Today, Jim Gilmore, a former Henrico County prosecutor, Virginia Attorney General, and Governor of Virginia was nominated as the Republican Senate Candidate for Virginia by a razor-thin margin of 76 votes. The other Republican contenders for the U.S. Senate were state delegate Bob Marshall and Veteran Bob Berry from Fairfax. Jim Gilmore outspent Marshall 14-1 indicating less enthusiasm in voters about Gilmore.
Gilmore's victory is still a victory, but it shows that Virginia Republicans are losing touch with their officials and want a call back to core conservative values, values Marshall was seen as having.
What moderately-conservative strategy works in Northern Virginia does not work in the bulk of the state. Gilmore is more moderate than Marshall.
I personally do not know who to support for the Fall general election, but am inclined to vote Republican at this point since I see more inspiration coming from Gilmore than Warner, the presumptive Democratic nominee.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Scott McClellan is the Biggest Jerk in the Nation
Scott McClellan recently published a book about what he did as press secretary for President George W. Bush. He says that the staff made him tell lies and say things he did not agree with when he addressed the public. He wanted to expose what the administration did and verify what the Bush critics have said for ages.
Sounds just, right? How about cruel and two-faced.
So let's look at what led up to this. McClellan started to work for Bush when he was first elected Governor of Texas. He did what the the then governor and now president said to do. He did his job. He held his job in the White House for six years before resigning because of differences between the president and him. Then this happened: he published a book and is making a ton of money.
How is any of this ethical or right?
McClellan was voluntarily employed by Bush to do a job, not comment on it. His job was to say what the White House wanted. He was paid for it. He did it for six years before saying that enough is enough. Then he made a book and is gaining more dollars every second it is in the marketplace. He completely turned on the man he had supported for years and complained about his job that he was being paid to do. Paid a lot.
It is unethical and wrong to tell a lie, but as the saying goes, "Don't kill the messenger."
I wouldn't have a problem with McClellan if he had done this earlier, but it's just that he had to do it when it was most profitable. It's not like Bush was a stranger to McClellan; he worked for him during his governorship and was good friends with him.
This just doesn't make sense.
Sounds just, right? How about cruel and two-faced.
So let's look at what led up to this. McClellan started to work for Bush when he was first elected Governor of Texas. He did what the the then governor and now president said to do. He did his job. He held his job in the White House for six years before resigning because of differences between the president and him. Then this happened: he published a book and is making a ton of money.
How is any of this ethical or right?
McClellan was voluntarily employed by Bush to do a job, not comment on it. His job was to say what the White House wanted. He was paid for it. He did it for six years before saying that enough is enough. Then he made a book and is gaining more dollars every second it is in the marketplace. He completely turned on the man he had supported for years and complained about his job that he was being paid to do. Paid a lot.
It is unethical and wrong to tell a lie, but as the saying goes, "Don't kill the messenger."
I wouldn't have a problem with McClellan if he had done this earlier, but it's just that he had to do it when it was most profitable. It's not like Bush was a stranger to McClellan; he worked for him during his governorship and was good friends with him.
This just doesn't make sense.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
I wish I was? No. I wish I were.
This is probably my biggest pet peeve when it comes to grammar: the subjunctive mood.
Let's clarify what the subjunctive mood is. For many of you, your foreign language classes have mentioned this mood, and you have forgotten it quickly.
What it is is a mood indicating doubt, hope, or desire. So basically, it covers anything that has not happened yet.
Here is a commonly mistaken phrase:
"I wish I was in Madrid."
No way, amigo.
It should read, "I wish I were in Madrid."
------------
Same goes for "If I was a rich girl, na na na na na na na."
It should be, "If I were a rich girl, na na na na na na na."
------------
So basically, whenever you say "if," "wish," "hope," "doubt," etcetera, you use "were" as the verb. "Is" is also acceptable at times when it makes sense.
------------
If you were to say "I wish I was in Madrid," you are saying that you desire you are somewhere even though you are technically there based off of what you said. "Was" triggers use of the indicative mood: a mood used for stating fact.
Just one of my rants.
Let's clarify what the subjunctive mood is. For many of you, your foreign language classes have mentioned this mood, and you have forgotten it quickly.
