My voting history is pretty much moderate conservative but I am in actuality available to be persuaded to change.
I've been accused of being a 'closet, flaming, liberal' and I have taken the on line test to find out which way I lean and it always comes out left. But, in my heart, I find it hard to follow the leftist line.
First of all, I don't believe businesses should be condemned for being successful nor do I think those who have gained wealth should be taxed to aid those who haven't. We brag about out nation being one where anyone can do and be anything and then we allow people to not become what they could be by giving them the dole.
I believe the down trodden should have help, especially jobs but if we tax the American business and demand unrealistic wages, we aren't going to do anything except drive the businesses elsewhere and how does that help people who want to work but can't find jobs?
I was a welfare child. Raised by a single parent until I was 9. I know what it was like to be poor, but I also know there were factories in our town where my mother could have worked but chose not to. It was a better situation to be a stay at home mom, which she thought was important, and welfare allowed her to do that. But our income would have been better had she worked. This was during WWII when women held down industry jobs.
I'm very emotional and cry when I see people suffering and I want the government to help all those in need but not by taking away from those who have earned. Yes, I know, it's the poor and middle class who suffer. Tell me about it. I'm below the poverty line, way below it, and if it wasn't for Social Security,and some baby sitting jobs, I'd be living with family, because my family would not let me live on the streets.
I'm so much a middle of the road person. You probably can convince me to vote for your guy if you can give me some good reasons why.
Give it a shot. I promise to respond ti everyone who comments.
|
|
|
More by M. Bradley McCauley McCauley |
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 63
If you feel that the current Administration has done a bad job, then vote for Obama. This will signal a change in the way things are done (that is a different set of people with their hands out) and remove from the Administration those policy makers who made the current mess. You will encourage those who hope for government handouts ( the middle class and the poor for the Democrats) to expect to finally get some. Those who financed Obama's campaign will expect commensurate favors in return.
Don't expect real change since it isn't that easy if you vote for Obama. Don't expect our current problems to go away unless we substantially change what the government is doing which isn't likely to happen under McCain.
I think the current Administration has been a disaster for the United States and the free world in general. I think the current Administration has been about as bad for the nation as it could have been. Therefore, I will be voting to at least put in office a different set of rascals. I have hope but no expectations since I don't think any of the candidates understand what is going on nor how to fix it. Sigh.
The real solution is in Invisible Hand but I have already suggested that you read that.
Best of luck in the voting booth. Yes it is worth it to vote even if you don't really like either candidate.
The opportunity for REAL CHANGE was rejected ... thus is really doesn't matter which MAN you vote for ...
YOU and the rest of the Country and the World will get more of the same macho nonsense that has been the 'rule' since a "male" God set "mankind" in motion.
I suspect WE may be a "failed" experiment ...
Maybe next election Humans will choose to CHANGE the nature of Politics ... really change ... and elect a WOMAN. Hey, it doesn't matter which WOMAN and more than it does which MAN ...
IF you want CHANGE ... change the Brain that drives the body!
I guess this was a little more that my "Two Cents" worth ... sorry for the rambling but I am one who was really disappointed that WE didn't, don't have the opportunity to realize a POLITCAL CHANGE in the American Government Leadership in year 2008!
I am not convinced Obama would have been the best candidate, but it's who the dems put up. I could go on and on about things like Obama being funded in large measure by small individual donors, pretty much a grassroots affair, but of course, he takes money from folks I'd rather he didn't, as well, but McCain, looking at his age and other considerations, realised this is pobably his last campaign, and kissed the ring of the Bush shadow government for a try at the brass ring. Without their money, and backing, and his lobbyist friends, he'd have been toast. He has shed every core principle he ever held, and changes more, daily, to appease those that hold his reins. Conservatives have brought this country to it's knees. Bush has dealt a crippling blow to America that could go either way. If you want the job finished, McCain's your man. Obama may not be my first choice, but he will get my vote in November, because he's a new broom, and this place has an odor that begs to be swept out. Comment stalk me, read my articles, get involved, for or against. Make up your own mind. I'm confident if you consider that this is a choice, as always, between two evils, and you look at the situation, you'll find the devil's on one man's shoulder, and as usual, it isn't easy to tell. Let me give you one url, because the one thing keeping this from being a total landslide, is the lie factories working against Obama. I daily find slander to be the realm of the wingnut right here, and this page is dedicated to debunking those lies
http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/11/12/obama_is_a_patriot.php
Good Luck, Mary. Navigating the spin and shck and jive, on both sides is a challenge. A challenge you have to want to undertake, and a challenge that is truly the responsibility, usually abrogated, of every American that casts a vote.
http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/11/12/obama_is_a_patriot.php
I know what I try and do is look at the facts the way I see them, try and think of what would help this country, and then look for someone that was somewhere close to that thought.
