On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: 1. I love TL, just the economic debate in this thread made the whole thing worth reading.
2. Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie. It has been shown time and again when one party controls the executive and legislative that that party tends to overreach (either to the right or left) and causes a backlash. It was also inevitable that the Republicans would bounce back in the mid term due to the amount of moderate Democrats that got elected on the coattails of President Obama in traditionally conservative districts.
3. I'm thinking Republicans take back the house (but not to the extent of their last majority) and fall short two seats in the Senate. This sets up an interesting dynamic where the House can pass all sorts of legislation and then portray the Senate and White House as obstructionists. My concern is that they'll take a win of 40 of 50 seats as a "mandate" when it really isn't. At this point, the American public is tired of the lack of compromise they see in Washington while their lives get worse and worse. If the Republicans think they can just run out the clock to 2012 I think they will not like the consequences.
4. Either way, if you're a Republican (like me), Democrat, Green Party, Libertarian, Communist go out and take part in the political process. The only way it gets better is if citizens participate. Voting, volunteering for a campaign, writing/calling your representatives, writing an opinion piece, these are all how you can make the system better. Also remember, even if you didn't vote for the guy/gal that represents you in whatever political office they still work for you. You are still their constituent and it's important to make sure they know that.
Like Washington, I disagree with the adversarial political system. Politics are better balanced on a tripod than on two legs. The problem with having only two political partys is that you are placed in a lesser of two evils situation every election. The parties take opposing sides on a few key issues and this basically ignores the interests of most of the population. I support firearms rights and small goverment, but I hate the continuing educational budget cuts and orwellian legislature that republican congress tries to introduce, so I vote democrat. I would love for their to be a party that I actually agreed with more than 51% of what they said. This is impossible with a 2 party system.
On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie.
Haven't you noticed how polarized the country is and how shockingly bad the dialogue has been? US politics are fundamentally sensationalist and the result is that issues are never properly discussed and progress is rarely made.
Despite what the media likes to tell you, we've been a polarized country for decades if not centuries. Hence, adversarial. We're a huge country made up of people from all types of backgrounds that all have varying valid ideas of what "progress" is.
Republicans like to look back at the Reagan years and talk about how he was able to bring the country together, Democrats like to point towards Clinton, or even JFK. This is nostalgia. Things were highly polarized in those times as well. I would argue that this is part of the reason that we have a history of mid term elections going to the opposition party.
The media likes to point towards, well really themselves, and talk about how polarized the country is. Well, Jon Stewart was right at his rally. People from all political backgrounds work together, play together, celebrate and mourn together on a daily basis. We're not defined by being Republicans or Democrats we're defined by being people first. A large portion of this country tends to skew slightly left of center socially and slightly right of center fiscally. We believe in "live and let live" and helping our neighbors, but also want to work for what we get and spend our money as we see fit.
Our political system is not designed to allow sweeping change or "progress". It's designed to have the hot headed House offset by the more measured Senate with the Judicial and Executive branches thrown in to keep things honest. Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers helps us avoid tyranny by the majority and allows for measured adaptation as times change. Does it slow us down sometimes (Civil Rights comes to mind) yes, but it allows for the greater good.
The beauty of our political system really comes down to one thing, the Constitution is a living breathing document that evolves constantly, even if not amended because of how it is interpreted. For all of their faults, the founders sure got that thing right.
Ultimately, it comes down to this. We've been in worse places than we are now. We've been more polarized than we are now (Civil War anyone?), and we'll come through this at the end. There will be other challenges facing us in the future and we can overcome that as well. The polarization comes in how exactly to proceed and varying opinions is a good thing not bad.
I definitely agree that there is nothing special about our "polarization" now compared to the last 200 years of our country.
In fact I agree with all of this except the part where our changing the constitution "evolving" without actually amending it is a good thing. The constitution gives our country solidity because it is extremely difficult to change whereas, it is very easy for congress to change hands or the presidency. So making it so the meaning of the constitution can change with just 1 judge (or 9 for that matter) is not a good thing. It undermines the entire purpose of having a constitution separate from just the laws of the country.
On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: 1. I love TL, just the economic debate in this thread made the whole thing worth reading.
2. Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie. It has been shown time and again when one party controls the executive and legislative that that party tends to overreach (either to the right or left) and causes a backlash. It was also inevitable that the Republicans would bounce back in the mid term due to the amount of moderate Democrats that got elected on the coattails of President Obama in traditionally conservative districts.
