I find that I have a mix of emotions about the RNC's choice for new leadership in Michael Steele...for me its partly funny, angering, and just downright frustrating in some cases. Obviously not superficially frustrated at their choice in choosing a blackman, a move that is pretty much obvious and kinda silly but more for their, probable, reasons in doing such. It does however make me feel a bit better about republicans that they would be willing to go down that road, a road that i'm sure in many of their minds was a pretty big no no, and at best a last ditch effort...
Now the question is, did they do it for the right reasons...probably not but lets examine...
Did they just see that the Democrats choose a black guy and they won, so they are copying that? Or that now they have a black man at the head of thier party, the Democrats 'black guy' doesnt really provide them any further advantage...they cancel each other out...(didnt they try this when Obama ran against Alan Keys for the senate spot? didnt it horribly backfire)? Or possibly the most noble of reasons for the choice, they actually want to expand their party to groups, specifically minority groups and bring more people into the fold...a reason that I would say is a great reason to choose someone of that group, similar as if the Catholic church had choose an African or S. American to be their new Pople, trying to get greater foothold into these ever populating and possibly catholic regions...
However I just dont see it as being really the latter choice. BUT Steele runs around and talks like thats his goal and thats his mission, which is great for him. But what really frustrates me and makes me laugh is the way he does it. I really dont know much about the guy from prior to being the head of the RNC, so I'm not sure how he talked or acted before...if its the same then I apologize and I just laugh at the RNC...but if you listen to how he talks, he's literally trying to bring the RNC to the 'hood.' He says words like "swagger" and "son" "get up in their face..." "wack"... What makes this all funny, and I guess my point for this rant and anger is that this is THE RNC'S attempt to COUNTER OBAMA...Obama who basically ran as the most NON "urban" black guy possible...If he had said ANY of the above or even close to it, Fox News, and the RNC would have jumped all over him...you saw how they tried to make the 'fist bump' the 'terrorist hand shake' or some shit like that...its just ridiculous and so obvious how quickly the RNC just turns their boat....
I think this just continues to propagate frustrations I had from the Bush administration...how they would say one thing and 10 minutes/10 weeks later they would be on the other side of the fence without any accountability for being a "flip flopper"....like the whole point of media is to create some sort of accountability and record and have someone call them out on shit like that...and the only people that I saw do this were Jon Stewart, Colbert, and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC (she used to have a really sweet 'lame duck' watch towards the end of bush's term...); sucks that 2 of the 3 are supposed to be kinda like comedic new report shows... We need media to step up, have some balls, not be afraid of getting kicked out of the white house press room and ask some real questions...they should have done it for Bush, and I hope they start for Obama...we choose them and they are accountable to US...so make em sweat, ask hard questions, catch them in double speak, call them OUT when you catch them bullshitting...
in the end, i dont think this guy is staying around too long...and I'm sad cause hes kinda funny in the fact that he doest represent most republicans in any way shape or form, or at least no republicans that I’ve ever really met.. and he is generally detrimental to their movement, which for me as a Democrat and supporter of obama is great...
aight sorry...
anywho, check out the colbert rap battle that he "had" with Steele...Its got a lot of good clips of Steele saying some of the stuff that I mentioned above:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP8_tXtb0Xc
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Monday, February 9, 2009
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Monday, December 1, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
the best....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp=27447282�
If you guys didnt have a chance to watch, Clinton and Obama were on stage together the other day. Its just soo amazing how they have a way with words, and how they are able to inspire so many people...if I could pay for that...
On this occassion its tough to say who was better, obviously it was Obama's crowd, and Clinton still looks like he's being forced into campaigning for Obama, but damn they are a dynamic duo...rediculous. Also rediculous that Bill was basically soo good at being a president that he got his wife elected to senate. I mean I think Hilary is great and desrves to be there, but I'm sure when she first ran people juged her more on him than on herself...
anyways, back to my point that these guys truly inspire me, and make me feel like there is hope for our country. I've recently been feeling down becuase I feel like the people of the US are soo easily hoodwinked sometimes. I mean I can see voting for bush the first time around, but after his blunders and bad mistakes after the first 4 years, I'm not sure how he got re-elected. And now Palin, I mean shes great at being about the republican base, and I'm ok with people believing in those ideals and philosophies, but whether or not you agree with what she says, you cannot seriously tell me that people think she's ready to run the US. I mean compared to Bush maybe, but seriuosly? Have you seen any of her interviews? Like when Katie Curick asked her what newspapers and magazines she read...I mean even if your from mars, you can easily ramble of 3 newspapers, the times, the wall street journal, and your hometown paper for crist sake...Also, she got on SNL and basically did her skit with whats her name...like she let the baldwin dude like talk shit about her on tv and just stood there and took it for 30 seconds...what were they thinking? did she just want to say "live from ny?"...I mean in general its less her fault than McCain's for picking someone that he didnt know shit about other than her sex....but still, I can understand how she took the stage and shook things up and thats great, but people still being all about her...cant stand it.
heres to hope and change...
