The Good Old Days

Feeling a little bit nostaligic. Sometimes its a good idea to take a look back and remember where we came from. Its easy for things to get lost as the time slips by. Was wondering where we were in the United States about 8 years. It's amazing how much things can change...

• The president had 65% approval rating, the highest end-of-term approval rating of any President since Dwight D. Eisenhower.
  
  
• Average economic growth of 4.0 percent per year, compared to average growth of 2.8 percent during the Bush Senior administration.
  
  
• The economy had grown for 116 consecutive months, the most in history.
  
  
• More then 22.5 million jobs had been created—the most jobs ever created under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous 12 years (bush and reagan). Of the total new jobs, 20.7 million, or 92 percent, were in the private sector.
  
  
• Economic gains spurred an increase in family incomes for all Americans. Since 1993, real median family income increased by $6,338, from $42,612 in 1993 to $49,950 in 2000 (in 2000 dollars).
  
  
• Overall unemployment was at its lowest level in more than 30 years, down from 6.9 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in January 2001. The unemployment rate was below 5 percent for 40 consecutive months.
  
  
• Unemployment for African Americans was 7.3 percent in 2000, the lowest rate on record.
  
  
• Unemployment for Hispanics fell from 11.8 percent in October 1992 to 5.0 percent in 2000, also the lowest rate on record.
  
  
• Inflation was at its lowest rate since the Kennedy Administration, averaging 2.5 percent, and fell from 4.7 percent during the bush senior administration.
  
  
• The poverty rate declined from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 11.8 percent in 1999, the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years. This left 7 million fewer people in poverty than there were in 1993 and they were at their lowest percentage since 1969. The lowest poverty rates for single mothers, black Americans, and the aged ever recorded.
  
  
• The government had an economic surplus. The surplus in fiscal year 2000 was $237 billion—the third consecutive surplus and the largest surplus ever.
  
  
• The cost for a barrel of oil was under $30 a barrel. The cost of a gallon of gas was $1.17
  

There are of course more things that have changed. An invasion of a foreign country for no reason hadn't occured recently. Banks weren't failing. No congressional sessions to bailout financial institutions, people could pay their mortgage...

Kind of brings a tear to your eye, doesn't it? I long for the good old days...

Palin Debate Lies

It was difficult to really call into question many of the facts that Palin made in her debate because of the few times she actually said anything noteworthy beyond the word 'Maverick' and the often repeated Republican mantra of a vote for democrats means higher taxes.

If they were both running for president and not VP, 82% of the people watching the debate said that Biden would have been a better presidential candidate then Palin. Considering that on any give issue, there are about 20-25% who always vote the party line or choice, this means Palin barely got the hard core party vote. Of course our current commander in chief doesn't have an approval rating much higher, so I guess she's got a chance...

Everything here can be verified on FactCheck.org or CNN's Fact Check pages.

• Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to “pre-surge” levels.
  
  FACT: Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.
  
• Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on “families” making as little as $42,000 a year.
  
  FACT: He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.
  
• Palin claimed McCain’s health care plan would be “budget neutral,” costing the government nothing.
  
  FACT: Independent budget experts estimate McCain's plan would cost tens of billions each year.
  
• Palin wrongly claimed that “millions of small businesses” would see tax increases under Obama’s tax proposals.
  
  FACT: several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.
  
• Palin said that Obama had accused American troops of doing nothing but killing civilians, a claim she called "reckless" and "untrue."
  
  FACT 1: Heres what Obama said. "We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there."
  
  FACT 2: The Associated Press found that in fact U.S troops were killing more civilians at the time than insurgents: "As of Aug. 1, the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can’t be attributed to one party." Afghan President Hamid Karzai had expressed concern about these civilian killings, a concern President Bush said he shared.

And while not in the debate, the latest lie is that Obama is supported a terrorist. Talk about a stretch. The article she is basing this on concluded the article with this statement:

"the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers."

Of course coming from Palin, this actually makes sense. She basis that she has good foreign policy experience because her state borders both Canada and Russia. Based upon that, I must have excellent foreign policy experience from partying in Cabo.

Based upon McCains age and Obama's race, their is a significant chance that whichever presidential candidate actually takes office, they may not live through their entire term. That's just they way it is. That being said, the VP that will go into office needs to be given greater consideration then in previous elections. Watch the Couric interviews and tell me this is the right person to be staring down a Putin or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a time of crisis. Compare that with Biden in the same situation and the choice is easy.

