Friday, September 26, 2008
Obama continues to make bold statements on a comfortable and well-thought out plan for the future of our nation...
Then McCain nitpicks and attacks his senate record...
Of course, Obama has done his share of nitpicking about voting records -- but that is not all he is doing. McCain may already be stuck on a tailspin... I think he's running out of steam, he's restating things he already said in an attack against Obama's "lack of understanding" about the Georgia/Russia situation...
and of course, McCain's subliminal intonations that Obama wants us to lose the war in Iraq, after already stating earlier in the debate that we are winning the Iraqi war a it stands right now and supports timely troop withdrawals... Ugh!!
Oh, and Obama made a last minute pro-Nuclear Power statement and both candidates will support research and development of a Missle Defense Shield.
I'm giving the victory to Obama on this one, strong showing by both early on, but McCain ran out of steam and had very few constructive arguments regarding our policy with enemies and is waaay to hawkish on the question of Russia for my tastes.
Well, that's my take!
Ok, so, a lot of good verbal sparring has occurred...
McCain is coming in stronger than I expected, but Obama is certainly holding his ground well.
After a little fluff attacks based on voting records and domestic spending we got to the meat of the debate:
Iraq, Afghanistan, and I assume we will be touching on Iran soon...
Anyway, apart from McCain's rousing defense of Nuclear Power, he seems to be offering little in the way of change or progressive movement forward...
I wholeheartedly agree that we need to be drawing down troops in Iraq (we should have started a few months ago) and then slowly (no more of these year long deployments and whip-lash re-ups) rebuild our forces in Afghanistan to clear out the Taliban, and the Mujaheddin-supporting warlords that control much of the country. That will be a decisive moral and objective victory for the US that the majority of world powers are behind us on.
Obama recognizes this, McCain deflected into an attack on Obama's support of eleventh-hour military action within the border of Pakistan without informed consent by the government...
McCain doesn't seem to understand that Pakistan is sliding into anarchy on a daily basis and their government is already largely seen as illegitimate.
Anyway, more to come soon...
Its on! Both Senators McCain and Obama will be present for the first of three presidential debates, to be held tonight @ 9:00 pm EST - so in about an hour according to my time zone calculations.
Now - here's my preliminary thoughts. Obviously, the Government bailout of the financial sector, which will plan on buying up all of these ridiculous mortage-backed securities and derivatives has taken up almost the entire news cycle this week, with late night debates yesterday evening and then a complete disintegration of bipartisanship efforts to dress up this very poison-pill of an expenditure.
So, pardon me if I am a bit "worn-out" by all this bickering about the economy. The market was up over 100 points by the closing bell - obviously the passing of the bill is not as time-crucial as Treasury Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernacke have painted it, it seems more like the classic Bush-style panic-plan. Obviously we need to do something dramatic, and do it soon - but I read the bill in its original form - it was blatantly unconstitutional - giving unprecedented amounts of power to the Treasury department and immunity from all congressional and judicial oversight... blatantly unconstitutional, as I said...
Anyway, I'm just sick of hearing about it and trying to think about it. Obviously, it will have to come up in some way or another - we can't just ignore it... but I am really really hoping this isn't going to be 2 hours of "debate the banking crisis."
Indeed, it would be very refreshing to hear about foreign policy, troop reduction plans, especially I am interested in the seeing the reserve both men have for continuing and making headway into the bitterly neglected Afghanistan operations.
As many neowhigs have direct and first-hand knowledge of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our so called "Global War on Terror" - as soldiers, marines, pilots and players of the PS2s in the Blackwater chill-tents, you know - heroes.
(Please, no hysterics - and please do not confuse me as someone who is not proud of our troops for slight sarcasm) -- the troops, indeed, are generally of my age and my socio-economic group (yeah, I'm poor, ok?). I know this is an oft-cited chickenhawk cop-out to why they themselves don't enlist -- "well, health problems..." but if I didn't have massive congenital heart defects I would be in special training in a nuclear submarine right now.
Anyway, I seem to have lost track of my point. Ah yes, we are very proud, in the Modern Whig Party, of being the party that is not only "for the troops," but is fundamentally comprised of the troops.
Of course, I would like to really learn what they feel the role of the US military is in the 21st century, where the future of conflicts might be headed, where developments need to be made and hopefully places where bloat can be cut.
Now I think they will both have a bit of hard talk towards Iran, as well as the now crumbling failed-state-with-nukes Pakistan. However, I fear McCain will demonstrate no real leadership - I imagine "listen to the generals; situation on the ground determines actions..." will be a common line of reasoning with McCain.
Unfortunately for McCain, Americans tend to like new ideas over old ideas that are largely unsuccessful. Obama may be able to provide new answers to the old problems we're saddled with these days (thanks Dubya!).
Oh crap its about to start! Be Back Soon!
