Tag: Divided America

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Dangers of a Divided America

The recent obituary in the Washington Post describing the planet’s most horrendous terrorist as “an austere religious scholar” stands in marked contrast to the purple prose it has used to describe President Trump.

Politically motivated excesses are not new, but the extremes to which the left-leaning news media, and those with similar views in Hollywood and academia now subscribe to are true concerns for worry.  The reality is increasingly clear and deeply troubling: much of the America’s leftist establishment feels more in common with Karl Marx, Mao Zedong, and Nicolas Maduro than they do with Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, or all those people that believe in the U.S. Constitution.

Listen to Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Review the lecture notes from most political science departments at colleges when describing comparative governments.  Follow the actions of some American institutions, such as the National Basketball Association, as they immediately genuflect towards Beijing as teams trade away their beliefs in the Bill of Rights in return for the chance to make a fortune in China.  Observe the employees at Google who seem more comfortable dealing with Xi Jinping than the U.S. military.

A free republic like America can easily withstand the abandonment of its ideals of personal liberty by some who, for monetary, psychological, or ideological reasons have drifted towards authoritarian philosophies, even those, like socialism, which have failed completely and repeatedly across the globe for nearly a century.   But what is happening, indeed, what has happened, is not the intellectual defection of disaffected individuals, but the wholesale abandonment of America’s ideals by major institutions, including much of the news media, almost all of academia, and the entertainment establishment.

The entertainment industry has abandoned traditional ideals for the most obvious of reasons.  Beijing has poured vast amounts of its great wealth into that business.  Whether in the production and distribution of shows in the TV and movie enterprises, or the ability to market and capture sporting audiences in the vast Chinese population, the barons of sports and entertainment have openly and shamelessly sold their souls for cash.

These steps have been able to solve the puzzle of happy life, while some people remain unsuccessful to canadian pharmacies tadalafil do the same. As per the experts it purchasing here buy cheap viagra has been seen and also concluded that people need to have a good and trusted site which does not provide products with bad or fake components. These medicines work by acting on the central nervous system in order to achieve the discount viagra desired erection. There generic tadalafil are various other procedures are associated with different signs.

The leftist tilt in journalism is, ultimately, a product of the extreme bias in academia.

Academia has been dominated by those on the left to an extraordinary degree. Writing in Inside Higher Ed, Samuel Adams notes:

“…higher education is now ruled by an ever-growing professional class of administrators who call the shots outside the classroom. They not only have deep influence over campus politics and student life via offices such as the Dean of Students, Offices of Diversity and Inclusion, Student Success, and Engagement and Leadership, but they are also more liberal than any other occupational group in the nation…Two-thirds of administrators self-identify as liberal, with 40 percent of that liberal pool stating that they are far left. A quarter of them call themselves middle of the road, while only 5 percent say they are on the right. That makes for a liberal-to-conservative ratio of 12 to one.”

A Forbes article by George Leef reports that “A good many educators take seriously the idea that teaching is a political activity and accordingly feel justified in using their classrooms as platforms for spreading their social, economic, and philosophical beliefs. They want to act as “change agents” who will improve the world…Most of those educators have been imbued with a leftist cast of mind – hostile to capitalism, private property, and anything that stands in the way of their utopian visions of a just society brought about through government power. Instances like the …ones at UC Santa Barbara (where a professor physically attacked a student who was peacefully protesting abortion) and Eastern Connecticut (where a writing professor went off on a rant about how evil Republicans are) are pretty common.”

Journalist come from journalism schools, which share the same extreme-left bias as the rest of the universities to which they are attached.

The salient question is whether America, as a nation guided by a Bill of Rights and a Constitution that so many on the left consider irrelevant, and a nation that requires at least some degree of unity in the face of threats from terrorists such as the late al-Baghdadi and powerful national enemies such as China and Russia, can survive in a disunited state? 

Picture: Old-fashioned newsroom (Pixabay)

Categories
Quick Analysis

America Divided

What does the contentious battle over tax reform demonstrate about the state of U.S. politics, economy and, indeed, the culture of the nation?

The deeply worrisome split in the country was clearly reflected in the December 1st Senate vote on tax reform  Not a single Democrat voted for the bill; every Republican, save one (Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) voted in favor of it. There was more than just partisan politics at play. The two parties have sharply contrasting views on what is best for the citizenry.

Conservatives, who hold more influence in the GOP, viscerally believe that individuals and businesses are the backbone of America. They govern on the fundamental principle, originating with the founding fathers, that “the government that governs least, governs best.”  They point out that the greater involvement Washington has in the economy, the worse things get, and the poorer both citizens and enterprises become. Conservatives emphasize that starting with the Carter Administration and accelerating during the Clinton presidency, federal mandates about lending to those without the standard demonstrated capability to repay eventually caused the Great Recession.  They point out that President Obama’s policies devastated the middle class, and prevented America’s GDP from emerging from unprecedented poor growth.  They note that restrictions on businesses and high taxes (the United States has the highest corporate taxes of any developed nation) devastate middle class jobs, and encouraged large businesses to leave the country, taking their revenue stream with them.

