Does anyone know about this? Help the Hikers!

Ten Months ago three American hikers Sarah Shourd, Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal accidentally crossed the the mountainous border from Kurdistan into Iran; this past July. Upon crossing the border, which the Americans said was by accident, the Iranian police took them into custody. They have been detained in an Iranian prison for over ten months now. Two of the Americans Shane and Sarah had been studying Arabic and teaching English when they decided to do some hiking in northern Iraq. No none told them however, that this beautiful mountain kingdom in Kurdistan was only 5 miles from the Iranian border, and there was no markings or border control. Upon being taken into custody they were blindfolded and interrogated harshly being suspected as American foreign agents. They were kept in serious isolation for the first few months, but this isolation lessened as time went on. According to sources two of them are now suffering from physical ailments and they are obviously suffering from some pshycological damage at this point. Why have these hikers not gotten the attention they deserve? In other cases when more wealthy and better connected Americans have been taken hostage in North Korea or Iran, it is serious news. Yet for these three people have criticised them calling them "morons" for walking in a war zone. Personally, I applaud their adventurous spirit as it is of the utmost importance that people in Kurdistan and those living in the other parts of them Middle East get exposure to what worldly Americans are like. These hikers are helping to breakdown stereotypes about Americans and are showing that they aren't afraid of meeting people of different cultures. Kurdistan is the safest place in Iraq for Westerners, and it was not their fault they crossed the border into Iran. I imagine it would be hard to be sure where your going in that type of mountainous enviorement. We need the media to pay more attention to these hikers who are being held against their will!

Sarah Palin is Not a Femnist. You betcha!!

So Palin has decided to jump into the and as usually she has some great political insights."It is time for Americans across this great country to stand up and say 'We're all Arizonans now and, in clear unity, we say Mr. President, do your job secure our border" Palin

It is clear Sarah Palin has taking on a role of political leadership in the United States. Many listen to her and what she has to say, whatever that might be.Is Palin someone we want to be a leading female political voice?

Her 2009 novel Going Rogue became a national best seller. She appears at many rally's, commentates on television and is potentially going to run for office in the national sphere. What makes her qualified? When John McCain choose her as the Vice Presidential candidate subsequently throwing her into the national political arena did he really know who she was or what she stood for? As her popularity is growing with Americans, especially those dedicated to the Tea Party movement. Is Sarah Palin really a voice worthy of speaking for American and more importantly is she a good representation of women in politics?

We all know the awkward rhetoric rambling Palin that ran with McCain in 2008. We saw her family, her pregnant teenage daughter, her Christain values, etc...


Sarah Palin is not going to be good for American Women. Here are just four reasons why I think so. Women have been discriminated against for a long time in American society and Sarah Palin does not really help the matter.

1. She has supported abstinence only sex education programs in saying in the 2006 gubernatorial race "Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support."
Abstinence worked out really well for her daughter.

2. She is against a woman's right to choose. She once said " I'd oppose rape even if my own daughter was raped." She would make the choice for her own daughter despite the fact she was brutalized.

3. She is not an advocate for women who are victims of assault. In fact she made
women in Wasilla pay for their own rape kits!




Palin said when she was resigning from being Governor of Alaska "Life is about choices!" Women and Men can make a choice and stop giving her any credence in the political sphere. Women have struggled to advance in politics, Olympia Snow, Hillary Clinton, Condeleza Rice, Susan Collins, Nancy Pelosi or Madeline Albright to name a few but women like Sarah Palin will do more damage for American women in politics than the a 100 Snow's or Albrights. Bottom line Sarah Palin is not good for American Women.

Top senators introduce comprehensive energy bill

On Wensday Senator Lieberman and Senator Kerry introduced a new bill aimed at bettering the environment and pursuit of renewable energy. The bill is aimed at cutting American greenhouse emissions by half and helping reduce Amercian foregin energy dependence for oil. This bill is looking promising with the support of President Obama and many well known memebers guiding into the senate.
Senator majority leader Reid opposed the bill because he would like to see the issue of immigration to be top priority.This statement caused some senators to back out of drafting proposal, most notable is Senator Graham of Soth Carolina. Supporters of the bill that any more postponment of making renewable energy a priority will result in the U.S loosing out in the competitive renewable energy market and will keep sending more and more money overseas.
The Bill also calls for more clean coal and nuclear energy. Senator Kerry says the bill would give consumers back two-thirds of the proposal's revenue that isn't dedicated to deficit reduction. The bill is aimed at pointing America in the rite direction by giving incentives to coal companies to clean it up and other industries so that we can maintain a low carbon system.Obama say th bill wil prodoce job defecit and help us compete more in the global economy.The bil leads the way for other countries to see how we need to reduce harmful emmisions because our climate is changing and some of these changes are really extreme like the melting of the ice caps.
This bill in my eyes is awesome. I am a strong believer in alternative energy because there is only so much oil in the world and we are consuming so much of it fastly. Our air is becoming polluting along with water sources. Things need to be done or over the next one hundred years our planet is not going to be sustainable to our population because we destroyed our environment,used up the oil, polluted the air to the point that it is heating up the earth and causing major climate change.We need to lead the way in demonstrating more concern for the environment and I hope this is the first step in many more to come so we can make the world cleaner and sustainable

Arizona bans ethnic studies in public schools

Another stunning step in Arizona's crackdown on immigration and ethnic tensions. Lawmakers recently made it illegal for public schools to teach classes that promote resentment of an ethnic group. This law aims to end classes designed for a particular ethnic group and classes that advocate for overthrow of the US government or resentment of a race. The bill was proposed primarily to end a Mexican-American studies class that teaches Mexican students they are an oppressed minority.
This decision comes on the heels of Arizona's recent immigration law. In that legislation police are instructed to question the citizenship of people who are likely to be illegal immigrants. Realistically, who's most likely to be an illegal immigrant in Arizona? That law has drawn widespread, international criticism. It's led to a boycott of contracts with Arizona-based companies and a potential supreme court challenge. Arizona has reacted to its problems in a way many other people simply don't agree with.
I happen to be one of those people. I understand the sentiment behind this new bill. Nobody wants a violent, ethnicity-based revolution in this country. But in reality what damage could this class do? We're supposed to produce critically-thinking, well-rounded students. The Arizaona bill aims to end ethnic tension and limit insurrection in this country, but what's the real threat in that? It comes not from ethnic hostilities but economic, religious, and social fractures.
Where does this restriction end? Are women not an oppressed class historically? What about teachers who want to explore the Communist Manifesto? It advocates violent revolution, but defined the world for half a century. I'm troubled by Arizona's increasing willingness to trample precedents of tolerance and liberalization in the name of state security and legal immigration. The spirit of Arizona's actions can be dfended, but not their manifestation or the rationale used to permit it.

Senate OKs 'too big to fail' bank amendment

I was very pleased when I read this article. With many months gone by since the big government bailout I was happy to see some new measures put into effect with all the talk and no action. On Wednesday may 5 the senate voted 93-5 approving a bipartisan deal to unwind big financial firms that are considered too big to fail. This deal drops a tax on banks that would have funded fifty billion dollars that regulators could have picked into to aid failing banks. The new plan calls for banks to be taxed so they pay for banks after a collapse and not the taxpayers.

This makes me happy because that was my biggest concern. I wanted the banks and big corporations to pay not the middle class man. An amendment that I am particularly fond of was also purposed by Senator Shelby which would impose stricter rules already in place to keep managers and bank directors who have a history of recklessness from obtaining future jobs in the financial sector. This shows me that we are also trying to prevent another collapse instead of just putting a band aid over it.
Republicans had a couple concerns such as that the democrats have given regulators to much discretion in paying back creditors. Another republican concern was that the bill did not do a sufficient job in reining in the emergency lending powers that both the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit of Insurance Corp. have to prop up banks in trouble.

There are talks of trying to tighten up some of the language in the bill and maybe amend a few things but I believe this is a giant a giant step in the right direction from what the market has been thru. Republicans and democrats will always differ but at least bill’s are being passed and something is being done instead of arguing. I am pleased and I think there is much more good to be done to clean up the mess.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/news/economy/Senate_Wall_Street_Reform/index.htm

Obama debates offshore drilling

Just one month after officially announcing plans to use offshore drilling for domestic oil production, Obama has made a visit to the gulf coast to examine the damage that the a recent oil spill caused. Last week BP PLC a major oil provider had a spill off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico that has already caused billions and damage and the bill is growing. Obama said in a speech at ground zero of the spill that his plans for offshore drilling will be put on hold pending a report of what caused the spill and if there was any way to prevent it. This is coming due to large pressure from activists and legislatures alike. Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida said that he would file legislation that would put a hold on any measures put forward by the administration to halt their plans for offshore drilling including any seismic testing. This is a major blow to the administration’s plans who last month although acknowledging the need for new types of renewable homegrown energy also said it is essential to build up traditional forms of energy in order to keep the economy growing. “"The bottom line is this: Given our energy needs, in order to sustain economic growth and produce jobs, and keep our businesses competitive, we are going to need to harness traditional sources of fuel even as we ramp up production of new sources of renewable, homegrown energy.” I agree that a full report of the oil spill and what could have been don’t to prevent it is essential, we also need to continue our research into offshore drilling. Just because BP PLC was careless in the way they transported their oil doesn’t mean we have to stop something that will be a major blow to the economy. I believe we need to cut our foreign dependence on oil and find our own ways into creating renewable energy. Finding a way to provide homegrown renewable energy isn’t something that can be done quickly and we need traditional energy sources at this time to eventually get to our goal of going green. Once the report is submitted to Obama by Ken Salazar at the end of this month and it confirms that BP PLC was careless and its not something that oil companies as a whole are doing wrong I think our research into offshore drilling should continue so that eventually we can become a nation that is not dependent on foreign oil because if certain countries have this power over us they can use it to whatever advantage they deem necessary. Which could be a major problem for the United States and its people and could throw the economy into an even bigger pickle then it already is.


