I keep seeing Obama in the headlines and there is story after story that questions the established ways of thinking about politics and choosing our leaders.
First there were articles and stories about whether or not experience really matters. I remember reading an article that detailed why experience can actually be a bad thing. That was back when it was still Obama vs Clinton.
Now I am seeing headlines online and elsewhere that ask if military service really matters. The real question is does anything really matter to the media other than the interest that a candidate can generate which of course generates increased revenues for all the media outlets?
Obama is a media darling because he is new, someone unknown, and exciting. He's like a pop star and he sells media whether it is news magazines, newspapers, TV time, or clicks to webpages. Of course Obama is on the cover of Time twice... that's how you sell more Time magazines right now. McCain and Clinton have both been around so long that there really isn't much new and interesting we can hope to learn from picking up a magazine with either of them on the cover.
Obama is a different story. Obama is sensational and everyone knows that they don't know enough about Obama. Even if you do not care about Obama at all and are 100% for McCain there are enough people out there that want to be objective and realize that they are pretty ignorant about Obama. They want to know about him before the polls so they can decide which way to swing their vote. There are also all the people comepletely crazy about Obama or inspired by him or whatever. In between those two extremes you have a lot of additional media consumption.
Obama is the choice for media outlets because he will continue to drive up new media consumption in the short term, and he is more likely than Hilary or McCain to continue to be interesting for the next four to eight years. Besides, think of how much easier the job will be when you are getting paid per word or per minute. In the first years you can have introdcutory comments like, "the first black president of the United States of America" or "one of the least experienced new Presidents we've seen in a long time" The whole thing just becomes too easy for everyone involved in the media.
Kerry's stance on the UN seems naive to me. He and others want more UN involvement. Fine. Let the UN spend their money on this too, such a large percentage of that is money straight from US it doesn't really make much of a difference. He also wants the UN to give a thumbs up to any military action in Iraq and elsewhere. This seems unlikely because the UN is predominantly Arab/Muslim.
There are 189 to 191 nations in the UN, depending on how you count it. Of these nations, forty-six are decidedly Muslim nations. They are either well over 60% Muslim or dominated by Sharia Law and Arab political systems. The other three in this list (the ones with question marks) are about half muslim and half every thing else, but still bare that strong Islamic presense. So, Islamic nations make up between 24% to 26% of the United Nations depending on which numbers you want to use. Many, many more nations than the ones listed below or included in these numbers are also strongly influenced by Islam.
I mention all of this because I feel that it is pretty silly to ask for world opinion or UN opinion when roughly a quarter of the nations probably feel a bit of a brotherhood with the country you are seeking to sanction, conduct weapons inspections, or attack.
Here's that list of Nations I was telling you about. It is pretty much in chronological order of admission to the UN: Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey, Afghanistan, 10. Pakistan, Yemen, Indonesia, Jordan, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, Burkina Faso?, Chad?, 20. Mali, Cyprus, Somalia, Mauritania, Algeria, Burundi, Kuwait, Maldives, Democratic Yemen, Bahrain, 30. Bhutan, Oman, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Comoros, Mozambique, Papua New Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe, Angola, Djibouti, 40. Brunei Darussalam, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina?, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Eritrea
Here's a flash animation that I received in an e-mail last week. I want to delete the e-mail, but save the link so I thought I'd blog it real quick.
I went out to see Noam Chomsky speak tonight. I wasn't sure if he was going to discuss Linguistics or Politics, but I presumed that his speech(?) would be more about politics than anything else. Still, I ventured just in case he mentioned some little something about Ling.
Hmmm... tired now. I'll write more about his speech tomorrow.
Imagine a school that cared about the student's emotional well-being.
Imagine schools that did more than teach your children about history, science, math, literature, foreign languages, social studies and physical education. Image schools that taught all of these things, but also fostered a strong desire to learn things that are useful to life and helped shape student's character and their ability to deal with their own emotions appropriately. I have imagined this, and I would like to see my imagination become a reality.