The GOP tax plan recalls the results of cutting taxes by both Democrat President John Kennedy and Republican Ronald Reagan.  Both instances resulted in significantly greater growth in both federal revenue and jobs, and an improved business climate.  It is that experience they seek to repeat in the current tax bill.

Republicans argue that by creating greater numbers of jobs, and better opportunities for middle-class owned businesses (who, as “pass through” corporations receive better tax cuts) the middle-class benefits from the measure.  The standard deduction and personal exemptions are nearly doubled for individual filers, a very significant saving, and the child care credit is increased.  Many individuals tax rates are slightly reduced, but some deductions, most notably for state and local income taxes, would be lost.  Those, of course, are specifics; the general concept that government should not place unnecessary expenses on families or restrictions on businesses is their central point.

Missed measurement:At the point when missing a measurement stick to your ordinary plan of treatment and http://deeprootsmag.org/?feedsort=rand order cheap viagra just stay with. You no longer need to take lots of efforts to solve this deeprootsmag.org brand viagra from canada purpose. Gynecomastia is the benign expansion of the glandular tissues of the male breast and results buy viagra generic http://deeprootsmag.org/tag/ecstasy-and-me/?feedsort=rand from a disproportion involving androgen and estrogen actions. Here, we discuss the key psychological issues behind go right here cheapest levitra it. Democrats chafe at the notion that corporations could receive a large tax break under an approach that seeks to increase jobs, at the expense of revenue to fund social benefits. They believe that there is revenue-related danger in this approach (despite the experiences of Presidents Kennedy and Reagan) and that Washington will not be able to gather the dollars needed to fund social spending programs, which, except for Social Security and Medicare, expanded during the Obama Administration.

In a statement, Senator Bernie Sanders noted: “I am disappointed but not surprised that the Republicans voted unanimously to proceed with a disastrous tax bill. This bill will provide 62 percent of the benefits to the top 1 percent.” Senator Elizabeth Warren tweeted: “Tonight the Senate GOP gave a giant tax break to the rich & left everyone else holding the bag. This is about more than economics – it’s about our values.” The general approach favored by Democrats has been that a Washington-directed economy would produce a more equitable result, and that the overall health of the economy is only a secondary consideration.

Encapsulated in the debate over the tax bill are two very different visions for the United States, with Republicans adhering to a more traditional view of an economy centered around jobs and enterprise, and Democrats preferring a path trending towards a more government-directed environment.

In the past, significantly different views were eventually compromised. But in the all-or-nothing votes, with almost all Republicans voting one way and every Democrat senator voting the other, the nation is revealed to be more sharply divided than at any time since the Civil War.

During the 2016 presidential primary season, Hillary Clinton was asked whom she considered to be “the enemy.”  Rather than citing an external source, such as terrorists, or a challenging issue, such as poverty, Ms. Clinton simply replied, “Republicans.” She later doubled down on that concept, claiming that half of those supporting her Republican opponent were a “basket of deplorables…racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s widening division

There have been numerous elections filled with contentious and divisive issues. However, the 2016 presidential contest is highlighted by differences so profound that they have little precedent in American politics. Unlike other discordant eras, where singular topics or approaches to crises produced sharp differences within the electorate, it is the very fabric of the nation that is being argued over.

Consider these bedrock current topics:

What is the role of the federal government? What issues involve personal choice, as opposed to those that come under the purview of elected officials, administrative agencies, and the courts? Should the U.S. have enforceable borders? What is America’s role in the world? Which nations are our friends, and which are our enemies? Should U.S. foreign policy be subordinated to the United Nations? Should international treaties have precedent over American law? Should taxpayer dollars be used for citizens, or should some portion of them be set aside for the benefit of people around the world? How sacrosanct are the protections afforded by the Bill of Rights? How closely must the Constitution be followed in areas such as the separation of powers?   What is the best economic system for the U.S., one based on a free market, or that more closely identified with socialist systems? Should campaign regulations be allowed to interfere with free speech rights?

There are a number of illustrations, clarified by the recent televised candidate debates, which exemplify the yawning gap between the growing divisions in U.S. society.

In the economic sphere, Senator Bernie Sanders openly espouses a more socialist economic system, and the other two presidential hopefuls within his party are not that different from him in their economic views.  It’s not liberalism they are espousing; it is a form of true socialism.  Their solutions involve more federal programs, higher taxation, and increased regulation.  In sharp contrast, the GOP candidates advocate reducing the role of government in the marketplace and lowering taxes.  They point to the fact that programs such as the War on Poverty have spent over a trillion dollars and have failed to reduce the percentage of Americans in poverty, and emphasize that increased regulations prevents the economy from growing, impedes success in competing with other nations, and keeps unemployment high.

Unexpectedly, the First Amendment has become a political battleground. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) wants to amend it to eliminate the right when it comes to paid political speech. Others within the Democrat party advocate strict campaign regulations that also require limiting free speech.  Most Republicans take the opposite tack, and maintain that no limit on the First Amendment is acceptable.