What it is is a mood indicating doubt, hope, or desire. So basically, it covers anything that has not happened yet.
Here is a commonly mistaken phrase:
"I wish I was in Madrid."
No way, amigo.
It should read, "I wish I were in Madrid."
------------
Same goes for "If I was a rich girl, na na na na na na na."
It should be, "If I were a rich girl, na na na na na na na."
------------
So basically, whenever you say "if," "wish," "hope," "doubt," etcetera, you use "were" as the verb. "Is" is also acceptable at times when it makes sense.
------------
If you were to say "I wish I was in Madrid," you are saying that you desire you are somewhere even though you are technically there based off of what you said. "Was" triggers use of the indicative mood: a mood used for stating fact.
Just one of my rants.
Fully Unfaithful Credit
I've been reading about a bazillion blogs and it seems that the only topic people talk about is the California gay marriage state Supreme Court ruling.
I've read people's blogs who would be willing to parade around with a rainbow flag and turn gay just to support all those who prefer their own sex over the opposite and I've read people's posts who just resent homosexuality but put up with it to be nice.
And then there are those who base their thought off of reason and Constitutionality.
I had a rather rough exchange with Ellen Falci about whether the "Full Faith and Credit Clause" could be used to mark the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. She claimed that because of this provision, it is not constitutional to deny the recognition of gay marriages in states which have passed laws prohibiting them. I said a firm "no."
Let's dissect the following passage, shall we?
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State"
Consistent recognition will be granted to any legal obligation or agreement regardless of location.
"to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State."
Recognition to the collective legislation, public records (marriages), and rulings of all states.
"the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
The national legislature can through national laws determine the effect or way in which this legislation, public records, and rulings should be demonstrated, and how they will affect the population.
--
So really, the passage could give Congress leeway to either apply this passage or not.
I've read people's blogs who would be willing to parade around with a rainbow flag and turn gay just to support all those who prefer their own sex over the opposite and I've read people's posts who just resent homosexuality but put up with it to be nice.
And then there are those who base their thought off of reason and Constitutionality.
I had a rather rough exchange with Ellen Falci about whether the "Full Faith and Credit Clause" could be used to mark the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. She claimed that because of this provision, it is not constitutional to deny the recognition of gay marriages in states which have passed laws prohibiting them. I said a firm "no."
Let's dissect the following passage, shall we?
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State"
Consistent recognition will be granted to any legal obligation or agreement regardless of location.
"to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State."
Recognition to the collective legislation, public records (marriages), and rulings of all states.
"the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
The national legislature can through national laws determine the effect or way in which this legislation, public records, and rulings should be demonstrated, and how they will affect the population.
--
So really, the passage could give Congress leeway to either apply this passage or not.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
A Bipartisan Failure and a Predictable Obama
Today, the House of Representatives performed an override of the President's veto of the Farm Bill. This bill provides about $307 billion in agricultural subsidies for domestic nutrition programs, crop subsidies, and foreign aid. This is Bush's second veto that was struck down in a resounding 316-to-108 vote.
This seems like a defeat, yes? Republican and Democrats working together in a strong way, right? Wrong. This is perhaps the single most-hurtful vote the Republican Party could have performed. The Party of fiscal conservatism and less government overrode a conservative president's veto that was done to prevent excessive spending. A few democrats, such as Ron Kind of Wisconsin did the right thing and voted against the override in an effort to keep Bush's veto in place. He wanted to do this because the bill was "bloated and wasteful."
In the Senate, it also approved the override and sent the colossal waste on to the American taxpayer, who now has over $300 billion to pay.
One Senator who stood out, like he always does, was John McCain, my boy. He voted against this in that it is a ridiculous waste of money and ineffective. This will help McCain in the election because it shows his fiscal responsibility and conservative values.
But, as expected, the man everyone (well, not quite everyone) wants to have a love affair with, Barack Obama, voted "Yea" for the override and made the national debt even greater despite his ramblings about how the country is being hurt daily by George W. Bush due to his spending habits.
This just shows the integrity and strength of Obama. His rank-and-file vote along with the rest of the high-power Democrats just show how he is a political puppet; he cannot make decisions without appeasing or agreeing with those higher in the Democratic Party.
