ConleyWorld » american president

Duties and Obligations

Andy — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 17:46:13 +0000

My son Thomas, First Class Boy Scout, has been working on his Citizenship of the Nation and Citizenship of the World merit badges. Last night, he struggled with the differences between the duties and obligations of a citizen. The merit badge books describe duties and obligations as derived from citizen rights. For example, the right to vote implies the citizen’s duty to vote and obligates them to become informed of the issues, candidates they are voting on. The nuance is not obvious with other examples, so it was a good conversation that we will continue.

I found it particularly timely as I stepped up to the voting booth this morning. It’s my duty to vote. I want to vote. My obligation to inform my choices based on research and my personal beliefs leaves me frustrated with my options. Do I vote based on who I think is electable? Do I vote for the candidate who most closely shares my beliefs? Are there any?

What are my topical political beliefs as a citizen? I haven’t changed much since the last time I posted on this.

The government still spends too much money.

There is no motivation for politicians to spend less. There must be a law requiring a balanced budget. We can not continue to spend more than we take in.

Make taxation simplified and equal.

50% of American’s still pay 100% of the taxes. A smaller number actually pays the majority of taxes. All employed citizens should pay taxes.
I don’t know if that means I’m in favor of a flat tax or something similar, but probably.

Make health care affordable, accessible.

How do you get there is really the problem. The government can’t require insurance. It’s not like requiring insurance if you own a car.
Costs need to drop. Reform malpractice litigation. Train doctors to acknowledge when they made mistakes and apologize. Some hospitals are doing this and their lawsuits have dropped.

Public education needs reforms.

From a purely business point of view, the return on investment isn’t there. To make us competitive again, we must find effective ways to educate our youth. Unfortunately, the trends are in shorter school years, less engagement with parents, less homework, more focus on passing standardized tests.

We need to actively pursue cheaper sources of energy.

Do not limit this to alternative energy sources. Tactically, we need alternative sources of fossil fuels which should mean opening things up in North America (Look at what’s happened in North Dakota as far as the economy if you question the value). Strategically (on the level of decades), alternative sources of energy make sense, but there’s no demand for it. If we’ve learned anything from the past 3 years, government investing here won’t create demand.

The government should have no say in defining marriage.

When I say that, I have friends who get mad at me for not supporting same-sex marriage. That’s not what I’m saying. To me, marriage is a union based on emotion, beliefs and lifestyles. The government has no right to dictate any of this.
The government should only legislate civil unions. That is a legal contract.
I support any loving couple who wants to get married.
I support any religious organization to practice their beliefs on this topic.

Something has to change with immigration.

Immigrants built this country. At our foundation, we are a melting pot and that’s what makes us strong. I’ve worked with a number of people who have come to America and worked hard to become a citizen. However, if someone can’t make the effort to legally become a citizen, I don’t want them here. They aren’t contributing to our nation, but creating a drain on government resources.

Ok, I don’t really offer any solutions, but that’s not my job. That’s what I pay elected officials to do. I just wish there were some qualified candidates I could trust to do what they were paid to do.

It’s an Obama Nation

Andy — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:36:02 +0000

Yesterday, I did the following tweet:

It’s an Obama Nation… That works no matter your point of view and on so many levels.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck

A friend called me on it with a reference to a post I made criticizing name calling and other negativities that came out of this election.

I still stand by that post. I’m not calling the President an abomination. I’m using the negative implication of “Obama Nation” in response to the worship and blind adoration taking place. Here are a couple of examples:

1) His staff said one of the first things he would do when entering office was close gitmo. Turns out that was more campaign rhetoric. Once elected, he backed off from that.

2) The inaugural fund for yesterday had a budget of $41m. When Bush spent the full budget 8 years ago, the media pounded him. Yesterday cost over $150m. What was the coverage? Isn’t this glorious?

A fellow twitter of mine pointed out an article on Media Matters that states this is an apples to oranges comparison. They suggest the Bush number’s don’t represent the cost of security and other items and if those were added, they would be similar. I’m adding a link here for transparency, but I have an issue with it. There seems no more evidence on that article than to the contrary. The article even states organizations such as MSNBC is reporting the ~$150m number.

Obviously, there has to be security for the inauguration day activities and I wouldn’t possibly believe they shouldn’t occur, but here are the facts:

The inauguration activities still cost more than was budgeted
Bush was reemed in the press for spending within the budget (max amount) during a time of war
No one is being critical of Obama spending over the budget amount during a time of war AND economic crisis
While there needed to be a celebration, did they really need 11 balls?

