Six years or a Lifetime?

          Many people say that you should never talk politics or religion. In this week’s text response blog, I will be breaking one of those rules. After reading the article “Bailout Politics”, I saw the very common Washington D.C. rhetoric. We messed up and caused a problem, but now let us fix it. Maybe, this is the problem in our nation’s capital. We trust that long-term politicians, regardless of party, will make decisions that are in our country’s best interests. But could they simply be acting in their own best interests? Could they be only seeking re-election? Or possibly to reward people who have given them favors in the past? This is why I am a big supporter of term limits for Congress.

            When the Constitution was ratified, I believe their intention was to create a government which was comprised of citizens who wanted to serve their country after an established private life. Instead, we have many public servants who only have experience as politicians. For example, Eighteenth District Congressman (IL) Aaron Schock has only been in politics since his graduation from Bradley University in 2002. I’m sure that he is an intelligent man, but he has been afforded the benefits of being an elected Congressman virtually his entire adult life. I doubt that he can truly empathize with the struggles of the average working person. Mr. Schock is only one example, and we don’t have to look very far to find him.

            I feel that people in Congress should be limited to six years. Three terms for the House and one term for the Senate are reasonable limits to serve our country. This may begin to limit the cronyism that infects Washington. There is nothing wrong with going to D.C., try to help our country, and then going home to resume your family life. Maybe if they weren’t always looking to the next election, they could possibly make decisions that make our country better.

Writer's block

           So, I am dealing with some serious writer’s block this week. I’m not sure if it is because my first writing project is almost finished, but I’m struggling to come up with a subject. I probably could come up with something rather easily, if I just wanted to gripe about a topic. But I don’t want to waste all of my free choice weeks by complaining about something. It’s week #8, btw. Ironically, I was one who lobbied for the blog as a bigger part of our grade because I thought it would be easy to write a blog entry each week. I guess it is easier said than done.

 

            It gives me a new found respect for bloggers. Now, obviously not every blog is a gem, but there are some very good ones out there. Some bloggers even find a way to turn their hobby into a full-time, paying job. And any job that you can do while wearing Hello Kitty sweatpants is a good one. Plus, the best thing is you can find a topic that interests you and connect with other people who feel the same way. I remember back in my stay-at-home Dad days, I found a blog where this lady was going to use a different crock pot recipe, every day for a year. It takes a lot of creativity and research to come up with 365 crock pot techniques, and make them interesting. People blog about their life, kids, hobbies, or basically anything that is interesting to them. Informational or cathartic, it all depends on why you chose to start or where it takes you.

The iWorld? Thank God….oh, and Steve Jobs

In this week #6 text response blog, I will critique an article by Andrew Sullivan entitled, “Society Is Dead: We Have Retreated into the iWorld. My response: Give me a break! Seriously. And this isn’t the first time that I have heard this narrative lately. It’s usually from someone of the older generation, and it’s always the same argument. “These kids can’t communicate anymore because they are always focused on their phones.” It could be a sensible contention, but maybe communicating is exactly what they are doing. A teenager that sends 2000+ texts per month is obviously keeping in touch with a lot of friends, or in the least, one really great friend.

As far as society goes, do we really have a responsibility to be ready to chat with anyone who crosses our path, at the drop of a hat? Aren’t we entitled to have some time alone with our thoughts without being disturbed? I feel that my morning commute is a great time to listen to music in my car and get ready mentally for my day. However, if a person doesn’t have a car and they must use public transportation, then aren’t afforded that luxury. I’ve taken enough Chicago to Newark flights to know that most people want to be left alone and have their personal space. You don’t want chatty Cathy in the next seat.

I understand the inability to accept this new generation’s dependence on technology. But it’s here to stay, and it’s time to accept it. Would someone have the same aversion to a person who had their nose in a Steinbeck novel on the subway? Probably not. But we automatically assume that the person’s iPod has some sort of dreadful music playing. Nickelback or Creed, perhaps? Maybe the person is listening to Beethoven, or quite possibly, that Steinbeck on Audible. Ultimately, it’s up to the person to decide how we use technology.

If Mr. Sullivan feels that we have slipped into a cyber-world, he can certainly take out his earbuds and close his laptop on his next flight. United has a non-stop flight from Chicago to Beijing, and I’m sure his neighbor will have no problem testing his theory. It’s a 14 hour flight. Good luck with that.