An Editorial on the first 2016 presidential candidate debate of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump

This is an editorial. The view expressed here do not reflect the views of PBN News Network, its employees, or ownership.They are attributable only to myself.

This will be a strange and unusual piece, as I myself am strange and unusual. Because I am a non-monolithic thinker, with concerns that matter not only to me, but to others in my constituency.

ATTENTION: This will not be a line by line, word by word, transcript of the debate. You can find that link here. Let’s talk about what wasn’t covered.

Okay, let me stop there for a moment. I am not going to go through every question. If you thought that was about to happen, you are mistaken. But I would like to look at a few things here.

First, what I would liked to see is a tiny bit more. Exactly, what parts of the “infrastructure” are we referring to here? Physical supports such as roads, bridges, and the like?

Are we also going to address the parks systems cascading closures and decimation by criminals invasion, poaching, and ecological theft by corporate robber barons? Is this mysterious “infrastructure” inclusive of small farmers as they struggle against Big Agriculture? Does it include railways, harbors, and brown field work? Curious Earth Huggers want to know.

This”job” question also bothers me. There has been a fundamental shift in how we view the labor in this country. The emphasis seems to be on the creation of holes into which we shove employees. In fact, workers sell their time to employers in a mutually agreed on goal of profit for both of them. That being said, how do these candidates propose we stop underhanded placing workers in the boat of people begging for the favor of working, and into the role of partners in economy?

AND are we going to address the erosion of the rights of individuals to gainful hire due to the recessive policies of neo-racist, anti-Pagan, and neo-traditionalist sexist policy makers on the state levels? These practices are also affecting those of alternative spiritualities, so it is of grave concern to me as a voter who falls into those groups. What protections will be put in place for those who are refugees that protect them in the workplace?

Family leave is also an issue. When we use the word family contextually in this debate, I sought clarification from any candidate that family means whatever form families look like today, not just the nuclear  ones in the text books from when we were young. Also, does that mean that the intersecting issues of birth rights and the medical industry’s control over women’s choices of service providers during pre and post natal services? What does this actually look like to a person on medical leave who cannot get unemployment, but cannot get food stamps either, and has a Medicaid coverage that will not cover her midwife and/or doula? What about Traditional Medicine, what role will it be given in these leaves and decisions?

Regarding college, where will the oversight come from that regulates the for profit collegiate machine with these plans for financial reform of tuition? What task force will be assigned to check campus sprawl and salary padding of huge nonprofit institutions of higher learning in urban areas.

Who are the gatekeepers of the interest rates and who is going to address the elephant in the room that forgiveness of those loans should be an option if they are crippling the economy and future of our coming generations? (Shout out to Motor City Muckraker)

What happened to the goal of college being attainable without having to mortgage a future? There need to be hard inquiries into where that money is spent and the salaries of those in places of authority in these institutions. What kind of life is it to go to school for the first third, spend the second third paying off the education of the first, and spending the remainder looking forward to retirement, a retirement mortgaged for our children for their loans?

When the issue of taxation arises, another issues is born of the discussion but ignored. If people are not gainfully employed, then where is the money you are taxing them coming from if not their own stores that provide them the means to live on basic necessities? Why is the EPA outlawing self-sufficiency and alternative green communities? And why is their power creeping backed by only the color of law in most cases? Why is it an Pagan collective herb farm that gathers rainwater and lives off the grid , or a front lawn garden in a city, are equally unacceptable when engaging in the practices of humanity since time recorded insofar as providing for themselves, but a threat to an entire river system can be jeopardized by a pipeline with silence from them?

We have a system where candidates can pointificate all they wish but not address the fact that states are taxing residents and not even providing the most essential services to the citizenry without hidden taxes and privatized service providers with virtually no oversight.

They tax, cut tax, retax, and continue this waltz with no actual accountability for those who cheat the system, manipulate the tax monies, and use the public trusts to appease lobbyists – the same lobbyists who they work for in the private sector when you retire from public life. They pander to the special interest representatives of the wealthy in hopes of trading in power and influence that will enrich them further. All while paying lip-service to the Reagan era legacy of financial bog that left us in ruins. All of this while paying no time to address the destruction of banking regulations.

Yes, this is what I would like to see when I turn on my television or monitor. I would like to see issues writ small, not just sweeping vistas of generalized sound byte button items. I want to see issues that matter to me as a citizen worker, mother, tree-hugger, Pagan, person of color, gender responsible person.

Too much?






%d bloggers like this: