2008 Elections. What I care about.

January 18, 2008 at 10:24 am (Politics thoughts)

With Super Tuesday looming on the horizon and the subsequent political events that will only snowball from there I think it’s about time for me to put out a nice juicy political post.

Politicians are panderers. If you haven’t discovered that yet you probably haven’t been around too long. I freely admit I haven’t been around too long, in fact the November elections will be just my third time voting for President of the United States.

In 1996 San Diego hosted the Republican national convention. I remember because I got a cool T-Shirt out of it. I also remember as a 16 year old actually taking an interest in politics for the first time. All that I knew then was that Bill Clinton was bad and that I should do all that I could to make sure he wasn’t elected president. Being 16 I couldn’t vote so instead I put a bumper sticker on my car that said “Dole*Kemp”.

They lost.

4 years later however a new face came onto the scene. The son of a former president, the former governor of the second most populated state and  a former owner of a professional baseball team. All these terrific qualities under one ten-gallon hat calling himself a “Christian” and I was hooked.

I say that to make it clear that even then, as a 20 year old, I had no idea what I actually cared about in electing my leader.

Now I do. And I have categorized what I care about in a convenient, easy to use top 8 list. 

Again politicians are panderers. They don’t care about anything except to say that they care about what you care about. So if I can cause a politician to care about what I care about then I’ll take him.

What I care about

1. Illegal Immigration.

Somehow or another this is constantly swept under the rug. All talk, no action. Not just from the executive branch but from the legislative as well. Why? Again, politicians are panderers. Whatever numbers they are looking at tell them that more people don’t want them to do anything about this crisis than do want them to do something about it. They are cowards. Something has to be done.

Maybe I am just more sensitive about this because I live near the border and I see stories like this all the time…

6 men executed in TJ 

And that story is nothing compared to the violence that Tijuana has endured this past week. If you are San Diegan and are unaware that this past week 3 Tijuana police officers were murdered in separate incidents, including one where his wife and young daughters were slain along with him, SHAME ON YOU.  It’s horrendous. It’s an outrage. And it’s on our doorstep. In fact it wouldn’t be so bold of a statement to say that it’s actually here.

I know, I know, most Mexicans aren’t drug dealers, corrupt cops or habitual drunk drivers bent on destroying America, but enough of them are that something must be done. And if you’ve demonstrated enough disrespect to violate our laws by taking up residency here than I don’t have enough respect for you to allow you any grace with regards to staying here.

And if you are “doing jobs Americans won’t do” then I say you  are stealing jobs from Americans.

Last night I had dinner with my Nana and she told me the story about how after 20 years of military service my Papaw started looking for a job. It was 1971 and there were no jobs available, he was “over qualified” as he had retired as a Sergeant Major. For two weeks he went and gathered unemployment. The next time he went in to get a check to feed his wife and 6 kids he said to them, “I will not receive any more unemployment; you give me a job.” They said “all we have available is a custodian job at the Poway post office. It pays 3 dollars an hour.” He said, “I’ll take it.”

Within a month the Poway post office received a reward for “cleanest post office in the county”.

In 4 months a clerk position became available and 20 years later he had retired. 20 years a Marine, 20 years at the Post Office.

There was no such a thing as a “job my Papaw wouldn’t do”. And in my eyes he defines what a true American ought to be.

2. The Economy.

Specifically a job for every single US citizen. See the above story for how to get that.

3. National Security.

Specifically that our country is strong enough to withstand any and every attack on it’s sovereignty. See the above story for how to get that.

4. Judicial Integrity.

I want to know that the laws of my country are in line with the constitution and that they are being properly enforced.

5. Financial Freedom.

I want the government to stay out of my money as much as possible and let me decide how best to spend it.  I want to decided if health insurance is right for me. I don’t want you to give it to me and I sure as hell don’t want you to force it upon me. I want to suffer the consequences for my own bad investments. How else will I learn? If I made a bad home purchase I don’t want your help in bailing me out. If I made a good home purchase I don’t want to help somebody else out by having to pay a fee. Let me decide what to do with my money. Let me decide which “arts” I want to support.

