It is Election Day here in the Excited States of America and the question today is, are you better off now than you were four years ago, and do you like the direction your leaders are taking you in? If the question is yes, then you should vote to keep the existing leadership in place. If the answer is no, then you should vote to throw the bums out. If you are not voting, your criticisms of your elected officials hold an lot less weight.
Of course, there are those of us that are prevented from voting for legal reasons. This does not change the fact that at the end of the day, the decision to vote or not to vote, rests solely with YOU.
Let us review. There are two candidates. One, who's record in public office is long and distinguished, but has never held the top job and one who is currently in the top job, who's record is not so distinguished. You can argue security all you want, but ask yourself this question - and be honest - are ANY of the security improvements put in place by the current administration really geared towards improving security, or are they simply designed to make you feel more secure? Think about it for a moment. If there was any real effort at closing the borders, would drugs still be able to get through? If there was any real effort at securing air travel, would the TSA have to fire hundreds of people that they hired because of criminal convictions? If there was any real desire to secure the country, wouldn't the government have issued federal IDs that were counterfeit proof? If you have a new passport of I-559 (Green Card) you know what the government contractors are capable of in terms of counterfeit-proofing the ID system...and yet, my drivers license can be generated with a printer that you can pick up at any ID store for about $2000, no questions asked. Clearly the COST of issuing IDs to EVERY US Citizen and Resident that is entitled to one is prohibitive, but if the government were really serious about security, the cost would be the smallest concern.
Does this mean the other guy will do better? No, I don't think so, but the current leader has alienated so many of the allies of the United States, that the ability to implement some of the global changes that need to be implemented to reduce or defuse the root causes of the current situation. While you cannot kill terrorism (I have mentioned this in the past) you can certainly do several things to make it less of an option to those that it would attract, and the 9/11 Commission Report lays out several very important steps. The biggest problem is that in order to implement the steps, the United States must work with other nations. Not against them, not unilaterally, not with a holier-than-thou attitude and certainly not with a we know better than you what you need attitude. That is what has gotten the Untied States into the mess it is in now. That alone would be cause to replace the current administration - to make it look to the world like the United States actually gives a damn about its behavior. After all, a company that is seen as evil or bad throws out its top administration, or changes its name and suddenly, they are the good guys. Since the United States isn't likely to change its name, then getting rid of the people in charge is the next best step. (Actually, getting rid of the current government structure and starting again is probably what is required, but that would take too much work and no one has the energy to reformulate the government in one fell swoop.)
So don't just sit on your brains. Go out and vote for the leader (and administration) that you think will do the best job.
10:38:24 AM 
|
|
