Bird fever is sweeping the nation. During the very first, eagerly awaited presidential debate – and even now, some days after – the economy and healthcare are nowhere near as ubiquitous as Big Bird.

The avian giant was brought into the political crossfire on Wednesday, when Mitt Romney said to Jim Lehrer, “I’m sorry, Jim. I’m going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I’m going to stop other things. I like PBS. I love Big Bird. I actually like you, too. But I’m not going to — I’m not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it.”

Responses to this statement have ranged from the very humorous to the visceral. Sometimes both. Bright yellow memes have cropped up and spread faster than any flu. Most of these feature the image of some unemployed version of the eight-foot giant. When a presidential candidate threatens the future of a beloved childhood icon, it’s not impossible to predict where the conversation is going to go.

To date, it has been ongoing. The participants in this conversation have not just been teenagers fooling around on Photoshop: PBS had choice words for Mr. Romney in a statement released shortly after the debate. So did the creators of Sesame Street, as well as different voices in circulations such as the Times. What could only have been a spur-of-the-moment example has set off some type of debate across different media spheres.

Romney’s reasoning seems off the mark when the numbers are considered. According to the Huffington Post, only one fifteenth of the federal budget goes to public broadcasting. And that small part only makes up seven percent of the overall costs for the show. That’s a very small percent. The rest is covered by licensing and sponsorships. The “public” in public broadcasting does not seem all that public in the larger picture.

It was a dent in what was decided to be a surprisingly good performance on the part of Romney. A bad example completely overshadowed what was meant to be an entirely different statement. Our economic debt with China is going to be Goliath for whoever it is that will have to make our future executive decisions. It goes back to the core disagreement between the candidates: How much should government be involved? And to that extent, how much should it invest in its citizens?

Next time though, Sesame Street should be kept out of it.

Image Courtesy of  Gage Skidmore

The article Election 2012: Big Bird Fever appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Contradicting Europe’s right-wing rise, the Danish Social Democrats have won the Danish Parliamentary election on September 15. The election have ended a decade of center-right majority in the Danish Parliament whilst electing their first female leader, Helle Thorning-Schmidt.

According to three polls released on the 14th September, voters were ready for a change as they prepared to cast their vote on the 15th, in order to elect the 179 members of Parliament. The Prime Minister in office Lars Loekke Rasmussen, who took over two years ago, replacing Anders Fogh Rasmussen who went on to be NATO Secretary General, was not taken too kindly by the Danish people as early voters cast their ballots and criticized his policies. Rasmussen lead a coalition composed of pro-market Liberals and Conservatives and was supported by the Danish People’s Party (DPP), a far-right and xenophobic party.

The election is expected to usher in the end of market reforms and strict border control, while the Socialist Democratic party will make a comeback as the majority leader in the Parliament, after 10 years in opposition.

Even though significant changes aren’t expected, Thorning-Schmidt, 44, hopes to protect the welfare system by raising taxes on banks and the rich and refrain from several austerity measures formulated by the government in order to avoid waves of contagion from debt-ridden countries. Altough Denmark did not hop on the Euro train, its economy relies on the export of national products to other European countries and its currency is subject to the uncertainty attached to the Eurozone.

According to a recent Associated Press interview, “We have a government that has believed that austerity was the right way to achieve more growth in Denmark,” Thorning-Schmidt said, “Austerity and tax cuts are not the right course for Denmark. What we want to achieve is to create more growth, kickstart the economy and then after that create the foundation for a new sustainable growth.”

The votes of Thurday’s election have been accounted for and resulted in a narrow win for the Social Democrats, with 92 seats, against the 87 seats won by Rasmussen’s coalition. Thorning-Schmidt must now manage a left-wing alliance consisted of former marxists, environmentalists, social democrats and liberals, who don’t see eye to eye in a small array of topics. There is some evidence of possible disagreement among the coalition parties. Margrethe Vestager, leader of the Socialist Liberal party, agreed to the austerity package presented by the previous government and is not backing away from that decision:

“We have made a deal which we believe is really good. It means that we will get more money in the chest and a sound economical starting point,” she said. Thorning-Schmidt’s toughest challenge has proved to be finding room in her Cabinet for the leaders of the Socialist Liberal Party and the Socialist People’s Party. According to political analyst Rune Stubager of the University of Aarhus “Her two coalition parties will try to almost tear her apart. The early retirement issue will be a big one for them to deal with.”

Hopefully, the election have created a turning point in immigration policy, as ten years of strict immigration and refugee legislation come to an end.

The article Denmark: The Right Step in the Left Direction appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.