the statements he has been making for years.
Barack Obama has put forth a plan along the lines of what McCain originally agreed with but has not calculated his way out of backing. In the plan that is currently forming under the stewardship of the democratic leadership the lenders will be "bailed out", but with provisions that would prevent any spending on executive compensation packages and with guarantees of equity in the companies that are bailed out. All of that is a fancy way of saying that the CEOs that ruined these institutions by taking on too much risk will not get millions of dollars in golden parachutes when they are let go, and that as taxpayers we won't just be GIVING our hard earned money to the banks, but we'll be purchasing them. This way while we will be purchasing them at a loss, the end result should be that they can be sold off resulting in a bill to the taxpayers that falls well short of the 700 billion dollar figure that is being talked about. Good thing too, since that amounts to over 2500 dollars for every citizen of the country. (including children!)
To me on this issue, it comes down to trusting which candidate is putting THEIR trust in people that have the interests of the American people at heart, and are competent about how best to help them. I don't think there's any doubt during this crisis that the deregulation first crowd is the worst possible thing for the country at this point, and that's why I believe that Obama is a better choice for our country right now.
P.S. - If you think what's happened so far is scary, check out what McCain has to say about your health care.
IT'S ABOUT THE ECONOMY STUPID!
At least it sure was when Clinton was running, an we look like we're in a whole hell of a bigger mess than we were then so it's more true today than it ever was then. So what I'm gonna do is lay it out there and tell you why I believe that Obama is better for the economy than G.W. McCain is.
Now here, I'm going to break cardinal rule #1 of being a pretentious blogger. I'm going to tell you that I don't know a whole lot about economics or finance. But the thing is, almost none of us really do. There are probably only a handful of people that really understand how the global economy works, and they themselves manage to royally screw it up every once in a while, so we can't even be sure that they know what's going on. And here's the thing, most presidents don't understand all of what is going on either. McCain said it himself "I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated..." And while Obama has proven smarts, he was a professor of law at the University of Chicago, not economics. Clinton, Bush #1, Bush #2, Reagan, none of them came from strong economic backgrounds. I can't off the top of my head think of any that do. Most come from military, law, or state political backgrounds.
The truth is, a country's economic policies are dictated by the people that the president surrounds themselves with. The same can be said about many domestic policies as well as military decisions, but it applies especially for economics. The major difference between the two candidates now is that the people who are advising Obama are from the Clinton era. The people who are advising McCain are the same people who have been striving towards the deregulation that brought about the current economic collapse.
In 2000, Phil Graham, the same man who called America a "nation of whiners" was instrumental in writing and passing legislation that allowed mortgage lenders to pass their loans on to others. If you're familiar with the mortgage crisis, then you'll know that it was the ability of lenders to package and then sell overvalued loans that led to the shit-storm that we're currently in. This crisis came about because of that and other deregulatory practices. Realizing this, McCain is now in the news talking about the need for more regulation. But it rings hollow when you look at the statements he has been making for years.
Barack Obama has put forth a plan along the lines of what McCain originally agreed with but has not calculated his way out of backing. In the plan that is currently forming under the stewardship of the democratic leadership the lenders will be "bailed out", but with provisions that would prevent any spending on executive compensation packages and with guarantees of equity in the companies that are bailed out. All of that is a fancy way of saying that the CEOs that ruined these institutions by taking on too much risk will not get millions of dollars in golden parachutes when they are let go, and that as taxpayers we won't just be GIVING our hard earned money to the banks, but we'll be purchasing them. This way while we will be purchasing them at a loss, the end result should be that they can be sold off resulting in a bill to the taxpayers that falls well short of the 700 billion dollar figure that is being talked about. Good thing too, since that amounts to over 2500 dollars for every citizen of the country. (including children!)
To me on this issue, it comes down to trusting which candidate is putting THEIR trust in people that have the interests of the American people at heart, and are competent about how best to help them. I don't think there's any doubt during this crisis that the deregulation first crowd is the worst possible thing for the country at this point, and that's why I believe that Obama is a better choice for our country right now.
P.S. - If you think what's happened so far is scary, check out what McCain has to say about your health care.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Who will tax you higher?
Don't take it from me, take it from NBC
I personally think it's the dumbest idea in the world to cut taxes in any way right now. I thought that before the bail-outs due to our giant national debt. After the bailouts, it's an even worse idea. Still, if taxes are going to be cut, I believe they should benefit the people that need the relief.
I personally think it's the dumbest idea in the world to cut taxes in any way right now. I thought that before the bail-outs due to our giant national debt. After the bailouts, it's an even worse idea. Still, if taxes are going to be cut, I believe they should benefit the people that need the relief.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)