Finally, on Sunday Hillary Clinton finally officially announce she would be running for the office of President again. Now, it's time for liberals to begin to freak out. Not because she's a bad candidate, but because she needs the competition. Nothing refines your views more than a good old debate with someone who is a part of the same party as you. This is what I believed helped Obama during the 2008 Election. He had his views, but debating with people who weren't just right wing Bible thumpers helped refine what he really believed needed to be done, and Hillary needs the same.
As long as she makes it through the primaries, then she should really have no problems. The Republican field is full of a bunch of far right almost libertarian, or evangelic candidates. Jeb Bush is probably the most moderate out of all of the potentials, and I don't want another Bush in the White House, the ones out front are plenty enough. Her real problem is going to be the Fox News Regulars. The people who believe she plotted Benghazi, the ones who believe (Still) that Obama is a Communist Kenyan who is trying to take away everyone's guns to instill Islamic Sharia Law on America. Like come on, is there any reasoning with these people? Hillary probably won't need to worry about them though, because they aren't the moderate voters. That is who she needs, and the way Republicans are looking, the Moderate voters might just be out of the question for them.
Overall, the biggest fight will be over the minorities, which I'm calling for Hillary already, because of the Republican goofs on Immigration, and the handling of Ferguson, and situations alike.
If Hillary wins the primary for the Democrats, which she most likely will, I'm saying she is going to win with close to, but not over 300 electoral votes. Probably closer to 290.
So, I wish Hillary the best of luck. Let me know who you want to see run if you aren't a fan of Hillary.
Monday, April 13, 2015
Friday, April 10, 2015
Socialist Libertarianism
The old saying is, "The Government that governs best, is the one which governs least." Some take this as advocacy for Fiscal Conservatism. I see it as a call for Social Libertarianism. This quote was written by Henry David Thoreau is his Civil Disobedience where he complains about the oppressive nature of modern society, and the Governments interference within all aspects of life.
What this says to me is that government is here strictly to keep the country up and running. To keep the economy in check, make sure the nation is stable, and jobs are growing. The job of the government is not to set the moral values of the people, or try to sway their religious beliefs.
This only makes sense, the founding fathers advocated for loose restrictions on Civil Liberties, hence why they wrote the Bill of Rights, to protect those liberties. Instead, they focused more on the economy, and making sure that the country was able to thrive and prosper/ They funded schools, taxed the wealthy, and promoted their form of equality of opportunity.
From the conception of our nation until about the 1920's the federal government had never stepped into the field of playing with Civil Liberties. With the exception of the Alien and Sedition Act during the War of 1812, or Abraham Lincoln suspending Habius Corpus during the Civil War, but both of these could be justified since they were during war times. Still, in the 1920's the Federal Government prohibited the consumption of alcoholic beverages.
This was quickly removed and the nation returned back to normal. The precedent of not messing with civil liberties was official broken though. After the New Deal, which ensured millions of Americans returned to work during the Great Depression, the government realized it could help out the people itself. FDR signed in Social Security, Lyndon Johnson brought in The Great Society, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Then from their the Government took off with social policy, total prohibition of marijuana, Defense of Marriage Act 1996, Restrictions on Abortion, bans on Gay Marriage, all of these the government tried to step in and limit the liberties of the people. Since Lyndon Johnson, the only bills that impact equality of opportunity in a positive way were the No Child Left Behind, and The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Basically, since the 1960's the only progress we've made is that the religious right can step in and try to instill their moral and ethical values onto America.
The power of government lies not in a control of its people, it is to allow its people to live, be free to think, choose, grow and learn. The only true duty of government is to keep the country strong and prosperous. To give its people the resources needed to succeed. Free schooling, and universal healthcare, are two of the best examples. European Nations that adopted these policies has seen a dramatic rise in quality of life, and better life expectancy. Yet we lag behind here in America. Socialism is used as a dirty word, people are convinced our president is a Communist, but they don't even know what a proper liberal actually is. The real problem with America is we want hands off economics, hands off social policy, small government, and low taxes. Well we had that, it was called the Articles of Confederation and it failed horribly.
Socialism, with open civil liberties is what government should really be promoting. This gives people the ability to do what they want and be free, while also having the opportunity to get educated, and become something regardless of if you are the lowest 20%, or the top 1%.
In closing, to anyone who talks down on Socialism, go to a Socialist country and ask people there what they think of it, because the American Politicians who talk bad about it have no clue what real Socialism is and are blatantly misinforming the public about the ideology.
Thank you for reading, feel free to discuss the ideas outlined in this essay.
What this says to me is that government is here strictly to keep the country up and running. To keep the economy in check, make sure the nation is stable, and jobs are growing. The job of the government is not to set the moral values of the people, or try to sway their religious beliefs.
This only makes sense, the founding fathers advocated for loose restrictions on Civil Liberties, hence why they wrote the Bill of Rights, to protect those liberties. Instead, they focused more on the economy, and making sure that the country was able to thrive and prosper/ They funded schools, taxed the wealthy, and promoted their form of equality of opportunity.
