The other day, I went to meet Senator George Allen at a cookout. I met him and I must say that he's a genuinely kind person. I know this because he had a coherent and meaningful conversation with me even though he's not campaigning for any office so it's not like he is trying to win a vote. He is a true people person who never once said in his speech that he gave while everyone was eating that we have to "beat the liberals" or "make Virginia red again" which to me showed that he is not a divisive politician like so many are. To make this speech even better, he stared me right in the eye when he said the last line about, well, I don't quite remember, but it was pretty powerful because it made me have butterflies in my stomach.
Long story short, George Allen has my vote any day.
As the dinner continued, former Governor and Republican U.S. Senate candidate for Virginia, Jim Gilmore, arrived along with State Senator and Attorney General candidate Ken Cuccinelli.
Gilmore was given the floor after Allen had spoken, using his time to discuss his run for U.S. Senate. He started out by talking about the liberals' plan to increase your taxes and how the Democrat Mark Warner is not good for Virginia. Being swept up in emotion after being in the presence of a Senator and Governor, I thought that he was a god amongst men. I liked some of the things that he said such as most of the social issues and about three-quarters of the economic issues (aside from the extreme tax cuts), but what really got me is his personality. To me, a Virginian is a gentlemanly character that is capable of leading a nation through times of strife and prosperity with sound decisions. Jim Gilmore is not this.
Gilmore is the epitome of a divider. He wants to get all of the conservative vote in Virginia to vote for him, assuming that it would easily propel him to Capitol Hill. To do this, he thinks it is necessary to start bashing liberals and saying that they have no good ideas because it is in the interest of the state. Um, Mr. Gilmore, who said that you are able to determine what is good for the state? That's right: no one.
I can almost say that I will not vote for Republican Jim Gilmore in the 2008 Virginia U.S. Senate race. I do this because, after having the honor and privilege of working in Senator John Warner's (R-VA) office, I can say that it would take an honorable and universalizing person to fill John's large and distinguished shoes. Now, this goes without saying that I am not totally convinced on Mark "Chompers" Warner, either. He has his faults, but I think that he could do a very good job at representing the Commonwealth of Virginia in the United States Senate. I am actually more inclined to vote for him rather than Gilmore. Amazing, I know.
But this candidate's discrepancies are becoming more common throughout Virginia and stem all the way back to the Republican Party of Virginia. Ever since Allen's ousting as a junior Senator by bull-headed Jim Webb, the Party in the state has been seen on a decline. Now with Representative Davis (R) retiring and Connolly (D) likely to replace him we are seeing even more losses across the state, not necessarily showing a change of ideology, but rather a change in the faith of the leaders.
Frankly, I am pissed. I am sitting here seeing great possible candidates I would love to rally behind get the shaft from a state Party that has terrible leadership and even worse organization. We need to get Allen back in the game and forget about people like Gilmore who damage the party more than anything else. Pull in out-of-staters or start getting wholesome conservative mayors or town/city councils elected, just do something, G.O.P.-VA.
But I digress.
By the way, Cuccinelli also has my vote for A.G. and anything else; he saw me about to drive away with my coke can on top of my car and held his hand in a "stop" gesture. He then proceeded to retrieve the can from by roof and hand it in to me through the window. Good guy, Ken is.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
We Fought the Valiant Fight, and We Won
However, the war is only beginning.
For the past couple of days, I have leisurely entered school and then casually left after the first period: it is the end of the year and I am able to depart after I do my remaining finals. For some, it may be a time of great glee after realizing that they are now seniors. For others, it is a time of limited happiness, knowing that they have to come back to the same place in about three-and-a-half months. But for the senior, it is different, at least for me.
There are those fellow upperclassmen who are looking forward to college such as myself for the newfound freedom and excitement. But there are also those who are truly going to miss high school not for the people, although that is quite a major aspect to consider, but rather for the feel of it. They are going to miss the easy-going mentality of the teachers, sense of community and pride, and lastly, conversations with your peers between classes.
I find myself identifying also with this second group of people.
High school is a place where I found out who I am and what I believe. And while these beliefs and this personality may change during college and the years following it, I know that I have found my base and I only hope to build from there. It's a place where we saw athletes take the basketball team to States, a place in which during its students' tenures friends had unforgettable weekends (and occasionally weekdays) with each other, and who could forget, where people fell in love.
I don't know what I'll miss most about high school, but I'm sure I'll realize on my first day of college.
