Ralph Nader is running for president again...

Parent Cafe
61

<p>lje62; sincere or not, (Hard to tell sometimes on these forums), my goal is not to be anyone’s hero. My advice about the answers being found within, applies to this and everything else in life.</p>

<p>If you do in fact agree with the concept that I have written, then build on it. Take that concept of being part of the solution and make it yours. Contribute to fixing that which is around you. When others complain about something, anything, ask them what they are doing to fix it. Part of my life was committed to 21 years in the Air Force. I’ve since been in corporate America as well as other government type jobs. But one thing I remember in 1979 when I first joined the Air Force, was a sign outside our barracks. It was the “Motto” of our basic training squadron. I saw it every morning, afternoon, and evening for 6 straight week. I will NEVER forget it. It said, simply;</p>

<p>“LEAD, FOLLOW, or GET OUT OF THE WAY”</p>

<p>That is exactly how I live my life. I’m not sure if that motto is still there, but it sure is a good one. When I worked for Qwest Communications, I use to hear people complain about the Union. “They” aren’t doing this for us. “They” aren’t doing that. My question was; “AREN’T YOU THE UNION”??? You vote these reps in and they speak for you. Same with life, politics, education, wealth, etc.,… There is not one thing in this world that happens to you or that involves you, that you don’t have control over. If you are poor, you can fix that. If you don’t like your job, you can change that. If you don’t like those representing you, you can campaign that. If you don’t like where you live, you can move that. </p>

<p>Personally, I get tired of hearing people complain about how poor they are. That they don’t have health care. That their schools suck. That there are no jobs. That the economy sucks. That the government sucks. The truth is, these people suck. They have total control over the outcome of more than 75% of what they think SUCKS. Yet they do nothing about it. They can fix their economy, education, employment, schools, neighborhoods, etc… The other 25% they have collective control over if they would get proactive with their vote, campaigning, etc… </p>

<p>I wonder how many people ever wrote to their congressman/woman or senator with complaints and suggestion. I wonder how many wrote an article for a local newspaper with suggestions. I wonder how many parents have gone to open school board meetings with concerns or suggestions. I wonder how many complaining out there have gone back to school to better themselves economically and with their job. (With the internet and correspondence/distance learning, there is no excuse.) In other words;</p>

<p>“Lead, Follow, or Get out of the Way”.</p>

62

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s illogical, Captain!</p>

<p>Regardless of whether you agree w/ the war or not - we’re in it, and it must now be resolved with the best outcome possible. The lives of Americans are dependent upon that, and possibly the future of our country as well. We must have a president who comprehends that - McCain is our best hope for bringing us through this bad situation w/ our honor, strength & reputation intact.</p>

<p>EVERYONE wants this Iraq thing resolved - but it must be done the best way. I’m putting my confidence in McCain - he’s the most experienced & knowledgeable AND he’s been over there seven times! Of all the candidates, he’s going to have the best grasp of the situation.</p>

63

<p>kluge you’re reasoning is a bit flawed since although conservative presidents appoint the judges, the judges don’t have to tend toward any ideology. In fact many judges become vote very liberally on various cases much to the chagrin of various presidents. Gerald Ford nominated Stevens while H.W. bush nominated Souter and both justices vote for the left wing yet they were both conservatives.</p>

<p>It’s more confusing than it seems, huh?</p>

64

<p>1st and foremost, as I mentioned previously, we are talking about our country and our citizens. With respect to this topic, I don’t care about the economic, political, and social situations of the world. (Don’t read into that what you are about to. I said in respect to THIS TOPIC!) And on this topic, American Citizen do in fact have great control over their destiny. </p>

<p>It’s all about choice. You may not want to choose to go a certain direction or path, even if it will improve certain situations. I know of people personally that are trained and educated but are out of work. They have been out of work and on unemployment for quite a while now. The problem is their choice. There are plenty of job opportunities in their field in other towns/states. They CHOOSE however not to move. That is their choice. They could also decide to get re-educated in a new field or area. Thus opening their possibilities to other employment. Instead they CHOOSE not to go back to school.</p>

<p>No, I’ve been there and I have seen many others who arr or were there. In my opinion, the MAJORITY of citizens in this country have control over the MAJORITY of the things that affect them. Their economics, health, social environment, education, employment, etc… It’s just that many of them CHOOSE certain directions that prohibit them from fixing many of these problems. My boss has a tendency to micro-manage sometimes. I’ve mentioned it to him, and of course he didn’t think he was. An example I gave him was how he needed me to engineer and new telecommunication system. I agree, he didn’t tell me HOW TO DO IT. However, without his realizing it, he had told me 4 methods/solutions that he didn’t want me to consider because from his past experience, he considered them non-viable. By the time he had told be what I COULDN’T do, there only remained 1 way I COULD DO IT. He didn’t realize that his choices influenced what I could or couldn’t do.</p>

<p>So, if a person is unemployed, they can approach it from 2 ways. If they say; I DON’T want to move. I DON’T have time to go back to school. I DON’T want to take a lower paying job in a similar field. I DON’T was to start a new career because I’ll have to start at the bottom. etc… Then they have limited themselves on what they can achieve. I do admit that the military did give me the advantage in that I was use to moving every couple of years. Therefor, when it came time for me to leave the military, I was mentally and emotionally able to relocate if necessary to find work.</p>