3. I'm thinking Republicans take back the house (but not to the extent of their last majority) and fall short two seats in the Senate. This sets up an interesting dynamic where the House can pass all sorts of legislation and then portray the Senate and White House as obstructionists. My concern is that they'll take a win of 40 of 50 seats as a "mandate" when it really isn't. At this point, the American public is tired of the lack of compromise they see in Washington while their lives get worse and worse. If the Republicans think they can just run out the clock to 2012 I think they will not like the consequences.
4. Either way, if you're a Republican (like me), Democrat, Green Party, Libertarian, Communist go out and take part in the political process. The only way it gets better is if citizens participate. Voting, volunteering for a campaign, writing/calling your representatives, writing an opinion piece, these are all how you can make the system better. Also remember, even if you didn't vote for the guy/gal that represents you in whatever political office they still work for you. You are still their constituent and it's important to make sure they know that.
Like Washington, I disagree with the adversarial political system. Politics are better balanced on a tripod than on two legs. The problem with having only two political partys is that you are placed in a lesser of two evils situation every election. The parties take opposing sides on a few key issues and this basically ignores the interests of most of the population. I support firearms rights and small goverment, but I hate the continuing educational budget cuts and orwellian legislature that republican congress tries to introduce, so I vote democrat. I would love for their to be a party that I actually agreed with more than 51% of what they said. This is impossible with a 2 party system.
Just what education budget cuts are you talking about? Total Education expenditures: Expenditures per pupil: Grants for disadvantaged children: Federal Spending Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Federal Grants to States for Special Education:
Contrary to popular belief, we actually spend a lot on education even compared to most european countries + Show Spoiler +
Annual Secondary Education Expenditures per Student
2. Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie. It has been shown time and again when one party controls the executive and legislative that that party tends to overreach (either to the right or left) and causes a backlash. It was also inevitable that the Republicans would bounce back in the mid term due to the amount of moderate Democrats that got elected on the coattails of President Obama in traditionally conservative districts.
That isn't really true. The center has shifted considerably over time.
There is no value in being divided and pushed toward the center with certain types of people. It would be nice if the division were on complicated questions, and variations on what would be best, but it is not.
On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie.
Haven't you noticed how polarized the country is and how shockingly bad the dialogue has been? US politics are fundamentally sensationalist and the result is that issues are never properly discussed and progress is rarely made.
Despite what the media likes to tell you, we've been a polarized country for decades if not centuries. Hence, adversarial. We're a huge country made up of people from all types of backgrounds that all have varying valid ideas of what "progress" is.
Republicans like to look back at the Reagan years and talk about how he was able to bring the country together, Democrats like to point towards Clinton, or even JFK. This is nostalgia. Things were highly polarized in those times as well. I would argue that this is part of the reason that we have a history of mid term elections going to the opposition party.
The media likes to point towards, well really themselves, and talk about how polarized the country is. Well, Jon Stewart was right at his rally. People from all political backgrounds work together, play together, celebrate and mourn together on a daily basis. We're not defined by being Republicans or Democrats we're defined by being people first. A large portion of this country tends to skew slightly left of center socially and slightly right of center fiscally. We believe in "live and let live" and helping our neighbors, but also want to work for what we get and spend our money as we see fit.
Our political system is not designed to allow sweeping change or "progress". It's designed to have the hot headed House offset by the more measured Senate with the Judicial and Executive branches thrown in to keep things honest. Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers helps us avoid tyranny by the majority and allows for measured adaptation as times change. Does it slow us down sometimes (Civil Rights comes to mind) yes, but it allows for the greater good.
The beauty of our political system really comes down to one thing, the Constitution is a living breathing document that evolves constantly, even if not amended because of how it is interpreted. For all of their faults, the founders sure got that thing right.
Ultimately, it comes down to this. We've been in worse places than we are now. We've been more polarized than we are now (Civil War anyone?), and we'll come through this at the end. There will be other challenges facing us in the future and we can overcome that as well. The polarization comes in how exactly to proceed and varying opinions is a good thing not bad.
I definitely agree that there is nothing special about our "polarization" now compared to the last 200 years of our country.
In fact I agree with all of this except the part where our changing the constitution "evolving" without actually amending it is a good thing. The constitution gives our country solidity because it is extremely difficult to change whereas, it is very easy for congress to change hands or the presidency. So making it so the meaning of the constitution can change with just 1 judge (or 9 for that matter) is not a good thing. It undermines the entire purpose of having a constitution separate from just the laws of the country.