So often schools these days concentrate on scholarship, athletics, and discipline. These three things are very important and I do not seek to do away with them, but I think that there needs to be more. This is obvious just by touring schools throughout our country. Students are not happy with the practices of many schools. Graduates are often no better than the generation before them. We can make schools that graduate students that are more prepared for life than our generation ever was. We can make schools that care more about the inner personal growth of each student than the way that their uniform looks or the time that they walk into each classroom.
How do we do this? How can I be so bold as to propose a better way of doing something that has been in progress for generations in our nation? I feel that someone can boldly call for reform because of the poor record of our schools. I feel like I can be that someone because I have been a student, I care about students, and I have thought about these issues for more than a decade.
So, what changes do I propose to make? I am proposing three changes, and I with each of these changes I think that we can have a vast improvement in our schools.
First, I think that we need to look at each child as a person. A person with many emotions that need to be addressed with concern. A person who has emotions and desperately needs to learn how to deal with them appropriately. These children are people who need to learn about their own individuality and in so doing they need to be constantly reminded that they are equal to everyone around them in that they are worthy to be here on this Earth and that they are worthy of greatness.
Secondly, I think that we need to explain to our students the duties, rights, and obligations that they have as members of society and citizens of this Nation, their state, and their community. We also need to explain to them why they have a duty to their fellow students, their fellow citizens, and themselves. We need to explain to them and demonstrate to them that by lifting up any person -- even if it is just themselves -- they are lifting up our society.
Thirdly, I think that we need to raise our standards and shift them. Academics are important, Athletics are important and discipline is important, but there is more to life than these three things. Unfortunately, these three things are the only things that we measure and laud in our school systems. That has caused an unbalanced focus on these three things. We need to measure character, leadership, teamwork, and concern for others. Academics are important, but they are just a part of the picture of what makes a person a success in this life. We need to do more for our children.
Imagine a school that cared about the student's emotional well-being.
Imagine schools that did more than teach your children about history, science, math, literature, foreign languages, social studies and physical education. Image schools that taught all of these things, but also fostered a strong desire to learn things that are useful to life and helped shape student's character and their ability to deal with their own emotions appropriately. I have imagined this, and I would like to see my imagination become a reality.
So often schools these days concentrate on scholarship, athletics, and discipline. These three things are very important and I do not seek to do away with them, but I think that there needs to be more. This is obvious just by touring schools throughout our country. Students are not happy with the practices of many schools. Graduates are often no better than the generation before them. We can make schools that graduate students that are more prepared for life than our generation ever was. We can make schools that care more about the inner personal growth of each student than the way that their uniform looks or the time that they walk into each classroom.
How do we do this? How can I be so bold as to propose a better way of doing something that has been in progress for generations in our nation? I feel that someone can boldly call for reform because of the poor record of our schools. I feel like I can be that someone because I have been a student, I care about students, and I have thought about these issues for more than a decade.
So, what changes do I propose to make? I am proposing three changes, and I with each of these changes I think that we can have a vast improvement in our schools.
First, I think that we need to look at each child as a person. A person with many emotions that need to be addressed with concern. A person who has emotions and desperately needs to learn how to deal with them appropriately. These children are people who need to learn about their own individuality and in so doing they need to be constantly reminded that they are equal to everyone around them in that they are worthy to be here on this Earth and that they are worthy of greatness.
Secondly, I think that we need to explain to our students the duties, rights, and obligations that they have as members of society and citizens of this Nation, their state, and their community. We also need to explain to them why they have a duty to their fellow students, their fellow citizens, and themselves. We need to explain to them and demonstrate to them that by lifting up any person -- even if it is just themselves -- they are lifting up our society.
Thirdly, I think that we need to raise our standards and shift them. Academics are important, Athletics are important and discipline is important, but there is more to life than these three things. Unfortunately, these three things are the only things that we measure and laud in our school systems. That has caused an unbalanced focus on these three things. We need to measure character, leadership, teamwork, and concern for others. Academics are important, but they are just a part of the picture of what makes a person a success in this life. We need to do more for our children.
