Post #1: Due 9/16/2011
Presidential elections are always a fun and important part of studying American government. Read up on the upcoming presidential election and answer the following questions in your post. Please use complete paragraphs, cite your information and proof read BEFORE posting. I look forward to reading your first posts!
*What candidate running for president in 2012 are you the most excited about? Who are you the most frustrated or outraged by? Why?
The leading candidates' webpages are below. They could be helpful to you. However, I want your post to use media sources and not just the candidates' propaganda in your post.
*Michele Bachman (R)
http://www.michelebachmann.com/
*Jon Huntsman (R)
http://jon2012.com
*Barack Obama (D)
http://www.barackobama.com
*Ron Paul (R)
http://ronpaul2012.com/
*Rick Perry (R)
http://www.rickperry.org
*Mitt Romney (R)
http://mittromney.com
posted by M Aby @ 12:35 PM
31 Comments:
I am particularly interested to see how Jon Huntsman fares in the 2012 election. Jon Huntsman is perhaps the most intriguing candidate to arrive on the scene, not because of his similar views to the Republican party but because he challenges some of the beliefs and views that have come part and parcel to it. Specifically, Huntsman challenged traditional Republican beliefs regarding evolution and climate change (1). I contend that regardless of what traditions he goes against, any effort to institute change in American politics is positive. Traditional values like patriotism and love of freedom can be a rallying force, most Americans hold such values in high esteem. I believe that some traditions, particularly those attached to our politics, are unnecessary baggage that hinders the flexibility the United States needs to deal with the world. Granted, challenging the established traditions can do one of two things, weaken a candidate’s party support and can make them look like a radical and many Americans are uninterested in radicals because of their extreme beliefs. Huntsman seems to have found a middle ground in this. The questions he raised and beliefs he challenged are beliefs held by the majority of Republican party (1). Other nominees that have challenged tradition, like Ron Paul, have come up short because they challenged the ideologies of both parties. I believe that there is a certain point that challenging everyone and their beliefs makes a candidate unappealing. I also believe that Huntsman brings a wealth of foreign policy experience to the GOP particularly in the area of our major trading partner, China (2). I think that because of the position of the U.S. in the world, it is necessary to have a strong foreign policy despite the fact that the economy is the most significant concern of many Americans. Gary Schmitt commented that foreign policy was needed to withdraw troops from the Middle East, thus saving billions in expenditure (2). Is that not an economic benefit? In fact that is exactly Huntsman’s stance on foreign policy (2).
As far as candidates that I am frustrated with, and disappointed by, Michelle Bachman is at the top of my list. Actually I’m a little annoyed that she made it this far and continues to have support. My main issue lies in her statements that are either vastly blown out of proportion or flat out incorrect or misunderstood (3). Bachman is also a major proponent of continuing the War on Terror (4). I personally believe that continuing it is a waste of resources and effort. The more the U.S. pushes the ‘terrorists’ around the more discontent builds for the U.S. This in turn creates more instances of attacks of terror and prolongs the war and the financial drain associated with it. Another point that I find to be inadequate in Bachman’s campaign is here stance on ‘Obamacare’, stating that it will hurt jobs. Her claim of 800,000 job losses relates to less than .05% of the total jobs in America, and while it is true that those jobs would disappear, it seems to me like a reasonable trade-off for universal healthcare (3). On a side note, I find that Bachman’s ability to misunderstand and confuse facts is hilarious and really hurts her ability to be elected.
1.Why the Press Loves Jon Huntsman but Ignores Ron Paul
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/why-the-press-loves-jon-huntsman-but-ignores-ron-paul/243910/
2.Will Jon Huntsman's Foreign Policy Experience Even Matter for 2012?
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/06/21/will-jon-huntsmans-foreign-policy-experience-even-matter-for-2012
3.Fact-checking Michele Bachmann’s announcement speech and Sunday interviews
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-michele-bachmanns-announcement-speech-and-sunday-interviews/2011/06/27/AGMfj4nH_blog.html
There are an alarming number of candidates on the above list whose social policies and actions in office give me cause for outrage. For the sake of variety, I will not add to the assured number of posts explaining in great detail the atrocities of Michele Bachman’s campaign, but instead turn to Rick Perry, a candidate of an almost equal amount of insanity, though apparently beloved by his home state of Texas. To begin, his stance on climate change is a polar opposite from mine; firmly stating that much of the related science is a “contrived phony mess.” (1) This view represents to me not a well-constructed argument against halting climate change, which I could respectfully disagree with, but a childlike ignorance, hoping that a problem will cease to exist if he refuses to see it. His socially conservative view on same-sex marriage is consistent with many other candidates, and I consider it a valid, if misguided principle. (2) I do not approve of government interference in such a personal matter, however, which I believe has no bearing on the government, nor does it infringe on the rights of any other citizen. This adds to my tally of differing views with Rick Perry. Another interference with personal rights which Rick Perry and I disagree on is his support of the abolition of abortion. In accordance with this view, he is supporting a bill which will force women who are about to have an abortion to see, and have explained to them, an ultrasound of their unborn child.(3) The bill will also require women to have a consultation explaining the “procedure, its ricks, and the alternatives” which is expected to “devastate” the abortion industry.(4) A final note to be brought up here is Perry’s numerous instances of corruption, such as the instance in which he supported a bill requiring HPV vaccinations in schoolgirls. That vaccination was being manufactured at the time by a single company, who had given significant campaign contributions to Perry, in addition to his top aide having previous connections with the company.(5) I would be very hesitant in electing a candidate who has been rightfully accused of corruption multiple times, in addition to giving significantly lower income tax percentage to wealthy individuals then to the impoverished. I could list many more reasons why I heartily disagree with Perry, but the list would continue long into the night, and I would perhaps still be writing by the time this assignment would be due. (Instead of citing a specific source for that list, I will instead cite Wikipedia, which in turn has citations and links to all of the above information) (6)
I will preface the next paragraph with the statement that none of the candidates who have the potential for getting elected whet my whistle; however I will present my reasons for my support of Barack Obama for president in the upcoming election. Contrary to many in this class, I believe that the most important aspect of any candidate is their views on technology and space exploration. I believe that the most effective method to solve our world’s problems is through technology that does not yet exist. Historically, the exploration of space has led to great advances in technology elsewhere, potentially providing the basis for research into the betterment of third world countries and our own nation. In the future I see the advances in agriculture and life support needed to send humans to distant planets, and even to another star as proposed in a long term grant by DARPA, leading to contributions to the realm of more inexpensive production of food and safe drinking water. Barack Obama shares my views in the vital role space plays, in addition to understanding that it will cost money to support.(7) He also understands the need to support the private space industry in its infancy, which will not only produce jobs designing and building new ships, but will also perhaps give another united effort for a country to rally behind which is not purely a contrived war fighting the wrong nation. (8) Another issue which I take very seriously is the issue of global climate change. Obama has moved far in the direction of curbing emissions, by supporting the idea of a bill which would apply to the largest pollution producing factories reducing their output into the atmosphere. (9) He has also promoted a deal with automobile manufacturers which will require fuel economy to double to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. (10) Other reasons for my support of Obama are his socially liberal ideals, such as allowing U.S. aid to provide support for organizations in foreign countries that provide abortions or advise on them, his “evolving” view on same-sex marriage, and his efforts at ending our occupation in Iraq. (11)(12)(13)
(1) http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/17/nation/la-na-0818-perry-global-warming-20110818
(2) http://www.chron.com/default/article/Same-sex-marriage-ban-wins-OK-1933429.php
(3) http://www.lifenews.com/2011/05/20/texas-gov-rick-perry-signs-ultrasound-before-abortion-
bill/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lifenews%2F
newsfeed+%28LifeNews.com%29
(4) http://www.lifenews.com/2011/07/26/rick-perry-gets-a-grade-on-abortion-from-texas-pro-life-
groups/
(5) http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-perry-merck-campaign-cash-
20110913,0,3068787.story?track=lat-pick
(6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Perry#cite_note-lifenews1-66
(7) http://www.nasa.gov/news/media/trans/obama_ksc_trans.html
(8) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/science/space/16nasa.html
(9) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/01/science/earth/01epa.html
(10) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/29/obama-fuel-economy-deal_n_913341.html
(11) http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17898.html
(12) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/us/politics/19marriage.html?pagewanted=all
(13) http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/01/obama-formally-ends-iraq-war
First off, I'll mention that Blogger won't let me post my whole post in one comment... so two posts it is!