Actually, you make a valid point and I struggled with that portion of my post. I do tend to skew towards agreeing with a more strict interpretation of the Constitution than what our current court system tends to have, but I see the need for the Judicial branch to stand up and make a choice even if the wording is not specifically in the Constitution.
I have more concerns in how much of our government has been pushed towards the Federal level, and specifically the rise in power of the Executive since FDR. I'd like to see more given back to the states than we currently have.
On November 02 2010 22:55 Losticus wrote: mindless drivel
Do you have any coherent opinions to offer or salient points to make, or are you just here to regurgitate Tea Party talking points?
I'm asking seriously, it seems impossible to have any actual civil discourse with a Tea Party member because this is all they do - parrot the same nonsense their candidates are spewing in attack ads.
You should listen to yourself. All I've done is articulate my points intelligently, without snark, without name-calling -- and all people like you've done, naturally, is call people you disagree with Teabaggers and crazies spewing "mindless drivel."
What part about me pointing out the profound irony of someone smearing a movement as racist (as par for the course, and with no proof), while begrudging lack of "civility" -- is a talking point or "nonsense spewed in an attack ad"? I mean, is this a joke? Actual civil discourse? Do you have that little self-awareness?
It seems that you folks are entirely incapable of refuting the Tea party on ideas, instead having to resort to name-calling and deriding it as "mindless drivel" so beyond the pale that it doesn't merit serious discussion. The people who claim to be tolerant, open-minded, and sophisticated, can't dare let their worldview be challenged -- so instead they just discredit the challengers as racist/extremist/stupid.
The Tea Party movement is all about ideas, principles, and policies. That's all it's ever been, made plainly clear in every rally ever held. You'd know that if you were intellectually curious enough to listen. I'd be happy to discuss that with you.
The problem with the current two-party system is that if you're person who likes a few things from one side and a few things from the other, you are blasted by BOTH parties.
Since I work, and also need to vote, I'll just share part of a column that may help the confused understand why those crazy teabaggers Americans like me are voting conservative. In fact, it comprehensively sums it up perfectly. Warning, lots of big words and paragraphs ahead:
So why are people angry? I’ll end with a brief list of twenty-one months of examples in no particular order. Each incident in itself was perhaps explicable by Obama supporters given the exigencies of the time or perhaps could be contextualized by the liberal media and political establishment. But in the aggregate they confirm an overwhelmingly damning pattern of ideological extremism, polarization, and basic incompetence — to such a degree that dozens of politicians are not running on the very Obama agenda that they once voted for.
Here We Go…
A vast new healthcare monstrosity that will send private insurance rates through the ceiling. The Machiavellian way in which it was slammed through. Failed stimulus. Wasteful pork-barrel spending of hundreds of billions in borrowed money. Persistent near 10% unemployment. Three trillion dollars in new debt in just two years. Record levels of federal spending. The vast increase in the size of government and its share of GDP. Eight years of projected $1 trillion annual budget deficits. Record high foreclosures. Record high usage of food stamps. The Keynesian zeal of Romer/Summers/Orzag followed by their sudden resignations in the wake of failure. Constant talk of higher taxes on “them” — the promised new healthcare surcharge taxes, the promised return to the Clinton income tax rates, talk of a VAT, talk of lifting the caps on income subject to FICA taxes, new capital gains taxes, new inheritance taxes on the horizon.
The use of extra-cabinet czars to avoid confirmation and audit. The neglect of the law, from reversing the order of Chrysler creditors to announcing a BP $20 billion shakedown and punishments for health insurers who don’t toe the line. The ascendance of ACORN and SEIU. The months-long shutdown of Gulf drilling. The failure to encourage coal, nuclear, and oil and gas new production. The Black Panther voting intimidation mess. The bowing abroad. The apologies. The outreach to enemies, and the snubbing of allies. The unnecessary humiliation of Great Britain and Israel. The Iran serial “deadline” charade. The unnecessary announcement of Afghan troop withdrawal deadlines. “Overseas contingency operations” and “man-made disasters.” The proposed civilian trial of KSM. The Ground Zero mosque mess. The beer summit mess. NASA’s new main mission of Muslim outreach. Stopping the border fence. Suing Arizona and demonizing the state. The apologies to the Chinese over the Arizona law, which was trashed from the White House lawn by the president of Mexico, and sued by foreign governments to the apparent approval of the administration.