In short, when Bush gave us a good dose of financial preservation, Congress disagrees with him. I guess the saying that goes "Damned if he do and damned if he don't." applies here. Ridiculous.
This seems like a defeat, yes? Republican and Democrats working together in a strong way, right? Wrong. This is perhaps the single most-hurtful vote the Republican Party could have performed. The Party of fiscal conservatism and less government overrode a conservative president's veto that was done to prevent excessive spending. A few democrats, such as Ron Kind of Wisconsin did the right thing and voted against the override in an effort to keep Bush's veto in place. He wanted to do this because the bill was "bloated and wasteful."
In the Senate, it also approved the override and sent the colossal waste on to the American taxpayer, who now has over $300 billion to pay.
One Senator who stood out, like he always does, was John McCain, my boy. He voted against this in that it is a ridiculous waste of money and ineffective. This will help McCain in the election because it shows his fiscal responsibility and conservative values.
But, as expected, the man everyone (well, not quite everyone) wants to have a love affair with, Barack Obama, voted "Yea" for the override and made the national debt even greater despite his ramblings about how the country is being hurt daily by George W. Bush due to his spending habits.
This just shows the integrity and strength of Obama. His rank-and-file vote along with the rest of the high-power Democrats just show how he is a political puppet; he cannot make decisions without appeasing or agreeing with those higher in the Democratic Party.
In short, when Bush gave us a good dose of financial preservation, Congress disagrees with him. I guess the saying that goes "Damned if he do and damned if he don't." applies here. Ridiculous.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
My Political Views
North Korean nuclear programs: I love my country. I love its way of life and its people. I love its earned privileges. Unfortunately, other countries want this same culture: an individual culture. They want to be able to research and do what they desire. I cannot deny such demands, but I can limit them. We need to heavily monitor the North Korean government because of a power-hungry leader and an equally hungry populace.
Dependence on foreign oil: We desperately need to drill for more oil while also heavily having companies invest in alternative energy sources. We would motivate them to do so through tax incentives/breaks.
Creation/Evolution: I believe in both creation and evolution. God says that He created man and Earth in 7 days, but never specifies just how long a day is. We perceive a day as 24 hours, but it could be a week, a month, a year, or 3 billion years. He created and then evolution occurred afterward.
Economy: It needs to fix itself by letting market forces repair it and the government needs to stop trying to get involved.
Education: Everyone should have the right to an education. No Child Left Behind is a bit screwy, however.
Separation of Church and State: To a degree. Church shouldn't influence our laws but laws shouldn't influence our religion, either.
Middle East Crisis: We had faulty intelligence when military operations began there. We need to fix the area now that we are there, however. There should be more of a diplomatic approach to the region.
Second Amendment: This is the most ingenious use of language ever used by The Framers; it purposely provides a vague description of firearm rights in the United States. This ambiguity results in the constant debate and special interest over whether to restrict guns or allow them, thus assuring that there will never be an agreement, and a balance of opinion will be sought. Incredible foresight.
Farm Policy: Stop the subsidies.
Stem Cell Research: Embryonic stem cell research, to me, is unethical and wrong; it's taking advantage of human life. There are other methods that work just as well and cost the same while causing no harm to life.
Gay Rights/Marriage: This is an "on the fence" issue. On one side, I have my personal morals telling me that this is wrong, but then I have my kind side telling me to love thy neighbor. I do not think that marriage should be an institution ensured and provided by the government. Some benefits given by the federal government should be removed for marriage in the future.
Immigration: We need to enforce our laws until new ones are made. My brother would call this "normative theory," assuming that the laws, as they are, are correct.
Environment: Protect it while considering the economy.
Health Care: Universal health care is a joke. It is a logistical nightmare and a horrid expense.
Death Penalty: Yup.
Taxes/Cuts: Only when they make good sense. Don't cut when you do not need to and do not tax when you don't have to.
War in Iraq: Based on flawed intelligence, but we need to do as much as we can to help the region while we are there.
Marijuana Legalization: Never. Never. Never.
Partial Birth Abortion: This is a wrong and disgusting thing to do to your child. You burn the baby with saline solution and then kill it while it is living inside of you.
Abortion: A terribly selfish and unethical thing to do. The only cases where this course of action would be justifiable would be in a case of rape; you didn't choose to have sex.