The last time I saw any one close, was when Ross Perot ran...
Not so well with an obstructionist Republican majority in the Senate (including Lieberman here, in a lot of cases) that blocks all productive legislation, has found the filibuster is their long lost friend after swearing to nuke it when the dems wanted to use it, and if all else fails, Bush vetoes anything remotely capable of blocking corporate America from raping us. Yeah, it's those damn do nothing Dems that are the problem, lol.
Favor continued tax breaks for the rich.
Want to continue to borrow 750 MILLION dollars a week from China to fund the war in Iraq.
Want to increase the national debt over the 4 TRILLION dollars that the Bush Gang has already rung up.
Think that the Republicans have done wonders for national security even though our ports and nuclear power plants are largely unguarded. Instead, they've built a big fence. And they were willing to sell the rights to our ports to a dubious Middle-Eastern government.
Liked the response to Hurricane Katrina.
Want to keep handing Neil Bush millions of dollars for "No Child's Behind Left".
Want to destroy the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.
I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
No one in Washington has worked harder, or longer, to bring both parties together then John McCain. When people say he is another George Bush they miss the point, John McCain tells us the way things REALLY ARE while Obama speaks in terms of what people want to hear.
Energy is the most important issue in this election, and I'm not just talking about the price of gas. Energy affects nearly everything else: foreign policy and mideast resource wars "to protect our vital national interest in the region", jobs and the economy, environment and public health, global warming and semi-natural disasters (e.g., Iowa floods/California wildfires). Eventually, we will of necessity move to renewable sources of energy. We will do so sooner if democrats are in power than if republicans are in power. So if you want renewable energy sooner, rather than later, vote democrat. Also, if you want to avoid, as much as possible, the expensive and distracting energy detours - namely nuclear and so-called "clean coal", vote democrat.
Well here's the thing about all that experience Danno. Some of us don't believe experience at influencing military contracts to favor a European company for that company's lobbyists, that end up giving you campaign contributions, then end up on your campaign staff, is such good experience. Some of us don't think that voting with the BA almost all the time is valuable experience. Some of us don't feel that shedding almost all your core beliefs for the big money backers that also brought us Bush is such good experience. Almost everyone in Congress having a loss of temper story about you isn't good experience. Fist fighting on the floor of congress we don't value as good experience. Selling the American worker down the tubes for the insurance lobby we don't consider valuable experience. I could go on here, but that's a short list. Experience is a door that swings both ways, good and bad. McSame swings very badly.
"No one in Washington has worked harder, or longer, to bring both parties together then John McCain."
Not since he recloned himself mentally as a Bush minion, he hasn't. That McCain is dead, long live McSame.
"When people say he is another George Bush they miss the point"
Which point is that, Danno? The one where he's voted with Bushco 95% of the time?
"John McCain tells us the way things REALLY ARE while Obama speaks in terms of what people want to hear."
John McSame doesn't even know how things are, until Leiberman tells him, from what I've seen.
Thanks for the laughs, Danno. Looks like you'll have to ask Mary to delete this, since it isn't your article this time. I know that just kills you, lol.
Can you tell me how voting for a man that threatens to open another war up with Iran, while we still haven't even begun to pay for the ones that continue to bleed us dry at the rate of 343 million a day*, just in Iraq, is going to help you keep and spend that which you've earned? The policies he's embraced, the huge deficit, the huge growth in government, etc.,have caused a constant slide in the value of the dollar for over six years here, making oil and food skyrocket, and soon it will spill over into all sectors of our economy, and make them more expensive, too. McCain embraces that policy. How does that help you keep more of your money, and decide how you will spend it, Dan? Near as I can tell, the back door, regressive, "devaluation of your dollar tax" makes Bush the biggest pickpocket I've had as my president yet. I have savings, now they've lost almost half their value, how does that help? Under McCain, same policies, same predictable outcome.
*
http://theiraqinsider.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-much-does-iraq-war-cost-per-month.html
Would it be fair if I were to say that you are a Fiscal Conservative, and a Social Liberal?
Would you consider yourself a "religious" person?