In the 2012 Presidential Race, I’m personally most excited about Mitt Romney. He is the only electable candidate, and he a has strong plan to create jobs, and take care of China among other things. Mitt Romney is also currently the only candidate in the running whose polling scores and growing substantially. According to the Gallup Positive Intensity Scores, he has improved greatly in the past few weeks. Since late August, his score increased from a mere 11 to a 16, the largest jump anyone has seen in a long time. He continues to close the gap with Rick Perry even further. Bachmann has seen a major decline in her score since August, standing currently at a 10. (1) Right now, the Gallup score’s are showing that Romney is gaining, Perry seems to be holding his ground, and that all other candidates, frankly, are falling behind.
Not only is Romney gaining in the polls, but he has recieved backing from Former Minnesota governor, Tim Pawlenty. Pawlenty said “[Romney] outlined a series of ideas to grow jobs and get this economy moving again in the United State of American... He is the most capable, most knowledgeable and most electable candidate in this race by far, and I’m honored to support him.” All throughout Romney’s campaign he has had an extreme focus on the economy and job creation, which has drawn a lot of attention from within the Republican party. Pawlenty’s endorsement may bring Romney to be the strongest candidate to solve the nation’s economic distresses. (2)
Romney’s commitment to creating jobs and his focus on the economy is what will bring him ahead in the polls. People feel especially vulnerable now because of the economy, and Romney is ready to swing in with the solution. He has laid out a plan to create 11.5 million jobs during his first term. “This is a business plan for the American economy,” said Romney. “If we want to create jobs we have to have the best business plan in the world.” Romney has promised that during his first day in office, he will take 10 actions to turn the economy around, and send a package of 5 bills to Congress requiring action within 30 days. This package, called the Day One, Job One Initiative, reduces the corporate income tax from 35 to 25 percent, which will induce a short-term growth through incentive hiring. About the plan, Romney commented, “It’s a practical plan to get America back to work. It’s also immediate. This isn’t something that’s going to take years to put into place.”
Romney also has a significant plan to take care of the China issue. China has been cheating us and Romney has a solution for this problem too. Romney commented, “I’ll clamp down on the cheaters, and China is the worst example of that. If they cheat, there is a price to pay... I don’t want a trade war, but I don’t want a trade surrender either.” (3) Order for sanctions on China is part of an economic plan that Romney has laid out. Obama’s administration has failed in regard to China, and Romney is going to create a fair trade relationship by holding China accountable. These plans for China are one thing that sets Romney apart from from his GOP competition.
Lastly, the candidate that most frustrates me is Rick Perry. Completely ignoring all of his claims for policy changes, he is completely unelectable. He makes extreme assumptions and rash actions about important situations. For example, he has called Social Security a “Ponzi Scheme.” Although I do agree that Social Security is currently a broken system, I think it was an extremely bad political move to refer to this program in such a way. Many people rely on Social Security and the fact that he plans to toss this program wrecks any hope a lot of people have for retiring. Secondly, I think his HPV policy is completely ridiculous. As Governor of Texas, he made an executive order that requires every teenage girl to get the HPV vaccine. (4) In reality, cervical cancer is not airborne nor can it be spread through and type of contact. People should have complete rights over their body as long as it does not endanger others. For many people in the world we live in, their body is the only thing they have control over. This mandate is simply ludicrous. Through his extreme actions, he has portrayed a picture for America that simply doesn’t say “President.” He is completely unelectable, and it will show in the polls next November.
(1) http://www.gallup.com/poll/149423/Perry-Leads-Romney-Gaining-GOP-Favorability.aspx
(2) http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/time-pawlenty-endorses-mitt-romney-for-gop-nomination/2011/09/12/gIQA11eiMK_story.html
(3) http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/romneys-job-plan-promises-11-5-million-jobs-in-first-term/
(4) http://swampland.time.com/2011/09/15/rick-perry-exclusive-the-gops-fiery-front-runner-on-his-rise-record-and-rhetoric/
President Obama has made a great deal of progress as president, even in the face of the economic depression and the War in Iraq. He is the best candidate to continue leading the United States of America. His position is one of his best assets as a president. Obama’s goal is to have “outstanding education within reach for every child" [1]. Obama has already been quite successful in his work to improve schools, especially those that have already fallen behind. For instance, Obama challenges underprivileged schools to turn themselves around rather than mandated government changes. In May 2011, the Obama Administration created the Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge to increase healthy competition between states based on their early education comprehensive plans [2]. States that apply can receive education grants specifically designed to help disadvantaged students. Research shows that a solid early education results in beneficial outcomes for the students through out their K-12 years and into college [2]. In addition to funding early education, Obama has successfully promoted the Educate to Innovate Program created to improve student’s science, technology, engineering, and mathematic skills [3]. Elements include a White House Science Fair for middle and high school students and National Lab Day. Furthermore, Obama and his administration are working with several companies, including Time-Warner Cable, Sesame Street, and Discovery Communications to spread the excitement of exploration and innovation [3]. This is just the start of Obama’s endeavor to have the “highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020” [4]. He has promised to continue these programs so that America strives to be among the top schooling systems. If Obama is reelected president, his goal is to improve and foster education for America’s next generation from preschool through college. I believe that President Obama has truly supported his campaign statement of the 2008 election, “yes we can” and will continue to do so if he is reelected [5].
On the other hand, Michele Bachmann, a member of the Republican Tea Party, is a ridiculous choice for a presidential candidate. A year ago, she was thought to be a prime Republican able to “ignite a crowd” [6]. Now, her is popularity has dropped to 4% [7]. I dislike the majority of Bachmann’s platform, especially her stand on education. Bachmann believes that it should be the parents, not federal government, who should be taking charge of their children’s education [8]. Contrary to her beliefs, the Constitution states that one of the goals of a government is to “promote the general welfare...to ourselves and our posterity” [9]. This belief in how education should be funded does not provide for the majority of Americans. It caters only members of the upper class with the money to pay for an education. If schools stop receiving federal funding, parents will have to take on the role to pay for teachers, textbooks, and technology to help their students thrive in school. Some low-income families now cannot even afford the basic costs of elementary school lunches and school supplies. Just apparel and supplies costs a typical K-12 family an average of $600 per year, which does not include field trip costs, instrument rental, and lab fees [10]. Thus, they cannot afford to have a proper education without sufficient government funding. If Bachmann were elected President of the United States, she would be harming the general welfare of America by under educating the future generations.