6. Educational Fairness.

This holds the hand of the above. I don’t want to pay to educate children who are not my own in subjects that I don’t believe in. Please allow me to educate my children and raise them how I want to raise them with my own money in the best way I believe possible.  And I do not believe that “The Simpson’s Movie” should be part of their educational process.

7. Abortion.

Any society that makes a habit of punishing people for killing animals while at the same time finances the execution of infants is bound to harm itself if not completely destroy itself. This isn’t a matter of individual rights, it’s a matter of the value that we place on human life. In my opinion human life should matter more than anything else. While that may seem contradictory given the fact that my highest priority is illegal immigration I don’t believe it is. Why? Because I believe that illegal immigration doesn’t just harm our country but it harms the illegals as well. The more of them that leave their native lands the less likely it is that their lands will ever improve. Likewise the more American’s that we destroy before their first breath the less likely it is that our country will ever improve.

8. Honesty.

While there are many more topics that matter to me I think they can all be fixed with some good old fashion integrity. A leader that tells me frankly and truthfully what is going on in the country and in the country’s place in the world is what I want.

I don’t want a candidate of “change”, I want a candidate of “courage”. The courage to tell it like it is, no matter how bleak it is. I want a man whom I can trust. Someone who when he speaks, people listen.  Someone who isn’t concerned with his own financial gain or his own popularity. Someone who will be organized, efficient and unafraid to cut out the crap that is bogging down this country.

I have yet to see him emerge on the current political landscape. If you see him, let me know.

Advertisements

33 Comments

  1. Former Multiple FFL Champ said,

    Sadly, if he or she is out there, I doubt if they would get elected.

  2. Need a Business Loan? said,

    Ok…I am finally going to step out and make a post. I think you are so right on in this post it is scary. My Dole-Kemp Bumper Sticker is still on my closet mirror in the room I grew up in.

    All your points are spot on except for the fact at the end there isn’t a candidate you listed as the one that fits that mold. Who do you think is the most like what you described. You jumped a little bit across party lines so are you asking for an indepeendent to run. I hear that the new mayor of New York City is still thinking about it. Throw out a name and see how it sticks around here.

    By the way GO Bolts. Can’t believe the stuff I hear on TV and Radio.

  3. danielbalc said,

    It’s true, there isn’t a candidate that fits my description. Yet.

    But I beleive the more people who have the same priorities and who vocalize those priorities that more likely we are to be able to find a candidate who will pander to us enough to deserve a vote.

    Most of my points are conservative enough that they can be espoused by a Republican candidate.

    I can’t see any Democrat running against abortion or for financial freedom, but who knows?

  4. amyleesspace said,

    Need a Business loan?? are you ted 😉

  5. Echo_ohcE said,

    Illegal immigrants = slave class.

  6. Albino Hayford said,

    Good post. Years ago we had some conservative democrats down here in Texas, sadly, those years are long gone. I wish the democrats wanted my vote. Obama says a lot of good things about no red states and no blue states, even praising Ronald Reagan, but his platform is straight liberal (to the left of Hillary).

    Although I agree with you in principle on immigration, the issue is much more complicated. Big business fights hard to block any reform, because they depend on cheap labor, and those guys are republicans.

    You also have to make some allowance for the children of illegal immigrants who have grown up in the States, speak fluent English, and have no connection with Mexico. To deport them would make no sense. I’ve also seen 80-year-old grandparents deported, whose children and grandchildren have become productive ciitizens, and, in some cases, marines fighting fighting in Iraq.

    Very difficult problem that needs exceptions.

  7. Albino Hayford said,

    Fun to hear Bob’s story. He was a great guy (whipped me in hearts on a regular basis).

  8. danielbalc said,

    Illegal immigrants = slave class.

    So true and it’s going to take a leader who’s unafraid to say it to do something about it.

    Albino, I understand your complications and propose several resolutions.
    Namely, EXTREME fines for corporations caught using illegal immigrants. When I say “corporations” I mean going past these little rinky dink independent companies like the Oceanside fence makers and going after industries such as the restaurant business. It’s no exaggeration to say that every restaurant From Chilli’s to Taco Bell to McDonalds to Ruth’s Chris is employing illegals in their kitchens. Sure they have “social security cards” but only a fool would pretend like those meant anything. I say you punish the companies without allowing them to plead ignorance. Put the burden of proof onto the employer. Require them to certify their immigration status or else.