Think of your Values, Mary. What is it that you VALUE?
I don't think that any of the candidates will help American this era.
Freedom, of speech, religion etc
Security - not worry about being attacked
The right to work - the right to a good education - the means to achieve
Am I a religious person? Yes and No. I don't attend a church or other religious rite but I believe in a creator, life after death, and the importance of being a good person respecting others.
I don't believe in abortion but I do believe in the woman's right to choose.
I believe in taxation but not biased taxation.
I believe we all have an obligation to help others but I prefer it be done through charities, religious organizations and state assisted help.
I do believe in states rights, individual rights and personal rights.
I don't mind if the government checks out my cell phone, computer, etc because I have nothing I wish to hide from them. I don't mind if they check others because I want to be sure I'm safe.
Lines at the airport don't bother me. I plan for them and try to get through security as best I can. I'm 71 and have been pulled over twice for inspection. I found it amusing.
I don't want my freedoms taken from me, I don't want to feel this country might be attacked at any time, I don't want another 9/11 and I don't want a President who really believes he can talk to those who hate us and work it all out.
Now that I've written this, I guess I know which way to go.
Thanks everyone for your input.
Then you should consider what strategy is going to make us safer - Big Brother looking at your emails, or getting the nation to a position of energy independence asap.
Yes, indeed. I believe You are right...and have, therefore, answered Your own question.
I Congratulate You.
Interesting, because those values fit both candidates.
That's because it is a good election year, and not a bad election year.
Thank You.
Let us further the discussion.
Mary, what would You value more?
That which is yet-to-be-borne... or
That which uses abortion as birth control, or a "remedy" to inconvenience?
Mary, which do You Value more?
The giving of a Loving Family, neighbour, Church... or
The (punitive) confiscation of funds by an unknown "entity," and from one "class," to then be re-distributed to strangers, and members of a different "class?"
Lastly, Mary, I wish to add; there is no such thing as a "right" to a "good education." The Right lies in the Freedom to determine our destiny for ourselves. Many are not "University material;" many are not fit to waste away in the pit of indoctrination that is the "campus," today. Many are fit for Entrepreneurialism, Art, self-sufficiency.
Education is no more a "right" than is Healthcare...Ask a student who has been denied entrance to "University," despite the fact that they are more qualified than the "student" put in their place. Or, the White Male who is denied a position because he is a White Male...
I hope that You understand my words...as You may find them "Socially" challenging...
What do you consider an unrealistic wage??? MOST of us that work everyday barely make ends meet ... I will honestly tell you that I make 11.85 and hour and work 40 hours a week ... BUT I barely make ends meet and forget about any luxury! I have people come in everyday and tell me that I make all the "big bucks" that I should pay for their groceries ... I can barely afford to feed my own family let alone theirs!!! These same people have new cars and by steaks, shrimp and other "expensive" items. I am lucky to have the makings for meatloaf. I have a union (what a joke) that (supposidly) fights for me to have good insurance and wages ... are you telling me that my wages are unrealistic????? In the last week I have seen how badly some of these "downtrodden" as you call them, wanted a job. They quit when they are asked to work. I have no pity for most of this country that are taking a welfare check instead of working ... what about the illigals that come in to this country and get all benefits for their families ... but when I lost my job I couldn't even get rent assistance!!! This country has gone down because we don't have "principled", "moral" people running it. I see more of the same because neither of these two canidates have shown me anything I haven't already seen in the years I have been voting. I have taken my right to vote seriously since I turned 18 and walked into a voting booth for the first time some 33 yrs ago. I do my research ... I don't rely on just what I hear or see. This November I might just write someones name in!
excuse the rant its been a long day and I guess the part about unrealistic wages just hit the wrong nerve ... guess I'll go back to my little corner of the world and read some more articles now.
You have every right. I agree with You about these "candidates"...not a one worthy of an American vote.
I don't know where you live or what your expenses are but I feel sad that you are having trouble making ends meet. It's tough. I know. I live on SS and babysitting and at 71 it can be very hard. I have very few regrets about my life but one of them is that I didn't plan for my older age income. Young people, take heed, make plans now for your retirement--NOW.
Katherine, I hope someone comes to your aid--and also that you get an increase in your wages. Is the company you work for making profit at its workers expense?
Ron and Mark-John, do you guys follow each other around and have your cat and mouse game? There is so much beneath your words to each other. Bet you both could be friends in a different scene.
Thanks for commenting.
