Today, the fight against 'global climate change' rings with more political
credibility, especially with the new and progressive President Obama now in
U.S. office. And just as we can see the environmental movement using
language in order to share or argue against certain beliefs and
perspectives, it is also to oppose a manipulation in language to the
destruction of the environment. Both environmental activists and polluters
depend on the public impression for the furthering of their causes, and
this makes the discussion on environmental language a very crucial one if
we are to understand the psychological factors of the environmental
movement for the public. This is to say that in spite of some evidence
which has been available to us for some time, it is only now that public is
making note of this pattern.
This speaks to a point which drives my sense of urgency in contacting you.
Now is the time to seize on the public's...
In my estimation, only the government has the resources
and reach to make the case to the public that action is needed in terms of
both legislation and personal lifestyle change if we are to break the cycle
of abuse and excess that has defined our descent into global warming. It
is my belief that you have achieved your office based on the promise to
contend with these issues. I do hope that you will honor this commitment
by invoking it in others. I thank you so much for your time and
consideration with respect to this most pressing public crisis.
Regards,
Yet on April 15th, Biggert issued a press release that sounded almost 'Tea Party'-ish in its tenor: "Tax day is a grim reminder that every dollar of waste, every unnecessary expenditure, and every misspent penny comes out of the pocket of a working American." Given Biggert's prominent position on the influential financial services committee, the vehemence of her statement is striking. Biggert has also opposed the President's healthcare reform
This is just as important as having a president who is equally representative of the interests of each state. The Founding Fathers succeeded admirably in the area of state-based election of the president, but did they succeed in also ensuring we have a democratically elected president? Are public presidential elections really shams, leaving us with a president who is essentially appointed by political party favorites, or does he represent
Conclusion: The Benefits of a Third-Party Friendly System While both proponents and those in opposition to a two-party system have well-founded arguments, the third-party friendly system is the system that most makes sense in today's modern democracy. As presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama have made clear, the American people are ready for change. They are tired of the same old formula Republicans and Democrats, and they want to be
If it was a little bit of such impact, one could expect it, and discount it as normal aberration, but it is more than just a bit to relate it to forming a united front with other forces" (Ghandichi, 2003). Thirdly, the opposition is considered to be responsible for the lack of communication with the current administration. Better said, it can be argued that the opposition tries to defy by
The moderate wing of the Republican Party is rarely heard from in the national media, with the possible exception of U.S. Senator Susan Collins of Maine, who tends to side with Democrats when healthcare issues are on the brink of defeat and need that one last vote to pass. In the Republican National Committee (www.GOP.com) Website under "Issues" the GOP does not state a policy or a goal, but rather:
dominant American political parties [...] question: Do the two dominant American political parties serve the public's interest, or just their own upper class interests? How would you change the party system so that all are truly represented? AMERICAN POLITICAL PARTIES The founding fathers did not create the two dominant American political parties, Republican and Democrat, to serve their own interests; they were created as instruments of the people's political and personal