Wednesday, February 29, 2012
GOP debate ...a little late...
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Bullies!
Bullying at school, in the neighborhood, at the bus stops...we have all witnessed it as adolescents, but today it is rampant. However, it isn't only kids or even the celebrity tabloids...it is our own politicians. The servants of the people...yes, they are the ones bullying one another...egging on a society already too cruel on one on another. Distracting Americans by all the mindless crap like Romney being mean to dogs bc of something he did 20 yrs ago. Give me a break! That is just so silly.
Candidates: Remember what your mother taught you (or should have)? "Be nice. Tell the truth. Stand up for what you believe in, but don't fight."
Seems pretty simple to me. Be professional. Cut the negative ads and instead add a refreshing positive ad to the campaign. It would probably win ya more votes at this point, bc I am sure I am not the only one sick of it all.
For more examples of this see this article I found on the topic:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/2012-campaign-harshest-sharpest-attacks-gop-race/story?id=15761249#
Candidates: Remember what your mother taught you (or should have)? "Be nice. Tell the truth. Stand up for what you believe in, but don't fight."
Seems pretty simple to me. Be professional. Cut the negative ads and instead add a refreshing positive ad to the campaign. It would probably win ya more votes at this point, bc I am sure I am not the only one sick of it all.
For more examples of this see this article I found on the topic:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/2012-campaign-harshest-sharpest-attacks-gop-race/story?id=15761249#
Monday, February 20, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
What do you think about Mitt?
Mitt Romney claims that Obama has made the recession worse...
And we have all heard "crony capitalism" come out of his mouth...
Can anyone enlighten me about what Mitt Romney is basing these claims on?
Also, which Republican party has the best shot to win against Obama?
I think the best shot would be Romney, but many disagree. Of course, I don't conceive of any of the Republicans actually succeeding...but Romney might be the best shot.
And we have all heard "crony capitalism" come out of his mouth...
Also, which Republican party has the best shot to win against Obama?
I think the best shot would be Romney, but many disagree. Of course, I don't conceive of any of the Republicans actually succeeding...but Romney might be the best shot.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Down with government....?
Because of a few big-headed, narcissistic so-called "news programs," people have begun to fear the government. I don't get the hate that people have against government. I understand it within the context of the seemingly "ill" congress and their inability to come together. Or frustrations expressed with our elected officials looking out for personal gain instead of the common good. But I do not agree with hatred or fear toward the government, in general. I believe is there for our good...for our security, for the organization of this wonderful country. "Big Government" or "Small government," broken or in repair, I believe in our government.
Personally, I am against government which discriminates against a people. I am against a government which stands by and watches its people fall so that the stronger can get ahead and become wealthy, etc. But I support our government....with my vote and my voice...however small it may be.
I love the following quote found at lds.org:
Personally, I am against government which discriminates against a people. I am against a government which stands by and watches its people fall so that the stronger can get ahead and become wealthy, etc. But I support our government....with my vote and my voice...however small it may be.
I love the following quote found at lds.org:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in good politics and good government and in the right of people to exercise their franchise. There is an entire section in the Doctrine and Covenants on the subject:
“We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society. … such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the voice of the people. …” (D&C 134:1, 3.)
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Brian...a response.
Brian...you should just email me! haha. I appreciate your comments! I think it is great that we can discuss this without hurting each others feelings! I do not let it impact me personally, FYI, so I hope you don't. It is just interesting and though I am passionate, I don't presume that I will change anyones mind about his individual political views, I just have to share my POV or I will burst. :) So thanks. I love this so I made this a political blog so people don't have to read if they don't want to. :)
I have to preface my response to you, Brian, with saying that I am typing fast and have little time to respond, so ignore typos and poor grammar. :) (If you would like to read Brian's comments click here).
Where to start!? I think we agree on more than I thought, however--or else you were trying to butter me up. :) I realize that SS is in trouble, but I don't think it is at all fair to say that "we" as in people our age, or younger,"have time" to prepare for retirement. Many people our age have no other means to prepare. They live paycheck to paycheck and many would LOVE to prepare, but have very little means to do so. Yet they aren't expecting a government hand out. They just work and work and most likely will have to work until they are too old to do so. I think many people we know will be fine, but I am more concerned about the "blue collar" folks, if you will. My family comes from a long line of hard workers, but unfortunately that didn't translate into having lots of extra money for retirement. My Great Grandpa was a janitor, my Grandpa was a mechanic, etc. On my other side we have farmers and musicians, teachers, etc. I don't know the answer...that is a bit above my head, but thank goodness I am not the one elected to deal with it. :) I can however choose someone I trust, whom I believe looks out for people who will be dependent on SS in their old age. I don't know what more to say on this topic. But I think we agree it has been an important government program that many fought against and thought it would turn our country into a socialist country...wait, this sounds familiar. Healthcare? :) I think healthcare can be another essential program that will take care of so many families who work really hard but somehow cannot afford insurance. I know way too many my own age who don't have insurance and can't afford it. So I think there are MILLIONS if I, here in UT know so many who seek an alternative to our over priced health care. We are the most expensive Health Care in the world! And yet we are at the top of the list in the world for having one of the largest amounts of low income households.
