The Lonely Englishman

The Most Unreasonable Assumption I Have Ever Seen

Why do I keep counting?

The GOP candidates have been dropping like flies, naturally. We now only have 3 prominent ones. We’ll discount Paul, I think it’s a little late for him to make a serious impact (I said the same about Santorum about 3 month ago, but you know).

Abortion – Increasingly becoming more of a religious fight than a moral or political one. With Santorum coming out as openly against it, let’s have a look at the others.

Gingrich – Calls for conservative judges to decide who gets abortions and no federal or state subsidies for abortion. However, does not call for a constitutional ban on them.

Romney – Say’s that the Roe V. Wade doctrine should be overturned by future Supreme Court justices. States should be able to decide their own abortion laws.

Santorum – Favours a constitutional abortion ban and completely opposes abortions – including cases of rape.

Gay Marriage – Let’s get all the controversial legislation out of the way nice and early shall we, because this is where candidates will be judged more harshly on in the short term.

Gingrich – I quote here ‘If the Defence of Marriage Act fails, you have no choice except a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage’.

Romney – Favours constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Thinks that it should be a federal government decision

Santorum – Very similar, thinks that there should be a federal government ban on gay marriage as well a constitutional ban on it. Of course, because ‘you can’t have 50 marriage laws’.

Health Care – All would immediately seek a repeal of Obama’s health care law, naturally. ‘Obamacare’ has not gone down well with these hard line conservatives.

Gingrich – Previously supported mandatory coverage of insurance. Offering a ‘generous’ tax credit to help buy insurance. Prohibit insurers from cancelling or charging hefty increases to insurance holders who get sick.

Romney – Opposes federal mandate to obtain coverage.

Environment – Typically with most conservatives, it is not worth talking about things such as ‘Global Warming’. Still, it’ll be fun to see their responses…

Gingrich – Once backed a tougher environmental regulation. Now, wants more energy, more jobs and a better environment at the same time. Surprising.

Romney – Has acknowledged that humans contribute to global warming but later said that he ‘did not know what was causing climate change’.

War – A very hot topic. Debates will no doubt be steered this way with the way Obama has acted being of debate itself. By debate, I mean any Republicans don’t like what he has done.

Gingrich – Supported the Iraq war and opposed early withdrawal from there as well. Said that U.S forces should not have been used in Libya campaign.

Romney – Supported war, has not said how many troops it is necessary to secure the gains and complete the Afghanistan mission successfully.

Santorum – Says he would order bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities unless they were open to inspection.

A varied selection here – not much common ground to build on. It’s a good thing that you onle have to pick one.

 

(Santorum (Far Left) has a jacket on which could probably fit all the GOP candidates in - But this isn’t a fashion competition)

So there you have it. A not so long selection on all liberal debate topics. I could have done a few more but I can’t really be bothered. Maybe I’ll do a part three after Super Tuesday as that will be a much better indicator that I ever could on American politics. 

Somebody Told Me.

One of my very first blog posts was to do with religion (http://thelonelyenglishman.tumblr.com/post/11914987586). There is no denying its importance in American politics. Yet, it is taking centre stage at during the presidential race. Is this standard campaign rhetoric or is there something different happening this year?

Republicans are still dealing with the religious beliefs of President Obama and his religious affiliation (Spoiler: he’s a Christian). By historical standard, this is extraordinary. In no previous election season have the faith-related convictions of presidential candidates been so scrutinized. Not since the election of Kennedy has religion played such a central role in American political elections. Such scrutiny comes primarily from a secular media mystified by the notion that personal faith might affect public policy decisions.

Actually, it actually might. Rick Santorum is openly against gay marriage and abortion – whilst there are constraints on what he can achieve in turning these over – there is a possibility of public opinion dropping for them. The President has considerable leeway within the media; public opinion on these might actually change. It probably won’t, but more than likely it will. In a much-discussed op-ed, The New York Times Executive editor Bill Keller claims that “Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann are both affiliated with fervid subsets of evangelical Christianity — and Rick Santorum comes out of the most conservative wing of Catholicism — which has raised concerns about their respect for the separation of church and state, not to mention the separation of fact and fiction.”

The religious rhetoric has been turned up recently, with Rick Santorum leading the pack of Republican candidates. However, whilst Santorum trails Obama in a head-to-head matchup, he has more support with religious affiliated members. Obama’s controversial call about Birth control a few weeks ago, didn’t help; for obvious reasons. Many of the GOP candidates were calling the move anti-religion, and now many of them are stepping up the pressure on Obama’s religion. Last weekend, Santorum said Obama has a ‘phony theology’ that’s not found in the bible. When asked to explain this point, Santorum said that the Obama administration is oppressing religious freedoms. This is common rhetoric; to rally against the president on ‘soft’ issues is something which is common in presidential season.

