Category: Humanity

McCain v. Obama: Personality and Judgment

How does one take the measure of an individual?  How will a person react under stress to unpredictable circumstance?  President Bush was so unengaged that he probably didn’t know when he should have been feeling more stress.  He failed to oversee little things, like the war in Iraq and the economy.  One actually wonders what he did in the White House all of these years.  But I digress.

John McCain likes to think of himself as a straight talker.  In general I think that’s true but it’s not always the case.  I liked that he took his change of heart to support drilling off the coast of California to the environmental lobby and told them to their face (even though I hate the idea of drilling off the coast).  Having heard him talk I like how he has handled opposition when dealing with abortion.  Still, I dislike that he did in fact flip flop on drilling, and I don’t like that he refused to answer a simple question by the press, like, “How many houses do you own?”

I am also deaply saddened by McCain’s resorting to negative campaigning, in spite of his protestations to the contrary.  To me, negative campaigning is the loser’s last refuge, and here it is as if someone said to McCain, “Do you want to be known as a statesman nice guy loser, or do you want to win?”  And he decided he wanted to win, damn his principles.

While the practice has been executed flawlessly by Republicans, it should be noted that Democrats can play the game as well, as Senator Clinton did in the primaries.  As distasteful as behaving this way in the general is, it is unforgivable in primaries, and Clinton violated what some call the Reagan Rule, named after the President who reminded members of his party who the opposition was.

Barak Obama has done very little negative campaigning.  He has another quality, however, that I like.  He has stated openly that he is not an idealogue.  He seems to take every situation as it is presented to him and responds appropriately.  This makes him perhaps a more difficult public speaker because he can’t just blat out the one liners.  It makes him unpreditable at times.

His level of education wards off some of my concern about his unpredictability, and he is not inarticulate.

This leads me to believe that Obama has better judgment and the appropriate personality for the job.

Obama v. McCain on Education: And the winner is…

It is typical for candidates to speak in platitudes on the campaign trail.  As the son of a teacher and a parent I look at the education system in America as creaking.  The average teacher salary in California is $59,345 while the median salary in California for people with between five and nine years of experience is $67,552.  In other words, we grossly underpay our teachers and undervalue our childrens’ future.  While the states take the lead on providing for our childrens’ education, the federal government has had a role for quite a long time.  The No Child Left Behind Act has done a very good job of leaving all children behind, unless you have a lot of money for private schools.  Teaching to tests and eliminating such “frivolities” as orchestra, music, and art, does not make for a well rounded education.

What am I looking from the candidates?  I want money, plain and simple.  I want them to see more money devoted to education.  Providing tax breaks is not the answer to me, because it generally robs money from our public school systems.  The lack of economies of scale in both the private and the public market for the foreseeable future would be intolerable.  In addition, faith need not apply.  Want religion?  Go to church, temple, or whatever else suits you.  Want science, arts, music, reading, language, and social studies?  Let’s have that in the schools.  I am not opposed to choice of school so long as everyone has that choice, it is not used as a back door for religion, and the basic standards are upheld (including building, health, etc).

How do the candidates rate?  According to OnTheIssues.Org John McCain believes in school choice, but does believe creationism should be taught alongside evolution in our schools (but see below).  He would fund education by reducing subsidies in other areas, including sugar, oil, and ethanol.  He wants tax breaks for charter schools, and he is a strong proponent of vouchers that could be used for any school, including religious schools.  He claims the money would not come from other education efforts, but that’s the sort of thinking that only someone who has been in Washington too long could have, and as a fiscal conservative, it offends me.

At that same web site, Barack Obama’s position boils down to this: we don’t pay teachers enough, we didn’t put any money into the No Child Left Behind Act, hire more teachers, pay excellent teachers excellently, provide a capital improvement fund for crumbling buildings, and free education for people who maintain a B average.  My problem with Obama’s plan is that it is a wishlist a mile long with a bill to go with, and perhaps even more than I could stomach, and he does not provide a way to pay for any of it.

Still, on the whole I am far closer to Obama than McCain on education.  If we are to err, it seems right to err on the side of too much, rather than too little, education.  If people reach their potentials through education, the other problems seem so much easier.

So round one goes to Obama, but it was a decision, not a knockout.  In fact, in scoring the candidates, I’d give Senator Obama a B- for having the right idea but not clearly stating how he would pay for it, but Senator McCain a D for bringing church into the back door of schools, but at least stating what he would do.  Or put another way: 80/100 for Obama, and 65/100 for McCain, a difference of 15 points. Have faith, Senator McCain.  There are many more issues.

Russians in Georgia? Blame us.

As I wrote not so long ago, The Great Bear has awoken and the Soviet Union is alive and well.  According to CNN, Russia used cluster bombs to kill civilians in their attack on Georgia.  This represents a war crime that could be taken to The International Criminal Court (ICC).  Of course, Russia is not a member, and as it turns out, neither is the United States.  Stepping away from the ICC was one of President Bush’s first activities, which means that in a (yet another) way, we are complacent to the crimes committed by the Russians.  It also means that now is a good time for us to revisit signing and ratifying the Rome Statute that established the court and its jurisdiction.

The ICC exists because any country can go too far.  It is not meant to usurp power from functioning democracies that enforce their laws, but is meant instead to provide redress to agrieved individuals and countries against dicatorships.  Does this include Russia?  I believe so.  Russia has not yet demonstrated an impartial judiciary and prosecutorial service that provides oversight over the central government functions.  Does it include the United States?  I wouldn’t have said so until we began holding captives in Guantanamo Bay, and not providing due process.  Torture at Guantanamo is particularly troubling.  But it is nothing like the abuse currently going on in Georgia.

Taxation and Representation, Take 2

Voting in California is perhaps one of the closest experiences one can have to true democracy in America.  Anything of substantial importance is presented to voters as a ballet initiative.  And this is true for cities and counties within the state as well.  I remember in November of 1992 voting on whether or not Officer Robert Geary should be able to bring his puppet Brendan O’Smarty in his patrol car.  In 1988, my first year in California, the citizens rejected the abusive behaviors of insurance companies and voted themselves a rate cut.

When we left California for Switzerland I knew that as an American I would be able to vote for President and for Congress.  What was less clear to me was whether I could vote as a Californian.  As it turns out I could continue to vote in the California elections, just as I had in the past, but there is a catch: California would like their share of my income.  And so I wondered: is this fair?  I came to the conclusion that it was.

I wanted to continue to be part of the community in which I had immersed myself in 1998, but California has a justifiable concern that only those who are actually impacted by their choices of laws should have a say.  Otherwise, since I’m not there, I could vote any which way with no consequence to myself or my family.  I miss California, and it saddens me that I can’t be a part of the solution to the many problems Californians face.  And those problems are substantial: the transportation network is failing, electricity and water supply is short, the education system remains strapped, and pollution remains a challenge.

Part of the reason for this blog is to share some of the experiences I’ve had in Switzerland so others might be able to apply them.  I was in particular thinking about my friends in California.