Evolving Government

I recently read an article in the Austin American Statesman about how the Obama campaign, now transition team, used and continue to implement online promotion through various forms of media as an outlet for critical information. The 2008 election was historic not only because of the diversity of its contenders, but also in the way it was presented to the public. The internet has become an ever increasingly ubiquitous part of our lives. Businesses have understood this for quite some time now, and it seems that politics has followed suit. Now president-elect Barack Obama, used the internet to ascend from total obscurity to capturing the Democratic nomination and raising over 600 million dollars during the course of his campaign. The internet has effectively given birth to the greatest innovation in political campaigning since the first televised Presidential debates between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. The article looks to the future and how the nature of politics and the presidency will change as a result. It covers the obvious pros and the more surreptitious cons of this kind of government as America prepares for its first “digital presidency”.

Balancing Security and Civil Liberty

This is a commentary on a post made by my colleague Benjamin Felder. While I do agree with most of the things he is saying, I do not necessarily agree with how he is saying them. I most definitely agree that homeland security is doing their job the only way it can possibly be done right. If you are being attacked from your left, you don't turn to your right. It is a fact that the people who are attacking us are mostly Muslim and of Arab dissent. Naturally this is the group of people that we are going to focus our attention on. When you hear the words "racial profiling" it comes with a negative connotation, but it is no different from what most people do every day. It is a defense mechanism, and nature gave it to us to protect us. It only becomes a problem when it is the single determining factor for how you treat people who are different from you.

That much of his post I do agree with. The part I don't agree with is where he talks about foreigners. Foreigners that come into this country legally or illegally should have as much right as everyone else as long as they are here and obey the law. Even before 9/11 it has been very difficult to enter this country legally and even harder to become a citizen. These people work hard and do jobs that no one else wants to do. They shouldn't be treated differently just because they are missing a piece of paper. Most people who enter this country illegally don't do so for lack of wanting to go through legal channels, but because they simply cannot. When I hear people make out of hand comments on illegal immigration like, "Well, they should have come in the legal way", it really makes me angry, because they have absolutely no idea what the legal way is. If you stop and think about why immigration reform is such a big issue right now, it isn't simply about stopping people from unlawfully crossing our borders, but also ensuring that anyone who is willing to work hard, pay taxes and obey the law can have a reasonable opportunity to become a citizen of this country.

Lastly, it troubles me the way he worded his final thought. "Would you rather have a proactive Homeland Security that does their best to save American lives by inconveniencing some foreigners...?” There is no us and there is no them. Citizen or not, if you love this country and what it stands for you are an American. This is the beauty of our democracy. The government should do everything in its power to keep us safe, and we should perform our civic duty by constantly scrutinizing them, thereby balancing security and civil liberty, ensuring that the freedom that this country has promised isn't being taken away.

Commentary: U.S. National Government

Saying that the U.S. National Government is under performing would be a huge understatement. In fact, you could make a reasonable argument that the government is working in the best interest of someone other than its citizens. Particularly over the past 16 plus years, much to the bewilderment of the American people, our government has been moving in a direction contrary to where the country should be heading. In the last two or three federal administrations, particularly the past two, there has been a complete revolution with regards to everything from international relations with both friendly and hostile countries and a diminishing of American independence, and in domestic policies with the blatant unwillingness to stop the mass exodus of production and manufacturing jobs and infrastructure. And also, the Federal Reserve, implementing policy that allowed unqualified individuals to obtain loans that they could not afford to pay, and reducing home lending rates to a level that encouraged millions of fiscally illiterate Americans to divest themselves of their homes, the one thing that made them wealthy. Those and other factors have lead us into the worst housing crisis in our nations history.

The USA Today reports that a total of nearly 1.3 million U.S. housing properties were subject to foreclosure activity(up 79% from 2006). And 3.2 million, one in six factory jobs, have disappeared since the start of 2000 alone. Yet, the president and Congress continue to engage in disadvantageous foreign relations that export jobs, technology and business, at the same time encouraging low wage foreigners into the workforce. There is also the issue of the un-Constitutional occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan that alone drains billions of dollars per day form the treasury and costs American lives. Hopefully, no matter which party wins this upcoming election, these issues are resolved, and America bounces back from the sunken state that it is in now, both with regard to international affairs and domestic and financial policy making.

Bailout Fallout

This is a critique of a recent commentary pertaining to the Republican Party’s management of the current financial crisis. More specifically, John McCain’s response to the situation. (http://tinyurl.com/3hw6gf)

This commentary is directed at anyone who is either interested in current events, politics, or finance. The author claims that the Republican presidential nominee and his staff have mismanaged the situation, and cites recent polls and news articles to back up his argument.

He claims that the majority of the public seems to not only blame the Republicans for the crisis, but also believe them to be responsible for the defeat of the first proposition. This, he says, will not only make it difficult for the republicans to win the presidential race, but also win races for the house and senate; stating that the party’s chances hinge on the success or failure of the bill.

I agree with the authors commentary that the majority of the country is less than impressed with the Republican Party response to the financial crisis, whether warranted or not. The bill is going to need to prove some real visible results in a short amount of time to increase the Party’s chances of retaining the presidency.