    (I know it’s not just the restaurant industry but retail, manufacturing and production companies that are guilty of this as well, and they all need to be stopped).

    Now again I recognize that no politician will do this because it’s those big companies that are financing their campaigns, but it has to be done.

    I also think that Military service should be a fast track to US citizenship. While that borders on amnesty I think the opportunity to EARN citizenship is something that should be granted to any who want it. I can think of no better way to earn citizenship than through the hard work of military service.

    Another track to citizenship should be English proficiency. In other words those kids you talked about who were brought here illegally but can speak English fluently now have an advantage towards earning citizenship (all they need to do now is serve 4 years in the military).

    There are other ideas but it starts with cutting off their money. If they can’t earn any money here they will stop coming. You don’t even need big walls and tough security to keep them out. Stop paying them and they will stop coming.

  9. Former Multiple FFL Champ said,

    This isn’t really related to this post but I thought you and your readers might be interested in this…then again maybe it is.

    http://www.globalincidentmap.com/home.php

  10. danielbalc said,

    So the Dems had a debate last night, which I was unable to watch because I was busy buying underwear at Wal Mart. And let me just say, inflation is killing me. The cheapest underwear available was 10 dollars for 4 pair. What a rip off.

    Anyways I decided to try and read about it in this mornings paper to see if any of the candidates cared about what I care about. That’s what this post is all about after all.

    Well instead of giving me any idea about the candidates beliefs this is what I got…
    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20080121-1904-democrats-debate.html

    You can waste your time reading it but you won’t find a single policy idea in the whole article. All you will find is that Obama and Clinton were mean to each other.

    I don’t know what upsets me more, that all the press mentions is their little sniveling fights or that their little fights were the only thing worth writing about.

    Well it’ll take some time but I’m going to try and read through the transcript cross referencing what they have to say with what I care about. I’ll let you know if any of them deserve my vote based on the criteria I stated above.

  11. danielbalc said,

    Surprise! Clinton just disqualified herself from my vote. I said that I care about financial freedom. I said that I want to suffer the consequences of my own bad investments so that I can learn from them.

    Here is what she says…

    BLITZER: Senator Clinton, your proposal calls for a five- year moratorium on interest rates, 90-day moratorium on foreclosure, five year keeping those interest rates the same. Alan Greenspan suggested that we simply have to let this housing crisis exhaust itself. Trying to prevent the housing markets from going down merely prolongs the agony.

    Does your plan, as he would seem to be suggesting, prolong the agony?

    CLINTON: No. I think it helps to mitigate the agony. I mean, what I hear as I go in and out of people’s homes and talk to so many who have already lost their homes, they’re in foreclosure, they see these interest rates that are about to go up and they know they can’t pay them, is that we take action now.

    I’ve been calling for action since last March. When I first started calling for it, a lot of the same economists who now say don’t do anything about it said, well, it won’t be that bad. We’ll be able to weather the crisis.

    Well, the fact is, the mortgage crisis is not only destroying the dreams of Americans for home ownership, it is having a ripple effect across the world. So my moratorium for 90 days is a work-out. It’s not a bailout. I want people to be able to see whether they can stay in their homes paying a rate that is affordable for them.

    And the interest rate freeze is I think merited, because look at what’s happening — if you’re a big bank that helped get us into this mess, you go borrow money from Abu Dhabi or somewhere. If you’re a homeowner who has been at the bottom of this incredible scheme that was established, you’re left holding the bag and you don’t have the house anymore.

    BLITZER: Thank you, Senator.

    CLINTON: So I just disagree with those who say don’t try to do anything to help the people who need the help right now.

  12. danielbalc said,

    I strongly disagree with Clinton on this. “Helping people out” of bad financial decisions shouldn’t be the responsibility of the federal government.

    I would have tolerated, “making it easier for them to help themselves out”. Like a proposal that gives them a break in property taxes. But that is a local government issue and again, should not fall on the federal government. The federal government can ease up on the income tax of those trapped in rising sub-prime mortgages. Heck this might already be the case, I don’t know because I don’t have a mortgage.