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/03/oil-spill-could-sap-appetite-for-obamas-offshore-drilling-plans/?iref=allsearch&fbid=s1UVAA22EsE

For the greater good

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/us/politics/26wind.html?ref=politics

Now, I was a little upset when reading this article considering our location. New England is home to four seasons, lush forests, skiing, mountains, rivers, lakes and the ocean. In order to protect this from climate change, the United States needs to reduce our need on foreign oil considering we use somewhere in the ballpark of 20 percent of the total world oil usage, while producing around 2%. In the works for the past nine years has been a plan to add a wind farm to the east coast, to be specific, off the coast of Cape Cod. This wind farm would produce 130 wind turbines in Nantucket Sound around 5 miles from the coast and would be around 24 square miles total. This farm goes right along with President Obama's plans to create cleaner energy, will create jobs and reduce our need for foreign only, if only a little at first.
My issue after reading this article is with the selfish individuals who oppose this plan for their own personal reasons. Many argue that it would hurt the view from historic sites. If that is their argument, then that rules out any wind farms along the East Coast considering our long history. My other issue with this argument is that historic sites are important because of what happened there, not what happened 5 miles out to sea. If they want to use the sea argument, say it will hurt the view, but they did not say that.
I was also a bit disappointed when I learned that Senator Ted Kennedy opposed this plan. For those of you who may not know, the Kennedy family has a home in Hyannis, Cape Cod. I feel that for the greater good of not only the economy, but the environment as well, people should give up their personal preferences of having a nice view from their beach front home. To be honest, I just don't get it because we do not complain about seeing tankers at sea from the coast even though they look ugly and dark, while polluting the oceans. So I guess that since I don't like the sound of airplanes, I am going to fight against airports across the United States even though it helps and services millions of people across the globe daily.
It is about time that people in the United States put aside their personal preferences for the greater good of the world and the economy. We are talking about a view here, a view! Come on. It is not like we are opening a military base out of US territory so that we can bypass any Constitutional protection for individuals or to blatantly disregard human rights. Just saying. I hope that on Friday, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar makes the decision to push this further.

Climate Change and Immigration Reform, Which Road To Take?

Senator Lindsey Graham has just stepped out of talks on climate change legislation, according to a new CNN article. This article shows how quickly immigration reform has become a huge hot button issue against the backdrop of the Governor of Arizona signing a bill that allows police officers to in essence racially profile, but according to the article "will allow local police to stop individuals suspected of being illegal immigrants". What exactly this means is still being hashed out as media pundits, police, governors, senators, and more from both sides have started clashing. One thing this does mean is that climate change legislation which was presumably next on the agenda after bank reform, is now going to be a little less pressing. After all, global warming is will still be there to tackle after all the protesters are removed and anyone "who might be an illegal immigrant" has been accosted. It is most unfortunate that this issue tops the agenda right now just because it has become a lightning rod nationally. Climate change can be dealt with concurrently with immigration reform, or perhaps we could simply wait until entire regions are under water before we start truly getting on board with the rest of the world in their efforts to halt globally significant changes in our environment. It is time that we start thinking globally and stop allowing ourselves to be brought into the "us against them" argument. We need to find global solutions to global problems, and cooperation and diplomacy will help us in this endeavor. Perhaps if illegal aliens had better living conditions, education, and opportunities in general, they would not be entering the United States in the first place? I am not saying that it is our obligation to provide these things to other nations, however if it is in our own interests to improve conditions elsewhere and it helps a neighbor, why not look at cost effective ways we can do so? The last time I checked, there was not an overabundant threat of immigrants flooding in from Canada, but then again they have excellent public education, healthcare, economic stability, and infrastructure. This may be a coincidence, but at least it warrants further review.

Don't Ask

President Obama has been under heavy fire as of recent for not stepping up to the plate and changing the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy that is currently instilled as our nation's military protocol with homosexuals; a change that he vowed to make during his campaign and then reiterated in his State of the Union Address earlier this year.
I'm very split on this issue. As a member of the New Hampshire Army National Guard, and a future member of the U.S. Army, I've spoken with several NCOs and other members who feel that changing the policy will have great affect to the chemistry of the military.
Repealing the policy will inevitably result in hundreds of soldiers, both male and female, coming out into the open. This doesn't worry me. As someone who serves, I don't care whether the soldier next to me is gay, straight, male, female, black, white, purple, it doesn't matter. What does worry me is how they will be treated by other soldiers and the possible fall out that could ensue. You get all of these non-military gays and lesbians crying for the change in policy, when maybe those who are in the military don't want the change. Maybe they don't want to be looked at as being gay, but just as being a soldier. The military isn't stopping the enlistment of gays or lesbians, more than it is just turning the cheek.
There may come a time when our country will clear itself of its ignorance, and a man will be able to serve next to a man regardless of sexual orientation. But I don't think that that time is upon us, and forcing this rule change will only hurt those who currently serve or are trying to serve.


http://www.myfoxny.com/dpps/news/dpgonc-obama-committed-to-repealing-dont-ask-dont-tell-mh-20100421_7175819

Patriots' Day 2010

On April 19th, 2010 Second Amendment protesters hit the streets to advocate their right to bear arms. Though some accuse that the day is in honor of the anniversary Oklahoma City bombing, the advocates argue strongly that statements like that are an insult. The protesters are in fact rallying in celebration of Patriots' Day. The protests are not party fueled, however there tended to be much more conservative and Tea Party support.

