Since I’ve been in the digital media space since 1995, I’ve developed a habit of listening to the news while I work. I think I probably listen to more news than just about anyone and it drives my wife crazy. The radio, TV or web is broadcasting at me 2-5 hours a day. One thing I’ve noticed over the years is a troubling and recurring pattern in American politics. Specifically, it is a policy of “support your party at all costs”. Each night, we’ll see a representative from the Democratic party and a representative from the Republican party exchange perspectives on the news story of the day. And do you know what you can expect? Absolute predictability. Got a Republican arrested for doing indecent things in a bathroom? Guess what I was waiting to here from the right? Exactly what I heard. Rush Limbaugh saying that Craig was “thrown under the bus”, as if to suggest that his acts didn’t contradict his usual calls for moral decency. Instead, he downplayed the incident and suggested he was “forced to resign by non-loyal members” of his own party:
“You people have committed far more grievous acts of indecency than Larry Craig committed here by tapping his foot in a bathroom.”
Just tapping his foot in a bathroom. What’s wrong with that? What’s wrong indeed.
The same people call a return to moral values imperative for our country and their platform is largely based on the notion.
Similarly, I recall the Clinton sex fiasco. As was common at the time, Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen declared sympathetically that President Clinton “has been mortified, subjected to an Orwellian intrusion by the gumshoes of the state.” Clinton defenders loved to use the phrase “sexual McCarthyism” — so much so that one of them, liberal law professor Alan Dershowitz, wrote a book on it. Dems spun the sex scandal as an “attack on privacy”.
In politics, a spade is rarely called a spade. And that’s why you’ll increasingly notice legions of facebook members who tag their political stance as “apathetic”. When a corporate america blue collar warrior is referred to as a “politician” within his organization is that intended in any other way than the negative? It’s certainly not a compliment.
The other problem with politics is that typical “pillars” of each party simply don’t hold water in my view. For example, one popular myth is that Republican governance is better for your pocketbook. In part, the theory goes that if you lower taxes you’ll stimulate the economy. The issue is that this topic is far more complicated than it seems and in fact TOO complicated for any Republican candidate to adequately explain to a typical voter. Thus, the “theory” is really little more than a well-tested blurb designed to attract votes. In reality, neither a Democratic President nor a Republican President has little DIRECT control over the economy. It is it’s own animal. There are too many other forces at work. I have long maintained that you should elect a President based on the things that he (or she?) can largely control. Two terms under a Republican leadership actually shows two interesting economic observations. The first is that CORPORATE taxes are actually at an all time high. Do higher corporate taxes stimulate an economy? Let’s assume for a moment that the theory still hasn’t broken down. The second economic notable is the relative strength or weakness of our currency. At the moment, the dollar is very weak. In a economy that is supposed to have been sparked by tax cuts for consumers should we be observing a weak dollar on the international stage. No. This too is a complicated topic but essentially, a weak dollar is a reflection of confidence. There actually ARE some advantages to a weak dollar. For example, U.S. firms find it easier to sell goods in foreign markets, its makes America a great place for international tourists and our capital markets start looking very attractive to outside investors. On the other hand, CONSUMERS will almost always feel an increased pain.Consumers face higher prices on foreign products/services which in turn will almost always impact their overall cost of living. It also limits the American consumer’s international vacation and travel plans or makes it hard for them to expand into foreign markets.
In any case, let’s just consider the cost of energy for a moment. Oil transactions are carried out predominantly in U.S. dollars. So, if you’re a Venezuelan, a Saudi prince, or a Dutchman who runs Royal Dutch Shell, you want to realize the same purchasing power from your oil sales that you had two years ago. If the U.S. dollar has fallen in value 20 to 30 percent vs. your currency in that timeframe, you need more dollars to have the same purchasing power. So, you raise the price of your oil. We all end up paying the bill for a weaker dollar when it comes to energy costs. That much is sure.
Remember, a Republican administration, in theory, is supposed to be the right choice for those who primarily value “economic conservatism” or sometimes called “Fiscal conservatism”.
Fiscal conservatism is the economic philosophy of prudence in government spending and debt.
Said another way? Democrats want to raise taxes and that’s bad for the economy. Republicans want to lower taxes and that’s good for the economy.
I’m cynical about politics in general but I was curious as to the financial record of our last democratic president. If, indeed, a President has a serious influence over the economy then what can we make of Clinton’s FINANCIAL record?
Record budget deficits have become record surpluses, 22 million new jobs have been created, unemployment and core inflation are at their lowest levels in more than 30 years, and America is in the midst of the longest economic expansion in our history.
In fairness to Bush Jr., the current unemployment rate is about the same as it was under Clinton. However, under Bush Sr. in 1993 the unemployment rate hit 6.9%.
Reagan had two recessions — one of which began in July 1981 and ended in November 1982. It was the most severe recession since the Great Depression, pushing the monthly unemployment rate as high as 10.8 percent.
I’m sick of politics because I don’t believe the rhetoric. Don’t prop up members of your own party who use the Oval Office as their private strip club. Don’t rail on about the necessity to a return to moral values while you’re illegally feeding your drug addiction.
And stop telling me that lowering my income taxes and increasing my corporate taxes is going to help me buy more presents during the holiday season. I don’t believe any of it.
What I’d really like to do is just take my hard earned vacation to another country and not feel like a sod when people hear my accent. Waging a war on terror effectively while all the while boosting our global popularity is going to be a tough balance. Our new president better have good diplomatic and PR skills. That’s all I ask for. I don’t care it’s a Republican or Democrat. Just be able to form complete sentences and not embarrass the rest of us.