Euthanasia: Again, it is unethical. Suicide is a horrible thing and we should not legalize it.
American Flag Desecration: Allow it, even though I hate the desecration.
Dependence on foreign oil: We desperately need to drill for more oil while also heavily having companies invest in alternative energy sources. We would motivate them to do so through tax incentives/breaks.
Creation/Evolution: I believe in both creation and evolution. God says that He created man and Earth in 7 days, but never specifies just how long a day is. We perceive a day as 24 hours, but it could be a week, a month, a year, or 3 billion years. He created and then evolution occurred afterward.
Economy: It needs to fix itself by letting market forces repair it and the government needs to stop trying to get involved.
Education: Everyone should have the right to an education. No Child Left Behind is a bit screwy, however.
Separation of Church and State: To a degree. Church shouldn't influence our laws but laws shouldn't influence our religion, either.
Middle East Crisis: We had faulty intelligence when military operations began there. We need to fix the area now that we are there, however. There should be more of a diplomatic approach to the region.
Second Amendment: This is the most ingenious use of language ever used by The Framers; it purposely provides a vague description of firearm rights in the United States. This ambiguity results in the constant debate and special interest over whether to restrict guns or allow them, thus assuring that there will never be an agreement, and a balance of opinion will be sought. Incredible foresight.
Farm Policy: Stop the subsidies.
Stem Cell Research: Embryonic stem cell research, to me, is unethical and wrong; it's taking advantage of human life. There are other methods that work just as well and cost the same while causing no harm to life.
Gay Rights/Marriage: This is an "on the fence" issue. On one side, I have my personal morals telling me that this is wrong, but then I have my kind side telling me to love thy neighbor. I do not think that marriage should be an institution ensured and provided by the government. Some benefits given by the federal government should be removed for marriage in the future.
Immigration: We need to enforce our laws until new ones are made. My brother would call this "normative theory," assuming that the laws, as they are, are correct.
Environment: Protect it while considering the economy.
Health Care: Universal health care is a joke. It is a logistical nightmare and a horrid expense.
Death Penalty: Yup.
Taxes/Cuts: Only when they make good sense. Don't cut when you do not need to and do not tax when you don't have to.
War in Iraq: Based on flawed intelligence, but we need to do as much as we can to help the region while we are there.
Marijuana Legalization: Never. Never. Never.
Partial Birth Abortion: This is a wrong and disgusting thing to do to your child. You burn the baby with saline solution and then kill it while it is living inside of you.
Abortion: A terribly selfish and unethical thing to do. The only cases where this course of action would be justifiable would be in a case of rape; you didn't choose to have sex.
Euthanasia: Again, it is unethical. Suicide is a horrible thing and we should not legalize it.
American Flag Desecration: Allow it, even though I hate the desecration.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Don't Do Anything Stupid This Weekend, Please
I know that by posting this, I'll be called a hypocrite and will most likely be detested by my friends, but I realized that there are just some things worth being hated for. I've done a lot of dumb things when I'm given the chance, and will, at the rate things are going now, will continue to do for many a year. But what one learns from experience, he should feel obliged to pass down this knowledge to those around and younger than he, thereby espousing wisdom.
As we get ever closer to prom weekend, we get excited with good reason. For some of us, it's our first trip to a place not known visually but rather emotionally, and for others it's a last time to forget your troubles and make memories that will last forever. However, some of us forget to remember that we are still human and as such, must treat our bodies as temples, not, as Jimmy Buffett said "like a tent."
So I ask anyone who reads this small post of only a few lines long, to think about what he or she may do tomorrow night and reconsider it if it isn't the right thing, for if you make the wrong decision, you risk so much for nothing.
I will think.
May God's grace be with you.
As we get ever closer to prom weekend, we get excited with good reason. For some of us, it's our first trip to a place not known visually but rather emotionally, and for others it's a last time to forget your troubles and make memories that will last forever. However, some of us forget to remember that we are still human and as such, must treat our bodies as temples, not, as Jimmy Buffett said "like a tent."
So I ask anyone who reads this small post of only a few lines long, to think about what he or she may do tomorrow night and reconsider it if it isn't the right thing, for if you make the wrong decision, you risk so much for nothing.
