I'm sorry, but this is just getting nauseating to me. I won't lie, I was hopeful that there would be something substantive in this speech considering the graveness of the situation...NOPE! It ends up being more of the same: finger pointing, blaming the other side, millionaire this and corporate jet owner that. When does it end? President Obama mentions that it's going to take an effort from both sides (I'm glad he didn't use the word bipartisan because I would have regurgitated my dinner...but it's the same darn thing!), but how can he expect both sides to work if he is trying to discredit one side from the get go?
I would also like to cite a quote from his speech which I absolutely detested seeing: "I won't bore you with the details of every plan or proposal, but basically, the debate has centered around two different approaches." (Obama, 2011) (You can read the full transcript here)
There are two reasons why I can't stand seeing or hearing a line like this. The first is that it makes Americans look and feel stupid. It's like a parent telling a child that they wouldn't understand this because it is for adults only. The second reason - which I feel is more important - is that this automatically turns me off of what is going to be said because it will lack any substantive points. Please, President Obama, BORE US WITH THE DETAILS!!! I think we are all the more agitated because we are not being given any details with regards to anything going on in the government today. I want to know what is going on with my country! I want to know how you plan to reduce the debt ceiling and how you plan to cut spending. I would love for all of this to be itemized and placed in a document for public viewing so that those of us who are interested can actually take a look and make sure that the numbers equate to your planned savings. Not telling America is only going to increase tension against the government.
Case in point, the definition of Politics has now become smoke and mirrors. A candidate need only be able to speak in an intelligent and articulate manner and be able to put up an abundant amount of smoke and mirrors along their campaign trail to be elected into office. If you have the gift of gab, have a degree and some time in the military you are a lock for being elected into office. Sales experience will be considered a huge plus! I don't know how it was prior to me paying attention, but I can't recall one time where a president, senator, or governor has ever given a speech or presented a document outlining a plan or bill with complete detail: to include any hidden spending or earmarks, pork, etc.
I would also like to point out that President Obama used the word Republican(s) a total of nine times: all but one time being in a negative context. For someone who wants a joint effort in resolving our economic situation, this speech was definitely not a strong selling point. The one positive reference came with regards to former President Ronald Reagan. Is this to say that the last time a true bipartisan effort took place was over 20 years ago?! It does not surprise me. We pride ourselves on being the greatest country in the world, but we have done so much to tarnish our own reputation. If we have to look back 20 some odd years to find a quote from the late Ronald Reagan to support an argument today, that only tells me that our problems could have been fixed much sooner.
Here's another statement that I am getting tired of (probably more so than the word bipartisan): "Most Americans, regardless of political party, don't understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask corporate jet owners and oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don't get...Keep in mind that under a balanced approach, the 98% of Americans who make under $250,000 would see no tax increases at all. None. In fact, I want to extend the payroll tax cut for working families. What we're talking about under a balanced approach is asking Americans whose incomes have gone up the most over the last decade - millionaires and billionaires - to share in the sacrifice everyone else has to make." (Obama, 2011) (Full Transcript here)
There are a few reasons why I don't like this statement. The first is that - I will admit - businesses need to thrive in order to stimulate the economy. Sure, you can go ahead and tax the fat cats more if you want. What makes you think they are going to take a loss? If anything, that will lead them to lay off as many workers as it takes to ensure their pockets don't lose any depth in the process of increasing their taxes. Secondly, it's always nice to see that anyone making less than $250,000 per year will not be taxed anymore and that millionaires will get a tax increase, but what about everyone between $250,000 and $1 million? There are very many people who fall into that category, such as the majority of professional athletes, lawyers, doctors, small business owners, etc. Once again, this is just proof of how vague plans are described. The third reason is that this is the same thing President Obama stated 18 months before he was even elected and on the campaign trail. We have all heard this before. It may have been worded differently, but it is the same exact message. Attack the deep pockets and give more to the middle class.
