...and by "this", I mean some things I'm hearing about the future of our country under President-elect Obama and his VP-elect Biden. Let me start with my optimistic side before I assuage my worries.
I think it's an encouraging sign of the times that a man of African-American decent has been elected by popular (and electoral) vote to the Presidency of the United States of America. Personally, I didn't vote for him, but that's not important. 52% of our country did, and that gives him the job. I sincerely hope that he comes through in fixing some of the major problems we face as a country. I sincerely hope that he finds a way to come through on the bipartisan promises of working with both sides for the future. I sincerely hope that the Democratic control of the Presidency, Senate and House of Representatives doesn't become an uncontrolled, unmonitored vehicle for change without a balance of power.
So many people are extremely confident that President Elect Obama will bring about these changes and many, many more. My optimistic side is rooting for that outcome.
However, in the 3 days since the election, I'm already hearing things that truly disturb me. Two of which follow here:
First, from
Obama's website:
"
Obama and Biden will set a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year. They will develop national guidelines for service- learning and will give schools better tools both to develop programs and to document student experience. Green Job Corps: Obama and Biden will create an energy-focused youth jobs program to provide disadvantaged youth with service opportunities weatherizing buildings and getting practical experience in fast-growing career fields."
Specifically, the bold/italicized sentence sends some shivers down my spine. Every middle and high school student will be mandated by the FEDERAL government to "participate" in community service programs designed and organized by the same FEDERAL government (presumably run by some committee or position assigned by Obama/Biden). To me, this is a VERY scary proposition. Government shouldn't be involved in making decisions for families at this level, especially setting it up in such a way that the children's 'service' will be in government mandated organizations and/or interest groups. The way this sounds, children won't be able to choose ANY cause of their choosing.
I feel that parents should be working with their children if and when they want to give back to their community. I feel that children shouldn't be FORCED to volunteer their time if they don't want to do so. What if children have after school and summer jobs? From the sound of this, they'll have to MAKE time (not donate, since it's a government mandate) for this community service. I don't know...this just sounds scary to me. Government control isn't a good thing, in my mind anyway.
The second topic of recent discussion that scares me is the creation of a "
civilian national security force". This concept apparently comes from a speech that Obama made on July 2, 2008. I've done some searching online, and I haven't been able to find any real answers to what this might really be. As near as I can determine, this particular portion of his speech had been removed by his speech writers and then ad-libbed back in by Obama during the actual speech. (my
source, unsure if it's 100% reputable, but I've seen similar information on a few other sites
)
All of the published versions of this particular speech have no reference to the "civilian national security force". I don't know what that means, but if it's in reference to expanding the Peace Corps...well, okay, fine. But, why would that be something to remove from a speech if that's the implication? If it's not referring to the Peace Corps (or something equivalent), I'm officially worried.
Other items of concern:
The Fairness Doctrine - I don't know how I feel about this. I've got a problem with the potential impact on talk radio, where they can theoretically censor programs if they don't provide equal time to alternative sides of a particular opinion. The beauty of talk radio is that it IS opinionated, that people are discussing topics openly (most of the time) and don't have to worry about repercussions if someone is "offended" by something that is said (other than the response from the host of the show, of course).
Media in general frustrates me beyond belief. This is where my Republican beliefs get me into 'trouble'. I want to be bipartisan, I want to be able to believe that the media isn't primarily skewed to the left. I just can't do it. When liberals talk about the media slant, they always talk about FOX News. One station. One network. One. Just one. That sounds a *little* ...off? Is "off" the right word? I don't know. It's better than some alternatives, I guess. Anyway, they don't refer to any newspapers (at least that I know of) for being too right wing. We have our fair share of talk radio hosts and a few network TV show hosts. That's about it. When a Republican tries to make the same accusation of any of the other major networks, we are chastised for making such a claim.
I think that journalism is dying. Everyone wants a scoop. Everyone wants a headline or sound bite. I feel like there are very few (if any?) journalists that actually do their due diligence before reporting or writing a story. There's always an angle, of course. No one is totally objective, it's just not possible. However, there should be some middle ground where both sides of a story are reported as equally as possible. It just doesn't seem to happen anymore, on any network, or in any newspaper. It definitely doesn't happen in any political blog on this world wide intarweb.
*sigh*
Another thing that just irks me is one
comment from the soon-to-be first lady, Michele Obama. "
People in this country are ready for change and hungry for a different kind of politics and … for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback." (and her
explanation of those remarks). I just don't know how I feel about the explanation. She's a smart woman, Harvard and Princeton educated. I don't know how you slip up and say something like she originally said. I just don't know, but it rubs me the wrong way when ANYONE says that they're not proud of this country. My grandfather, father, best friend, and many other friends and acquaintances didn't serve in the US Military for people to not appreciate the risk that they took to provide the freedom and safety under which we live every day.
I know our country hasn't been perfect, nor does it treat everyone equally. We're still the best country on the planet, in my personal opinion. Anyone who disagrees has the freedom to go and live in the country that they think is better. We're also the most economically, socially, and racially diverse country in the world (as far as I know anyway)...it's hard enough to keep all the French people happy in France. How are we supposed to meet the needs of everyone in our ridiculously diverse country? Unfortunately, we can't as a government. However, we CAN look out for each other as citizens, as neighbors, as friends, and as family. The government shouldn't tell me how to live my life, they should just provide the basic needs and protection that allow me to live my OWN life and make my OWN choices.
-RamblingHarvey, signing off for now...
