The President is dead-on accurate with these comments. Colleges should be places of robust discussions – not places where only one side of an argument is allowed to be presented for fear of hurting the feelings of college students. In fact, more than “both sides” of the story should be presented. As we all should understand, each issue has many different “sides” and as many of those sides as possible should be presented to help give college students better perspectives on which to make their own decisions.

The New Reality is a medical thriller set not too far in the future (the year is 2080, though the story jumps to 2081 soon after it starts) with very real connections to today’s political world. As the story moves along, the reader is introduced to different characters situated on a global landscape ranging from America to the Arab states and more. For example, the main antagonist – Ari Lesmana, known as “the Malik” – seems to be born from the hype that surrounded President Barack Obama’s first presidential campaign. The main protagonist is a scientist and medical entrepreneur named Alex Pella who is cast in the same mold as a Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, or Jeff Bezos. During the story, Martino ties Lesmana to a citizenry with a near-brainwashed level of euphoric fanaticism. From my perspective, that connection closely followed the bizarre euphoria that followed Obama’s supporters after 2008. I never understood that – he’s just a politician, not the Second Coming. Calm down, people. Anyway…

Martino does an excellent job of bringing the reader into the panic that surrounds The Disease and, particularly, the desperation that Pella and his team feel as they try to find a cure before it’s too late. Unlike many recent releases in the thriller genre, The New Reality brings the reader a fast-paced, action-packed adventure that moves as fast as you can flip a page. There are no long, drawn out segments of the book to bore you to tears. Instead, Martino writes in a style closely resembling that of Dan Brown and Harlan Coben. And that is the style that this story needs to be told in because of the amount of movement that the characters experience during the story. One chapter takes place in America while the next chapter takes place in a high-tech, super-fast airplane while the following chapter might be in Israel or somewhere in the Arabian Peninsula. If you like reading a strong “thrill of the chase” novel that actually has a significant story to tell, then this is the one for you. And watch out for the storyline extension at the end of the novel – it’ll leave you hungry for the next book in the Alex Pella series!

The New Reality is the perfect book to read while you’re laying on the beach this summer, too. As I’ve noted, the story moves quickly and Martino moves the core discussion along in each chapter. You won’t be left waiting for dozens or hundreds of pages to find out why a certain character said something in a prior chapter – the answers are given to you as fast as you can read them and put the pieces together. Martino’s experience as a neurologist certainly plays into his ability to write a strong medical-based thriller. If you’re a fan of this genre, looking for a great book to read this summer, and/or just looking for a book that has characters with depth, a story with resonance, and a real lesson to teach today’s political leaders, then The New Reality is for you. Plus, based on the high level of quality in his first novel, I think we’ll be seeing more of Martino in the literary world. Give the Alex Pella story a shot – I really think that you will enjoy it. I definitely did!

