This is the kind of spin
journalism that makes me question whether young people are capable of rational
thought. The headline alone makes me
mad. The basic premise that voters are
driven only by emotion and the author’s belief that voters actually conspire to
punish the President insults me, both as a voter and a rational citizen.
Mr. Newman spends his time
explaining how great the President is doing compared to his predecessors but
then goes on to say that while his performance on job creation, lowering
unemployment and GDP growth are ho-hum, the stock market has done great, but
that is really because of the policies of the Federal Reserve Board, and he
doesn’t really control that anyway. He
also points out the stock market is quiet possibly on the verge of a
correction, which I think we are seeing now. So by the Newman’s own
reckoning this President’s performance is to give it a word – average.
What we have seen for the last
six years is a President who is more interested in condemning the opposition
than seeking solutions. Someone more interested in fund raising than raising America’s standard of living. An individual focused on party politics and
shifting blame than in solving the tough problems the nation faces. With this kind of admiring press
rationalizing his failures why should we expect different.
So let’s take a look at what he
has done for the average citizen. At the
cost of rising deficits he has pushed a national health care law that will make
the insurance companies and hospital corporations billions while significantly increasing the national debt. Those who do not buy insurance
will pay a penalty, if that part of the law is actually enforced by the IRS so at the end of the day taxes will go up either through increased insurance premiums or directly to the IRS.
In 2011, the median household
income was $49,000. Adjusted for
inflation that is below what it was in 1989[1]
Last year 71% of college
seniors graduated with an average of $29,400 in debt.[2] It appears this push to make everyone attend
college will make the colleges and bankers rich, but what will it do for the
students? Ms. Warren, D-MA, is arguing
for debt relief, but I don’t see anyone talking seriously about controlling
college tuition to make it truly affordable.
That would force the not-for-profit institutions to actually live within
an actual budget and control costs, not something they are very good at.
According to the Bureau of
Labor Statistics,[3] in
2013 there were 75.9 million workers age 16 or older who were paid at hourly
rates. Of these 4.3 percent were paid at
or below the $7.25/hour federal standard.
Of that 4.3% roughly half were aged 16-24 and worked part time (less
than 32 hours/week). This issue seems to
get an awful lot of attention when we are talking about 3 million workers out a
total labor force of 156 million. I
think we would be better served talking about how to employ the roughly 9.3
million men and women who are actually unemployed.
As we know the President has
spoken at length on both these subjects, but to what useful purpose. To my way of thinking his use of these issues
is not to really improve the lot of the common man, but to simply further his
political agenda. For the first two
years of his term he had both the House and Senate solidly behind him and chose
the most divisive legislation possible to push through. Since then, with a Republican house and a
Democratic senate he has pursued an agenda to stall all legislation, and upset
the checks and balances our constitution provides.
So at the end of the day what
will be the motive for the average voter?
To bolster the non-productive policies of an Executive and Congress that seems more
interested in the division of the nation, or to reject those policies and seek
a different course. This whole idea that
the average voter sets out to punish an individual by voting for the opposition
reflects the fundamental mindset of the writer that personality is more
important than substance. I reject that
mindset, as does the rest of the average middle class voting block.
2 comments:
Can't argue with anything you've said! Just the facts for allot interpret and spin to their liking.
Part of what has happened politically over the last few years is that the climate has been more
"Ad hominen" in general and thereby less issue or actual impact focused. There was so much criticism if one had a concern about the president that it's hard to have a dialogue about the actual facts rather than one's motive or race or outlook. True democracy requires real conversation and that requires a common base ( The Constitution did provide this for a time...no picker of party) and a basic level of trust in the citizens. Well...you articulate all this better than I do. Keep it up John!
Post a Comment