    What about giving borrowers a break in social security tax? After all if they’re buying a home (the point of a mortgage) shouldn’t that be equated to a retirement investment? and if they are investing in retirement why should the government be planning their retirement for them?

    again I am not an economist at all, and quite frankly I am not that great at finances, but this just seems to make sense to me.

  13. danielbalc said,

    Edwards lost my vote because I happen to care about national Security and I believe that a permanent military base in Iraq is key element to maintaining national security. Why? because the biggest threat to nation security is Islamic Terrorism and the Middle East happens to be a region ripe for cultivating Islamic terrorism. Do the math.

    If the biggest threat to national security is Islamic terrorism,
    and the Middle East is where most Islamic terrorism is encouraged, financed and trained for.
    Then should we want our military troops to be in that region?

    John Edwards?

    And I have said in the first year that I am president, I will have all combat troops out of Iraq. All combat missions will end in Iraq, and there will be no permanent military bases in Iraq.

    Hillary Clinton?

    We should not be planning permanent bases and long-term troop commitments.

    Obama wasn’t clear enough in his quotes for me to tell if he would maintain a permanent base in Iraq.

  14. Echo_ohcE said,

    Daniel,

    While I don’t think the fed should be in the business of debt relief either, nonetheless, drastically increasing defaults on loans and home foreclosures leads to a recession. People have made bad decisions, and they should suffer the consequences, but I don’t want to suffer with them.

    Obama wants to pull troops out of Iraq and end the war, but he’s smart enough to know that he doesn’t have all the facts, and won’t have all the facts until he’s president. He’s a sharp guy. He wouldn’t make a good president, but he’s a sharp guy at least.

    Anyway, the dems are arguing that our presence in Iraq is actually hurting national security. It’s not that they don’t care about national security.

    So the question is, does our presence in Iraq hamper or hurt national security? It’s actually not an easy question.

    On the one hand, you could argue that our presence there now is helping national security, because it is a flood gate holding back the Iranian juggernaut which would surely be unleashed the very day we pull out. Since it’s not in our interests to have a neo-Persian empire in the Middle East, therefore we should stay in Iraq.

    But a counter argument can be made. The Shia and Sunnis have been at war for a millennium and a half. Can they ever come to terms? No. They’re both going to keep fighting until someone wins out. So should we just continue to stand between them indefinitely? To what end? Their war hasn’t stopped since Muhammed died, except in some cases when some strong leader united them, and they rose up together against the West.

    So then, we could say, hey, let’s stop standing between them and let them kill each other. What do we care? At least they won’t be killing us for a while. And then one day, some strong leader will emerge and unite them, and we’ll have to fight them…again.

    Of course, there’s a counter argument to that too. The argument is only one word: oil. We need it. They’ve got it. A Middle East at peace is in our best interests.

    But maybe it’s time to let them fight it out. Maybe then the world will see and be horrified and vow to put an end to it. Who knows?

  15. Echo_ohcE said,

    By the way, Bush has been planning for a pull out by strengthening the Saudi military lately. He seems to be hoping to balance out the power in the region.

    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/DE9B2738-71B2-4ECD-8D82-DA527AFC2992.htm

    A divided balance between Sunni and Shia is apparently in our best interests, because united, they’re a serious threat to the world.

  16. danielbalc said,

    We call recession “suffering” but in actuality it’s more like “budgeting”. It’s about having to go without luxuries we were once accustomed to. Defaulting on a home loan is bad. No one likes it. But on a global perspective what we call “suffering” is pretty pathetic.

    I think that is why Greenspan recommends letting it work it’s way out. The reality is the past decade or so has been an unrealistic “lifestyle” as people’s property value increased 400% and they started buying jet ski’s because of it. This crashing back into reality may not be pleasant but it doesn’t have to be painful.

    As for Iraq I hear you about their civil war. But all you need to do is look north to the post-cold war Soviet Union and see how long and hard the process is. And that’s a place we didn’t even “shock and awe”. Eventually however democracy finds a reasonable balance. Radicals lose their influence. Rebels lose their interests. It just takes time.

