Today's post is my very first one from college! While it's weird that I am living 1 hour in the future, it's also incredibly exciting to finally be done with high school and be able to do whatever the hell I want, when I want.
Again, a little off track of elections because right now the polls utterly depress me, I'd like to talk about my initial impressions (both personal and political).
So far I've really only met my floor and a few more people. My floor is amazing! We are mostly freshman (excluding my roommate and a few others, but we love them too) and it is just so awesome to see people open to being with new friends and meeting people from all over the country and even the world. I feel very blessed to have been introduced to everyone I already feel very close to so far - in high school, there was so much immediate judgment, while in college everyone just doesn't give a shit. I love it!
It's also more interesting to see the political views of my fellow youth. While readers of this blog can get a pretty good feel of how I conduct my politics, I'm finally able to see a large group of people who certainly have the power to vote and come from different backgrounds. It always amazes me when I meet a non-liberal in college (I guess that's just a stereotype I can't get over), but I find it even more interesting when I meet someone who doesn't care about politics at all. Now don't get me wrong....I don't expect everyone to be active or agree with me - as hard I as try to convince them to - but the reasons behind why everyone feels the way they do always make me appreciate the human intellect just that much more.
I don't want to give names, or give too many details in case she ends up reading this, but I did meet a fascinating girl (who happened to agree with my stances) that I just can't resist writing about. Her family is from a country occupied with war and bitter religious hate between two different peoples, and she just has the most positive outlook on life I have ever witnessed. I love her to death already, and I hope we can stay great friends throughout college.
I met another girl and a boy who claimed to be very conservative....and they are, but I don't know if it's for the "right" reasons (bahaha pun intended!). They both (at least I think they do) come from pretty wealthy lifestyles, and both are Republicans because of many issues they described to me. We actually tried to stay out of the political discussion because it is so polarizing, but the information they said was...interesting, like I said. It really all just makes me hate the media more and more. This whole idea of a liberal-media bias is so ridiculous. These people must have gotten their (okay I will say it...false) information from somewhere, whether it be their parents (who inevitably also got it from the media) or directly through the media. That's as far as I'd like to touch on that subject though; they are both very nice people who I hope I will spend a lot of time with this year and in the future.
However, as of right now, classes haven't started. I am wicked (I'm in Boston, I can now say wicked to describe everything) excited to see whether college professors have that stereotypical liberal bias towards life, or if maybe society doesn't give the ivory tower of academia enough credit to be independent.
And I leave with one final note: it is often said that college professors have an extreme tendency to favor liberals and Democrats...but it is often acknowledged that these people would not have their jobs if they weren't the most intelligent people on the planet. Hmm, go figure.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Monday, August 16, 2010
On Progressives
A little off of what I would normally talk about, but I'd like to discuss the reasons that I shall never again proclaim myself to be a progressive.
Although I would never associate myself with any far right (or even right of center) political parties, I also find myself confused as to what, if anything, I should associate myself with. The Blogosphere of the left? Netroots? Cable news? Non-mainstream media? There are only so many options on the left without becoming borderline insane.
In the spring of 2010, I had the opportunity to visit my brother who helped organize a guest speaker for his university's Democrat club. Who did they invite AND pay to speak? None other than Amy Goodman of DemocracyNOW!. While I had never heard of Ms. Goodman, I kept an open mind and was eager to hear her ideas and intellect on the world around us and her experiences.
But what did I find? The textbook example of an "America-hating liberal progressive". I honestly didn't think it existed, but she managed to convince me that it does really exist. Rather than focus on the recent accomplishments in Congress that the Democrats have done (and we can argue on whether they are accomplishments or not all day long - but it's still very different from what we've seen before), she decided to attack former President George W. Bush, his cabinet, and the Congress from 1994 to 2006. Granted, I knew we would see something like that - I myself haven't gotten offer the Bush administration. However, I listened and kept my ears and mind open in hopes it would move past the belittling of what will go down as one of the lesser presidencies.
She continued on and on about minutia surrounding where Donald Rumsfeld lived, who John Ashcroft and Dick Cheney associate themselves with, and yadda yadda yadda. Is this really important? No.
Then she approached the subject of Haiti's disaster at the beginning of the year. All we heard about was how terrible the crisis had been handled and how the US ignores other countries when we should be helping them and how terrible we are and how our politics are stupid and blah blah blah. Uh...what about the US? What about taking care of ourselves at home before going abroad? When did we get ordained as the world administrator who must repair any problems? Are you ever going to be happy with what the president does?
