Since when did Penn Jillette's opinion matter?
This was the first thought that ran through my head when I saw this article on cnn.com this evening:
Penn Jillette: U.S. doesn't need a great leader
And then I read the article and, surprisingly, he had some good things to say. He presents his point in a very self-deprecating way, the gist of it being candidates are all talking about how much they're going to do for us and how that's not what makes a good president.
I couldn't agree more. The presidential race seems more and more about what the candidates are going to do for you, how they're going to make your life better, how they're going to put more money in your pocket. All these promises sound great, even if we all know that very few of them will actually come true. Who wouldn't want universal healthcare? Lower gas prices? Increased governemtn aid programs? Etc, etc, etc...
But is a system of handouts and free passes really best for the future of the country? Will universal healthcare really improve the health of the country, or will it just create a greater gap between the haves and the have-nots, with long waits and poor care at government facilities juxtaposed against the sterile, segregated, private hospitals?
I'm not saying that is how universal healthcare would end up, but it is just one example of the kind of issue that I think people can get blindly excited about without thinking past the immediate benefit. And it is these voters who can't see past the present, acting on what sounds good and will benefit them now rather what is best for the future of this nation, that scare me the most in this election. They will get distracted by flashy smiles, puffed-up rhetoric, and reformation-era plans from both parties and will miss the issues that matter most to our long-term survival.
I generally think picking a candidate is going to come down to the lesser of two (or three) evils; there will always be things to disagree on. I just hope I can decide this election's lesser evil before November rolls around.
I could write pages and pages on how I think the current generation is spoon-fed too much, how we are being babied by our parents well into our 20s, how we are given such a false sense of entitlement to the luxuries of life that we can't comprehend what it means to sacrifice. And it's becoming more and more apparent to me the older I get. But that'd be a book in and of itself, so I'll leave that alone. For now.
Penn Jillette: U.S. doesn't need a great leader
And then I read the article and, surprisingly, he had some good things to say. He presents his point in a very self-deprecating way, the gist of it being candidates are all talking about how much they're going to do for us and how that's not what makes a good president.
I couldn't agree more. The presidential race seems more and more about what the candidates are going to do for you, how they're going to make your life better, how they're going to put more money in your pocket. All these promises sound great, even if we all know that very few of them will actually come true. Who wouldn't want universal healthcare? Lower gas prices? Increased governemtn aid programs? Etc, etc, etc...
But is a system of handouts and free passes really best for the future of the country? Will universal healthcare really improve the health of the country, or will it just create a greater gap between the haves and the have-nots, with long waits and poor care at government facilities juxtaposed against the sterile, segregated, private hospitals?
I'm not saying that is how universal healthcare would end up, but it is just one example of the kind of issue that I think people can get blindly excited about without thinking past the immediate benefit. And it is these voters who can't see past the present, acting on what sounds good and will benefit them now rather what is best for the future of this nation, that scare me the most in this election. They will get distracted by flashy smiles, puffed-up rhetoric, and reformation-era plans from both parties and will miss the issues that matter most to our long-term survival.
I generally think picking a candidate is going to come down to the lesser of two (or three) evils; there will always be things to disagree on. I just hope I can decide this election's lesser evil before November rolls around.
I could write pages and pages on how I think the current generation is spoon-fed too much, how we are being babied by our parents well into our 20s, how we are given such a false sense of entitlement to the luxuries of life that we can't comprehend what it means to sacrifice. And it's becoming more and more apparent to me the older I get. But that'd be a book in and of itself, so I'll leave that alone. For now.
2 comments:
I am glad to see you are blogging again. I always enjoy your humor and your perspectives. I would like some more thoughts on how parents are babieing their children too long. I wouldn't want to do that!
Dadster
i agree with the last paragraph of this post. hence our generation (well, the generation right below me...so, you) :) is called the boomerang generation. all these kids are coming right back home and living off of their parents. it's so weird, but like you, i feel like i could write a book on many of these issues.
i don't necessarily agree with your perspectives on what might happen if universal healthcare were to happen, etc. i know you said it's just one of the outcomes that could come out of it, but let's be real, the last 40 years (sans about 16 of those) have not made any positive differences in these areas. in fact, they have done a great job of perpetuating the problems we are now faced with repairing. so, i say, bring in the new blood, bring in the new thoughts, bring in the new ideas, and let's see what happens. if you don't like, vote for someone else in 2012. but we gotta do something in 2008!!
Post a Comment