In the spirit of the 'Real Americans' who call themselves the Tea Party, I would like to ask everyone if they think the Tea Party could be a real independent 3rd party should it ever be jettisoned from the GOP.
What do you think? Can the Tea Party stand on its own as a political institution?
Sep 10, 2010
Answer to 9/9 Question: We are better off
In the spirit of Ronald Reagan I challenged everyone yesterday to consider whether the country was better off today than we were two years ago.
I think the answer is undeniably yes. There is less economic uncertainty today than there was 2 years ago. The economy is adding more jobs than it is shedding. Thanks to the Health Care Reform passed by Congress more Americans than ever before will have access to quality health care from the best doctors and hospitals in the world.
The Obama administration has suceeded in ending combat operations in Iraq. It is moving forward on civilian and military tribunals for the enemy combatants imprisoned in Guatanamo Bay and focusing our military's efforts on establishing conditions for cessation of hostilities in Afghanistan. Most significantly, Israelis and Palestinians have returned to the bargaining table.
Despite one of the loudest and angriest opposition movements in American history, the Democratic Party and Barack Obama have suceeded time and again in passing strong compromise legislation that will raise the quality of life for the majority of Americans. We are safer from terrorist attacks than ever before and a concerted effort is finally being made to improve our infrastructure so we are more safe on our highways, in our airspace and on our rails.
I'm not completely sure where the criticisms of the Obama Administration have come from. He has been a textbook moderate president reaching for compromise solutions to our most heated controversies, and he has for the most part been successful at implementing his agenda.
When you look past the noise, the country is indeed a better place since Barack Obama became president. Could we do better? Of course. As Bill Clinton once said, we must always strive for a more perfect union.
I think the answer is undeniably yes. There is less economic uncertainty today than there was 2 years ago. The economy is adding more jobs than it is shedding. Thanks to the Health Care Reform passed by Congress more Americans than ever before will have access to quality health care from the best doctors and hospitals in the world.
The Obama administration has suceeded in ending combat operations in Iraq. It is moving forward on civilian and military tribunals for the enemy combatants imprisoned in Guatanamo Bay and focusing our military's efforts on establishing conditions for cessation of hostilities in Afghanistan. Most significantly, Israelis and Palestinians have returned to the bargaining table.
Despite one of the loudest and angriest opposition movements in American history, the Democratic Party and Barack Obama have suceeded time and again in passing strong compromise legislation that will raise the quality of life for the majority of Americans. We are safer from terrorist attacks than ever before and a concerted effort is finally being made to improve our infrastructure so we are more safe on our highways, in our airspace and on our rails.
I'm not completely sure where the criticisms of the Obama Administration have come from. He has been a textbook moderate president reaching for compromise solutions to our most heated controversies, and he has for the most part been successful at implementing his agenda.
When you look past the noise, the country is indeed a better place since Barack Obama became president. Could we do better? Of course. As Bill Clinton once said, we must always strive for a more perfect union.
Not this again
In the past few days there have been rumblings in the GOP ranks about forcing another government shut down.
Attentive readers will remember that Gingrich and the GOP congress forced a shutdown in 1995 during the successful administration of Bill Clinton. It ended up being a disaster for our country and a humiliation for the Republican Party.
I guess they didn't learn their lesson. Grim days ahead.
Attentive readers will remember that Gingrich and the GOP congress forced a shutdown in 1995 during the successful administration of Bill Clinton. It ended up being a disaster for our country and a humiliation for the Republican Party.
I guess they didn't learn their lesson. Grim days ahead.
The Enthusiasm Gap
One reason that the Democratic Party is going to be taken behind the woodshed in November is the lack of enthusiasm of Democratic voters.
It is difficult to get fired up when your party controls the White House and both chambers of Congress. It is even more difficult to get fired up when your party has not offered many concrete plans for what it would do with another two years of power. Traditionally the party that hold the presidency experiences losses of seats in congressional election. This year should be no different.
Political gridlock has also created some malaise among Democratic voters. The base was disappointed with the compromises made in passing health care reform. Liberals wanted a public option and more strong progressive legislation. Many moderate and conservative Democrats, on the other hand, would have preferred that reform not pass at all.
Democrats don't even agree on the New York City mosque issue.
The media allows the GOP to dominate the rhetoric describing Democrats. Upon close examination most congressional Dems don't appear liberal at all. They destroy the stereotype of big government, big spending, tax-raising atheists that the Republicans perpetuate.
There is no easy way to define what a Democrat looks like or what he or she believes in.
That, indeed, is the difficulty of motivating the diversity of groups and interests withing the Democratic big tent. Candidates will always make someone unhappy with their statements and decisions. The only way to truly unite Democrats is against a common enemy, whether it be Bush-era policies or the specter of the Christian Right.
At this point Obama and congress have wasted too much time doing damage control and not spent enough time formulating policy and uniting the party against Republican opposition. November will be painful indeed.