[1] http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues
[2] http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/obama-administration-announces-500-million-race-top-early-learning-challenge
[3] http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/education/educate-innovate
[4] http://www.whitehouse.gov/commencement [5] http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/05/16/president-obama-booker-t-washington-high-commencement-challenge-winners
[6] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/20/us/politics/20bachmann.html [7] http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/140754/republican-debate-a-crucial-turning-point-for-michele-bachmann/ [8] http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2011/09/05/bts-bachmann-education-dept.scetv?iref=allsearch [9] http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/preamble [10] http://www.startribune.com/business/yourmoney/127471783.html
I am most excited about President Barack Obama in the 2012 election. I agree with many of his ideals and policies. While he has not yet given actual support for legalizing gay marriage nationwide, Obama has made significant strides forward in the area of gay rights by repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell and deciding that the government will no longer legally support part of the Defense of Marriage Act (1). Although I would prefer a candidate who unequivocally supported gay marriage, Obama's views on gay rights are more favorable than the other frontrunners. Obama is also blamed by Republicans for the nation’s current economic difficulties, but the actions he has taken were the best things he could have done in a bad situation (2). The economy might be much worse if things had gone differently, and many of the economic problems Obama is blamed for started before he began his term. I also support Obama’s health care plan, because I believe as many people as possible should have access to health insurance in our nation, especially since we are currently behind many other Western nations in the area of health care (3). While Obama has not accomplished as much in his first term as I had hoped he would when he was elected, especially since the Democrats lost control of the House and the Republicans have the numbers to block things in the Senate, I have high hopes that his second term will be more productive.
The candidate I am the most frustrated by is Michele Bachmann. I am actually astonished that she is still considered a serious candidate, because she has repeatedly proven herself untrustworthy. Recently, she claimed that the HPV vaccine can lead to mental retardation, but there is no evidence that this is true (4). She has made several other claims during her campaign that have been proven to be untrue, both in the areas of basic American history and our government’s current policies (5). While I don’t expect to have a presidential candidate who has never told a lie, Bachmann has made so many inaccurate statements that I find it impossible to have any faith in her. Even the claim that she believed the things she said to be true at the time is no excuse, because if she expects to be president, she should expect to have to do her research. My disgust at Bachmann is not due only to her untruths, as I also oppose many of her policies. One of the top priorities she lists on her website is to “defend marriage,” meaning that she opposes gay marriage (6). I do not think the government should have the right to prevent the marriage of any people who love each other. Bachmann also has ties to a religious movement called Dominionism, which states that Christians have the divine duty to rule the world (7). This is a clear violation of the provision in the Constitution for the separation of church and state. Bachmann claims to be a constitutional conservative (6), but she has failed to understand or refused to acknowledge one of the Constitution’s most basic tenets. These are just a few of the reasons why the idea that Michele Bachmann might become president is actively frightening to me.
1. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/06/obama-to-ask-lgbt-community-for-2012-support-despite-his-evolving-stance-on-gay-marriage/#tp
2. http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/09/he-made-it-worse.html
3 .http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/health_insurance_and_managed_care/health_care_reform/index.html
4. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/us/politics/misstatements-shadow-bachmann-in-republican-presidential-race.html?ref=politics
5. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/leslie-marshall/2011/06/29/bachmanns-gaffes-and-lies-mean-shes-unfit-for-white-house
6. http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/
7. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/14/dominionism-michele-bachmann-and-rick-perry-s-dangerous-religious-bond.html
For this presidential campaign, quite frankly I'm still waiting for a candidate. There are far more bad candidates than okay ones, and there still isn't one I feel is a truly good candidate. Obama has not done anything resembling well in office, and of the wide range of Republicans I find it hard to support anyone. Currently, I am leaning towards Ron Paul as perhaps the best man for the office, despite the issues I have with some of his positions. The media is paying him little heed, and I doubt that he has the ability to stand out in a full field. Nevertheless, I like him best for president.
Ron Paul is essentially a libertarian in the Republican party. He firmly believes that the government should stay out of the lives of its people. Some of his positions, such as his noninterventionist foreign policy I find quite good. I rather like his immigrant attitude. He strikes as nice neutral ground, offering neither punishment nor reward for immigration. He seems to recognize the impossibility of truly solving the issue, but also has ideas that actually stand a chance of making a difference, however small, in the face of 12 million illegal immigrants(2). He is extremely suspicious of Homeland Security. I view this as good, but it is up for debate as to whether it is good or not. Then there is his other half. He is in favor of abolishing the Fed, restoring the country to the gold standard, and outlawing income tax, among other things(2). What this would do is impossible to accurately predict. However, I believe that Congress would sufficiently moderate his actions so that the more extreme reforms could not get passed. Is he a good presidential candidate? Maybe. In my mind, he certainly is better than the competition.
The candidate I dislike most strongly is Rick Perry. He currently holds the lead, but with the attacks he has been weathering, I can't see him maintaining it. The statements he has made about his positions either fail to set him out from a sizable body of would-be Republican presidents, have dubious veracity, or, in the case of Social Security, come down on both sides of the issue in a rather crippling fashion. He has been in the recently for calling Social Security a failure and a "Ponzi Scheme.(1)" He has also been in the news as of late for talking about how Social Security needs shoring up so it can continue.(1) The man who not so long ago was promising to tear Social Security down is now running as a man with intent to fix it? Methinks that his comment was judged too inflammatory, and that instead of backing down and looking bad he has decided to ignore it altogether... and look bad. I feel if he is going to make a radical statement, he should at least stand by it. It's almost as if his current position is solely dictated by what the public seems to want, and changes based on his perceptions of public desires.
I dislike Rick Perry for more reasons than his comments on Social Security, though. One of the things he touts about his track record is the economic boom going on in Texas right now. Texas is presently having an oil boom, and is getting basically all of its economic growth from that.(3) Further, if Romney's words during a recent debate are to be believed, his two predecessors as governor did a better job than he.(3) This would include George Bush. I sincerely doubt Perry has any useful insights as to how to jump-start the economy. Also worth a passing mention is the campaign donations made by Merck, a company that was greatly benefitted by a law Perry passed requiring teenaged girls to receive vaccinations for a cervical-cancer causing STD. When attacked for this by Michele Bachmann, Perry stated "If you're saying I can be bought for $5,000, I'm offended.(1)" Apparently it takes at least $30,000. That's how much Perry has received from Merck in the past 10 years(1). All in all, an extremely poor candidate.
(1) http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/12/fact-check-perry-debates-himself-on-social-security/
(2) http://www.ontheissues.org/ron_paul.htm
(3) http://www.economist.com/node/21528663
The candidate I am most excited about in the upcoming 2012 presidential election is Barack Obama. Although the incumbent is perhaps not the most spectacular candidate to endorse, the simple fact is I agree with most of his political views. Although his economics policies may not always be popular, I believe that big government spending—in the right areas—is the way to pull the nation out of this slump. With his “American Jobs Act” proposal, it seems that Obama has begun to campaign for re-election in 2012. With the speech’s refrain “pass this bill”, Obama is putting responsibility on the shoulders’ of those in congress; that way, if the bill is still not passed by elections, he can divert blame on the state of the economy [1]. In my opinion, this is a clever move, one which I truly hope will prompt significant change. On another note, for me, one of the most important issues is the state of the environment, and the need to develop clean sources of energy. This is an issue that Obama takes very seriously. For example, Obama administration put $90 billion dollars towards “clean energy” and even believes that climate change is a real issue [2]!