• Governor Christie Is In Control. Thank God we have a leader like Governor Chris Christie in charge of New Jersey during this chaos. I don’t care if you’re a Republican or a Democrat, you have to respect the way that Christie took on this situation directly and without any delay. He warned people well in advance to get out of certain areas of the state. He is on-site managing cleanup and recovery efforts. He isn’t making stupid decisions like attempting to hold a marathon in the middle of the mayhem (a rare miss by New York City’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg). Christie is doing an amazing job for the state and I’m glad that we have him on the job during this time.
• The Governor Throwing Politics to the Side. Again, unlike some of his pathetic predecessors, I have to praise Governor Christie for his direct statements about President Barack Obama and the leadership that he showed during his visit. When a FOX News reporter asked Governor Christie about how he felt about potentially giving Obama a pre-election bump in the polls after thanking him during his visit, this is what Christie said: “I endorsed Mitt Romney 13 months ago because I thought he was the best guy for the job and on Tuesday I’m voting for Mitt Romney because I think he’s the best guy for the job. But it doesn’t mean that I can’t turn the President of the United States of American and say to him ‘Thank you, sir, for providing good leadership during this crisis and for helping the people of New Jersey,’ and to extend my hand of friendship to him.” Can you imagine a liar like Governor Jim McGreevey or Governor Jon “Money Bags” Corzine giving as direct and noble an answer as Christie did?
• The Immediate Post-Hurricane Shoppers. What I really don’t get about the aftermath of the hurricane are the people who stormed the grocery stores and left with wagons and wagons filled with food. First, didn’t these people do the same thing not but two days earlier when the entire state was in a panic over the pending storm? And if they did, then did they eat through a wagon (or two) filled with groceries in just two days? Stop eating so much! Second, if these people did not fill up their pantries and refrigerators prior to the storm hitting… why not?! What part of a major storm aiming directly for our state did you not understand? Get with the program, people!
• Staten Island is Decimated. I can’t believe the pictures and video coming out of Staten Island. Seriously, if you’ve not seen these pictures, then you need to do a Bing or YouTube search and you’ll see the devastation that I’m talking about. It’s absolutely unbelievable. I’m going to comb through some of my clothes to see if I can donate some of them to the people who lost everything in the storm.
• There Are Always Dumb People. If you live in New Jersey, then you’ve probably tuned in to NJ 101.5 at some point in the last week. I heard one called say that she was really upset that there was so much focus by the utility companies on the Jersey Shore region and not where she lived up in Northwest New Jersey where she was without power, too. Typically, I’m with this woman and I think that the people in Northwest New Jersey are often overlooked when it comes to government-regulated services. But what really irked me was what this idiot mentioned in her rant. She said that the utility companies were disregarding the people in her area because “we don’t live right on top of each other like it’s the Third World like they do down the shore.” What a moron. The hosts of the radio show were quick to tell her that what she thought was her biggest selling point – that the people in Northwest New Jersey live in a geographically dispersed region – was actually what was preventing the utilities from focusing on them. Anyone with half a brain realizes that these utility companies have to get power to the most people as quick as possible. So they’re obviously going to choose to restore power to those areas that are heavily populated versus those that are widely dispersed. I wanted to call in to this woman and tell her that if she was annoyed that this happened all of the time, then she should go out and buy a generator. Yes, if you live out in the woods (like all of my family does and like I would like to do again some day), then you should be prepared to buy a generator for situations like this one. Get real, idiot.
• We’re a Strong, Hardy People. The populations of New Jersey and New York are strong. We’re a tough people, a hardy people. We’re the American versions of the British mentality of keeping a stiff upper lip. In other words, as soon as it was safe to go outside and start cleaning up and helping people recover their lives, we began working. Companies opened, neighbors helped neighbors once the power came back on, people began donating old clothes and other items in mass quantities, congregations began organizing food drives. This part of the Northeast megalopolis is packed with tough, stern individuals. We relish being challenged. We love overcoming adversity. We typify the American angst and, frankly, anger at being put off of our various courses in life. When things get bad, the New Jersey/New York population digs in fights back. This entire area will come back stronger for the effort.

I was conflicted on whether or not to add a final thought in a final bullet point up there. The final thought relates to my last sentence in these bullet points about coming back stronger for the effort. I’m not entirely sure that we should be planning to come back in the same form or with the same function as we were before the storm hit. Let’s be honest – when the people who were living below sea-level down in New Orleans were obliterated during that storm, there were voices from throughout the nation saying that they should not be rebuilding in those low-lying areas that are prone to destruction. The same chorus can be heard each year when parts of the Gulf States and Florida, in particular, get battered by hurricanes.

That same thought is running through my mind in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. Should we rebuild everything as it was or should we rebuild things differently? If you think we should rebuild things differently – how so? What should be different?

Other than additional reinforcement of some of our structures, I don’t know what could have been done to protect against a storm of that nature. I’m interested in your thoughts, so please share them!

Pretty entertaining if you ask me. I hope you enjoyed the video!

With this entry, I’d like to kick off my comments about this year’s Presidential election by providing you with some official comments on what each campaign thinks about “my issue” – that is, what they think about student loans.

From the Obama website (the Obama website bashes Romney quite a bit; that low-level partisanship crap is not carried over here):

By doubling funding for Pell Grants and establishing a college tax credit, President Obama is putting higher education within reach for millions more Americans.