    I was watching Air Force One the other night. The bad guys in that movie were disgruntled Russian separatists looking to release a rebel general. That movie was made about 7-8 years after the cold war had ended (1997). Here we are a decade later and we can’t understand why the Iraq war is still being fought? Why they haven’t completely embraced democracy yet? why it hasn’t solved every issue?

    I don’t buy the argument that leaving would make us safer. Persistence makes us safer. Resolve makes us safer.

  17. Former Multiple FFL Champ said,

    Here’s a question for you…Are we getting rebate checks because the polits care about us and the economy or is it because it’s an election year. Ok…dumb question.

  18. Echo_ohcE said,

    Well, I don’t know if our leaving would make us safer either. But let’s think about it. What makes us not safe? What makes us not safe is that people out there hate us and want to kill us. Why do they hate us and want to kill us? Just ask them, and they’ll tell you. They hate us because for years upon years we’ve treated the world as a big chessboard. Both the US and the UK have done this for a very long time. We seek to make the rest of the world our employees in order to become fat and rich. The world hates us for it.

    Go back to Afghanistan when the Taliban were fighting against the Soviets. What happened there? Well, we wanted the Soviets to lose. So we aided the Taliban, the mujaheddin. We gave them lots of weapons and such, particularly stinger missiles. With our help, they defeated the Soviets.

    It seems like they ought to be grateful for the help. But they weren’t. They resented the pro-American, pro-Western feelings that came about in their country as a result of our help. Being Muslims, they had something of a revival, a backlash against western influence. They began to paint us as using them like pawns, which we did, and they hated us for it. And they blamed their economic woes on us. They say that we used them to spank the Soviets. We used them to do our dirty work.

    And that’s when Muslims really began to see us that way and began to hate us so much that they wanted to kill us. This is what made Osama bin Ladin.

    You want to talk about persistence? Our country doesn’t have it. Talk about short attention spans and no patience or eye for the long term! Americans want everything to happen right now, immediately. Iraq should have been a booming economy overnight for most Americans, and when it wasn’t, they were appalled, beginning with the looting of the museums during the war. You can hope and wish that Americans would grow up and mature, but realistically, it’s not going to happen.

    But consider the Muslims. They don’t believe that man is made in the image of God. As such, human life means nothing to them. It isn’t precious, it isn’t valuable. These are people who throw parties when their children kill themselves by suicide/homicide bombing. These are people who will gladly sacrifice 20 Muslims to kill 3 Americans. These are people who dance in the streets when 9/11 took place. There is no remorse, there is no shame, there is no respect for human life, whether their own or that of others.

    If resolve and persistence eventually wins the day, then the Muslims are destined to win eventually. And they’ve been waiting for 1500 years already. They’re content to wait. They’ve got all the time in the world.

    When Iran and Iraq went to war, you’d be appalled to hear of the resolve of the Iranians. The Iraqis would come at them with tanks and well trained troops, and the Iranians would come at them in mass waves of humanity. Only those in the front even had a weapon. The ones in back had to wait till the guy in front of them got killed, and they’d pick up his weapon and begin shooting with it. What utter recklessness! That kind of courage, if you can call it that, is downright inspiring, and we simply don’t have that in our country.

    Our country is like a little child who is terrified at the idea of getting a shot. Talk of a recession sends them screaming in terror to their broker to get out of all their investments. A few soldiers and marines die, and they’re ready to cry uncle and get out. Stop the bloodshed! they cry. Nothing is worth suffering for! They are little children who’d rather get sick than get a shot, because the needle is so terrifying.

    In the Marines, part of the brain washing includes a quote by an old heroic Marine named Chesty Puller. His best friend was John Wayne, who admired him greatly and sought to emulate him in his movies. This is what he said, around the 50’s sometime: “Our Country won’t go on forever, if we stay soft as we are now. There won’t be any AMERICA because some foreign soldiery will invade us and take our women and breed a hardier race!”

    Like Israel who grew fat and sleek and forgot how they got there, forgetting the Lord their God, so too America has grown fat and soft, forgetting how they got here, namely through tremendous, heroic sacrifice. The days of heroic sacrifice from the American people has come and gone.

    But is there no hope to return? I suppose there is, but a lot is going to have to change. Movies like 300 are refreshing to many, because it positively portrays that Homeric ideal.

