JW Wrote
We all know what Bush is about, and I for one voted for the guy twice. I am very disappointed of His second term.
But I will also ask what have the democrats done. They hold the majority in the House, but what have they done with it.
Gas Prices are still very high.
There was a report around veterans day about upwards of 75% of the homeless are veterans - great way to support the people who gave up their lives for our freedom.
Teenage pregnancy rates continue to climb
Drop out rates maintain
The unemployed population continues to grow
The welfare population is not getting out of welfare
I think the problems that we have in this country go way beyond Democrat or Republican politics...
SOMEBODY FIX SOMETHING - Make the country better
Disclaimer first 2 of my 4 children have been vomiting since 3pm, and the other two went to bed feeling "yucky" - so there's a good chance this will be a distracted response.
JW:
I've thought about the thought you express in the last line quoted for a long time. And quite honestly, the statement "Make the country better" has never been a more undefined statement. What is "Better" presently depends on one's political persuasion. And that's because our America has come further faster in addressing and remedying macro historical problems that have plauged nation states for eons - so what's left to answer? The divisive exceptions are some of the final questions that a society must ask, but in an age of total information availability, potential solutions to each can be represented as a threat to each of us. And because the larger questions where compromise could be found have, for the most part, been answered, we are left with qustions that don't have a potential unifying center position that can be the focus of compromise. America is rapidly approaching a time of hard choices - choices that should be made after discussion, contemplation and debate, all while keeping the dictates of our constitution and system of precedent in mind.
I'm about to speak in generalities now, knowing that there are exceptions, so if you are going to find fault with my post, please do it on the grounds other than "there is an exception to your generality". I've also made the generalization that - in the end - our budgetary resources are finite.
HOW DO WE MAKE THINGS BETTER? (please note - the following discussion attempts to outline the divergent views held on some "hot button topics" - not to disclose my views on these issues, with one exception below on teen pregnancy)
Health Care = are there societies that have a health care system that can treat more people than ours for less $? Yes. But for many, the US health care system is the innovating giant - the system that has created new and innovated technologies that push the envelope on life span, and, for many, quality of life. Yet the cost of that system precludes many from entering it.
How do we make it "Better"? Depends on whether you think that it is more "valuable" to treat more people at a basic rate, or continue to reward specialization and development of new treatments Compared to our great-grandparents, our current health care system's reach and technology would be magical. So, at their time, when neither existed, it was easy to find common ground on the More vs. Better question -- a step toward more doctors necessarily meant better care, as there weren't that many doctors around - now, not so much.
Immigration: Whether you view this as a security issue or a "elimination of the middle class" issue - the quesiton is how do we make it "Better"? And, again, in our great grandparent's time, this issue existed - I can recall my Grandmother talking to me about the hatred of the continuing increase of Irish immigrants in New York during her childhood (she was Irish, but told to hide that fact at school) - and the solution found by many of her male friends - namely going into civil service where advancement was more (but not solely) based upon rational indices. But then (depression aside) more jobs were continually created - we were a growing nation, finding our role as an economic superpower. But now, as a consumer-focused nation, with jobs fleeing to other countries, the remaining jobs become increasingly valuable, and are filled by an employer who is continually conscious of her bottom line.
What's better mean here? If we admit no one - does our society stagnate? do our social classes stratify in fear of losing one's place? And if not, do we continue to look at labor as a fungible commodity, replaceable with the person that works for the least $? Again, a political quesiton that exists because the easy answers no longer exist - i.e we're not creating jobs for anyone who comes to America.
Race Relations: Again - we've come a long way from the time of our grandfathers - but one is blind if one believes racism no longer exists. Yet how do we address this continued racism to make it "better"? And what is "Better?" Voting Rights Act was a big step forward -But in retrospect, it was something that could be supported as a basic human right. Yet now, in an age of conflicting belief over the role of race in college admissions, we are past the time when all could agree that it would be "Better" if every adult deserved the right to vote without barrier - that bare minimum step has already been taken. Now we are faced with questions about whether race relation issues in education/business must continue to be a concern addressed by governmental rule or whether we, as a society and individuals, have matured to a time where all are judged by their accomplishments and potential, and not by their skin color. Again, potential for compromise and central leadership on the specifics is difficult - wanting an end to prejudices is a basic American, and laudatory, goal.
Security: This is a relatively new debate (WWII-Japanese Internment aside). I believe Democracies are inherently dangerous, and will accept that risk for the liberty it grants me and my family - note - I'm not advocating anarchy - merely that I don't want to live in a police state that would be necessary to elimiate risk. Others do not agree, they are entitled to that view point. In the past - in times before advanced technologies made it possible for wide-spread destruction to be accomplished by small groups of people - better security meant hiring more police. Hiring more police is rarely something that cannot be agreed upon by society. Now, "better" security - some believe - can only be accomplished by intrusive "total informationation awareness" type systems, or by not requiring even post-event probable cause hearings for eavesdropping. And others don't feel this way - believing the biggest threat to individuals is a government with unfettered power.
There are more, but I just had to clean up more vomit from the 5 year old, (now if that image is not effective birth control, I"m not sure what is), and I'm exhausted. I'll end on this note (which does discuss my thoughts on a couple of the issues raised by JW) :
JW = You note a bunch of "problems" that you think (apparently) should have been solved by a democratic congress that has had a majority for less than two years out of the past 10, and faces a president that suddenly found his veto pen.
Of the issues raised, the only one that I think common ground SHOULD be found easily is the treatment of veterans.
Gov't will not, and should not, regulate gas prices.
Teenage Pregnancy rates (if your assertion is correct) cannot be regulated by Congress (apparently the Ralph Reed "just say no" abstinence plan doesn't trump millions of years of evolutionary drive -sorry, couldn't resist that one).
Unemployment - there are some constituencies who believe that some unemployment is an economic reality - and necessity. Other believe differently. What is Congress' role in the employment context? New Deal? Something else? Protectionism?
Welfare - this is the issue about which i know the least - are you sure that the indigent are not moving forward? I don't know the stats.
I think the present republican and democratic parties represent two quite divergent views of what "better" means on many of these issues. And easy answers will not be found in the middle. Given that, we may be faced with decades of federal power that varies between extremes (when the congress and executive are of the same party) OR which gets nothing done because middle ground cannot be found between a congress of one party and an executive of another.
My "Danny Boy" reference was to Rather not to you my fellow message board jouster. Anyway, that is certainly one way to look at Memogate but not the view I take. I don't think anyone is really disputing that W got special treatment during the Vietnam era, many people did (or went to Oxford), the point is that a broadcast news show reported highly suspicious documents that were damaging to an incumbent President as truth a short time before the general election. And I'm not even including the hi-jinks that the media pulled before the 2000 election. Try to explain it away as much as you want but them's be the facts.