This is just how frustrated I get with the radical left. You ask for this, this, that, and that, and if it's not done NOW, well the radical left will just need a new candidate. Jeez...give the guy a break, he inherited a mess that has to be cleaned up!
There's more about Ms. Goodman's visit that troubled me. For example, her support of Norman Finklestein, who you can all read about yourselves. I didn't like anything this man has had to say/publish.
I admire Ms. Goodman's courage to stand up for what she believes in, but it reaches a point where it's just as bad as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. When you constantly need new things to bitch about, we don't actually "progress" to anything...we just get stuck in the mud.
Although I would never associate myself with any far right (or even right of center) political parties, I also find myself confused as to what, if anything, I should associate myself with. The Blogosphere of the left? Netroots? Cable news? Non-mainstream media? There are only so many options on the left without becoming borderline insane.
In the spring of 2010, I had the opportunity to visit my brother who helped organize a guest speaker for his university's Democrat club. Who did they invite AND pay to speak? None other than Amy Goodman of DemocracyNOW!. While I had never heard of Ms. Goodman, I kept an open mind and was eager to hear her ideas and intellect on the world around us and her experiences.
But what did I find? The textbook example of an "America-hating liberal progressive". I honestly didn't think it existed, but she managed to convince me that it does really exist. Rather than focus on the recent accomplishments in Congress that the Democrats have done (and we can argue on whether they are accomplishments or not all day long - but it's still very different from what we've seen before), she decided to attack former President George W. Bush, his cabinet, and the Congress from 1994 to 2006. Granted, I knew we would see something like that - I myself haven't gotten offer the Bush administration. However, I listened and kept my ears and mind open in hopes it would move past the belittling of what will go down as one of the lesser presidencies.
She continued on and on about minutia surrounding where Donald Rumsfeld lived, who John Ashcroft and Dick Cheney associate themselves with, and yadda yadda yadda. Is this really important? No.
Then she approached the subject of Haiti's disaster at the beginning of the year. All we heard about was how terrible the crisis had been handled and how the US ignores other countries when we should be helping them and how terrible we are and how our politics are stupid and blah blah blah. Uh...what about the US? What about taking care of ourselves at home before going abroad? When did we get ordained as the world administrator who must repair any problems? Are you ever going to be happy with what the president does?
This is just how frustrated I get with the radical left. You ask for this, this, that, and that, and if it's not done NOW, well the radical left will just need a new candidate. Jeez...give the guy a break, he inherited a mess that has to be cleaned up!
There's more about Ms. Goodman's visit that troubled me. For example, her support of Norman Finklestein, who you can all read about yourselves. I didn't like anything this man has had to say/publish.
I admire Ms. Goodman's courage to stand up for what she believes in, but it reaches a point where it's just as bad as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. When you constantly need new things to bitch about, we don't actually "progress" to anything...we just get stuck in the mud.
Monday, July 12, 2010
California Love
Okay, I haven't updated in a very long time but that's because these take forever to write. However, I still want to share and I promise to post more frequently.
Today I'm going to skip the Illinois elections and make this a more national blog by talking about my second favorite state: California. Ah, the land of liberals who hate to pay taxes and want tons of government services without having to pay for them.
So being the governor of California has got to be one of the toughest jobs on the planet. I'm not so sure I would even want the job given the chance (okay, yes I would, but it would be a hard decision!). There are so many different constituencies that pleasing everyone is pretty much impossible. However, if you can govern in California, you've pretty much proven yourself able to govern the entire country - as we have seen with two former presidents and a former Supreme Court Chief Justice (for all you non-history-freaks, that would be Nixon, Reagan, and Earl Warren, respectively).
So this year marks the end of the Governator's term. Yes, good old Arnold cannot run anymore because of California's two term limit, and thanks to the US Constitution, I doubt we will see an Arnold presidency (at least with the prevalence of the Tea Party Movement... but that's another blog post).
The match-up: Attorney General (and Former Governor) Jerry Brown (D) vs. Former Ebay CEO Meg Whitman (R)
Personally, I don't like either candidate too much. I like Gavin Newsom who is running for Lt. Gov. after being mayor of San Francisco, but Jerry Brown seems way too old school. Jerry Brown has plenty of clout to look at: he has served in some public position since 1971, working with then-Governor Reagan as Secretary of State. He went on to be governor, mayor of Oakland, and now Attorney General of California. How can he run for governor if he's already been one? Well, California's term limits didn't go into effect until after Brown was governor, so he is free to do as he pleases. As far as I can tell, Brown is pretty much textbook liberal...which can be good or bad for California. It's good because he will support the public services Californian's love, but bad because he needs to find the money to do so.