Overall, this is a bad example to set when the nation needs to learn how to be fiscally responsible.

3) The hollywood nitwits put out videos like this:

Now they are going to start doing those things? They need a president they voted for before they act like responsible, engaged citizens? And they are proud of that?

Yes, I still stand by that post.

Notice to All Employees

Andy — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 21:11:03 +0000

Sent from a friend…

Notice to All Employees

As of November 5, 2008, when Obama is officially elected into office, our company will install a few new policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:

1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales commissions into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you. This will serve to give those of you who are underachieving a ‘fair shake.’

2. All hourly employees will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally amongst yourselves. This will help those who are ‘too busy for overtime’ to reap the rewards from those who have more spare time and can work extra hours.

3. All top management will now be referred to as ‘the government.’ We will not participate in this ‘pooling’ experience because the law doesn’t apply to us.

4. The ‘government’ will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging its workers to continue to work hard ‘for the good of all.’

5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it’s ‘good to spread the wealth..’ Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more ‘patriotic.’

6. The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks. Don’t feel bad though, because President Obama will give you ‘FREE’ healthcare, ‘FREE’ handouts, ‘FREE’ oil for heating your home, ‘FREE’ food stamps, and he’ll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can’t pay your mortgage. If you appeal directly to our democratic congress, you might even get a free flat screen TV and a coupon for free haircuts (shouldn’t all Americans be entitled to a flat screen TV and a nice looking hair?) !!! If for any reason you are not happy with the new policies, you may want to re-think your vote on November 4th.

A much more detailed argument

Andy — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:00:39 +0000

Let’s face it, there are people more articulate and with more time on their hands to focus on politics (well, you may question that if you follow me on twitter).

It’s no secret I’ll be voting for John McCain come Nov 4. He’s not a perfect match for the job and there are issues I have with him. To me, however, the comparison to Barrack Obama puts him ahead. Here are two articles that do a much better job and summarizing the issues I have with an Obama/Biden presidency.

CLOSING THE DEAL
A Roadmap for Campaign 2008’s Homestretch
By Guy Benson (www.guybensonshow.com) and Mary Katharine Ham (www.weeklystandard.com)
Editor and Contributor, Ed Morrissey

Biden Was Wrong On the Cold War
By Peter Wehner
ARTICLE
Wall Street Journal
Publication Date: September 4, 2008

Because you didn’t ask for it… here’s my opinion

Andy — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:14:35 +0000

People are posting all over why they are voting for the candidate they are. Mike Doel gives the reason for HIS post as a sort of reminder to his future self on why he is voting for Obama. That makes sense and inspired this update from me.

I’m voting for McCain. On the various issues, Obama and McCain are not that far apart. McCain is questionable as a Republican appearing conservative only when compared to Obama’s far left voting record and vocal supporters.

There is a lot of healing and political bridge building this country needs to undergo and McCain, closer to the middle of the 2 extreme ideologies, is better positioned to serve as catalyst. I’ve seen too much blame finding and finger pointing in Obama’s campaign to believe they are interested in pulling the country together. We need to start with the foundation that the last several years has given us a president and congress with the worse approval ratings ever. That represents both parties. Partisan politics needs to be put aside.

Government spending needs to be controlled. Just as citizens are suddenly waking up and realizing that they really do need to be responsible for their bad decisions and debt, so does the government need to be held responsible for living outside it’s means. The economy is critical. This isn’t McCain’s background, but neither is it Obama’s. Either candidate will surround himself with strong advisers and both have shown they’ll bring in experts from the field with practical experience. The difference comes down to their interpretation of the American dream. Obama seems to feel everyone is entitled to financial success and frequently discusses redistributing wealth through taxation. Obama says that 95% of Americans won’t see a tax increase and will probably see a tax decrease. The problem he ignores is that only about 50% of Americans actually pay taxes. The rest either pay nothing or get their money back in refunds. The people who fall into this category are the low/middle class. So, he’ll give them larger refunds to compensate for the social security tax coming out of their salaries. Now, we have the income tax paying for social security for 50% of the population and not covering government spending. That’s why he needs to raise taxes for the “larger” small businesses and most successful Americans. His plan will create a welfare state where half the population is dependent on the other half. McCain believes that people be given equal opportunity to work hard and build wealth and through this jobs are created and the economy improves. Are there problems with his plan? Sure. I look at it this way, however. If I got myself in so much debt that I was spending more than I made, I would stop all of my spending, build a budget that included paying off my debt that allowed me to live within my means. It would also account for taking care of my children and their education. McCain is ready to do this at the government level. Obama isn’t.

