November 4 is just eight days away and responsible and concerned Americans should have all voted as to who will be their next commander-in-chief. Would it be a "donkey", Sen. Barack Obama, or an "elephant", Sen. John McCain?
My friend in Namibia, a republic in South-West Africa bounded by Angola, Zambia, Botswana, South Africa, and the Atlantic Ocean, told me that Namibians would like to see Obama win. My friends in the Philippines, a republic in South-East Asia with more or less 7,100 islands, would like Sen. Obama to win. My Indonesian-American friend is definitely for Barack Obama.
Besides the youthfulness of Sen. Barack Obama, I am assuming that racial affinity and migration interest are pulling voters to the Democratic camp.
In order for me to solidify my hunches, I went around Pasadena, a beautiful city in Southern California, to ask non-Caucasian Americans in parks, city streets, churches, and at Paseo de Colorado on their possible presidential votes. Almost all of those I asked would be voting for Sen. Barack Obama. Reasons given were the following: born and raised in an interracial family, experienced normal living in other countries, received a short humble education in Indonesia would help him understand international issues, particularly the immigration concerns of many foreign-born Americans.
Immigration issues were never talked about during the three presidential debates. Topics were focused on the pressing need to find solution to the economic woes. However, deep in the heart of many foreign-born Americans, they are counting for Sen. Barack Obama to positively address a comprehensive immigration reform, which was one of the hottest senatorial and congressional debates in 2007.
Definitely, the African and Asian population would like to see the democrat win. The name and the Kenyan blood that runs in Obama's vein, and his affinity and his little taste of elementary education in Indonesia are factors to their votes.
According to a 2006 study on "The Immigration Population of the United States..." by Jack Martin, one in every eight US residents is foreign-born, and California has the largest. With that said, I am tempted to say, "Beginning in January 2009, the first mixed-race President of the United States of America will begin his term."
So, American voters, go out on the 4th of November and vote.
Showing posts with label 2008 U.S. Presidential Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2008 U.S. Presidential Election. Show all posts
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Saturday, October 18, 2008
US Presidential Debate On Education
Last question of the moderator, Mr. Schieffer, during the final presidential debate at Hofstra University on October 15th was on education. Both Senators, Barack Obama and John McCain, specifics did not meet my expectation. I thank them, though, for not forgetting parents as a significant factor in the success of education. I am just sad that Mr. Obama considered parents as the last ingredients, and McCain considered them solely as a decision maker as to where their kids go.
What American education really needs are change of priority, equality of compensation and attention, and complete trust and support for its classroom teachers.
Most teachers are very good and gifted; however, it is also true that there are few bad tomatoes among them. Teachers were not born yesterday. They pretty well know what are in store for them in the classroom. They were trained as educators for 4 years and have passed the certification exams. Therefore, America does not need to have what Obama called new generation of teachers and what McCain suggested to weed out poor-performers. Ousting bad teachers have been going on ever since. That's the reason why the school administrators do both announced and unannounced evaluation of classroom teachers' performance several times in a school year.
The USofA needs to change priority in its educational system. It needs to emphasize the 3Rs not just math and science. It is just too bad that many schools are now emphasizing non-academic programs, like competitive sports. I cannot forget the shock while teaching middle school in Port Arthur, Texas. I learned that the entry level salary of a football coach was twice as much as the academic teachers. (And check the differences of a college coach salary to an academic professor. It could be worst.) With the incongruity of salaries, tell me, what is the priority and what signal are we sending to the school children, not to mention the kids' knowledge on the salaries of professional athletes. If schools would continue to instill and reinforce the culture of sports, there's no way for America to improve its educational system.
It needs to emphasize students' discipline in the classroom. And America needs to give complete trust and support as to how teachers instill discipline and manage their classroom as long as such discipline program is not abusive. The problem facing the system nowadays is the fear of teachers of being ousted by the district or sued for "excessive" discipline by over-protective parents. True, there is a need to monitor the disciplinary action of every teacher, but to create the feeling of fear does not help teachers with their classroom management. Time outs and putting middle school student in a corner are barely helping, especially if there are 30 rowdy students in a classroom. There was a time when I was tempted to yell at a student,"Settle down or I'll whack your butt real hard." Parents can say that to their kids, but why is it abusive for teachers to threaten them like the parents do? Yes, teachers could send undisciplined kids to the assistant principal office to be paddled, but what help does the paddling do when students ended up coming back to the classroom with a wide grin on their faces, because the paddling were not painful at all. Slight whacking is, for me, a complete joke. And for the students? They consider it fun (or funny)and an opportunity to be out of the classroom.
