Thursday, September 01, 2005
The Price of Gas
We have witnessed the beginning of an economic panic, possibly an economic crisis. People are growing more and more concerned. Gas prices have climbed to ridiculous highs. What is the answer? In my email yesterday I received a don't buy gas on Thursday message. Will that really do anything? The oil companies know that we rely on them. Last night I receieved an email directing me not to purchase gas from Exxon and Mobil. The rationale is that the drive the market price up since they primarily rely on Middle East oil. Honestly, I don't purchase Exxon or Mobil anyway because they are always priced higher than others in my area.
Things are going to have to give at some point. People can't afford these prices. But these gas prices will have an effect on many things. Food prices will skyrocket due to added transportation costs in addition to many other retail objects. Neo Cons will say it is time to tap ANWAR for more oil. They will attempt to use this crisis to push their own anti-environment agenda.
I believe that people will turn to the internet. People will shop prices more now than ever. Personally for gas, I am relying on gasbuddy.com. It allows me to search gas prices in my area. That is my first step. What will be yours? Let's offer some suggestions for saving some money and helping to save the economy. we need to continue to purchase items to get the economy moving but with gas prices very high we also need to be money conscious.
This will effect everyone. I'm glad I took my vacation a month earlier. I don't think I could have afforded the gas now.
Things are going to have to give at some point. People can't afford these prices. But these gas prices will have an effect on many things. Food prices will skyrocket due to added transportation costs in addition to many other retail objects. Neo Cons will say it is time to tap ANWAR for more oil. They will attempt to use this crisis to push their own anti-environment agenda.
I believe that people will turn to the internet. People will shop prices more now than ever. Personally for gas, I am relying on gasbuddy.com. It allows me to search gas prices in my area. That is my first step. What will be yours? Let's offer some suggestions for saving some money and helping to save the economy. we need to continue to purchase items to get the economy moving but with gas prices very high we also need to be money conscious.
This will effect everyone. I'm glad I took my vacation a month earlier. I don't think I could have afforded the gas now.
Friday, August 26, 2005
The Imperial Presidency
I saw someone comment on another blog and use the term the “Imperial Presidency” and I thought that this would be a good topic to discuss. It’s a term that has roots back to the 1960s and was the title of a book written by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
Imperial Presidency is the idea that the government is controlled by the President and his close advisors that reside in the West Wing. All major decisions and policies originate there. The Chief of Staff to the President acts as a pseudo Prime Minister and the rest of the cabinet is not as important as the President can appoint people to serve in the West Wing whose roles can almost mirror Cabinet positions and do not require Senate confirmation.
A contention of the Imperial Presidency theory is that the Executive branch is small and cannot exert that much control over the entire federal government. The small number of people in the executive branch cannot effectively govern.
The reality I believe is that each President establishes his own brand of Presidency. Their own leadership style determines how the Executive branch will function. Right now we are going through an Imperial Presidency. President Bush often acts without concern to Congress and many Americans. He has taken his 51% as a mandate for every initiative he has. Instead of working to gain more support, he instead does what he wants when he wants. Is this the Presidency our forefathers designed? I don’t think so. They limited the power of the executive branch in a direct response to the monarchy of Great Britain that they escaped.
Also is it coincidences that many of the Presidents accused of having Imperial Presidencies are Republican? Presidents FDR and Kennedy were accused of Imperial Presidencies also but trying to offer an impartial observation. Clinton did not have an Imperial Presidency; he often reached out for bipartisan support. Give me your thoughts, is this a problem or just something that is a natural occurrence. Would Cindy Sheehan be able to talk with the President if he wasn’t in the midst of an Imperial Presidency?
Imperial Presidency is the idea that the government is controlled by the President and his close advisors that reside in the West Wing. All major decisions and policies originate there. The Chief of Staff to the President acts as a pseudo Prime Minister and the rest of the cabinet is not as important as the President can appoint people to serve in the West Wing whose roles can almost mirror Cabinet positions and do not require Senate confirmation.
