Write or Remain Silent

Try Cooking For Once

2009-05-31T14:54:00.003-04:00

First Lady Michelle Obama has used her position in the White House to encourage America to eat healthier by growing a home garden. But what about cooking your own meals?

Growing your own fruits and veggies is great, and I commend Mrs. Obama for encouraging America to do so. But cooking your own meal is also crucial to eating healthy. And I don't mean heating some water and making instant soup. I mean making a meal entirely from scratch, where you cut your vegetables (which you picked up yourself) and choose your seasonings and use your pots and pans and stove and oven to create a meal that you were intimately involved in from start to finish and so can see what is or isn't healthy about it.

I was brought up in a household where I was expected to cook entire meals, both for myself and my family, since I was in 9th grade. I started simple, with spagghetti and sauce, and worked my way up to stir-fry with a dozen different vegetables and seasonings. As a result, I feel deprived when I have to go long periods of time without cooking, and I don't like not knowing what's in my meal.

Unfortunately, it seems like I may be in the minority with this exerience. According to a New York Times Op-Ed article, "research by the NPD Group showed that Americans ate takeout meals an average of 125 times a year in 2008, up from 72 a year in 1983. And a recent U.C.L.A. study of 32 working families found that the subjects viewed cooking from scratch as a kind of rarefied hobby...[and] according to a 2008 NPD study, of all supper entrees “cooked” at home, just 58 percent were prepared with raw ingredients".

These statistics are appalling. Cooking is a hobby now? Not for me or my family, it isn't. Besides being healthy, cooking is a way to spend quality time with family, chatting is a neutral zone while working together to create a delicious and healthy meal for yourself. Some of my fondest memories are of me and my parents and siblings working together to create a dinner, listening to Garrison Keillor's A Prarie Home Companion. Laughing together, talking about the day, making plans together for the week: that's what cooking means to me.

So come on Mrs. Obama. You've got the bully pulpit here - and the press already loves you and yours - so use this opportunity and show people how to love to cook. And since "cooking isn't one of [your] huge things", maybe you could work with your White House Chefs (who must love to cook) to show the American People how to make simple, healthy meals.

Maybe this metaphor is more appropriate for your basketball-playing husband, but the ball's in your court now.

The Church: Pro-(Embryonic)-Life, Screw Everyone Else

2009-05-21T15:17:00.006-04:00

According to a recent article on The Huffington Post, a scandal has just been uncovered in which Irish children, both boys and girls, had been sexually, emotionally, and physically abused at religious children's homes run by the Church. Many of the children were abandoned by parents who could not afford to take care of them or because of the unbearable negative social pressure accorded to the children being born out of wedlock. At these "shelters", the children were horribly treated, as if they had no value, were just tools. The boys were subjected to:

"Punching, flogging, assault and bodily attacks, kicking, head shaving, beating on the soles of the feet, burning, scalding, stabbing, being made to kneel and stand in fixed positions for lengthy periods, hosed down with cold water before being beaten, beaten while hanging from hooks on the wall, being set upon by dogs, being restrained in order to be beaten, physical assaults by more than one person, and having objects thrown at them."

The girls had just as bad a time. They were "treated as slaves, laboring up to 7 hours a day... were routinely sexually abused, often by more than one person at a time."

If the Church were truly "pro-life", it would take care of life after it left the womb. Instead, all it cares about is protecting the fetus's life. Afterwards, screw it, just more fodder for the priest-abuse machine. The children's shelters won't even release the names of those involved, because the criminals of the religious order are more important than those they are charged with caring for.

How can the Church possibly claim the right to tell us how to live our lives and what is moral when its own members don't live by the morals they preach? Maybe this is why the youth of today are so disillusioned with organized religion. (see post below) It's all just a bunch of bullshit.

Palin: She Really Does Suck

2009-05-16T21:03:00.004-04:00

During the presidential campaign of 2008, the Republican's VP choice of Sarah Palin scared many Democrats, who opposed her for many reasons - her politics, her ideology, and the cynical view that McCain seemed to have of the electorate, to name a few. Many pointed out that she would not make a good vice president, because she just did not have the experience, or maybe even the knowledge, to be able to hold that position. I'd say, those fears have been validated, based upon her speech and actions about the stimulus package that's coming to Alaska.

The package is coming to Alaska, and Palin has held the position that she will veto the money - even though everyone else in Alaska wants the money, and desperately. It will create and save thousands of jobs, but yet she holds on to her position of veto or bust.

In the latest run-up, the Alaska Legislature has held several hearings and meetings to examine if her "fears" have any basis, but yet she was absent for all of them - and there were no issues found with the stimulus, just good money for good projects. Even the Republicans, who seem to be of the opinion that anything Obama is evil, are on board and ready for the cash. So Palin backtracks, says she can't say how it will turn out, and tries to point other issues with the package, which are then debunked by the legislature, yet again.

Palin has backed herself into a political corner that even smooth-talking Obama couldn't explain his way out of. No matter what she does, she'll either be hated for vetoing a crucial stimulus package, or she'll be caught 'flip-flopping' on her position and 'caving in'. No wonder the Republicans have all dropped her like a hot potato - she's a political liability these days.

Maybe this is why we all despised her when McCain chose her as VP - even then, we could tell that she was no good. Even Alaskans agree. Her approval ratings have taken a nose dive since July of 2008, just before McCain chose her. From a high of 80% favorable and 15% unfavorable, she has fallen to a low of 55% favorable and 42% unfavorable. Ouch.

She's also had other problems, beside the stimulus inconsistency. She had: a dozen ethics complaints (which she is still fighting, to a current cost of $500,00), an inappropriate pick for Attorney General that crashed and burned (with her getting some of the embers), a war with the Senate Democrats over appointments, trying to force out a US Senator and denying it when caught, attending a right-to-life dinner party instead of the final legislative session, and many other things that she blamed the bloggers for.

Well. That's quite a resumé, Governor Palin. Only, I don't think it's a resumé that you want to apply for a job with. A job like the presidency, which she seemed to think was within reach. Only now, she's sunk. I doubt she'll be able to hold the governorship in the next election.

Bottom Line: Sarah Palin sucks. She's unfit to rule. The evidence is out there for everybody to see in Alaska, and I'm just glad that the voters came to their senses and elected Obama and Biden.

Abstinence and the Media: Mixed Messages

2009-05-12T19:29:00.006-04:00

There are many people who believe that abstinence-only education is the only way to go about teaching sex-ed. But they are up against a far thicker wall than they may realize. The Candies Foundation, which is an organization that raises awareness about teen preganancies, recently hired Bristol Palin as a spokeswoman. This in itself demonstrates just how ridiculous the whole abstinence-only sex-ed movement is in today's world.

First: Bristol Palin has a child - and she lives in a wealthy family that can help her raise the child. Not only is she living proof that abstinence-only can be unrealistic, but her home life is completely unlike the average teen mother, who would most likely drop out of school, take a job to support herself, and be living in a broken home.

Second - The Candies Foundation is a philanthropic arm of Candie's clothing company. If you haven't seen what they model as teen clothing, take a look. It's anything but abstinence. The clothing is scanty, and the poses are sexy. Trust me, as a teenage guy, if a girl dresses is those outfits, abstinence is the first thing leaving my mind. And what kind of self-image would a girl have if she wore those clothes? Not an abstinent one, that's for sure.

Third - Bristol Palin's advice falls on the wrong ears. She goes on TV, on talk shows, that only air while school is in session. The people she is trying to reach can't even see her! Besides which, I don't know any teens who watch MSNBC or The Today Show all that frequently (or ever, in my case). Who is going to see her are the parents, who are in all likeliness already trying to keep their kids abstinent. And we all know how effective the parents are - because Bristol Palin really listened to her mom, right?

Fourth - The mass media in general doesn't seem opposed to teen pregnancies. Think about popular TV shows, or movies. For example, Juno. The main female character gets pregnant,and isn't even in love with the guy she had sex with until the end of the movie. Then, when she tells her parents, the reaction is something like, "Well, I'm just glad it isn't drugs." Right, that's an average reaction to a teen pregnancy. And then, she rejects the idea of an abortion and finds, first try, a couple willing to adopt her baby. Just like that, and the movie ends happy. She doesn't drop out of school, doesn't need to get a job to support herself, just has the baby and is done.

OK, so the media does not actually seem to really be working hard in favor of abstinence. What is realistic? Maybe teaching other methods of safe sex as well as abstinence? Yeah, abstinence is the most effective method of preventing disease and pregnancy (duh!), but it can be unrealistic, especially in today's pop culture. In that case, teens have the right to know how to protect themselves safely.

That should be enough to satisfy those who seem so concerned about teen pregnancy, but yet, abstinence programs always leave out the crucial information about how to protect yourself if abstinence is unrealistic. What's worse, is that abstinence programs always demean and lie about other safe sex methods. One example is when Pope Benedict declared that condom use can make the HIV problem in Africa worse. What???!! Condoms, one of the few proven methods of preventing disease transmission and preventing pregnancy to the tune of a 90-95% success rate, is now being dismissed by the Pope? WTF!

Abstinence-only sex-ed is unrealistic, but what's worse is not teaching other safe sex methods, and then demeaning them. That's like teaching someone that the best way to perform CPR is to pray, and that using an AED will only make the heart attack worse.

Just ridiculous.

Who Needs Religion? Not The Youth.

2009-05-11T20:39:00.005-04:00

According to a recent study conducted by Harvard University professor Robert Putnam, the percentage of young Americans who do not affiliate with an organized religion has grown exponentially. Historically, it has been between 5 and 10 percent; his study pegs the number at 30 to 40 percent. However, those polled did not necessarily state that they were atheist; they just did not affiliate with Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, or any of their respective branches. (The Huffington Post, May 9 2009)

Frankly, I'm not surprised at all. Who needs religion now, when all we see of it is hypocrisy and mixed messages? Each religion preaches tolerance in its respective holy books, but yet the Middle East is a breeding ground of hatred and warfare. At home, Obama had to fight rumors that he was a "secret Muslim", as if being a Muslim was a disqualification for the Presidency. A politician, who was Muslim, had to fight to be able to swear into office on the Koran instead of the bible. Religion preaches that we must help our neighbors and those worse off than us, but yet the wealthiest countries barely pay more than a lip service of aid to struggling nations. Don't get me started on the priest sex abuse scandals - who wants to be part of a religion that has that history in its culture? We are a nation that prides itself on religious tolerance, but yet we must swear in on a bible, and swear allegiance to the flag of a nation "under God".

In addition to the recent study, there was also an article in The Huffington Post about some churches that have used false advertising to get children baptised. Apparently, these churches have a history of luring children into baptisms through false claims that baptisms can save the children from bee stings or through "carnivals" that require a baptism for attendance. This is just one more nail in the coffin of my examples as to why religion has begun losing out on the youth of America. Luring children into baptisms with "carnivals" and "bee sting immunity" is just sick and desperate.

I could go on and on about all that has shown itself to be false in religion. Personally, I have never identified with an organized religion. I identify myself as "culturally Jewish" - I don't practice the religion of Judaism, but my ancestors are Jewish, and so I respect that part of my heritage. I also identify myself as atheist, because I find that science is more trustworthy than religion in that Evolution and the Big Bang can almost be proven beyond a doubt, and it just makes more sense to me. (Hey, whatever you believe is fine with me, I'm just writing my opinion - take it or leave it, fine.) My problem with religion is that someone is given too much power, to tell you how best to morally live your life. I'd rather figure that out myself, thank you very much.

So if the youth of America don't like organized religion, what do we like? Tara Stiles of The Huffington Post posits that there may be an upswing of interest in a more spiritual path, through yoga and meditiation. That seems to make a lot of sense, especially since for someone disillusioned by the large establishment of religion, spirituality through yoga and meditation can be achieved by yourself or in a small group.

Personally, and here again you can completely disagree with me, I am glad to see this change. In my opinion, the major organized religions are way too powerful and hold way too much sway over peoples' lives. This is a great change, a great way for people to take back control over their lives.

write or remain silent: Barack Obama

2008-12-17T21:04:00.000-05:00

I liked senator Barack Obama’s speech. Knowing all the things he's gone through to get where he his.When he said that his candidacy was about us, and not about him. That let me know he was looking out for our interest and benefits. Also when he said he'd eliminate capital gains taxes for the small businesses and the start-ups that will create the high-wage, high-tech jobs of tomorrow.Cut taxes - cut taxes - for 95% of all working families. Because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class. The most important things he said that will benefit our country has a whole was that he has president will eliminate capital gains taxes for the small businesses and the start-ups that will create the high-wage, high-tech jobs of tomorrow.Investment in things that will lead to new industries and open five million new jobs that pay well and can't ever be outsourced. Invest in early childhood education. Recruit an army of new teachers, and pay them higher salaries and give them more support. And in exchange, I'll ask for higher standards and more accountability. And we will keep our promise to every young American - if you commit to serving your community or your country, we will make sure you can afford a college education. After hearing Obama's speech it got me more amped to vote and with all the support from his wife Michelle Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton I feel there is a good chance that this November Barack Obama could win this election.

Is John McCain desperate: SNL

2008-12-17T21:02:00.000-05:00

Is John McCain so desperate to win the 2008 presidential election that he'll do anything? Even help make fun of his own VP pick, Sarah Palin on "Saturday Night Live?" Really? It's weird I can't see Barack Obama making fun of Joe Biden. Anyways during SNL McCain speaking about not having enough money to afford a prime time infomercial like Obama. Tina Fey's as Palin even pushes a set Joe Action Figures: Joe Six Pack, Joe the Plumber and Joe Biden. Minutes later, Sarah goes rogue, pushing her line of "Palin in 2012" T-shirts while McCain is off camera he asks what's going on? Did McCain go too far appearing in a skit that makes fun of his running mate? Or not far enough? He took a desperate attempt to boost his campaign but will it cost him the win? or help him lose?This skit wasn't to long ago, will people remember his desperate attempt voting tomorrow? Guess we'll see.