I would like to suggest that when a rowdy kid needs whacking, the school should call on the parents. Have that parents come to school and have them whack their own kids right in front of the assistant principal. I believe this would achieve active participation of parents to the education of their kids, at the same time, free the school personnel from their fear of being sued. Pulling off TV set and putting away video games is not complete participation of parents in their kid's education. Having them come to school and actively participate in the disciplinary action is, to me, a real active participation. But ask any public school teacher what happened during an "open house" and PTA meetings? Teachers would tell you that there would be very few parents come if attendance would not be checked. But ask the parents what they'd do if they heard their kids hurt or complained of being abused. Parents would sprint to the principal office and elevate their complaints to the school board.
Look what happen recently at Simeon High School in Chicago. A volleyball coach was ousted for employing corporal punishment to the players. Chicago Sun-Times(Oct. 8)quoted this statement from the overly protective mom,"...I couldn't believe it. I lost my mind." Did she asked the kid why? Did she try to rationalize the coaches action or did she immediately went berserk. It seemed that the latter was true. Did the school board asked themselves, why were the other kids mad at this kid after the coach resigned?
The rowdiness of students can never be discouraged if teachers are even afraid to stop a fistfight in their classrooms. Teachers are not only afraid to be hurt, they are afraid to be sued by the parents if they accidentally pushed or touch a sensitive part of the student. One Caucasian science teacher at the school where I taught was asked to resign by the school board after he accidentally pushed one of the two African-American kids, who had a fistfight, onto a wall. I was a little bit fortunate that my principal and most of my students were on my side, when a rowdy 7th grader, complained that I touched her breast. Her parents immediately rushed to the principal office. I was made to explain the case. Other students were interviewed. The principal considered the allegation unfounded. The parents threatened me to take it to the school board. The parents were not successful in convincing the district, so they ended up threatening me on the phone.
I cannot forget while my colleague and I were on our way to a professional development workshop in Beaumont, Texas. My colleague told me that she gets frustrated, because even with all these development trainings, it seems that the principles and methodologies that she learned at the university and in seminars and workshops are ineffective. I knew she loved to teach. I knew she was smart. She was even teaching an honor's English class. I told her that probably what we need in order for teachers to teach effectively is a training on military strategy and tactic.
Look! Military curriculum is an elective course in American educational system and it is offered to high school kids, while it is a prescribed program in other countries. Why could we not have a compulsory military training among the middle school kids, where discipline (or shall I say classroom management) have been very problematic. Military program instills discipline and develops proper conduct,not competition. This would help take care of querulous and rowdy kids.
So there you are, my friends. Yes, we need to correct the American education system, but we don't only need to remunerate our teachers well and re-prioritize the school program. We need to strongly show our complete trust and support to the teachers' classroom management, and to require parents to board the ship and actively participate in in-school disciplinary actions.
NOTE: For Filipino readers, I wrote another weekend blog exclusive to GreatPinoy.com. I would appreciate it very much if you also could check it out. Maraming salamat!
What American education really needs are change of priority, equality of compensation and attention, and complete trust and support for its classroom teachers.
Most teachers are very good and gifted; however, it is also true that there are few bad tomatoes among them. Teachers were not born yesterday. They pretty well know what are in store for them in the classroom. They were trained as educators for 4 years and have passed the certification exams. Therefore, America does not need to have what Obama called new generation of teachers and what McCain suggested to weed out poor-performers. Ousting bad teachers have been going on ever since. That's the reason why the school administrators do both announced and unannounced evaluation of classroom teachers' performance several times in a school year.