The mostly male protesters were advocating firearm freedom, but made clear that they were not in support of armed violence. Their real message was to get real "fighters" into office this November. The target of the protesters was to not only to get rid of Democrats but also of what they call RINOs (Republicans in Name Only) However, many groups held "open carry rallies" where they openly displayed their firearms. Many of these people were not happy with the current government and were mainly afraid that their Second Amendment rights were in jeopardy.

With every rally, you cannot forget the radical ideas that are also being conveyed. Larry Pratt, President of Gun Owners of America quotes that,

"They are coming for our freedom, for our money, for our kids, for our property. They are coming for everything because they are a bunch of socialists."

Rep. Paul Broun, R-Georgia, quotes,

"we must declare war against oppression and against socialism, and you are the people to do that."

These views however, cannot be attributed to the entire Second Amendment rally. Many people simply fear that with the powerful institute of government growing every year (IE health care, bailouts, etc.) they don't want it to interfere with an industry that they feel protects their general well-being.


This story was originally from:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/19/second.amendment.rally/index.html?npt=NP1

Obama or Palin in 2012?

In a recent poll conducted by CNN President Obama would beat Sarah Palin if the presidential election were held today. Not only would President Obama defeat Sarah Palin but he has an 8 to 12 point edge on any of the three other possible candidates for the GOP which includes Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Newt Gingrich. These results cannot be taken too seriously however because the poll at this point reflects more name recognition than anything else. Many of you may be thinking that Sarah Palin is out there in the media and might be just as well known as Obama so is it really name recognition or is it that many Americans just don’t agree with her on issues. In that very same poll of 1,008 adult Americans, 61 percent of them voted that Palin was unlike most other politicians, 54 percent say they don’t agree with her on the issues, and 56 percent say she is not a strong and decisive leader. With all these statistics swirling around and working against the former Alaskan governor it is strange to consider that she is the most well known republican considering a run for the presidency and taking back the oval office from Obama and the democrats in 2012. With this information out there, 69 percent still believe she is not qualified to be president and have her losing to Mitt, Mike, and Newt in the next quest for the GOP presidential nomination. I personally think anyone who would even consider voting for Sarah Palin for president of the United States is not an educated voter. She barely has the competency to run for the PTA at a school never mind be the leader of the free world. Her lack of knowledge and experience especially in the area of foreign policy makes you wonder how so many Americans would even consider her to be vice president or president ever. She quit her job as Alaskan governor during the middle of her term, a job which she wasn’t even qualified for to begin with. This is the woman who didn’t know the difference between North and South Korea, and the very same women who repeatedly blamed Saddam Hussein for 9/11. Her lack of knowledge in foreign affairs shows that she cannot handle being the leader of a superpower such as the US. She can’t just expect that her patriotic and “down home gal” attitude is enough to run this country. It is a problem when a person like her is establishing a niche of followers like with the Tea Party. Her lack of foreign policy experience is scary. She doesn’t even care what other countries are doing. She just hopes for the best. It is a problem when I feel that I can do a better job as president then she can. The bottom line is that Sarah Palin is an extremely misinformed individual and if anyone is even considering voting for her if she does run in 2012 they should consider themselves an ignorant voter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfEnyru9m98------Sarah Palin caught writing on hand

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/14/cnn-poll-who-wins-an-obama-vs-palin-matchup-2/?fbid=4sLqhr3QR_e -------CNN Poll

Democratic lead Congress may fail to produce a budget for the following fiscal year.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/35647.html

This link goes to an article about the very real possibility that Congress will fail to produce a budget for the following fiscal year by memorial day when their session ends. I believe this is not a responsible act by congress because of the track record our government has had recently. A track record, which consists of huge spending measures and bailouts that have further expanded our growing national debt. Though a passed budget by congress is essentially non-binding the article bring up a good comparison about a family that doesn't review their financial situation for the following year. Problems can arise if an idea about how much money is available and how much should be spent is not discussed because then overspending can occur. The Democrats are not exactly in any rush to push for a passed budget because of the republicans anxiousness to call out democrats if the budget involves increased spending or increased taxes. I think that congress needs to pass a budget and that they should feel that it is their responsibility to pass a budget that will help decrease our national debt. Congress in general whether they are republicans or democrats have helped over the past ten years increase our debt to soaring hights and now for only the fourth time in history Congress will most likely not pass a budget. Whether or not it is binding I would feel better about my government if they can at least attempt to be fiscally responsible.

Confederate Confusion

I’ve really thought about how to get into this piece, and I’ve decided that I’m just going to put it right out there! Could someone please tell that jerk McDonnell that the Republican Party WON the Civil War! I’m sorry, but what the hell is going on here?!?! Okay okay, before you start screaming, true the GOP is quite clearly no longer the same animal of Lincoln’s Republican Party. However given the underlying theme of this blog being party politics, I just couldn’t resist making that point. While the GOP is sniveling over how they can’t get any support from the African American and Latin American voters in this country, maybe they should be vetting out party members like good old Bob here, who apparently has had to be forced and pressured into admitting (and amending his proclamation) that slavery is both a bad thing and a significant part of Virginia’s Civil War history.