As far as healthcare goes, neither candidate has put forth a sustainable plan that really will make a difference. It’s a wash.

Energy independence will be critical for us and both McCain and Obama agree. Again, it’s on execution that they differ. Obama wants to be Kennedy and invest trillions into government programs to create alternative energy sources. While Kennedy did get to the moon, he started with a better economic footing and still wasted huge amounts in government contracts. Obama is also disingenuous on his talk of nuclear and domestic/offshore drilling. He wants to leap frog right into alternative energy with no plan on how to migrate there. Anyone in IT knows it’s easy to design a new system, but the work comes in how you sustain your current users and migrate them to the new platform. McCain is strong on the sustain and migrate plan, but, I agree, is weak on the longterm. He needs to strengthen his funding for alternative sources, but understands where the investments need to go to (domestic/offshore drilling, nuclear and clean coal for oil independence; nuclear, air, wind, solar, others for alternative fuel moving forward). McCain wants to setup multi-million $ prizes for corporations/individuals who come up with viable alternative energy solutions. I think this is good, will motivate Americans and draws on the competition that makes this country great, but it’s no where near enough.

Finally, and probably ultimately, it comes down to what I view as the judgment of the person running. First, let’s get a few things out of the way. Politicians lie. They all do. You can describe it as playing with the truth, but any distortion of the truth is a lie in my view. Campaigns do it and so do the politicians they back. If you don’t believe your candidate does, you are naive. So, that brings me back to the people. If you can’t believe what they tell you or really pay much attention to their voting record (a bill for medical support of late term failed abortions could contain something tacked on completely unrelated or be filled with other pork spending), you have to go by who they surround themselves with. I don’t believe Obama is a domestic terrorist, racist or slum lord, but he tends to surround himself with these people and only after being asked about them does he distance himself. A politician will meet all kinds of people. A person aspiring for the presidency (which he has for much longer then 2 years) should be more sensitive to who is around him. Obama doesn’t seem to care. That shows poor judgment to me. Who he has done business with in the past, who he has associated with, who he has worshiped with is indicative on who he will associate with in the future and allow to come close and influence him. That’s his business. But if he’s president, that’s my business, too.

Now, because Doug wants to rile me up and I’m argumentative by nature, I have a few comments on Mike’s reasons for voting for Obama:

1) Obama will invest more in renewable energy – I don’t disagree. Obama will throw lots and lots of money at renewable energy w/o cutting anything out of fear of taking away some special interest’s cash cow throwing us into even more astronomical debt. It’s a gambit that MIGHT work, but there’s no way to prove my case until after the fact.

2) He wants to teach the Republican Party a lesson and punish them for poor decisions/leadership. I don’t think picking a candidate that represents a party as guilty of poor decisions/leadership will teach anyone a lesson. I haven’t really sat down to classify my political party affiliation and probably won’t. There are issues I identify with various parties on. What Mike is forgetting is that these parties represent Americans. The politicians won’t understand, care about his point or learn from his “lesson”.

But, as he says, I don’t believe I will sway your vote or opinion. As I’ve said quite a few times on Twitter lately, he and I will have to agree to disagree. I respect everyone’s right to their opinion. I won’t tell you to vote for McCain because of my beliefs. I will only ask you to go out, do your own research. Check factcheck.org and other such sites. Read the propaganda from each candidate. While they are riddled with lies, there is truth on both sides. Don’t blindly believe what your campaign is telling you, their talking points or the mass media. There is truth out there, but no one is going to give it to you. You have to find it. Also, talk about your opinions and candidates. Not just with people who are voting the same as you, but with people on the other side. Debate with them. If your beliefs can’t hold up to a debate with your neighbor, blog post, twitter discussion, maybe you need to change them? Remember that the world is not black and white, but many shades of gray. Like I told my son this week, both Obama and McCain are good men. They ultimately want what’s best for our nation. It’s our responsibility as citizens to decide which has the background, fortitude and well-meaning to help us.

So, I’m simply going to ask you to go vote. Vote with your heart and with your head.

More Fairness in Politics and Blogging

Andy — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 17:20:28 +0000

Like I’ve said, character and honesty are critical for me in relating to a person. A reflection of who a person is is the people he surrounds himself with.

Senator Obama has stated his disdain for the prejudice comments by Reverend Wright and the terrorist actions of Bill Ayers. Obama didn’t do those things and as soon as the press let him know about the actions of these loose associations in his life, it took him less then a couple of months to distance himself and state his dislike for what they did (and that he was unaware of the hateful things they said/did).

