Originally posted by: Craig234
You left out 'what's best for the world/human race'. I look at that, too. It's a combination of all of the above, though I look most at what's best for the world.
However, it's not that simple - for example, I think the US has a lot to offer the world as a leader in things like freedom compared to China or India, for example, and so often things that favor the US also favor the human race. However, the US's bad tendencies such as supporting terrorism in the lower American countries are a factor the other way.
Electing a Nixon gives us the horrific replacement of Allende by Pinochet and terror for a nation. Electing a Kennedy gave us the 'Alliance for Progress' to spread democracy.
The short-sighted might point to Pinochet and say he was 'good for America' by introducing Milton Friedman economic and good deals for American corporations. If that's the case, I'd put the global view ahead of the American one. On the other hand, Kennedy's policy was good for both America and the other nations.
The Republicans have made it clear they're a sort of global mafia for whom the 'US interest' is not 'enlightened' but rather the thug approach, e.g., disregard for international law when it gets in the way of 'interests'. They have myopically pursued the short-tem greed for our corporations without much regard for doing right, IMO.
Originally posted by: Craig234
You left out 'what's best for the world/human race'. I look at that, too. It's a combination of all of the above, though I look most at what's best for the world.
However, it's not that simple - for example, I think the US has a lot to offer the world as a leader in things like freedom compared to China or India, for example, and so often things that favor the US also favor the human race. However, the US's bad tendencies such as supporting terrorism in the lower American countries are a factor the other way.
Electing a Nixon gives us the horrific replacement of Allende by Pinochet and terror for a nation. Electing a Kennedy gave us the 'Alliance for Progress' to spread democracy.
The short-sighted might point to Pinochet and say he was 'good for America' by introducing Milton Friedman economic and good deals for American corporations. If that's the case, I'd put the global view ahead of the American one. On the other hand, Kennedy's policy was good for both America and the other nations.
The Republicans have made it clear they're a sort of global mafia for whom the 'US interest' is not 'enlightened' but rather the thug approach, e.g., disregard for international law when it gets in the way of 'interests'. They have myopically pursued the short-tem greed for our corporations without much regard for doing right, IMO.
Originally posted by: Eeezee
What's best for me is often what's best for the country. However, I always vote for what's best for the country. Bush cut my taxes (good for me) but inflated the deficit (bad for the country, and ultimately bad for me as well). I voted against Bush because he's bad for the country.