Okay, lets play a little game. I will make a statement and you tell me which party’s battle cry this sounds like.

1. What do you mean you’re against the war in Iraq? That’s un-American!
2. You don’t agree with the Patriot Act? Your Unpatriotic!
3. Gay Marriage? Un-American!
4. Health care for everyone?!?! What are you, a communist? That’s not the American way!

It seems like it is the Republican way, to resort to calling even slightly liberal positions and policies as un-American and unpatriotic. So it is in THAT vein I that would like to call attention to this notion of harking back to, honoring, and celebrating Confederate History. Because it seems to me that there couldn’t possibly be ANYTHING less American or less Patriotic than celebrating the Confederacy – an armed and violent insurrection aimed at dividing the nation. So Bob, are you a bad Republican… or just a rogue? …or maybe a maverick?!

And another thing. – Bob McDonnell, even though your party has fallen from grace since its formidable days of Abraham Lincoln, is it really your goal to be espousing the doctrine of states rights to the extreme degree of succession? Incase you have forgotten, the Civil War was the bloodiest most tragic event in domestic American History… the Confederacy STARTED it, and the Confederacy LOST! Now ask yourself honestly – should the government of Virginia be celebrating this particular legacy? Or would it be more appropriate for it to be offering a public apology? How about a public apology to the descendants of those who were formerly held in bonded servitude, or the descendants of those soldiers who died in an ill fated and ill guided war (I mean of course from the Confederate perspective!). Or maybe the new Republican way is akin to living in some delusional bubble apart from reality. Well Bob, I sure am glad that you’re in Virginia making an ass of yourself and your state and not in Texas writing textbooks that will make asses of our children!

One more comment I’d like to make that the Texas textbook debacle brings to mind. Which is that clearly, by and large, history is written by the winners. I can think of examples where I think this tendency is to the detriment of the common body of knowledge that is shared by all of mankind. Often times, the losers of a conflict have been dominated over and taken advantage of by a stronger and self-serving opponent. We see this in oppressive governments subjugating their citizens, and in expanding governments that have decimated native populations. In these instances the winners writing history get to paint themselves in a noble light, and to characterize the losers as brutal, uncivilized, or somehow inferior by nature. I understand how this happens – that the winners write the story – but I have to say that I see it as a loss to the truth of history and a loss to the common body of knowledge that we share. The most useful thing about history is the use of it as a tool to predict the future, understand the present and make decisions today. It is hard to do that well with such a warped and distorted story to go on. In this vein I do support the idea that multiple sides of story can and should be told and recorded in the annals of history. In McDonnell’s case though, I’m afraid it is not his goal to record the plight and story of the Confederacy as the losers to some oppressive and brutal enemy. If that be the case – then I say – let the story be told, the whole un-American story, and I’m fine with that being part of the Republican ethos. I’m afraid his efforts only lead to more distortion and delusion, and the worst thing of all is that it breeds and feeds stupidity and hatred. This kind of ignorance mongering is about as unpatriotic as the Confederacy!

Is the Rise of the Tea Party dangerous?

It had often been speculated before his inauguration that there may be movements born out of racism towards our new black president. Since his inauguration no one could have possibly guessed how these movements would come to fruition. It took some time to come, but the absence of new Republican leaders left a power vacuum that was filled by tea party leaders. It began with the Tea Parties on April 15th, 2009. Tea Party protests were held across the country against the countries new budget. The largest one was held in the Boston Commons. A majority of the parties advertising came from Fox News who tried to say that they were just giving the cause a voice, yet happened to have hosts from many of their shows making speeches or hosting these parties.
Since then the party has been gaining traction in Republican, and even certain radical Democratic circles. It has radicalized much of the right, and has gotten to the point where not being in support of the Tea Parties can endanger a Republicans campaign. The party really grew around protests against Health Care Reform. Most of their incendiary protest signs mimicking comments made by radical right wingers such as Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann.
So, is the Tea Party dangerous? It is not uncommon to find a sign at one of their protests that threatens "We didn't come with weapons, this time!" and much of their beliefs seem to be built around fake facts. The Birther movement thrived in the Tea Parties, as did the idea of death panels, and the belief that Obama is a Communist. Putting aside how terrible this is for legislation, and how impossible it will make it to find our way out of this recession. The anger and threats of violence toward senator Stupak and others could easily be a sign of things to come. When you convince the people that the government is out to take away your freedoms, and it comes down to cries of revolution, what's to stop this from coming to violence. It is one thing to build protests against a current administration/congress, it's another to rally that base around false "Facts" and give the protest historical precedence as a fight against tyranny. Questioning your government is very American, but with lack of responsibility can is dangerous.