And with that, I’ll skillfully segue into the candidate I am most frustrated with: Rick Perry. Staying for a moment the climate change issue, Perry has stated that climate change scientists have “manipulated data” for money, and that many “are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change” [3]. Now, I don’t know what Perry means by “many,” but I do know that “between 1993 and 2003...not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused” [4]. In a 2008 gallup poll, around 97.5% of climatologists still agreed with the “consensus position” [4]. Not only are Perry’s remarks offensive, they are just plain false. I shudder to think of the policy Perry would have in office on climate change, effectively destroying the chance of cap-and-trade legislation. Another high profile faux pas that Perry engaged in was when as a governor of Texas, he tried to mandate that all school girls of a certain age take the HPV vaccine. While I agree with the premise, further research shows that the maker of the HPV vaccine, Merck, has donated over $30,000 to Perry’s campaign [5]. Perry has also offended many with his statement that Social Security is a “Ponzi scheme” [6]. As M.S. from The Economist explains, Social Security displays none of the key traits of a Ponzi scheme [7]. Another false statement. Although Social Security may need to be reformed to account for the influx in Baby Boomers reaching retirement age, Perry had no reason to resort to controversial statements, with the clear intent of inciting the irrational passions of the American public. Michele Bachman is doing a pretty good job of that on her own—I think many would agree that she doesn’t need any extra help.
[1]http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/09/obamas-jobs-speech
[2]http://www.whitehouse.gov/energy
[3]http://www.npr.org/2011/09/07/140071973/in-their-own-words-gop-candidates-and-science
[4]http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm
[5]http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/perry-has-deep-financial-ties-to-maker-of-hpv-vaccine/2011/09/13/gIQAVKKqPK_story.html
[6]http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rick-perry-mitt-romney-clash-on-social-security/2011/09/12/gIQAyyM9NK_story.html
[7]http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/09/social-security-0
I am most excited for republican candidate Ron Paul’s 2012 presidential campaign. I would say that I am most excited for this candidate due to his personal background, and how it influences his political standpoints. I would say that Ron Paul’s background as a doctor, and working in his own private practice, gives him a different insight into the healthcare system than a lot of people (1.) As someone whose family frequently deals with problems with insurance companies and Medicare, I fully support reforms in the healthcare system. Ron Paul advocates that a freer system will help to improve the healthcare system, and will therefore create maximum medical care and prosperity for everyone (2.) I also think that it will be interesting to see Ron Paul’s stance on immigration, and how others react to it. Ron Paul states that in order to help protect our country, we need to be stricter on border control, and in order to do that, we need to bring troops home from overseas to protect the border (3.) He also urges that in order to tempt illegal immigrants less, we need to end birthright citizenship so that illegal immigrants’ children born on our soil do not become legal citizens (1.)
My excitement for Ron Paul’s campaign carries over into my annoyance of Michele Bachmann’s campaign. Recent surveys have shown that Bachmann has an 85% recognition rate, proving that she reaches many republicans and republican leaning independents (4.) Thus, when she states that the HPV vaccination for young girls can cause mental retardation and that she met a woman whose daughter had this happen to her, Bachmann can thoroughly scare parents away from having their children protected by this vaccine (5.) Even though scientists and people from the medical community have made statements against Bachmann’s opinion, she continues to enforce her remark, and even some of her campaign advisers will admit that Bachmann lets her emotions get in the way of facts (6.) For those reasons I am excited for Ron Paul’s campaign, and quite annoyed by Michele Bachmann’s.
1. http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/economy/
2. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/14/ron-paul-on-debates-healthcare-moment/?iref=allsearch
3. http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Ron_Paul_Immigration.htm
4. http://www.gallup.com/poll/149252/Perry-Cain-Widen-Lead-Positive-Intensity-GOP-Field.aspx
5. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/14/michele-bachmann-hpv-vaccine
6. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/63659.html
Thanks God for America, apple pie, baseball and guns. What would we do without the land of the free, the home of the brave, the protector of liberty and the defender of democracy? However, America has lost its way. The current president has turned our land of righteousness into an obamintion. This is inexcusable, which is why I am almost peeing myself over the prospect of Michelle Bachmann as president. Except peeing oneself is un-American. So I won’t do it. Anyway, about the chief mama bear herself (yes, Palin coined the term, but she lives in Russia). Let’s focus first on Bachmann’s position in regards to job creation and growth. Bachmann firmly believes that Obama is wrong. Her policy on job creation is to do everything that Barack Obama did not do [1]. This pleases me immensely, as I believe that government should not exist, and Bachmann is promising me a step in that direction. Her calls to never raise the debt ceiling also bode well for the Queen of Minnesota [2], but I want to see her take it another step and eliminate all spending. Yes, government spending is infringing upon my God given rights to use my money how I want. Additionally, Bachmann has promised to bring the price of gas to under $2 when she is President [3]. Although she provides little insight into how she will do so, I know how she plans to do it: she will pray to God. That’s right ladies and gentlemen, the answer to all our problems lies with God. And Bachmann knows it. She has seen through the ACLU’s ploy to prevent religion in school [4], seen through the heathen like behavior of “the gays”[5] and calls out those who don’t fear God enough to prevent illegal immigration [6]. This is why Bachmann has me ready to throw an “Amurica” party: she knows that at heart this is a Christian nation, where rights are for men, women are to be submissive [7], church is to be attended regularly and the Revolutionary War started in New Hampshire [7].
This being said, the candidate that I am least excited about is obviously Barack Obama. The man can hardly hold his own at a game of basketball, let alone run the country [8]. Also, his foreign policy is clearly designed to radical extremists to infiltrate and take over the country. For example, he recently told Iran to “come clean” on their nuclear policy [9]. What?? My mother tells me to “come clean” about whether or not I did my homework. In my opinion the president needs to be exercising the military might that God gave this nation, not asking Iran nicely to comply with the IAEA, and also would they be so kind as to give us our hikers back [10]. I believe that Obama needs to be doing more to ensure the freedom of America by sending our troops to every nation that poses the slightest threat to our safety. Iran, North Korea, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, Libya, Egypt, China and Russia should be occupied in 40 days. That’s a lucky number in the Bible, so we would win, because God would be on our side.
Please note that this is not intended to offend. I apologize if it does. Please talk to me in person if you are offended. Thank you.
[1] http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/jobs/
[2] http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/debtceiling/
[3] http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/08/energy-prices
[4] http://minnesotaindependent.com/44946/bachmann-on-school-prayer-aclu
[5] http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/michele-bachmanns-top-ten-anti-gay-quotes/politics/2011/06/02/21233
[6] http://www.mmdnewswire.com/illegal-immigration-59702.html
[7] http://www.economist.com/node/21526349
[8] http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/11/barack_obama_basketball_badass.html
[9] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33016209/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/obama-warns-iran-come-clean-nukes/
[10] http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-30/politics/obama.iran.hikers_1_american-hikers-shane-bauer-sarah-shourd?_s=PM:POLITICS
Out of all the candidates, the one I am most excited about is without a doubt Obama. First off, we share a birthday (1). I agree with most of his directives and ideas, my favorite one being the Affordable Healthcare Act, or “Obamacare”. While much of the legislation does not take effect until 2014, there have already been increases in the amount of 18-24 year olds covered under health insurance (2), mostly due to the provision that young adults up to age 26 can stay on their parent’s health plans in the absence of an employer-offered plan. However, the big gains occur in 2014, when Medicaid expands to cover a much larger segment of the low-income population, and when Federal subsidies increase. This is the biggest issue in this election for me, and I want Obama to win for no other reason than to be able to get to Jan. 1st, 2014. The rising costs of healthcare have wiped out a decade of income increases (3). We are a 1st world country, and we deserve a 1st world healthcare system.