Big rating on SNL: Sarah Palin

2008-12-17T21:00:00.000-05:00

Tina Fey as Sarah Palin earned SNL the biggest ratings in 14 years. Over 17million people for the first half-hour, when Fey's Palin first came out. "Did you catch Sarah Palin on 'SNL'?" McCain asked a crowd in Toledo, Ohio. "She did a great job." In the show's opening, Fey's Palin said at a news conference: "First off, I just want to say how excited I am to be in front of both the liberal elite media, as well as the liberal regular media. I am looking forward to a portion of your questions." Moments later, the camera cut away to the real Palin watching a television monitor alongside the show's executive producer, Lorne Michaels. "Saturday Night Live" had been reluctant to do so, feeling embarrassed when it announced Barack Obama would show up for the season's first show and he canceled hours ahead of time, but the early word created heavy anticipation. Michaels owes Palin a debt of gratitude. "Saturday Night Live" so far this season has been up 76 percent over last year at this time, Nielsen said. Even beyond that, the Fey skits have gone viral over the Internet, drawing more attention to the show. One study last week said only one-third of people who had seen Fey's impersonations did so on live TV; the rest saw them on DVRs or on their computers. Will the Sarah Palin phenomenon continue after tomorrows election? If the republican lose will there still be more skits on governor Palin? Who knows what will happen, we'll see towards the days to come.

John McCain: 7 more states

2008-12-17T20:59:00.001-05:00

McCain on monday gave a speech in Miami, Florida to over 10 ,000 Cuban American conservatives. Saying there is one more day left until we take America in a new direction. Earlier that day he spoke in Tampa with a few less people but alot of cheers and enthusiasm. McCain spoke to the people saying with this kinda of intensity we will win florida and win the elections. Next he flow over to the Tennessee Virginia border. To make sure the Virginia turns red, even with Obama trailing ahead in Virginia with electrol votes of 51% to 47%, McCain is counting on GOP, the get out the vote ground game.Sarah Palin trys to work her magic in Ohio knowing the GOP must win there, she said she could feel it that we could win this. Mccain makes one more stop to Pennsylvania before flying to Indiana then to New Mexico where he will travel some 34000 miles before going to Nevada and Arizona. This was on Monday it is now November 4th and the elections has started. Did making those last stops for the electrol votes help? or did they hurt his chances? We'll see today.

Sarah Palin: Votes in Alaska

2008-12-17T20:57:00.000-05:00

Shes speaks with fox news saying how proud she is to be able to vote and exercise her right to vote and everything else that our great nation has to offer for todays elections. She says tomorrow she hopes to be Vice President and be able to get right into working to help us Americans. Fox's news asks governor Palin who she's voting for and she says she doesnt have to say, she has her right to privacy that's the great thing about America. She then talks about the differences between Alaska and Washington, that Alaska has cleaned up the corruption and turned their government around. That that's what she hopes to do if she Vice President, change the wallstreet mayhem in Washington with refinement and fine tuning. Governor Palin says she knows that this election will be one of the most historical moments for America.That it bolds well for us no matter which side prevails, that through shatter glasses (9/11) we stand. They ask more questions on her past she answers and then she leaves. Will this update on Sarah Palin change the minds of some voters? or not? We'll find out November 5th, if the Republicans win.

Voters concern

2008-12-17T20:55:00.000-05:00

Problems have been reported with vote machines in parts of Connecticut and in Palm Beach County, Florida that 450 voting machines have been rejecting ballots because people are not selecting the second form of the ballot that has florida state amendment. People want to know what happens when you ballot is rejected? there's no retake. They dont want another Algore mishap, so an expert of the public policy group from NYU says it's a new protection for the formum after the elections in 2006 for states like Florida that have had problems in the past. So that if a person forgets to vote for a race they have a chance to fix it. That's why the voting machines have these protections. The problem in florida is that people leave before the ballots get spits out and dont know that it was. Are those ballots thrown away? or keep to the side? NYU expert says they should be saved and counted later not thrown away. Another big problem that have people concern especially in Philly is that some Democratic monitors had kicked out some GOP election monitors saying your the minority you dont get to monitor this vote. NYU expert says it varies from state to state, that it's unlikely for the majority party to kick out the minority party. Will people know if their ballot will be counted if it was spit out? or will it be another mishap like in 2006?

College Professors Are Losing Out

2008-12-14T22:21:00.004-05:00

Tenure. Such a big, fancy-sounding word, sure to get you some significant Scrabble points. Yet, without it, you're screwed.

According to a recent story in The Huffington Post, there are many college professors who are losing their jobs - such as they are - in this time of economic downturn. These professors, known officially as "adjunct professors", are, literally, temps. They are brilliant men and women, with PHDs and publications and decades of experience and research behind them, that are hired like WalMart employees. They are hired part-time, given no benefits, skimpy pay, and can be let go at a moments' notice.

Some examples from the article:

A writer who taught for more than twenty years at a private Southern California college was paid so little, he had to work the graveyard shift at airport gift shops.
Another professor made a 4 hour commute to teach a class for 27 years, but was only paid $3,000 a semester. Now, he's lost his job because the school could hire someone for less, in this terrible economy.

So why do these colleges and universities, that ask for 40 or 50 grand a semester take such advantage over these people? Simply put, because they can. There are no laws or regulations backing up the professors, they have no unions to fight for them, and there are always others who would eagerly take their jobs if they could. It's like swimming upstream with no arms or legs-impossible. The professors are helpless against the power of the institution.

These colleges and universities, that bill themselves as "guardians of knowledge" and "champions of the arts", are really no better than the chain box stores that screw their employees to give the CEOs a few million more. At least with WalMart, the employees they're screwing are in a position where the job is all they've got - the schools are screwing some of the most brilliant people of our time, who are responsible for the education of the youth of America. I'd say, at the very least they deserve some compensation for their work.

How to Start a Cascade (or at Least Some Ripples and Waves)

2008-12-13T17:40:00.012-05:00

After reading everyone's final essays and visiting all of the blogs and Facebook groups, I have to say, you have started some amazing projects. I know some of you may not have grand ambitions for your new blogs and Facebook groups, yet it's easy to see that quite a few of you not only have an important vision, but a plan and a desire to keep working to make a change in the world.

Even if you do not see yourself being an avid blogger now that the semester is over, I am asking all of you -- as in everybody -- for a favor. A number of you mentioned feeling disappointed that more people hadn't joined your Facebook groups. Since your group is one of the best ways to publicize your blog, the more people you can attract to the group the higher your blog's profile is likely to be.

So here's the favor: Teaching the two sections of this course this semester was very rewarding for me, and among the many things I valued about the experience is the sense of camaraderie and community that was developed in both the classroom and on the blog. As a way to continue in that spirit, I would like to encourage you all to visit your classmates' blogs and to join their Facebook groups.

This second step is really important. As you all know by now, when you join a group, this will appear to anyone who can view your feed, which in turn will allow people in your networks to learn about their existence. Simply by joining the groups, which takes no time at all, you will surely help grow the groups and increase the visibility of your classmates' blogs. Combined, you can reach thousands of others (the 11 public profiles I could view boast a combined 4,719 friends)!

Below you find links to everyone's blogs and Facebook groups. Please visit the blogs and join the groups, and make any contributions to others' efforts that you can.

Thank you!

Blogs

The Child Saver

Choice

Class Structure: The Importance of Blogging

Debate-A-Base

The Deep Blue Sea

An E-Vote Today Keeps Your Candidate Away

End Female Genital Mutilation

Gender Stereotypes

Give Red: Donate Blood

The “Ideal” Woman

In Harmful Hands

The Last of the Zoroastrians

License to Kill

Make a Difference — End Indifference

MCAS

More Trees, Less Bush

Revitalize America’s Rail Network

SAG on Strike

Save the Sharks

Social Exclusions & Inclusions of Disabled Individuals in Society

Truth Commission for the Congo

Un Gran Trecho

Facebook Groups:

1,000,000 Against Animal Cruelty

Adventures in Colombian Microcredit

American Class Structure

The Child Saver Choice

Concerned Citizens for Rail Transport

Debaters for Speed

End Shark Finning

A Fight Against MCAS Testing

Give Blood!

His & Hers

The Last of the Zoroastrians

Marine Sanctuaries

More Trees, Less Bush

PMC Watch

SAG on Strike

Social Exclusions & Inclusions of Disabled Individuals in Society

Spread Knowledge and Help End FGM

Truth Commission for the Congo

Voters in Opposition to E-Voting (V.O.T.E.)

Wake Up! End Indifference and Make a Difference

The Women’s ‘Ideal’

Blackwater Being Held Responsible

2008-12-06T17:52:00.003-05:00

It seems that, now that Obama is the new face of America, we will finally start being responsible. 5 Blackwater guards have just been indicted by the U.S. Justice Department for killing 17 innocent Iraqi civilians on September 16, 2007.

Blackwater, the private security firm, has been running amok in Iraq since Bush declared "Mission Accomplished". There has been no oversight, and it seemed like the Blackwater guards were above any laws.

However, last week the Iraqis and the Americans signed an agreement which removed the Blackwater guards' immunity. These five guards are the first to have charges brought against them - and I would fully expect there to be more to come.

However, I would just like to take a few minutes to just let it sink in...

GOVERNMENT AND MILITARY RESPONSIBILITY IS BACK!!!!!!!!!!

Source: The New York Times: In Iraq, Anger and Satisfaction Over Blackwater Charges

Changing Bush's Orders

2008-12-05T02:20:00.002-05:00

There is a good chance the President-Elect Obama will overturn some of President Bush's most controversial decisions. The orders under inspection range from embryonic stem cell research to "gag" orders on international aid organizations regarding abortion, to oil and gas drilling on federal lands.

According to John Podesta, Obama's transition co-chair, Obama's transition team has been going through "hundreds of Bush's executive orders", determining whether or not they require further review and possible turnovers. Obama may use executive orders to make his mark on Washington quickly, especially if he decides to lift the ban on stem cell research, as this would cause quite a stir not only in the political world but also religious, medical, and in the general public.

Stem cell research in particular has been a heavily debated topic during the Bush administration. In August of 2001, Bush stopped the National Institutes of Health from providing any funding for embryonic stem cell research. Despite the fact that stem cell research could help millions of people around the globe. People with diseases such as Parkinsons, Diabetes, and even spinal injuries could be helped, possibly even cured by stem cells. These people are definitely waiting for the Bush ban to be lifted on stem cell research. The controversy behind stem cell research is that researchers require human embryos for their research, which come from recently aborted fetus's. Conservatives are against this notion, and President Bush being a Conservative stunted the ability to pursue research into the capabilities of Stem Cells.

However with President-Elect Obama coming into office in January we are likely to see some of these orders overturned. If Obama were to reverse any of Bush's orders it would be an instant example of change in Washington.

Loan Modification Plan Allows Many to Keep Their Homes

2008-12-05T01:20:00.002-05:00

Eddie Morrison, a truck driver making $65,000 dollars a year, was behind on his mortgage and waiting for a foreclosure letter when he received a letter from their mortgage holder, IndyMac, that informed him that he would be able to keep his home.

The mortgage holder, which had recently be seized by federal regulators, and was now being headed by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Chairman Sheila Bair, put a hold on foreclosures. This freeze gave people such as Eddie Morrison the time to create an affordable loan payment plan. Bair based this plan on the idea that she thinks it is of the utmost importance to deal with the root of the economic problem by helping homeowners such as Morrison.

Bair has proposed a plan that will "allow homeowners who are sixty days late on their mortgage a chance to reduce high interest rates and extend the length of the loan if they qualify". Some people in Washington believe that the proposal is really just a subsidy for troubled homeowners. However Bair was quoted as saying "we could prevent 1.5 million foreclosures from occurring". She also believed that her plan could prevent thirty percent of the predicted foreclosures expected over the next two years.

I hope that this plan is taken into consideration by politicians in Washington, because if her numbers are correct then the proposed plan could give some seriously needed stress relief to homeowners.

The Fall of the Auto Industry?

2008-12-05T00:22:00.002-05:00

By 2009 there are estimated to be only 19,700 auto dealerships left in the United States. This is compared to the 50,00 that were in operation during the 1940s. An even more telling number is the 747,000 cars sold in November; seems like a lot? Not when compared to the 1.18 million that were sold by this time last year. This report comes courtesy of Autodata and is a frightening look at the American auto industry.

In Miama, Florida a sign on car dealership read "buy one, get two!" This is desperation as never before seen in the auto industry. Car dealerships continue to to report record low sales level, and it seems the only hope lies in the proposed government bailout of the big three auto companies; Chrysler, Ford, and GM. Ali Ahmed, sales manager at Rob Lambdin's University Dodge in Miami, was quoted as saying, "The first thing people think when they walk in is, 'it's a fake ad. It's a normal car dealer ad. It's a gimmick". The sad fact is that it is not. The only catch is that you must buy a Dodge truck at retail price before you can receive your second vehicle at $3,000 dollars in tax, tag and dealership fees.

With auto sales at an fifteen-year low, 700 dealerships have had to shut down since the beginning of the year, and that number is expected to hit 900 by the end of the year. Annette Sykora, the chairwoman of the National Automobile Dealers Association, stated that dealers have had to cut personnel and expenses. She has had to cut staff by almost twenty percent at her dealerships.

