Iran Deal Riles Americans. Should It?

Last night, a group of countries reached a treaty with Iran to start working on its nuclear stuff.

Does it sound like I have no idea what happened last night?! That's because I don't have any idea what happened last night. Sure, I can parrot back news headlines and what my senators have to say about the deal; but could I explain it to a sixth grader? Not a chance. And I'm not alone.

Most people in the US are not foreign diplomats. Most people in the US are not nuclear engineers. Most people in the US know about foreign relations and nuclear treaties based only on what the media shows them.

This morning I woke up and on my Facebook Newsfeed one of my friends was calling Obama "a dangerous president" because of the deal we made last night. Another friend said that "our country is going downhill and now taking the rest of the world with it."

Really? Is that what you think based on your years of experience in the field? Or is that what the news channel that you decided to watch told you?

Our age of 24-hour news has made all of us "experts" and we all have our "expert opinions" that we try to shove down other people's throats on social media. I'm willing to bet that neither one of my friends who commented about Iran's nuclear program has any reason to think what they think other than "well, that's what a particular news channel said" or "well, that's what a particular senator who disagrees with the President said."

Come on, guys. Even if you "research" your opinions on foreign relations, how are you so arrogant to think that you know better than the people you put in office? Oh, you didn't vote for Obama? Well, tough cookies. You still put him in office. And if you think that reading a couple of articles about Iran's nuclear program makes you more qualified to form an opinion and create a plan than the President (regardless of his party), you're arrogant.

None of us know what exactly is going on in that program.
None of us can fathom what's at stake.
None of us should think that we know better than experts just because we watched a certain news channel.

The age we live in is showing just how quick we are to take sides and fight to the death for something we know nothing about. We know so little and yet we are so willing to put everything on the line to tell everyone how "much" we know and why everyone should agree with us.

A year ago, I "knew" that the guy I voted for was the bomb-diggety and I couldn't wait to rub it in the faces of people who lost the election. I was super-arrogant about everything, too. I am beyond grateful that I've been humbled to the point that I have realized just how little I know about everything that I was writing and fighting about last year. It's made me see how silly people who think that they're being "progressive" or "politically active" make themselves look so much of the time.

I believe in having opinions (obviously) and I believe in voting for the person you think will do the best job carrying out your opinions. But I do not believe in pretending to know anything about other countries' nuclear programs or anything where you have to go through years of specialized training to know anything about it.

This week is Thanksgiving. Instead of trying to provoke people into arguments and violence, put your arrogance down and be thankful--be so thankful--for the little that you do know.

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." --Gandhi 

Debate Rundown: What Undecided Voters Might See

The patriotic cupcakes I made!

Last night was the last presidential debate before the election. I threw a very cool party and, even though only a couple of people came, we had a great time.

In my opinion, the debate was alright. Foreign policy is not a popular topic, and I would venture to say that most people don't know a whole lot about it. I don't like the fact that this was the topic, because I feel like a lot of people were put off by it. I think the moderator could have done a much better job of keeping the candidates from going on tangents, but I think both of the candidates know that Americans are more familiar with domestic policy. I can't fault them for going back to it and trying to keep their audience engaged.

President Obama has a whole lot more experience in foreign policy than Governor Romney, and in my opinion it showed. It looked to me like Romney tried very hard to come to the middle, possibly upsetting some of his constituents, but a great tactic to use. He agreed with the president multiple times, but it just seemed to me that he was saying, "I like what you have done and I would have done the same thing, but I would have done it sooner."

I think Obama's one-liners got out of hand. While the "horses and bayonets" line was funny, I really think him saying, "The 80s called and they want their foreign policy back," was extremely childish. That is what teenage girls say about other girls' outfits (well, not now; the 80s are back!). It just seemed like something far beneath what the Commander-in-Chief should say.

Romney seemed like he was being a little bit like a teenage girl, as well, when he kept saying, "Attacking me is not explaining your policies," and then he turned around and attacked Obama. I mean, I agree with the fact that attacks are petty and childish, but both campaigns are doing it. I think they should both stop. I think it was a great strategic move by Romney to try to make it look like Obama was "attacking" him and he was a victim, but I think it just made Romney look like he was jealous of the prom queen.

I don't know anyone who is an undecided voter, but I want to share what I think I would see if I was an "undecided" and uninformed voter and watched the debates. I am trying to put myself in the undecided voter's shoes and put aside my biases. During my time working in the campaign office, it has become apparent that a lot of voters pick one or two issues and vote based on those issues alone.

I would like to preface this by saying that if you are an undecided voter and you feel that this is a misrepresentation of your views, it is not malicious or intentional.

Romney:

• Strong
• Good speaker
• Doesn't let people walk on him
• Has 5 points in his plan
• I'm still not sure about his math 
• Insincere
• Does he keep changing his views to get more of the vote?

Obama:

• Has 4 years of experience under his belt
• Has 5 points in his plan
• Going to make wealthy people pay more taxes
• Irritable
• Good speaker
• Charismatic
• Stays solid on his views

If I were undecided and uninformed, here is what I would think on certain issues:

Healthcare:

• Obamacare? Isn't that the same as Romneycare from Massachusetts?
• I don't want someone telling me what I can and can't do with my body--either way. I don't want Obamacare telling me what my government-funded healthcare is going to be, but I don't want Romney deciding how women's wellness check-ups and abortions will or will not be covered.
• What's a voucher system?

Economy:

• Romney is a businessman. He would be good at balancing a budget and bringing our country back to where it needs to be financially.
• Did Romney say that we should let the auto industry go bankrupt? Didn't the companies the government bailed out still file Chapter 11 bankruptcy before they got the bailout money?

Jobs:

• The unemployment rate is 7.8% nationally. It was 7.9% when Obama took office. Obama said he would get it to 5.4%. Was that possible? Should I trust his "arithmetic" on other issues, since this didn't work out?
• Obama saved tens of thousands of jobs in the auto industry. That's good.
• Obama wants to hire thousands of math and science teachers. Could be a good thing for teachers. What about other careers?

Gay Marriage:

• Obama supports gay marriage. Romney thinks each state should get to amend their constitutions to either support or deny gay marriage. Does this have anything to do with me at all? 
• Most of the people who don't approve of gay marriage say it's because it goes against their religious beliefs. What about separation of church and state? Shouldn't personal religious beliefs take a back seat to equal rights for all?

Education:

• Romney thinks that there shouldn't be teacher's unions. Does that mean that teachers could just get fired even if they'd been working for a long time? This would make teaching merit based, so maybe our teachers would get better.
• Obama wants to hire new math and science teachers to make sure we get closer to the top in terms of technology development. That's good, because we should stay the #1 country in the world.

Foreign Policy:

• Is Libya by Afghanistan?

Taxes:

• Isn't making wealthy people pay more taxes like socialism?
• I'm in the middle class; I can't afford to pay more taxes.
• Romney says he's going to cut taxes for everyone. How does that work without putting us in more debt?

This is obviously just my opinion on what undecided and uninformed voters might be thinking. But it's interesting, because if you look at it as an "undecided" voter might, it's a close race. I just want to say to the undecided voter, "Please do your homework!" Regardless of who you decide to vote for, know why you're voting for them. This is one of the most important elections of our lifetimes and we need to be informed citizens, using the freedom of democracy to our advantage.

If you need to become more informed, here are the two candidates' websites:

MittRomney.com

BarackObama.com

We have 14 days left until this election. Make it the best 14 days of the campaign. Make up your mind about who you want to vote for and then go campaign for them! Knock on doors, make phone calls, talk to people; and when you get tired, keep going.

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." --Gandhi