I will think.
May God's grace be with you.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
The Mystery of Faith (Think, as Mr. Smith would say)
I read this from meaning-of-life.info and thought it summed up what I think faith is very well.
"Faith is not something that we can produce for ourselves. It is not something that we can simply decide to have. We cannot turn it on like a water faucet; it does not work that way.
Faith is a gift from God. It is a gift of the Holy Spirit. This gift is always offered by God, but we are not always able to accept it. In order to accept it, we must want to be good people. We must truly invite God into our lives. We must try to do God's commands. Christ said: to believe in me you must do the commands of my Father in heaven. There is no way around it, if we turn away from God and refuse to try to follow His commands, we will not be able to accept the gift of His true faith. And God's one great command is this: love and take care of everyone on earth, as much as you love and take care of yourself."
That's all.
"Faith is not something that we can produce for ourselves. It is not something that we can simply decide to have. We cannot turn it on like a water faucet; it does not work that way.
Faith is a gift from God. It is a gift of the Holy Spirit. This gift is always offered by God, but we are not always able to accept it. In order to accept it, we must want to be good people. We must truly invite God into our lives. We must try to do God's commands. Christ said: to believe in me you must do the commands of my Father in heaven. There is no way around it, if we turn away from God and refuse to try to follow His commands, we will not be able to accept the gift of His true faith. And God's one great command is this: love and take care of everyone on earth, as much as you love and take care of yourself."
That's all.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Accident Admirers: A Love Story
Coming home from my internship with Senator Warner of Virginia, I sluggishly work my way out of a reverse game of Tetris, also known as city traffic. After the mastermind behind the movement of cars shifts enough cars' positions and gets them going, I eventually escape the grasp of this behemoth comprising cars, trucks, SUVs, buses, travel buses, and tour buses. After I start going my way on I-66, I hear my truck's engine roar as I approach 65 miles per hour and shift into fifth gear. Everything seems golden; cars are moving at the same speed and I am thinking that I'll be home in about 30 minutes. But as soon as my engine has been going at about 2500 revolutions-per-minute, I see the needle that pops my bubble of hope and happiness: a blue light. As soon as I see it, I know that my aspirations of getting home early and maybe being able to watch a rerun of "The Simpsons" are no more. People awkwardly gawk out of their smudged car windows to the accident that just occurred. I have what seems to be a pretty good stereotype of who the gawk-er is: She usually drives a 2000-2004 silver or dirty black Japanese car and generally has an "Impeach Bush" or "Obama '08" bumper sticker haphazardly plastered on her peeling bumper. These people seem to really be attracted to automobile accidents.
Seriously, I could make a love story out of these so called "accident admirers." You have your exposition: driving quickly, hoping for a speedy return back to your home; rising actions: the blue light and distant sirens, people dodging in and out of lanes in an attempt to weave through and evade the potential future 2 mile-per-hour traffic; climax: the awkward gawkers gazing passionately at the wreckage; and finally the resolution: returning to normal speed.
And this wreck doesn't even have to be a real wreck to be rubbernecked, it could be something as simple as a flat tire or a even some road pizza (roadkill) sitting on the granny (slow lane/access road). (Thanks to my uncle and "Home Improvement" for the trucker lingo.)
This love affair needs to be broken up. And what breaks up a relationship better than legislative reform? In order to make travel less eventful, we need serious transportation reform within the Commonwealth. For one, what we have now is a highway suitable for a city the size of Norfolk or Newport News, but not Washington, D.C. It's like you're taking a malleable cube and trying to shove it down and through a funnel. Now unfortunately, communities and businesses have developed along the banks of this gargantuan corridor of people and pollution, so any possible expansion of roadway is near-impossible. So how to fix this. Well, the state could declare eminent domain on the private property, but that would most likely be heavily protested, along with the opposition and limitations as set forth by President Bush in his executive order limiting the amount of private land that may be requisitioned and claimed eminent domain. One thing there is left to do is . . . the most dreaded option of the uptight yuppies from the northern region of Virginia: public transportation. Usually just used for getting to a Nationals ball game or the Washington Auto Show, the Metro and Metro Buses are seldom used by a majority of commuters because they want to have their own space and peace-of-mind. This seems reasonable, but where is the peace-of-mind in waiting in antagonizing chain-links of traffic moving at 5 miles-per-hour and then going up to 35, and then back down to 5? Where is the personal space when you are trapped between two eighteen-wheelers and have to hold your course so you don't accidentally let your car slip under the trailer?
