Pro-Obama or Anti-Romney?

I had been waiting for a week to get my dishwasher fixed, and believe me I was most excited to find the repairman at the door this afternoon, but did not know that I was in for a political "treat". As I talked with him about the summertime, and the fact that you have to force children out of the house nowadays, unlike when I or him were little and were out by 9:00 A.M and not back home until dinner was on the table our conversation took a turn to politics. I asked if he was Democrat or Republican, and his answer was delightful. He said, "While I do not mind Obama I cannot say I am pro-Obama, but I am definitely a Democrat, and very much anti-Romney." The comment seemed to make perfect sense to me, a lesser of two evils scenario I guess. He then went on to point out that he felt like Romney had ostracized women and "every minority possible". So, I began to think.... What else does a president need to know? The answer came to me through an article by The Houston Chronicle. Amy Tiebel wrote, "Romney Angers Palestinians with Pro-Israel Comment". In Romney's latest political campaign trip to Israel he made comments that have started quite a stir. He states, "You notice a stark difference in economic vitality...And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things." These statements left Palestinian leaders outraged. The Palestinian Labor Minister felt that Romney's statements were a clear sign of "a true racist spirit". As I continued to look for more evidence on Romney's "racist spirit" I came across yet another article in The Washington Post . In the article written by Phillip Rucker and Joel Greenberg, "Romney faces Palestinian criticism for Jerusalem remarks as he heads to Poland" they really highlighted Romney's lack of cultural intelligence. He stated that he had pondered the Israeli's obvious advantage over surrounding countries, but how can he ponder such things and not know the true facts. Saeb Erekat, a top aide to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, said in an interview, “All I can say is that this man needs a lot of education. He doesn’t know the region, he doesn’t know Israelis, he doesn’t know Palestinians, and to talk about the Palestinians as an inferior culture is really a racist statement.” I cannot speak for everyone in this nation of ours, but I know that I want a strong, honest, compassionate, and knowledgeable leader. From what I have seen so far Romney just is not that. Actually, according to Newsweek's Michael Tomasky, "He’s kind of lame, and he’s really ... annoying. He keeps saying these ... things, these incredibly off-key things. Then he apologizes immediately—with all the sincerity of a hostage. Or maybe he doesn’t: sometimes he whines about the subsequent attacks on him. But the one thing he never does? Man up, double down, take his lumps.” In an NBC-Wall Street Journal poll released last week, 45 percent of respondents said President Obama would make the better commander in chief, while 35 percent said Romney would. Forty-eight percent said Obama was “knowledgeable and experienced enough to handle the presidency,” while 32 percent said that phrase better described Romney. The race is just beginning and over the next couple of months we all need to decide what we want in a President before we hit the voting polls. Don't ask yourself, "Am I Republican or Democrat?" Instead ask, "Who better represents America as a whole, and am I willing to overlook party stigmas?" I came to the conclusion that President's should not only be educated on world news, but on the values and culture in our surrounding countries. Our President should be a clear reflection of the multi-cultural and diverse country the United States is. While we need someone who is strong and willing to stand for our values, we also need someone willing to educate themselves on other cultures and countries as well. Afterall, he is our "spokesperson".

Health Care

Libertarians favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. They believe people should have the right to decide what kind of insurance they want (if any). They also believe people should be able to make all of their medical decisions, of whether to be treated or not. And that people have the right to purchase insurance across state lines. Democrats are in strong favor of Health Care Reform. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires individuals not covered by employer- or government-sponsored insurance plans to maintain minimal essential health insurance coverage or pay a penalty unless exempted for religious beliefs or financial hardship, a provision commonly referred to as the individual mandate. Republicans believe the key to real healthcare reform is to give control of the health care system to the patients and providers, not the government. Libertarians feel very strongly about the Supreme Court ruling to uphold Obamacare. They believe it has torn down the walls of the Constitution and takes any sense of freedom and liberty from the American people. Mark Hilgenberg, the Libertarian Party Chair of Utah, stated “Contrary to outraged cries from Republicans that it’s some sort of radical departure from our “free enterprise” system, Obamacare is in fact a direct continuation of the bipartisan neoliberal consensus of the past thirty years." Republicans took a little more elegant approached and wrote, " It's time to repeal Obamacare and replace it with commonsense, step-by-step reforms that will actually lower costs." But even the Libertarians do not want a Romneycare to replace Obamacare. Now, I may be a little biased about my opinions on this topic because I am a supporter of the Act (or Obamacare) and a Democrat. But, in my opinion, I feel that the Libertarians are being a little "far-fetched"in their expectations or platforms in healthcare. We often hear politicians talk about the future of tomorrow, but where will the future be if everyone is sick and dying with no insurance. On December 6, 2011 while speaking to a group of about 100 students at a small Iowa Christian college, Santorum claimed that no one in America has ever died because they didn’t have health care coverage. This is not true. In FACT, “Researchers from Harvard Medical School say the lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States — a toll that is greater than the number of people who die each year from kidney disease.” (New York Times, 2009) In September of 2011 while campaigning against Obamacare Lindsay Bayerstein wrote an article on Ron Paul's campaign manager "dying penniless and uninsured". When Paul was being interviewed about a 30 year old man dying of cancer because of lack of health care this is what happened..."That's what freedom is all about: taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to take care of everybody—" Paul began before he was drowned out by hoots of glee from the audience. Blitzer asked if we should just let the guy die, which drew cheers from the crowd. Paul allowed that maybe churches could step in and fill the void. The article then goes on to say that his campaign manager had racked up $400,000 in medical costs. To me, that is not dying "free", but leaving debt left to your loved ones. These articles were downright depressing. People cheering for a man dying because a party did not want to support a plan to help people with their insurance? The last article I read, Sick + Tired, published in the Texas Observer was incredibly sad. A young man died eight months after his diagnosis of prostate cancer, not because he did not catch it in time, but because that is how long the fight took to get him seen and treated. He did not even last two weeks after his surgery. What a waste. What everyone seems to forget is that this Act takes care of those with pre-existing conditons. Two years ago I had to have two lumpectomies in fear of breast cancer, while my results came back negative, they also came back pre-cancerous. Once pre-cancerous is on your charts, and no better at 25 years old, it is hard to get AFFORDABLE insurance. The Obamacare is going to make it possible for millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions to once again afford healthcare. I believe in liberty and freedom just as much as the next guy, but I do believe with all three parties listed that sometimes they are not thinking about what is in the best interest of the people but what is in the best interest of the election or their party. It is hard for me to imagine that people do not have compassion for others when they are sick. Obamacare definitely is not perfect but it is a step in the right direction. I do not have any feelings of security with the Libertarians platform, and the Republicans need to emphasize their "reform" policies. I encourage everyone to not only understand the health care platforms but research what they truly stand for before deciding if you will stand with them. http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/santorum-no-one-has-ever-died-because-they-didnt-have-health-care/politics/2011/12/06/31304 http://www.democrats.org/issues/health_care http://www.lp.org/platform http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/06/libertarian-candidates-oppose-supreme-court-decision-to-uphold-obamacare/