Discussions of faith are a staple of American politics, on both the left and the right. One minister who supported Rick Perry said that, as a Mormon, Mitt Romney is not a Christian – but still would be preferable to Obama who embraces ‘un-biblical’ values. If politicians say their religion guides the, it’s fair to ask: Which politicians espouse policies central to the Christian doctrine?  

Clearly that’s a big ask – I probably won’t do it in this blog; I’m sure it’s been done by academics prior to me writing this. Religion during the 2012 election will play a big part. Religion is central to America but there is a separation of Church and State values; and so there should. I’m rambling similar to the previous blog post now. I’ll stop before it gets too boring. 

Midnight Show

Who even is Rick Santorum? Someone who could win, apparently.

On December 2^nd 2011, I wrote this - http://thelonelyenglishman.tumblr.com/post/13645754271. It was a brief rundown of what essentially was a ‘Dummies guide for GOP Presidential Candidates’; during which I said that Santorum is a ‘nobody’ and if he wins, I will change my support to him rather than backing Obama. An audacious statement, but one I was very confident in succeeding. That was then, before Santorum carried 4 States.

Santorum is gaining some momentum and this could not only effect the GOP and America, more frighteningly, it could also change the dynamics of my blog. Shit.

Like any ‘wanna-be’ writer, I started this blog on good intentions and like any ‘wanna-be’ journalist I make wild accusations. This could backfire in a monumental way.  Let me explain…

The former Pennsylvania senator clinched three notable victories yesterday (Tuesday) in the Missouri primary and Colorado and Minnesota caucuses. The results of these caucuses aren’t binding, which means Santorum won’t immediately add any new delegates to his 10 which he has so far. But binding or not, Satorum’s wins give him momentum and the hype which he probably needed more than any other candidate. Romney seems to assume that he has already won the nomination; focussing much of his attack on the Obama administration. But this is a little premature and the other candidates have much to gain on the leader. Santorum, who did not win any of the early battleground states, has failed to become the clear number two of the party, which seems to be Newt Gingrich’s position.

Santorum’s Colorado win comes as something of an upset. But America has been used to upsets this week – with the New York Giants winning the superbowl, something I am extremely happy with, by the way – but Romney was expected to win. He led in recent polls and with all the money Romney has to spend it seemed almost inevitable. Santorum though, was expected to win Minnesota and Missouri.

Luckily for me, Romney still leads the GOP pack with more than 100 delegates to his name – 65 more than Newt Gingrich, currently sat in second place. Newt Gingrich was the nights biggest loser though. He had the possibility to gain more. Considering Romney wasn’t expected to win, Gingrich could have capitalised. But this wasn’t the case because he failed to pay the filing fee so he wasn’t even on the ballot paper in Missouri.

All in all though, whilst Santorum’s win wasn’t much of a shock to America, it was a shock to my blog. We don’t want a right-wing, tea-party orientated blog, do we? We’d much rather a pro-Obama one, because there are hardly any of those. 

Roe.

Ah, Roe V. Wade, how you’ve caused so much trouble. But when is the issue of abortion never in trouble. By trouble I mean, causing excruciating debate and the most contentious issue to ever be discussed in politics. Before you begin reading this is a pro-Choice blog post. Sorry about that.

William Earnest Henley once wrote, ‘I am the master of my fate’. Yet this seems to have little relevance to anyone in the US. It would be more appropriate to replace ‘I’ with ‘State Government’ because let’s face it, American women don’t have it easy do they. Advocates of Roe describe is as vital to the preservation of women’s rights, personal freedom and privacy. Denying the abortion right has been equated to compulsory motherhood and some have argued that abortion bans therefore violate the Thirteenth Amendment.

The few who are against abortion are the few that are in government. Government is meant to represent the few and the majority, but they are not doing the latter. Not at all.  A Gallup poll conducted in May 2009 indicates that a minority of Americans, 37%, believe that abortion should be legal in any or most circumstances, compared to 41% in May 2008. Religious fanatics preaching about abortion is more than likely working, or is it just that Americans don’t understand a woman’s right? Here in the United Kingdom, there are no legal constraints on abortions. Parliament almost unanimously supports a woman’s right to choose. Perhaps this is due to the fact that we are more liberal than our American counterparts, or it is due to Religion not having a large impact on the day-to-day lives of most Britons.

Despite all of that support is beginning to climb in the pro-choice camp. However, it usually wavers between the two. It’s usually a neck-and-neck tie. 

As you can see, the opinions of the American people change all the time. What’s more concerning is that on average, 2% of Americans don’t know what the terms mean. Maybe they should have been aborted? It’s safe to say America will never have a referendum on this issue. Nope. Instead it’s left to the trusty, up-to-date, Supreme Court justices. The court is generally filled with 80 year old evangelical fanatics, who will definitely be pro-life. But, in saying that, it was passed and it hasn’t really been under threat since. Incumbent president Obama, added two pro-choice female justices to the court though, just in case.