Response to 'Single Issue Voter'

This entry is in response to http://the-blog-of-truth.blogspot.com/2008/09/single-issue-voter.html

Not surprisingly, many of the things that are on your list also exist on mine

The economy – financial crisis – mortgage / wall street
The economy and taxes – size of federal government
The two major ongoing wars – Iraq / Afghanistan
Energy and the environment
Homeland security / Immigration
Foreign policy
HealthcareVeterans, seniors and social security

However you will notice one glaring difference between the two lists. Faith and Family values are removed. They don't belong there. They are not and should not be motivators for how our country should be run. They are subjective opinions that change based upon the circumstances and interpretation by individual people.

Every other issue you mention in your list is generally objective. Foreclosure rates can be measured. The effects on the environment can be scientifically studied. Healthcare and benefits to Veterans and seniors can be statistically understood. Etc, etc. The only thing on your list that can't be measured scientifically or statistically is Faith and Family values. and that's because they are subjective. Your idea of faith is different from your neighbors. They are even different then many of your neighbors who consider themselves Christian. They are different from mine.

You can't state what a family value is precisely, you can only state what your own personal values are based upon your intuition, intellect or faith. They can and do vary from person to person. You might say a family value is 'Teach kids abstinence' and mine may be 'Teach them about birth control'. They are both different, yet they are both 'family values'.

The government does not belong in our personal lives. It only takes a moment to try and look at it from the other point of view to realize that trying to instill your personal values and religious beliefs on others is both wrong and immoral, regardless of those beliefs. Suppose that instead of a predominately Christian nation this was a nation where 90% of its citizens were atheist or agnostic. Would you want the pledge changed to say 'one nation, without a god' or would you take the stand that people shouldn't have their beliefs trampled on by the government? My faith is not your faith. My values may not be your values. However we both united in the right to express and hold those values, and it is in the best interest of both of us to keep the government out of them.

On to abortion...

There is nothing in the Bible which states that abortion is wrong or immoral. There is nothing that says 'Life begins at conception'. In fact the word abortion doesn't appear in the bible at all. The closest quote is 'thou shalt not kill' and the word for kill in hebrew in the 6th Commandment is rasach, which more accurately means "murder," or illegal killing judged harmful by the community. Even though a commandment, many forms of killing were considered legal. If fact, god often commanded Israel to kill on some occasions. (ex. In I Samuel 15:3, God ordered Saul to massacre the Amalekites: "Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants…")

So if the bible doesn't mention abortion, is there anything in jewish law that would indicate that abortion is murder or that life begins at conception? Actually, jewish law is quiet clear on the subject:

"an embryo is not reckoned a viable living thing (in Hebrew, bar kayama) until thirty days after its birth. One is not allowed to observe the Laws of Mourning for an expelled fetus. As a matter of fact, these Laws are not applicable for a child who does not survive until his thirtieth day."

So the bible doesn't mention abortion and jewish law says that even a full term infant isn't a person until 30 days after its birth. Doesn't sound like there is much biblical support for the position. From this its quiet clear that your own beliefs on abortion and life are completely subjective and opinions of what you 'think' (or what others have told you) god meant or would mean. At best you try to infer god's mind based upon your own interpretation of the bible. However since it is an interpretation, it is an opinion by definition!

The issue of abortion, regardless of how much you try to simplify it with a 'its against the bible' approach is a large, complex issue with a lot of grey area. What about in the case of rape? What if it would kill the mother? What about incest? You want to state that life begins at conception, but I personally don't see a few cells as being on the same level as a new born infant. Should it be considered alive when it can survive outside the womb? That's changing every day with medical advances. It is multi faceted and to even try and trivialize this as wrong or immoral based upon the words of men who lived 4000 years ago, prior to every known medical and scientific advancement since then, would require me to shut off my brain. Sorry, but I only do that for attractive women, and that's because I don't have enough blood to serve both my brain and my peter. I don't even really need that much blood for the latter. (or the former for that matter)

Finally, your response that 'everyone' is a single issue voter is a non-sequitur. What if McCain was pro-abortion but also a supporter of the Taliban? Aren't you now a two issue voter? Anyone can take an extreme position about something any sane person would not tolerate and say 'if your candidate was for torturing infants would you vote for him' and everyone would say no. That doesn't mean that suddenly you only care about that one thing. Everyone has multiple things they care about. Some care about some things more then others. You're right I wouldn't vote for the candidate saying he was going to raise my taxes to 85%, but since no one is talking about doing that, is it really even worth discussing?

People shouldn't base their votes on 'Family Values' or faith. Allow people to believe what they want or need to believe. Base your vote on who is going to be best for the country. If you believe that the current Republican administration, who ran unchecked for 6 of its 8 year term and was able to pass any bill or law it wanted to; that invaded a foreign country (Iraq) without cause or provocation at an estimated cost of $3 trillion; that championed deregulation that has led to the collapse of most major financial institutions is what is best for this country, then by all means, vote for they guy who agreed with that approach 90% or more. You may even get me praying that there are enough people to vote the other way.