So who to support?

Barack Obama Vs. Mitt Romney

Santorum and Gingrich are out, Ron Paul... exists, and Huntsman, the candidate which I supported in the past, faded away and died due to a lack of recognition and funds. So now it has come down to two choices, incumbent Barack Obama, or runner-up Mitt Romney. So who do I support?

The reason why this is a tough choice is that I honestly like both Romney and Obama. Mitt Romney, for example, was previously a moderate Massachusetts Governor from 2002-2006. During that time he showcased his stance as a fiscal conservatism while still being relatively liberal when it came to social issues, indicated by his previous support for gay and abortion rights. His previous experience as an executive at Bain Capital, and the President and CEO of the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games Organizing Committee indicate his experience as a leader.

You'd think that with all that said though, Romney would be the definitive choice. Admittedly, when it comes to the economy, Romney's stronger when it comes to fiscal issues when compared to Obama, who's current rhetoric reeks of populism due to proximity of election day. However, the reason why I won't support Romney is due to the fact that the positions he held as governor previously have long sinced changed, his stance changing from that of a moderate Republican, to that of an extremist.

Normally, I wouldn't hate this. I accept that people can change in any direction with time and experience. With Romney though, the changing of his views coinciding with his 2008 Presidential candidacy is too much of a coincidence to make this idea of evolving views even reasonable. This coupled with his "severely conservative" statement made at CPAC 2012 make it glaringly obvious that Romney is being an opportunist. He obviously is more moderate then he claims to be, but his willingness to hide behind extreme conservative positions such as opposition to gay marriage and abortion rights, is infuriatingly disappointing. This isn't enough to make me opposed to a Romney presidency, as I don't think it's possible that Romney could, in good conscience, follow up with all the outrageous campaign promises he has made to the conservative extremists, but it's enough to cause me to support Obama.

Two things need to made absolutely clear about Obama though: I do not believe that he has done a perfect job and I definitely do not support him with much enthusiasm. The populist tone and the bashing of the wealthy definitely don't sit well with me. That being said, Obama has done well with foreign policy issues and has improved the economy, albeit slowly. His social liberalism is great, but his hesitance to fully embrace gay rights is a bit frustrating, though a repealing of Don't Ask Don't Tell does indicate what side he's leaning on. Economically, Obama is more mixed. Being a Democrat should make me automatically disagree with his economic policy, but his actions in office have been quite surprising. His willingness to allow for cuts to social programs during the debt fight was the most shocking due to the improbability of a Democratic president even considering those cuts. This showed a willingness to cooperate with the Congressional Republicans, the actual failure of the negotiations occurring when the Republicans became completely uncompromising by not allowing for the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the raising of revenues. However, Obama has not done the nation any favors by the demonizing of the wealthy, an obvious attempt to strike a populist tone by pandering to the societal hostility towards corporate culture.

It is for these reasons that I will vote for the reelection of President Obama come election day. While my enthusiasm has definitely waned, he has shown himself to be extremely moderate when compared with the "Romney of Today." That isn't to say that I'm against a Romney presidency, but I just wish he would be more honest and allow himself to be labeled a moderate. Moderate should not be a bad word.

Memorial: Ted Peter Neura Jr.

This is a memorial that I made for a dead Vietnam soldier, named Ted Peter Neura Jr. I made this for school project and found out that I quite enjoyed making it, so another memorial could be out in the coming months. I made this using a combination of Photostory, Windows Movie Maker, and Audacity. The music I got from a composer named Kevin MacLeod.

Any requests for a memorial? Then please give me an email at theaustincritic@gmail.com.

Now that was a long hiatus...

Sorry about the long wait. School work really has gotten in the way lately. Now that the school year is coming to a close, I hope to work on this blog with more frequency. New video blog entries are currently being planned. Stay tuned...

The Amateur Political Pundit Video Blog: Episode 1

Here is Episode 1 of my video blog. New episodes won't be around until after the end of the school year. Enjoy!

Jon Huntsman: The Moderate Candidate

"So what do you think of Jon Huntsman" -Question

"Who?" -Response

The following exchange was a conversation I had with a fellow peer over Jon Huntsman, a conversation that didn't last long due to the fact that very few people actually know who Jon Huntsman. For those who don't know who Jon Hunstman is, he is a 2012 presidential candidate for the Republican party. His record paints a picture of a fiscal conservative with daily liberal social views, making him the most moderate candidate of all the Republicans. He is also the person that I want to win the Republican presidential nomination.

