A brief political post.
Jul. 15th, 2003 09:22 pmI'm sorry, I can't restrain myself from writing about this any longer. I didn't post the entry I wrote about civil liberties, although I actually lost sleep over it before deciding to let it go, so I'm going to get it out of my system this time. I'll try to keep it brief, though.
Okay. I'm not anutritional anthropologist economist, nor do I play one on TV. But there's just something that amazes, annoys and disturbs me. This is the sort of thing that deters me from following the news too closely. I'm easily depressed by how the world works.
I can understand how people would have differing views on The Issues. I can even understand and in some instances am actually glad that people take a stand behind One Issue if it's important, although most often it just makes me cringe to hear people justify their vote against something important they stand for because of a minor issue they DON'T believe in and not even realize it. What I find fascinating, though, is how the people blatantly ignore the numbers. The republican party, in the midst of cutting funding for this or that or implementing reforms that do absolutely no good (don't make me look for a link, I read it in the paper last week.. related to the Headstart program, I believe.) has actually put us an estimated $455 billion in debt. Hello? Billion? Do you have any idea how much that is? I know that President Beeblebrox has no clue. We had a surplus the last four years Clinton was in office. We had a deficit when Bush Sr. was in office. Are we beginning to see a trend? Unemployment rates are higher than they've been in nine years, with 6.4% of the population out of a job. 27% of the population believes we're in a good situation economically (compared to 80% in 2000.) It's just not good!
And for pete's sake, before someone says something technically true but totally inane like "like, uhh, you can't like blame all of the like, economy problems on like, the president and stuff", I'd just like to point out that if there was still a surplus, you would sure as heck be blaming THAT on him. And furthermore, I'm sure that Sept 11 didn't help matters, but you absolutely cannot lay $455 billion dollars at a national tragedy's door just to get the patriotic juices flowing. Keep in mind that there was no massive terrorist attacks (definition being: worthy of laying such a huge debt on) when the deficit was at $290 billion in 1992.
And um, no offense intended to any of you. I hope I didn't have to mention that, though. I'm just annoyed at the situation and the world. *sigh* I do feel better now, though. ;)
--
"At $455 billion, the new deficit would eclipse the previous record of $290 billion in 1992 when Bush's father was president. The U.S. government enjoyed four straight years of budget surpluses between 1998 and 2001." --CNN Money.
Okay. I'm not a
I can understand how people would have differing views on The Issues. I can even understand and in some instances am actually glad that people take a stand behind One Issue if it's important, although most often it just makes me cringe to hear people justify their vote against something important they stand for because of a minor issue they DON'T believe in and not even realize it. What I find fascinating, though, is how the people blatantly ignore the numbers. The republican party, in the midst of cutting funding for this or that or implementing reforms that do absolutely no good (don't make me look for a link, I read it in the paper last week.. related to the Headstart program, I believe.) has actually put us an estimated $455 billion in debt. Hello? Billion? Do you have any idea how much that is? I know that President Beeblebrox has no clue. We had a surplus the last four years Clinton was in office. We had a deficit when Bush Sr. was in office. Are we beginning to see a trend? Unemployment rates are higher than they've been in nine years, with 6.4% of the population out of a job. 27% of the population believes we're in a good situation economically (compared to 80% in 2000.) It's just not good!
And for pete's sake, before someone says something technically true but totally inane like "like, uhh, you can't like blame all of the like, economy problems on like, the president and stuff", I'd just like to point out that if there was still a surplus, you would sure as heck be blaming THAT on him. And furthermore, I'm sure that Sept 11 didn't help matters, but you absolutely cannot lay $455 billion dollars at a national tragedy's door just to get the patriotic juices flowing. Keep in mind that there was no massive terrorist attacks (definition being: worthy of laying such a huge debt on) when the deficit was at $290 billion in 1992.
And um, no offense intended to any of you. I hope I didn't have to mention that, though. I'm just annoyed at the situation and the world. *sigh* I do feel better now, though. ;)
--
"At $455 billion, the new deficit would eclipse the previous record of $290 billion in 1992 when Bush's father was president. The U.S. government enjoyed four straight years of budget surpluses between 1998 and 2001." --CNN Money.
no subject
Date: 2003-07-15 06:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-07-15 08:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-07-15 10:37 pm (UTC)When it looked like Bush Sr. was going to be elected, I said at that time that I wanted to leave the country. Would that I had. Still, I believe that the administration of Bush Jr. is far worse, and that goes much deeper than the deficit and into the erosion of freedoms in the name of security. What I read in the news makes me cringe daily. What I don't read in the American news, but do get from other sources, disturbs me.
no subject
Date: 2003-07-19 07:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-07-15 07:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-07-15 07:56 pm (UTC)