    But for our country to change, to become great again, people need to learn to sacrifice again. That would take more than a movie or two. It takes constant inundation.

    The Army has recently created a game for kids to play as a recruiting tool. It’s literally brilliant. It’s too late for the baby boomers. It’s too late for our generation X. But the next generation may rise up and make sacrifices, and perhaps the world will admire us again.

    And then America can finally usher in one world government and do away with war once and for all, defeating all our enemies, and usher in the age of Antichrist.

    Won’t that be nice?

    Of course you realize that to do away with war you have to do away with religion, from the liberal, “non-religious” perspective. After all, religion is the root cause of war in their eyes.

    John McCain has proposed a League of Democracies. It’s basically a UN replacement, but only our democratic allies will be members. In other words, Russia won’t be able to trump everything we want to do anymore. And if Russia wants to join the new UN, there will be conditions it will have to meet.

    Yup, these are exciting times to be sure.

  19. danielbalc said,

    Echo, I don’t know what to make of your comments.

    I agree in principle with nearly everything you’re saying, but i can’t tell if you’re just complaining or if you’re offering up a solution?

    Everything you’re saying tells me that we need some better, stronger, wiser, leadership (politically speaking).

    But politics is just a hobby for me. Not a job. And yet much of what you’re saying does fall upon me (and you) as our job. Because leadership isn’t just the job of politicians, but the job of Husbands, Fathers, and (in our case) Ministers.

    So might I suggest, don’t be satisfied to just complain about it. Do something about it.

  20. Echo_ohcE said,

    I’m only describing the situation.

    My hope is not in this world. So I have done something about it, I’ve dedicated my life to pointing people to the true hope in the age to come.

  21. Echo_ohcE said,

    I’m only describing the situation.

    My hope is not in this world. So I have done something about it, I’ve dedicated my life to pointing people to the true hope in the age to come.

  22. Albino Hayford said,

    Ok, I’ll step up. If nominated, I will serve as President of the United States.

  23. danielbalc said,

    5 PM tonight on CNN will be the republican debate.

    I hope the Guilliani doesn’t ruin it by showing up. That would be a huge waste of air time.

    I want to see Romney and McCain and Huckabee duke it out on the things I care about.

    Paul may be there but I have no interest in wasting a vote on someone who has no chance.

    Edwards lost my vote but now he’s withdrawn so he doesn’t matter.

    Clinton lost my vote in her last debate.

    Obama didn’t lose my vote yet but he certainly hasn’t earned it.

    I want Mccain, Romney or Huckabee to earn my vote. Tonight is their chance.

  24. danielbalc said,

    I’m working my way through the transcript of of the GOP debate from last night. was able to watch bits and pieces and I remembered this statement from Romney explaining how he dealt with health care in his state.

    In this country, you have today about 47 million people that don’t have health insurance. We went out and tried to find out why they don’t. We found out that about half of them could afford to buy insurance if it were reasonably priced. They could afford to buy it, but they weren’t buying it. it? If we get sick, we can go to the hospital and get care for free.”

    And we said: You know what? If somebody could afford insurance, they should either buy the insurance or pay their own way. They don’t have to buy insurance if they don’t want to, but pay their own way. But they shouldn’t be allowed to just show up at the hospital and say, somebody else should pay for me.

    And so we said: No more free riders. It was like bringing “workfare” to welfare. We said: If you can afford insurance, then either have the insurance or get a health savings account. Pay your own way, but no more free ride.

    And that was what the mandate did. It said, you have got to come with either the insurance or a health savings account or the like.

    I think it’s the conservative approach, to make sure that people who can afford care are getting it at their expense, not at the expense of the taxpayers and government. That I consider to be a step towards socialism.

    This is tough for me to buy into.

  25. danielbalc said,

    I just don’t recognize how his plan (which fines you if you don’t have health insurance) is any better than the Democrat plan.

    Here’s the heart of the problem with regards to health care…

    The medical industry bills the uninsured and the insurance companies differently.

    I don’t have health insurance. If I break my arm I go into the hospital they set it and bill me 2,000 (I’m making up numbers). For the same injury the hospital will bill the insurance company 8,000.

