Those not in the office of president, but who are running for that position, make grand pronouncements on what they would do, if elected, to solve all of our problems in one fell sweep. They act like magicians; I guess as part of their acts they would make the opposing party disappear, as well as dissidents in their own party.
But most of them have some sort of record, albeit very small and not noteworthy in some cases. They also should give some details along with their broad pronouncements. And it is funny that nothing they propose is objectionable to almost anyone. They are for the proverbial motherhood and apple pie.
What about Michelle Bachmann, who is going to abolish the Department of Education on January 20, 2012. First, of course, she adds thousands to the unemployment rolls. Second, what happens to the accreditation of all of our institutions of higher learning? Currently they are subject to earning accreditation through regional agencies that are subject to the scrutiny of the Department of Education. I guess that is not that important to Ms. Bachmann, just one less thing she has to worry about. Let the states and the regions come up with their own standards. Whether they agree with each or, or whether a student from California can transfer to South Carolina and get credit for the work they have done so far, is not really important to her. She also says that a gallon of gasoline will cost less than $2.00 when she is president. How? Has she made deals with the OPEC nations? How can you promise, with a straight face, that you can control all the various elements in the US that control what a gallon of gas costs, let alone control those elements in the world economy?
And Mr. Perry, the gentleman from Texas. He supported a state version of the Dream Act, giving in-state university tuition to illegal immigrants who graduate from Texas high schools, and said it would be unfair to punish these young folks for their parents’ actions. Then why does he oppose the national Dream Act? What is different about Texas in this case? He also has been critical of the Federal Reserve’s printing of money even though that has essentially provided several years of low interest rates after the Lehman crash. What would the country have done without that? And there has to be a body to control the supply of money. And then there is the criminal justice system in Texas – they put more people to death per year than most of the rest of the country combined. And I bet most of them are actually guilty. He also cut the budget 75% for volunteer firefighters in Texas. So I guess that all those folks risking their lives fighting the huge fires in Texas covering an area about the size of Connecticut will have to pay for their own protective gear, food, and gas from now on. Thanks for your help.
In Massachusetts, Mitt Romney passes something that Obama care looks like, but opposes the national plan. He understands that everyone in MA should be covered by Health Insurance, but not the whole country. What’s with that? He waffles between no tax cuts for the rich and then supports the Bush tax cuts.
There is much more about these folks out there that makes me cringe.
They do not pledge to work together with all factions of both parties to arrive at workable solutions for all citizens. They just want to get elected. That’s it. Be wary, my friends.
Take care.
No comments:
Post a Comment