Sykora discussed with the school superintendent of schools in Slaton, Texas where some of her dealerships are located, and discussed what would happen if those dealerships were to shut down. She stated that "the loss of tax revenue would would force them to cut programs and teachers". Not only this but families who lost their jobs would have to leave town in search of other work, which would only further hurt the towns economy.

This domino effect is something that not many people may relate with a dealership closing. The economy of a town would be seriously damaged, as not only would families leave, but teachers salaries would be cut, local media would take a hit as dealerships are a prime source of advertising. These are only a few examples of how closing dealership impact this particular town, imagine if towns all over the nation began to experience these consequences.

Bill Gates Speaks on Stimulus Package

2008-12-05T00:02:00.002-05:00

On Wednesday December 3rd, Bill Gates, the creator and CEO of Microsoft, was interviewed on his take on the current economy. He believes that President-Elect Obama must work with Congress to implement a wide-ranging stimulus package as soon as possible, as well as double the United States commitment to foreign aid. Gates was quoted as saying "clearly we need a stimulus that doesn't undermine the incentive for business to be careful about their spending and making those correct investments". This is true as if a stimulus package were to come into play companies could become comfortable with where they are, yet this cannot happen if the economy is to recover and build. For the foreseeable future companies must remain vigilant and smart in their dealings.

Another point that Gates is pushing toward Obama is the need to increase the spending on the nation's education systems, as well as attempt to increase upon technological advances which would improve agriculture, prevent disease, and promote agricultural growth in the world's poorest nations. This is also a valid point as the global South is just beginning to enter their industrial revolution as it would be of value to the United Sates if they were to help the growth now.

Gates made another great point in saying "The key point I'd make is that in addition to that stimulus, you've got to fund the kind of scientific work and educational investments that could really have us be a much better country as we emerge from the recession". This is true as while we need a stimulus to help us out of this economic slump, we also need programs that will help us to avoid this type of situation in the future.

Changing Interrogation Policies?

2008-12-04T23:38:00.002-05:00

On Wednesday December 3rd, Eric Holder, President-Elect Obama's nomination for Attorney General, met with twelve retired admirals and generals about making changes to the United States current policy on interrogation. Each of the twelve officers has been against President Bush's endorsement of brutal interrogation techniques, such as the use of water-boarding. Water-boarding is designed to make the prisoner fell as though they a re drowning when in reality they are not.

Each of the officers has expressed the need for a single, less controversial, policy for interrogation and detainment that will apply to all agencies. The meeting was also attended by Washington lawyer Greg Craig, who is one of Obama's appointment for White House Counsel, and Mary De Rosa, a member of Obama's national security transition team.

Retired Rear Admiral John Hutson, was quoted as saying "It is (important) that the new President say up front that the United States is not going to engage in torture or enhanced interrogations". This is true as Obama needs to take a stand on a controversial issue such as the use of torture by the United States, as techniques such as these only help to strengthen a poor image of America. Another important point made by Hutson was that some inmates currently detained in Guantanamo Bay "should be treated like any other criminal" and tried in a United States district court.

This would be a huge step in strengthening the image of the United States as Guantanamo has constantly an issue of debate among the citizens of every country. During his campaign President-Elect Obama indicated that he would like to close Guantanamo Bay and re-evaluate the Bush administrations policies on torture and detainment of suspected terrorists. Obama was quoted as saying "I have said repeatedly that I intend to close down Gunatanamo, and I will follow through on that". I for hope that this becomes a reality as the current detainment policies for Guantanamo Bay are ridiculous, containment without trial? Who knows how many innocent people are currently being housed in the facility. A change in torture policy and the closing of Guantanamo Bay would go a long way towards changing the image the world holds of America.

God Bless this American

2008-12-04T23:20:00.002-05:00

In January Washington D.C. is going to be filled to the brim with people hoping to get a glimpse of President-Elect Obama during the inauguration. Tickets are difficult to get and are incredibly high-priced. Packages have gone for hundreds of dollars, and space to stay is even more difficult to find. Hotels have booked, and people have begun to look for rooms to rent.

However one businessman, Earl Stafford of Virginia, is making sure that some of the less fortunate people of the nation will be able to share in the historical event. Stafford has spent $1 million dollars to give hundreds of impoverished people, terminally ill individuals, and wounded men and women in uniform a chance to attend the inauguration for a cost of absolutely nothing.

Tickets are handed out by congress and there are only 240,00 seats available. Yet Stafford has put together what is being called a "build-your-own-ball" package. HIs deal includes a high-end hotel room or luxury suite, food and drinks, a heated viewing spot above the parade route, and gowns and tuxedos to wear to the celebratory ball. He has even thrown in a beautician to help attendees get ready. Stafford invested his $1 million dollars into the JW Marriots "build-your-own-ball" package just after the election.

The bill is being paid for by this family's nonprofit organization, the Stafford foundation, however the organization is also open to money from sponsors. Stafford was quoted as saying he hopes the balconies are filled "with those who are disadvantaged, those who are distressed, mingling with who aren't so. And we hope to see on their faces a sense of excitement." So far at least 2/3rd of the tickets will go to underprivileged people while the rest will be handed out to contributing sponsors, companies or volunteers.

Auto Bailout Unpopular

2008-12-04T23:07:00.002-05:00

The Auto companies proposal for a bailout, which looked strong in early November, is beginning to fail in the eyes of the American public. A recent poll has shown that six in ten Americans disagree with using taxpayers money to bail out auto companies. The poll, which was conducted on Monday and Tuesday, showed that sixty-one percent of those questioned were fully against the government using taxpayer money to aid failing auto companies, while thirty-six percent were for the auto companies receiving government aid.

The poll also revelaed that fifty-three percent of people do not believe a government bailout will help the failing U.S. economy. This is an interesting notion as American auto-companies supply the population with millions of jobs and if they were to turn a new leaf that could result in more jobs which would strengthen the American economy. Only fifteen percent of people polled thought that they would be immediately affected if the auto-makers were to declare bankruptcy. Again this is interesting as auto-makers supply many jobs to the United States people.

One funny aspect of this poll is that in early November there was fairly strong favor for this bailout. However after executives from GM, Ford and Chrysler performed poorly at congressional hearings, and admitted that they had taken private jets to those hearings, support dropped drastically. You would think they could have flown coach.

Where did the Ballots Go?

2008-12-04T22:45:00.002-05:00

The recount of ballots for the senate race in Minnesota has stalled due to a large number of missing votes. An envelope from the city of Minneapolis, which contained 130 ballots, has gone missing. Deputy Secretary of State Jim Gelbmann has decided to give the city until December 16th to find the missing votes, if the votes are not found by then the canvassing board will meet that day and decide upon a course of action. Gelbmann was quoted as saying "We won't meet our goal to have all the ballots hand-counted by the end of the day [Friday] unless the envelope returns in the 24 hours". Andy Barr, the spokesperson for Democratic candidate Al Franken, has said he is "glad that Minneapolis election officials now acknowledge that these ballots are missing and that they are committed to finding them".

However, Fritz Knaak, the spokesperson for Republican candidate Norm Coleman, has stated that it was "premature and simply irresponsible to suggest that there were missing ballots". He accused the Democratic Minneapolis Mayer R.T. Rybak of giving the Franken campaign news of the situation before the Coleman campaign. Going so far as to suggest the partisanship may cause an unfair advantage for the Democratic candidate by saying that "...the Secretary of State's office will refrain from any activity or action that can be perceived as partisan or supportive of the Franken campaign's overblown rhetoric about missing ballots".

The recount began when unofficial results from the November 4th general election had Coleman, a freshmen Republican, ahead of Franken by 215 votes. How an envelope with 130 votes goes missing we may never know, but hopefully they will be found soon and Minnesota can find out who next represent their state in the Senate.

Amerian's Agree with Obama's Plan for Troop Withdrawal

2008-12-04T21:44:00.003-05:00

A recent poll of Americans has shown that the majority agree with President-elect Obama's plan for U.S. troops currently in the Middle East. As it stands his plan now involves a 16-month drawback of troops from Iraq, while transferring troops into Afghanistan. A recent CNN poll shows that fifty-five percent of people polled agreed with his plan to lower the number of troops in Iraq and increase the number in Afghanistan.

The poll also revealed that sixty-three percent of those polled are against the war in Iraq, while thirty-six percent agree with the war. Interestingly enough fifty-two percent are in favor of a war in Afghanistan, while forty-six percent are against military involvement in Afghanistan. CNN Senior Political Advisor put the situation into the best terms i have heard yet, "To the American public, Afghanistan is the good war, and it's going badly. Iraq is the bad war and it's going fairly well". I believe that the poll results reflect these numbers, as people think we need to be in Afghanistan and while the war in Iraq may be going fairly well, we still are not supposed to be there.

President Obama is still standing by his plan, he has been quoted as saying that 16 months is the still the "right time frame" for a withdrawal. However, the some political analysts believe that the dispute between Pakistan and India may be the next big flair up in the world. So far Americans has stated that they want to remain out of this conflict, yet if the terrorist groups responsible continue to target American's, it is a possibility that we may see some American military forces in the area; so far Obama has been against this type of action, which is a good sign for Americans.

Rights and Bailouts

2008-12-04T20:55:00.004-05:00

"If I knew for a certainly that a man was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should run for my life, as from that dry and parching wind of the African deserts called the simoom, which fills the mouth and nose and ears and eyes with dust till you are suffocated, for fear that I should get some of his good done to me,-some of its virus mingled with my blood"

- Thoreau

As I consider the ultimate effects of our governments continuing bailout of various business interests in the country I am disheartened by a few facts. One, We have no idea what it will ultimately cost. Two, we have been convinced that is imminently necessary. Leaving aside the economic arguments for and against for a moment let us consider the ominous effects of ceding so much of our rights to the government. We Americans guard are right jealousy, in times of peace and prosperity no one can generally shake us from an understanding of what is our due as citizens. It is only in times of trouble, when the mass of people is frothing at some nameless fear, can the government, with all the best reasons, rapidly grow in size and potency. In the infancy of our Republic the threat of war with France gave us the Alien and Sedition Acts. Our Civil War brought about the rise of a grand bureaucracy, the draft, and the first income tax in the victorious North. World War I gave us a modern standing army and the Sedition Acts With the Great Depression, which the government and prolonged through tariffs and interference, we saw an attempt to pack the Supreme Court and a massive expansion of Government power which brought us everything from redlining to the Farm bill. During this same period the crime wave that came with government enforced prohibition was used to justify the creation of the FBI headed by Mr. J. Edgar Hoover. This dreary list continues on to present day, and I would continue, but who wants to get a file started at Carnivore? The point is that the consequences of these programs and infringements generally far outstrip the urgency with which they were called for. What will be the consequences of large portions of the banking world remaining under government control? (Some of these banks, it should be noted, accepted Government funding against their will.) Who can say with any certainty? But mark well where the benign hand of our government flits and tarries in these days of panic.

Conservatives are Whiny People

2008-12-04T14:28:00.004-05:00

Conservative groups are currently latching onto a piece of the Constitution that makes Senator Hillary Clinton ineligible to be Barack Obama's Secretary of State. Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution states: "No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time." This basically means that no lawmaker can hold a position if the salary for that position has been raised while that lawmaker was in office.

This is a problem for Senator Clinton as in January, President Bush raised the salary for the Secretary of State and other cabinet positions by $4,700 dollars. Senator Clinton has served in the Senate since January of 2001. The conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch says that the case is closed and shut, that Hillary Clinton cannot be the Secretary of State. Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton was quoted as saying "There's no getting around the Constitution's ineligibility clause, so Hillary Clinton is prohibited from serving in the Cabinet until at least 2013, when her current term expires".

However many legal scholars are claiming that there are ways around this clause. One such solution is to lower the salary of said position to its previous amount. This happened in 1974 when Ohio Senator William Saxbe was appointed attorney general by President Nixon. CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin listed off several other solutions, such as, for Senator Clinton to accept a lower salary, for the Senate to vote on a lower salary, or to simply ignore the problem based on "...the idea that no one has the right, has the standing, to sue to stop her from becoming secretary of state".

The clause can say what it says, as far as the Obama administration is concerned there are plenty of ways around it. In fact, Obama has said that he was well aware of the clause when he nominated Senator Clinton for the position. Also the public has fully agreed with the decision as a poll showed that 71% of Americans agree with Obama's decision. Overall the conservative groups such as the Judicial Watch Committee need to get over the fact that they lost and allow the Obama administration to move ahead unhindered. When there is clearly precedent to accept Clinton to her nominated position, the conservatives should allow it to happen and stop whining.

What's a Proper Reaction?

2008-12-03T13:22:00.004-05:00

So India has suffered an embarrassing and horrific attack on its citizens, on its' soil, on one of the best known symbols, the Taj Mahal Hotel in Mumbai. Now what? India has two options: it could do like the U.S. did after 9/11, and just go wild, using military force to defeat a guerilla foe. Or, it could do what the U.S. should have done, and work with the leadership of the country where the terrorists came from. Let's examine the two scenarios.

Option 1: Respond Like the U.S.

Well, it certainly seems to be a popular idea. All of the pundits and reporters and TV commentators seem to be stuck on the metaphor of "India's 9/11". And there certainly are parallels. Like 9/11, it was a devastating attack on India's soil, with a high number of civilian casualties, on a national landmark, with shocking swiftness, preparedness, and surprise. If India chose to go the route of the U.S., they would likely raid Pakistan to destroy the training camps, because it is the country of the terrorist's origin.