On the other hand, I really don't see what Meg Whitman has to offer. After becoming a billionaire CEO with Ebay, Whitman feels like the best way to run a state like California is as a business. How much more wrong could she be? California survives with plenty of bureaucratic agencies and jobs, even if it is unsustainable. In an economy like the current one, people cannot afford to be laid-off because of a governor's desire to balance the budget. People come first, debt comes second - sorry Meg Whitman, but you're completely wrong. Whitman is also running as a classic conservative; for the most part, she agrees with the Republican national base. Uh...yeah, prop 8 may have passed in 2008, that was pretty much a fluke. California is like a liberal's paradise.
My predictions: Brown will win, 54 to 45. Whitman just doesn't have the statewide name recognition, and she is trying to finance her campaign by herself. Brown has spent pennies on the dollar compared to Whitman, and it hasn't been his own money like she has spent. Brown will do a good job readying the governor's position to (future president?) Gavin Newsom to achieve great things.
Today I'm going to skip the Illinois elections and make this a more national blog by talking about my second favorite state: California. Ah, the land of liberals who hate to pay taxes and want tons of government services without having to pay for them.
So being the governor of California has got to be one of the toughest jobs on the planet. I'm not so sure I would even want the job given the chance (okay, yes I would, but it would be a hard decision!). There are so many different constituencies that pleasing everyone is pretty much impossible. However, if you can govern in California, you've pretty much proven yourself able to govern the entire country - as we have seen with two former presidents and a former Supreme Court Chief Justice (for all you non-history-freaks, that would be Nixon, Reagan, and Earl Warren, respectively).
So this year marks the end of the Governator's term. Yes, good old Arnold cannot run anymore because of California's two term limit, and thanks to the US Constitution, I doubt we will see an Arnold presidency (at least with the prevalence of the Tea Party Movement... but that's another blog post).
The match-up: Attorney General (and Former Governor) Jerry Brown (D) vs. Former Ebay CEO Meg Whitman (R)
Personally, I don't like either candidate too much. I like Gavin Newsom who is running for Lt. Gov. after being mayor of San Francisco, but Jerry Brown seems way too old school. Jerry Brown has plenty of clout to look at: he has served in some public position since 1971, working with then-Governor Reagan as Secretary of State. He went on to be governor, mayor of Oakland, and now Attorney General of California. How can he run for governor if he's already been one? Well, California's term limits didn't go into effect until after Brown was governor, so he is free to do as he pleases. As far as I can tell, Brown is pretty much textbook liberal...which can be good or bad for California. It's good because he will support the public services Californian's love, but bad because he needs to find the money to do so.
On the other hand, I really don't see what Meg Whitman has to offer. After becoming a billionaire CEO with Ebay, Whitman feels like the best way to run a state like California is as a business. How much more wrong could she be? California survives with plenty of bureaucratic agencies and jobs, even if it is unsustainable. In an economy like the current one, people cannot afford to be laid-off because of a governor's desire to balance the budget. People come first, debt comes second - sorry Meg Whitman, but you're completely wrong. Whitman is also running as a classic conservative; for the most part, she agrees with the Republican national base. Uh...yeah, prop 8 may have passed in 2008, that was pretty much a fluke. California is like a liberal's paradise.
My predictions: Brown will win, 54 to 45. Whitman just doesn't have the statewide name recognition, and she is trying to finance her campaign by herself. Brown has spent pennies on the dollar compared to Whitman, and it hasn't been his own money like she has spent. Brown will do a good job readying the governor's position to (future president?) Gavin Newsom to achieve great things.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Illinois - Governor
Seeing as this is my first post, here's a little structure on how it will work. I will either start with an election, candidate, state, or issue and expand on it as I go - for example, right now I am focusing on Illinois (I know the most about it because I see it everyday!), but I may focus on California, South Carolina, Kentucky, or even Alaska.
So in Illinois right now, there are two big elections to be decided in November: Governor and U.S. Senator. I will cover these two mainly.
Governor: Gov. Pat Quinn (D) v. State Sen. Bill Brady (R)
I'm a bit unenthusiastic about this election, mainly because I don't see a leader in either of them. Pat Quinn became Governor as a result of embattled former Governor Rod Blagojevich being indicted and then impeached with removal from office because of accusations that he tried to sell President Barack Obama's old senate seat. Pat Quinn came into a rough time - the people of Illinois were disgruntled with politicians, and we had just lost Barack Obama to the whole country. However, when it came to the primary, Pat Quinn was really the best option - he ran against State Comptroller Dan Hynes (no one knows what a comptroller does, but I'll give you a hint: whatever you think the treasurer does, the comptroller probably actually does it). Hynes ran a smear campaign, so it was a very close primary that was more about picking the best of two evils.