It is difficult to get fired up when your party controls the White House and both chambers of Congress. It is even more difficult to get fired up when your party has not offered many concrete plans for what it would do with another two years of power. Traditionally the party that hold the presidency experiences losses of seats in congressional election. This year should be no different.
Political gridlock has also created some malaise among Democratic voters. The base was disappointed with the compromises made in passing health care reform. Liberals wanted a public option and more strong progressive legislation. Many moderate and conservative Democrats, on the other hand, would have preferred that reform not pass at all.
Democrats don't even agree on the New York City mosque issue.
The media allows the GOP to dominate the rhetoric describing Democrats. Upon close examination most congressional Dems don't appear liberal at all. They destroy the stereotype of big government, big spending, tax-raising atheists that the Republicans perpetuate.
There is no easy way to define what a Democrat looks like or what he or she believes in.
That, indeed, is the difficulty of motivating the diversity of groups and interests withing the Democratic big tent. Candidates will always make someone unhappy with their statements and decisions. The only way to truly unite Democrats is against a common enemy, whether it be Bush-era policies or the specter of the Christian Right.
At this point Obama and congress have wasted too much time doing damage control and not spent enough time formulating policy and uniting the party against Republican opposition. November will be painful indeed.
Sep 9, 2010
Question of the Day 9/9: Are We Better Off?
In 1980 during a presidential debate, Ronald Reagan had a wonderful moment and asked a question that should define every election in our flawed 2-party system from now until we break free and open up to competition from other parties.
So the question I put to everyone today, 8 weeks before yet another key election, is are we better now than we were two years ago?
So the question I put to everyone today, 8 weeks before yet another key election, is are we better now than we were two years ago?
Answer to last question of the day: Rap versus Hip-hop
Well, I'm back. After a very long, laborious Labor Day weekend and a day-or-two under the weather, it is time to pick up right where we left off.
I asked what the difference between hip-hop and rap was, a deviation from the normally political tone of this blog only tangentally related due to the tendency of many rappers to evoke political thought in their rhymes.
My dear friend Nick and I were discussing what this difference could be. There are acts that we associate with the term "rap" - Eminem, Jay Z, Dr. Dre, Snoop Dogg, Nas, 50 Cent, Beastie Boys, Ludacris. There are other acts that we deem "hip-hop" - Brother Ali, Jurassic 5, Blackalicious, Atmosphere, Tribe Called Quest, Wu-Tang Clan.
What is the difference between these groups of artists? Both include white and black acts. Both include lyrical styles that run the spectrum from dark and violent to concious and educated, and often blur the two. Both use a mixture of complex and minimalist production styles.
The reality is that there is no difference between rap and hip-hop as far as the musical style is concerned. We call underground rappers hip-hop artists because they are more closely tied to the hip-hop cultural movement. Rap is just one element of that movement.
The 4 original elements of hip-hop were DJing (mixing both live and in the studio), breakdancing, MCing, and graffiti. With mainstream rap, record producers strip MCing away from it's base culture and package it for mass consumption.
Underground rap feels like hip-hop because it still has a stronger connection to its urban roots, when the youth involved in the subculture still breakdanced, beatboxed and tagged graffiti.
I asked what the difference between hip-hop and rap was, a deviation from the normally political tone of this blog only tangentally related due to the tendency of many rappers to evoke political thought in their rhymes.
My dear friend Nick and I were discussing what this difference could be. There are acts that we associate with the term "rap" - Eminem, Jay Z, Dr. Dre, Snoop Dogg, Nas, 50 Cent, Beastie Boys, Ludacris. There are other acts that we deem "hip-hop" - Brother Ali, Jurassic 5, Blackalicious, Atmosphere, Tribe Called Quest, Wu-Tang Clan.
What is the difference between these groups of artists? Both include white and black acts. Both include lyrical styles that run the spectrum from dark and violent to concious and educated, and often blur the two. Both use a mixture of complex and minimalist production styles.
The reality is that there is no difference between rap and hip-hop as far as the musical style is concerned. We call underground rappers hip-hop artists because they are more closely tied to the hip-hop cultural movement. Rap is just one element of that movement.
The 4 original elements of hip-hop were DJing (mixing both live and in the studio), breakdancing, MCing, and graffiti. With mainstream rap, record producers strip MCing away from it's base culture and package it for mass consumption.
Underground rap feels like hip-hop because it still has a stronger connection to its urban roots, when the youth involved in the subculture still breakdanced, beatboxed and tagged graffiti.
Sep 4, 2010
More on Stimulus part 2
So it is official, more economic stimulus is on the way but it is still unclear what exactly that will entail. The folks at The Daily Beast have a small outline and suggest that it might include tax breaks and rebates and possibly more infrastructure spending.
Tax cuts have never been shown to effectively stimulate the economy, but the Obama Administration may have specific targets in mind that would make it more beneficial than it would otherwise.
If we really want stimulus, it has to be infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure.
Tax cuts have never been shown to effectively stimulate the economy, but the Obama Administration may have specific targets in mind that would make it more beneficial than it would otherwise.
If we really want stimulus, it has to be infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)