 |
The Guru's Views on Politics |
CNN projects Obama to win the election. He will get more than the needed 270 electoral votes to win. In the twitter world, Republican supporters are crying foul.
Republican supporters were cheering when in 1876 Republican Rutherford B. Hayes defeated Democrat Samuel Tilden by one electoral vote, 185-184, while Tilden won 50.9% of the popular vote to 47.9% for Hayes. Why are they crying now.
The modern day politics in America is more aligned with religiousness. Today, we see politicians – from House Representatives (Michelle Bachmann) to Governors (Rick Perry) and Presidential hopefuls all trying to invoke God’s name in order to garner votes. Last time I checked, The US Constitution specifically states (via the First Amendment) “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. Yet we have these politicians trying to use religion as a vote machine and this is pathetic. This is an insult to religion.
Take for example Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN), who claimed that God asked her to run for President in 2012 elections. She was trying to get God fearing people to vote for her. She expected that people from the Bible belt will want her to be the President. But soon after the first primary debate, she quit. Why? She did not say God did not want her to run anymore. Does that mean that she does not want to follow God’s orders? Why would God want her to run for few weeks and then ask her not to run?
More and more voters in America are now waiting to see whom their church preacher will endorse and will the blindly vote for that person instead of studying about the candidate’s position on how a country should be run and voting based on those positions.
When Thomas Jefferson used the phrase “Separation of church and state”, the current scenario in elections is exactly one of the many things he wanted to avoid. People blindly say they will not vote for Romney because he is a Mormon or Obama because some feel he is Muslim. Since when did religion change the way one governs a country? When people look at religion of a candidate and votes base don that, the basis for having elections is drowned. We are electing a President or Senator or Representative of United States of America. We are not electing a pastor at the local church. Whether the candidate believes that there should be abortion or not does not make a country better. Its up to the people to decide if they want make abortion illegal, not up to the President or Senator. People should decide if marriage will be between one man & one woman or something else. Why should what the President think on this matter?
Unfortunately, there are millions of Americans who want to infuse religion into politics and still claim to uphold the US Constitution. As long as there are such gullible people out there, politicians will find such stupid ways to attract and succeed in winning their vote by claiming to be more religious even though they may be useless at governing.
For now, all I can say is “God save America” – else, we will very soon see nothing different about America than what we have already seen about the Taliban.
The very first debate for the 2012 Presidential election was held tonight. Very first impression, POTUS looked as if he was not interested. Even CNN analysts stated that Obama looked that he did not want to be there. Mitt Romney clearly stole the debate.
Mitt Romney was able to speak for the job creation.His points whiz that he is different than the Romney we have known......but then that means other Republicans are right, he is a flip flopper.
Obama did not hit back at Romney even when Romney mention China. Remember Romneys have invested a lot in China, including in companies that ignores US patents and those who work with Iran.
Obama did not bring out Bain Capital either.
Romney spoke well about what he will do as President and more about specifics of Obama strengthening his position. I feel with this debate, more people will lean towards Romney and he did well.
I now looking forward to the next debate. :)
Today, President Obama signed an Executive Order which will stop deportation of illegal immigrants who entered the country as children. It’s not that easy though. The memo from Janet Napolitano (Sec. of Homeland Security) states that the following conditions should be met for the deportation to be stopped. The illegal immigrant should have:
All this sounds good. If the immigrant came into this country without the intention of breaking laws and they live their childhood without intention of breaking laws, it’s a good gesture by the Govt. which will benefit the immigrant rather than dumping immigrant onto foreign land (his/her native land) with no source of income. Keep in mind if the person has lived in US from toddler to adolescence, the country where he/she has roots is now alien land.
I applaud the President in taking this bold step. Even Republicans were leaning towards but now that a Democrat has taken this step, they are hell bent on opposing this. I wonder what will Sen. Marco Rubio say about this as his version of “Dream Act” had similar plans.
The only thing I do not like about this is that The President took this decision in election year and did not have the guts to take this decision before. To me, had it happened a year or two ago, I would have said the President wants to help these people. But now, I feel more like the President wants to score an election victory and so is trying to appeasing the Latino voters.
It is surprising that Wisconsin Gov., Republicans & Tea Party supporters want to ban collective bargaining rights of citizens. They want to take away the freedom of individual middle-class workers. I was always under the impression that Republicans & Tea Party supporters were always for more individual freedom, but here I see them wanting to stop opposition members from getting more freedom. Is this what they call democracy where they oppress opposition’s freedom. If they truly stand for democracy, then they should allow opposition to have collective bargaining rights. If you do not want to accept the demands, then do not accept them, but do not limit their freedom. What is the difference between making collective bargaining illegal and making any kinds of protest as illegal. We have seen that in Iran protests are illegal so does it mean Wisconsin is moving in that direction. Gov. Scott, if I were you, I will not limit their freedom…..if I cannot accept their monetary demands I will ask them to resign. But I will not limit their freedom of collective bargaining.
It is surprising that three….not one….not two….but THREE persons nominated by Obama for various high posts in the new administration have been evading taxes illegally. These persons should be barred from public office for the rest of their lives. These are the same persons who speak in public that taxes are required for our economy and behind the scene, illegally avoid paying taxes.
I understand when there is an unintended problem of paying less tax or more tax, IRS will check and ask for the due or return money if you had paid more by mistake. But those are unintended issues. The genuine taxpayers should forgive such unintended gaffes. However, when it comes to illegally evading taxes knowingly or with intention, the genuine taxpayers should not excuse them. They should be brought to justice and should be barred from life from serving the country they decided to cheat. They should also be barred from having any ties with Government (Fed/State) and also barred from working with any organization which has ties with Government (Fed/State).
The latest culprit, Nancy Killefer, is a director at management consulting firm McKinsey & Company and a former assistant Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration. She was nominated to oversee Budget and spending reforms as deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The other two culprits are Tom Daschle, the former Senate majority leader and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. These are all high profile criminals. A shoplifter is usually handcuffed and jailed or cheating a shop, while those high profile criminals who cheat the country are given posts like Treasury Secretary or deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget who will manage billions of dollars which belong to the taxpayers.
How in the world could the public accept the thought that such criminals (criminals who cheat the country) will serve the country and its people in an honest way…. in working for the interest of the country first.
I hope the people wakeup and take action by calling their representatives to raise their voice over this. The Government is supposed to be serving in the public’s interest and not vice versa. If you want, you can get the new administration to change its policies towards such persons.
Wish all readers a very Happy New Year. This year poses a big challenge for many Governments across the Globe. The financial meltdown has gripped nearly all countries in its tightening hold. Some countries are posed to welcome new Governments who will have to face this issue the moment they take office. One such country is USA whose people have elected for the first time a president who has African roots.
Though Barack Obama’s administration will face the issue form January 20th onwards, they will need to think very fast and very carefully on how to control the meltdown. It is going to be a daunting task and if this new administration is able to control it fast within this year, it will be a huge boost for the whole globe.
So lets focus our attention towards this new year 2009 and see how the new administration will be able to manage the issue with support from the political opponents. I will keep you posted with all the good and bad news on politics with main focus on Finance and Security. See you soon.