I myself am not an avid user of Metro and use it only for the two situations told above: Nats games and car shows. Metro needs to expand its lines to accommodate more passengers and create more stops. It is a lot of money, but if we in Virginia, can divert some of the gas tax revenue used for highway maintenance and commit it to the expansion of Metro, we will inevitably have better road driving conditions. To make up for the loss in highway revenue, we can shift the maintenance of highways, notably I-495 and I-66, to private companies, just like the Greenway. As an incentive to get a company to take charge of these roadways, we will give them liberty to set the tolls (only influenced by possible state censures of the company if the road is not up to par.) and give them a tax incentive for taking on such a project. Eventually, the state will lose control of these roads, except for minor toll controls, and the tax burden will be removed from the Commonwealth.
This plan is far from perfect, but it is a good way of stimulating the economy, easing the transportation situation, and lessening pollution.
Either way, if you fall in love with an damaged car, it is not meant to be.
Seriously, I could make a love story out of these so called "accident admirers." You have your exposition: driving quickly, hoping for a speedy return back to your home; rising actions: the blue light and distant sirens, people dodging in and out of lanes in an attempt to weave through and evade the potential future 2 mile-per-hour traffic; climax: the awkward gawkers gazing passionately at the wreckage; and finally the resolution: returning to normal speed.
And this wreck doesn't even have to be a real wreck to be rubbernecked, it could be something as simple as a flat tire or a even some road pizza (roadkill) sitting on the granny (slow lane/access road). (Thanks to my uncle and "Home Improvement" for the trucker lingo.)
This love affair needs to be broken up. And what breaks up a relationship better than legislative reform? In order to make travel less eventful, we need serious transportation reform within the Commonwealth. For one, what we have now is a highway suitable for a city the size of Norfolk or Newport News, but not Washington, D.C. It's like you're taking a malleable cube and trying to shove it down and through a funnel. Now unfortunately, communities and businesses have developed along the banks of this gargantuan corridor of people and pollution, so any possible expansion of roadway is near-impossible. So how to fix this. Well, the state could declare eminent domain on the private property, but that would most likely be heavily protested, along with the opposition and limitations as set forth by President Bush in his executive order limiting the amount of private land that may be requisitioned and claimed eminent domain. One thing there is left to do is . . . the most dreaded option of the uptight yuppies from the northern region of Virginia: public transportation. Usually just used for getting to a Nationals ball game or the Washington Auto Show, the Metro and Metro Buses are seldom used by a majority of commuters because they want to have their own space and peace-of-mind. This seems reasonable, but where is the peace-of-mind in waiting in antagonizing chain-links of traffic moving at 5 miles-per-hour and then going up to 35, and then back down to 5? Where is the personal space when you are trapped between two eighteen-wheelers and have to hold your course so you don't accidentally let your car slip under the trailer?
I myself am not an avid user of Metro and use it only for the two situations told above: Nats games and car shows. Metro needs to expand its lines to accommodate more passengers and create more stops. It is a lot of money, but if we in Virginia, can divert some of the gas tax revenue used for highway maintenance and commit it to the expansion of Metro, we will inevitably have better road driving conditions. To make up for the loss in highway revenue, we can shift the maintenance of highways, notably I-495 and I-66, to private companies, just like the Greenway. As an incentive to get a company to take charge of these roadways, we will give them liberty to set the tolls (only influenced by possible state censures of the company if the road is not up to par.) and give them a tax incentive for taking on such a project. Eventually, the state will lose control of these roads, except for minor toll controls, and the tax burden will be removed from the Commonwealth.
This plan is far from perfect, but it is a good way of stimulating the economy, easing the transportation situation, and lessening pollution.
Either way, if you fall in love with an damaged car, it is not meant to be.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
The Bush Factor
Coming in the fall is going to be an epic battle of name-calling and calling-out. McCain will face an embroiled Democrat and the baggage of the Bush administration when voters are deciding who to support.