Obama, Russian president sign arms treaty

On Thursday President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a nuclear arms control treaty which will result in the downsizing of both nations stockpiles of nuclear weapons. The agreement will reduce each nations stockpile by one third. This is a huge deal in leading by example of global leadership seeing as Russia and the United States of America own over ninety percent of nuclear weapons on this planet. This treaty is huge in also dealing boosting cooperation between both superpowers. Both presidents discussed the issue of Iran and their nuclear weapons program. With rumors about Russia selling nuclear fuel and supplies to Iran hopefully both the U.S and Russia can work together to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear cappability. This treaty is huge for the U.S because over the past twenty or so years our Govermental leaders have always spoke of stoping other countries from obtaining nuclear capability or having nuclear stockpiles. The U.S can not try to monitor nuclear threats because other countries look at the U.S and say how come they can have them. President Obama is doing a good job in demonstrating some responsibility and using actions to lead by example. lately the headlines have been overshadowed with the healthcare bill and the NCAA tournament, but this is a huge deal for everyone. This agreement will not make the world a whole lot safer but if cooperation amonst super powers continues then the international community can move foward one step at a time.

Take Action Soon to Shape Fiscal Future

This article talks about the changing of the American population and how it will create much fiscal challenges. Right now that baby boomers are starting to get older and fade out. This whole situation is not making it easy on the situation of the American government. This puts alot of strain on the American public. At this point there is no proposed action that anyone wants to hear to keep this issue from becoming too large in the future years to come.

Ben S. Bernanke, the federal reserve chairman talks a lot about how we need to change things early on to help for the future. He thinks that if we have a good amount of time to plan things out then we the American population and government will not be caught off guard as much when it comes time for these challenges.

Much of these for seen challenges for the government are the budget pressuers that are put on my the social security and the medicare expenses. At this point there will soon not be enough money around to keep this program running effectively for many years to come. The baby boomers also do not help much in this issue. Bernanke basicly said that there are only a few options to fix this problem, without completly getting rid of the systems. The options to make up for this are for the people to chose between raising taxes, modifications to the programs, less spending on everything else (such as education, etc.), or a combinaion of all of this. If we start to take action now then maybe the later on in the future the challenges wont be "as challenging". It maybe easier to put things off but in the end it might just be harder.

I can see how people want to put this subject off where this really is so many other things going on in politics right now and taxes are high enough as they are. However, we really do need to do something about this soon. Otherwise when my generation goes to collect medicare and social security we will be having some serious issues. I will be so much better to start now. However, this probably wont be the case because many Americans are too stingy on money, even if it will benefit the future generations of this country. I guess we will just have to see what comes of all of this.






Much of the information that was gathered for this blog is from
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/business/economy/08fed.html?ref=politics

Drilling is for the better

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/science/earth/01energy.html?ref=science

On March 31, 2010 at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, President Obama discussed his plan to potentially open up the shores of the United States to oil drilling. Many people, including Obama supporters were taken aback with this decision but overall, I support the plan. The idea behind the plan is not to take us off of foreign reliance on oil, simply because there would not be enough new oil to do that. But it is to help ease the burden, explore new energy (clean) technologies, drill safely while protecting our natural resources, improve security and to help the economy. The plan would open up parts of the Atlantic Ocean below the tip of Delaware for an exploration phase because many of the geological maps are upwards of 30 years old. If oil was found, it would be up to the government to determine if they want to open the land up for lease or not. If they choose to do so, the government would get some much needed income to further their environmental plans among other things. At the same time, the new areas for drilling would open up jobs in the oil industry to get people back to work. Under this plan, no drilling would be allowed on the Pacific Coast and Alaska's Bristol Bay, famous for its billion dollar fishing industry and wildlife, would be protected. This plan is a middle of the road approach which appeases some in favor of drilling and does not necessarily hurt those who are looking to protect the environment. This decision may also enable President Obama to gain some allies when he pushes to further his environmental initiatives.

The Godfather of Earmarks RIP

Earmarks or the more infamous political jargon “pork barrel” spending has made for grandiose news stories about the failure of government and ardent speeches from lackluster candidates. Last month the godfather of earmarks passed away and “with him may have passed the Golden Age of the Earmark.” (Elving, March 16,2010) Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) slated Congressman John Murtha as one of the most corrupt politicians in Washington. Here’s a link to that listhttp://www.citizensforethics.org/files/Beyond%20Delay%20Full%20Report_0.pdf Murtha a democrat from Pennsylvania who has been accused of various sketchy earmarking such as various connections too defense contracting groups and promotions of self interests. Some giveMurtha credit for getting money to places that needed it like a failing airport but in reality if one looks at the long list of lets say interesting funding it causes one to think how is this good governance.

Murtha was called out on the floor by Rep. Jeff Flake for some of his intersting earmarks.

His death has posed a question how did earmarks come to be? Despite Harry Reid's claim that “"The FoundingFathers would be cringing to hear people talking about eliminating earmarks”. (Elving, March 16,2010) Earmarks while having some historically revelance have never been prominent like they are modernly. In 1817 President Madison rejected Bonus Bill by wisely saying "The legislative powers vested in Congress are specified and enumerated in the eighth section ofthe first article of the Constitution, and it does not appear that the power proposed to be exercised

by the bill is among the enumerated powers, or that it falls by any just interpretation with the

power to make laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution those or other powers

vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States," (Pye, on March 28, 2008)

Earmarks have seen a significant rise over the years in 1970 the Defense Apporations Bill had a dozen earmarks by 2005 it had 2,671. Is it a clever means of legislation or just another benefit of the job of politician. Earmarks are about the only bipartisian thing in congress because members from both sides actively engage in the practice. Earmarks currently cost the tax payer $29 billion dollars. While things like Bridge to No Where are considred politically humourosus this is a significant amount of money that is being spent.