Barack Obama said on the anniversary of this bill that it is vital to upkeep and support it. GOP Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, has vowed to change it. This is something which won’t come up in the presidential debates. It’s a far too contentious ground to be fighting the presidency on. Roe V. Wade is best not thought about, but it should be though about. It effects a lot of people and American women should have the right to abort a child.

If a single mother won’t be able to give a child the best life possible, if a family cannot afford to have a child, if the child is as a result of rape, the right to abortion should remain. Obviously by child, I mean foetus. If a foetus can survive without the mother then abortion should be illegal, but if the foetus can’t survive on its own, then abortion should be legal.

Wow, that was intense. What a depressing blog post. On a brighter note, Giants in the Superbowl, whadddup?

Ah, Roe V. Wade, how you’ve caused so much trouble. But when is the issue of abortion never in trouble. By trouble I mean, causing excruciating debate and the most contentious issue to ever be discussed in politics. Before you begin reading this is a pro-Choice blog post. Sorry about that. William Earnest Henley once wrote, ‘I am the master of my fate’. Yet this seems to have little relevance to anyone in the US. It would be more appropriate to replace ‘I’ with ‘State Government’ because let’s face it, American women don’t have it easy do they. Advocates of Roe describe is as vital to the preservation of women’s rights, personal freedom and privacy. Denying the abortion right has been equated to compulsory motherhood and some have argued that abortion bans therefore violate the Thirteenth Amendment. The few who are against abortion are the few that are in government. Government is meant to represent the few and the majority, but they are not doing the latter. Not at all. A Gallup poll conducted in May 2009 indicates that a minor

America; the most liberal country in the world.

‘In fifty years time, America will more than likely be the most liberal country in the world.’

Perhaps that is a rather audacious statement to make, for I don’t really have any facts, figures or articles to back up the claim; just my own insight, which is probably faulty anyway. Regardless, I will try and persuade you, the listener, to agree with me.

It is important to note briefly that by ‘liberal’, I mean being rather lackadaisical about abortion, same sex marriage and other such controversial areas which are hot-topics in America today. You see that the majority of people who are against these things are the elderly, or the 60+ generation. These were born during the ‘Baby Boom’ and depending on gender, knew their place in society. For a man, it was being the breadwinner; the woman, the housewife.  These ‘people’ are big players in the two main parties, let’s hazard a guess that they are more supportive of the Republican Party but I can hardly see why. *cough cough* Obama *cough cough*. Their opinions matter to the party members so controversial legislation such as Roe V. Wade, which yesterday celebrated its 39^th Anniversary, is considered the anti-Christ for the older generation.

Ok, maybe I’m being rather general. I’m sure there is a 59 year-old Texan who is pro-Abortion, and favours same-sex marriage but from what I can gather, that is the minority. Each Republican presidential candidate is against abortion and is against same-sex marriage. Each Republican presidential candidate is old. Each Republican presidential candidate is a man (with the absence of Michelle Bachman). But, this generation, without intending to sound too morbid, will eventually be the minority – because they’ll die.

Before I begin this paragraph, I’m not intending we cause mass genocide a kill off anyone over the age of 60 – that would be tragic and not forgetting highly illegal. Logistically it wouldn’t work either, but I digress. Death is horrible; but everything dies eventually. Whilst it will be tragic when they do die, it may also be a time of celebration – in purely political terms anyway, celebrating a death is strange, unless its Bin Laden, then it’s completely acceptable. With the death of the Baby Boomers, will be the death of their archaic ideology. 30 Million People or so were born in the 1950’s which is still a considerable amount of the electorate – not forgetting the children that they had which were influenced by their out-dated ways of thinking. This amount of the electorate, or these people are in government running for Congress seats, governor seats and even the Presidency is under threat from this age of people. Sorry Ron Paul, but you’re fucking old.

So it’s time the youth started getting into government and voicing ideas. There is no point protesting, because changing embedded ideas of the elderly is near impossible. The only way to change, is to act.

‘The country doesn’t need Harvey Milk, because there is thousands of him and his ideologies embedded into the youth of America’

Today though, the youth of America favours equality and they are becoming more politically active. The Occupy movement has effected a lot of American youth to start thinking about what is wrong with their country. The country doesn’t need Harvey Milk, because there is thousands of him and his ideologies embedded into the youth of America. Sure, religion will play a factor because it always has in America, but it is possible for a religious person to support these liberal propositions. Religion on its own cannot and will not stop the growing consciousness which is beginning to craft ideology of the youth. Even if, God forbid, Obama didn’t win this year’s election, he had the opportunity to appoint two Supreme Court justices who will, hopefully, protect women’s rights. So there’s no need to panic just yet, right?

This could all be rubbish. None of this could actually happen; it is all just theoretic ramblings of someone who doesn’t even live in America. I’ll do another post on Roe V. Wade because it’s a pretty symbolic thing. But for the meantime, this will suffice. 

Support both of these and it will make you this happy -