A Look in My Mirror

I was watching the last part of The American President, the movie starring Michael Douglas and Annette Benning.   It began to make me think about the idea of the passionate president, the man who goes out and says what he feels and lets the chips fall where they may.  We love that idea, don’t we.  We think it would be refreshing to hear a politician come out and say exactly what they mean and do exactly what they say they will do.  It stirs our hearts.  It makes us go “Right on.  I may not agree with him, but I like him for telling the truth.”  We watch these movies and wish our politicians were more like that.  One day we we would like a politician to have a speech dedicated to what they believe, not what we want to hear.  At least for the few minutes after the movie is over.

In real life, what do we want?  We want politicians to pander to our every whims.  We want a candidate that will say, “I’ll give you a tax break.”  rather than the politician that says, “It is tough but we can get through this.”  No, in real life we want someone that will tell us exactly what we want to hear.  We want someone who can attack their opponent the best.  The person that can paint the worst picture about the opposition.

The myth we hold dear is the very image we run from in real life.  What would happen if a candidate told us everything they believe, with no hidden agenda?  They would never be president.  That is the world we live in today.  Unfortunately, today, the line that can get you elected is “Ask not what you can do for your country, but what can your country do for you?”

The following article Prisons Said to Skew Jobless Rate, in the News and Observer, incensed me so much I had to take a day or two to write about it.  The article basically says that if you included prisoners and military to the number of of unemployed people it would increase the jobless rate.  No duh.  If you add a million and a half, or more, people to the number of people looking for work you it would increase the jobless rate.

If you add the number of illegal aliens, wait, undocumented workers I mean, then it would affect the job market too.  I think this is an attempt either point out the researchers belief too many people are in prison or an attempt to show the economy is weaker than we think.

The problem with the report, prisoners are not eligible to work so they can not be include in the jobless rate.  Military people are already working.  If anything they should be added as employed workers.  They are working after all.  But they are not eligible to be included in the employment rate also.

So to sum up, when you include all categories that are eligible to be counted, the jobless rate is 5%.  You can not get around that number by adding people who are not eligible to be counted.  The economy may be weak but it is growing.  We are not in a recession, we are not growing at a fast rate though.  Nothing will change that fact.  When the oil bubble bursts and the housing market corrects itself, the economy will start growing faster.  So right now, we have to deal with what is given to us, not what a person wishes was the story.

If I was incoherent in the post I’m sorry, my blood began to boil again thinking about the &*$%@#@ (bad word) research.  Hey, they could have given me the money they spent on the report and I could have told them in a couple of days, I would draw it out for show, that if you add prisoners to the the unemployment numbers it would show  a larger percent of unemployed.  Sheesh, such idiots, such lack of common sense.  Give me a break.

I think part of my anger comes from the fact they spent good money to such a stupid research.

I am puzzled over the allegations of sexism many Hillary Clinton supporters have been making the past week.  Many have said the media is responsible for the comments.  I am wondering where the are the examples?  I watch Foxnews, MSNBC and CNN fairly regularly.  I don’t see any of sexism.  I have seen people question her ability based on voting and past performance.  I have seen people question her personality and integrity.  I have seen many reports along those lines.  But I have also seen similar reports about the other candidates.  I am worried that the race will devolve into a scenario where any criticism of Clinton will be termed sexist.  Just as any criticism of Obama is considered racist.  I believe that voting records in all levels of government and business dealings, and even personal relationships should be open for discussion.  They all give us insight into the type of person the candidates are.  To deem a legitimate questions racist or sexist because of the person they are directed at is dishonest and disingenuous.

And to answer some specific allegations about Obama, the church he attends is a legitimate target.  The preaching at the church and the tolerance he gives to the messages shows the type of person he really is inside.  Just like Bill Clinton lying under oath showed the type of person he was.  If I was involved in a church where constant hatred or racism was being taught I should be questioned about it, because I have aligned myself with an organization that is questionable.  I am not as concerned about friends candidates have.  There were many friends I have had whose politics I despised but they were nice people.  That is different.  But, if I align myself with an organization then there is valid criticism.

I watched the speech Rev. Jeremiah Wright gave to the Detroit chapter of the NAACP and the Q&A session he had at the national press club.  I have to say I don’t understand what is so controversial about the NAACP speech.  It poked fun at people and he seemed to be in good humor.  I agreed with most of what he said about seeing people as different not deficient.  I think some of what is being shown about him is being overblown.  Do I agree with everything he had to say? No.  There needs to come a day when people place their hope in the future not chain themselves to the past.  It takes everyone changing their hearts and minds though.  I hope that part of his message is not overlooked.  Of course, I also hope he heeds his own words.

I wrote an earlier post making the point that Raleigh was thinking about easing up water restrictions since Falls Lake has begun to fill.  Well I actually think they implemented a sensible plan (I know shocking to think I think Raleigh is being sensible.)  The council has place increments for water restrictions to be eased.  If the Lake is 90% full or higher then Stage 1.5 restrictions will be eased.  If the lake falls between 75%-90% then stage 1.5 restrictions will be reimplemented.  If it falls below 75% then Stage restrictions will be reimplemented.  They haven’t gone past that yet but they are working on Stage 2.5 and Stage 3 restrictions if need be.