Sorry, I don't know how I got on health care. Are you still reading? :)
Next topic: the "flip-flopping"
I do believe that elected officials who change their votes based on the people they work for are very respectable. However, can you honestly say that is the reason Romney has changed his career long views within recent years? I think it was purely on a selfish part of wanted to be elected Rep candidate. But there is no way to know that for sure. It is irrelevant to me, why he changed his vote on some issues, as long as he can prove he has a backbone for the REAL issues.
More on Romeny:
In my view he is out of touch with the people. I try so hard to like him, and I think as a person, I like him. But politically I am not aligned with him on many topics. I think he demeans low income families, and he unknowingly says off hand remarks that are condescending to the working class. I am sure all of his comments (or at least most) were mistakes, and he regrets them, but they do give some insight into how out of touch (for lack of a better expression) he is with people making less than 6 figures a year.
TAXING the wealthy
As far as taxes and doing a "fair share," I think people making less than $250,000 (let's just say) still have a responsibility. They are responsible for being the working class...in which all of the economy would tumble without. So their responsibility is in a small spectrum, but still essential. They are to be employed and work up to purchasing homes and goods and help build the economy. In addition, their responsibilities lie in being active in communities through services that will help build up and improve the area. An example would be habitat for humanity, volunteering at Boy and Girls clubs, donating to things such as DI, food bank donations, volunteering for public school services, speaking up for those who cannot do so themselves, etc. But you cannot make anyone do these things; you can only inspire. Barrack and Michelle are very inspirational in this way. But where people do not have the funds to pay federal taxes, they still have a responsibility. You know more about the actual numbers with the taxes and what would be required of those who are wealthy enough to fall within that bracket would have to pay. And your example is fascinating. Would you suggest a change in the requiring percentage? Again, I am not the expert. I am DEFINITELY open to a tax which would require less wealthy to pay a percentage of tax. I just think in the whole picture of America...too many are struggling to say that we should cut taxes for everyone, but also cut essential government programs that help not only men and women but children...and it is definitely the low income families with children that concern me. Cut the programs that do not work, improve programs that need improvement? Definitely! Such as "No child left Behind"--great idea, but wasn't executed correctly. But--this is directed at Newt--we need food stamps, we need educational grants, we need programs that help educate and feed America. I can't stand the thought of hungry children, and I am sure there are improvements that could be made to WIC or food stamp programs...none are perfect I am sure, but it is important we provide basics to families who cannot manage it themselves. How can they imagine a future when they are just trying to make it through the day of hunger. Makes me sick. I am not saying "Let the rich take care of it." I am just saying that taxing the wealthy is a better way to help with the debt we are in than taking food off of low income family's dinner table. (That might sound like an extreme analogy, but it is kinda how I see it). In a different time when we had no debt, I would agree about not taxing anyone. But obviously that is not the time we are in.
As far as that law (what is the name? Like Pippa or something? I can't remember), but the one that supports non-pirating (mentioned in your comment)... I am against that law. I am with Obama on that one. According to Bryson, who knows more about the internet than I do, he said it would affect everything...not just music and movies...but blogs and everything. That is unconstitutional. But I am against pirating music and movies, don't get me wrong. It is interesting to note that Google was a supporter of Obama's campaign, but as you deem the "flip-flops" in Romney's record a part of politics, I am forced to shrug this one off. Maybe if I was in support of the law, I would be more concerned with why Obama was against it. It totally stinks that more money might win the candidacy and or presidency for a campaign. I wish it didn't cost money. :) Then we could have a fair fight. Kinda like a campaign in a school for student body president. Although, usually the wealthy kids passed out candy and soda and cool stuff to secure their win, so maybe that is not the best analogy.
In addition, have you read this? CLICK HERE
I probably missed something, but I gotta run. Feel free to keep the conversation going! :)
I have to preface my response to you, Brian, with saying that I am typing fast and have little time to respond, so ignore typos and poor grammar. :) (If you would like to read Brian's comments click here).