Brady, on the other hand, is a hardcore conservative from downstate. What concerns me about him are his views on abortion (staunchly pro-life) and his views on gun control (pro-gun). Brady is not an Illinois politician in the sense that I don't think he can win because of his views. Illinois is a D-leaning state that will rarely vote moderate. Brady very narrowly won his primary to State Sen. Kirk Dillard, who is from the northern part of the state and is much more moderate. If Republicans wanted to win, they should have gone with Dillard.
My Predictions: Brady is up in the polls now (about 10 points last I checked), but Quinn hasn't even begun the core of his campaigning. Quinn is going to pull ahead and easily win, even with the anti-incumbent mood across the country. I'll go with a 52 - 47 result, with the Green Party candidate (can't remember his name) getting 1%.
Stay tuned for the Senate and other executive races.
So in Illinois right now, there are two big elections to be decided in November: Governor and U.S. Senator. I will cover these two mainly.
Governor: Gov. Pat Quinn (D) v. State Sen. Bill Brady (R)
I'm a bit unenthusiastic about this election, mainly because I don't see a leader in either of them. Pat Quinn became Governor as a result of embattled former Governor Rod Blagojevich being indicted and then impeached with removal from office because of accusations that he tried to sell President Barack Obama's old senate seat. Pat Quinn came into a rough time - the people of Illinois were disgruntled with politicians, and we had just lost Barack Obama to the whole country. However, when it came to the primary, Pat Quinn was really the best option - he ran against State Comptroller Dan Hynes (no one knows what a comptroller does, but I'll give you a hint: whatever you think the treasurer does, the comptroller probably actually does it). Hynes ran a smear campaign, so it was a very close primary that was more about picking the best of two evils.
Brady, on the other hand, is a hardcore conservative from downstate. What concerns me about him are his views on abortion (staunchly pro-life) and his views on gun control (pro-gun). Brady is not an Illinois politician in the sense that I don't think he can win because of his views. Illinois is a D-leaning state that will rarely vote moderate. Brady very narrowly won his primary to State Sen. Kirk Dillard, who is from the northern part of the state and is much more moderate. If Republicans wanted to win, they should have gone with Dillard.
My Predictions: Brady is up in the polls now (about 10 points last I checked), but Quinn hasn't even begun the core of his campaigning. Quinn is going to pull ahead and easily win, even with the anti-incumbent mood across the country. I'll go with a 52 - 47 result, with the Green Party candidate (can't remember his name) getting 1%.
Stay tuned for the Senate and other executive races.
Introduction
Although there are hundreds of thousands of political blogs, I believe everyone has a unique perspective on issues and candidates today, so I may as well publish my thoughts. Therefore, welcome to my blog, where I will focus on current events, elections, global relations, and - most importantly - interpreting what is going on in a legible manner so even those who do not care as much can read it.
Whether or not anyone ends up reading this doesn't matter to me. I've got so many ideas and so few people who wish to hear them (or understand them) that I hope this will help me get some things off my mind. I may throw in the occasional personal note, but I will stick mainly to what I'm interested in: Politics.
So a little background: I was raised in a suburb outside of Chicago, so I have a Democratic lean. However, I am not completely loyal to the Democratic party - on many issues I'm more liberal, on others I'm more moderate or conservative. I find it striking today that classic liberalism isn't really followed by the "liberal" party. With the Tea Party atmosphere and such disgusting partisanship, it's more exhausting to follow politics than ever.
Finally, I will always try to cite my sources. Most of my information comes from the Huffington Post, or from things I hear on MSNBC, CNN, Fox, or my local news. Thanks for reading, and I hope someone can relate!
Whether or not anyone ends up reading this doesn't matter to me. I've got so many ideas and so few people who wish to hear them (or understand them) that I hope this will help me get some things off my mind. I may throw in the occasional personal note, but I will stick mainly to what I'm interested in: Politics.
So a little background: I was raised in a suburb outside of Chicago, so I have a Democratic lean. However, I am not completely loyal to the Democratic party - on many issues I'm more liberal, on others I'm more moderate or conservative. I find it striking today that classic liberalism isn't really followed by the "liberal" party. With the Tea Party atmosphere and such disgusting partisanship, it's more exhausting to follow politics than ever.
Finally, I will always try to cite my sources. Most of my information comes from the Huffington Post, or from things I hear on MSNBC, CNN, Fox, or my local news. Thanks for reading, and I hope someone can relate!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)