The USofA needs to change priority in its educational system. It needs to emphasize the 3Rs not just math and science. It is just too bad that many schools are now emphasizing non-academic programs, like competitive sports. I cannot forget the shock while teaching middle school in Port Arthur, Texas. I learned that the entry level salary of a football coach was twice as much as the academic teachers. (And check the differences of a college coach salary to an academic professor. It could be worst.) With the incongruity of salaries, tell me, what is the priority and what signal are we sending to the school children, not to mention the kids' knowledge on the salaries of professional athletes. If schools would continue to instill and reinforce the culture of sports, there's no way for America to improve its educational system.
It needs to emphasize students' discipline in the classroom. And America needs to give complete trust and support as to how teachers instill discipline and manage their classroom as long as such discipline program is not abusive. The problem facing the system nowadays is the fear of teachers of being ousted by the district or sued for "excessive" discipline by over-protective parents. True, there is a need to monitor the disciplinary action of every teacher, but to create the feeling of fear does not help teachers with their classroom management. Time outs and putting middle school student in a corner are barely helping, especially if there are 30 rowdy students in a classroom. There was a time when I was tempted to yell at a student,"Settle down or I'll whack your butt real hard." Parents can say that to their kids, but why is it abusive for teachers to threaten them like the parents do? Yes, teachers could send undisciplined kids to the assistant principal office to be paddled, but what help does the paddling do when students ended up coming back to the classroom with a wide grin on their faces, because the paddling were not painful at all. Slight whacking is, for me, a complete joke. And for the students? They consider it fun (or funny)and an opportunity to be out of the classroom.
I would like to suggest that when a rowdy kid needs whacking, the school should call on the parents. Have that parents come to school and have them whack their own kids right in front of the assistant principal. I believe this would achieve active participation of parents to the education of their kids, at the same time, free the school personnel from their fear of being sued. Pulling off TV set and putting away video games is not complete participation of parents in their kid's education. Having them come to school and actively participate in the disciplinary action is, to me, a real active participation. But ask any public school teacher what happened during an "open house" and PTA meetings? Teachers would tell you that there would be very few parents come if attendance would not be checked. But ask the parents what they'd do if they heard their kids hurt or complained of being abused. Parents would sprint to the principal office and elevate their complaints to the school board.
Look what happen recently at Simeon High School in Chicago. A volleyball coach was ousted for employing corporal punishment to the players. Chicago Sun-Times(Oct. 8)quoted this statement from the overly protective mom,"...I couldn't believe it. I lost my mind." Did she asked the kid why? Did she try to rationalize the coaches action or did she immediately went berserk. It seemed that the latter was true. Did the school board asked themselves, why were the other kids mad at this kid after the coach resigned?
The rowdiness of students can never be discouraged if teachers are even afraid to stop a fistfight in their classrooms. Teachers are not only afraid to be hurt, they are afraid to be sued by the parents if they accidentally pushed or touch a sensitive part of the student. One Caucasian science teacher at the school where I taught was asked to resign by the school board after he accidentally pushed one of the two African-American kids, who had a fistfight, onto a wall. I was a little bit fortunate that my principal and most of my students were on my side, when a rowdy 7th grader, complained that I touched her breast. Her parents immediately rushed to the principal office. I was made to explain the case. Other students were interviewed. The principal considered the allegation unfounded. The parents threatened me to take it to the school board. The parents were not successful in convincing the district, so they ended up threatening me on the phone.
I cannot forget while my colleague and I were on our way to a professional development workshop in Beaumont, Texas. My colleague told me that she gets frustrated, because even with all these development trainings, it seems that the principles and methodologies that she learned at the university and in seminars and workshops are ineffective. I knew she loved to teach. I knew she was smart. She was even teaching an honor's English class. I told her that probably what we need in order for teachers to teach effectively is a training on military strategy and tactic.
Look! Military curriculum is an elective course in American educational system and it is offered to high school kids, while it is a prescribed program in other countries. Why could we not have a compulsory military training among the middle school kids, where discipline (or shall I say classroom management) have been very problematic. Military program instills discipline and develops proper conduct,not competition. This would help take care of querulous and rowdy kids.