Option 2: Diplomacy and Cooperation

The Indian government could, instead, work with Pakistan to take down the terrorists in a more lasting and damaging way, by building up security and intelligence and then sharing information with Pakistan. It's not like the Pakistani government was behind the attacks; it was an entirely solo attack by the terrorists. Pakistan's government is weak at this time, and is unable to effectively root out the terrorists hiding within its borders. It needs help from other countries, especially India, to fight it's terrorists. Plus, Pakistan has had some horrible attacks of its own, such as the September attack on the Islamabad Marriott. It's not like the government enjoys having such dangerous chaos-makers inside its' borders.

So what'll it be? Go on a reckless military offensive, attacking other countries mercilessly and needlessly? Or will it be a diplomatic approach, working with other countries to counter-act the terrorists and root them out? So far, it seems that India is going with route # 2. I'd say that it's by far the right choice.

Now, what about the Pakistanis? The terrorists came from their country, and they claim to be waging a jihad against the forces of evil. What should the people of Pakistan do? Should they sit by, let the governments make big, sweeping statements about how this cannot be tolerated and the terrorists will be dealt with? Or should they act on their own, and show the terrorists that they are not helping their Muslim sisters and brothers?

Do you remember when the Muslim world rose up and protested the offensive Danish cartoon about the Prophet Muhammed? What if the Muslim world rose up again and protested the killing of innocent civilians? Most of Pakistan is not under the control of the radical fundamentalist Imams who preach hatred of the West. They can show the terrorists that killing others is not the way to get to heaven and the promised 72 virgins.

So far, there have been some positive signs of a repudiation of the terrorist's ideology. The Pakistani government has responded with sincere seriousness and has shown no link to the group involved. In addition, many of the prominent political and cultural leaders have stated their outrage and dismay and horror at the attack. Now, however, it is time for the rest of Pakistan and the Muslim world to step up. Because its' one thing for a politician to say something. It's quite another for the people to rise up as one and agree.

SOURCES: New York Times Op-Ed Column

India's 9/11? Not Exactly

Calling All Pakistanis

Rice Visits Pakistan

2008-12-03T04:33:00.002-05:00

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made a brief stop in Pakistan today. Rice met with President Asif Ali Zardari, her purpose being to strengthen the lines of communication between India and Pakistan, in light of the recent attacks on Mumbai. Her stop in Pakistan cam on the heels of a stop she made in India just a few days ago. The purpose of the meeting was to again speak about the recent attack on Mumbai.

President Zardari promised Rice that Pakistan would be investigating whether or not Pakistani militants were involved in the Mumbai attacks, he also vowed to take strong action against anyone that is found to have been involved. This statement was made after India accused Pakistani militants of being responsible for the attacks and requested that Pakistan find and turn over twenty suspects to the custody of authorities in India.

The Pakistani paper, The Daily Times, stated that "Rice herself has made no such accusation, saying that she wouldn't make conclusions until more evidence has been gathered". Despite this Pakistani cooperation in the matter would go a long way towards improving relations between India and Pakistan. While it is still unclear as to who exactly carried out the attacks, many believe it was Pakistani militants, while others blame it on Indian Muslims, on thing that is certain is that it will take cooperation from everyone to find the people responsible and bring them to justice.

Secretary of Defense Gates to Stay on for Obama Cabinet

2008-12-03T01:15:00.003-05:00

Current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has agreed to stay on during the Obama administration. While the two have had their differences on certain issues, such as the Iraq war, secretary gates was quoted as saying he was "impressed" with comments made by president-elect Obama. Gates has already stated that he has no intention of being a "caretaker secretary" and listed off several challenges that Obama will face including the budget and war strategy, while also stating that he will be involved in all of these issues.

Gates has said that he does not necessarily disagree with Obama's withdrawal plan for Iraq, stating that "he [Obama] wanted to have a responsible drawdown, and he also said that he was prepared to listen to his commanders." This is frankly great news as it shows that Obama truly is open to suggestions from people that have had more experience in government. Gates has so far stressed the issue of the Iraq war, specifically in regard to the length of a soldiers duty and the implementation of stop-loss. Stop-loss refers to the involuntary extension of a soldiers tour of duty.

Obama to Choose Richardson for Secretary of Commerce

2008-12-03T00:25:00.001-05:00

A Democratic source close to president-elect Obama has told CNN that Obama is likely to choose New Mexico governor Bill Richardson for his Secretary of Commerce. According to this source Obama has had Richardson on his list for cabinet members and also spoke to him about the position during November. CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley was quoted as saying "He brings to this plate, in particular in an era where the economy is the focus of attention, a lot of skills that could be put to use -- perhaps opening up marketplaces for U.S. products abroad". If this is true to be one of the reasons that Obama is seeking him then it shows that the economy is still first ad foremost on Obama's agenda.

Richardson was considering running for the 2008 presidential election, however after a poor showing the New Hampshire primaries he dropped out and later endorsed Obama.

Saxby Destroys Hopes for Filibuster Proof Seante

2008-12-02T23:15:00.003-05:00

When the 2008 general election began results on the senate races began to indicate something that has not happened for over thirty years; a filibuster proof senate. The democrats were beginning to have hopes that they may not only have control of the senate but also be filibuster proof. However this dream was shot dead on Tuesday, December 2nd, when Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss was elected over his opponent, Democrat Jim Martin.

Chambliss was reported as saying that the "people all around the world truly had their eyes on Georgia, and you have delivered tonight a strong message to the world that conservative Georgian values matter". The election, which has been going on since November 4th, due to Chambliss's inability to win the majority vote in a three-person race, marks the end of the dream for a filibuster proof senate. An interesting fact is that this is the first time since 1992 that Georgia has held a run-off election.

The New Ambassador

2008-12-02T23:11:00.000-05:00

Susan Elizabeth Rice was born on November 17, 1964. She is a foreign policy expert and is now the American Ambassador to the United States. The two ambassadors who came before her were Kofi Annan, and Ban Ki-Moon.

Barack Obama has chosen Susan E.Rice to be the ambassador of the United Nations. According to a recent article in The New York Times, Ms.Rice will hopefully help stop major problems even if it means using armed forces to help solve those problems. Problems can include the recent genocide cases that have taken place in Darfur. According to this article, Experts believe that Obama is serious about spreading positive change, the reason they believe such a statement is because he chose Susan E.Rice who is Obama's "closest advisors, so it underscores how much of a priority he's making the position." She is a good candidate for this position because she is not afraid to face whatever she has to in order to prevent a crisis from happening. “Admirers said she is a good listener and able to stand up to strong personalities, including foreign autocrats and militants in volatile regions of the world.” (www.nytimes.com) The reason I believe Ms.Susan Rice is going to be an excellent United Nations Ambassador to the United States is because, according to the article, she visited Rwanda in 1994 right after the genocide. After she saw millions of bodies lying on the ground, she promised herself that she would never let this happen if she ever was in charge of managing or even being part of the UN. “I swore to myself that if I ever faced such a crisis again, I would come down on the side of dramatic action, going down in flames if that was required,” she told the Atlantic Monthly in 2001.

For more information, please click here.

Jimmy Carter and Human Rights

2008-12-02T22:43:00.002-05:00

The world was ecstatic when it heard that Barack Obama was going to be the next president of the United States. With Barack Obama as president, everyone knew that everything was going to be okay whether it was ending the two ongoing wars or defending and properly understanding Human Rights worldwide. Jimmy Carter, the founder of The Carter Center, has said in a recent interview with CNN, “a high priority will be the restoration of human rights, which have been badly eroded in recent years.” The reason Jimmy Carter decided to focus and address this topic is because he believes that the United States should focus more on enforcing Human Rights around the world. According to Jimmy Carter, activists from around the world join his annual conferences and say that the US is not advocating and encouraging other countries to engage in Human Rights acts. Because the US is not encouraging those acts, countries do not feel the need to do so. “For years, these activists have told us that when the United States engaged in torture and indefinite detention, their decades of struggle for rights began to erode. Dictators who had felt pressure from the United States to improve rights were suddenly off the hook. With new leadership in Washington, a clear and principled message on the centrality of human rights can help set a new tone.” Jimmy Carter believes that the United States is the main and higher power in which developing countries can look up to when it comes to issues regarding Human Rights. The main purpose of Jimmy Carter’s interview was to show that when humans are taken advantage of, used and abused, peace could never be achieved. He also encourages people to listen to Human Right activists when they speak about problems within their own communities. We need to be aware of those problems and help solve them before they escalate and become more dangerous and harder to handle.

For more information, please click here.

Guaranteed Paycheck

2008-12-02T20:45:00.003-05:00

Here's a reason for some why the Army is so appealing: a guaranteed paycheck. In an officially receding economy in which we are now hearing that A-Rod is starting to feel the difficulties of economic struggle, the view switches to everyday youth who would rather risk their lives in the Army rather than risk testing the waters of the slumping job market. According to an MSNBC report, the retention rate of soldiers in their early careers has been steadily increasing since 2004 and now rests 20% higher than in 2004. One soldier was identified as not hesitant in re-enlisting for 5 years after serving in the 82nd Airborne Division which suffered the highest one year total of the units sent since the fighting between Iraq and Afghanistan started (MSNBC). The soldier reasoned, "I want a stable life for my wife in a very shaky economy. There were no other options. I figure if do another five or ten years in the Army, the economy will turn around and I can get a truck-driving job." Others who were noted in the report for enlisting as a result of the sagging job market included a factory worker being laid off and a 21 year old who wanted to get a 2 year college degree but opted to enlist in the army for security.

In turn the economic crisis has been a big help to the Pentagon, which had its strongest recruiting years since 2004. David Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness admitted, "We do benefit when things look less positive in civil society. What difficult economic times give us, I think is an opening to make our case to people who we might not otherwise have."

This may seem upsetting at first, to see America's jobless youth resorting to enlisting in the Army for job security because of the lack of other options. But when all is said and done, serving in the Army is a much better use for Americans than say, working at a dog racing track, which sparked debates recently about closing and eliminating jobs. And the job security that soldiers get is by far not the only benefit they receive. Many learn skills while serving in the Army that could serve them use once they finish their service. A Marine Staff Sergeant, Angela Mink stated her reason for deciding to re-enlist even after suffering a helicopter related injury, "Equivalent pay is nonexistent, once you factor in insurance premiums, housing costs...and we would definitely have had to relocate. I have a child with a disability and what civilian employer is going to take that into consideration when they think of moving you somewhere?"

At the same time people could argue that it is not right for people to have to put their lives in mortal danger in order to get better financial and employment security. It comes down to whether or not you would risk your life for a number of years instead of financial adversity, and no matter how many people join the Army, it is one job that will always be hiring.

"Soldiers choose war over bleak economy". Associated Press. 2 December 2008. MSNBC. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28019406/

guess foreign policy is a big deal after all...

2008-12-02T20:42:00.003-05:00

So, the economy is still a pretty big deal, but after the terrorist attacks in India, foreign policy has jumped to the forefront of a lot of peoples minds. So whats going to happen?

Well, Obama has defended his belief that, if terrorists flee the US into Pakistan, they can be pursued. But it will be interesting to see what his opinion is about India pursueing terrorists into Pakistan, which is where the attacks are believed to have originated from.

But besides other issues like Russia, Al Queada, Iran, and Iraq, Obama will also have to deal with one of the worlds new great powers: China.

In recent years China has had an economic growth rate 3 times that of the US, and while it is estimated that both will drop in the next few years, the best estimates are that the US will have a growth rate of 1%, while China will have a rate of 5%. If China is growing five times faster than the US, then it will not be long until the US is surpassed as the worlds leading power.

As if Obama didn't have enough on his plate with the economy, he now has to deal with all of this to? The task laid before him was already more difficult than any President has ever faced, but this is almost impossible. Hopefully he live up to expectations. Because it is very possible that America as we know it is at an end. Will the US continue to be a leading power, or will constant economic decline, terrorist attacks, and the success of other nations lead to us being the beggar of the world?

Where will Hillary go from here?

2008-12-02T20:17:00.003-05:00

Even though she lost out to Obama in the primaries, being the newly nominated Secretary of State sure isn't that bad. But what does it mean for her career? As Secretary of State she is in a prime position to demonstrate her political effectiveness, but then again she is also in a great position to usurp Obama and cause dissent among his followers.

Clinton's options are to either work with Obama and put the past behind her, or to work to undermine him. If she works with him she will show a unified force in the White House, and will demonstrate a lot of qualities people will look for. But, if she works against Obama, and leaks information that she is displeased with the way he is handling a situation that goes badly, then she can almost gaurantee herself the Democratic nomination in the next election. Of course, if she does do that, then there is no telling what will happen to the countries economic position.

But, with either position she chooses, her performance as Secretary of State will determine what happens to her political career. If she does a good job, then she opens up more doors for herself, and, again, could have a chance at running again for President in a few years.

Regardless, Hillary Clinton is part of Obama's new powerhouse cabinet. She is intelligent, and she is capable, and while she is the most controversial of Obama's selections, she is also probably one of the best candidates ever nominated to that position. Where ever she goes from here, the nomination to Secretary of State has the potential to be a huge boost for her. While she will never overshadow Obama, she has the potential to ride the wave all the way to another presidential ballot.

