Notes from the chasm
I avoid writing about politics or work, but a couple things from Obama's nomination acceptance speech last night sent the smoke curling out of my ears. I followed the primary races like most other adults and likewise was properly nauseated by the disengenuity of the Clintons. Obama had his share of gaffes of course, but by and large he has up to now been able to steer clear of any boondoggles surrounding his claims versus his record.
This is the upside of the experience issue. Maybe he hasn't spent much time in the game, but doggone it, isn't his uniform beautiful and stain-free?
Anyway, listening to his speech there were red flags galore indicating the chasm between his platform and reality. But there were two particular points that I felt noteworthy enough to break my no-politics guideline with this blog:
It's obvious that Obama's supporters believe in what he is saying. It is unclear if Obama does. But between Obama and his supporters I think that somebody is being naive, and I don't think it's Obama.
Sorry again for interrupting my stream of unimportant dribble with politics. As you were.
This is the upside of the experience issue. Maybe he hasn't spent much time in the game, but doggone it, isn't his uniform beautiful and stain-free?
Anyway, listening to his speech there were red flags galore indicating the chasm between his platform and reality. But there were two particular points that I felt noteworthy enough to break my no-politics guideline with this blog:
- "I will cut taxes for 95% of the working families!"
Absent from Mr. Obama's speech was any mention of the crisis that America is facing with mandatory spending items (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other entitlements that the U.S. Government is legally obligated to pay). The money that has been collected for those programs up to now has already been spent, and each year our payout comes out of the current budget.
As more baby boomers retire, there are going to be more people collecting on those entitlements and as such more of the budget will be required to meet the costs. If we are to maintain the amount of discretionary spending that this country engages in, that will mean that the amount of revenue the federal government takes in will have to increase (i.e. higher taxes). And that's not even mentioning what to do about America's $9.2 TRILLION dollar national debt, my non-political friends!
What's worse, Mr. Obama in several other points suggested that he would increase the government's discretionary spending with new programs (ex., $150 billion on renewable energy research).
Newsflash: You cannot decrease taxes and increase spending without borrowing more. It's not a democrat or republican thing. Nobody can do that. Come to think of it, maybe that's why he didn't mention the national debt. How any tax-paying American who was within earshot left there believing that their taxes will be going down anytime soon is beyond me. Nevertheless this unattainable promise was met with enthusiastic applause. - "I will set a clear goal as President: in ten years, we will finally end our dependence on oil from the Middle East."
I guess it's nice to have goals, however lofty and unattainable they may be. The inference may be taken that he is counting on his $150 billion dollar renewable energy gamble to return a jackpot.
The fundamental problem with this statement of course is that Mr. Obama did not indicate the significant paradigm shift that this country will need to undergo with it's relationship to fossil fuels in order to accomplish this goal at all, much less within ten years, which is laughable.
The food we eat doesn't reach the store in the back of some ex-hippie's prius. The diesel trucks that move our goods, the planes, trains and automobiles and every mundane thing in our lives, including the plastic keyboard I am clacking away on right now, all come from oil.
America is not addicted to oil. America is a morbidly obese consumer of the stuff.
What Obama did not do is point his finger at America and say, "And that means you, fatty, are going on a diet!" I'm not arguing that we don't need the diet. Rather I am pointing out the disingenuousness of touting such superb-sounding ends and not mentioning the very painful means he will need to employ in order to keep that promise.
Those means, after all, will be falling directly on to our shoulders. With no renewable (or even nonrenewable for that matter) energy sources that can take the place of oil on the horizon, that means we are going to have to not only dramatically cut back on our consumption, but completely change our attitude towards consumption. Don't expect that to happen without a lot of kicking and screaming.
This statement by Obama, like all of his others, was met with thunderous applause. His supporters really do seem to think that within ten years we will all be using Mr. Fusion.
It's obvious that Obama's supporters believe in what he is saying. It is unclear if Obama does. But between Obama and his supporters I think that somebody is being naive, and I don't think it's Obama.
Sorry again for interrupting my stream of unimportant dribble with politics. As you were.
PS - Don't think for a second that this means I support the other guy... I think he's a snake too.
4 Comments
|
Was This Article Helpful to You? Please take a moment to post a comment. I'd love to hear from you! |
Link
Save to del.icio.us
Digg This!