So there you are, my friends. Yes, we need to correct the American education system, but we don't only need to remunerate our teachers well and re-prioritize the school program. We need to strongly show our complete trust and support to the teachers' classroom management, and to require parents to board the ship and actively participate in in-school disciplinary actions.
NOTE: For Filipino readers, I wrote another weekend blog exclusive to GreatPinoy.com. I would appreciate it very much if you also could check it out. Maraming salamat!
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
A Hey Poem (Dasang) on Voting Govt. Officials
I am anxiously looking forward to the third and the last US Presidential Debate, which will be held tonight at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York.
In line with the debate and the coming presidential election, I decided to post another experimental performance poetry, the Hey Poem, entitled Voters, Wake Up! This poem has been included in my upcoming book, THE EXPERIMENTAL DASANG (Hey Poem) and 45 OTHER POETRY FORMS.
VOTERS, WAKE UP!
Edmund M. Industan
A blot of an ink on a boxed paper board;
A hit of that screen with names that we know,
An effort from us with hope that it would
Better the globe; changed rotting world.
Soar to the world! See how they perform.
First year o’erflows with peaches and cream;
Following months served with decaying fruit…
Good to the cronies; bad to those who can’t be reached
With the magic wand of the elected!
But hey!
It is ‘them’ fault? Or it’s ‘us’ to blame!
Hey!
We put them there! And we sleep and dream!
Hey!
The bed of roses would slip so fast…
Then we’re awake, we cried for a failed task!
We muster the disgruntled; we marched to the street.
To the leaders, we’re roaches to be quashed and contained.
We joined forces to startle and threaten
Wishing for more strength! But alas! ‘twas hard to gain.
Many of us would raise our hands up.
Others would show thumbs down for the lame.
The herd disoriented! Others jumped off! Some were maimed!
Those voices so strong before…now just whispers of dying men.
But hey!
It’s not the end! The full term will come!
Let’s educate every man this time!
Let’s cast our vote wisely mark for those
Candidates, who have brains and brawns…
Morals pleasing to God and not just to men!
(c) e. industan, 2007
I hope and pray that voters will vote wisely on Nov. 4th.
In line with the debate and the coming presidential election, I decided to post another experimental performance poetry, the Hey Poem, entitled Voters, Wake Up! This poem has been included in my upcoming book, THE EXPERIMENTAL DASANG (Hey Poem) and 45 OTHER POETRY FORMS.
VOTERS, WAKE UP!
Edmund M. Industan
A blot of an ink on a boxed paper board;
A hit of that screen with names that we know,
An effort from us with hope that it would
Better the globe; changed rotting world.
Soar to the world! See how they perform.
First year o’erflows with peaches and cream;
Following months served with decaying fruit…
Good to the cronies; bad to those who can’t be reached
With the magic wand of the elected!
But hey!
It is ‘them’ fault? Or it’s ‘us’ to blame!
Hey!
We put them there! And we sleep and dream!
Hey!
The bed of roses would slip so fast…
Then we’re awake, we cried for a failed task!
We muster the disgruntled; we marched to the street.
To the leaders, we’re roaches to be quashed and contained.
We joined forces to startle and threaten
Wishing for more strength! But alas! ‘twas hard to gain.
Many of us would raise our hands up.
Others would show thumbs down for the lame.
The herd disoriented! Others jumped off! Some were maimed!
Those voices so strong before…now just whispers of dying men.
But hey!
It’s not the end! The full term will come!
Let’s educate every man this time!
Let’s cast our vote wisely mark for those
Candidates, who have brains and brawns…
Morals pleasing to God and not just to men!
(c) e. industan, 2007
I hope and pray that voters will vote wisely on Nov. 4th.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
POLLS, FOCUS GROUP, and MY SCORE CARD: US First Presidential Debate
Polls and focus group are two different research methods of getting public opinions. Most polls are taken through telephone or online, while focus group are based on a small discussion group on a series of topics introduced by a discussion leader, which of course is a voter himself. Results in both polls and focus groups has the tendency to be biased based on how participants are selected. Basically, it should be randomized; however, if the selection doesn't consider the political leanings of the participants, results of both methods would be prejudicial against another. That is how I see why all the results of the polls and focus groups on last night's US Presidential Debate favored the score to Sen. Obama, while many expert political critics saw the debate differently. (see BBC Online News, "McCain and Obama Spar in First Debate", Sept. 17.) We also must remember that most TV networks have openly shelled out their money to the Obama campaign. Such overwhelming financial support to Obama by these TV networks could have contributed to the skewed results on the polls and focus groups.