President Obama successfully fought to prevent federal student loan interest rates from doubling for more than 7 million students, and capped federal student loan repayments at 10% of income. This means responsible students and their families can make decisions about the future based on career goals rather than the price of tuition.

From the Romney website:

Higher Ed: A New Vision Of Affordable And Applicable Learning

America’s traditional community and four-year colleges are the heart of our nation’s higher education system. However, a flood of federal dollars is driving up tuition and burdening too many young Americans with substantial debt and too few opportunities. Meanwhile, other models of advanced skills training are becoming ever more important to success in the American economy, and new educational institutions will be required to fill those roles. Mitt’s reforms spur the access, affordability, innovation, and transparency needed to address all of these challenges:

• Strengthen And Simplify The Financial Aid System.
• Welcome Private Sector Participation Instead Of Pushing It Away.
• Replace Burdensome Regulation With Innovation And Competition.

There are additional comments on each website regarding the candidates’ educational plans and the Obama website also gives additional details, separately, about his plan. However, Obama’s website goes well out of its way to bash and mischaracterize his opponent. It’s really disheartening that the President of the United States would rely on old school, bash-based politics for his re-election campaign – especially after tens of millions voted for a politician in 2008 who promised hope for the future and change from that type of politics.

Oh well, I guess that hope and change guy from 2008 wasn’t being entirely truthful about what type of change we had in store!

All of that aside, the takeaway that I get from reading the two blurbs above is that neither of these candidates are speaking directly to my concerns about student loans. Sure, they are talking about making college more affordable, but that’s really a false issue. Think about it – why do you think the cost of higher education keeps skyrocketing? It has nothing to do with the salaries of professors or staff (despite what you might hear). The truth is that colleges are in a cutthroat race against each other to provide higher levels of service and better, more modern facilities. And neither of these candidates has a solution that addresses that problem because, frankly, it’s not a concern that should be handled at the federal level!

You may be wondering, “Then what would be a good answer for you on this topic, Joe?” Well, I’ll tell you! I don’t want to hear about the cost of higher education decreasing because of higher federal subsidies. No. Instead, I want to hear that good, honest, decent students who academically perform in a remarkably successful manner while attending a public high school will be offered a path to a reasonably affordable bachelor’s degree in the public higher education system. What does that mean? It means that if you score at the highest levels of your high school class, then there ought to be a program for you to receive a dramatic tuition reduction (if not just free tuition) to attend the local county college for two years. Once you complete those two years, if you maintain that high level of academic achievement, then the same financial benefit (either dramatically reduced tuition rates or free tuition) should carry over to a four year public institution.

In this scenario, you can receive a college education at almost no cost, so long as you bust your butt in the classroom to earn it. As a guy who has been a student on-and-off for 30 years and as a guy who has taught in several different types of classrooms, I can tell you that there just aren’t that many students who would qualify for this type of program. So why not offer this program – and do it at the state level without getting the federal government involved – starting immediately? New Jersey used to have this type of program, but it was gutted and I don’t think it’s in existence any more.

When it comes to student loans – there isn’t much substance on either side of the election thus far.

The message here is obvious, right? If you’re Catholic, then you should probably vote for the candidate that will support religious freedom as defined by not forcing religious institutions to provide contraception to their employees. Like it or not, I agree with that stance. I think if you’re a registered, recognized religious organization (Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, Wiccan, whatever!), then you are protected by the Constitution’s guaranty of religious freedom. Further, I think if the government tells you that you have to do anything that is fundamentally against your teachings, then the government is wrong.

I have no interest in going into details on the other issues noted in the video such as the job creation, the economy, the definition of marriage (my take on this particular issue is totally out of view with the mainstream anyway since I don’t think the government should be saying anyone is “married”), and so on. However, I do think the overall message of the video is one that religious folks should consider during this election cycle and all election cycles: do you vote according to what is popular or do you seriously consider the issues and vote according to your faith?

Most folks would assume that voting your faith means that you’re going to vote Republican. Well, that’s not entirely accurate. In some parts of this country, the education reform movement is bolstered and supported by the Democratic Party and thus if you vote your Christian faith (or whatever faith you are) you may be persuaded to vote Democrat. Further, if you are of a new age Christian faith where your interpretation of the Bible redefines marriage and the structure of civil society, then you’re probably also voting Democrat.