I think watching the debates and/or attending public forums with candidates allows me to learn directly from the candidates. That, combined with a careful study of how their past actions compare to what they say in these forums allows me to make an informed decision. Accepting the opinions of strangers, on the other hand, is dangerous. I've learned that many don't know the difference between fact and opinion, some will purposely misrepresent candidates, hoping to mislead me, and many do not share my values so their opinions do not reflect what is most important to me.
Not being perfect doesn't translate into unworthy. Both of these candidates are of good character in my mind, so that is a wash. This election is about issues, despite the mainstream media. The primary issue in this election is not Iraq or the economy. Both of those are underpinned by energy (which is not simply gas prices). These candidates both propose to address energy issues, but in very different ways. McCain and republicans want to expand nuclear energy and use of coal, which is being heavily marketed as "clean coal". Obama and democrats want to transform our energy infrastructure (or at least begin the process) to renewables. This is a major decision, and a major direction that the next administration/congress will set for this country. I would urge you to reconsider "writing someone's name in". The stakes are very high. Personally, I favor renewables, so I will be voting for democrats.
In brief, nuclear energy is nuclear energy. It is radioactive, and waste from nuclear plants has never been adequately disposed of. Coal, despite claims of being "clean", is an environmental nightmare - especially mining it. Both nuclear and coal involve burying waste, something we will leave for someone else to deal with.
Renewables are clean and sustainable. They require no military to stand guard over world supplies. Technology for wide deployment already exists. It is already expanding faster than either nuclear or coal, but could grow more quickly with favorable public policies, which democrats will more likely bring to Washington, if elected.
In reading your article and comments, I believe you are, Mary. Unfortunately, I see far too many others who are willing to buy whatever "a friend" is selling, without looking for facts.
Hmmm...... So much for promises.....
Uhhh......... You had to have missed my comments. If you go back and read them, I think I discussed them in a fairly non-biased manner. I favor democrats in this election, but I clearly state why. That is not bias. It is answering the question your article raises: "Tell Me Why--Should I----Vote for---Your guy?"
Pickens Plan
Forget Nuclear
There are no perfect candidates out there and anyone serious about voting needs to consider how the philosophy of them affects their lives and vote accordingly.
Our earth, indeed even our Universe is shrinking as we advance into the vast horizons of space. I can't believe we are the only element of life throughout infinity. And I do believe there will be a time when we need a United front.
There will always be a 'middle class'--wish I could say I was even a part of the middle class but alas, I was negligent in planning for my Sr. years and now live way below the poverty line but since I spent my early years there, it isn't something new to me. I have learned in the past few years to live on less, and require less. Trust me, less is best.
A few years ago my motto was, if it doesn't fit in my car, it doesn't go. When I moved to TN from FL, everything I brought with me fit in my car, and I didn't have a Van or SVU. What I'm trying to say is that we don't need the latest, best, most expensive of this and that. We can learn to live within our means. and trust me, most of us who are living on less have less we have to worry about losing.
I have to supplement my income, and I don't have the latest technical device, or a flat screen TV, I do have an MP3--a 19 inch TV and a PC. I have found that most people who have to hold down two jobs etc are people who require, at least they think they do, the latest to keep up with the Jones'.
I raised six kids on a meager budget. They have all done well in their lives, have fine families, college bound kids, and a credit to their communities.
I listen to the financial experts who say our economy is in good shape. What is going on? What's going on is people wanting to live beyond their means. What's going on is the old, Champagne taste on a beer budget. Holy cow, I read a comment here recently about a woman who couldn't make it on $11.00 an hour. Why? Is she one of those who bought a house beyond her means and now has to pay for it? What kind of car does she drive? Bet she's got the latest in gadgets and widgets. Put them on her charge card and now can't pay her bills because of the debt she created keeping up with the crowd.
Spencer, smack at me with your written words if you think what I'm saying isn't true. People can live within their means if they didn't try to live beyond their means.
True gas is up, when I lived in Europe in the 60's, they were paying the equivalent of $4.50 a gallon. I've learned these past few months to modulate my driving and guess what, I'm helping the environment. Whoa, who would have thought that maybe the high cost of gas would cut down on pollution? Maybe God, or the Universal Power knows what He/She is doing?
Guess what else, this oil situation just might create alternative fuel. Then what would happen--a whole new industry in our midst?
Spencer, I could go on and on since you unleashed a torrent of thoughts but it's late, and I've been babysitting three kids the past four days (supplementing my income) and I'm tired.