<p>The point is; in this country, the majority of the people have control over their destiny. Over their economics, employment, education, social environment, community and political involvement, etc… I don’t believe that it’s always easy. But I don’t believe that it’s the government’s job to make sure you have a job. Education. Know how to save and invest money. etc…</p>

65

<p>Asinine, it isn’t my reasoning which is flawed, but your perspective. :slight_smile: Judges appointed to the bench don’t become “liberal”, they’re just forced to deal with real cases involving real people and events, directly examined without the warping effect of the huge national right wing propaganda machine, which does tend to result in some of them becoming more centrist. </p>

<p>Your perspective however, like that of most Americans,** is** warped by that propaganda machine, to the point that you accept the polished lie that a balanced legal analysis is “liberal” simply because it doesn’t follow the specified path of the right wing spinmeisters, even though, if you’re like most Americans, you haven’t studied the facts of the case, legal precedent, the consequences of various different decisions (on numerous other laws, agencies, individuals and jurisdictions) or read the court’s opinions.</p>

<p>American courts are still overwhelmingly on the right - particularly in the area of economics, and the rights of anyone other than major corporations.</p>

<p>Christcorp - the average inflation adjusted income of 75% of American taxpayers has declined over the past 30 years. (I’m not making that up. I’ve posted links to the IRS data confirming that fact dozens of times here on CC.) Exactly how do you square that with your theory that they have “control”?</p>

66

<p>Control comes through choice. Whether or not a person chooses certain alternatives is a separate issue. When people state that a HUGE portion of a population has all these problems, that isn’t totally accurate. That same portion also has options. Again, whether or not the choose to exercise those options is a totally different subject.</p>

<p>It is natural that over the last 30 years that the adjusted income of most Americans would go down. In the last 30 years we have moved more towards a global economy. We can no longer be a totally self sustained economy. Example: If one group of people (Americans) gradually inflate their standard of living higher and higher; while another group of people (India) grows much slower and the separation is too wide; then economics will force many goods and services to be provided by the cheaper people. The main factor of that is the consumer. The consumer wants the $10 pair of jeans or $20 pair of sneakers. They want to shop at Wal-Mart. It isn’t because they can’t afford to shop other places. It’s because they choose to shop at the cheapest place.</p>

<p>Also, many studies that show our adjusted income as having gone down, don’t take into consideration our self imposed rise in standard of living. Example: When I, and many of you over 45 were kids, we probably only had 1 Television. We also probably only had 1 car. We didn’t buy disposable technology like cell phones, dvd’s, players, Playstation, numerous vacations, college education for our kids, etc… When I graduated, if I wanted to go to college, it was pretty much up to me. That was the norm where I came from. Some families mom worked outside the house, others didn’t. If mom didn’t work outside the house, you didn’t have to use most of her paycheck to pay for child care. Basically; if you made your standard of living the same as it was when you were young, and only had 1 tv, no satellite/cable, no PC’s, internet, 1 car, etc… But had the amount of money in income that you are making today; that statistic of adjusted income would be totally different.</p>

67

<p>yawn!!!</p>

68

<p>bz2010: The reason I prefer Obama over McCain or Clinton is that IMHO the NUMBER ONE problem in our country is not the war, not the economy, not health care, not trade, but it is the extreme polarization of our politics. Both domestically and internationally. This is the mindset that views everything in black and white, and promotes demonizing the “enemy” which is the term we use for those who have the opposite view than ours. In reality, there are few if any absolutes in life. Everything is shades of grey. Obama recognizes this. Hillary and McCain do not. </p>

<p>McCain particularly scares me with his absolute convictions on many issues. The charitable view is that he is a man of principle. My view is that he is just plain stubborn. His stubbornness helped him survive torture in Vietnam. But it would come in the way of governing if he were to become President. Bush has been stubborn enough- we can’t afford 4 more years of that.</p>

69

<p>vp - your points are well-taken. However, even if I were to agree with you that political polarization is the number one problem in our country as you assert, I submit that McCain offers the best REAL solution to that problem. Unlike Clinton or Obama, McCain has a RECORD of “reaching across the aisle” to bridge the gap and actually work with those on the other side of the political spectrum. What have Clinton or Obama done (besides “talk” about it?). </p>

<p>Further, ideologically, C & O represent the FAR FAR left on that spectrum. There is a reason Obama was voted the MOST LIBERAL Senator and Clinton not far behind at number five. </p>

<p>Therefore, given their extremism, and McCain’s record, as well as his more centrist position on certain issues, McCain is the REAL hope of reconciliation (and cooperation) between the partisans in government/politics/society.</p>

70

<p>"This is the mindset that views everything in black and white, and promotes demonizing the “enemy” which is the term we use for those who have the opposite view than ours. In reality, there are few if any absolutes in life. Everything is shades of grey. Obama recognizes this. Hillary and McCain do not. "</p>

<p>I actually agree that the polarization of the country (see the above posts for a disgusting example) is a huge problem and that Senator Obama doesn’t arouse the negative feelings that Senator Clinton does. I disagree about Senator McCain, though, because he is more “friendly” with the left than with the right.</p>