The constant “Bush did it” refrain. The gratuitous slurs against limb-lopping doctors. The thrashing of the “rich” going to the Super Bowl and Las Vegas. The artificial divide of them/us based on $250,000 of annual income. The racial divisiveness from a sad cast of characters that gave us “cowards,” “stupidly,” “wise Latina,” and whites polluting the ghetto. Unhinged appointees like Van Jones and Anita Dunn. The occasional unguarded admissions like “never waste a crisis” and “at some point I do think you’ve made enough money.” The wacky behavior from the whining of “like a dog” to the sudden junketing to Copenhagen to lobby for the Chicago Olympics. The Orwellian cheap damning of the Bush anti-terrorism protocols only to accept or expand tribunals, renditions, Guantanamo, Predators, Iraq, and intercepts and wiretaps. The golf obsession and Costa del Sol while trashing the indulgent rich.
I’ll stop there since we have another 27 months to go.
On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: 1. I love TL, just the economic debate in this thread made the whole thing worth reading.
2. Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie. It has been shown time and again when one party controls the executive and legislative that that party tends to overreach (either to the right or left) and causes a backlash. It was also inevitable that the Republicans would bounce back in the mid term due to the amount of moderate Democrats that got elected on the coattails of President Obama in traditionally conservative districts.
3. I'm thinking Republicans take back the house (but not to the extent of their last majority) and fall short two seats in the Senate. This sets up an interesting dynamic where the House can pass all sorts of legislation and then portray the Senate and White House as obstructionists. My concern is that they'll take a win of 40 of 50 seats as a "mandate" when it really isn't. At this point, the American public is tired of the lack of compromise they see in Washington while their lives get worse and worse. If the Republicans think they can just run out the clock to 2012 I think they will not like the consequences.
4. Either way, if you're a Republican (like me), Democrat, Green Party, Libertarian, Communist go out and take part in the political process. The only way it gets better is if citizens participate. Voting, volunteering for a campaign, writing/calling your representatives, writing an opinion piece, these are all how you can make the system better. Also remember, even if you didn't vote for the guy/gal that represents you in whatever political office they still work for you. You are still their constituent and it's important to make sure they know that.
Like Washington, I disagree with the adversarial political system. Politics are better balanced on a tripod than on two legs. The problem with having only two political partys is that you are placed in a lesser of two evils situation every election. The parties take opposing sides on a few key issues and this basically ignores the interests of most of the population. I support firearms rights and small goverment, but I hate the continuing educational budget cuts and orwellian legislature that republican congress tries to introduce, so I vote democrat. I would love for their to be a party that I actually agreed with more than 51% of what they said. This is impossible with a 2 party system.
Just what education budget cuts are you talking about? Total Education expenditures: Expenditures per pupil: Grants for disadvantaged children: Federal Spending Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Federal Grants to States for Special Education:
Contrary to popular belief, we actually spend a lot on education even compared to most european countries + Show Spoiler +
Annual Secondary Education Expenditures per Student
I read 2 good reason to vote Republican in your post, and I don't follow you at all on the 2 reasons not to.
And your end resulting decision was to vote democrat?
while it's certainly true the US spends more than any other country on education, I thought the general consensus for analysts and the population was that the US quality of education is not in line with the spending and is [Ironic]more badder than other countries.[/Ironic]
On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: 1. I love TL, just the economic debate in this thread made the whole thing worth reading.
2. Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie. It has been shown time and again when one party controls the executive and legislative that that party tends to overreach (either to the right or left) and causes a backlash. It was also inevitable that the Republicans would bounce back in the mid term due to the amount of moderate Democrats that got elected on the coattails of President Obama in traditionally conservative districts.
3. I'm thinking Republicans take back the house (but not to the extent of their last majority) and fall short two seats in the Senate. This sets up an interesting dynamic where the House can pass all sorts of legislation and then portray the Senate and White House as obstructionists. My concern is that they'll take a win of 40 of 50 seats as a "mandate" when it really isn't. At this point, the American public is tired of the lack of compromise they see in Washington while their lives get worse and worse. If the Republicans think they can just run out the clock to 2012 I think they will not like the consequences.
4. Either way, if you're a Republican (like me), Democrat, Green Party, Libertarian, Communist go out and take part in the political process. The only way it gets better is if citizens participate. Voting, volunteering for a campaign, writing/calling your representatives, writing an opinion piece, these are all how you can make the system better. Also remember, even if you didn't vote for the guy/gal that represents you in whatever political office they still work for you. You are still their constituent and it's important to make sure they know that.