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Well, pretty much a neowhig is an old whig who is no longer so concerned with the annexation of Texas or where to relocate the tribes.
Its a similar situation to neoliberals, who are classical liberals that don't delve too much into exactly how much sweat from one's brow is needed to obtain property.
But very dissimilar to neocons, who aren't conservative, even though they might be "new."
And we are certainly not the neowhigs of neowhig.org, which is a political joke site (and is not actually funny, either).
Also, neowhigs are not in anyway related to the party currently named "The American Whig Party," which isn't very whiggish at all and more in line with the vast swath of ultra-conservative fringe parties such as the Constitution Party (which is not very beholden to the constitution).
Oh, and if the site for the American Whig Party is down worry not - it only means that there's currently a dispute between the three members of that party as to whom should be the leader.
No, most neowhigs are more likely to gravitate towards the Modern Whig Party, which is currently mostly just a website, albeit a website with 16 state chapters and some 12,000 members. Check it out, they don't bite (I don't think?).
Still, that really doesn't define us. So here's some adjectives:
Pragmatic, intellectual, rational, progressive, moderate, traditionalist.
Those are a few I think we can get behind.
Unlike neocons, we don't have distasteful ideals we have to couch with newspeak, such as "spreading democracy," which of course means forcing countries to trade with us, a form of Imperialism and not Democracy.
And what of big-D Democracy? Well, its a great ideal, but a Constitutional Republic (such as the one we live in) is much better at controlling the tyranny of the majority, even if it seems pretty bad at it.
A neowhig is not a "centrist," nor an "undecided," - but probably is "independent." We are not nationalistic, but surely we are patriots.
As for me, the one who is royalizing the we all over the place here... I like using neowhig because I want to fight the neocons. Preferably in deuls, with pistols.
Probably more people would self-identify as something else, even though they may share the same views as a neowhig. And that's fine, I suppose. For now... bwahahahahaaa!
"The president needs to be stripped of these imperial and unconstitutional powers!"
"The government needs more transparency!"
"We need to protect our American manufacturing jobs!"
"We need to get these special interests out of congress!"
"Our infrastructure needs to be rebuilt and revitalized!"
"Whatever happened to public works?!"
"Whatever happened to the 'big tent' philosophy?!"
"Why are we fighting these repugnant 'wars' that have no goal or end?"
Where have these views been given voice before?
THE WHIG PARTY! That's where!
And with the ever growing threat of the fascistic and grossly immoral neoconservative movement, we need to counter.
However, before we go into exactly why the neocons are both wrong and evil, let's take a look at the issues shall we?
- The Democrats want to make health insurance less expensive by moving around some taxes.
- The Republicans want to make health insurance less expensive by moving around different taxes.
- The Democrats want to give tax breaks to the middle class.
- The Republicans want to give tax breaks to the middle class.
- The Democrats believe in magical solutions like "biofuels."
- The Republicans believe in magical solutions like "clean coal."
On the Economy:
- The Democrats pay lip service to fair markets.
- The Republicans pay lip service to free markets.
On Government Spending:
- The Democrats increase taxes so they can spend more.
- The Republicans increase the deficit so they can spend more.
On International Interventions:
- The Democrats spend billions on foreign aid.
- The Republicans spend billions on foreign wars.
On Social Issues:
- The Democrats like to heavily regulate movies, video games, the internet and other scapegoats.
- The Republicans like to heavily regulate sex, drugs, the internet and other scapegoats.
On Civil Liberties:
- The Democrats passed the PATRIOT Act.
- The Republicans passed the PATRIOT Act.
Vast canyons of difference separate these two parties, don't they now? Well, no, of course not. They have the same ideology, only different targets; and they answer not to the people, but to corrupt corporate masters.
Now lets bring in the neocons, the self-proclaimed saviors of American conservatism... What do they believe in? Well you can't listen to them, they won't tell you the truth! Here's some definitions for you from the neocon wordlist, in case the neocon meaning confuses you:
FREEDOM: Trade with America
DEMOCRACY: Trade with America
LIBERALS: Communist strawmen
UNAMERICAN: Not Neocon (see LIBERALS)
WEALTH: Corporate wealth
POVERTY: (No entry)
CORRUPTION: Independence from the American sphere of influence
TERRORISM: Unsanctioned terrorism
FREEDOM FIGHTERS: Neocon-approved terrorists (see PINOCHET)
THE PRESIDENT: Our Majesty
We've witnessed this kind of maniacal distortion of American ideals before, with Andrew Jackson.
Only, instead of the war in Iraq, it was land grabs in Texas and Mexico.
Instead of Hurricaine Katrina, it was the Trail of Tears.
And we're sick of it! Get businesses out of government and government out of businesses. Get our lost jobs back! Get rid of these ridiculous "executive orders."
And get rid of the two party system!!