I found this shirt in Beijing. I probably paid too much for it, 120 yuan is a lot for a shirt, but I had to have it. Sadly, it turns out it’s too short for me. So, Sarah, guess what you’re getting for Christmas! I have no idea what the writing says, but I’ll be sure to ask my Chinese teacher. While I find the comparison pretty hilarious, I realize that with the election coming up so soon this would be a great way to do a political post. (Let’s pretend that I came up with some witty segue, possibly one that involved the name “Mittens” or “Nobama,” which will diffuse any potential tension that may come from this article).
I respect a person’s right to vote for whichever candidate they choose; just because a person has a right does not mean that they exercise it with due diligence. I will not complain about how people these days don’t truly understand the gravity of political choices, I doubt there has ever been an age where politics engaged the whole population as it should. We are too far removed from the people we are choosing to understand what we do with a vote for one or the other, especially with the presidential race.
My vote is for Obama. I will give you time to boo and hiss. I will not blame you if you stop reading, I usually do when articles take a strong political bent. I am certainly a social liberal, and I may even be a fiscal liberal. Those words may have given my dad another heart attack (sorry, dad, but I’m sure you suspected by now, if I hadn’t already told you that is). It is not that I think everyone should be given a free-ride or that those who have a lot of money don’t deserve it. I only believe that if given the choice, the majority of people will not freely give to those in need unless those poor souls are somehow related to those with the money and means. How often do we think of the poor and underprivileged in our own towns and cities, yet fail to extend that pity and concern to the rest of the state or the country. There are some people who are generous beyond what they need to be, but those are the exceptions that prove the rule. The vast majority of people could care less what happens outside of their self-absorbed bubble. I realize that Obama has not saved the economy. But I think it should be clear that there are few economies in the world that have weathered this storm. Then of course there is the fact that we cannot know what would have happened with other policies in place. Our criticisms of his policies stem from our belief, not our knowledge, that something else would have worked better (almost always a plan that agrees with our own political leanings, whether or not those leanings have empirical and historical basis). It would be great to be able to go back in time and try a bunch of different bailouts, but my flux capacitor is broken and I have yet to see a DeLorean for sale here in China.
I cannot agree with a party that claims to be for less government involvement but would also seek to uphold discriminatory policy. Rights for same-sex couples should not even be an issue. For some reason, people view sexual orientation as some condition upon which they can pass judgement, just as people did with race years ago. I am not going to enumerate points to defend the right of people to do what they please in the bedroom as long as it involves consenting adults. We make allowances for all sorts of “bad” behaviors, yet this one is so twisted and grotesque that we view their existence as less than that of others. We have scientific proof that smoking causes cancer and a whole host of other ill effects, but smokers can get married and have children (which can be scientifically proven as harmful to the children), they can visit their partners in the hospital. And yet, homosexuals cannot get married in the majority of what is supposedly the “freest” country in the world; they do not always have visitation rights in the hospital. Who gave us the right to withhold rights from those who have done us no harm: they have not ruined the economy; they have not robbed us, or assaulted anyone; they have not devalued our homes; they have not led to an increase in teenage pregnancy (a fact with which I think everyone can agree). They have not broken any laws, yet they are still legally beneath us “citizens.” The hubris is sickening. I don’t care what a particular faith says about the “lifestyle,” I believe in the separation of church and state. Blocking someone’s secular rights because of our religious convictions is legally flawed. I cannot agree with a party whose main platform is upheld hypocritically.
Phew! I apologize for the tirade. If you are still reading, I thank you for your patience and understanding. I hate to bring politics into this blog, or even any conversation I have. It is a subject that brings more ill than good. Being in China while the election is going on gives me a much different perspective on the issues. I only hope that those of you reading this will not see my words as attacking your views should we disagree on politics. I only wish to voice my opinions. Should we disagree, I hope we can have a civil disagreement, and potentially, even a rewarding discussion of the topic. It seems that nowadays we cannot discuss among friends serious issues, for whatever reason we deem it unseemly in conversation, even if that conversation is not public. I don’t like that, I think we should be able to discuss while keeping our tempers in check. If we cannot speak freely and rationally, then we are in no position to make decisions which determine the fate of not only our country, but of our planet. These sorts of decisions resonate far beyond our immediate sphere. The election reaches me here, 6000 miles away. It is not something to be taken lightly.
In other news, I visited a phenomenal shopping mall today. I wish I would have brought my camera, but I had no idea it would be so cool. They have an imax theater, which I was surprised to learn. Then the sheer amount of upscale retail places blew my mind. It reminded me that China is fast becoming a modern country, despite what we may think of them (I find that our views of China tend to be a good 30 years behind it actually is).
