Tuesday, January 25, 2011
It doesn't matter if the argument is about the Federal budget or the"Advocate’s editorial board opinion: Our non-profits are deserving of hotel/motel tax money", it always comes down to ideology. Some always come to the table claiming that government is the problem, and the other side will claim that we cannot solve our problems without effective government. It's very hard to make the case for effective government because corporate interest has effectively and literally paid for their opinion being pushed as being the best.
Everyone loves the idea of self -reliance, a smaller responsible government, transparency, and whatnot but as Dr. Martin Luther King once said “It is a cruel jest to say to a bootless man that he should lift himself by his own bootstraps. It is even worse to tell a man to lift himself by his own bootstraps when somebody is standing on the boot." We should weigh the balance of smaller government between oversight efficiency and bureaucracy. We all want efficient government, but if we continue to make drastic cuts; how can we realistically expect government to be competent? It’s the same way with transparency. We all want transparency but information in the hands of amateurs can produce undesired results. E.g. Profit and loss statements and balance sheets contain a lot of useful information, but, unless you know the exact details of every transaction; the numbers can be twisted to support a lie. Locally, the conversation is about “plastic or paper.” There will always be a comment like Observer’s when he said “Should we encourage everyone to eschew plastic in favor of paper or cloth? Sure, good idea. Do we need one more instance of nanny government telling us what we can and cannot do? HELL NO! That comment puts him on the side of “government is the problem."
I continue to hear the main stream media ask GOP leaders about the Tea Party movement within their party. It's as if they think that the Tea Party movement is on a level plain with the established parties. The Tea Party has corporate donors to give them the legitimacy they need. It's always been a custom for the opposition party to have someone give the rebuttal to the president's state of the union address. Paul Ryan will do the honors for the establishment republicans. Michelle Bachman via the Internet has decided to give her rebuttal representing the Tea Party. How silly is that? I hope the mainstream media don't give her the attention she craves. It's bad enough Sarah Palin’s tweets, and Facebook’s page will be given a platform. Place close attention to Paul Ryan's rebuttal where he will lay out the GOP's plan to privatize Social Security and issue vouchers for Medicare. He will emphasize the need to give even more tax breaks to the rich. His road map is not fully endorsed by the Republican Party but the democrats have a trick up their sleeve to counter his proposal. Independent/ Socialist Bernie Sanders will introduce an amendment to adopt Paul Ryan's plan; knowing full well it will be soundly defeated. The president will express our need to remain competitive but the GOP will say that's just a call for more spending. The president's call for another Sputnik moment will be mocked by the right as it was when President John Kennedy mentioned it. That's where we stand today, under the president's leadership; he wants to attack the deficit but move things around for investments in education, alternative energy, and research and development. I'm not really sure what the republicans want because they have two separate factions, the slash and burn Tea Party and the tax cutting, social conservative establishment republicans. When President Ronald Reagan warned in his 1987 State of the Union that "it's widely said that America is losing her competitive edge," his solution included expanding free trade. President George W. Bush said a key component of competitiveness was tax cuts. President George H.W. Bush had a "Council on Competitiveness" which came to be seen by some as a tool for businesses to kill regulations. That’s the difference between the two parties. Trey Ware of KTSA Said “the democrats want government solutions but republicans, and conservatives want a solution to come from individuals and small businesses. It sounds good but it just boilerplate language used to make their side look better.
Politics and ideology may differ at times. A good example of that came from a poster day goes by the handle of jbj. When I called him out for accusing the president of the United States of being a racist. He replied “Mike, I will own up to calling the President racist, due to his participation and membership in a church that preaches about hating white rich people. Any church that preaches about hating a people due to race is racist, in my book. And so is anyone who continues to go there and continues to support it with their membership.”…I’m pretty sure jbj got all his information from the media he watches.Oprah Winfrey used to belong to Rev. Wright’s church. President Obama might not be all that religious but was told that the largest black church on the South side of Chicago was a great place to make important contacts. If I had posted that information, he would have replied “so he’s a fake” or something like that. I have seen people change churches because a new supervisor belonged to a different church. Sometimes it’s all about networking and not about a 20 year membership in a church where the pastor said some provocative things. It’s like when Bill Clinton golfed at an exclusive club. He got a pass because; he had a track record of not being a racist. Politics is about getting the edge. Some pundits are saying that Michelle Obama is going on Oprah today, to start a campaign to help the veterans. The administration will also ask for more veteran benefits to counter a GOP claim that “Obama doesn’t care about the troops “when he calls for defense cuts.
Want to know how split we are in Victoria,TX? Read my last blog in our local paper.