If you guys didnt have a chance to watch, Clinton and Obama were on stage together the other day. Its just soo amazing how they have a way with words, and how they are able to inspire so many people...if I could pay for that...
On this occassion its tough to say who was better, obviously it was Obama's crowd, and Clinton still looks like he's being forced into campaigning for Obama, but damn they are a dynamic duo...rediculous. Also rediculous that Bill was basically soo good at being a president that he got his wife elected to senate. I mean I think Hilary is great and desrves to be there, but I'm sure when she first ran people juged her more on him than on herself...
anyways, back to my point that these guys truly inspire me, and make me feel like there is hope for our country. I've recently been feeling down becuase I feel like the people of the US are soo easily hoodwinked sometimes. I mean I can see voting for bush the first time around, but after his blunders and bad mistakes after the first 4 years, I'm not sure how he got re-elected. And now Palin, I mean shes great at being about the republican base, and I'm ok with people believing in those ideals and philosophies, but whether or not you agree with what she says, you cannot seriously tell me that people think she's ready to run the US. I mean compared to Bush maybe, but seriuosly? Have you seen any of her interviews? Like when Katie Curick asked her what newspapers and magazines she read...I mean even if your from mars, you can easily ramble of 3 newspapers, the times, the wall street journal, and your hometown paper for crist sake...Also, she got on SNL and basically did her skit with whats her name...like she let the baldwin dude like talk shit about her on tv and just stood there and took it for 30 seconds...what were they thinking? did she just want to say "live from ny?"...I mean in general its less her fault than McCain's for picking someone that he didnt know shit about other than her sex....but still, I can understand how she took the stage and shook things up and thats great, but people still being all about her...cant stand it.
heres to hope and change...
Thursday, October 23, 2008
'spread the wealth around'
For those of you who missed it, the OECD put out a report last week called Growing Unequal?. The report focused on income distribution and poverty in OECD countries. In the midst, as we likely are, of a very serious recession, this report strikes me as particularly relevant. It shouldn't be surprising to most that according to the report, the gap between the rich and the poor has continued to widen over the past two decades. What concerns me is that I sense a very strong sense of apathy about this issue. Interestingly, I read about the report in the Financial Times (of London), but nobody has mentioned it to me here at home, nor have I seen any mention of it in the media.
I'll spare you a country by country breakdown (I was disaappointed to see that both inequality and rates of child poverty have gotten worse in Canada), but I found notable that many of the changes are attributed to demographic changes in the labor force. The bird's eye view is that people in obsolete jobs get left behind as economies increasingly shift into more valuable, often information-intensive roles. Here, it must be said, strong social programs such as education seem to be the key. Protectionism, even when it manages to keep obsolete jobs around, too often leads to stagnant wages that cause the workers' income to shrink over time (on a relative basis). Indeed, the authors make this very point, although certainly not exclusively.
The authors also emphasize that "Work alone is not sufficient to avoid poverty: more than half of poor people live in households where one or more members are in work." Sad, no? On this closing note, I would strongly urge all of you to read The Working Poor: Invisible in America by David Shipley.
I'll spare you a country by country breakdown (I was disaappointed to see that both inequality and rates of child poverty have gotten worse in Canada), but I found notable that many of the changes are attributed to demographic changes in the labor force. The bird's eye view is that people in obsolete jobs get left behind as economies increasingly shift into more valuable, often information-intensive roles. Here, it must be said, strong social programs such as education seem to be the key. Protectionism, even when it manages to keep obsolete jobs around, too often leads to stagnant wages that cause the workers' income to shrink over time (on a relative basis). Indeed, the authors make this very point, although certainly not exclusively.
Nordic countries and western European countries, such asI could go on for pages and pages about this, but instead, I'll just encourage you to go and read the report yourself.
Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands. Social spending on people of working age
was 7-8% of national income in 2005 and the share of working-age people in
poverty was between 5% and 8%. At the other end of the spectrum, Korea, Mexico,
Turkey and the United States spent 2% or less of national income on benefits and
had 12-15% of the working age population in poverty.
The authors also emphasize that "Work alone is not sufficient to avoid poverty: more than half of poor people live in households where one or more members are in work." Sad, no? On this closing note, I would strongly urge all of you to read The Working Poor: Invisible in America by David Shipley.
NKW
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)