Now, allow me to give my unsolicited criticism.
1) Economic & Financial Rescue - Although both Republican candidate John McCain and Democratic candidate Barack Obama positively addressed this issues on strict regulations and accountability, McCain has specifically satisfied me on how he would carry out his plans, particularly on Business Tax Cut. He got in-depth reasoning, contrasting Ireland's 11% business tax rate against US 35%. I see his point loud and clear. In economics, when investors are hit with a high tax rate, they'd bring their busines elsewhere to make more profit. That is why many US investors are bringing their businesses overseas were the business tax rate, the wage rate, and the raw materials are low, putting the US workers out of jobs. Obama, on the other hand, addressed it so specifics from US infrastructure, to energy, from education to health. However, he did not really hit the target well.
2) Change and Reform - I mentioned in my previous blog that Obama, being an innovator, has been vocally preaching a radical change in the US politics and economy. However, I haven't seen that from last night's debate. Despite his strong allegation that McCain would just be adopting the current president's agenda, he did not really prove any revolutionary changes,henceforth, saw his possible changes still not so different from the status quo. Remember what anthropologist Ruth Benedict wrote in her book, Patterns of Culture (1934,1959:24), which I quoted in my past blog? "...From the point of view of an outsider the most radical innovations in any culture amount to no more than a minor revision, and it is a commonplace that prophets have been put death for the difference between Tweedledum and Tweedledee."
3) Tactic and Strategy - I don't question Sen Obama's linguistics acumen. Of course, he knows the difference between tactic and strategy. Nevertheless, when talking about international relations and conflict, he did not address them well enough to show his ability in dealing with the issues. Sen. McCain's response was so deep, even mentioning the Battle of Normandy (and explained and connected it very well to today's problems). Very well done!
I just hope that McCain would not listen to the poll and focus groups results. Rather, McCain has to take it as a challenge to give better his already very good performance in yesterday's debate. I don't want to see the repeat of the presidential elections of 1980, where Carter conceded early to Ronald Reagan, when some people in the West Coast were still at work and had not have a chance to vote. Carter's early concession was affected by the Nov. 4 survey by a major TV networks who showed that Reagan was ahead of him in a landslide vote and projected Reagan's win.
And for Sen. Obama? I would like to hear him in the next debate to be more in-depth to effectively prove his platform.
This 2008 presidential election is a close fight, my friends. Let us tighten our seat belts. Let's watch the final result in November.
Now, allow me to give my unsolicited criticism.
1) Economic & Financial Rescue - Although both Republican candidate John McCain and Democratic candidate Barack Obama positively addressed this issues on strict regulations and accountability, McCain has specifically satisfied me on how he would carry out his plans, particularly on Business Tax Cut. He got in-depth reasoning, contrasting Ireland's 11% business tax rate against US 35%. I see his point loud and clear. In economics, when investors are hit with a high tax rate, they'd bring their busines elsewhere to make more profit. That is why many US investors are bringing their businesses overseas were the business tax rate, the wage rate, and the raw materials are low, putting the US workers out of jobs. Obama, on the other hand, addressed it so specifics from US infrastructure, to energy, from education to health. However, he did not really hit the target well.
2) Change and Reform - I mentioned in my previous blog that Obama, being an innovator, has been vocally preaching a radical change in the US politics and economy. However, I haven't seen that from last night's debate. Despite his strong allegation that McCain would just be adopting the current president's agenda, he did not really prove any revolutionary changes,henceforth, saw his possible changes still not so different from the status quo. Remember what anthropologist Ruth Benedict wrote in her book, Patterns of Culture (1934,1959:24), which I quoted in my past blog? "...From the point of view of an outsider the most radical innovations in any culture amount to no more than a minor revision, and it is a commonplace that prophets have been put death for the difference between Tweedledum and Tweedledee."