The point here is two fold. First, I like that the video encourages religious people to consider what their faith teaches them about the issues of the day. Second, don’t be so quick to assume that integrating a faith-based perspective into politics automatically means a vote for the Republicans or the Democrats.

Give it some thought. If you believe in something greater than yourself that is of a religious nature, then maybe this is the year that you want to let your faith be your guide.

Though I don’t think it’s necessary, I don’t mind citing who I voted for in the prior presidential elections. In 2000 I didn’t vote (and I couldn’t tell you why – I honestly don’t remember), in 2004 I voted for George W. Bush, and in 2008 I voted for Obama. The reason I voted for Bush in 2004 is because he was the right man for the job at that time and his competition (Senator John Kerry from Massachusetts) just wasn’t the man to be President. Similarly, the reason that I voted for Obama was because he was the right man for the job. The difference between my vote for Obama and my vote for Bush was that Bush was ready for the job and Obama was a little green under the collar. However, I thought that with the cast of characters surrounding Obama (Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, etc) that he would be able to cobble together a decent first year, learn about executive leadership while on the job, and then have an outstanding second, third, and fourth years in office.

As an independent observer, I can’t honestly say that the past four years have been good ones for Obama or for the country.

The root of the problem for the last four years is an executive leadership team (headed up by Obama) who refuse to take blame for the bad things going on in the country. They point to prior administrations and say the bad things are their fault, not the fault of the current administration. That argument may have worked during the first days, weeks, and months of the administration, but at some point you bought the farm and its lack of crops is your fault. Obama and his advisors don’t seem to get that simple fact of management – that at some point you can no longer point behind you and say, “This is all their fault.”

So I look at a guy like Obama – a guy who doesn’t understand leadership and doesn’t understand the economy and there’s no way I can see myself voting for him again. His Presidency will go down as one of the most mediocre, if not fiscally atrocious, ones in the modern era.

And then I turn and look at a guy like Mitt Romney and I want to put my fist through the wall.

Really, Republicans? Really? This is the guy you chose to run against Obama? Good grief.

When I look at Romney I see what the man is – a very rich, northeastern businessman who dabbled in politics for a little while and has been running for President since 2007. He made a ton of money as an investor before he became a politician and that doesn’t bother me at all. Good for him. I hope everyone has an opportunity in their lives to make the type of money that Romney made. Granted, not everyone will seize that opportunity or even be presented with that type of opportunity in the first place, but I don’t begrudge anybody on this planet their success or their natural environment. In other words, if you’re born into a rich family like Romney, then I don’t hold that against you. If you choose to flaunt that wealth like it’s your own (think Paris Hilton and the crew of morons that she hangs around with), then I think you deserve the near-unanimous scorn that you get from the public.

Romney might have been born into money, but he made a ton more money on his own and I don’t hate him for that success.

What I find absolutely shocking, though, is that the Republican power brokers decided to make this man the presidential nominee when his core life experience doesn’t speak – at all – to the group of Americans who are most upset with the Obama administration. If you look at the folks out there who are disenfranchised by and upset with Obama’s performance, then you’d see that they are mostly middle class people who live in the heartland of American. Sure, some of the liberal-leaning people from the far West and East Coasts are also fed up with Obama’s inability to lead and fundamental dislike of the capitalist economy, but you can’t talk to the fringes of the disenfranchised and expect that to ignite the type of fire that can throw a sitting President out of office. And that’s what the Republicans did by selecting Romney – they chose a guy whose life experience is cut from a different cloth than the type of people who want Obama out of office. They chose a rich guy who has absolutely no idea what it’s like to struggle financially, what it’s like to not be able to find a job, what it’s like to have seemingly insurmountable bills piling up week after week, month after month.

Did the Republicans have to pick a “common man” to be their nominee in order to beat Obama? Not necessarily. They should have, however, picked a guy who at least speaks to the common man’s experience in America. That’s not Mitt Romney. At all.

The bottom line is – do you think Romney would be a better leader than Obama and I think the answer is a simple, unenthusiastic “yes.” The man was a wild success as a businessman/investor and a good executive-level politician. That’s it. He’s got the charisma of a wet noodle and is about as endearing as a bruise that won’t go away.