Like Washington, I disagree with the adversarial political system. Politics are better balanced on a tripod than on two legs. The problem with having only two political partys is that you are placed in a lesser of two evils situation every election. The parties take opposing sides on a few key issues and this basically ignores the interests of most of the population. I support firearms rights and small goverment, but I hate the continuing educational budget cuts and orwellian legislature that republican congress tries to introduce, so I vote democrat. I would love for their to be a party that I actually agreed with more than 51% of what they said. This is impossible with a 2 party system.
Just what education budget cuts are you talking about? Total Education expenditures: Expenditures per pupil: Grants for disadvantaged children: Federal Spending Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Federal Grants to States for Special Education:
Contrary to popular belief, we actually spend a lot on education even compared to most european countries + Show Spoiler +
Annual Secondary Education Expenditures per Student
I read 2 good reason to vote Republican in your post, and I don't follow you at all on the 2 reasons not to.
And your end resulting decision was to vote democrat?
while it's certainly true the US spends more than any other country on education, I thought the general consensus for analysts and the population was that the US quality of education is not in line with the spending and is [Ironic]more badder than other countries.[/Ironic]
Yes, the problem is that the bureaucracies managing the education in the US are so bad and corrupt that a huge percentage of the billions that we spend on education is wasted. That's why there are stories out there about school districts where $30,000+ per year is spent per child on public education, yet the schools are still failing (See Washington DC). How many of the politicians there send their kids to public schools? Practically none of them do. They'd rather shell out $20,000 per year to send their kids to private school where they are better-educated. And people wonder why teacher's unions are so demonized.... could it possibly have anything to do with the fact that so many of them do an absolutely shitty job?
On November 03 2010 01:06 Losticus wrote: You should listen to yourself. All I've done is articulate my points intelligently, without snark, without name-calling -- and all people like you've done, naturally, is call people you disagree with Teabaggers and crazies spewing "mindless drivel."
What part about me pointing out the profound irony of someone smearing a movement as racist (as par for the course, and with no proof), while begrudging lack of "civility" -- is a talking point or "nonsense spewed in an attack ad"? I mean, is this a joke? Actual civil discourse? Do you have that little self-awareness?
It seems that you folks are entirely incapable of refuting the Tea party on ideas, instead having to resort to name-calling and deriding it as "mindless drivel" so beyond the pale that it doesn't merit serious discussion. The people who claim to be tolerant, open-minded, and sophisticated, can't dare let their worldview be challenged -- so instead they just discredit the challengers as racist/extremist/stupid.
The Tea Party movement is all about ideas, principles, and policies. That's all it's ever been, made plainly clear in every rally ever held. You'd know that if you were intellectually curious enough to listen. I'd be happy to discuss that with you.
Okay bro. Challenge accepted.
First of all, what is "all people like you"? And "you folks"? What people like me? How do you even know what kind of person I am? I ask a serious question and from that you've somehow inferred me to be part of whatever cabal you're railing against, it's pretty comical.
Secondly, I called it mindless drivel, because all of this:
Aww, poor guy. From "Hope and Change" that resulted in more-of-the-same-supercharged, to Damn These Idiot Voters Because I Disagree With Them.
Obama and the Democrat Congress have done more to wake this country up than anything.
So thanks, lefties, for over-exposing your ideology
no matter how hard you try to force it down their throats.
As for me, I eagerly anticipate voting today...with a Slurpee and a smile (inside joke).
And yes, as baffling it is for you to comprehend -- most Americans do not want to become more like you, and more like Europe. I know, crazy.
So ironic it should be satire: Poster agrees with how poor the dialogue has been; proceeds to smear the policy-driven people he opposes with sexual epithet name-calling and unsubstantiated charges of racism. Sanity, 2010.
Do you have that little self-awareness?
It seems that you folks are entirely incapable of refuting the Tea party on ideas
is just mindless drivel, and yes, just crap Tea Party candidates are repeating ad nauseum in attack ads. There's no ideas. No arguments. Just sniping at people and angry ad hominem attacks. You haven't contributed anything or refuted anything, you've just slung more mud around - it's like some elementary school playground fight: "you're stupid!' you: "no, YOU'RE stupid!". And then to top it off, you respond to the only person being civil and actually responding to you seriously instead of just ignoring you like everyone else with - guess what - even more baseless accusations and personal insults. I should listen to myself? Maybe you should listen to yourself, then you might realize why no one else is even talking to you - and no, it's not because you're in such a higher league of intellectual sophistication you've shattered everyone else's worldview to the point where they can no longer speak coherently.
On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: 1. I love TL, just the economic debate in this thread made the whole thing worth reading.
2. Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie. It has been shown time and again when one party controls the executive and legislative that that party tends to overreach (either to the right or left) and causes a backlash. It was also inevitable that the Republicans would bounce back in the mid term due to the amount of moderate Democrats that got elected on the coattails of President Obama in traditionally conservative districts.
3. I'm thinking Republicans take back the house (but not to the extent of their last majority) and fall short two seats in the Senate. This sets up an interesting dynamic where the House can pass all sorts of legislation and then portray the Senate and White House as obstructionists. My concern is that they'll take a win of 40 of 50 seats as a "mandate" when it really isn't. At this point, the American public is tired of the lack of compromise they see in Washington while their lives get worse and worse. If the Republicans think they can just run out the clock to 2012 I think they will not like the consequences.
4. Either way, if you're a Republican (like me), Democrat, Green Party, Libertarian, Communist go out and take part in the political process. The only way it gets better is if citizens participate. Voting, volunteering for a campaign, writing/calling your representatives, writing an opinion piece, these are all how you can make the system better. Also remember, even if you didn't vote for the guy/gal that represents you in whatever political office they still work for you. You are still their constituent and it's important to make sure they know that.
Like Washington, I disagree with the adversarial political system. Politics are better balanced on a tripod than on two legs. The problem with having only two political partys is that you are placed in a lesser of two evils situation every election. The parties take opposing sides on a few key issues and this basically ignores the interests of most of the population. I support firearms rights and small goverment, but I hate the continuing educational budget cuts and orwellian legislature that republican congress tries to introduce, so I vote democrat. I would love for their to be a party that I actually agreed with more than 51% of what they said. This is impossible with a 2 party system.
Just what education budget cuts are you talking about? Total Education expenditures: Expenditures per pupil: Grants for disadvantaged children: Federal Spending Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Federal Grants to States for Special Education:
Contrary to popular belief, we actually spend a lot on education even compared to most european countries + Show Spoiler +
Annual Secondary Education Expenditures per Student
I read 2 good reason to vote Republican in your post, and I don't follow you at all on the 2 reasons not to.
And your end resulting decision was to vote democrat?
while it's certainly true the US spends more than any other country on education, I thought the general consensus for analysts and the population was that the US quality of education is not in line with the spending and is [Ironic]more badder than other countries.[/Ironic]
Yes, the problem is that the bureaucracies managing the education in the US are so bad and corrupt that a huge percentage of the billions that we spend on education is wasted. That's why there are stories out there about school districts where $30,000+ per year is spent per child on public education, yet the schools are still failing (See Washington DC). How many of the politicians there send their kids to public schools? Practically none of them do. They'd rather shell out $20,000 per year to send their kids to private school where they are better-educated. And people wonder why teacher's unions are so demonized.... could it possibly have anything to do with the fact that so many of them do an absolutely shitty job?
Waste in the education system is absolutely true, and probably worse than most of us realize. My ex's father did some investigative reporting on his cities' school district (Cleburne, TX) and found that upwards of 44% of funding was being wasted on stupid shit like "meetings in Hawaii" and "golfing at an exclusive resort," with upper management spending over $1000 at dinners. I'm not even kidding. This is just one school district an hour away from DFW, too.
On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie.
Haven't you noticed how polarized the country is and how shockingly bad the dialogue has been? US politics are fundamentally sensationalist and the result is that issues are never properly discussed and progress is rarely made.
Despite what the media likes to tell you, we've been a polarized country for decades if not centuries. Hence, adversarial. We're a huge country made up of people from all types of backgrounds that all have varying valid ideas of what "progress" is.
Republicans like to look back at the Reagan years and talk about how he was able to bring the country together, Democrats like to point towards Clinton, or even JFK. This is nostalgia. Things were highly polarized in those times as well. I would argue that this is part of the reason that we have a history of mid term elections going to the opposition party.
The media likes to point towards, well really themselves, and talk about how polarized the country is. Well, Jon Stewart was right at his rally. People from all political backgrounds work together, play together, celebrate and mourn together on a daily basis. We're not defined by being Republicans or Democrats we're defined by being people first. A large portion of this country tends to skew slightly left of center socially and slightly right of center fiscally. We believe in "live and let live" and helping our neighbors, but also want to work for what we get and spend our money as we see fit.
