The opening paragraph said, "The primary near-term security concern of the United States is the global economic crisis and its geopolitical implications." He continued, "all of us recall the dramatic political consequences wrought by the economic turmoil of the 1920s and 1930s in Europe, the instability, and high levels of violent extremism."
Recently I've blogged concerns about potential civil unrest brought on in part from economic pressures particularly in hard hit inner city neighborhoods.
For raising these concerns — parallel I might add to concerns raised by the Obama administration — readers questioned my motives and resorted to calling me a racist.
In another blog I quoted an article in the Wall Street Journal in which Allan H. Meltzer, a professor of economics at Carnegie Mellon University, observed Britain and Germany making policy moves which apparently were already showing promise helping them move out of their respective economic slumps.
I suggested Washington could learn some lessons from these two governments, and was again taken to task by some readers who inexplicably resorted to calling me a racist.
I'm talking about the economy and jobs here.
Yet, as conservatives (including TEA Partiers) raise concerns about the economy, jobs, and taxes, "the other side" makes charges completely unrelated in transparent attempts to draw attention away from the economy to more emotionally charged subjects.
Why?
Why are Democrats still running against George Bush?
Voters need to evaluate what platforms candidates are actually running on.
I'm not interested in voting for someone who's still running against W. They are obviously way out of touch with reality and the American people, and they are following the lead of our President who has yet to assume responsibility for his own failed policies choosing instead to continue blaming his predecessor.
How can voters learn what candidates actually believe? I suggest following diverse news sources. For example, every day I read the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Jackson Clarion-Ledger, and our local paper.
I also watch equal parts of CNN and FOX News, and occasionally one of the alphabet networks. One reader told me he didn't have to watch FOX News because he got his news from Jon Stewart on Comedy Central.
What are TEA Partiers saying? How about Sarah Palin, Newt, Rand Paul, and Sharron Angle? Are they all really radical extremists like the lame-stream media and liberal/progressives charge? I have seen absolutely no resemblance between Glenn Beck and depictions of him by leftist wingnuts!
When I was young, someone asked me if I believed everything I read. At the time I had no reason not to. Since then, I've learned to question all sources of information. Enlightened voters will peruse news from a wide diversity of sources and draw reasonable conclusions. Ideologues on both sides will hunker down into their comfy little ideologue news niches and cast party-line stones at their enemies.
Daniel L. Gardner is a syndicated columnist who lives in Starkville, MS. You may contact him at PJandMe2@gmail.com, or interact with him on the Clarion-Ledger feature blog site http://www.clarionledger.com/section/blogs06. Gardner's columns are also featured on dannygardner.opinioneditorial.com
Post a Comment