Where to start!? I think we agree on more than I thought, however--or else you were trying to butter me up. :) I realize that SS is in trouble, but I don't think it is at all fair to say that "we" as in people our age, or younger,"have time" to prepare for retirement. Many people our age have no other means to prepare. They live paycheck to paycheck and many would LOVE to prepare, but have very little means to do so. Yet they aren't expecting a government hand out. They just work and work and most likely will have to work until they are too old to do so. I think many people we know will be fine, but I am more concerned about the "blue collar" folks, if you will. My family comes from a long line of hard workers, but unfortunately that didn't translate into having lots of extra money for retirement. My Great Grandpa was a janitor, my Grandpa was a mechanic, etc. On my other side we have farmers and musicians, teachers, etc. I don't know the answer...that is a bit above my head, but thank goodness I am not the one elected to deal with it. :) I can however choose someone I trust, whom I believe looks out for people who will be dependent on SS in their old age. I don't know what more to say on this topic. But I think we agree it has been an important government program that many fought against and thought it would turn our country into a socialist country...wait, this sounds familiar. Healthcare? :) I think healthcare can be another essential program that will take care of so many families who work really hard but somehow cannot afford insurance. I know way too many my own age who don't have insurance and can't afford it. So I think there are MILLIONS if I, here in UT know so many who seek an alternative to our over priced health care. We are the most expensive Health Care in the world! And yet we are at the top of the list in the world for having one of the largest amounts of low income households.
Sorry, I don't know how I got on health care. Are you still reading? :)
Next topic: the "flip-flopping"
I do believe that elected officials who change their votes based on the people they work for are very respectable. However, can you honestly say that is the reason Romney has changed his career long views within recent years? I think it was purely on a selfish part of wanted to be elected Rep candidate. But there is no way to know that for sure. It is irrelevant to me, why he changed his vote on some issues, as long as he can prove he has a backbone for the REAL issues.
More on Romeny:
In my view he is out of touch with the people. I try so hard to like him, and I think as a person, I like him. But politically I am not aligned with him on many topics. I think he demeans low income families, and he unknowingly says off hand remarks that are condescending to the working class. I am sure all of his comments (or at least most) were mistakes, and he regrets them, but they do give some insight into how out of touch (for lack of a better expression) he is with people making less than 6 figures a year.
TAXING the wealthy
As far as taxes and doing a "fair share," I think people making less than $250,000 (let's just say) still have a responsibility. They are responsible for being the working class...in which all of the economy would tumble without. So their responsibility is in a small spectrum, but still essential. They are to be employed and work up to purchasing homes and goods and help build the economy. In addition, their responsibilities lie in being active in communities through services that will help build up and improve the area. An example would be habitat for humanity, volunteering at Boy and Girls clubs, donating to things such as DI, food bank donations, volunteering for public school services, speaking up for those who cannot do so themselves, etc. But you cannot make anyone do these things; you can only inspire. Barrack and Michelle are very inspirational in this way. But where people do not have the funds to pay federal taxes, they still have a responsibility. You know more about the actual numbers with the taxes and what would be required of those who are wealthy enough to fall within that bracket would have to pay. And your example is fascinating. Would you suggest a change in the requiring percentage? Again, I am not the expert. I am DEFINITELY open to a tax which would require less wealthy to pay a percentage of tax. I just think in the whole picture of America...too many are struggling to say that we should cut taxes for everyone, but also cut essential government programs that help not only men and women but children...and it is definitely the low income families with children that concern me. Cut the programs that do not work, improve programs that need improvement? Definitely! Such as "No child left Behind"--great idea, but wasn't executed correctly. But--this is directed at Newt--we need food stamps, we need educational grants, we need programs that help educate and feed America. I can't stand the thought of hungry children, and I am sure there are improvements that could be made to WIC or food stamp programs...none are perfect I am sure, but it is important we provide basics to families who cannot manage it themselves. How can they imagine a future when they are just trying to make it through the day of hunger. Makes me sick. I am not saying "Let the rich take care of it." I am just saying that taxing the wealthy is a better way to help with the debt we are in than taking food off of low income family's dinner table. (That might sound like an extreme analogy, but it is kinda how I see it). In a different time when we had no debt, I would agree about not taxing anyone. But obviously that is not the time we are in.
As far as that law (what is the name? Like Pippa or something? I can't remember), but the one that supports non-pirating (mentioned in your comment)... I am against that law. I am with Obama on that one. According to Bryson, who knows more about the internet than I do, he said it would affect everything...not just music and movies...but blogs and everything. That is unconstitutional. But I am against pirating music and movies, don't get me wrong. It is interesting to note that Google was a supporter of Obama's campaign, but as you deem the "flip-flops" in Romney's record a part of politics, I am forced to shrug this one off. Maybe if I was in support of the law, I would be more concerned with why Obama was against it. It totally stinks that more money might win the candidacy and or presidency for a campaign. I wish it didn't cost money. :) Then we could have a fair fight. Kinda like a campaign in a school for student body president. Although, usually the wealthy kids passed out candy and soda and cool stuff to secure their win, so maybe that is not the best analogy.
In addition, have you read this? CLICK HERE
I probably missed something, but I gotta run. Feel free to keep the conversation going! :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)