I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. Why would a politician play with the truth?

Now, we have the Post reporting that Obama’s campaign reached out Franklin Raines for advice on the economy and mortgate industry. Further, we know that James Johnson was in charge of Obama’s VP selection team until there was too much criticism. Who cares, really, right? Oh, Raines and Johnson used to run FNME (Fannie Mae) during the periods when it was discovered that they artificially inflated their reported revenue, used suspect business practices in granting loans and other illegal activities. Both left FNME after receiving MILLIONS (like $50m in Raines’ case) in bonuses.

Further, there’s the protest of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to the UN. Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin were both invited. When Clinton found out Palin was coming, she pulled out. In order to remain party neutral, the group reached out to Biden and the Obama campaign to send someone else. They refused. The group then got pressure from other democrats to either disinvite Palin or cancel the rally. So, they disinvited her. What kind of crap is this? It’s more important to ensure Palin doesn’t attend than it is to protest Iran’s ruler?

Fairness in Politics and Blogging

Andy — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:11:28 +0000

There ain’t no such thing… Everyone is biased. It’s who we are, how we are made up. Other than claiming that McCain is too old to be President or votes too close to party lines, there has been little the liberal pundits and bloggers have been able to attack him on from a character perspective. Instead, they’ve focused on Governor Sarah Palin. Her religion is different than their’s, she wasn’t pregnant – she covered up for her daughter’s pregnancy, no, wait, she should stay home and take care of her family because her 17 yr old daughter is engaged and pregnant, her marriage is going to go to hell because she’s a working mother, she looks like Tina Fey, she’s a war monger, she’s a puppet, she’s a liar, she’s despicable, a sign of pure evil on the horizon. I’ve read all of these online by “professional” media and bloggers.

I’m not going to defend her today, there are enough people out there doing it themselves. But in case folks forget, it’s McCain running against Obama. Say what you want about his days being numbered, Matt Damon, but you’ve brought up the issue about character. Let’s look at Obama’s character:

Lied about his career in his book he authored on his life: http://sweetness-light.com/archive/did-obama-turn-down-a-wall-street-career
Lied about debating the issues with McCain anywhere: http://tr.im/u7 after McCain challenged him to 10 unscripted townhall debates http://tr.im/u8 Why is he afraid of a public discussion without a speech writer?
Lies about his “bipartisan” political record?
Why aren’t there lines of people coming out giving personal references based on direct experience with his character? Everything I hear is from people citing references to his books, resume or speeches. Where are the testimonials?
I won’t hold the actions or words of Pastor Wright or Bill Ayers against him, but he has no remorse or strong condemnation for what they have said or done. His only real rebuff is that he knows lots of people. Normally, that’s ok, but not for my president. Distancing himself isn’t enough. I want to know he hates what they have said and done.
He talks about charity and giving back, but has a poor personal record based on his income.

Character and honesty is important to me. I think Obama is not quite the saint that some (including himself) would like to paint him as. Normally, that’s ok. But this isn’t a job interview. This is for the Presidency of the United States of America. Sure, I want change. I want honesty from politicians and fairness in reporting.

Interesting Parrallel

Andy — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:21:02 +0000

I read the following in a customer review on Amazon for The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate. Now, I don’t want to come off as a right-wing nutjob. I’m really trying to spend time understanding how either candidate will be better for the country. Unfortunately, there are few unbiased discussions taking place, so I end up lurking in the trenches on both ends of the spectrum and usually needing a shower after.

So, back to the comment… one of the things that does concern me about Obama is that several of his plans have a ring of socialism about them. That’s a non-starter for me. So, does anyone have any information that shoots holes in the historical parrallels layed out below? I just don’t know enough here.