Black Friday

2008-12-02T18:31:00.004-05:00

Jdimytai Damour, a 34-year-old salesman, died during what was considered to be a crowd of customers of about 4-5,000 shoppers at Walmart. “An autopsy showed that Damour died of asphyxiation after being trampled, Nassau County officials have said.” A lady who was there at exactly 3:50 am said, “It was a real mob.” The reason for his death is that Walmart did not have enough security and was not assuring people that they will all be able to enter the store and get what they are looking for. It all happened on Friday, which was also called “Black Friday”, in New York. Two customers are suing Walmart because they thought that Walmart should have been more prepared because it should have known more about “Black Friday.” The two customers were both injured during the rush early in the morning. The two customers were father and son, also known as the Messadieus. They were “literarily carried outside the store, and are now suffering from pain in their neck and back from being caught in that surge of people.” (cnn.com) The lawyer said that the police visited the site several times but never even bothered to really look into it. The Messadieus’ lawyer says that there should have been better security, and Walmart should have known of what was going to happen. According to CNN, a video that was taken of the scene showed customers being stepped on and being thrown to the ground. This did not only happen in New York, it also happened around the country in many other shops. In Boston, one man died in the downtown-crossing district and many were injured. Storeowners need to accept the fact that whenever black Friday comes along, chaos is bound to happen. They should know to set up security. What is ironic is the fact that people are dying and being injured when they are shopping for a happy and joyful holiday.

Bye Bye to bushisms

2008-12-02T17:45:00.004-05:00

Im going to miss Bush. How could you not? I mean we have calenders and books based solely off of the 'Bushism'. I mean, Bush might have actually been a very competent man, whom will be remembered badly simply because we couldn't inderstand what the hell he was getting at most of the time. take this for example:

"The system is becoming unthawed, and it's going to take time for the system to become unthawed. What the American people have got to know is we've taken the steps to unthaw it, which is the first step to recovery."

If something is becoming unthawed, doesnt that mean its freezing? We dont want to have the system to freeze. that would be very bad Mr. Bush. Honestly though, I cant tell if he's a smart guy who cant talk, is just stupid, or is a criminal mastermind who openly admits his devilish schemes to 'unthaw' the Earth.

Of course, one of the good things is that we wont have to deal with his confusingly adamant nature anymore. I mean the guy has found every reason possible to make the Iraq war justified, but in a recent interview said himself that going to war was a mistake. But later in the same interview, when asked if he would go to war again, stated "that is a do-over I can't do". Say what? I'de like Bush as a clown, or maybe a stand up comedian, but a President needs to be a bit more concise.

Anyways, I am still glad I can finally say farewell to Bush. It's been a long strange trip, but we're starting a new one. Hopefully Obama will do better, but hes already off to a good start.

School Choice

2008-12-02T16:51:00.005-05:00

The news recently has been that the President-Elect and his wife have decided to a send their two children to the exclusive Sidwell school in Washington D.C. The future first couple have acted prudently, in a manner not dissimilar to how the rest of the transition has been run. The children will undoubtedly receive a fine education and Sidwell seems well equipped to deal with the special needs that will arise regarding the daughters of the most powerful man in the world. One question though remains, if the Obamas recognise the superiority of private education, why then do they deny that choice to thousands in our nations capital and millions around the country by going against school choice vouchers. Vouchers would allow parents to take the total or a large portion of what it costs for the state to educate their child and apply that money to a private institution. They are currently being tested in the capital, and for every one child who has applied for the program, three are denied. The average income of the families these children come from is 23,000 dollars. The state has failed these families, D.C. public schools rank at the bottom of 11 major city school systems. The same article notes that half of the children attend schools that are described as "persistently dangerous", and that the cost per pupil is among the highest among major cities at close to 13,000 dollars a year. That parents line up to receive a check for a little more then half of that is certainly telling. I may just be naive, but I can't see any reasonable argument for not extending this program across the country and giving the gift of hope and decent education to the most impoverished of our citizens. this would not only help to level the playing field between public and private education, the worst public schools would simply cease to exist, but it would give poorer families a far greater choice as to how their children are educated. Wouldn't that be change we could believe in?

Justice and Law

2008-12-02T16:48:00.006-05:00

Great nations, it is said, are not destroyed from without until they are weakened from within. With the myriad of topics and grave national discussions this country is engaged in the most far reaching effect of this next election has been obscured. The opinion of the judges appointed during the coming presidency, particularly those placed on the Supreme Court, will shape the way our constitution is understood and enacted upon well into the next century. The effects of which will be felt long after the next president, with all his promises and hopes, passes into history.
The basic stability of our country is based on the simple not overly long document, ratified by the states, known as the United States Constitution. It enumerates ways which laws can be enacted and repealed; defines the rights of its citizen; and lays out a system of checks and balances which have brought this country, in the span of roughly two hundred years, from a new world back water to unarguably the greatest power on earth. The continued belief in and protection of the Constitution is an integral part of ensuring that our Republic remains the potent force and garuntee of freedom that it has become. As Thomas Jefferson said, "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. "

The major candidates presented two stark interpretations of the judges necessary to maintain our rights and check any unlawful usurpation of power. Senator Obama believed in a "living constitution" that is a constitution whose interpretation changes over time. Senator Mccain believed in strict constitutionalism or in a "dead constitution" that is an interpretation where the founders "original intent" is given heavy weight. Now the idea of a living constitution is on the surface an atractive one. It allows a judge to take present mores into account and allows him or her greater leeway in correcting wrongs that are not specifically noted in the constitution. It is this changing understanding of the prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" that evolves the methods by which we execute our prisoners, from strait forward hanging and firing squads to the use of more ingenous gases and injections. Of course, there is a great danger in this method, because just as such leeway can be used to do good above and beyond the letter of the law, it can just as easily be used to commit evil. The proper role of Judges is to interpet the laws that are passed by the legislative branch, not create new rights or penalties based on their own opinions. Some judges have begun to site the rulings of foreign courts, like those in Zimbabwe, as a justification for their decisions, this is completely wrong. The temptation is great to cheer the appointment of those judges that will act in accord with one's political persuasion, but Democrat and Republican alike should fear the increasing power that is placed in the hands of these unelected officals. If new rights are needed or old laws are wanting, the best place for change is in the ballot box.

Deterrence, Terrorism...Raskolnikov

2008-12-02T16:39:00.007-05:00

Todd brought up an interesting point in one of his comments, the West has yet to come up with an adequate form of deterrence against terrorist assaults that is both effective and morally acceptable. The idea that a strong well prepared armed forces is the best guarantee to peace, and as an extension of that, that a balance of power makes War too awful to contemplate ( An idea that came to the fore with the ghastly result of World War I but was then refined and simplified to produce the horrific "Mutually Assured Destruction", where the certainty of a global nuclear holocaust was meant to chasten those among the super powers who hoped for a first strike. ) is an idea that has no power against a stateless terrorist entity. This is particularly true to a group which is dedicated to giving their lives for their cause. What threat is potent enough to stay such determination? Adolf Hitler wrote that in regards to partisan attacks in the territories his armies occupied "whatever worked" was what was to be done. This evolved in France, but even more violently in the East, into a system of hostages held in certain townships who would be shot in many multiples for every German killed or act of sabotage perpetrated. While surely monstrous, one wonders if it was even effective, for it doesn't seem to have appreciably slowed partisan activity and assuredly turned the populace more heavily against the occupying armies. Echos of this extreme response exist in present day. Seven years ago Thomas Friedman wrote an Op-Ed in the New York Times describing the father of the current Syrian "President's" method in dealing with terrorist attacks emanating from a certain city, Hama. He ringed the city with troops, and then shelled it into submission, 15,000 to 20,000 Syrians are estimated to have died. The Op-Ed went on to note that Terrorist attacks from that city ceased. A few years later a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed tackled the problem more squarely and finished by considering the idea that the United States should publicly state that if a terrorist attack involving WMD occurs on American soil the response would be a Nuclear strike on the Muslim holy city of Mecca. It would seem to me that such a declaration would not be believed, but if it was would create such fear and loathing in the Muslim world as to completely negate the statements purpose.
There is something in the human psyche, perhaps particularly in the West, that craves the simplicity of the action unhampered by morality and law, as if such limits inherently impede just accomplishment. In our future considerations of how best to protect ourselves from terrorist attacks and in our responses to attacks here and abroad, we should not be so quick to accept policies which go against our country's understanding of morality and justice in hopes of greater safety. It would cheapen what we fight to save. Still, the problem of deterring those men and women who would do us harm and die for it will not fade quick, as the somber, bloodied hotels of Mumbai unfortunately reveal.

Barack Obama's Cabinet: Part 2

2008-12-02T16:35:00.003-05:00

Barack Obama has just announced that he will be nominating Bill Richardson as Secretary of Commerce for his cabinet. It seems Obama's new strategy is to employ his former opponents from the Democratic primaries into positions of power. 4 out of the 8 candidates are now going to be in the cabinet this Spring. What's next? My guess, John Edwards as Secretary of Energy, Dennis Kucinich as Secretary of Transportation, Chris Dodd as Secretary of Health and Human Services, and my personal favorite, Mike Gravel as Secretary of Agriculture. Then again, Mike Gravel after the primary jumped ship, endorsed a Green party candidate, and then joined the Libertarian party. Talk about reaching across the aisle...

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

2008-12-02T16:25:00.003-05:00

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the UN sixty years ago this week. Today, as a member of Amnesty International, I helped out at a petition tabling in Balfour, and some interesting discussions and arguments began, especially when I spoke with certain members of this class.

I don’t necessarily agree with everything Amnesty International does, or how we go about things. As for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, I have a few problems with it. I know it can’t technically be “universal.” I have a lot of issues with the UN in general, actually. There is also the problem of mixing things that are human rights with things that should, by nature, be civil rights, which the Declaration does.

That being said, I think that most of the values the document lays out are still a significant part of our global society. These rights should be common sense. People should be treated equally. They should not be tortured or enslaved. It’s all quite simple, really. It goes back to the concept of “Everything I need to know I learned in kindergarten.” Yet we see the UDHR violated every day. We see political prisoners and torture, and we see people being denied basic rights that make us human.

To be honest, I have no clue how to fix these problems, and stop the horrors caused by violators. And I don’t think anyone does have a perfect solution, because no matter what we do, we will be encroaching on the rights of governments to make decisions for themselves.

If we do find a way to overcome these obstacles, I believe we should find an alternative to the UDHR. I think it’s a good way to take a stand against issues like torture, but it still has problems. Right now, it seems like it is merely symbolic. Even a revision might be helpful. Until then, I believe it is the best we can do for a temporary stand for human rights.

The Supreme Court: The Final Frontier

2008-12-02T16:20:00.008-05:00

Although most is the election is over with two senatorial races still remaining, one aspect of the American Political System remains overlooked. This aspect is the Supreme Court. While thinking about which party to vote for, one had to consider what that would mean for the Supreme Court later down the line. With an increasingly aging court, there will be vacancies that will need to be filled by the Obama administration. Justice John Paul Stevens is currently 88 and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is currently 75. There are also three other Justices in their seventies. This past election was pivotal to the Supreme Court as the future nominated Justices would either mean a conservative or a liberal court.

Justice Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito are considered to be the conservatives of the court whereas Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer are thought to be the liberals of the court with Justice Kennedy viewed as a "swing voter". If McCain had been elected president, that would mean that his nominations would most likely be conservatives and would therefore have more conservative rulings. Roe v. Wade would most likely be overturned and abortion would no longer be protected.

With an Obama presidency however, his picks will most likely be more liberal and will therefore have more liberal rulings. If more Justices retire, or are no longer healthy enough to serve, Obama may be able to secure a liberal majority in the court, which could mean a liberal court for over 25 years or until more Justices retire. I'm sure we will know in the near future.

Sex Education Reform

2008-12-02T16:20:00.004-05:00

In modern American society, families are changing and evolving faster than ever before. While this evolution is for the most part for the better, there are still some issues that linger and need to be answered with comprehensive policy changes in the new Obama Administration. Policy reformation must be brought forth to ensure that America’s youth stay healthy, informed, as well as responsible when dealing with sex. Therefore, the lack, or misguided use of sex education in the public school institution must be reformed to be more comprehensive and informational.

Abstinence-only education. Especially in religious context, teenagers are taught to wait until marriage to have sex, yet some of these teenagers then become pregnant though being taught abstinence-only; much like the case of Bristol Palin, Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s daughter becoming pregnant though being taught to stay abstinent until marriage. Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) also run rampant among teenagers that are taught abstinence only education. The article Red Sex, Blue Sex from The New Yorker states, “Communities with high rates of pledging also have high rates of S.T.D.s” (Red Sex, Blue Sex). Pledging meaning teenagers who vow to remain abstinent until marriage.

Clearly, teaching abstinence only education or having no sex education does not impede teen pregnancy or the spread of STDs in the manner that it should. Therefore, policy should dictate that abstinence should be taught as the primary sex education in school, yet also there should be an emphasis and safe sex. Condoms should be distributed freely to students in high school. Sex should not be taught as a “bad thing” to students and should be embraced as natural as long as long as teenagers are healthy and responsible.

Although these issues are not the only ones hurting American teens, their reformation will act as a conduit for other issues like child neglect and abortion. A developed society should be able to reform it’s policies when they no longer work in the modern context. A society’s foundation relies on a strong family unit and a healthy population of citizens to survive.

Work Cited: Margaret, Talbot. "Red Sex, Blue Sex." The New Yorker 11 Nov 2008 2 Dec 2008 .

2013: The end of the world?

2008-12-02T16:00:00.005-05:00

According to CNN, A Biological terror attack will most likely take place. This attack will be more powerful than any nuclear weapon every created. This biological weapon will hit somewhere in the world and the results will be "devastating". According to Bob Graham, a former senator, "It would be 9/11 times 10 or a hundred in terms of the number of people who would be killed." The shocking article also related this attack to the flu virus that killed millions in 1918. The attack will kill millions and leave thousands of people if not millions with life-threatening diseases. If this is true, security should be taken more seriously around the world. Biological Research Laboratories need to be watched over, and airports need to be safe and protected at all times. It is scary what a group of people can do to the world. Scientists believe that terrorists are going to threaten peace around the world. The article mentioned that if the attack does happen it will most likely come from three major countries that are now producing nuclear weapons, the three countries are North Korea, Iran and Pakistan. This does not make sense at all, why would scientists come up with a year of when the world would is going to be under attack? What people are trying to do now is spread peace and try to repair the world and not predict future attacks. If anything, I believe that most of us are trying to move on and look forward to a bright future. I think that as young and aware citizens we should be able to speak out about this topic and be able to disagree with the fact that attacks are going to take place in the near future. The world is already suffering a series of wars; I do not believe that a biological attack will make everything better. Are we looking at World War 3?