Please reply--I'm sure you have many thoughts and I welcome them. You are articulate and I believe a caring person. In the meantime, enjoy, life is too short not to.
Spencer, are you following what I'm trying to say? I really feel an affinity towards you, I like that you make me think and maybe I am too idealistic, (remember, Pollyanna?)
I've lived a life of means. I've traveled a good part of the world. I lived in Europe for five years, (military brat and Army Officer's wife) I've cruised to most of the Caribbean Islands, been to Alaska three times, traveled to Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, cruised through the Fjords of Norway and a luxury cruise through to Greek Isles. Etc, Etc, ETc,
I've spent a week in Hawaii, a week in Aruba, etc etc etc. What I'm trying to say is that less is best. I'm happier now than I've ever been--I have very little, a one bedroom apt.,
Some would say these people need to down grade their living standards to match their new income levels. On the surface they are right but cost for rental units are sky rocketing because the foreclosures have caused pressure on all rental property to rise. Plus in the St Louis area affordable rental units always remain at a premium in that they are so rare. There is always a shortage of low priced "decent" rental units in which low income people can live. So, I must disagree with your assessment that all one has to do is live within their means.
I too have traveled all over the world for business and pleasure and am aware that gasoline in GB was $1.20 a liter when I was there. Europeans have longed lived with high fuel prices and small cars to conserve energy. One might look at high gas prices as a way to conserve fuel but many might not see it as such and feel they are being forced to change long term habits. There has been an attitude in the St Louis area the last few years for more people to move back into the core areas of the city and not make those long drives from suburbia to their jobs. Many are selling their big homes and moving into recently completed lofts and rehabbed homes in the city which has caused a huge flurry of housing activity. Now many of those folks can walk to work or hop a bus for a few blocks to get there and use their vehicles for mainly shopping or entertainment purposes. Changes are being made but everyone does not have the opportunity to simply modify their living standards with down sizing. They can no longer afford decent housing within the confines of their new budgets but seem to be left out of the cycle. Certain hourly wages mean different standards of living in different areas. What one can pay for in St Louis might not be the same in Boston or New York. Housing cost in one area is not the same all over and must be taken into account when attempting to compare finances of people.
You might be perfectly comfortable with the economic status you have now but I don't feel you can feel what another feels when they are faced with a new lower wage job and the prospect of losing a home they were paying on for a number of years due to a job downgrade. We all have our status and need to make adjustments accordingly. Some are faced with terrible choices due to no fault of their own.
I do not agree that their always will be a middle class. It has narrowed in recent years and unless some changes are made soon it will continue to lesson. We are all connected financially in that money is spread all over society. We have already seen a down turn in the housing market which affects the appliance and furniture industry and many others. Those with less money to spend on entertainment affects that industry and on and on. The middle class is important to the overall welfare of our economics. Some economist might tell you how well the economy is doing but he/she doesn't live in my area and I am betting a lot of other areas.
Your opinions are always welcome and I hold no grudge in that they may differ from mine. It all helps the world go round.
Your point about the people who's income lessened due to a downward trend in business is valid. I understand---and know it's got to be hard on them and almost impossible to struggle to make ends meet.
As I mentioned earlier, if I didn't babysit to supplement my income, I'd most likely have to move in with family. Working at a full time job at age 71, with 6 stents in my heart and various age related difficulties, is why I babysit--plus I love kids. It's the Pollyanna in me--they represent pure joy.
I was in St. Louis a few years ago and did see the downtown renovation programs--I thought it was fantastic. I know the same is being done in many cities. Plus some of the new home divisions are including a 'downtown' type atmosphere with shops, stores, etc.
I'm not sure about the middle class disappearing. I'm wondering how much of our future industries will be Internet related and high tech jobs. I think our working class will be the lower income nations, as the non technical jobs are going in that direction. One of the politicians, I don't remember which one, once said we need to train our 'out of work' people for high tech jobs. I don't think it is the middle class that is shrinking as much as it is the world shrinking. Getting to a business located in another country is as easy as accessing the Internet or hopping a jet.
Our nation was built on industry. That industry is no longer the mainstay of our future. And something else that I think of, other countries that use cheaper labor would eventually take away our manufacturing industries, perhaps it's a good thing that we have begun a stake in those areas.
