Why does anyone believe this is fair or acceptable by the way? I thought Democrats were all for fair and balanced and quotas for the little guy and all.
Sheesh. Following are impressions:
Color (I hesitate to call it race, since I’m sure it isn’t) and gender is a hugely recurring theme, often injected sideways into a discussion that must be gerrymandered to include it. It takes up an incredible percentage of the debate. In the business world, I have never heard gender or race discussed in such a strange and pervasive manner. It is often artfully but also artificially accomplished in politics, especially by those running for office. Businesses can not afford to consider race/gender in anything remotely approaching the manner polilticians talk about it; pandering, over simplification, almost implying a reparation mentality on every topic in every instance. Business has a huge prejudice in favor of capability; the Financial Statements tell their own rather immediate tale and obtain their own insistence. Since ability does not favor skin color or gender, it is unproductive to give it such a huge percentage of any conversation, either in hiring, firing or promotion. I’m sorry, but it just doesn’t come up, other than where the government has by now insisted it does. In my humble experience it almost always is an embarassment for the minorities it encompasses; they like to think they made it because they deserved it. And they did.
It is also interesting to note that the two obviously most ‘interested’ candidates in these topics, Obama and Clinton, refer to these themes the most, but in a very politically correct and artful way. But they are both consistently identical in what they say and imply:
- Color/gender has been a defining and terrible problem in the past.
- It’s still a huge issue and defines almost every topic.
- It’s time to get past it.
- I’ve championed it in my life.
- I’ll champion it for all of us.
- Don’t pick me as President because of it though. Pick me because I’m a great person.
- I’ll work hard to make it a non-issue so we can all forget about it.
- But don’t forget I’m a Black/Woman and the empathy and underdog power that position enjoys.
- What’s really important is that I’m really concerned about all the other issues in the world and I’ve been trying to solve them. Listen to me discuss them…
LET’S JUST GET OUT! Bush lied, people died! Maybe we can leave in an intelligent way, but it might not matter, because it’s nasty and LET’S JUST GET OUT! People hate us now, and ohmygod Bush lied and people died! and it’s really a distraction from the war on terror or hunt for bin Laden or whatever. Did you know that? Because that’s a really seriously intelligent, strategic way to think of it and frame the Iraq War and another thing that makes Bush so evil. And LET’S JUST GET OUT! But really we have to run, because it’s really just big oil, and big corporations, and all about money (good lord it makes the world dirty) and LET’S JUST GET OUT!
And that is the official Democratic position pure and simple. And I have heard no deeper thoughts than that for some years now. In a saner world, much of the Democratic discussion is moot; it matters not at all (except to the historians) about why we went (e.g., AMDs), or what has occurred so far. In a word, these are all sunk costs now. The only concern now is what our objectives are given the data we have so far acquired, and the strategies and tactics we wish to employ to achieve them.
The issue with the ‘LET’S JUST GET OUT’ tactic is that it becomes difficult under any scenario to understand how it would help achieve any worthy objective other than saving American lives. It might even increase deaths in the short run. But I am one of those folks who happen to still believe there are more important objectives in the Iraq war than just not dying. So far, the media has explored this issue almost not at all; in fact helped Democrats make their ‘Iraq plan’ sound more reasonable and plausible. In any adult planning session part way through any huge project, botched or not, the folks crying about the mistakes made, or trying to quit because either the going got tough or something unexpected happened, would be quickly asked to shut up and contribute, or summarily fired. They aren’t adding anything to the discussion.
It is unbelievable to me that no one, especially The White House, is not belaboring this last point and driving it into the American consciousness like a spear, given the inability of the MSM to make any kind of cogent point anymore.
Public discussions on the minimum wage (like it matters) are obviously of the worst and unhelpful sort. How can we learn something if our leaders willingly pander to the uneducated and encourage improper, incorrect views of the world? The simple fact is that if you raise the minimum wage, businesses will not hire as many people; they’ll further automate or they’ll break up simple tasks and assign them to higher paid salary folks to avoid another person.
In nearly every case, we are not talking about someone who is living on a minimum wage. There are other government support programs for them. Folks willing to work for minimum wage are overwhelmingly trying to get their first job (living at home) or they are part timers who don’t (for whatever reason) want a full time position. If you want to make it more difficult for your son or daughter to get their first job and begin climbing the career ladder, then support the minimum wage hikes. Hell, raise it to $10.00. You’ll have jobs moving out of the country at that wage, but at least you’ll be able to see yourself as a good person. Or perhaps you’ll make outsourcing jobs illegal too. Good luck with that. Because now you’re living in an alternate reality from me and I refuse to speak to you anymore.
Incidently, with marginal labor costs rising so quickly, the issue is quickly becoming moot. Demand for labor is outstripping supply and businesses will increasingly need to be creative in how to outsource production to countries that have willing and able minds or bodies. Either that or fix the Immigration laws, but we shan’t hold our breath on that one. By the way, being a first mover on comprehensive immigration reform will be a huge advantage in the next twenty years, for any country that is studying demographics and understands its effect on GDP and per capita income.
It’s all about supply and demand. Talking about moving to wind and solar is fine, if you’re ready to pay half again as much for your fuel. There’s really a much easier way to get energy efficiency and independence; open up ANWAR and off shore drilling, and wait for innovation to move us away from oil.
Governments’ largest contribution in the energy debate is to take away their byzantine tax system of both rewarding and punishing not only oil exploration and production, but all types of energy, including nuclear. Unfortunately for the Greens, the simplest, most efficient, cost effective, non-intrusive energy substitution for oil and coal is nuclear, but their high priests have declared it a banishable sin. There is evidence we can build nuclear power right now that would be incapable of melt down. By the way, much of that Chinese technology is American, not German. Imagine where we’d be if we had continued to innovate in nuclear power all these years, rather than declaring it a sin.
There again though, if the politicians can’t have an honest discussion about energy, then illogic rules and it takes much longer and it is much more expensive to get to the solution. Do we have time for such non-sensical discussions? Where is the media? Answer: they’ve turned into the driving force of the Democratic party.
I honestly did not hear a discussion or a debate here. I heard a lot of denial about it’s impending bankruptcy and I heard that if that’s not true, we could always either make it a government thing (??) or raise someone’s taxes. These are not intelligent discussions, but what is frightening me is that they might try one. We can only imagine the cost to the country, the economy, and to individual citizens’ health and happiness if they do.
Copious Dissent has more.
Newsbusters makes the excellent point that virtually all the video questions were left wing softballs. But then, what did you expect from this surreal political landscape we live in now? I should have named my blog Irrational Debate.