For more information click here.

After some time in the shadows, Biden is desperate for some attention!

2008-12-02T15:43:00.005-05:00

Vice President Cheney was always one to work in the shadows, but Biden seemed happy to be out in public with Barack Obama in meeting with the nation's governors. In the past month since the election, he has mostly been silent side-kicking, only to join Obama in private meetings or standing behind him during conferences without saying a word.

But this week he looked happy to be out there, and unleashed as he was given a speaking role both at the unveiling of the national security in Chicago and then during a meeting with the National Governers' Association. He even had more to say than Obama did, proves how eager he was to speak!

“Since the race is over, no one pays attention to me at all,” Mr. Biden said. “So maybe you will walk outside with me or something later and say hello to me” (New York Times).

He even gave Palin a warm welcome, poor guy, he may be bored. He wants to be out there and participate. Well at least he's the future Vice President, and he's not over stressing himself. But I'm sure we'll see much more of him in the near future, I mean, we have to!

However, he got a biographer recently, maybe that'll give him enough attention. The books are likely to his the shelfs in 2012. Vice presidents need biographies too!

Overall, Biden will remain in Obama's shadows, no matter how bright and big his smile in, I kind of feel bad for him, he seems to be a really people-person, and as of now he's not getting much attention and he not doing what he signed up to do yet...but he sure will be soon, and he'll be over his head with work!

However it's great that we have a leader who is eager to work and participate, we need someone at this point in time to be enthusiastic about leading our nation, all he wants is to do his job, and hopefully his eagerness will lead us in the right direction.

"Biden Has His Say (Once Again)" 2008 Election Update and Politics and Government - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com.

Murkowski: "Leave my seat alone Palin!"

2008-12-02T15:07:00.002-05:00

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski has some advice for Sarah Palin: If you want a chance for the White House, leave my seat alone.

Murkowski, who is up for reelection in 2010, is nervous to hear whether Palin is competing for her spot in the US Senate.

But Murkowski is defending herself saying that Palin should be the one who is nervous.

Palin is up for reelection in 2010. She could do a second term as governor, but the Senate has some decent attractions: a national platform, getting her résumé to look better, and to rebuild her damage reputation on foreign policy and other issues.

Murkowski thinks running against her would be a bad idea for Palin's sake, because if she lost her "stock would drop just ahead of a 2012 presidential run. And if she won, she be a backbencher on chamber that is dominated by seniority-and would have to begin her presidential campaign as soon as she took office" (Politico).

It also seems as if there as personal issues between the two woman as well that adds onto the drama. Palin defeated Frank Murkowski, Lisa's father, in the governors race, and claimed that her father was part of the "old boys network". This term is obviously offensive to Lisa, as she cut an interview short when the topic was brought up.

Even though Palin's popularity decreased after she took on the role as the GOP's vice presidential candidate and didn't perform so perfectly in television interviews, at home she still has high ratings, with about 80 percent support from Republican voters. Murkowski shares similarly high numbers.

Two Republicans from Alaska head to head for the US Senate? Pretty Crazy. But I must say that I have to agree with Murkowski on this issue, because if Palin wants to run for president, being in the senate would be unreasonable as she would have to start her campaign right as she starts her job as senator.

"Murkowski to Palin: Leave my seat alone" Politico.com. 2 Dec. 2008.

Cabinet Picks

2008-12-02T14:53:00.002-05:00

What can we learn about the Obama war cabinet picks and what does this say about the current state of American Politics? Well, it says a lot of things. Obama is well known for his academic credentials, Editing the Harvard Law Review, among other achievements. But his approach to politics seems to be the same one: that of an academic. This is also evident in his choices for Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and his choice for Secretary of Defense, who also served under the Bush administration, Robert Gates. It seems as though he is more impressed with academic credentials and governing record rather than loyalty or familiarity with a secretary or other Whitehouse position. This could play out in one of two ways: the academic vigor of his picks will eventually pay off in that they make the most logically sound decisions for the country. That, or the lack of experience by himself and others like Clinton will decrease the strength of American diplomacy, and the Obama presidency will be worth little more than popularity.

But if intelligence is the defining guideline that secures American foreign policy, instead of experience, then we're in good shape. Of the 18 nominations, 12 were educated at an Ivy League school, Stanford or MIT. The academic vigor of this cabinet and ability to make sound decisions will allow the Obama camp to take risks, and maybe act on the themes of change that ubiquitously resounded over the course of the campaign. Fortitude and confidence in decision making, traits necessary in this time of war, will be present. Big personalities were chosen for their use in persuasion with foreign diplomats, this strategy used instead of force abroad. With intelligence he can trust, and a Democratic congress behind him, Obama should be able to promise at least some of the change he promised in regard to foreign affairs. Lets hope all goes to plan.

Spare Some Change, Mr. Obama?

2008-12-02T14:28:00.006-05:00

As Barack Obama unveils his cabinet dream team, I can't help but wonder how these picks indicate change in the government. Some of the people he are picking were members of past administrations and even (gasp) the Bush administration. His pick of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State indicates that he is putting in the same people that he has spoken against throughout his campaign. It seems hypocritical to put in his opponent, the person he worked to beat, into his cabinet. People can no longer blame it on him trying to appease Clinton supporters since he no longer has to. Is it out of guilt or obligation? No one can say for sure.

Rahm Emanuel, Obama's pick for Chief of Staff, worked as an advisor for Bill Clinton during his term as President in the 90's. Many politicians have charged that Emanuel is too partisan, being a strict democrat. House Minority Leader John Boehner claimed, "This is an ironic choice for a president-elect who has promised to change Washington, make politics more civil and govern from the center" (Emanuel pick gets mixed reaction). Obama ran his campaign stating that he would reach across party lines in order to proliferate bi-partisanship, yet his pick of Emanuel might say the opposite.

Finally, Obama's decision to keep Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, on board for his Presidency is completely hypocritical of his call for change in government. Secretary Gates has served under three Republican Presidents, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush. Keeping Secretary gates on is not change. I support Obama's pick of a republican to encourage bi-partisanship, but he should have picked someone fresh with new ideas. In order for Barack Obama to achieve his vision of a new government must come with a new crowd. As the saying goes, if you're part of the problem, you're not part of the solution.

Works Cited:

"Emanuel Pick Gets Mixed Reaction." CNN.com 11 Nov 2008 2 Dec 2008 .

Millennial Monies

2008-12-02T14:05:00.002-05:00

It appears that Obama raised the most amount of money of any candidate running for office, ever. An article on Politico today shows some figures that assess the gross funds that Obama was able to raise, and also how he was able to do so. It seems that funds raisers, the people that contributed to the campaign from their own pocket, were determined not to let Obama's hopes die. The article points out that Obama's estimated $750 million raised over the course of the last two years was more than the combined raised sum by Bush in 2004 and his rival John Kerry. The article also points out the uncanny ability for the Obama camp to raise money without even asking for it. They reportedly raised nearly $10 million the night of the Republican National Convention, between the back-to-back speeches of John McCain and Sarah Palin.

No doubt this money was able to be raised because of the internet. The use of the Obama website, allowed numerous donations to be make without even asking for it. This is evidenced in the fact that early in 2007 when Obama was first thinking abot running for office, he had about 20,000 people on his mailing list. He now has 10 million. And of these 10 million names, nearly one half of them turned into donors, some more than once.

The increased use of the internet allowed for fundraising records to be set in the 2008 election. The electronic age has ushered in an easy of operations that will surely be copied and studied in years and elections to come.

Obama and Clinton's Rocky Relationship

2008-12-02T14:03:00.004-05:00

Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton's relationship has been through quite a ride since just four years ago when Obama was a Senator for Illinois and Clinton was the junior senator from New York and former first lady.

Obama has since moved past her to the top, and many say that they aren't surprised that they have taken their relationship to the next political level, even though they were rivals during the election. Just because they were rivals for the presidential position, they never really felt dislike towards one another, and it seemed more that supporters for each candidate were the ones who felt much dislike towards the opposing Democratic candidate.

In fact, Obama was more open to consider Clinton as VP pick than most thought, he would always say things like 'should we take another look at Hillary?' while he was trying to make his decision. But from his advisors the answer he always got was a no.

When Obama was elected into the US senate, he praised her and stated that he would look to her and her staff for advice. Now, after being rivals, he is her boss. However, though they have been through this rocky road people don't necessarily realize how much respect that have always had for one another.

Of course there has been some rough patches between them during the election.

"She attacked his inexperience and called him naïve on foreign policy for saying he would meet with foreign leaders without preconditions.

He attacked her as Old Washington and defined his early candidacy in opposition to her vote to authorize the war in Iraq, which he framed as 'the single most important foreign policy decision since the end of the Cold War' " (Politico).

As the election became more heated, it is reported that Obama even ignored an awaiting handshake from Clinton and walked off. There have also been some racist and sexist issues between Obama and Clinton during the election, one where Obama interrupted Hilary's response in a debate with "You're likable enough, Hillary." and when Bill Clinton compared Obama to Jesse Jackson's presidential runs, which was widlwt understood s an attempt to put down Obama from "a mainstream to a fringe, black candidate" (Politico).

Hillary only's compliment for Obama after she exited the primaries was that he had a

“spirited dialogue” then said, “That was the nicest way I could think of phrasing it” (Politico).

It was even speculated that the Clintons avoided meeting with Obama after Hillary dropped out of the election.

Yes, they've had their rough patches but after the dust settled after the primaries, they seemed back to normal, and they were respecting each other just like they 'always had'. She then had her full support for him, and they gained trust for one another when Clinton started helping Obama in the campaign.

Their relationship has overall been fairly up and down, but now they are on they're ups, and even when they were in their downs, they still had the upmost respect for one another. Now, they are happy to work together, with Obama as boss and Hillary as Secretary of State.

"Evolution of the Obama-Clinton connection." Politico.com. 1 Dec. 2008. 2 Dec. 2008

Obama's Test: The Economy? Mumbai? Somali Pirates?!?

2008-12-02T13:23:00.007-05:00

Since Joe Biden proclaimed that there would be an international crisis within the first 6 months of the Obama presidency to test Obama's leadership, the media and the American Citizens have been holding their collective breath waiting to see what horrible event will occur. Will it be the economic recession, the Mumbai crisis, or was it the Somali Pirates that Obama should have handled? The correct answer is that these are not Obama's problems.....yet.

What the media seems to neglect is that we still have a president named George W. Bush. Although he is in the lame duck phase of his presidency, or as CNN put it "the lamest duck", He still has the ability to work on reform to even remotely try to fix the economy. Although his approval rating is the lowest it has been, that does not change the fact that he is still our leader and Barack Obama is not. It is a great idea for Obama to create his economic team now and to set out a plan for when he is elected, but that is not for another two months. Two months of economic recession could mean the difference of putting some people out of their homes or not being able to feed themselves. George Bush should be working now with Barack Obama to make the transition easier into office when his term is over so Obama can set his plan into motion right away. There should be some aspects George Bush could do now in order to put a solution to the crisis in motion. (Obama's full economic plan can be found at http://change.gov/agenda/economy_agenda/).

Some people have suggested moving the inauguration to an earlier date so Obama can work right away to fix the economy. Though audacious, this measure has occurred in the past. The original inauguration date was March 4 but during The Great Depression, it was decided that Herbert Hoover should leave office earlier and Franklin Roosevelt be put in sooner so that he could work to fix the crisis earlier. I say let George Bush be president until inauguration and let history will judge his presidency.

Auto Trouble

2008-12-02T13:13:00.005-05:00

It seems that another one of America's biggest niche markets is in trouble, the auto industry. Ford Motor Company is asking Congress today for a $9 billion "stand-by line of credit" to help stabilize the company in this recession, but has no plans to actually tap into it. This is obviously a very special issue, since if one of the three big American auto makers goes bust, Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler, the American auto industry is all but gone. What I found interesting about the article in the LA Times is the fact that this line of credit that Ford is asking for they don't intend to use, ever. Of course if they have to, they will, seeing as the current economic situation of the country doesn't bode well for a market where the asking price is $15,000+ for one of their products. Ford CEO Alan Mulally has made a public statement to help convince Congress to allot tax-payer dollars to dig out the auto industry.

"Mulally said he'd work for $1 per year if his firm had to take any government loan money. The company's plan also says it will cancel all management employees' 2009 bonuses, scrap merit increases for its North American salaried employees next year, and sell its five corporate aircraft."

Now, these seem like drastic measure, and I'm sure they are, but I don't believe for a second that a CEO of formerly one of the largest companies in the world will accept basically no compensation is his compan goes under. Call me crazy, but Ford may have played a part in making this recession, why should our tax dollars fish them out?

This is a big issue. GM and Chrysler have said they could collapse in weeks if not given some kind of booster to their market, and will probably present their cases to Congress later this week. With billions owed to creditors, its clear that the great American auto industry that has thrived for a decade could now be on its last leg.

Larry King Live

2008-12-02T13:07:00.006-05:00

There were many reactions to Obama's appointment of his cabinet yesterday. Larry King, host of the highly rated "Larry King Live" on CNN, dedicated part of his TV talk show last night in order to ask questions about the decisions that Obama made or as he referred to it "drafting the right players", particularly the choice of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. Larry King discussed the experience Hillary Clinton could bring into the White House and the positive aspects of the appointment with authors and political analysts.