Our political system is not designed to allow sweeping change or "progress". It's designed to have the hot headed House offset by the more measured Senate with the Judicial and Executive branches thrown in to keep things honest. Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers helps us avoid tyranny by the majority and allows for measured adaptation as times change. Does it slow us down sometimes (Civil Rights comes to mind) yes, but it allows for the greater good.
The beauty of our political system really comes down to one thing, the Constitution is a living breathing document that evolves constantly, even if not amended because of how it is interpreted. For all of their faults, the founders sure got that thing right.
Ultimately, it comes down to this. We've been in worse places than we are now. We've been more polarized than we are now (Civil War anyone?), and we'll come through this at the end. There will be other challenges facing us in the future and we can overcome that as well. The polarization comes in how exactly to proceed and varying opinions is a good thing not bad.
Well I'm not really sure what you mean by what the media likes to tell me. The abysmal quality of political dialogue in the US certainly isn't the kind of thing that happens overnight, so you'll get no argument from me about that. The point I was trying to raise is that the sensationalist nature of the process isn't a good thing. People aren't really being informed so I don't think there is any helpful or legitimate sense in which this sort of stuff helps steer the country towards centrism. And if it was about having varying opinions then you wouldn't have a two party system in the first place.
On November 02 2010 22:05 ey215 wrote: 1. I love TL, just the economic debate in this thread made the whole thing worth reading.
2. Our country is based on an adversarial political system. This is a good thing. It helps drive us towards the center, where most American's political values lie. It has been shown time and again when one party controls the executive and legislative that that party tends to overreach (either to the right or left) and causes a backlash. It was also inevitable that the Republicans would bounce back in the mid term due to the amount of moderate Democrats that got elected on the coattails of President Obama in traditionally conservative districts.
3. I'm thinking Republicans take back the house (but not to the extent of their last majority) and fall short two seats in the Senate. This sets up an interesting dynamic where the House can pass all sorts of legislation and then portray the Senate and White House as obstructionists. My concern is that they'll take a win of 40 of 50 seats as a "mandate" when it really isn't. At this point, the American public is tired of the lack of compromise they see in Washington while their lives get worse and worse. If the Republicans think they can just run out the clock to 2012 I think they will not like the consequences.
4. Either way, if you're a Republican (like me), Democrat, Green Party, Libertarian, Communist go out and take part in the political process. The only way it gets better is if citizens participate. Voting, volunteering for a campaign, writing/calling your representatives, writing an opinion piece, these are all how you can make the system better. Also remember, even if you didn't vote for the guy/gal that represents you in whatever political office they still work for you. You are still their constituent and it's important to make sure they know that.
Like Washington, I disagree with the adversarial political system. Politics are better balanced on a tripod than on two legs. The problem with having only two political partys is that you are placed in a lesser of two evils situation every election. The parties take opposing sides on a few key issues and this basically ignores the interests of most of the population. I support firearms rights and small goverment, but I hate the continuing educational budget cuts and orwellian legislature that republican congress tries to introduce, so I vote democrat. I would love for their to be a party that I actually agreed with more than 51% of what they said. This is impossible with a 2 party system.
Just what education budget cuts are you talking about? Total Education expenditures: Expenditures per pupil: Grants for disadvantaged children: Federal Spending Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Federal Grants to States for Special Education:
Contrary to popular belief, we actually spend a lot on education even compared to most european countries + Show Spoiler +
Annual Secondary Education Expenditures per Student
I read 2 good reason to vote Republican in your post, and I don't follow you at all on the 2 reasons not to.
And your end resulting decision was to vote democrat?
while it's certainly true the US spends more than any other country on education, I thought the general consensus for analysts and the population was that the US quality of education is not in line with the spending and is [Ironic]more badder than other countries.[/Ironic]
Another reason our public education system is so bad compared to how much money we spend on it is the teachers unions making it hard for school administrations to fire or punish teachers who are not doing a good job. Putting teachers ahead of "teaching" is never a good idea.
This is one reason why you can get a better education with a private school even if the money you pay for its tuition is less than what the government gives public schools per child.