A contention of the Imperial Presidency theory is that the Executive branch is small and cannot exert that much control over the entire federal government. The small number of people in the executive branch cannot effectively govern.
The reality I believe is that each President establishes his own brand of Presidency. Their own leadership style determines how the Executive branch will function. Right now we are going through an Imperial Presidency. President Bush often acts without concern to Congress and many Americans. He has taken his 51% as a mandate for every initiative he has. Instead of working to gain more support, he instead does what he wants when he wants. Is this the Presidency our forefathers designed? I don’t think so. They limited the power of the executive branch in a direct response to the monarchy of Great Britain that they escaped.
Also is it coincidences that many of the Presidents accused of having Imperial Presidencies are Republican? Presidents FDR and Kennedy were accused of Imperial Presidencies also but trying to offer an impartial observation. Clinton did not have an Imperial Presidency; he often reached out for bipartisan support. Give me your thoughts, is this a problem or just something that is a natural occurrence. Would Cindy Sheehan be able to talk with the President if he wasn’t in the midst of an Imperial Presidency?
Thursday, August 25, 2005
Iraq...The Big Topic
Aside from the neo-cons and the strong Bush supporters, where is support for the Iraq War coming from? Please don't confuse this with support for the troops in Iraq but rather support for the mission itself. The neo-cons and Bush supporters would like people to believe that support for the troops is the same as support for the mission but we all know that is not true.
The war was started with a battery of misinformation that much we can see. No weapons of mass destruction have been found. In fact, Iran with a blossoming nuclear program offers more of a threat than Iraq did. Donald Rumsfeld has bragged that "We have no exit strategy, only a victory strategy." Saddam is out of power, a representative body of Iraqis is building a government and still that is not a victory? That is something the Bush administration could have hung their hat on and claimed as a victory and removed our troops from harm's way. Instead American troops still serve in Iraq putting their lives on the line on a daily basis.
Now Democrats in Congress are beginning to call for troop removal. Cindy Sheehan's crusade has further pushed the issue to the forefront with the President refusing to address her concerns. Her son dies in Bush's Iraqi campaign and he cannot even talk with her. Whether he concerns are appropriate or not, he owes her that much. But Cindy's issues are clear and paint a much different picture than Bush political minds want Americans' to see. They want to avoid any discussion of death and casulties but the lack of pictures of coffins returning does not eliminate the fact that Americans are dying in Iraq.
We have a presence in Iraq that cannot be immediately removed. American policy in Iraq has not been directed in creating a strong infrastructure. We must gradually start removing troops and continue until Iraq is governed by whomever THEY decide, not the Bush administration.
I believe however much effort is put into rallies to remove troops, an equal effort should be put into supporting the troops that are there. If someone is pushing an anti-war rally, then have a place to drop off sunscreen, movies and books for the troops. Unfortunately, anti-war is seen as anti-soldier and that ridiculous theory must end.
The war was started with a battery of misinformation that much we can see. No weapons of mass destruction have been found. In fact, Iran with a blossoming nuclear program offers more of a threat than Iraq did. Donald Rumsfeld has bragged that "We have no exit strategy, only a victory strategy." Saddam is out of power, a representative body of Iraqis is building a government and still that is not a victory? That is something the Bush administration could have hung their hat on and claimed as a victory and removed our troops from harm's way. Instead American troops still serve in Iraq putting their lives on the line on a daily basis.
Now Democrats in Congress are beginning to call for troop removal. Cindy Sheehan's crusade has further pushed the issue to the forefront with the President refusing to address her concerns. Her son dies in Bush's Iraqi campaign and he cannot even talk with her. Whether he concerns are appropriate or not, he owes her that much. But Cindy's issues are clear and paint a much different picture than Bush political minds want Americans' to see. They want to avoid any discussion of death and casulties but the lack of pictures of coffins returning does not eliminate the fact that Americans are dying in Iraq.