3) Tactic and Strategy - I don't question Sen Obama's linguistics acumen. Of course, he knows the difference between tactic and strategy. Nevertheless, when talking about international relations and conflict, he did not address them well enough to show his ability in dealing with the issues. Sen. McCain's response was so deep, even mentioning the Battle of Normandy (and explained and connected it very well to today's problems). Very well done!
I just hope that McCain would not listen to the poll and focus groups results. Rather, McCain has to take it as a challenge to give better his already very good performance in yesterday's debate. I don't want to see the repeat of the presidential elections of 1980, where Carter conceded early to Ronald Reagan, when some people in the West Coast were still at work and had not have a chance to vote. Carter's early concession was affected by the Nov. 4 survey by a major TV networks who showed that Reagan was ahead of him in a landslide vote and projected Reagan's win.
And for Sen. Obama? I would like to hear him in the next debate to be more in-depth to effectively prove his platform.
This 2008 presidential election is a close fight, my friends. Let us tighten our seat belts. Let's watch the final result in November.
Friday, August 1, 2008
A Blog on Elected or to-be Elected Officials
It's election year in USofA. Rhetorical battle between the Presidential candidates has been heating up, while the outgoing president has been trying to do something to be remembered positively.
Yes, government officials come and go. Some walk their talk; others just talk and talk. Selfless over-performers receive peoples accolade; egoistic under-performers receive insult and ridicule.
I never will forget an elected governor in the early 60s in Mindanao, Philippines. I learned that he wasn't a good governor; however, he was (and will continue to be) remembered. It's not because of his accomplishments, but because of his "carabao" English that he used to impress people with.
So, here I am perpetuating his government service by etching his "carabao" English in a Kyoka.
Kyoka is a Japanese poetry form considered as a crazy poem. It makes fun of politicians or leaders, and of a certain event that took place. Syllable structure is similar to Tanka: 5,7,5,7,7
The Governor's "Carabao" English
"Good morning this noon.
I’m here running for office.
Voting is here soon
You should vote for me, at least,
Because I’m the very best.
If you’d vote for me,
I’d invite one and all
And cows would kill me
And I’d surely eat you all
…Before we raise the flagpole."
Men in Mindanao
Let’s think twice before we vote
A change we need now
Put to office those we thought
Who are worthy of your vote.
Don’t forget the past.
Men spoke English to impress
Let’s act real fast
Lest you want to hear them say,
‘Let’s sing the flag ceremony!’
Edmund Melig Industan (copyright, 2007)
This Kyoka reflects a terrible English of this under-performing official in Mindanao, Philippines, but it also might have happened (or still happening) in other parts of the world.
So, elected officials, please do your best and put your words into action; otherwise, you only would be remembered from generation to generation by your high faluting words and unsatisfactory performance.
Notes: 1) One of the poems included in my upcoming book, 101+1 Poems on THE EXPERIMENTAL DASANG and 45 OTHER POETRY FORMS: An Anthology.
2) Carabao is a Philippine English term for a water buffalo
Yes, government officials come and go. Some walk their talk; others just talk and talk. Selfless over-performers receive peoples accolade; egoistic under-performers receive insult and ridicule.
I never will forget an elected governor in the early 60s in Mindanao, Philippines. I learned that he wasn't a good governor; however, he was (and will continue to be) remembered. It's not because of his accomplishments, but because of his "carabao" English that he used to impress people with.
So, here I am perpetuating his government service by etching his "carabao" English in a Kyoka.
Kyoka is a Japanese poetry form considered as a crazy poem. It makes fun of politicians or leaders, and of a certain event that took place. Syllable structure is similar to Tanka: 5,7,5,7,7
The Governor's "Carabao" English
"Good morning this noon.
I’m here running for office.
Voting is here soon
You should vote for me, at least,
Because I’m the very best.
If you’d vote for me,
I’d invite one and all
And cows would kill me
And I’d surely eat you all
…Before we raise the flagpole."
Men in Mindanao
Let’s think twice before we vote
A change we need now
Put to office those we thought
Who are worthy of your vote.
Don’t forget the past.