When Larry King put the question out there of what struck the analysts about the decisions, the analysts were quick to jump on the appointment of Hillary Clinton and how bold the move was, but also how beneficial it could end up being it they would be able to establish a stabilized relationship. Hillary Clinton could have a lot to offer and lot of advice from her previous experience in the White House. Larry King also asked whether there was anything in the appointment of Hillary Clinton that reflected his continuous slogan of change during his campaign. The main response King got was that both Hillary Clinton and Obama share completely different views compared to George Bush and that any small difference between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama is marginal at most when compared to Bush once again, so there is change coming. The issue of big egos playing a part was also discussed, but mainly downplayed the significance of the clash that may occur between them, referring to the many appearances made during Obama's campaign and the support Hillary Clinton gave to him as well as endorsing him after she dropped out of the race.

It is strange that after bashing her so much on the campaign trail and appearing to disagree with Clinton so much, a clip was shown at the beginning of Larry King Live, with Obama saying how much confidence he has in Hillary Clinton as a woman of American stature. A clip was also shown of Clinton praising Obama and showing her excitement on being able to share the journey with Obama. On camera they will act nice for now, but we have to wait and see whether they will really buy into each other. I think the analysts on the show were being a little bit too nice in downplaying their egos. I believe both are very intelligent and if they end up having conflicts, it would be a shame because together they would be a formidable duo.

Facebook for Kids?!

2008-12-02T12:46:00.005-05:00

In the Surrey UK, a 'mum' has been feeling left out when she off everyday working in her recruitment job, with a daily round trip of 90 miles. She misses the talks she would have with other moms at school gates to plan play dates and whatnot. And in general, she feels that she is not as much a part of her children's lives as she would like to be.

"I saw other mums chatting and it bothered me that I wasn't building those relationships. I wished there was a website for parents that re-creates that school-gate community, a site you can log on to in your own time and catch up with other parents from the school. If I felt like this, I reali[z]ed there must be lots of other mums feeling the same way." Said mother Esther Guy.

So she decided to launch her own website, and she thought she may even get to quit her job if the site takes off, that way she'll be able to do what she originally wanted to do, and still run the website.

Then a though came to her mind, "Let's do it for the kids as well," she exclaimed, "There are loads of primary-school-aged kids using Facebook-even though they're underage. I thought my site could be a way of introducing children safely to the grown up world of social networking. If they're on a space their parents us, they can be supervised. Children accept their real friends - their classmates - as buddies and chat to them online."

So her website ( www.schooltogethernow.com ) went live last month, and even though the official launch is not until January, it's receiving more that 1,000 hits a day from across the UK. 57% of registered members are children ranging from ages 7-11.

Parents are exchanging school updates and information, which children are debating over High School Musical over Hannah Montana. Here's an idea of the kids networking conversations:

"I AM going to the disco, ARE YOU?" asks Holly, adding 20 smiley faces and 8 other emoticons. No one answered Holly's question, but Allison wrote "Your smilies are cool."

I can't help myself but to laugh at all of this. Is our society becoming so technologically advanced that even children who can barely spell their own name are becoming involved in today's 'fad' of social networking? It seems ridiculous to me that children would be getting involved, because in my opinion, if such a tool such as social networking is introduced to children at such a young age, I don't think they will be able to determine it from reality. They may just get confused when they see their friends at pre-school compared to when they see them on the Internet.

Also, children should live out their childhood, and take every advantage of his/her youth, not technology. Introducing such tools created for adults will just expose them to a world they are not ready for. It will just influence kids to act older and 'cool' and forget their child-like ways. Social Networking has an age limit on it for a reason.

"Facebook for kids" Times Online . 29 Nov. 2008. 2 Dec. 2008

Expectations Through 2012

2008-12-02T12:39:00.003-05:00

The months after the highly anticipated election in 2008 leaves the American people with much to be desired. Slogans of hope, change, and a new tomorrow resounded with voters, but the question still remains whether this presidency will actually translate into a safer and brighter tomorrow. Well, thats for the future and other countries to decide whether they like us again. But an article I read in The Nation tells us, or reminds us, rather, that some of the "fundamental differences" that strengthened the Obama camp may not be so fundamental. Though not particularly riveting or profound, Nichols does add a bit of pessimism to the "revolutionary" campaign strategy launched by Obama. To begin with, naming Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State further extends Obama's vision, and does not add any opposing view to our alliance with Israel. It also brings a Clinton, one of the most prominent political families of our time, back into the Whitehouse. And as much of a beloved president as Bill was, is it really in keeping with Obama's theme to introduce some of the pre-Bush diplomacy back into the Whitehouse, and the man at the Oval Office desk? I guess what Clinton voters didn't get in presidency they made up for in the most important position in the cabinet.

This isn't to say that Clinton was a bad pick, though. The article notes an important message by Russ Feingold, U.S. Senator from Wisconsin and one of the most "determined opponents of the war in Iraq." Obama and Clinton still haven't staked out distinct opinions on U.S. actions overseas. However, he does point out that Clinton is extremely well researched and well read on almost any issue in foreign policy, and is undoubtedly well known after her husband's tenure as the head of the country. I guess what I'm really saying is that the "fundamental differences" in foreign policy, differences that may have won Obama the Democrat's support, weren't really that fundamental or different after all. But you knew that already.

Last-Minute Regrets

2008-12-02T11:12:00.003-05:00

President Bush has recently admitted that beginning the war in Iraq based on flawed intelligence is one of the greatest regrets of his presidency. This article discusses the bad intelligence indicating that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when, in fact, there did not, and quotes the President as saying:

The biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq. A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein.

However, the President refused to speculate when asked if he would have invaded Iraq even if he was certain Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, instead opting to dodge the question by saying that he didn't get a chance for a "do-over." By refusing to answer the question, it makes it look like he probably would have invaded Iraq regardless. While it's nice that the President has publicly admitted to making a mistake, it does sound more like a publicity stunt than anything else; an effort to raise his embarrassingly low approval ratings. Regardless of his intentions, I think most would agree with me saying that this apology comes about 4,200 men too late. Bush discussed how he was advised to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, but ultimately decided not to because it would "compromise his principles," according to the article. Additionally, Bush revealed that he was unprepared for war when he was elected (but to be fair, nobody was or could have been prepared for 9/11).

Bush also lamented about the recent economic crisis, but was confident that he did what needed to be done to save the economy and prevent "a huge financial meltdown." He hopes to "leave the White House with [his] head held high."

Works Cited
Zakaria, Tabassum. "Bush Calls Flawed Iraq Intelligence Biggest Regret." Reuters. 1 Dec. 2008. 2 Dec. 2008 .

A Cockeyed Optimist

2008-12-02T00:28:00.001-05:00

Another piece of news to war your heart and lift your spirits. According to this article, we can expect a nuclear or biological attack shortly after we’ve graduated from college and moved off into “the real world.”

Experts are saying that scientists will begin selling their secrets to terrorists very shortly, and by 2013, there is a good chance that the United States will fall prey to biological or nuclear attacks. According to the article, they’re “less concerned that terrorists will become biologists and far more concerned that biologists will become terrorists.” It’s not so much that the terrorists will become rocket scientists, but that they’ll be able to convince a rocket scientist that the United States is “bad.” And with enough propaganda and clever wording, you can convince people to do anything.

I’m glad they’re being so optimistic. Great way to boost the national morale. Especially since we’re officially in a recession.

But there’s a new plan to place 20,000 troops in the United States over the next few years. They will be “trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe.” It frightens me that they’re looking at clean-up measures when the mess hasn’t happened—yet. Why should this sort of thing happen in the first place?

I really hope that Obama manages to a) improve our relations with other countries—a lot of them really don’t like us—to reduce the terrorist threat, and b) find ways to stop scientists from giving their secrets out to those who would harm us. Like al-Qaida. Bush let them slip through his fingers. Let’s hope that our new president doesn’t follow in his footsteps.

This was my Thanksgiving.

2008-12-01T23:08:00.003-05:00

A few days ago, my father and grandfather, both of whom are very conservative, had the following conversation:

Dad: I hope Obama is a good president.
Grandpa: Are you kidding? We don’t want him to be a good president! If he is, they’ll elect him for another four years!
Dad: But if he’s a good president, we won’t have to worry.
Grandpa: He’s a Democrat.
Dad: But he looks like he’s going to keep things towards the center.
Grandpa: Then he’s a flip-flopper.
Dad: That means he realizes his mistakes. Or that he’s trying to please everyone.
Grandpa: Bush never flip-flopped.
Dad: Bush was a bad president.
Grandpa: Oh yeah? Name one thing Bush did wrong!

At this point in the conversation, my dad gave up. My grandfather is incredibly stubborn and slightly senile. But I feel that this dialogue brings up several important points.

Why is it that people get so angry when someone changes their views or policies? It’s good to admit our mistakes, but we are ashamed to (and I include myself in that statement). Plato believed that we should thank people when they correct us, but instead we get defensive (once again, I am very guilty).

Another thought: if we’re stuck with Obama, we’d all better pray that he’s the best president we’ve ever had. Because I would hate to see things get worse. I mean, if McCain had been elected, I would have been upset. But would I have hoped he did well? To quote Sarah Palin, “You betcha!”

Unfortunately, my crazy grandfather’s ramblings are being echoed everywhere. People are hoping for Obama’s failure, so he won’t be reelected in 2012. It’s some of the most backwards thinking I’ve heard. But it’s out there, and it’ll run our country even further into the ground if we’re not careful.

Well... It was the Thought That Counted

2008-12-01T21:44:00.004-05:00

Today it was announced that the United States economy is in fact in a recession and has been since December 2007, according to this article at MSNBC ("It's Official: U.S. is in Recession"). I don't know about the rest of you, but, I kinda figured that out sometime in late winter/early spring of this year (admittedly, I wasn't sure of the exact date we entered a recession, but that's what the officials at the National Bureau for Economic Research are for!). Wasn't it only a few months we were told a recession "was possible?" Now we're in the middle of a full-blown worldwide economic crisis. To top it all off, the White House didn't even use the word "recession" when they commented on the recession! Okay, so, I probably overreacted a bit just then. But, what does this newly-gained knowledge do for us? Will it help us recover from the recession? Probably not. Instead of wasting money looking at when we got into this mess, let's look at how we got into this mess and how we can get ourselves out of it! The article tries to explain why the announcement comes so late:

The NBER committee that sets official dates for recessions typically does not act for many months after a downturn has begun. The panel is looking for clear evidence of a substantial, lasting contraction. "The committee waits long enough so that the existence of a recession is not at all in doubt," according to the NBER Web site. "It waits until it can assign an accurate date."

I can understand that. Waiting a few months seems logical, so as not to cause panic. But, it's been a year since the recession began, according to their report. Rather than avoiding panic, it's just made people angry and made themselves look like fools.

Even Charities are going Millennial

2008-12-01T21:37:00.002-05:00

The Salvation Army is looking for new ways to raise money in the financial downturn, and they are getting creative.

According to an article on CNN, "To boost donations, the Salvation Army is expanding its fundraising campaigns from traditional shopping centers and direct mail to cell phones and Internet social networks like Facebook and Twitter."

It also stated they were interested in reaching out to the younger generation, and were very much interested in learning what makes us tick. In a very creative way to reach young people, the Salvation Army is trying out a new cell phone plan in Atlanta and Columbus. By texting a code to the given number, cell phone users can donate five dollars, which is then charged to their monthly bill.

Also, the SA has a twitter account, and an email account where people can solicit donations from contacts via the internet. The SA is really hoping for some donations to roll in, because 2007 was the first year in eight years that donations slowed down instead of increased.

Although they are not looking to get rid of the red kettle altogether, they acknowledge that it is much cheaper to use text messaging and social networking sites as opposed to paying people to ring a bell.

The News of Tomorrow; Today?

2008-12-01T19:46:00.003-05:00

According to an article in the New York Times, ("A Generation of Local TV Anchors is Signing Off;" Brian Stelter) many high-paid anchors for local television news stations are being replaced by younger, cheaper anchors as the economic situation worsens. While this may make economic sense, viewers have a strong attachment to the anchors they're used to, so this move could drastically cut viewership. However, part of the reasoning behind these cuts are part of an effort to keep up with online news:

On the Web, users can assemble their own newscast from an around-the-clock buffet of options, making anchors seem somewhat superfluous, especially to younger viewers. Perhaps as a result, station layoffs are in the news almost every day now, said Tom Petner, who edits the television industry newsletter ShopTalk.

This reminds me of Sunstein's Republic.com 2.0, in which the author discusses the concept of the "Daily Me," the hypothetical online newspaper of tomorrow custom-tailored to each and every individual reader. Sunstein also discusses the important of TV news anchors in providing diversity in the news people get and warns of the danger of a world in which everybody sees only the news he or she wants to see.

The article also discusses other ways the news industry has had to make cutbacks to keep up with online news and blogs. Television news stations have cut back in the behind-the-scenes production crews. Newspaper is also suffering; thousands of newspaper journalists across the country have already lost their jobs. Just as Winograd & Hais predicted in Millennial Makeover, online news and blogs are beginning to replace television as America's primary source of news. Although I expected these changes to occur as more and more Millennials reached adulthood and took positions of authority, I didn't expect them to occur so quickly!

Works Cited
Stelter, Brian. "A Generation of Local TV Anchors is Signing Off." The New York Times. 30 Nov. 2008. 1 Dec. 2008 .

Sunstein, Cass. Republic.com 2.0. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2007.