We have a presence in Iraq that cannot be immediately removed. American policy in Iraq has not been directed in creating a strong infrastructure. We must gradually start removing troops and continue until Iraq is governed by whomever THEY decide, not the Bush administration.
I believe however much effort is put into rallies to remove troops, an equal effort should be put into supporting the troops that are there. If someone is pushing an anti-war rally, then have a place to drop off sunscreen, movies and books for the troops. Unfortunately, anti-war is seen as anti-soldier and that ridiculous theory must end.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Robertson and Christianity
Funny thing happened today....Pat Robertson, host of the 700 Club and self proclaimed 'Christian' called for the murder of the President of Venezuela. Maybe I should repeat that...The founder of the Christian Coalition and former Republican candidate for President (in the 1988 primaries) advocated the killing of the elected leader of another country.
The Bush administration quickly moved to distance themselves from the comment. A spokesman from the State Department stated that Robertson was a private citizen and his views and statements are not US policy.
The Venezuelan government is not too happy. The Vice President of Venezuela has called for the US to take action against Robertson. What action is possible besides embarassment and shock is unknown. Robertson is on quite a run of late with a series of strange suggestions and statements. In May he said that the erosion of the courts to liberal tendancies was more of a threat to America than terrorists. October of 2003 saw Robertson suggest that a small nuclear device should be detonated at the State Department to shake things up.
I am a practicing Catholic and consider myself a decent person. My question is what part of Christianity allows you to call for the murder of someone. What did the President of Venezuela actually do to earn this death sentence from Pat Robertson? Is it just me or is this the opposite of Christianity?
The Bush administration quickly moved to distance themselves from the comment. A spokesman from the State Department stated that Robertson was a private citizen and his views and statements are not US policy.
The Venezuelan government is not too happy. The Vice President of Venezuela has called for the US to take action against Robertson. What action is possible besides embarassment and shock is unknown. Robertson is on quite a run of late with a series of strange suggestions and statements. In May he said that the erosion of the courts to liberal tendancies was more of a threat to America than terrorists. October of 2003 saw Robertson suggest that a small nuclear device should be detonated at the State Department to shake things up.
I am a practicing Catholic and consider myself a decent person. My question is what part of Christianity allows you to call for the murder of someone. What did the President of Venezuela actually do to earn this death sentence from Pat Robertson? Is it just me or is this the opposite of Christianity?
Gas Prices
We're all feeling the pinch. Gas is going up, up and away. It's become more and more important to shop price and here is a website that will help all of us.
www.gasbuddy.com
You can find your own area and see the highs and lows. It's a great tool to utilize!
www.gasbuddy.com
You can find your own area and see the highs and lows. It's a great tool to utilize!
We're Back
After an all too long hiatus, we're back. We had a few health concerns but we are rearing to start discussing issues and concerns once again. I want to start a few things on here. Book discussions and the such.
Saturday, November 06, 2004
The Democratic Reality
This blog will discuss the Democratic Party and policy issues. It seems that many people with various views are being excluded from meaningful discussions within the party on a local, state and national level. We can recognize the fact that while much finding for the two major political parties comes from the extreme left or the extreme right. The bulk of voters come from the middle, average working class people living paycheck to paycheck with families. I am proud to be a democrat, I am proud to be raising a young family with my wife and searching for ways to incorporate more income into our household, but the feeling is that my party is excluding me. Is a conservative Democrat really a Republican? Where is the moderate element? Where are the leaders who can bridge the gap among moderates on both sides? Is it time to seek candidates that can appeal to a broader spectrum of the population while remaining socially conscious? Who would these candidates be? It might be time to change the course of the Democratic Party to gain more support. It will take quite the effort, but the direction of our party and our country is worth it. This past Tuesday saw the moderates side with the radical right not only in the Presidential race but also in Senate and Congressional races, we need to move forward and find the consensus we need to take this country back through the Democratic Party.