On November 03 2010 01:28 Losticus wrote: Since I work, and also need to vote, I'll just share part of a column that may help the confused understand why those crazy teabaggers Americans like me are voting conservative. In fact, it comprehensively sums it up perfectly. Warning, lots of big words and paragraphs ahead:
So why are people angry? I’ll end with a brief list of twenty-one months of examples in no particular order. Each incident in itself was perhaps explicable by Obama supporters given the exigencies of the time or perhaps could be contextualized by the liberal media and political establishment. But in the aggregate they confirm an overwhelmingly damning pattern of ideological extremism, polarization, and basic incompetence — to such a degree that dozens of politicians are not running on the very Obama agenda that they once voted for.
Here We Go…
A vast new healthcare monstrosity that will send private insurance rates through the ceiling. The Machiavellian way in which it was slammed through. Failed stimulus. Wasteful pork-barrel spending of hundreds of billions in borrowed money. Persistent near 10% unemployment. Three trillion dollars in new debt in just two years. Record levels of federal spending. The vast increase in the size of government and its share of GDP. Eight years of projected $1 trillion annual budget deficits. Record high foreclosures. Record high usage of food stamps. The Keynesian zeal of Romer/Summers/Orzag followed by their sudden resignations in the wake of failure. Constant talk of higher taxes on “them” — the promised new healthcare surcharge taxes, the promised return to the Clinton income tax rates, talk of a VAT, talk of lifting the caps on income subject to FICA taxes, new capital gains taxes, new inheritance taxes on the horizon.
The use of extra-cabinet czars to avoid confirmation and audit. The neglect of the law, from reversing the order of Chrysler creditors to announcing a BP $20 billion shakedown and punishments for health insurers who don’t toe the line. The ascendance of ACORN and SEIU. The months-long shutdown of Gulf drilling. The failure to encourage coal, nuclear, and oil and gas new production. The Black Panther voting intimidation mess. The bowing abroad. The apologies. The outreach to enemies, and the snubbing of allies. The unnecessary humiliation of Great Britain and Israel. The Iran serial “deadline” charade. The unnecessary announcement of Afghan troop withdrawal deadlines. “Overseas contingency operations” and “man-made disasters.” The proposed civilian trial of KSM. The Ground Zero mosque mess. The beer summit mess. NASA’s new main mission of Muslim outreach. Stopping the border fence. Suing Arizona and demonizing the state. The apologies to the Chinese over the Arizona law, which was trashed from the White House lawn by the president of Mexico, and sued by foreign governments to the apparent approval of the administration.
The constant “Bush did it” refrain. The gratuitous slurs against limb-lopping doctors. The thrashing of the “rich” going to the Super Bowl and Las Vegas. The artificial divide of them/us based on $250,000 of annual income. The racial divisiveness from a sad cast of characters that gave us “cowards,” “stupidly,” “wise Latina,” and whites polluting the ghetto. Unhinged appointees like Van Jones and Anita Dunn. The occasional unguarded admissions like “never waste a crisis” and “at some point I do think you’ve made enough money.” The wacky behavior from the whining of “like a dog” to the sudden junketing to Copenhagen to lobby for the Chicago Olympics. The Orwellian cheap damning of the Bush anti-terrorism protocols only to accept or expand tribunals, renditions, Guantanamo, Predators, Iraq, and intercepts and wiretaps. The golf obsession and Costa del Sol while trashing the indulgent rich.
I’ll stop there since we have another 27 months to go.
While I have no comment on a lot of the problems with the Obama Administration (there definitely are problems), Summers and Orzag are NOT Keynesian economists. Please don't repeat this BS. Keynesian economists (Krugman, DeLong, Stiglitz) advocated for a much much larger stimulus then what was passed. Romer LEFT because of the office's shift away from Keynesian policy.
Edit: With regards to the healthcare policy, poll ratings varied widely depending on what question was asked. Granted this is just personal anecdotes but most of the people I've talked to couldn't tell you what was actually in the healthcare bill (it's available online along with a synopsis). Many of the center-right ideas such as selling insurance across state lines, combined risk pools, a "mandate" that isn't a mandate were all part of both Romney's original plan and Gingwrich's plan, so don't pretend that what we actually enacted is in anyway a plan that aligns itself with the left.
EPT
go out and take part in the political process. The only way it gets better is if citizens participate. Voting, volunteering for a campaign, writing/calling your representatives, writing an opinion piece, these are all how you can make the system better. Also remember, even if you didn't vote for the guy/gal that represents you in whatever political office they still work for you. You are still their constituent and it's important to make sure they know that. ![[image loading]](http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/expend.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/pupil.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/title1.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/investment.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/speced.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/oecd.gif)
