In response to a comment...

In response to a comment from a friend on my Facebook page, I am posting this lightly edited comment here as it is too long for Facebook to handle...

I am more than happy to engage in some political debate as long as you keep in mind that I have a thick skin and I expect the same of my opponents. I love the intellectual exercise of political debate, and though I don’t expect to change many minds, as it’s my belief that in general, only a small percentage of the population is truly “on the fence,” I can always hope.

That being said, I don’t want to get into a point-by-point debate over the substance of the various accusations leveled by either side. Suffice it to say that while many on both sides of the partisan divide are correct in pointing out that neither candidate has been completely objective and both have, at times, stretched the truth, it is fairly clear that if we were to compare apples to apples, McCain and Palin have gone so far off the reservation that even prominent conservative commentators such as David Brooks of the NY Times, Ross Douthat of the Atlantic, and Richard Cohen of the Washington Post (not to mention Fox News, and even Karl Rove, of all people) complaining about the tenor and the conduct of their campaign. The level of obfuscation and deliberate avoidance of the issues has reached a level that a Fox News (!) commentator just today called “unprecedented.” I also feel compelled to point out that the sources you cited/linked to are far from objective; perhaps your energy would be better spent taking the time to cross-check your accusations on a more objective site such as www.factcheck.org , a non-partisan media & political watchdog site rather than reading the poorly researched and unreasonably partisan cheerleading of a few right wing apologists.

I think there are 2 primary issues at stake here… first is your basic political philosophy. In general, it’s been my observation that while both progressive/Democratic and conservative/Republican administrations end up spending lots of money bailing out the corporate interests that keep them in office, the difference comes in their approaches to those corporate interests, and their approaches to the people they claim to serve. However, in general, conservatives want to deregulate business on the premise that doing so will cause economic growth, but seek to regulate human behavior. In contrast, progressives generally seek to shield personal behavior from the regulation of government and attempt to regulate the behavior of big business to protect the average citizen from their collective and focused avarice. For myself, I have never believed in the idea of “trickle down” economics, and will never believe that the government can legislate the right choices for people. However, I strongly believe in a government that acts on behalf of its citizens, providing in times of need, protecting the vulnerable, giving voice to those who would otherwise be drowned out in the river of commerce and trampled by the unfettered rush to profit.

The second issue is, which candidate do you believe represents the government that you want? If you want a government that is beholden to big business, worships commerce and profit above all else, and seeks to enact laws that invade the privacy of the individual, casting aside the very spirit of the living Constitution that is the core of our country’s existence, then John McCain and Sarah Palin are your candidates. Their words and actions have made it more than clear that they are qualified to turn this country into the corporate sponsored theocracy that would be proud to hold its head up along side the likes of Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. I, on the other hand, seek something different, and hope for something more. I don’t necessarily agree with every policy and platform that Barack Obama and Joe Biden espouse. However, within their campaign, I see a genuine goodness, and a real effort to change the course of this country by at least trying to tackle such problems as insuring the 50+ million citizens who languish without healthcare coverage, and curbing the rapacious activities of the financial sector, which have, in the past 10 days (and to the terrible detriment of generations of taxpayers to come), laid bare the bankrupt policies of ultra-free-market capitalist (read conservative) economics.

So there you have it… and I ask you, where do you fall? Are you here to help your fellow man? Or climb over him to turn a profit?

Angry about the Bush bailout proposal...

This line is contained in Section 8 of the proposed bailout legislation: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!? We are going to give them $700B in spending authority and have no way to review it? No way to even oversee it? It's a blank check to rape the system (and by extension, every taxpaying citizen in the country) and cover it up as you go along, all in the name of "rescuing the economy." We clearly need to do something to clean up the mess of years of fiscal conservative deregulation, but giving them license to screw us further without any way to hold them responsible is ludicrous. And the Administration that proposed it should be slowly and carefully spit roasted over an open fire (after an long and proper trial that observes every one of their constitutional rights, and bankrupts them and their families).