I often hear of people decrying the military or NASA. They're arguements are basically two-fold -- "why do we need these things?" and "The goverment money would be better spent on welfare programs to help people!"
I have thought that both of these sentiments must be valid concerns, because I too care about making sure people have jobs and have their other needs met. After some thought and discussion, however, I have come to the conclusion that by providing funding for programs such as NASA and the Military the government and it's citizens are providing for the welfare of some of the people in Nation. These programs provide jobs.
If there was no military there would be fewer jobs. We'd make fewer war machines, guns, uniforms, and employ fewer soldiers, doctors and mechanics. Our military spends millions of tax payer's dollars a year, and much of that money goes to people who might not otherwise have a job... or they might have a job, which would push someone else out of the different job that they got. In fact, the military could be looked at as almost essentially a welfare mechanism for the Nation and the world. Jobs are provded, training and other educational opportunities are provided... ROTC can pay for much of the expense of a college education, the G.I. Bill will pay for education... that all counts as military spending and it all helps provide for the betterment of individuals in soceity, which is exactly what any welfare program would do. So, the military provides job, but it provides more than just jobs... security is also provided. With greater security comes more jobs and more pride in our Nation. After looking at the military in this light it seems to me that the military is a great public institution to have (under the control of the citizenry.)
As for NASA, NASA also provides a great number of jobs. It provides high-tech jobs that pay well, which raises the level of income per capita. It also provides demand for things that employ jobs across America and beyond. The things that NASA uses need to be manufactured and that provides jobs, but before manufacturing can begin the materials need to be mined and fabricated. More jobs. NASA and the aerospace industry employ thousands of people. People from manufacturing, mining, refining, and fabrication. The program employs engineers, scientists, technicians, and mechanics. Throughout the process of trying to accomplish the goals that NASA sets for itself new technologies are developed which can be used by private entities to create new products and services which in-turn create even mroe jobs.
So, if you ever wonder why the hell the government is giving money to NASA and the military, and you don't see the need of going to the moon, mars, or having newer, cooler weapons then think of the programs as if they were programs in FDR's New Deal. They lift up the Nation through the process of accomplishing their goals... not because of the goals that they accomplish. Or, put another way, it's their journey that makes us stronger not their destination.
It has always been a rare occasion that I sit down to think and feel about what I believe. In fact, on many issues I still don't know the best answer for me, personally. So, I'm going to try to figure a lot of this out in the next nine months before I graduate. Mainly, because I believe that a little knowledge and a strong opinion can be a dangerous thing. And I don't want to be a danger to anyone. So, bare with me in this series I'm starting called, "If I were a Politician." I work best when I use my imagination, so I am going to imagine myself in a role where I have to answer these questions. Please leave some constructive comments if you think you can be of some help.
"David Martin, what is your take on the abortion issue? Do you believe in women's rights or are you pro-life?"
I beleive that abortion is legal, but I don't believe that abortion is right. I don't think that it is right for me or my family. I agree that it may be the best thing for the mother at that time, bit I don't think that it is the best thing for the child being aborted, and I don't think it is the best thing for our country. To me, when a child is aborted a future citizen is lost. That means one less person in my consituency that is helping to further growth. To me an abortion means one less person making a positive difference in this world.
I am a realist though, so I realize that abortion is legal, and I think that it probably should be that way. I do, however, think it is very sad that there are so many abortions today. This nation as a whole has come a long way to expand a woman's rights, a woman's options, and a woman's responsibilities. People are fighting so hard to give a woman "a right to choose," but they fail to bring to our attention a woman's responsibility to choose. I believe that with every right and every privilge comes a responsibility. Women have fought hard to be in control of their bodies, so I say control them. Women have fought hard to have more reproductive options, so use them. If circumstances truly are out of your control as in a rape situation, then perhaps it is best for you to abort your baby, but we should not be needlessly excercising a hard earned right, just because we have not used these new found powers over our bodies. Now, because I do not have the support or the wherewithal to change the law I will instead challenge women to take more responsibility in their sexual roles so that they do not have to exercise this right to abortion.