I'm doing this blog to express political opinions. I believe in helping people who need help, who don't have strong families. I believe government has done great things like building roads, subways, schools. I think the government protects us from bad products. It gives jobs and stimulates business. It does a million things. I know the government has grown tremendously, and to some of those who are older, it must seem to be too big. I do think we should have a two party (or more) party system, that we need democracy. I want more democracy, please.
I'm not really into politics, but my friends get me into debates and forward me things. And it's cool to develop thoughts.
I don't think my politics would interfere with my performance of a job, so I'm not going to worry that a future employer will find this. This is a political opinion, which I have a right to have, and express. To keep me out of a job because of my blog would be discrimination, and silly.
I'm not really into politics, but my friends get me into debates and forward me things. And it's cool to develop thoughts.
I don't think my politics would interfere with my performance of a job, so I'm not going to worry that a future employer will find this. This is a political opinion, which I have a right to have, and express. To keep me out of a job because of my blog would be discrimination, and silly.
By the way, I have many conservative friends, and we get along fine, we just disagree intellectually and personality wise, about government. We can have healthy debates.
Here's my first post: I read this article by William J. Bennett called "Why Liberalism will ultimately fail"
Here is my response:
I don't agree that liberals think short term and conservatives think long term. I think it's the opposite when it comes to the budget, which the Republicans drive up debt to hog tie the democrats into not expanding social programing, so that when democrats come into office,
they will feel them go away. The debt is short sighted, and steals the mandate from the democrats, and is a cheap short sighted ploy.
And it's pretty rich for him to point to the liberals for driving up the debt. BOLD FACE LIES.
That's just one example. I think not taking care of our poor is a long term disaster, and very short sighted. Like someone who doesn't have food wants to wait for a market correction.
Once again, I think the narrow ideology of Republicans perverts word use, and plays fast and loose with the truth.
Once again the weird goal of self reliance was good for the pioneers, but bizarre for my friend, who has never made a single thing in his house that he uses. Not the clothes, not the food, not the electronics. His taxes pay for the subway he rides, the roads he drives on, etc., etc.
The psychological goal of responsibility and self reliance has once again been perverted by the rich, to dupe the other 99%.
Bennet trots out the equally disproven Reaganomics. Giving more to the rich will not stimulate the economy the way people think. Giving more money to the government also stimulates the economy, duh. How stupid can you get. Business isn't the be all and end all. Government does good things. When you stop riding on the roads, riding the subway, then you can tell me government is no good.
And so he wants the poor to have more children? You know the biggest factor in driving down the crime rate is? Abortion. I'm not saying it's right, but please, lets just see birth control for what it is--it is a way to stop people from being dependent on the government--isn't that your goal. Once again, curiouser and curiouser as we go down the rabbit hole of Bennet's conservatism.
Oh wait, schools are character forming??? Really. That happens to be a government thing. Democrats are pro-school. Conservatives want to privatize and further polarize America destroying the middle class. And he has the gall to say his party is for the middle class. You
can't make this up.
I don't agree that liberals think short term and conservatives think long term. I think it's the opposite when it comes to the budget, which the Republicans drive up debt to hog tie the democrats into not expanding social programing, so that when democrats come into office,
they will feel them go away. The debt is short sighted, and steals the mandate from the democrats, and is a cheap short sighted ploy.
And it's pretty rich for him to point to the liberals for driving up the debt. BOLD FACE LIES.
That's just one example. I think not taking care of our poor is a long term disaster, and very short sighted. Like someone who doesn't have food wants to wait for a market correction.
Once again, I think the narrow ideology of Republicans perverts word use, and plays fast and loose with the truth.
Once again the weird goal of self reliance was good for the pioneers, but bizarre for my friend, who has never made a single thing in his house that he uses. Not the clothes, not the food, not the electronics. His taxes pay for the subway he rides, the roads he drives on, etc., etc.
The psychological goal of responsibility and self reliance has once again been perverted by the rich, to dupe the other 99%.
Bennet trots out the equally disproven Reaganomics. Giving more to the rich will not stimulate the economy the way people think. Giving more money to the government also stimulates the economy, duh. How stupid can you get. Business isn't the be all and end all. Government does good things. When you stop riding on the roads, riding the subway, then you can tell me government is no good.
And so he wants the poor to have more children? You know the biggest factor in driving down the crime rate is? Abortion. I'm not saying it's right, but please, lets just see birth control for what it is--it is a way to stop people from being dependent on the government--isn't that your goal. Once again, curiouser and curiouser as we go down the rabbit hole of Bennet's conservatism.
Oh wait, schools are character forming??? Really. That happens to be a government thing. Democrats are pro-school. Conservatives want to privatize and further polarize America destroying the middle class. And he has the gall to say his party is for the middle class. You
can't make this up.
[and when a friend discussed public school failures, I wrote this:]
This is the fundamental shift. Places that believe in government have more responsive and better running governments. Why not improve government instead of wanting it not to work, and then selling it off to people who profit from things I don't really want people to profit off.
I think if there's something wrong with the public schools, you fix it. A problem with the public schools that the catholic schools have over them, is that you can't get rid of bad apples. I read an article that that was the biggest problem with public school. So if you changed how you could get "bad apples" out of the schools.
For me the failures of public schools just means we've got to fix them and do it better. Wanting to shift the job to the private sector leads to the loss of the middle class and profit from things we don't want profit off of. Do you want them cutting costs to increase their profits in education?!
This is the fundamental shift. Places that believe in government have more responsive and better running governments. Why not improve government instead of wanting it not to work, and then selling it off to people who profit from things I don't really want people to profit off.
I think if there's something wrong with the public schools, you fix it. A problem with the public schools that the catholic schools have over them, is that you can't get rid of bad apples. I read an article that that was the biggest problem with public school. So if you changed how you could get "bad apples" out of the schools.
For me the failures of public schools just means we've got to fix them and do it better. Wanting to shift the job to the private sector leads to the loss of the middle class and profit from things we don't want profit off of. Do you want them cutting costs to increase their profits in education?!
No comments:
Post a Comment