This is easier said then done when most of the population doesn't even know of the existence of Huntsman. If Huntsman wants to win, he will absolutely have to show up in all the remaining debates in order to get attention. The last GOP debate, which was on CNN, had him failing to show up, a big error on his part, as the event would have allowed him to earn some recognition. The biggest problem with Huntsman is that he still has yet to establish an identity in the party, a problem that could be easily fixed with the appearance in debates. If he were to appear, Huntsman would gain attention for his lack of anti-Obama rhetoric (Used by nearly every single Republican candidate) and his moderate political views that will be a big contrast to the fringe views of most of the candidates.

Fiction For Political Geeks: Rubicon

Before we begin, I would like to introduce Fiction for Political Geeks. This is a segment of my blog where I will introduce a work of fiction that I believe is necessary reading or viewing for my fellow political geeks. The work can be a movie, book, or television show.

When I think of Rubicon, I immediately conjure up depressing memories of a show that showed enormous potential in it's first season (13 episodes), but was never allowed to grow due to a swift cancellation caused by low ratings. The show was a conspiracy thriller that followed brilliant intelligence analyst Will Traverse (James Badge Dale), who finds himself embroiled in a government conspiracy involving his own intelligence organization, after the death of his step father, the leader of the organization, causes him to investigate. The show was glacially paced, meaning viewership for the show tanked despite fantastic acting, beautiful cinematography and an intelligent plot, leading to the inevitable cancellation of this thrilling political drama.

The reasons I would recommend this would be the following: First, the shows depiction of intelligence gathering is highly realistic, as the show features intelligence analysts looking at stacks of paper trying to find information over foreign threats in an archaic manner, unlike the high tech method in which shows like 24 do. This is also true in the manner that these analysts fight terrorism, as they spend a majority of their time thinking, with nearly no fight scenes or action taking place during the entire show, again unlike 24. What makes Rubicon even more realistic is the way it depicts terrorism, exploring the causes of it and the various reactions that the government has to it. Rubicon is definitely a show for those who love to spend lots of time thinking about these topics, rather then wondering when the car chases are going to take place. (Hint: There are none.)

Secondly, Rubicon features a conspiracy plot, while less realistic then the intelligence gathering plot, that is still very interesting due to the many subjects it deals with, its intelligent writing, its great acting and the remarkable tense mood that steadily builds up as a results of its fantastic cinematography and paranoia that the main character feels due to fear of being silenced by the conspirators. The pacing is very slow initially, but speeds up steadily, rewarding the audience with shocking plot twists in the second half of the show.

Their is only one huge flaw with this potential masterpiece: It never ended. The first season ended on a cliffhanger, meaning that the cancellation of the show resulted lots of dissatisfaction. With a second season never to exist in the future, I do hope they at least create an alternative ending to the first season or a least a webisode to provide the ending so desperately needed to satisfy those who watched it. Sadly, Rubicon has still yet to get even a DVD or Blu-Ray release date, despite it being a year since the show aired on AMC, making an alternative ending or webisode an unlikely prospect.

That being said, I still do recommend that you watch Rubicon. The lack of a conclusion may be a big problem, but it's a thriller that political geeks will come to love. It's a show relevant in our current time due to its accurate depiction of terrorism and intelligence gathering. Do not pass this up.

Same-Sex Marriage Passes in New York

When it comes to social issues, I believe that the government should never have any control over the personal lives of the people. For example:

I believe that if those of the same-sex want to marry, they should be allowed to do so. It is not the role of government to pass judgement on their lifestyles or the lifestyles of anyone else. Government only has the responsibility of ensuring the safety of its own citizens and same-sex marriage does not in any way harm those who are not involved in the marriage. The marriage of two people of the same-sex has absolutely no consequence on me, for that reason alone, I say that it should be legalized.

On June 24, the state of New York legalized homosexual marriage, making it the sixth largest state to legalize it. Spearheading the effort was Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who had promised to push for gay marriage last fall's campaign. Supporters included New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (An independent) and former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat. The most remarkable aspect of the vote, which passed the New York senate 33-29, was the use of bipartisan support, as four Republicans and 29 Democrats voted for the measure, while 28 Republicans and 1 Democrat voted against it. This use of bipartisanship, while not a major difference in voting patterns, shows that gay marriage is starting to gain acceptance in society.

A problem that I have had with the fringe groups of the Republican party, is this belief that government should promote family values, meaning that they are thus against homosexual marriage, despite the party's core belief that government should have a severely limited role in the lives of people. Remember that quote by Reagan, you might have heard of it.

"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden." -Ronald Reagan

It's strikes me as ironic that the majority of Democrats, a party obsessed with government interference, should be in support of gay marriage.

What are your views on gay marriage? Voice your opinions on the comments section.