    Why?

    Because it can. Because the insurance company ultimately won’t PAY 8,000 they employ thousands of people to argue with the billers and to fight until the price gets to a middle ground like 4,000.

    Now just imagine a world where everyone has insurance. then what will the hospitals and doctor’s visits cost?

    Shudder the thought. The increase would be exponential.

    Now lets try a different plan. One where every time you visit a doctor or hospital you have to pay. And pay your own money.

    Would these places become less crowded?
    Would people stop telling their doctors “I need this drug I saw on TV”?
    Would doctors offices begin to lower their prices to compete for your business?

    The arguments is that our society would become less healthy in such a world because people wouldn’t put doctors visits high on their budget.

    I argue that will make us healthier! It will mean an overall less medicated society. It will mean people will discover the benefits of exercise and a healthy diet. Why?
    Simply survival of the fittest.

    The natural human instincts to survive and to be greedy and love money will lead them to the conclusion that the best way to save money while being healthy is to change their lifestyle.

    Presently they have an easy way out. It’s called medicine. There is a drug for everything that ails them. And since they have insurance they will go tell their doctor to give them that drug.

    Financing such a system will destroy our society.

  26. danielbalc said,

    And then there was this bizarre conversation that came about from McCain being asked if he would vote for his own bill.

    HOOK: Senator McCain, let me just take the issue to you, because you obviously have been very involved in it. During this campaign, you, like your rivals, have been putting the first priority, heaviest emphasis on border security. But your original immigration proposal back in 2006 was much broader and included a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants who were already here.

    What I’m wondering is — and you seem to be downplaying that part. At this point, if your original proposal came to a vote on the Senate floor, would you vote for it?

    MCCAIN: It won’t. It won’t. That’s why we went through the debate…

    HOOK: But if it did?

    MCCAIN: No, it would not, because we know what the situation is today. The people want the border secured first. And so to say that that would come to the floor of the Senate — it won’t. We went through various amendments which prevented that ever — that proposal.

    But, look, we’re all in agreement as to what we need to do. Everybody knows it. We can fight some more about it, about who wanted this or who wanted that. But the fact is, we all know the American people want the border secured first.

    MCCAIN: We will secure the borders first when I am president of the United States. I know how to do that. I come from a border state, where we know about building walls, and vehicle barriers, and sensors, and all of the things necessary.

    I will have the border state governors certify the borders are secured. And then we will move onto the other aspects of this issue, probably as importantly as tamper-proof biometric documents, which then, unless an employer hires someone with those documents, that employer will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And that will cause a lot of people to leave voluntarily.

    There’s 2 million people who are here who have committed crimes. They have to be rounded up and deported.

    And we’re all basically in agreement there are humanitarian situations. It varies with how long they’ve been here, et cetera, et cetera.

    We are all committed to carrying out the mandate of the American people, which is a national security issue, which is securing the borders. That was part of the original proposal, but the American people didn’t trust or have confidence in us that we would do it.

    So we now know we have to secure the borders first, and that is what needs to be done. That’s what I’ll do as president of the United States.

    COOPER: So I just want to confirm that you would not vote for your bill as it originally was?

    MCCAIN: My bill will not be voted on; it will not be voted on. I will sit and work with Democrats and Republicans and with all people. And we will have the principals securing the borders first.

    And then, if you want me to go through the description all over again, I would be glad to. We will secure the borders first. That’s the responsibility and the priority of the American people.

    While I’m glad that he says he wouldn’t sign his own bill (which was one of the worst EVER) I’m still very nervous that he has no real sense of what the American people want done with Illegal immigrants.

    This really is something that congress needs to address and fix and with congressmen like Tancredo and Hunter leading the way I think it can be fixed but not if the President is unwilling to fix it (ahem Bush) so I need a solemn promise from McCain to do what the American people want done in this situation and I am not getting that.

  27. danielbalc said,

    This bit sounds like Romney is preparing for the cold war all over again…

    COOPER: Governor Huckabee — excuse me — Governor Romney, your thoughts on Vladimir Putin?

