Can we talk issues please?
By liscampll
@liscampll (124)
United States
September 14, 2008 7:46am CST
This election is getting out of hand. With all the mud-slinging, everyone is forgetting what's most important, issues. Let's rise above the mud and talk about them. Pick one, any one--energy, education, economy, foreign policy, healthcare. etc. and tell me why or why not you agree with your candidate's plan.
2 people like this
7 responses
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
14 Sep 08
I care mostly about the economy and education. I'll pick education to talk about since I know a lot more about education than economy. The candidate that I am supporting is Obama, and his education plan is very extensive. I will try to put it as simply as I can. He plans to take all the education plans that the "best" schools in the nation are currently using to guide his education plan. Which really seems like the best idea, to create a system that would produce the "best and the brightest" that everyone wants but do not seem to know how to get. He would also increase funding to "charter" schools as known as "community" schools in some states. I'm mixed a little on that one part. I don't know if you are aware but charter school in my state do not generate funds from local property tax their main funding is the federal money that follows the child no matter which school they attend. Here lays my issue, charter schools have been able to run and educated children some do not have fancy buildings and supplies but they are able to run on a lot less money than "traditional public school districts" but, if we increase funding to the charters will they then turn into the broken system of the traditional public schools. I'm not sure. All and all I really like the plan it is better than the Republican candidate's plan.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
15 Sep 08
I am a huge advocate for charter schools. My middle daughter attended her last year in one and she flourished. It really did save her education. I like that Obama wants to increase charter school funding, but I would hate to see that funding come with more federal mandates and complex regulations and requirements. I think the federal government should just close their mouths and write the checks. Leave the regulation up to the state education standards as they know best what works in their region of the country. this condition in his plan would ensure that charter schools don't go the way of our public school systems.
I think the NEA needs to be done away with entirely. It has created more of a disaster in our school systems then even no child left behind itself.
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
15 Sep 08
I use to work for a charter school sponsor or in some states they are called authorizer. Two of my children attend a charter school here, it was started for children with ADHD and Asperger's it has changed them completely. The bases behind the school is that discipline is the best form of teaching the children how to control their behavoir. Discipline is taught at the Dojo through martial arts. It's a great program. My only fear with more funding is they will become the now broken traditional public schools. I am surprised you are a support of the charters most are critics.
@liscampll (124)
• United States
15 Sep 08
I agree. I think Obama understands the failing system and wants to improve it. My son is in the third grade, FCAT year. So this year his class is learning nothing but passing the FCAT. I hear believers in No Child Left Behind claim it's a huge success, test scores are rising! The problem is, our kids are being taught the test, not everything else they should be learning.
I think as a whole, the public school system needs revamped. Instead of a school losing funding for a failing grade, they should receive help to improve. I understand a little about charters and as a parent, if my child's school was failing I would move him. But I think vouchers don't hold the failing schools accountable. I believe that good teachers should get raises and bad teachers should probably "look for another line of work" like Obama said once. LOL
@shoffman2000 (560)
• Alexandria, Virginia
14 Sep 08
Yes you right. Here is the challenge to both parties, come on MYlot and explain specifically how they are going to solve these problems. A book the both need to read is Execution The book is almost a classic. It tells how business leaders did or did succeed at reaching goals. Frequently, leaders announce goals but have no clue on how to reach their goal. Eventually the board fires them and they collect their golden parachute.
@lilaclady (28207)
• Australia
14 Sep 08
This was the same here in Australia, I hate the mud slinging, I reckon the parties should be able to work together in a way, ok the people vote for the party to run the country then the other party should help them do that, so all what both parties should be put on the table for the people to decide and to stop all this bitterness that seems to happen.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
15 Sep 08
I'm not sure how your elections work, I'm going to assume they follow the usual parlimentary model, If I am wrong, please correct me. Anyway, here in the states, we choose our congressional members and our president seperately. that is, If I like a republican candidate for president, and a particular democrat as my senetor and a libertarian for a house representatives member, I can pick them in Ala carte fashion. I am not limited to just choosing a party.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
15 Sep 08
State's rights and soveigrnty. Minimal federal government. Every solution I hear being offered from left end candidates, seems to be based on government involvment at he federal level. With the federal government growing and it's authority and problem solveing becomming ever more reching. States no longer have the authortity or even the incentive to take care of there own issues, regulation and problems. What's great for California probably is an outright failure for Montanna. But why would the states have any incentive or it's citizens have any incetive to pay more attention to state and local politics if the federal government is going to do it for them? Folks, please, before you lobby for or demand another federal program or law, ask yourself, is this something that an already bloated and ineffective federal government should even be involved in? Or is this a problem that my state can solve for itself. I want a president who thinks like this and trusts the individuals and their states to solve problems there where they can. One that encourages and recognizes state's rights.
@evanslf (484)
•
15 Sep 08
Yes this election is getting out of hand and has totally veered off the issues. Sadly though, that does not surprise me. Hopefully as many people as possible will watch the debates so at least then they will be able to make up their own minds by listening to the candidates debate the issues. They can also compare the two candidates without having to go through the usually biaised press, tv and radio media filters.
@magnolia17 (39)
•
14 Sep 08
It seems as if this is the last thing that matters. There are a lot of problems we need to solve. We should be thinking about what each person is planning to do, and what they seem likely to do based on their previous record. Instead, we are simply talking about stupid stuff, as you say. It's a clever tactic, and it has worked for two electgions in a row. How soon after 2004's election did most people think, "oops, wrong decision?" But of course it was too late.