Thank you, everyone, for reading once again. I promise that the following posts will return to the previous tone and much lighter topics. Xie xie, and zai jian!
I respect a person’s right to vote for whichever candidate they choose; just because a person has a right does not mean that they exercise it with due diligence. I will not complain about how people these days don’t truly understand the gravity of political choices, I doubt there has ever been an age where politics engaged the whole population as it should. We are too far removed from the people we are choosing to understand what we do with a vote for one or the other, especially with the presidential race.
My vote is for Obama. I will give you time to boo and hiss. I will not blame you if you stop reading, I usually do when articles take a strong political bent. I am certainly a social liberal, and I may even be a fiscal liberal. Those words may have given my dad another heart attack (sorry, dad, but I’m sure you suspected by now, if I hadn’t already told you that is). It is not that I think everyone should be given a free-ride or that those who have a lot of money don’t deserve it. I only believe that if given the choice, the majority of people will not freely give to those in need unless those poor souls are somehow related to those with the money and means. How often do we think of the poor and underprivileged in our own towns and cities, yet fail to extend that pity and concern to the rest of the state or the country. There are some people who are generous beyond what they need to be, but those are the exceptions that prove the rule. The vast majority of people could care less what happens outside of their self-absorbed bubble. I realize that Obama has not saved the economy. But I think it should be clear that there are few economies in the world that have weathered this storm. Then of course there is the fact that we cannot know what would have happened with other policies in place. Our criticisms of his policies stem from our belief, not our knowledge, that something else would have worked better (almost always a plan that agrees with our own political leanings, whether or not those leanings have empirical and historical basis). It would be great to be able to go back in time and try a bunch of different bailouts, but my flux capacitor is broken and I have yet to see a DeLorean for sale here in China.
I cannot agree with a party that claims to be for less government involvement but would also seek to uphold discriminatory policy. Rights for same-sex couples should not even be an issue. For some reason, people view sexual orientation as some condition upon which they can pass judgement, just as people did with race years ago. I am not going to enumerate points to defend the right of people to do what they please in the bedroom as long as it involves consenting adults. We make allowances for all sorts of “bad” behaviors, yet this one is so twisted and grotesque that we view their existence as less than that of others. We have scientific proof that smoking causes cancer and a whole host of other ill effects, but smokers can get married and have children (which can be scientifically proven as harmful to the children), they can visit their partners in the hospital. And yet, homosexuals cannot get married in the majority of what is supposedly the “freest” country in the world; they do not always have visitation rights in the hospital. Who gave us the right to withhold rights from those who have done us no harm: they have not ruined the economy; they have not robbed us, or assaulted anyone; they have not devalued our homes; they have not led to an increase in teenage pregnancy (a fact with which I think everyone can agree). They have not broken any laws, yet they are still legally beneath us “citizens.” The hubris is sickening. I don’t care what a particular faith says about the “lifestyle,” I believe in the separation of church and state. Blocking someone’s secular rights because of our religious convictions is legally flawed. I cannot agree with a party whose main platform is upheld hypocritically.
Phew! I apologize for the tirade. If you are still reading, I thank you for your patience and understanding. I hate to bring politics into this blog, or even any conversation I have. It is a subject that brings more ill than good. Being in China while the election is going on gives me a much different perspective on the issues. I only hope that those of you reading this will not see my words as attacking your views should we disagree on politics. I only wish to voice my opinions. Should we disagree, I hope we can have a civil disagreement, and potentially, even a rewarding discussion of the topic. It seems that nowadays we cannot discuss among friends serious issues, for whatever reason we deem it unseemly in conversation, even if that conversation is not public. I don’t like that, I think we should be able to discuss while keeping our tempers in check. If we cannot speak freely and rationally, then we are in no position to make decisions which determine the fate of not only our country, but of our planet. These sorts of decisions resonate far beyond our immediate sphere. The election reaches me here, 6000 miles away. It is not something to be taken lightly.
In other news, I visited a phenomenal shopping mall today. I wish I would have brought my camera, but I had no idea it would be so cool. They have an imax theater, which I was surprised to learn. Then the sheer amount of upscale retail places blew my mind. It reminded me that China is fast becoming a modern country, despite what we may think of them (I find that our views of China tend to be a good 30 years behind it actually is).
Thank you, everyone, for reading once again. I promise that the following posts will return to the previous tone and much lighter topics. Xie xie, and zai jian!