I see a global future, not of border separations but of united nations (not the one in NY right now) Our future is beyond sewing shirts or building tools. Our future is in new industries such as space and developing food sources in the event of the predicted global warming. Trust me, the Unions will make their way into those working classes in other countries someday and the cost of labor will rise, which will raise the cost of goods. Hopefully our future generations will have mastered the technical fields that will create the world of tomorrow.
Is this too much like Pollyanna looking through rose colored glasses? Or an older woman who believes you can't stop change therefore learn to manipulate and use it.
Blessings my friend. You have sparked so many thoughts--I think I'll write another book. My last one was rather metaphysical, the theme being the universality of all that is. I believe we are all connected, all a part of the Creative force and therefore should help each other. When we hurt one, we hurt all in the long run. But then that's another topic, another story for another time.
Namste
Spencer, I wrote after your last comment and when I hit 'post' it disappeared. Wonder what unseen forces did that -- and I was offering to send you an e-copy of my book. You can read a bit about it at:
The Secret Something Within
I couldn't disagree more. If you think that our situation would have been the same if Gore had been president for the past 7.5 years, then I'd like to have some of what your drinking/smoking. Democrats have twice, within the last year, tried to extend incentives for renewable sources of energy, and twice republicans have filibustered the efforts. Why? Because those incentives would have been paid for by repealing some of the incentives fossil fuels have enjoyed for decades. Elections make a difference.
Mary: "I can't believe Obama will be that much different since he is already building up debt to those backing him."
There's a difference between who's backing Obama and who's backing McCain. One MAJOR difference between the two is on how they propose addressing energy, which is THE major issue in this election. Obama will push conservation and renewable technologies. McCain will go after domestic drilling and nuclear energy. Elections make a difference.
One other thought. My brother agrees with your statement. He (not necessarily you) is cynical and lazy, and he uses your sentiment as an excuse for failing this country as a citizen. Democracy can only exist when citizens take their role seriously and responsibly. That means being informed, participating ($$$), and voting.
Fortunately my grandkids are learning---two, who will be voting for the first time this year, can sit down and discuss the issues with me. They are informed and care. Wish I could say the same for many older people I know who still vote the way their parents voted in the 30"s. You'd probably like that--the were FDR'ers. Smile, Smile.
As I have been saying, elections make a difference. One clear difference from the 2006 congressional elections is that Barbara Boxer chairs the environment and public works committee in the senate instead of Inhofe. As a result, the political push has been advanced toward addressing climate change. That is important, if we don't want to continue to see extreme events, like floods in Iowa and wildfires in California, and droughts in Atlanta.
Finally, I don't care about political parties. I care about issues. If republicans were pushing renewables instead of nuclear and (so-called) clean coal, I'd back them. If republicans were pushing a real plan to reduce greenhouse gases by 80% by 2050, as scientists are recommending, then I'd back them. But they are not, and democrats are. So democrats get my support and my votes (for now).
I know you are also a cynic, especially about those who won't stand up for what they believe in. So many, like you, have been disappointed in how our politicians run this country and they no longer believe the one lone voice will be heard or listened to.
Thank you for making me think, especially about what issues are important to me. I'll get back to you when I have determined what they are.
I am making the case that the issue of energy is the most important issue to the country, and I have been trying to show that it is the most important issue in this election, because it affects nearly every other issue. Foreign policy and mideast "resource" wars, environment and public health, jobs and the economy, global warming and quasi-natural disasters (California wildfires, Iowa floods) - all of these are directly tied to how we produce and use energy. Even education is indirectly affected by energy. When JFK, for example, announced plans to put a man on the moon, thousands of students were motivated to study math and science. So energy is a "hub" issue, and many, many other issues are spokes. That's what I want you to consider - not just issues that are "important to me".
Mary: "I personally believe that until renewables are profitable, there won't be much done from either side."
Example: a company called Nanosolar is producing solar "power sheets", which will be cost competitive with coal within within a decade. This company has big money investors, including Google and Swiss Re. It located its first manufacturing plants in California and Germany. Why? Because public policy (tax incentives) favored those locations.
In Travis Bradford's book, Solar Revolution, the case is made that solar energy is "inevitable". He doesn't even write about new technologies, like Nanosolar. He also writes that one of the ways to speed the deployment of solar energy is to enact favorable public policy.
Fossil fuels and nuclear energy have enjoyed tax incentives and subsidies for decades. Do you not think it's time to begin shifting those incentives to renewables, like solar?
I'm going to help you spread the word. Don't know how much it might change my voting decision but it will be one of the main issues I consider.
Thanks.