There are of course the absurd earmarks like

$50,000 for the National Mule and Packers Museum in California

$107,000 to study the sex life of the Japanese quail.

$2 million to construct an ancient Hawaiian canoe.

While there is cultural and historical relevance to these kind of projects perhaps why am I going into so much debt to get an education and working 4 days a week, while someone get 2 million dollars to build a canoe. It doesn’t seem fair.

Even Obama is not blameless in this he earmarked money for University of Chicago Medical Center

where his wife is employed.

The Seattle Times released an interesting list of $ 3.5 billion in mystery earmarks. Like $147.2 Million for ArmyJunior Reserve Officers' Training Corps these mystery earmarks have no viable programs that they are realted too. They are truly a mystery as to where the money is going.

Earmarks need reform and as it stands there doesn’t seem to be any real change that’s occurring.

The 2010 Midterm Elections

On November 2, 2010 at least 36 of the 100 seats in the Senate and all House seats are up for election. Though the Democrats have been dominant in the recent elections, maybe things are about to change. Since the vote on U.S. health care, CNN.com reports that more than 10 Democrats have reported trouble. Many will argue that these violent acts against Democratic Congress members are a political statement. It definitely seems that the population is expressing anger towards the health care plan, mainly a Democratic sponsored bill.

The House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and South Carolina Democratic Representative James Clyburn spoke out against the attacks, quoting that democracy "is not about violence." It is not proven that it is only Republican citizens and not just a generally angered population. House Minority Leader John Boehner has made it public that he urges opponents to demonstrate legally. He makes a strong point that "If people are angry, they ought to register to vote and get involved in a campaign."

From shouting racial slurs to African-American House Democrats, to spitting on Massachusetts' Democratic Congressman Barney Frank and shouting anti-gay slangs when he is openly gay, the American population has gone too far. Be smart and voice your opinion legally at the voting booth.

Republican radio shows are voicing their opinions early that they may see some gained support for their party in the upcoming election. However, this may just be a false hope when in reality, Republicans have not held up well in recent elections. With the new revolutionary Tea Party, Republicans may also lose some of their votes to candidates of the Tea Party. The current party structure in Congress may not change much, but there is an evident change in the views of our population.

Here's a wild idea to help get us out of some debt: focus on business which is arguably the main driver of our economy. Get rid of some of the regulations and taxes on businesses in the United States, and try and get back the companies that left to produce cheaper in other countries. Bring more production to our homeland and maybe a stronger dollar would persuade banks to start lending. Any small change could lead to bigger progress in fixing our hurting economy.

Impractical Politics

America, you are living beyond your means. You spend more than you earn. You take on loans without establishing a way to pay them off. You aid others where you have not yet helped yourself. It is time you act responsibly. It doesn't matter whether you're politically liberal or conservative, what you need is to be politically practical.

To the Democrats of America: we need to cut spending. These cuts cannot come solely from the defense budget. The money that we save from these cuts or that we make from raised taxes cannot be funneled into welfare programs. Redirecting funds is not the same thing as removing them. We cannot afford the many programs you propose. Government has a responsibility to protect the welfare of its citizens, yes, but that is exactly what it is doing by being fiscally responsible.

To the Republicans of America: we need to raise taxes. We will never return to a smaller, decentralized government; we have gone too far. We cannot get by cutting programs alone. You need to allow taxes to be raised. By working together we can do more than by working individually. While some individuals are successful on their own, society can accomplish more if it cooperates.

To the disenfranchised of America: we need you involved. It is unlikely that your candidates will win; America is not structured to accommodate three parties. We need you to martyr yourselves. While your candidates may not win seats, your voices are heard and do influence American politics. It is better to see some gains rather than none at all.

To the apathetic of America: we need you to inform yourselves about the issues and then to participate in politics. Democracy cannot work without an informed and active citizenry. The government is not representing you unless you make yourself heard. It is in your own best interest to participate.

To the politicians of America: we need you to take responsibility. You need to convince Americans to vote for whom they think the best candidate is rather than who they think will win. You have to convince them of your issues, not of your popularity. Stop trying to please us. This may sound insane, like political suicide; it might be. It is necessary, the unpopular decisions are the ones most needed. We need to cut programs and raise taxes in order for democracy in America to remain viable.

Obama will be a one term president

Barring a complete reversal of the way President Obama is currently running his administration, Obama will be a one term president. Even if we ignore all of the recent polls showing significant drops in both his approval and the Democratic parties, the writing is still on the wall. We will ignore these poll results since we are just under 3 years away from the next presidential election and everyone knows that public opinion can change within a few weeks time. What we can't ignore however are President Obama's legislative priorities and lack of fiscal conservativeness.

