Jackson Free Press

I'm not a Democrat or Republican. Nor am I liberal or conservative. I shun the two-party mindset, believing that there's no either/or scenario when it comes to politics. I'm more moderate if I'm anything, a subscriber to a more common-sense approach when it comes to governing people. The loonies on the left scare me, and I'm equally frightened by the crazies on the right. For me, progress in this country will occur somewhere in the middle—where, in my opinion, most of us stand.

Last Tuesday's mid-term elections revealed some interesting things. For one, many Democrats got trounced. It was indeed a banner night for Republicans and their upstart offshoot, the tea party. But methinks those results were not so much an embrace of the right as it was a statement to the current administration and President Barack Obama.

I'm equally hard on both sides, and what I saw the past two years was complacency within the Democratic Party. The country overwhelmingly voted for a new direction in '08 and handed the keys to some new drivers. But just as it happened after the successes of the Clinton administration, the Dems snatched defeat from the jaws of victory by getting a bit cocky with their House majority. Wrestler Ric Flair always said it's much harder to keep the title than it is to get it.

Now that they've lost a little momentum, Dems have two years to get visible wins under their belts. Should Obama have pointed to jobs as his No. 1 agenda item instead of a new health-care bill? Who knows. But it's hard to convince the laypeople that things are improving when they're out of work right now.

In the next two years someone on the right is going to have to define "Taking Back Our Country" for me and a lot of other common-sense moderates. Who is "our"? Better yet, whom are we taking our country back from? Why are some folks "patriots" but others aren't? Is the brush-back due to policy or President? Does loving your country mean you can't criticize it? How can you try to stick so strongly to the Constitution but conveniently overlook the passages that call for men being created equally?

Lawmakers: Partisan politics won't get us anywhere. Neither will tit-for-tat actions.

It seems the closer we get to leveling the playing field for everyone, the more of a schism we create. To the new Republican lawmakers, your challenges are clear. Sure we'd like for you to curb spending. And if you can help it, a few tax breaks would be in order. But from the common-sense end of things, how about fixing our system so that the disadvantaged can receive the same health care as the affluent? Help us ensure that poorest kids in Jackson can receive the same quality education as the kids at Jackson Academy. Acknowledge that not everyone has the same opportunities. Not everyone begins at the same starting point, but in reality, some begin several paces behind.

Understand that we all love our country.

It belongs to all of us, even though we may hate some of its policies. I believe that's what Obama attempted to impart these two years, but he simply hasn't gotten it done, yet. True, he had a tremendous hole to dig us out of.

But now is the time to see if Dems and Repubs can take the "I" out of team and govern accordingly. We common-sense moderates will be watching. Remember, we vote again in two years.

And that's the truth ... sho-nuff.

Previous Commentsshow

Poor children can get an education. At least the mechanisms for that to happen are in place. Books are there. Desks are present. The teachers have chalk. There is transportation. The kids get two meals so they are not distracted by grumbling stomachs. So somewhere in between the kids, teachers, or parents are not doing their part. I think a child can earn enough money to buy pencils and paper, if his/her parents are unable. I've heard the stories of single mothers working at night, unable to help their kids study. It hurts. Those children do not have the same opportunities. And yes they are a couple of steps behind the child who's mother is home all day- her main focus being that child's development. But, is single parenthood the federal governments business. I like the ending of the story where the kid learns regardless, cause his/her mother instills good ethics in the child, in the sparing moments she spends with him/her. I like the ending where the kid succeeds regardless of skin color, religion, socioeconomic status, level of attention, etc. A child can be self driven to learn, and achieve, but not all are. I don't want to see the government try to fill that void in someone's character by throwing money at them. Why should a poor person receive the same medical treatment as the rich? It's a service/product, and is priced accordingly. I'm not advocating letting people die in the streets, but yes I do think people should be allowed to expire naturally, as god intended. But, if a rich guy wants to pay for five more years of life through dialysis, why then is every poor person owed this same treatment? As it is, if you are poor, and can reach a state hospital, you can have bones mended, and get sown up. If you live three hours away, take action on this problem as soon as you can. What more do we owe? Or do some owe it to themselves to try harder to provide more for themselves. As in providing a healthy, safe lifestyle. Not smoking, exercising, not eating crap food. You can eat healthily and inexpensively on peanuts, plain yogurt, boiled cabbage, and beans. Does it sound oh so yummy-no, but no one owes anyone that either. The Federal Gov. business should be defense, and asset allocation. More simply, ensure we the people can safely purchase, and sell materials to, and from other countries without being ripped off, so we can then convert these materials into sellable goods, thus creating jobs and fueling the economy. protecting the borders is expected.

Mark Ellis

Nov 12 2010

I left out bread in my diet. sorry peanuts, bread, cabbage, yogurt, and beans.

Mark Ellis

Nov 12 2010

Mark, Your comments leave me speechless. May God continue to bless you and yours.

FrankMickens

Nov 17 2010