Another issue I support Obama on is his plan to reduce the deficit. Specifically, his plans to increase taxes on the wealthy (4). I am sick and tired of the Right’s blitzkrieg on any attempt to raise taxes. Taxes need to be increased if the government is going to stimulate the economy. Corporate tax loopholes and the Bush-era tax cuts need to be repealed. Both have failed, and are partially responsible for the mess we call an economy (5). What we need is a combination of austerity measures, tax increases, and economic stimulus, something Obama has put together in a clever piece of legislature called a “bill”. I just hope the Right will be able to recognize it for what it is, a way out of this downward economic spiral, instead of dismissing it as socialist propaganda, as they are so apt to do (6).
The candidate I am most amused about is Rick Perry, or as I like to refer to him as: Bush 2.0. He has it all; the West Texas accent, the down-to-earth attitude, and even the trademark Bush “Heh” (7) (watch the Youtube video, at around 0:41). This man represents everything that is wrong with the Republican Party. On one hand you have Obama, who graduated from Harvard Law School. On the other, you have Rick Perry, who got several D’s and F’s at Texas A&M, which isn’t remotely close to the rigor of an Ivy League institution, by anyone's standards (8). Aside from his dubious qualifications for President, his policies and political beliefs are abhorrent. He frequently claims Texas has the fastest rate of job creation in the U.S.. This is true, in fact, 40% of new jobs in the last year have been created in Texas. However, he conveniently leaves out the fact that a large percentage of these jobs are low-to-minimum wage jobs, and will almost certainly NOT lift people out of poverty. A particularly appalling statistic: about one in four children in Texas were in poverty (9). Is that what we want for America? It’s what we will get if Rick Perry is elected President. A despicable and feeble-minded person, and a worse candidate.
Sources
1. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
2. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/15/opinion/main20106631.shtml
3.http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/how-health-costs-wiped-out-a-full-decade-of-income-increases/2011/09/07/gIQAL8SJAK_blog.html
4.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/opinion/fixing-the-economy-a-good-jobs-program.html?scp=1&sq=tax%20increases&st=Search
5.http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-jobs-crisis-began-in-2001/2011/08/25/gIQAMK3eSK_blog.html
6.http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/obama-unlikely-to-put-social-security-cuts-back-on-the-table-sources-say/2011/09/14/gIQAsW9LTK_story.html
7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ354DksO64&feature=related
8.http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/15/1017164/-Rick-Perry,-Dumb-and-Proud-of-It?via=tag
9. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/15/texas-poverty-rick-perry-jobs
In the current state of the 2012 Presidential election I am the most excited about Michele Bachmann as a candidate. She is god’s gift to Obama. Michele Bachmann’s only real success as a candidate is in sheer media attention. While yes, media attention and public recognition are obviously important qualities in presidential candidates, generally some positive attention is also required to win the race. As it is, Michele Bachmann has been recently panicking over her loss of popularity to Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. This has caused her to say many things that have simply gotten her publicity. Her strong opposition against “government injections” to give the HPV vaccine to young girls based on the claim that it causes mental retardation has been sure to get her in the headlines. (1) However, I think these are not the kinds of statements Americans particularly care about in a time of great economic downturn while looking for a reasonable leader. While Michele Bachmann is swimming in a surplus of unverified, often offensive comments, she has a striking lack of legislative, executive, or business experience. (2) This is fantastic for Barack Obama and even the reasonable Republican candidates, because as we learned in the 2008 presidential election, credentials matter. Michele Bachmann is making enemies at every turn. A scientist at the U of M claimed she is creating a public health scare to benefit her career (3). She is exciting as a candidate not only because she adds drama to the presidential race, but she could be just what the doctor ordered to make swing voters and reasonable republicans forget about Obama's lack of economic success and bring him back to the office.
I am most frustrated by Barack Obama. He has spent too long clinging to the notion that some semblance of bipartisanship could be maintained throughout issues such as healthcare and the debt ceiling. He was setting himself up to look like he kept getting steamrolled by his opposition, especially in regards to the debt ceiling debate. It seems that he is turning to a better strategy, one where he actually maintains positions, for example his jobs initiative. (4) Right after that speech, Obama led Romney 49 to 45 percent. This is the direction he needs to head to stay competitive. He is a president in the worst recession in Americans’ memories, he needs to “stay strong” and be a candidate people can put their trust into. Obama is also finally changing his tune from “change you can believe in” to “democracy is hard and messy. Wait it out”. He is finally deciding to cut out the cute slogans and talk about the important issues. Americans don’t seem to be questioning his values or his motivations anymore, but they are questioning his ability to improve the economy. (5) I am frustrated because I think that with a more cooperative Congress, President Obama could have an effective second term, but his image and focus on the wrong issues are distracting his reelection campaign.
1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/republicans/8763183/US-election-2012-Michele-Bachmann-claims-vaccine-causes-retardation.html
2. http://www.dailylocal.com/articles/2011/07/02/opinion/srv0000012246142.txt
3. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shawn-lawrence-otto/michele-bachmann-hpv_b_964090.html
4. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-09-15/obama-picks-a-fight-to-define-2012-election-margaret-carlson.html
5. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-offers-2012-election-supporters-change-they-can-believe-in--next-term/2011/08/25/gIQAJz9AhJ_story.html
Although I am a Democrat, and continue to support Barack Obama, I am elated to see Jon Huntsman running for the Republican nomination. The initial reason for this excitement was that Huntsman is the only Republican candidate who isn’t a caricature. Unlike the vast field of ultra-conservative, Tea Party supporters representing the Republicans in politics right now, Huntsman is known as a more moderate alternative. He supports gays’ right to marry, believes in both global warming and evolution, and served as ambassador to China under President Obama. He has unique experiences that are not those of the typical Washington insider: he dropped out of high school to join a rock band, finishing school later; he understands Asia, having been a missionary in Taiwan, the ambassador to Singapore under President Bush Sr., and the ambassador to China under President Obama; and is a member of the Mormon church, a fairly nontraditional faith (1). Huntsman is a rational, cooperative man. While these seem like prerequisites to even consider running our nation, it could be argued that many of the other candidates do not display these qualities. However, Huntsman’s chances are probably not very high. His moderate stance and bipartisanship, which would serve him so well as a president, will likely repel the Republican voters who would prefer a staunchly uncooperative Conservative candidate (2). I hope that Huntsman finds a major position in politics, because he is qualified, and is legitimately interested in improving the country for all.
I am choosing not to write about Michele Bachmann, as I do not even consider her a legitimate candidate. She makes ignorant statements on a weekly basis, and cites facts too rarely to be considered a possible leader for the free world. Instead, I am most dismayed by Governor Rick Perry’s campaign for the nomination. He inappropriately led a prayer rally during his term as Governor, which makes me fear for the sanctity of the separation of Church and State if he were president (3). Perry has even publicly said that “anyone that doesn't accept Jesus as their savior is going to hell.” While he appears to a more extreme type of Republican, moderate Republicans like Meghan McCain think he is besmirching the image of the Republican party (4). Perry also has complete faith in Texas’ death penalty, which is known for the execution of innocent men, like Cameron Todd Willingham (5). The idea of Perry leading our country scares me, because it seems to me that he isn’t particularly concerned with the United States Constitution.
1. Profile: Jon Huntsman
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13847539
2. Jon Huntsman
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/primaries/candidates/jon-huntsman
3. Republican Candidates
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11802187
4. Rick Perry is George W. Bush 2.0
http://powerwall.msnbc.msn.com/politics/rick-perry-is-george-w-bush-20-1701591.story
5. Rick Perry on Death Penalty
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/07/rick-perry-death-penalty-gop-debate_n_953214.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
The 2012 presidential election is still over a year away, and yet the anticipation and controversy surrounding this monumental time for a nation dealing with many internal and external problems has already begun. The gauntlet has been thrown down, and people are beginning to pick sides in this debate.