I have been told that I come off as more conservative than liberal, but I would like to think that I try to approach things as neutral as possible. I don't agree with abortions, but I respect an individual's right to choose. I don't support same sex marriages, but I don't oppose their right to do so. I am firmly against supporting people who enter this country illegally, but I will root for someone goes through all the proper channels to become eligible for assistance. I do not believe that the government needs to be charged with the oversight of business and playing big brother by bailing them out. I believe in letting businesses fail. I believe in free enterprise. I believe that millionaires and billionaires do not need to be taxed any more than middle class and lower class members of society. In essence, all you are doing is penalizing them for succeeding in life. You are going to make people try to stay away from making $250,000 dollars because they know they will make more if they are at $249,999.99 instead. You're putting a price on the American dream. Make more so you can lose more. I am pretty sure America was not founded with that mentality, and yet, that is exactly what we all have to look forward to in life.
Targeting one group of people over another just makes no sense. Penalizing someone for succeeding in life is not going to improve the economy. Corporate jet owners EARNED the jets they fly in. They earned their 70,000 sq.ft. mansions, the 30 cars and 10 limos, the other 10 homes all around the world along with special accommodations to whichever hotels and resorts they frequently visit. This is how they choose to stimulate the economy. If you take their money, they will still find a way to make it: even if it means sending people home with a pink slip in hand.
There is one quote from President Obama's speech that I did agree with wholeheartedly: "The American people may have voted for divided government, but they didn't vote for a dysfunctional government." (Obama, 2011) (Full Transcript here)
Obama makes an excellent point here, but I would like you to look deeper into one part of this quote: divided government. I was thinking about using this as a topic for another entry, but I will go ahead and touch on it a little here. We look at the country today and think about the fact that we have eliminated segregation and discrimination (for the most part at least...) and have come together as a country. OK, I'll say that we are not seeing the degree of violence against minority populations as we did during the Civil Rights Era, but I will be the one to tell you that segregation is quite alive and well; no, I am not talking about segregation in racial terms.
Our country is politically segregated. We have drifted away from hate over one's color, sexual and/or religious preferences. Now we hate over an individual's political preference. Democrats hate Republicans, Republicans hate Democrats; the clearest way to see it is simply by turning on the news and listening to politicians. When President Obama speaks, he immediately points to the Republican party for the failure to create some plan of action. When Senator Boehner speaks, he blames Obama and his democratic constituents of the same fallacies. And so begins the trickle down effect. Now you see Tea Party activists on one end and Code Pink activists on the other end. I am sure there are other groups out there, but all they do is invoke hatred over one another's political beliefs rather than express the desire for the government to set aside their differences and create a solution that will benefit America in the long term.
Did it ever occur to you all that - quite possibly - everyone is wrong? You know what, I now know SHOULD BE the definition to the word bipartisan: Two opposing parties who, at all costs, vigorously work against each other to secure hopes for re-election while overlooking the interests of the citizens who voted them into office in the first place: resulting in the most chaotic economic collapse of all time. Let's think about it, by having two political parties that do not share the same interests it trickles down to society and results in people feuding over the same reasons. The result becomes a political civil war in which battles occur every 2 and 4 years to determine which party has supremacy. I am beginning to see why other countries are not so willing to adopt "democracy"; if we are the example, it doesn't look so pretty. Sure, we have rights...oh, wait...those are gradually being taken away from us too. What ever happened to lead by example?
I fail to see how America can improve if you have two opposing sides vowing to work against each other. You can want both parties to work together, President Obama, but you must first approach it on a neutral playing field. This speech sounds a lot like a quarterback who threw 5 interceptions in a critical game but blames the kicker for missing one field goal that could have won the game. No one in the government should be pointing the finger right now. They all need to look in the mirror and point. Blame yourselves. Stop trying to cater to the few and realize that everyone's livelihood is a stake. It's not just about rich people, the jet owners, middle class, low class. It's about 300 million Americans that want a solution to a problem that will affect them all.
No comments:
Post a Comment