But will the legacy of the 43rd President of the United States, George Walker Bush, hurt him? It would be an easy answer to say yes, but you must look at the statistics of the states.
The biggest issue about President Bush is the War in Iraq. Regardless of what you may think of the progress or lack thereof being made in the foreign nation, the Republican Party is at a disadvantage when this is brought up for debate. For McCain, this could mean bad news. But only in some areas. In the entire nation, people view the war as having little positive impact as reflected in a 31 percent approval rating in March 2008. But in Virginia, a predominantly conservative and Southern state, the people of the Commonwealth view the war as a winning cause for us with a 57 percent approval rating and that over the next six months 40 percent believe that the war will improve. It is also interesting to note that 69 percent of Virginians view the U.S.'s environment as fair and decent as opposed to the 21 percent that said it was unfair and discriminatory. This shows the voter base of Virginia (Rasmussen Reports).
John McCain may not be viewed as Denis Kucinich may, an elve for peace, but he has considerable support in the areas that have traditionally voted Red. He maintains big leads over Obama and Clinton in Virginia with 58% to 36% Clinton and 52% to 41% Obama (March 26, 2008).
If McCain can hold onto former Republican strongholds and gain some of the Blue, he has a decent chance of winning the Big American Fiasco: The 2008 Presidential Election.
But will the legacy of the 43rd President of the United States, George Walker Bush, hurt him? It would be an easy answer to say yes, but you must look at the statistics of the states.
The biggest issue about President Bush is the War in Iraq. Regardless of what you may think of the progress or lack thereof being made in the foreign nation, the Republican Party is at a disadvantage when this is brought up for debate. For McCain, this could mean bad news. But only in some areas. In the entire nation, people view the war as having little positive impact as reflected in a 31 percent approval rating in March 2008. But in Virginia, a predominantly conservative and Southern state, the people of the Commonwealth view the war as a winning cause for us with a 57 percent approval rating and that over the next six months 40 percent believe that the war will improve. It is also interesting to note that 69 percent of Virginians view the U.S.'s environment as fair and decent as opposed to the 21 percent that said it was unfair and discriminatory. This shows the voter base of Virginia (Rasmussen Reports).
John McCain may not be viewed as Denis Kucinich may, an elve for peace, but he has considerable support in the areas that have traditionally voted Red. He maintains big leads over Obama and Clinton in Virginia with 58% to 36% Clinton and 52% to 41% Obama (March 26, 2008).
If McCain can hold onto former Republican strongholds and gain some of the Blue, he has a decent chance of winning the Big American Fiasco: The 2008 Presidential Election.
Presidential Postulations
This year's coming presidential election is anything but ordinary. There are candidates who are attempting to "reshape" politics into what they believe is correct and there are those who just want government to get stuff done and get it right the first time.
The Democrats, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are in a continual battle of voter tugrope, further dividing an already fractured yet somewhat unified Democratic Party. On the other hand, you have John McCain: the presumed (but let's face it, "the") Republican nominee for President of the United States of America. While the Left is hard at work trying to galvanize its members behind a single candidate in a two-person race, those of the competitor, Hillary Clinton, are feeling left out. And if you ask me, they are. The Democratic Party, with its figureheads Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy are pleading with the superdelegates and voters to support Obama even though Clinton is ahead in the popular vote. They just seem to think that Obama is the better candidate. And maybe he is, but all I know is that when you are a leader and want your entire constituency to do what you say even though half of it doesn't want to, you end up hurting yourself.
But I digress.
The Democrats, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are in a continual battle of voter tugrope, further dividing an already fractured yet somewhat unified Democratic Party. On the other hand, you have John McCain: the presumed (but let's face it, "the") Republican nominee for President of the United States of America. While the Left is hard at work trying to galvanize its members behind a single candidate in a two-person race, those of the competitor, Hillary Clinton, are feeling left out. And if you ask me, they are. The Democratic Party, with its figureheads Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy are pleading with the superdelegates and voters to support Obama even though Clinton is ahead in the popular vote. They just seem to think that Obama is the better candidate. And maybe he is, but all I know is that when you are a leader and want your entire constituency to do what you say even though half of it doesn't want to, you end up hurting yourself.
But I digress.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