After reading the book I realized it is the kind of writing that people either ferociously agree with its message or hate the author for undermining someone whose qualifications make him worthy of being elected president of the most powerful nation on Earth.
I am not going to agree with either side. All I wish to express as a former Cuban exile, is that Barack Obama and Fidel Castro share many personality traits, ie:
Both were abandoned by their fathers at an early age.
Both are charming, elocuent lawyers that say exactly what people want to hear at the right time and place.
One never led the nation to suspect he was a communist at heart, the other doesnt mention the word socialism when in reality this is exactly what his agenda stands for.
Neither Obama nor Fidel ever held a real job either in government or in private enterprise for they think of themselves as demigods unworthy of soiling their hands when their destiny is much larger than their own realities.
Both were virtually unknown until they began to use the word “change” as their main political motto.
Both have egos as tall as the twin towers, yet they manage to present themselves humbly, one in soiled military fatigues and the other sweating and with an undone tie.
Both have the unique ability to distort truth and lies as if they were the same.
Both have the ability to hypnotize the ignorant and fool the wishful thinker and to divide a nation in classes, (divide and you shall win) In Fidel’s case he divided the rich against the poor, the illiterate against the educated and the black against the white.
In Obama’s case even if by omission, he’s de-facto dividing the races already.
Another resemblance between Obama and Fidel and one that shall never be forgotten is that the American media supported the “Twentieth Century Latin American Liberator” (Time Magazine) with the same degree of irresponsibility devoted to Barack Obama today.
And lastly I’ll use the words of Jorge Santayana to finish my case in point: “Those who can’t remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
And in the words of Sir Winston Churchill: “The inherent vice of Capitalism is the unequal distribution of blessings, the inherent vice of Socialism is the equal distribution of misery.
GOD SAVE AMERICA!
Signed: Andrew J. Rodriguez, Author of “Adios, Havana,” a memoir.

What I don’t understand about politics…

Andy — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:30:41 +0000

ok, I’m not going to go into EVERYTHING I don’t understand about politics, because there is so much I don’t know that I don’t know. I’m a generalizer… The voices agree that this isn’t the same thing as stereotyping. Stereotyping is not good and assumes there really are no exceptions. All cats are the same and completely unlike a dogs. I know there are some cats that are more like dogs than some dogs. But I’m simple and I need to generalize to be able to manage.

I’m a child of Cappra politics. I want Mr. Smith to go to Washington… I want to vote for the American President… I want Dave to come in and balance the budget and just applying common sense to government. But I’m an adult of modern America where one president sits on his ass letting the economy falter (dotcom, enron, etc) and have the next president take the fall; where America gets bombed, citizens on our own soil get murdered and years later we argue over the politics of oil and presidential mistakes in judgement.

So, here’s my random list of things I don’t understand about politics…

why do we have a political establishment that in all practical sense only allows the wealthy to run for office?
why do most bloggers or twitters fall to personal jabs in response to criticism of their candidates when we abhor our candidates doing such?
don’t people understand that neither extreme in parties would benefit this country? We aren’t red or blue, we are purple, right?
I’m thrilled that a black man is running for president, but isn’t the historic event more important if we don’t talk about race other than acknowledge it? I’d feel the same about a woman (and do about Gov Sarah Palin).
Aren’t elderly a protected group in America? Why is it right to criticize someone for being older then they are? The average age of presidents taking office is 55, right? good, bad or otherwise…
does anyone think someone ever gets into a political office without making compromises? Do they really think that changes as you become president? Whatever they say they stand for is mostly what they think you want to hear to get your vote.
Shouldn’t we judge based on experience? Why is picking a candidate any different from hiring a new employee?
why is it important how many houses someone owns or how many millions of dollars they paid for their home? Politicians at the presidential candidate level are so far removed from the lower-to-middle class they really can’t relate on a personal level, right? Why don’t people accept that and focus on real issues?
don’t people understand that in order for America to help wore-torn, impoverished, threatened nations, we need a strong military? Leaders of these countries or the thugs, mercenaries, terrorists killing people won’t respect us telling them to stop if we aren’t willing to back it up. if we don’t want to back it up, why do we care what happens there? They could care less about sanctions or embargos. and I’m not just talking the middle-east… I’m talking anywhere we scream out in outrage because of injustice or human sacrifice.
why don’t we learn how to better educate our children from the nations that are beating us (say Finland) and quit trying to fix things through more money or cutbacks?
why can’t people see that we need to cut our dependency on oil? But to do that, we still need oil until we have a solution? In short term, isn’t it more important to cut our dependency on middle-east oil? Alaska wants to drill… it’s why they were made a state. We have fields hundreds of miles off the coasts… why is this wrong? Why can’t we do both (research/drive alternative fuels while breaking our middle-east oil dependency while supporting US industry)?
why do people think it’s ok to come to this country illegally? Each year, thousands of people come to the US and become citizens legally after years of effort and hard work. Why is citizenship something we should give away like candy on the corner? Why is it ok to break the law and reward people who don’t even pay taxes?
why does the government care if two people get married? What do my religious beliefs have to do with their decision? How does that take anything away from me?

I really don’t think these are that complicated, but I’m sure I’m missing something. Pick a path, execute and commit.