Whats that? You say President Bush wasn't any better when it came to spending? I'll give you that President Bush was bad...but Obama is worse, and he's only had one year in office so far compared to Bush's eight. According to CNSNews and the last CBO report Bush averaged 20.4% spending of the GDP. Obama? Try 24.1% of GDP. That's a 3.7% increase in just one year! On top of that the the government under Obama had a deficit of 1.412 TRILLION dollars, compared to the previous high in 2008 of 458.5 billion dollars. While I'll give you that some of the spending during his 2009 term was carry over from President Bush's administration, Obama was still responsible for signing the $787 billion stimulus package, and with unemployment continuing to grow, that money was obviously not well spent. So lets go ahead and throw out the 2009 numbers for a minute since some of that was from President Bush's administration. Instead lets look at the projected numbers for the 2010 budget. 1.5 TRILLION dollars...not only is it not going down, he's actually managed to increase it over the previous year.

Now I'm like most people who think we spend too much money on health care, and I'd love to see some kind of reform in the system. However, I don't believe the time for that reform is now. President Obama's current health care reform, in his own words, is only projected to reduce the deficit over the next decade. That reduction in deficit is only in the billions over that time period. So here he is spending 1.5 trillion a year while at the same time touting that his health care reform bill will save us 200+ billion over the next 10 years. WOW, that's some kind of savings there! Sarcasm aside, President Obama needs to change his priorities over the next 3 years if he wants to even think of having a bid for reelection. Health care reform needs to happen, but not until after the economy is back on the mend and the unemployment rate goes down. I agree people are having a tough time paying for health insurance, but that's probably because over 10% of the population is jobless right now. Hard to pay for something when your out of work.

President Obama, you need to focus on the economy and unemployment rate, THEN you can move on to your social reforms.

Refocusing on Education

President Obama is pushing for a 3.5 billion dollar revamp of the Bush administrations No Child Left Behind Act. CNN.com reports that the goal of this overhaul is to change the focus entirely. The Bush administration created the bill back in 2001 and did so in order to track school progress and success with standardized tests in grades 1 through 8. The law was ultimately a failure. The plan was to have every student in the country on their grade reading level by 2014; but it wasn't funded nearly as much as it should have been. Now the Obama administration wants to, instead of having every student at their grade reading level by 2014, make sure that by 2020 everyone graduating high school is college or career ready. They want to make sure that teachers and principals are effective; and if they aren't, that theyre being fired. Instead of dummying down our expectations so that every student, teacher, and school can easily reach them without putting forth any real effort, the Obama campaign wants to strain the system. They want to reestablish the US among the smartest countries in the world, a list that we have fallen too far down on.
Its about damn time that the government did something about our education system. Teachers are way under paid, our work force is getting dumber, and we as a country are too busy focusing on our military and GDP. The youth represent the future, and education is only going to brighten that. Enough with kids dropping out of school or not going to college because their teachers made them hate learning; enough with teachers under achieving or being under paid; and enough with the belief that teachers are all the same because they are not. Great teachers are extremely rare, but have the potential to inspire children and young adults to do incredible things. The future lies in the minds of this country's youth, their future lies within their education, their education lies in the hands of their teachers; so in the end the teachers have the ability to influence the future, lets start paying them like their job has some significance.
I mean how many times do you drop a class because of a teacher? Or even pick a class because of a teacher? Imagine if you could have done that in elementary school? College has options, whereas middle school and high school really do not. Now Im not saying that teachers are always the reason why kids drop out of school or dont do well in classes, because that simply is not the truth. Some kids just do not try, they bluntly do not care; and there isnt much to be done about that. But lets say we removed every single ineffective teacher and replaced them with inspirational ones. Would we see improvements in grades, graduation rates, college attendence, etc.? You bet.

Political Parties, Elections and Interest Groups: The unequal distribution of wealth among single women of color

Political Parties, Elections and Interest Groups: The unequal distribution of wealth among single women of color

The unequal distribution of wealth among single women of color

In a new report by the Insight Center of Economic and Community Development we find out some staggering statistics. Black and Latino women in the United States are earning far less than their single white female peers. The annual median wealth of a Black women was $100 dollars and female Latino women had a median wealth of 120$. In contrast the annual median wealth of a single white woman was 41,500 dollars. This is not a slight difference, but one showing substantial inequality in income and assets. The report concluded that about half of Black and Latino women had negative wealth, indicating that their debts were more than their assets. The growing problem of debt among Americans is growing, especially among minorities, and this study highlights that problem even more. This study indicates what could be serious setback to the future generations of minorities in this country. There seems to be a serious problem in the disruption of wealth among races and gender, which is inhibiting the prospect of racial equality in the United States. This study comes as and argument for more social programs that directly help benefit minority groups who are not getting the same opportunities to increase wealth as their white counterparts. Affirmative Action and other similar programs are always being argued, but I personally can’t see how these programs could not be addressed. It is apparent that this inequality among races is only going to further damage the status of minorities in the United States and slow the economy as a whole. It is imperative to do something about this and do something now!!!