Currently, no candidate sticks out to me as being the “savior” of our nation, but if I had to choose the candidate that I am most intrigued by it would be none other than President Barack Obama. I cannot deny the fact that the nation doesn’t view Democrats too favorably right now; however, President Obama is still far more popular than the other political parties despite his problems [1]. This illustrates the fact that Americans still genuinely like the president and have faith in him in guiding our nation. But wait, how can that be true when President Obama has a pretty low approval rating? That’s true, but it must be noted that polls show that Congress (which is primarily Republican run) has even worse approval ratings [2]. The President’s image has been quite negative lately, but this has a lot to do with a Congress who is so bipartisan that nothing can be accomplished, so it reflects badly on him. People are trying to be so righteous, but are simply pigheaded resulting in nothing being accomplished. Under no circumstance, can the full blame be laid upon the President’s shoulders. To his credit, Obama has had some pretty monumental events happen under his leadership. A couple of these include: the killing of Osama Bin Laden, who America has been searching for since the attacks on the Twin Towers; and the repealing of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’, finally giving gay people in the military vindication. Most recently, Obama delivered a Jobs Plan that has garnished much support from the public [2]. The main reason that I am most interested in President Obama is to see if he is able to recapture the hope and faith of the nation in order to be re-elected.
On the flip-side, the candidate that is annoying me to no extent is Republican Representative Michele Bachman. In my opinion Representative Bachman is a Sarah Palin wanna-be who’s a tad bit crazy. To begin, it must be made evident that Bachman is far less concerned with the facts and issues that truly matter to our nation than she is with making headlines [3]. For a person who wants to be the President of the United States, the latter seems more important than the first. Clear examples of her spotlight-seeking tendencies include: her accusing Barack Obama of having “anti-American views”, implying Democrats are to blame for the swine flu and her inability to handle the predominant issues in the election [3]. Seriously? Bachman seems to have no sort of filter, and also seemingly lacks the capability to a conscientious leader. In addition, Representative Bachman is possibly one of the “furthest out” on the social conservative spectrum [3]. This significantly limits her ability to compromise and listen to reason, and at a time where our nation has so many political factions, this is not something we need in our next leader. Luckily, her quick rise to fame has not seemed to last long. The Tea Party is not viewing her as a strong candidate anymore, and after the Republican debate she “looked like she knew she would not win the nomination” [4]. The lack of confidence on her party’s end, accompanied with her own is definitely not helping her campaign and the nation’s view of her. Let’s face the facts, Michele Bachman is last week’s news and people are starting to realize that a nation with her at the head is not in our future.
Sources:
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/americans-begin-to-question-obamas-leadership/2011/08/25/gIQA4UhseJ_blog.html
[2] http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gallup-poll-congress-jobs-20110913,0,4688826.story?track=rss
[3] http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/09/bachmann.profile/index.html
[4] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/14iht-letter14.html?_r=2
Through the progression of the Republican nomination process, I am most intrigued and impressed by Ron Paul’s campaign. To me, Paul sparks my interest the most out of all the candidates, which is based on not only his political standpoints, but also his personal character and experiences. As a doctor, I think that this is extremely beneficial as it has an impact for the better on some key issues. His stance on healthcare is one that I find almost relieving, as he advocates for healthcare that is not forced on anyone, and more so a part of choice (1). I think that these views are a step in the right direction regarding the issue of healthcare. I also am in agreement with his support for the military. This support is an admirable quality, and a good indicator of his concern for national safety, which will hopefully lead to strong action (2). This is an issue I place high value over. As for the economy, it is crucial that a candidate be realistic and offer many reforms for any hope of support of their standpoint. Paul states that the economy is going to get worse, and claims to know the action to take to help, which is essentially to restore the basic principles of the economy, which initially made the nation wealthy (4). There is a lot of buzz about Paul being a man who has “helped birth over 4,000 babies (as a doctor).” While I don’t think that this should up his credibility much as a presidential candidate, his experience in this has lead to his being pro-life. Many of my peers with whom I have actually had discussions on this topic with are pro-choice, but being pro-life myself, I concur with Paul’s views on this issue (3). Lastly, I think that Paul’s indication of his construction of the Constitution, mostly dealing with the First and Second Amendments, is something really interesting. He claims that his decisions are made in keeping with these, which is reflected in his voting record (3). Ultimately, I think that Paul may not be the most electable candidate, but is one whose standpoints I find interesting, and will want to keep following.
Rick Perry overall causes me the most frustration. He presents himself as the down-to-earth man from Texas, which to me is much too similar to Bush. The nickname “George Bush 2.0” seems about right on target. Simply, Perry is not president material. His low grades in college should normally not be frowned upon, as he obviously is quite different from then, but to me, it seems that the United States cannot afford a leader who was on “academic probation” given the current situation (6). Though his strong faith seems to be quite guiding to him, he appears to cross the line of separation of church and state. He has boldly stated that he believes those who are not followers of Jesus will be going to hell (5). Well, according to Wikipedia, about 76% of Americans identify as Christians. Instances like these are only setting himself up as a more controversial candidate who will inevitably get questioned a lot by those who don’t agree with what he says. As for the death penalty case of Willingham, I personally do not think that this particular situation will be a deterrent to him in the election, though it has sparked attention (7). Overall, I do not believe that Perry possesses qualifications to lead the nation, and he is not focused enough on issues that seem to require more attention at the time.
(1) http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/
(2) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-koerner/ron-paul-can-win_b_939993.html
(3) http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul.htm
(4) http://amherst.patch.com/articles/ron-paul-warns-economy-will-get-worse
(5) http://powerwall.msnbc.msn.com/politics/rick-perry-is-george-w-bush-20-1701591.story
(6) http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/perry-cites-struggles-with-faith-grades-as-college-student/
(7) http://theweek.com/article/index/216692/rick-perrys-death-penalty-disgrace-a-2012-dealbreaker
As the 2012 Presidential candidates continue to debate and outline their ideas to the media, two individuals stand apart from the rest; Barack Obama is distinguished as the most exciting candidate, and Michele Bachmann is the largest source of frustration.
Barack Obama stands out as the most exciting candidate for the 2012 election. Obama ran his original campaign with the idea of change, and brought with that concept the promise of economic recovery. The American Jobs Act that Obama recently proposed is aimed directly at the economic issue that most individuals are concerned with; job security. Although the unemployment rate continues to rise, the Jobs Act will attempt to lower the numbers. Obama has the right idea with his plans; government oversight is necessary in times of economic crisis (comparable to Roosevelt and the New Deal programs). The Jobs Act first promises tax cuts to spur businesses to rehire (1). Specifically, the plan includes measures to cut payroll taxes from 6.2% to 3.1%, and give businesses a $4,000 tax break for hiring individuals who have been unemployed for a significant period of time. (4) Targeting small businesses is a considerable part of the Job Plan, which is a logical approach, as the economic difficulties erode at the smaller industries faster than billion dollar corporations. A second idea that appears logical is the updating of America’s infrastructures. Again comparable to the New Deal, this part of the program has an added benefit of upgrading the “D” rating that our infrastructure has, while still creating new jobs. (2) The other candidates target Obama on how the Jobs Act will impact America’s debt. Although not released, Obama claims that he will stabilize the debt, while completely financing the new programs. (3) A large portion of the financing will come from the reduction of tax-breaks for the upper class, which Dick Durbin refers to as a “sensible” measure. (4) Aside from the Jobs Act, Obama’s healthcare plan is also providing additional jobs; $700 million in new funding helped to build additional community health centers, with thousands of new positions available since 2009. (5) Four years is not enough time for a president to accomplish a recovery of this magnitude. By reelecting Obama, he will continue to guide America back onto the path of success, and this prospect paints Obama as the most exciting candidate of 2012.
