tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10193821.post2318062868003131878..comments2023-12-21T01:45:16.323-05:00Comments on Bostonmaggie: A Liberal SupermajorityBostonMaggiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17298341600851300309noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10193821.post-53355247914292928362008-10-19T20:01:00.000-05:002008-10-19T20:01:00.000-05:00Damn, you're good. What an even-handed post after...Damn, you're good. What an even-handed post after my rant. I appreciate your graciousness.<BR/><BR/>I'd like to get started, but I'm just too tired. How about that? Something short and bittersweet from me...<BR/><BR/>Be well, wise one.Stella by Starlighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16385761338190877425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10193821.post-47309069128479048062008-10-18T20:46:00.000-05:002008-10-18T20:46:00.000-05:00It's not a great idea to have a super majority on ...It's not a great idea to have a super majority on either side.<BR/><BR/>I am not saying that this particular scenario would play out. You are correct that no one can know. But I beleive that friction adds to the process.<BR/><BR/>The statement on Bush cutting veteran's benefits being cut is incorrect.<BR/>http://www.factcheck.org/funding_for_veterans_up_27_but_democrats.html <BR/>the link discusses 1994 to 2005. There have increases every year since as well.<BR/><BR/>Deregulation in and of itself is not a solution or a problem. It's simply something that Republicans feel should be an option every where it will work. <BR/><BR/>The appeal to certain Obama voters did not mean you. I was speaking to people who are voting for Obama *soley* because they think it would be cool to vote for a black man, etc. If Obama, the man and his policies, appeals to you, then by all means you should vote for no one else. I was talking to those people for whom voting (unlike you and I) is nothing more than flipping a mental coin. I was talking to people who have not given enough thought to how Obama or McCain reflect their core beliefs. I am asking them to get past the fact that Obama is eloquent and exotic (as a candidate - young, minority, etc.) and look at the parts that I personally find disturbing.<BR/>**********************<BR/>I don't envy him: he will have a terrible job cleaning up Bush's bankruptcy, destruction of the U.S., and severe limitation of civil liberties, such as habeus corpus and FISA. <BR/>***********************<BR/>Bush did not cause our current economic woes. Perhaps he could have done more to stop it, but it started long ago and there are plenty of villians. The US is not destroyed. We are strong and vibrant and the greatest country in the world. My civil liberties are fine and I don't know of any rash of civil liberty violations in this Administration that could not be found in any Administration. There has been no suspension of habeus corpus for US citizens. If you are referring to GITMO, we will have to agree to disagree. They are enemy combatants and in my opinion, have no claim on American civil liberties.<BR/><BR/>It is very true that changing policies is like changing course at sea in an LHD. It takes a while to see the results. However, while I have my problems with NAFTA, I don't think it "impoverished" our nation. We are still adapting to the realities of globalization. But NAFTA or no, globalization is the future and we must go with it.<BR/>***********************<BR/>Maggie, I would like to finally have a president who can pronounce "nuclear," and not look down on education, another program he's cut. Testing increase does not provide education: it merely teaches children how to take tests. That's not learning.<BR/>**************************<BR/>I will gladly admit that everytime "W" mispronounces nuclear it is like fingernails on a chalkboard.<BR/>I don't know where you get the idea that Bush looks down on education. Because he had a different approach? Because the result wasn't perfect? No Child Left Behind may not have been the solution "W" hoped for but it was born of desire to solve problems that clearly exist in our education system. As far as cutting money - well more money is never going solve the problem. Time and again it's been proven that there is no correlation between how much money is spent per student and the quality of the education the child receives.