Where that leaves me this November is in an uncertain place. In good conscience, I can’t vote for Obama again. Aside from lying during the campaign (remember the line that no one making less than $250,000 would see their taxes go up? Yeah – then we got the myriad hidden taxes to pay for his healthcare law… liar), he’s just not grounded in the realities of this economy. However, my gut tells me that Romney isn’t the right man for the job. He has no connection to the disgruntled voter base and simply doesn’t understand what it’s like to be a regular, working class or struggling person in today’s America.

It’s a shame that there isn’t a strong third party in America because this is the election where they’d see major success. You have the Libertarian party running former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, but they aren’t given any coverage by the media. There’s always the chance that a guy like Ron Paul could launch an independent candidacy and challenge both Obama and Romney, but that would just about secure the reelection of Obama and I don’t think Paul wants to do that at all. Or, you could just not vote this time around, but I prefer to actually vote because you get a chance to vote for the “undercard” including state and local elections (where, I think, a person’s votes actually matter).

Not sure who I’ll vote for this November, but a third party looks more exciting than either of the big two candidates. All I know for sure is that I absolutely cannot vote for Obama again.

The reason why I’m not interested in watching Barack Obama continue to be the “leader” of this country is because the man has very poor leadership skills. And don’t think I’m flattered with the Republicans, either. When I look at the national, elected Republican leadership I can’t help but shake my head while thinking, “Mitch McConnell and John Boehner are the best that this party can do?”

The economy is in the dump because, in part, the leadership qualities of our nation’s leaders are even further in the dump.

Enjoy!

After you’re done reading them, I think you’ll understand why New Jersey’s Democratic leaders are actively working to hurt the progression of the political discourse in this state. And yes, I’m saying that even after the Governor scolded that bum Tom Moran from the Star-Ledger for being too thin skinned. Speaking in real terms like the Governor does is one thing, but being obstructionists like New Jersey’s Democrats are should be completely unacceptable to New Jerseyans.

Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky – “Fulfilling our duty to advise and consent on a nomination to this office requires a thorough process, not a rush to judgment.”  (Politico)

v.

“This nomination will not be taken up by Senate Judiciary Committee.”  (Senator Sweeny Press Release) – Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney, D-Gloucester/Cumberland/Salem

House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio –  “Solicitor General Kagan deserves a fair hearing on her qualifications.”  (Cong. Boehner Press Release)

v.

“I hope what the Senate does is actually leave it vacant…”  (Daily Record) – Assembly Majority Leader Joseph Cryan, D-Union

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah – “I…look forward to actively participating in the confirmation process.”  (The Washington Post)

v.

“Regardless of her qualifications, she’s not going to get a hearing.”  (NJ.com)  – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Nicholas Scutari, D-Union

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa – “I expect Elena Kagan to receive fair, respectful and deliberative consideration. The Constitution gives the Senate a tremendous responsibility to carefully review the President’s nominees to the Supreme Court.” (CNN)

v.

“There is absolutely no way we’re going to have a hearing, and no reason we should.” (Associated Press) – Sen. Raymond Lesniak, D-Union

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama – “I look forward to learning more about Ms. Kagan through this process.” (CNN)

v.

Sarlo said he fully supports Senate President Stephen Sweeney’s position on not granting a hearing to the Governor’s nominee.  (Senator Sarlo Press Release) – Senator Paul Sarlo, D-Bergen/Essex/Passaic

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Arizona – “I congratulate Ms. Kagan on her nomination to the United States Supreme Court.” (CNN)

v.

Said Patterson should withdraw her name. (NJ.com) – Sen. Raymond Lesniak, D-Union

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina – “I intend to be fair and firm in my questioning of the nominee. The hearings can be a valuable public service as they give us a window into the nominee’s judicial philosophy and disposition.” (CNN)

v.

Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney today said he will not authorize confirmation hearings for Governor Christie’s nominee to replace Associate Supreme Court Justice John Wallace.

(Senator Sweeny Press Release) – Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney, D-Gloucester/Cumberland/Salem