Men spoke English to impress
Let’s act real fast
Lest you want to hear them say,
‘Let’s sing the flag ceremony!’
Edmund Melig Industan (copyright, 2007)
This Kyoka reflects a terrible English of this under-performing official in Mindanao, Philippines, but it also might have happened (or still happening) in other parts of the world.
So, elected officials, please do your best and put your words into action; otherwise, you only would be remembered from generation to generation by your high faluting words and unsatisfactory performance.
Notes: 1) One of the poems included in my upcoming book, 101+1 Poems on THE EXPERIMENTAL DASANG and 45 OTHER POETRY FORMS: An Anthology.
2) Carabao is a Philippine English term for a water buffalo
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
U.S. Presidential Candidate: Walk the Talk
November 4 will be the U.S. Presidential Election day. More people are becoming skeptics on the economic plan of Republican candidate John McCain, particularly on his plan to continue on Pres. Bush's Tax Cut Program; more are beginning to question the feasibility of Democratic candidate Barack Obama's spending plan.
Following the sociocultural innovation approaches, McCain's plan is leaning towards discovering new information and altering what is present (which may only have some changes in semantics); Obama's plan, though trying to discover, is more leaning towards inventing a plan seen by many as out of reach that even Isabel Sawhill, an official of former Democratic President Bill Clinton's Office of Management and Budget said,"...the plan does not add up."
I understand where Sen. Obama is coming from. As an innovator, he likes to portray a radical plan. Nevertheless, in the political arena, an innovator should also learn how to listen and how to see reality, especially if it involves expenditure. Sen. Obama has to remember that an innovation, whether by invention, discovery, diffusion, or alteration must be based on the environmental and internal factors.
The U.S. economy is ailing today. It is in recession. It can't afford ostentatious spending. As a presidential candidate, one has to promote austerity. One must help save money by deciding to give an acceptance speech at a 21,000-seat Pepsi Center, where the 4-day convention is to be held. Spending more money for a 76,000-seat football stadium just to give an acceptance speech is enough to question if the candidate will really walk the talk.
Let us hope and pray that the elected president come November will really walk the talk.
Here are two clerihew verses for all of us.
Democratic Candidate Barack Obama
Yahoo, Sen. Barack Obama
Enough of these convoluted blah-blah!
"Spending plan doesn't add-up," said Sawhill.
Be realistic if you don't want to go downhill.
Republican Candidate John McCain
Hey, it is Sen. John McCain
Short of money for his campaign
Yet onward he goes, an old army, persevering
That’s the president we need when economy is ailing.
(c) edmund melig industan
Following the sociocultural innovation approaches, McCain's plan is leaning towards discovering new information and altering what is present (which may only have some changes in semantics); Obama's plan, though trying to discover, is more leaning towards inventing a plan seen by many as out of reach that even Isabel Sawhill, an official of former Democratic President Bill Clinton's Office of Management and Budget said,"...the plan does not add up."
I understand where Sen. Obama is coming from. As an innovator, he likes to portray a radical plan. Nevertheless, in the political arena, an innovator should also learn how to listen and how to see reality, especially if it involves expenditure. Sen. Obama has to remember that an innovation, whether by invention, discovery, diffusion, or alteration must be based on the environmental and internal factors.
The U.S. economy is ailing today. It is in recession. It can't afford ostentatious spending. As a presidential candidate, one has to promote austerity. One must help save money by deciding to give an acceptance speech at a 21,000-seat Pepsi Center, where the 4-day convention is to be held. Spending more money for a 76,000-seat football stadium just to give an acceptance speech is enough to question if the candidate will really walk the talk.
Let us hope and pray that the elected president come November will really walk the talk.
Here are two clerihew verses for all of us.
Democratic Candidate Barack Obama
Yahoo, Sen. Barack Obama
Enough of these convoluted blah-blah!
"Spending plan doesn't add-up," said Sawhill.
Be realistic if you don't want to go downhill.
Republican Candidate John McCain
Hey, it is Sen. John McCain
Short of money for his campaign
Yet onward he goes, an old army, persevering
That’s the president we need when economy is ailing.
(c) edmund melig industan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