Michele Bachmann is the most frustrating candidate for the 2012 election. Although the other Republican runners also want to reverse many of Obama’s actions, Bachmann refuses to reveal her “master plan” for how she will implement those changes. Michele Bachmann often cites that her first action as president would be to repeal Obamacare. Bachmann fears that the employers (about 30 to 50%) planning to drop health coverage for their employees will overburden the new healthcare plan, with the added costs of roughly $1 trillion. (6) The initial intent of Obama’s healthcare plan was universal healthcare. It would be acceptable for Michele Bachmann to oppose this idea, but she is instead claiming that the system is failing. If up to 50% of Americans found themselves without healthcare, many WOULD switch to Obamacare. However, instead of ruining the established system, it would only force lawmakers to take notice and work towards making the healthcare system able to support such a substantial population. Taking on more individuals pushes the system towards actually being universal, the intent of the original bill.
The second frustrating issue that Michele Bachmann vaguely claims she will fix is the economy. Specifically, Bachmann promises that as president, she will be able to give jobs back to Americans. Bachmann blames Obama for the still-high unemployment rate, but she herself does not lay out an actual plan for righting this issue. Bachmann believes that a hands-off system will enable businesses to fix the economic situation themselves, and “a Bachmann Administration will create the climate of sound currency and certainty employers needed to start hiring again.” (7) “Certainty” has nothing to do with hiring. Work brings in money, and money allows employers to hire again. The frustration with Bachmann stems from her lack-of-plan. Just throwing out buzzwords such as “tax-cuts” and “spending cuts” without referring to HOW these actions will fix the current situation make Bachmann lose all credibility as a candidate.
1. http://www.americanjobsact.com/helping-small-businesses.html
2. http://www.americanjobsact.com/putting-workers-back-on-the-job.html
3. http://www.americanjobsact.com/reducing-the-deficit.html
4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcEhOuzeNGM&feature=player_embedded#!
5. http://www.healthcare.gov/news/blog/chcjobs09092011.html
6. http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/healthcare/
http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/jobs/
Why change something that works? The best canadate for the 2012 presidential election is Barock Obhama. Obama is the best choice for president because he is the only canadate who has the experience necesarry to hold the office in this time of turmoil. With the country in the state its in we, as a nation can not take a chance with a new un-known president. Obama's programs over the past three years have yeilded results. Results being sucess and failure in public programs through a trial and error process. Some of Obama's programs include cash for clunkers, the jobs creation act, and the most famous to date, the healthcare bill. (1) Cash for clunkers involved the buying of old cars that did not meet fuel efficiency standards for a flat rate. This program promoted the buying of new cars which boosted new car production in the US and promoted fuel effiniency as a standard in the auto industry. Perhaps the bigest immediate problem facing the country is the unemployment rate. Obama started the jobs creation act to help lower the unemployment rate. (1) This is a great program for the country and is greatly better then similar GOP plans. Perhaps the most significant of Obamas efforts is the healthcare bill, also known as Obama care. This was a very bold move by the current president and may not have been a complete susess but was a step in the right direction. The nations healthcare must have major reform in the near future and Obamas plan has the most promise after some revisions. The worst canadate is Michelle Bachman she wants to severly limit government. In this time of great economic downturn we cannot limit government in fact the government should be stepping in more then ever to stimulate the economy. (2) Bachman also wants to cut spending to reduce the deficet. A cut in spending would make our failing education even worse as the nation falls behind forigen competitors in academic acheiement. Bachman wants to lead the country with no intervention, in the long run this will be disasteres as we need intervention in this time of uncertainty.
1.) http://www.barackobama.com
2.) http://www.michelebachmann.com
From Karma:
I am very excited for Barack Obama to compete in the upcoming presidential election. President Obama has the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act running, which benefits multiple early learning projects such as Early Head Start by giving them $5 billion. $77 billion was given to elementary and secondary schools to help stabilize state budgets as well. The total amount of money that is broken up under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is roughly $120 billion. (1) Although this is a fairly large amount of money spent on a single Act, these contributions greatly improve the education system, which is very important to many people in America. The Act also has many different parts to it that all require substantial amounts of money. On the issue of energy, Obama has made many investments in worthwhile public transportation, which immensely helps the environment. "As we recover from this recession, the transition to clean energy has the potential to grow our economy and create millions of jobs - but only if we accelerate that transition. Only if we seize the moment." - President Barack Obama. (1) This quote accurately displays one of my main concerns in this election; energy. I am very interested in the effects of renewable/clean energy, and I want it to have a huge push in the coming election. For multiple reasons, it is necessary that we turn to these types of energy in order to power much of our country. Another issue that I support Obama on is his American Jobs Act. There are now 6 million long term unemployed Americans, many of whom belong to middle or lower class. As the rich continue to get richer, ordinary Americans are struggling to make ends meet. Obama’s American Jobs Act will add 3.9 million miles of road, as well as 120,000 miles of railroad, 250,000 miles of waterways, 5,000 airports and 300 ports. Not only does this create jobs, therefore lowering the unemployment rate, but it also improves the transportation system. (2)
I am not excited to see Michele Bachmann in the election. Her platform is weakened by her lack of support under the issues that she proposes. Many of her ‘plans’ are one-dimensional and do not seem like effective ideas to better the country as a whole. She also holds such strong opinions that it almost seems like she wants her ideas to become law automatically. These strong opinions make it hard for people to agree with her, so it’s basically an issue of ‘all or nothing’. I choose nothing. Bachmann’s views on global warming oppose Obama’s in that they show that she thinks that Carbon Dioxide is a natural byproduct of the earth, and that there should be no efforts to reduce it. (5) Even though there is scientific evidence that global warming exists and is very harmful to the environment, she is ignorant of the fact that it exists and insists that it is a natural process. Bachman has also claimed that by reducing taxes and cutting spending, she will fix the economy. She plans to repeal Obamacare as well as stop cap-and-trade so that businesses can start growing again. (4) I think that Michele Bachmann should not be elected because I disagree with many of her opinions on issues and I don’t think she would be a good candidate for the presidency.
1. http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/education
2. http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/
3. http://www.ontheissues.org/house/michele_bachmann.htm
4. http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/
5. http://thinkprogress.org/green/
From Brooke:
I am not really excited about any of the candidates running for office in the 2012 political election. Unlike the last election when "Change" was in the air, hardly any of the candidates are proposing positive change this election. The common theme this election seems to be a lowering of expectations. The candidates have gone from an attitude of anything is possible and "Yes we can" in 2008, to "No we can't" in 2012. The candidates, and the voters, seem to be focused more on just getting by than on working for positive change. However, if I were to pick one candidate it would be Barack Obama. I feel that because he has already spent one term in the White House, he is able to set realistic goals that can actually be accomplished. Rather than a complete transfer of power to another candidate, Obama would be able to keep the momentum going from the end of his first term and carry it right over into 2013 and beyond.