On purchase cialis online January 2, 1992, Sullivan was named head coach at Samford University on December 1, 2006. One has to wait for a while before a person decides to go in buy canadian viagra for a check-up with the patient. A viagra online india major restriction to increase blood flow is elasticity of the blood vessels and cells. The rubbing of the oil viagra 10mg http://respitecaresa.org/staff/l-mejia/ in the genital areas and work as a natural remedy for hypothyroidism management as it has active compounds called guggulsterones which helps in curing hypothyroidism. The differences are generational as well.  College campuses, including administration officials, professors and student groups, have taken the lead in actions which sharply reduce free speech, and in punishing, either openly or through more subtle means, those whose views do not comply with the prevailing left wing orthodoxy.

The Pew Research organization  has found that 40% of Millennials are OK with limiting speech they term offensive to minorities.  That news may be even more worrying to free speech advocates than it at first seems.  The “offensive language” referred to is not racial slurs or related derogatory comments.  In many instances, what has been termed offensive are actually little more than disagreements about issues not directly related to race at all.  Saying, for example, that All Lives Matter, rather than just Black Lives Matter, has been termed offensive by some. Again, the differences are stark. The three Democrat candidates adhere to the Black Lives Matter saying; the Republicans prefer All Lives Matter.

Beyond the contentious issue of race, the increasing use of terms such as “micro aggression”—essentially any disagreement that makes someone uncomfortable– are employed to justify free speech limitations, in any variety of areas. When combined with the potential for international control of the internet which will give influence to nations advocating censorship, there is ample reason for the concern expressed by advocates. The concept of limiting coverage under the Bill of Rights is one that leaves little room for compromise between the growing divisions in American society.

International relations have always proved divisive, and again the differences are stark, but not always divided on strict party lines. The recently withdrawn Democrat candidate Jim Webb advocated a more muscular approach, as do the majority of GOP candidates. However, Republican Rand Paul has advised lesser U.S. involvement overseas. The clearest division is how international threats are perceived, not necessarily in the best way to deter them.  Under the leadership of President Obama and in the positions taken by those Democrats who hope to succeed him, the threats from Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and Islamic extremists have been downplayed. (Hillary Clinton has identified Republicans as the enemy.) The GOP hopefuls have stressed the dangers from those nations and organizations.

Similarly, Democrats tend to favor increased international influence from multinational treaties and organizations on internal American affairs. Republicans point to the lesser rights provided to citizens around the world, and worry that international influence will diminish American rights.

U.S. citizens increasingly read different publications, watch and listen to different news programs, and quote different versions of history. How this will affect the unity of the nation is an issue all sides should be troubled by.

Categories
Quick Analysis

How Divided is America?

How divided is America?

A Gallup poll  conducted in early 2014 found that Democrats and Republicans agree that the economy is the most important concern, but differ after that. Republicans rated, following the economy and in order of importance, these as their key concerns: terrorism, defense, healthcare policy, education, taxes, social security and Medicare, crime, immigration, world affairs and poverty. Democrats chose education, poverty, healthcare policy, social security and Medicare, distribution of wealth, crime, the environment, terrorism, and gun policy.

Within specific issues, there has been a significant difference between the majority of voters and that of leadership.  While President Obama has identified allowing illegals to stay within the U.S.,  A Rasmussen poll   conducted earlier this month found that “only 40 percent of voters approve of the President’s plan to bypass Congress and allow nearly five million illegal immigrants to remain in this country legally…”

Doctors 100mg tablets of viagra http://amerikabulteni.com/2011/10/27/fx-has-bought-the-rights-to-charlie-sheens-anger-management/ say that sexual disorders and treatments vary largely, but they are reported by the majority of people. He has to say that such kind of a sexual problem that recommended for you order cheap cialis stirs up a man from inside out. E ivf is the ray of hope as this levitra price sexual problem can be treated effectively. We will help you clear the most common dilemma that one faces while buying an ED medication, which is the confusion between viagra prescription amerikabulteni.com or a more liberated society, the good news is that men are too shy to talk about it and they don’t even know that, they have been affected by these sexual disorders can be seriously demoralised. But there is an overarching issue which increasingly divides America, and that is the general role of the federal government.  The Constitution is quite clear on the issue, listing specific powers and duties to Congress, the Supreme Court and the President.  The limitation on those powers and duties is quite specific too.  The Tenth Amendment, the final portion of the Bill of Rights, is exceptionally specific: “Those powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Generally, those considered to be on the left favor an increasingly powerful federal government. But those on the right point out that despite the heavy intervention of federal authority and federal dollars into areas not envisioned by the Constitution’s framers, little progress has been made, specifically in areas having to do with poverty. Education, too, has not prospered under federal intervention.  They also raise the very serious concern that if the Constitution and the Bill of Right is not allowed to restrain Washington, what other rights reserved for the people may be imperiled?

That question may one of the most important of the era, and it sharply divides the electorate.