For the past couple of days, I have leisurely entered school and then casually left after the first period: it is the end of the year and I am able to depart after I do my remaining finals. For some, it may be a time of great glee after realizing that they are now seniors. For others, it is a time of limited happiness, knowing that they have to come back to the same place in about three-and-a-half months. But for the senior, it is different, at least for me.
There are those fellow upperclassmen who are looking forward to college such as myself for the newfound freedom and excitement. But there are also those who are truly going to miss high school not for the people, although that is quite a major aspect to consider, but rather for the feel of it. They are going to miss the easy-going mentality of the teachers, sense of community and pride, and lastly, conversations with your peers between classes.
I find myself identifying also with this second group of people.
High school is a place where I found out who I am and what I believe. And while these beliefs and this personality may change during college and the years following it, I know that I have found my base and I only hope to build from there. It's a place where we saw athletes take the basketball team to States, a place in which during its students' tenures friends had unforgettable weekends (and occasionally weekdays) with each other, and who could forget, where people fell in love.
I don't know what I'll miss most about high school, but I'm sure I'll realize on my first day of college.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Obama and Economics
In this presidential election, there used to be many candidates vying for their respective parties' nomination. Way back when, it was thought that George Allen and Hillary Clinton would easily snatch the support of their parties and everything would be over. Then Allen lost his Senate seat and everything changed: Giuliani and McCain became the front-runner for the Republicans and it was thought that the GOP would face nomination troubles; it didn't know who its nominee would be until the Spring of 2008. Then it was Giuliani (R) and Clinton (D), and then McCain and Clinton, and then Huckabee and Obama, and then finally McCain and Obama.
So here we are today. We have a party uniting, the Republicans, and a party that is fractured but now mending its wounds, the Democrats. We have Johnny Mac and Barry trying to get into that white house that president George W. Bush won twice. So far, it seems as though McCain pulls through better nationally in terms of favorability when compared against Obama. This is very good news for the Republican Party, especially considering the harsh electoral environment for them due to a particularly unpopular president.
But even though these are the results from the somewhat unreliable polls, people seems to give Obama more credit than is due, in my opinion.
While I am very biased against this Barack character, I do try to look at both candidates with an objective mind. For instance, I give Obama a high-five on the rejection of a gas tax holiday and give McCain a major "Boo!" But I don't give Obama any major "ups" when it comes to the rest of his economic "change." He wants for the government to provide insurance (not literally, just figuratively) on people's jobs. Why? What is the federal government's role in securing citizens jobs? He wants to halt foreign trade and increase production in the nation. Why? If companies are moving their jobs overseas and are making products or providing services more efficiently, what room do I have to stop them? If anything, stopping businesses from outsourcing is more damaging than the initial loss of jobs. And anyway, why should the government cripple the commerce of America, the commerce that has brought us to where we are today?
So you see, for Obama, his economics need some work. This politician "from the people" is not what I want to see. I want to see a person who can connect with the population, but who can better know what's best for it. Obama clearly through his economic policies, cannot.
So here we are today. We have a party uniting, the Republicans, and a party that is fractured but now mending its wounds, the Democrats. We have Johnny Mac and Barry trying to get into that white house that president George W. Bush won twice. So far, it seems as though McCain pulls through better nationally in terms of favorability when compared against Obama. This is very good news for the Republican Party, especially considering the harsh electoral environment for them due to a particularly unpopular president.
But even though these are the results from the somewhat unreliable polls, people seems to give Obama more credit than is due, in my opinion.
While I am very biased against this Barack character, I do try to look at both candidates with an objective mind. For instance, I give Obama a high-five on the rejection of a gas tax holiday and give McCain a major "Boo!" But I don't give Obama any major "ups" when it comes to the rest of his economic "change." He wants for the government to provide insurance (not literally, just figuratively) on people's jobs. Why? What is the federal government's role in securing citizens jobs? He wants to halt foreign trade and increase production in the nation. Why? If companies are moving their jobs overseas and are making products or providing services more efficiently, what room do I have to stop them? If anything, stopping businesses from outsourcing is more damaging than the initial loss of jobs. And anyway, why should the government cripple the commerce of America, the commerce that has brought us to where we are today?
So you see, for Obama, his economics need some work. This politician "from the people" is not what I want to see. I want to see a person who can connect with the population, but who can better know what's best for it. Obama clearly through his economic policies, cannot.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
It's Called "Reality": Oil
Last night on a warm Virginia evening, Alexa, Brice, Timmy, Rob, and I went to go get some fried chicken to eat on the fields at Clearview Elementary School. It was going to be perfect: we were going to get a twelve-piece meal of both spicy and original chicken along with some biscuits and coleslaw and mashed taters. It would cost about five dollars a person.
While driving in Alexa's minivan, we were driving on Elden Street past the Jiffy Lube and Church, and then I saw it. It was 4.04. Four dollars and four cents. This was the readout of the section in the glowing Exxon station's price sign for regular-grade gasoline. I pointed in shock and awe after seeing this.
I screamed "Hey, guys, look! It's over four! Thank goodness I didn't drive my car! Thanks, Alexa."
This is not good. It is already June and prices are going just as planned, over four dollars per gallon. And listen here, kiddies, I don't think it's going down any time soon.
If it were to ever go down to a significantly lower price, it would damage our economy because the only way it would is by fixing prices. Sure this sounds like a plan, right? Only if it is a plan made to decimate American commodities. When you fix your prices, you create an artificial price ceiling which in turn does not accurately portray the true cost of the good or service.
So for example, if the bread producers are running low on supply and prices being to go to extorted levels, I decide to fix prices at $1.99 for every package of white bread purchased at the grocery store. Fantastic; people are now able to buy more of the good and can feed their family. This is where most politicians leave off. They forget that after millions of previously non-bread buying families start purchasing loaf upon loaf, you drain an already drained supply. In addition to this, you end up giving people who have little utility for bread greater access than those who have a larger utility.
In order to understand this a little more, you have to know about the invisible hand. This hand is what naturally controls and adjusts the marketplace as time goes on. It is the most efficient distributor of wealth, not the government.
Here is a link to the "Ten Principles of Economics" that I know everyone should read and understand, because they are true.
http://www.slembeck.ch/principles.html
Also, here is a rap version:
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2007/12/principles-of-economics
-rap-version.html
But now we come to the idea that we may have reached our "peak of production" of oil or as others say "peak oil." In other words, we are just draining an already drained resource; we produce less and less of it every day at a cost higher than the oil is actually worth no matter what we do because the supply is shrinking and the remaining oil is harder to extract and locate.
Here is a link discussing peak of production theories:
http://www.energybulletin.net/primer.php
And here's a video about peak oil:
http://video.google.com/
videoplay?docid=5934722682850294854&q=peak+
oil&ei=fdJCSLeGJoS4rgLKwvWcCQ
While driving in Alexa's minivan, we were driving on Elden Street past the Jiffy Lube and Church, and then I saw it. It was 4.04. Four dollars and four cents. This was the readout of the section in the glowing Exxon station's price sign for regular-grade gasoline. I pointed in shock and awe after seeing this.
I screamed "Hey, guys, look! It's over four! Thank goodness I didn't drive my car! Thanks, Alexa."
This is not good. It is already June and prices are going just as planned, over four dollars per gallon. And listen here, kiddies, I don't think it's going down any time soon.
If it were to ever go down to a significantly lower price, it would damage our economy because the only way it would is by fixing prices. Sure this sounds like a plan, right? Only if it is a plan made to decimate American commodities. When you fix your prices, you create an artificial price ceiling which in turn does not accurately portray the true cost of the good or service.
So for example, if the bread producers are running low on supply and prices being to go to extorted levels, I decide to fix prices at $1.99 for every package of white bread purchased at the grocery store. Fantastic; people are now able to buy more of the good and can feed their family. This is where most politicians leave off. They forget that after millions of previously non-bread buying families start purchasing loaf upon loaf, you drain an already drained supply. In addition to this, you end up giving people who have little utility for bread greater access than those who have a larger utility.
In order to understand this a little more, you have to know about the invisible hand. This hand is what naturally controls and adjusts the marketplace as time goes on. It is the most efficient distributor of wealth, not the government.
Here is a link to the "Ten Principles of Economics" that I know everyone should read and understand, because they are true.
http://www.slembeck.ch/principles.html
Also, here is a rap version:
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2007/12/principles-of-economics
-rap-version.html
But now we come to the idea that we may have reached our "peak of production" of oil or as others say "peak oil." In other words, we are just draining an already drained resource; we produce less and less of it every day at a cost higher than the oil is actually worth no matter what we do because the supply is shrinking and the remaining oil is harder to extract and locate.
Here is a link discussing peak of production theories:
http://www.energybulletin.net/primer.php
And here's a video about peak oil:
http://video.google.com/
videoplay?docid=5934722682850294854&q=peak+
oil&ei=fdJCSLeGJoS4rgLKwvWcCQ
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