The candidate I am most outraged by is Michelle Bachman, because I find her to be a hypocrite. Michelle claims to be for smaller government, but she wants to use the powers of the government to force her views on social issues such as gay marriage, and abstinence only sex education on the rest of us. She claims she wants to cut government spending and eliminate earmarks, while at the same time seeking earmark funding for transportation projects in her Congressional District. She also accepts payments from the government in the form of farm subsidies and Medicaid payments. I understand that no politician can be consistent on issues all the time, but Michelle's hypocrisy is enough to be outrageous.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/27/michele-bachmann-quotes-_n_885756.html
http://www.michelebachmann.com/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43570552/
From Andrew C:
Rick Perry would be a good presidential candidate because I believe that the biggest crisis we have in America is unemployment. He is the strongest candidate for job creation. Mr. Perry has shown that he can create jobs like he did in Texas. He gave funds to private companies to encourage job creation and invest in new technology. Rick created more than a million jobs when he was governor. He also gave money to education to produce a job climate that is ranked best in the nation. When he was governor of Texas, he controlled tax spending and balanced Texas' budget. Unlike the rest of the republican candidates, Rick thinks that there needs to be a change in the Social Security system. Early on in the race, he called Social Security a ponzi scheme, but was taken the wrong way in which people thought he wanted to get rid of it. He has now softened his language on the subject and calls for a change to the system to strengthen it for generations to come. The person I am most frustrated by is President Obama. I believe that the stimulus bills were a huge waste of money and frankly, it was not smart to use it more than once. If a business fails, then they should fail and let new businesses take over. It's also frustrating to see him blame President Bush for all our problems. Bush maybe wasn't the greatest president, but he still did some good things. Instead of putting all the blame on the republicans, he should focus on the task at hand and compromise on some of our problems. As far as taxes go, taxing the rich and increasing the taxes for everyone is not the way to go on getting rid of our debt. The American dream is to become super rich, but taking away some of that wealth kind of distorts that dream.
www.foxnews.com
www.rickperry.org
Alie B:
The candidate I am most excited to see in the presidential election of 2012 is Barack Obama. Obama is looking to lower the current unemployment rate at 9.1 % (1), by adding 1.9 million jobs (2). Obama recommends that the country spends 447 billion dollars on jobs in order to keep the country from falling deeper into the recession (1). This will help boost the economy and moral of the country. I think this policy will help small businesses and middle class citizens who have been suffering the effects and unemployment problems. This is going to provide more jobs bringing in more money to the people. I support what Barack is proposing because I think the middle class and the poor are in the most need of assistance. In the coming years Obama also expects to cut more than 2 trillion dollars from the United States government budget (1). “The Administration proposes to reduce funding by $2.1 billion on a wide range of administrative expenses across civilian agencies. This initiative is in addition to the effort by the Department of Defense to reduce administrative overhead” (3). I agree with this because it will give money back to the people or it will be money better spent. This is because some of the programs that are being spent on are unsuccessful and therefore not returning money into the economy.
I am not excited to see Michele Bachman run in the presidential election of 2012. Social Security and Medicare are essential to people’s lives, and Michele Bachman is proposing that in order to keep the debt ceiling low, the United States must cut funding for these programs (4).Social Security and Medicare help improve the lives of millions of people. I think cutting these programs will lower the quality of life and the freedom enjoyed by the people of the United States. “It’s time to draw a line in the sand, and put the federal government back in its place” (4). I think she is wrong in this statement, I feel as if the federal government is the only reason we are making it through this recession. They are looking and searching for ways to help the country in the future by strong and sustainable.
(1)http://www.bls.gov/cps/
(2) http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/
(3) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/trs.pdf
(4) http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/debtceiling/
I’m most interested in watching the hilarity that is Michele Bachmann unfold in the race to be named commander-in-Chief. I’m not going to talk about her decidedly interesting quotes, but I am going to talk about her policy ideas that frustrate me. First would be her stance on abortion, she is pro life, even in cases of rape (1). I honestly feel that if the mother does not want a baby what kind of incentive is there for her to care for it, not much really. So the baby will either grow up with a parent who resents the fact it was born or dumped in an orphanage. Neither are really great options. Also seriously you get raped and you have to have the baby of the man that raped you? Getting raped is physiologically damaging and the effects begin to fade in two to six months but the effects can last for a year or more (2). And I can’t imagine how carrying the evidence of a rape around for nine months would help on the way to recovery. Also there is another reason that people get abortions and it is never talked about. My mom’s friend has a disorder that is passed to any baby she might have, and the disease would kill her any son of hers within a week of his birth (So girls are not effected by this disease). So when she was pregnant and found out it was a boy she got an abortion. I feel that is a logical and fair thing for her to be able to do. I don’t have anything to cite for that, because nobody really talks about that as a reason for abortion but I think it’s a good reason. Another issue I have with her is that she opposes gay marriage (1). I don’t really think it’s the governments business (separation of church and state right?). I am also highly confused as to what she would do with the issue if elected. She has signed papers that state she would put judges in power who would “apply the original meaning of the Constitution” (3). Ok, so does she know that the founding fathers only wanted rich white men to vote and that they never really took a stance on what marriage is? I feel like both of those little details would be important for her to know. So overall I disagree with many of her beliefs and ideas, but she interests me the most because she says the most interesting things.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
As for the candidate I’m most excited for? I am not excited for any of them, in my old age I have become disheartened and believe that no politician is in it for the good of the country anymore. Having already talked about the republicans I will now talk about the Democrats. As they have a man in office the only logical person to talk about in regards to the next election is President Obama. I find the economic situation in Europe and Greece very interesting, as does Obama. He has previously stated that he believes in the US giving lots of (monetary) international aid (1). Now with the situation in Greece he wants the other countries in Europe to support Greece, to basically bail it out (4). Here’s the thing though, Germany has already done that in 2010 Germany spent 22.4 billion Euros bailing out Greece (5). So a year later Greece needs more money, but the answer is not just to throw money at Greece, that won’t solve anything. It’s almost like coming across the Titanic when in the possession of a giant crane; You then see the ship is sinking, so you pick it up with the crane let all the water empty out, you see that the ship has many holes in the side but you put it back in the water anyway. After doing this you shouldn’t be shocked when the ship starts sinking again. That’s how I feel the situation in Greece is being handled, there is obviously something wrong with its economic policies, and they need to be actually dealt with. So I disagree with President Obama when he says that other countries should give Greece a break with their debt or donate money to Greece because that is not going to solve the problem.
1. http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/
2. http://web4health.info/en/answers/sex-rape-effects.htm
3. http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2011/08/michele_bachman_national_organization_for_marriage_gay_marriage_pledge.php
4. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/9/obamas-big-fat-greek-bailout-redux/
5. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10095083
The candidate I am most excited for is Ron Paul. I am excited for him because his libertarian policies, despite being far to the right, are fixing the most negative stereotype about republicans, and their moral standards. While he still opposes abortion and would end the right, he feels that it is a decision best handled on the state level [1], something that i agree with. This state rights perspective is something i agree with, but is a way to dissuade the notion that republicans would try to rule our lives, he would open up more choice because parts of the nation would have policies that we like. Aside from this, he would enact more efficient enviornmental policy, something conservatives are not fans of. He would do it with a variety of measures, all coinsiding with the free market. He would prvent the oil subsidies,[2] which would make alternative fuels much more competitive, rather than forcing them to beat the entrenched and federally backed oil market. Ron Paul feels that the state and free market should be the only regulating bodies. his more controversial legislation, that being the abolishing of the federal reserve, is not something I support, regarless of its inneficiency.
The candidate that I am frustrated about is Michelle Bachman. My frustration comes from the fact that she has said some of the most of center things, [3] and still come out with a respectable rating in the polls. I initially thought her evangelicalism would be offputting for most Americans, but that seems to be her saving grace in the republican states. All that aside, I do enjoy the inflamed rants by anyone who is opposed to her or the church or any legislation.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home