<BR/>Testing is not learning but there has to be some way to have accountability. Until someone comes up with a better answer, testing it is. I know that when I was in school 30 years ago there was yearly testing and my school looked at it in a competitive manner as did the ity of Boston. We wanted a good showing. How is that different now? Why is it such a problem now? <BR/><BR/>For me the article was an illustration of why you would not want to further facilitate a Congress with a 10% approval ratingBostonMaggiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17298341600851300309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10193821.post-43672087791221495432008-10-18T20:41:00.000-05:002008-10-18T20:41:00.000-05:00OK, so I messed up. In editing my own comment for...OK, so I messed up. In editing my own comment for spelling errors, I deleted Stella's. I can't get it to come back, so I am reprinting it from the email blogger sent me.<BR/><BR/>So this is from Stella even thought it doesn't have here name or pic on it.<BR/>********************************<BR/>Maggie, since Murdoch bought the WSJ, a once great paper started leaning right. That's fine: I believe all journalism is slanted in one direction or another. However, this author is writing about a fantasy dystopia of the future. His emulation of Huxley is so obvious, I cannot take his accusations seriously.<BR/><BR/>Bush has significantly increased government size and spending: the federal payroll has 140,000 additional employees. Taxes have increased. Unemployment is at 7.7% in California (We have a Republican governor) and 6.6% nationwide.<BR/><BR/>During the Nixon Administration, unemployment was a 6.1%, and peaked at 7.5% during Reagan's Administration. Deregulation does not work. Although we were experiencing inflation during the Carter Administration, we had a booming economy during the Clinton, Johnson, and Kennedy Administrations.<BR/><BR/>The "change" in 1933, was the Depression Era into which Republican Hoover plunged us. Democrat FDR who saved the fiscal crisis of our nation. In 1965, despite his extreme escalation of the Viet Nam war with which I disagreed, LBJ signed more civil rights bills than any president in history.<BR/><BR/>LBJ made a horrific mistake in Viet Nam: however, he didn't cut, but increased, veterans' benefits. Bush cut them six years in a row, and you can find this information out at the GAO federal budget.<BR/><BR/>Will Obama be the same type of Democrat? I don't know. Either do you. This "writer's" entire article rests on supposition and fear tactics.<BR/><BR/>In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s. If activism fell out of favor in the 1970s, then why are so many people, including life-long moderate Republicans, voting Democrat?<BR/><BR/>The Bush Administration is responsible for this "horrifying scenario," as you term it. I am not a "crazy Obama supporter" thinking "it would be cool to vote for a black man." I admire his intellect, bearing, and warmth.<BR/><BR/>I don't envy him: he will have a terrible job cleaning up Bush's bankruptcy, destruction of the U.S., and severe limitation of civil liberties, such as habeus corpus and FISA. <BR/><BR/>Even McCain is against this Administration's use of torture, a position for which I greatly respect him. I recognize the difficulty between his balance of politics and conscience.<BR/><BR/>Conservatives will probably blame Obama's policies without realizing that policies take time to effect change. For at least the next two years, any difficulties this country experiences will be a proximate result of Bush's failed Administration.<BR/><BR/>Clinton signed NAFTA into law in 1999, with a Republican Congress in place. American did not discover how an increasing global economy would impoverish our nation due to many, many jobs outsourced overseas. Bush even gave these companies tax cuts for outsourcing.<BR/><BR/>I expected Henry Waxman's name to come up, given his oversight of the financial misdoings of KBR, Halliburton, and Bechtel, among others. I am keenly aware of Waxman's excellent record: he is my Congressman.<BR/><BR/>Maggie, I would like to finally have a president who can pronounce "nuclear," and not look down on education, another program he's cut. Testing increase does not provide education: it merely teaches children how to take tests. That's not learning.<BR/><BR/>We are both guilty of name calling, and we are both wrong to do so. I have always been willing to listen to you, and I would appreciate the same courtesy from you to think about some of the perspectives I've shared with you today. I have learned much from your blog, even when I don't agree.<BR/><BR/>Let us not fight about this. I don't want to fight with you but present a different perspective. Rhetorically, this article is based on overt scare tactics. Nothing more.<BR/>*********************<BR/>Sorry for the confusion.BostonMaggiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17298341600851300309noreply@blogger.com