Thursday, February 5, 2009

Speaking of books,

I am now reading "Eat, Pray, Love," and enjoying the vastly different voice of a woman author. . . .ahhh, women and men truly are different. I'll give you my review later (probably a day or two as I am a book binger and have temporarily (for the last month) and surprisingly turned off my T.V. at nights.

Speaking of voices, as the author of this book is describing her intelligent and directed sister, Catherine, she uses an example of something she said to describe her personality. When someone asks her sister if she is afraid of having a new baby, her sister curtly replies that the only thing that scares her is that her baby will be led astray and grow up to be a Republican. . . . .really, that is how strongly a person can feel about the opposing party?

I don't think I am naive enough to believe one party has all the answers. I don't. I also don't believe that one-half (or in this presidential election, 52.4%) of the population is smart and the remaining 47% are just plain idiotic and misguided. . . .the fact that over time two dominant parties have rallied for power in the last century tells me that clearly there are smart people on both sides of the isle.

The thing I don't understand, given the current debate on the stimulus package, is how one party is CONVINCED that the nearly one trillion dollars we are about to spend to boost our economy from the threshold of depression-era economics is exactly the right answer, while the opposing party is TRASHING a bill "full of pork" and "disguising liberal and government-growing policies" that will put our country in never-before-seen debt--not to mention have little impact on the economy.

How can one party laud FDR's depression-era government-led stimulus, while the other party defames such policies and says that history doesn't even prove that 'government-growing stimulus' even works. Really which is it? Was FDR right or did the depression only end because of WWII? Please, historians, economists--decide would you, so we don't have to wonder what our country should do!!!!!

Yesterday, President Obama issued a stark warning regarding the stimulus package. He said "that failure to pass an economic recovery package could plunge the nation into an even longer, perhaps irreversible recession." Wow, that's serious. But it confuses me that days earlier, I read that, "According to the Congressional Budget Office, only $26 billion — just over 3 percent — will be spent this year. Another $110 billion — or 13 percent — will be spent next year." Which means that by the time President Obama's term is halfway through, just 16 percent of the money will have been spent. To me, only spending 16% of the proposed 'stimulus' simply is not immediate stimulus. . . . .but, are these numbers right?

Where is the truth here? From everything I've read, it sounds like government stimulus IS in order to some degree. . . .but I'm not sure that the current stimulus package is (which, by the way, have you tried to go online and figure out for yourself what is actually in it-I did--it is a nightmare-- literally millions of dollars are earmarked to some enigmatic program--millions of dollars-- I want to know EXACTLY how this money will be spent!--is it stimulus or not).

So, here's my solution: BREAK APART THE STUPID STIMULUS PACKAGE INTO SEPARATE BILLS. The reason that 100% of Congressional Republicans and 11? (can't remember the exact number) democrats voted against the House Stimulus Bill last week was because it was TOO BIG. I don't think every "no" vote meant "not ever" vote. I believe a "no" vote was like saying, "wait a second here, 80 BILLION dollars (for those of you scientists, that is 8 X 10^10) is a lot of money--lets not just spend it wherever. Lets be smart about it and spend it where it is really needed."

I know, I know, I lean to the Republican side of things (and the majority of Americans voted for the other ticket in November), but I believe I have an open mind. . . . I am seriously trying to find truth in this whole mess. I am just confused because I am hearing two different stories about one gigantic, debt-inducing bill. I feel like I am going to have a heart attack just mulling over it!

5 comments:

Nichole said...

great commentary! i'm so glad other people aren't duped. i thought i was the only one =D

Melissa@thebblog said...

Ah yes, passing a bill! I also think it is so stupid that they add on so many dumb attachments to the real meat of the thing that then they can never get it passed because well - the repulicans aren't going to vote for something good if there is legistlation regarding STD's attached to it, and the democrats certainly aren't going to pass a good bill if there is something about "marriage" in it . . .

RR said...

Hi I love the way you think!! You don't know me. I'm a friend of Heather Milllers. I happened to click on your blog from hers and it is so refreshing to meet an lds person that is even openminded to a democratic idea. I tend to embrace ideas from both sides. You're smart. Let me know how your lastest book is.

Michelle Glauser said...

I'm not going to say anything about the politics, though I was impressed by your logic. I did want to say that I find it interesting that you say it's refreshing to read a woman's voice. I read that book and found it interesting, but I hope the typical "woman's voice" in literature isn't so whiny and unprincipled. I'm interested to hear what you think of it.

Michelle Glauser said...

Oh, and I also wanted to say that I like that you're looking at the name "Reed." That's my grandpa's name. He is awesome.