    ROMNEY: Well, Putin is heading down the same road that we’ve seen authoritarian leaders in Russia and the former Soviet Union head down before, and it’s very troubling. You see a leader who wants to reestablish Russia as one of the great powers of the world, potentially a superpower, potentially the superpower.

    And he has — the evidence of that, of course, is his elimination of the free press, his terrorizing and imprisoning political prisoners, and unexplained murders that are occurring. It’s a — it’s another repressive regime, which he is overseeing. And the question is what do you in a circumstance like that and what it portends for the future of the world.

    What we have today in the world is four major, if you will, strategies at play. One, they’re the nations with the energy, like Russia. They’re trying to use energy as a way to take over the world.

    Then there’s China, which is saying we’re going to use communism, plus sort of a Wild West form of a free enterprise. We’re going to give nuclear weapons — or nuclear technology to the Iranians, we’re going to buy oil from the Sudanese. You’ve got China.

    Then you’ve got al Qaeda, which says we want to bring everybody down.

    And then finally there’s us, the only major power in the world that says we believe in free enterprise and freedom for the individual. And this great battle is going on right now, and it’s essential for us to strengthen other friends like ourselves, and to confront one by one these other strategies and help turn them towards modernity so that the world our kids inherent does not have to know war.

    Will there be war? Of course there will always be terrible events in the world. But let’s do everything in our power to keep war from occurring. Move these voices of moderation and having such strength in our own military that people never question our ability to respond.

    I don’t know anything at all about Mormon eschatology but if was shaped by dispensationalists during the 80’s (Like I’m sure Huckabee’s was) then I find comments like this to be very disturbing.

  28. danielbalc said,

    Best answer of the night came from Ron Paul…

    COOPER: Congressman Paul, what makes you capable of being a leader both on the economy and the military?

    PAUL: OK. The Constitution is very clear that the president is commander in chief of the military, but the president is not the commander in chief of the economy or of the people. And when we get reflection of conventional wisdom, but of a lot of lack of understanding of how the economy works.

    The president is not supposed to manage and run the economy. The people are supposed to do this. The government is supposed to give them sound money, low taxes, less regulation. The people are supposed to run it.

    But here, we’re assuming that the president is supposed to run the economy. We’re not supposed to manage. We’re not supposed to manage the people’s…

    COOPER: What role do you think the federal government should have — I mean, does the federal government in your opinion have a role in stimulating the economy?

    PAUL: Yes, by lower taxes and less regulation. They could do a whole lot by having sound money, where we don’t print the money out of thin air. That causes the business cycle. That causes your bubbles.

    We’re always dealing with the symptoms of the disease and never saying, “how did this come about?” You know, it comes about because we have a Federal Reserve that creates money and prints it out of thin air. There is a lot of malinvestment.

    That’s the most important thing to understand about the inflation of the monetary system, is the malinvestment. Then, later on, people suffer. You wipe out the middle class. But the evil of it all is the vehicle for financing wars that we shouldn’t be in and a welfare state that we shouldn’t be doing.

    So, yes, we have a role to play, but it’s a negative role. We want the people to be free. We don’t want to manage the people and tell them how to live. And we need a commander in chief.

    But the most important thing as a commander in chief is not moving troops around, as much as it is having a wise foreign policy that doesn’t get us involved in so many things that we get trapped in and we linger year after year. We’ve been doing this for so long.

    And I like President Bush’s argument that we have a humble foreign policy when he ran in 2000, and that we not be the policemen of the world.

  29. danielbalc said,

    I have decided who I will vote for in the primary on Tuesday.

    I will write a post on Monday explaining who it will be and why.

  30. Bruce S. said,

    Free burrito for the guy that picks your choice first?

    McCain.

    Burrito 1.

  31. danielbalc said,

    Sorry no deal. But I am interested as to why you think I may choose McCain.

    Do make sure to get in on the football prediction for your shot at the burrito.

  32. Bruce S. said,

    McCain’s negatives don’t outweigh Romney’s – a nice form of double-negative for you right there.

  33. 2008 Elections: What I care about. part 2 « Daniel’s Den said,

    […] 3, 2008 at 10:20 am (Politics thoughts) Way back in January I wrote a post about what I care about in this upcoming election. Well that election is in a few hours so here is the scorecard of my […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: