MARK'S WORLD
I'll be blogging about my life, my opinions and the world as I see it.

A blog about News and Politics.
About motopoet


Gender:
male
Member Since:
March 14, 2006
Last Signed In:
November 23, 2009
Profile Views:
8715
Blog Views:
39784
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
About the Boy: Week 11
About the Boy: Week 10
Laughter: The best medicine
And now, introducing my "Little"..
About the Boy: Week 8
A little of the "Poet" side of Motopoet
Slow down..It's REALLY easy!
My Pie! She scores!
About the Boy: Week 7
About the Boy: Addendum
Archives
June 06
July 06
August 06
September 06
October 06
November 06
December 06
January 07
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
November 08
December 08
January 09
February 09
March 09
April 09
May 09
June 09
July 09
August 09
September 09
October 09
November 09
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


motopoet - > MARK'S WORLD -> Beret's, Big Glasses and Politics
Beret's, Big Glasses and Politics

I read an article the other day about the Beret and how it is making a fashion comeback. I have always thought that berets looked silly, especially on men, unless they had been earned with an elite military unit such as the Rangers or Green Berets. I have noticed that over the last ten years, many old styles have made comebacks with big sunglasses and afros being a couple of the notable reruns. I guess the fashion industry runs out of ideas every generation or so and tosses those reruns back into the mix hoping that no one notices and if they do that they won't mind dropping a C-note at a high end retailer on something they used to get out of the Ward's catalog for $9.95.

Politics is much the same. Every generation thinks they are on to something new, that their ideas are fresh and that the public will have forgotten about the last time their "progressive ideas" were run through the mill. Does anyone remember the "New Deal", "The Great Society or "The War On Poverty"? The details today may be slightly different due to priority rotation, but the sales pitch is the same. WWII had more to do with the economic resurgence of America than did the New Deal. The war unified the country and helped fire up the country's industrial machine. The New Deal just gave Americans some confidence in themselves and their country again.

Social Security was aimed at helping retirees with(not providing them with)security in their Golden Years. Kind of like what Bush tried to do recently, but people missed the point this time because they are so used to demanding the government provide for them, which is a manifestation of the liberal credo that people aren't smart or responsible enough to provide for themselves and now the Baby Boomers are paying the price for misunderstanding what FDR was trying to do. SSI has been a dismal failure and it's not going to get better.

The Great Society was a noble cause. Social equality for all. Yeah..That's worked out well. It was doomed from the beginning. The country was, and still is, divided along so many lines that any plan having to do with solving such problems is a lost cause. Things just aren't that much different today, even though we like to pretend they are. Oh, women and minorities have it easier at the top of the pile and everyone nod their head in self absorbed back-patting and mindless, useless self appreciation and self centered congratulations whenever a woman or a minority becomes the CEO of some corporation or is elected or appointed to some lofty office in government, but the rank and file are still pretty much where they were in 1965.

Every president and congress since Warren Harding has been regurgitating the same social drivel, they just try and word it so it sounds "fresh" and "progressive" hoping no one notices the foul stench of the diseased and dying animal they parade in front of a public desparate for change.

Society seems to hear more often that they listen, and as long as the politicians continue to dispense their new solutions downwind, the public seems content to believe them because they are hearing what they want to hear rather than listening to what they should be listening to. Hmm..Sound familiar? The democratic candidates are after society's problems againg with te same promises of solutions that have been in reruns for eighty years. Rushing to the defense and care of a society they have determined are unable to defend or care for themselves, leaving the government to think and act on their behalf.

Today it is Universal Healthcare, and once again, social equality for all. I guess nobody is paying attention to the fact the men who have made themselves mouthpieces for Black America have no intention of ever allowing racial lines to disappear. That would put them, the biggest racists in America, out of a job. There is really little difference between Malcom X and Jesse Jackson. Both despise whites and blame them for all for society's ills and for the apparent lot of Black Americans, Malcom X just had the moxy to say it aloud.

The costs of Universal Healthcare will quickly outpace the cost of any war in which we may find ourselves engaged. The cost of Medicare in 2006 alone was over two TRILLION dollars! Can you imagine the cost of Universal Healthcare? Well, you don't have to. John Kerry's OWN numbers for it over a 10 year period was over seven trillion dollars. Somebody has to pay for that and that someone is the tax payer, most of whom won't qualify for it's benefits!

Social Security is a failure people didn't listen. All they heard was "We will creat a program to help....". They didn't hear the part that said"...you help yourself by adding to the savings YOU create yourself".

Affirmative Action failed because people heard the same thing, but failed to hear the pat that said "...you further your education and ability to enter the workplace when you are on equal footing'. Suddenly sub par students and workers were demanding, and getting those positions, in direct conflict with the dream of Martin Luther King, creating problems that plagued society for thirty years in the form of high college dropout rates, poor workplace output and quality all of which fomented social resentment for those who DID listen.

The people who properly utilized these programs were able to truly reap the benefits they offered because they listened and acted themselves and didn't count on the government to do that for them. Two of todays democratic candidates have utilized and realized the benefits of those programs and ideals. A woman and an a minority. They took advantage of the rights and opportunities society offered them without leaning on the governemnt to "make it happen" and they now vie for the most powerful position in the world and they have done on their own merits.

Let's not be hornswaggled by todays political Berets and Big Glasses. We have seen them before. If you aren't sure, go ask your parents. They should remember. Politics can not afford the retro gimmiks of the fashion industry's recycle bin. It's time for people to listen to what is being said and compare that to what has already been said. It's time to ask the candidates the hard questions and see if they stutter when they answer. We don't get to pick the fashion industry's leaders, but we do get pick our country's leaders. Let's make them accountable for what they are trying to sell us and not just buy it because our neighbors and friends did.

 

 

Posted in these Groups:
Topics: Politics, fashion, News, campaign, candidtates, government
posted by motopoet on Friday, January 18, 2008 at 03:21 PM
Report a Violation
Viewed 61 times
11 comments from 6 users

1

posted by adampayne on Jan 19, 2008 at 05:03 PM
You want to really know what is making a come back? The depression. When the all mortgage insurers like PMI fall into bankruptcy within the next month watch the stock market plummet.

I guess you must not have anybody in your family who is predominately supported by Social Security. Count yourself as a lucky individual. The vast majority of people in this country who are living out their days in retirement do rely on Social Security and Medicare to cover themselves month to month. Why is this a failure in your eyes? Is it because they were not able to keep their promised pension agreements, or because unforeseen  expenditures and inflation  forced them to borrow  against  most of their savings?  

Take a history course. I can assure you Warren Harding and every Republican President in the 1920s had no social progressive message other than the business of government is business. That worked out really well by the end of that decade. Bush, Reagan, Nixon and Harding all had one thing in common, an ability  to create scandal by allowing business to give Americans the business.

The Great Society was a goal to achieve equality and a better standard of living for all at the time the Civil Rights Act was passed in the mid 1960s. The fact that the act passed in 1964 and nothing of consequence was started to improve the blight of many inner cities caused the violence that spread in most major cities from 1965 to 1968. A great society is still a goal, but people have to have some hope that something better will come from their labors. It is a sad fact that inequality today is as pronounced as it ever was in the 1960s. Women still earn far less than men in the workplace and minorities are profiled and stigmatized daily in our society.

There is nothing retro about demanding universal health care and forcing our government into honoring commitments for all those who paid into their own government backed retirement.
posted by ChicoEsquela on Jan 19, 2008 at 05:14 PM

comeback=beret's, big glasses and politics

beret's=special forces

big glasses=NVG's

politics=kill em all. let God sort 'em out

posted by motopoet on Jan 20, 2008 at 03:38 PM

I have taken history courses..I guess I just remeber everything I learned and actually read the transcripts of debates. I am not talking about what actually got accomplished, I am talking about what got talked about. Social change has ALWAYS been a factor in debates and it always will be. And the were right..the business of government IS governemnt, not taking care of the masses.

You can blame what you like for the failure of Social Security, but the fact remains that it was NEVER intended to be the sole means of retirement income. I know plenty of people who, in spite of the economic problems of the last 30 years have managed to create a nice nest egg for their SSI to supplement. SSI was never a pension fund, that's just what the people(evidently yourself included)chose to hear.

I never said Universal Healthcare had been a topic of the past, but it is just another way of saying the government should care for the people. I didn't see anyone arguing with the numbers..But then nobody REALLY wants to talk about that when its so much easier to blame a lame duck persident for all of societys ill's. We'll see next January what the newvbies are really able or willing to do. Can you say democratic controlled congress?

The more things change, the more they stay the same..That's all I am saying.

posted by motopoet on Jan 20, 2008 at 03:44 PM
Another thing about "The Great Society"..It was such a dismal failure that LBJ forbade it to even be mentioned in his presence or in any speeches the last 18 months of his term. When the author see the futility of such a program, what else is to be said?
posted by motopoet on Jan 20, 2008 at 03:56 PM
And another thing as long as I am feeling high and mighty! As to people having to liquidate their nest eggs to keep pace with the economic up's and down's..POPPYCOCK! They didn't need to do that to survive. My Dad didn't have to do it and he never had an unusually high paying job, he just didn't feel the need to keep up with the Joneses.. He didn't go out and buy boats and bigger and bigger houses and new cars and Harley's and send his kids to Ivy league schools just because they wanted to go there when CSUB offers the same education. No, he looked after his finances and never lived beyond his means(well..not very often). He was still able to enjoy a couple of Hot Rods, his Blacksmith hobby and an impressive antique collection. He is not waelthy. He still chooses to work a day a week to make some extra bucks(actually to enjoy extra bennies and perks)and lives in a smallish place on the east side, but if more people took care of things in that manner they wouldn't be stuck where they are today depending on SSI to meet their needs.
posted by RoyTullis on Jan 20, 2008 at 04:10 PM
Adam. If you were not aware, Social Security was not intended as a RETIREMENT PLAN but only a supplemental plan to help out.  People should plan for retirement.  You would be surprised what a few dollars saved from every check starting in your 20's would be worth when you retire.  I did that and even though just making enough money to make ends meet many times and collecting  cola bottles and selling them to go to the drive in movie on Saturday we never touched it.  Too many people do not want to take the responsibility and expect  Social Security to take care of them..An idiot should realize that it will not do it.
posted by ChicoEsquela on Jan 20, 2008 at 05:08 PM
Adam has all the glib lib answers Its the fault of: Bush Republicans Everyone except His fellow socialists And The people themselves Back to Ant and Grasshopper parable aren't we?
posted by randomfactor on Jan 20, 2008 at 05:39 PM

Chico, the ant didn't waste all his supplies attacking anthills on the other side of the earth.

.

What killed LBJ's career was not the Great Society (some of which--HeadStart in particular--was a rousing success.)  It was the same thing which will doom Shrub to the bottom rung of the historical ladder:  fighting an unwinnable, unpopular war for no valid reason.  I do look forward to a larger Democratic majority in Congress in 2009 (even though I understand what the current Congress is doing, I don't agree with it.)  And I really hope Senator Franken goes ahead with the plans outlined in his book.

posted by randomfactor on Jan 20, 2008 at 05:41 PM
I assume Mark is using "SSI" for "Supplemental Security Income" and not as an acronym for "Social Security."  I can state that SSI works for the two people I know who have been on it.  And Social Security is, of course, the greatest governmental success story of the 20th century.
posted by ChicoEsquela on Jan 20, 2008 at 05:47 PM

Oh, but the Ant did indeed defend himself.

He strategically picked his battles and always employed the Powell Doctrine (overwhelming force by  numbers)

We all could learn from the formidable ant. Not just Dems.

posted by Katatak on Jan 20, 2008 at 06:33 PM
In 1960, there was something like 8% illegitimate births in the black community nationwide, and about half that for whites.

Today, the illegitimacy rates have gone down a little bit to about 89% for blacks in large cities and about 68% for the rest of the country for blacks. White illegitimacy rose to about 33% with a bit of a drop recently.

That represents millions of very hurt children.

I don't know about you, but I believe our well intended services have had harsh consequences. If we stop the flow of the funding, I believe that would cause even more catastrophe.


1

  (You need to be signed in to leave a comment)

Advertisement