From the conception of our nation until about the 1920's the federal government had never stepped into the field of playing with Civil Liberties. With the exception of the Alien and Sedition Act during the War of 1812, or Abraham Lincoln suspending Habius Corpus during the Civil War, but both of these could be justified since they were during war times. Still, in the 1920's the Federal Government prohibited the consumption of alcoholic beverages.
This was quickly removed and the nation returned back to normal. The precedent of not messing with civil liberties was official broken though. After the New Deal, which ensured millions of Americans returned to work during the Great Depression, the government realized it could help out the people itself. FDR signed in Social Security, Lyndon Johnson brought in The Great Society, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Then from their the Government took off with social policy, total prohibition of marijuana, Defense of Marriage Act 1996, Restrictions on Abortion, bans on Gay Marriage, all of these the government tried to step in and limit the liberties of the people. Since Lyndon Johnson, the only bills that impact equality of opportunity in a positive way were the No Child Left Behind, and The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Basically, since the 1960's the only progress we've made is that the religious right can step in and try to instill their moral and ethical values onto America.
The power of government lies not in a control of its people, it is to allow its people to live, be free to think, choose, grow and learn. The only true duty of government is to keep the country strong and prosperous. To give its people the resources needed to succeed. Free schooling, and universal healthcare, are two of the best examples. European Nations that adopted these policies has seen a dramatic rise in quality of life, and better life expectancy. Yet we lag behind here in America. Socialism is used as a dirty word, people are convinced our president is a Communist, but they don't even know what a proper liberal actually is. The real problem with America is we want hands off economics, hands off social policy, small government, and low taxes. Well we had that, it was called the Articles of Confederation and it failed horribly.
Socialism, with open civil liberties is what government should really be promoting. This gives people the ability to do what they want and be free, while also having the opportunity to get educated, and become something regardless of if you are the lowest 20%, or the top 1%.
In closing, to anyone who talks down on Socialism, go to a Socialist country and ask people there what they think of it, because the American Politicians who talk bad about it have no clue what real Socialism is and are blatantly misinforming the public about the ideology.
Thank you for reading, feel free to discuss the ideas outlined in this essay.
Wednesday, April 8, 2015
Climate Change is Real
There has been a rising following of Climate Change Deniers, even within Congress. These people claim that they know that global warming isn't happening because they can find 10 year intervals in the Average Temp graph above that shows temps going down. They claim, even if there is something with CO2 then it's not humans, because we are so great, and anyone who says we aren't are evil, and hate America. They argue with Climate Scientists, and others with actual formal higher education in the field of Meteorology, or something related to that, and still people want to argue with them. There was even a Senator that claimed he would not read the Scientific Literature on Climate Change because, why would he trust the people who get paid to publish papers on climate change. He seriously said that. That's like saying, why should I trust a Doctors, they get paid as long as I'm sick, or Why trust a mechanic, he'll get paid every time he fixes your car.
Still, I give the Climate Change Deniers credit, it takes and extra stupid person to believe that they know better than nearly 97% of all scientists. Don't believe me? Google "Climate Change" and don't go on any official science organizations website, only the blogs, and weird shady websites, and I can guarantee they will be sitting here saying how these scientists who has studied their field for years, and have dedicated even more years to research are wrong, and how he's right because Glenn Beck told him. This is ridiculous, and needs to stop. Science is not something you can argue if you don't even understand facts, and facts are one of the few things that the GOP and other far-right groups hate more than gays. I still encourage everyone to go out and do some personal research on the topic before jumping onto any bandwagon.
Campaign Financing
A while ago, I had published a post on The Supreme Court Ruling that limits on Campaign Donations was Unconstitutional. Since that time, we had the 2014 midterm elections. In this midterm, incumbent Democrats like Sherrod Brown in Ohio faced enormous waves of spending by Right Wing PACs, and Organizations, like the Koch Brothers and sometimes even international donors. What happened was, not only did Republicans gain seats in the already Republican Majority House of Representatives, but they also gained the majority in the Senate. Luckily Senator Sherrod Brown was able to keep his seat, but many of his Democratic colleagues did not.
The impact of unlimited Campaign Donations is that the Republican party is inherently more backed by large Corporations, mostly because they do help the big businesses a lot, and it's pretty hard to deny that. In the 2014 midterm election, 7 out of the 10 biggest Campaign financiers around the country were large Right Wing Non-profits, that are funded by big businesses. The other 3 were unions, like the National Educators Association, and they obviously backed the pro-union Democrats. It definitely makes it an uphill battle for Democrats, but even though there was a huge loss by the Democrats in the midterm, they have historically bounced back during Presidential Election years. 2016 will be the best way to judge how much of an impact unlimited Campaign Financing really has.
The impact of unlimited Campaign Donations is that the Republican party is inherently more backed by large Corporations, mostly because they do help the big businesses a lot, and it's pretty hard to deny that. In the 2014 midterm election, 7 out of the 10 biggest Campaign financiers around the country were large Right Wing Non-profits, that are funded by big businesses. The other 3 were unions, like the National Educators Association, and they obviously backed the pro-union Democrats. It definitely makes it an uphill battle for Democrats, but even though there was a huge loss by the Democrats in the midterm, they have historically bounced back during Presidential Election years. 2016 will be the best way to judge how much of an impact unlimited Campaign Financing really has.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)