Winograd, Morley and Michael Hais. Millennial Makeover. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press, 2008.

As if $700 Billion wasn't Enough...

2008-12-01T17:05:00.005-05:00

According to this article by Richard Cowan, ("House to Push $500 Billion Stimulus Bill," Reuters) the Democrats are planning on spending another $500 billion on yet another economic stimulus bill that, according to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is "aimed at 'creating jobs for the 21st century,' with a focus on energy projects" and will "include a middle-class tax cut, billions of dollars for road, bridge and mass transit construction, expanded aid to states and investments in renewable energy." Look, I'm all for the Democrats, but what happened to that $700 billion awhile back? Where did that go? And where is the next $500 billion going to come from; who's going to pay for all that? At what point do we draw the line and realize we're going to have to do more than throw money at the problem in order to fix it? The budget deficit is already at a record $455 billion. With war in Iraq and a worldwide economic crisis, how can the government so casually toss money around? How can the average citizen be sure this will help him or her? Will there be enough jobs for everyone? There are so many questions this bill raises, and so few answers. If the government wants to spend all this money, I want to see some guarentee that the money will help the average American and isn't just another attempt to stall for time. Money may make the world go 'round, but lately it looks like it can't support the weight of the world on its shoulders alone. We're going to need something else to help us through these difficult times, and we need it fast. Hopefully it won't be too late.

Currently, Pelosi hopes the bill will be ready for President-elect Obama to sign shortly after he takes office on January 20th.

Obama Warned About Attack On Afghanistan, China May help

2008-12-01T13:44:00.009-05:00

A few weeks ago, Ayman Zawahiri, a very prominent member of Al Qaida, released an audio message over the Internet warning president-elect Barack Obama against sending more troops to Afghanistan. Zawahiri threatened Obama by referring to the past occupations in Afghanistan involving the Soviet Union and England, and included President Bush's own recent failures (The Times of India). We can remember from the first presidential debate that when it came to Middle Eastern foreign policy, Obama was firm in informing the nation that he was determined to gradually removes troops from Iraq and to begin concentrating forces on Afghanistan. He didn't shy away from that determination after the threat and a few days later officially vowed that he would not break from his campaign promise and continue with the plan. While public opinion in America usually sways towards peace, Obama's popularity and charisma will be able to handle any backlash from the public in response to war. Ultimately, any success in Afghanistan will rely heavily on the amount of support the United States can obtain from other countries, a vital aspect in terms of manpower and global image; an aspect they failed to succeed in during the Iraq war which garnered hate for the Bush administration not only from the American people, but from a global standpoint stemming from the lack of global participation.

What's interesting about the situation in Afghanistan is the possible involvement of China, "which is famously allergic to intervention" according to Newsweek, and with many other countries refused to aid America in their efforts in Iraq. China also decided to take the side of Iran and Russia in the nuclear dilemma, which is why it is very strange to hear of their potential involvement in Afghanistan. According to multiple sources, including Newsweek, Press TV, and the International Herald Tribune, talks of China sending troops to Afghanistan have been on and off. There are many strategic reasons to why China would want involvement in Afghanistan. Geographic reasons, including the mountainous border that separate the two countries, as well as China's present battles with Islamic extremists and the role Islamic extremists may play in Pakistan (Newsweek).

However, China continuously denies that they may become involved, perhaps for fear of their own negative image they might create. America has been deemed an interfering country by numerous Middle Eastern countries, and China most likely would not want to share that image. I think the likelihood that Obama would accept help from the Chinese is very high because of the lesser need to use resources and money, and the positive resonation that may carry among the public in America. Of course, China can be very crafty and may end up seeking to take complete control over Afghanistan as the Soviet Union did and that would not bode well for the U.S.

Liu, Melinda. "How China Could Quietly Play A Key Role In Afghanistan". Newsweek. 22 November 2008.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/170320

"Zawahiri warns Obama against sending troops to Afghanistan". The Times of India. 19 November 2008.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Gulf/Zawahiri_warns_Obama_against_sending_troops_to_Afghanistan/articleshow/3733434.cms

One small step...

2008-11-30T22:50:00.003-05:00

The Florida ban on adoption by same-sex couples was declared unconstitutional! Finally, a victory for equal-rights activists!

It is terrible that bans like this exist in our country. With so many children waiting in orphanages and foster homes, being denied normal childhoods, I wonder how anyone could deny loving couples the opportunity to adopt. If people think that being raised by a same-sex couple is bad, how about a heterosexual abusive couple? Or being passed around from foster home to foster home, with no permanent family?

This is not an issue of who is right, who is wrong, and who’s going to Hell. It’s about love and belongingness. It’s about having someone there for you. So many lives are torn apart by these types of bans.

In Arkansas, for instance, they recently passed a ban—originally initiated to prevent same-sex couples from adopting—that outlaws adoption or foster care by any unmarried couple.
This is ridiculous. Loving parents are loving parents. Gay, straight, married, unmarried, old, young, whatever. The alternative is worse. I’m sure the “psychological damage” that supposedly results from being raised by a same-sex couple is nothing compared to the trauma of being bounced around by a broken adoption system.
What’s next? Is Arkansas going to pull children from their single parents? Are they going to prohibit divorce? Around the country, situations like Proposition 8 are taking rights away from homosexuals. It’s horrible.

And I know that not everyone supports equal rights, and to them I say this: how can you do that to the children? Stop thinking about the parents for one moment, and think about what this will do to children everywhere, who are without families? You may view homosexuality is a sin, but I view depriving these children of a loving home as an even greater crime.

Too Much Attention?

2008-11-30T22:17:00.001-05:00

I remember when HIV/AIDS was the biggest topic to talk about. I remember when there was no medicine to even control the rate of the disease and that once you received HIV you were don for. With medicine now becoming so advance that it can stop the rate in which AIDS will kill you the topic is becoming more and more in control. I do still see HIV/AIDS as an important and deadly disease but I now think it is time to focus on other uncontrollable disease. In an article in Yahoo the doctor explain that more children are killed by pneumonia than AIDS. The article goes on detail to explain that we are now wasting and prioritizing AIDS funding that we are forgetting other deadly disease and sickness. I believe this is true. Even though I know AIDS is horrible we are now finding ways to control it as I stated before. People are living longer with the disease. Now that we have a foot at the door we should keep moving forward but not with so much force. I think we should have enough research and funding for the disease but not 47 million dollars. Let’s try to cut that in ¾. With other killing machines such as malaria and pneumonia what attention are they going to receive? I have heard this year of so many people dying because they had pneumonia. Something so common is now becoming complex and hard to control and monitor. If we do need to focus on AIDS let focus on help we need in Africa, such as proper cheap medicine and enough medical help. That seems to not be there. Besides that I think we need to back off a little. I know a lot of people will disagree but we need help in other forms of illness and diseases.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_med_challenging_aids

Woe, woe, woe

2008-11-30T22:09:00.001-05:00

This made me cry.

Death in Nigeria

2008-11-30T21:37:00.000-05:00

India is not the only place where tragedy has struck. In Nigeria revival religious groups and ethnic groups starts to burn homes and kill anyone in their way. With an estimated of 200 deaths and many more wounded. What caused all of this bloodshed? With the lost election between Christian and Muslim, the killing started Friday. It is said that ANPP party had lost because of the all Christian ticket of the PDP. With corpses lying on the floor containing bodies of women and children people are now running away from their homes. About 7,000 people are stated of leaving their home. There is also a 24 curfew and military strict assistant. People are walking the streets with their hands raised making sure to show the military that they have no type of weapons. The killers are said to have been killing with guns and machetes. With all the violence the PDP candidate is suppose to be sworn in Monday but is now being postponed. Nigeria is known for having its equal amount of Christians and Muslims and leaving peacefully, but one area the “Middle Belt” is disrupting this tranquility. However, this is not the first time this violence occurs between the two different religious groups in 2001 hundreds were killed, and in 2004 hundreds were also killed and made than President Olusegun Obasanjo to declare an emergency. With all these troubles between these two groups would you not think that they have better security or methods to response to the outburst of violence? Yes, the incident in India was awful but we have not have no real media coverage to what is happening in Nigeria. There are more deaths and wounded in Nigeria but we have not gave importance to this incident at all. Nigeria is also in trouble!

The bailout Cost more than the rest of U.S. History combined

2008-11-30T21:25:00.002-05:00

Well maybe not more than than everything, but you get the point.

Source:http://www.voltagecreative.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/bailout-pie.png

Obama Wastes No Time

2008-11-30T20:33:00.002-05:00

President Elect Barack Obama may still have a little over a month to be sworn in as President, but he has already set his presidency in motion. This has bothered some people because he seems to be overstepping his power. In normal times this transition from president elect to president was usually a time of celebrations and parties. But these are not normal times. We used to look forward to the new presidents first one hundred days in office to see what his priorities are, to see if he can deliver on his campaign promises and to see if he can successfully lead the country. Again, these are not normal times. Obama is facing a bigger crisis than even Franklin D. Roosevelt. Roosevelt was faced with the Great Depression and had to lead the country out of it with his “New Deal” policy. Obama is facing a recession leading towards a depression. With two wars taking place, terrorist threats always occurring, and an incredibly large debt, our country needs drastic changes. It would seem like a job nobody would want to take on but Obama has jumped right in. He has held two press conferences and has put together his economic cabinet. When he stands at the podium the sign “President Elect” is clearly visible. We all know who he is and we all know he will soon be the President. It is admirable that he wants to be prepared to get right down do business and to lead this country out of crisis. The one thing we should all know is that we don’t have a lot of time. We are all feeling the economic crisis. It isn’t happening to other people, it is happening to our neighbors. Jobs are being lost by the thousands. We all see the for sale signs in front of houses. Christmas is coming and the food pantries are already running out of food. It is not just about hope and change, it is about hard work and good people.

Mumbai Terrorists and Pakistan

2008-11-30T15:01:00.006-05:00

The dust has settled in Mumbai and the unfortunate task of cleaning up the wreckage, mourning the dead, and figuring out what actually happened has begun. Indian authorities were able to capture one of the terrorists, a 21-year-old Pakistani named Azam Amir Kasab. After questioning the man authorities learned that the five terrorists seized a fishing boat to sneak into the country and once there intend on killing 5,000 people. The terrorists were all Pakistani and had been trained in Pakistani controlled Kashmir. There were even speculations that the terrorists had been trained by Pakistani intelligence. There have been many conflicts between India and Pakistan in the past, but with only slightly secret U.S. military attacks of terrorist bases in northern Pakistan, and now this incident I am confident that Hillary Clinton should be studying any thing and everything about Pakistan that she can get her hands on. There have long been roomers that Al Qaeda had been hiding out in the north of Pakistan for a very long time. The accusation that the Pakistani government had a hand in training terrorists that attacked is not a new theme, there have long been mutterings, however disreputable, that Pakistan has some how been involved in terrorism. This, however, may be the event that proves incendiary enough to put Pakistan at the forefront of U.S. foreign policy, let alone other nations, such as England and India. The big difference between Pakistan and Iraq or Afghanistan is that they are a super power, there is no need to search for a weapon of mass destruction; Pakistan has made it very clear that they have nuclear weapons. President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton need to have a very real plan to what is going to be done about Pakistan.

Works Cited

Gallagher, Ian. "'I was told to kill to my last breath': Captured terrorist's account of Mumbai massacre reveals plan was to kill 5,000." 'I was told to kill to my last breath': Captured terrorist's account of Mumbai massacre reveals plan was to kill 5,000 Mail Online. 30 Nov. 2008. Mail Online. 30 Nov. 2008 ./http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1090546/i-told-kill-breath-captured-terrorists-account-mumbai-massacre-reveals-plan-kill-5-000.html

Things are looking up...

2008-11-30T00:51:00.004-05:00

It’s tough being an optimist today. I find it hard to watch the news, because all I ever hear about is war, terrorism, greed, violence, consumerism, and a million other horrible things that make me cringe.
Thankfully, I will occasionally see some sort of heartwarming story that renews my faith in the world and in humanity. And despite the recession, the attacks in Mumbai and the disgusting commercialism that has infiltrated two holidays that are supposed to be about love and compassion, I was fortunate enough to find two such stories this weekend.

The first was about the food crisis in Malawi.
Thanks to a government subsidy program, small farmers were able to grow a bumper crop this year, and Malawians are starting to pull themselves out of their food crisis. People are being fed, and are able to sustain themselves. And children can go back to school instead of scavenging for food.

Many countries advised against this program, including the United States. It was risky. But it worked. The Malawian economy is healing itself, which is more than we can say for ourselves.

The second exciting story I found was about the possibility of HIV eradication within the next 10 years. Studies have found that with enough frequent testing and drugs, HIV rates in South Africa and Malawi (they’re having a good weekend, I guess) dropped drastically.
There are a lot of flaws with this, of course. First, it could create a resistance to drugs, and make HIV and AIDS even more difficult to fight off. It would also be incredibly expensive. And overall, it would simply be a huge task to undertake.
But it’s hope. It’s hope for the elimination of HIV and AIDS.

Tomorrow, December 1st, (World AIDS Day), the Theatre and Social Change class is performing an original theatrical production about AIDS called “Walking Red Ribbons.” It’s at 7:00, and it’s free. You should all attend!

Unity and Tragedies

2008-11-29T23:34:00.006-05:00

Ever wonder why people come together when tragedies happen? I have noticed that whenever a tragedy happens whether it is a hurricane or a terrorist attack, Citizens unite and become one. The recent attacks on Mumbai were devastating and unfortunate. The Taj Mahal hotel owner said that he did receive a warning that there will be a terrorist attack, but believes that he did not prepare well for it. The security plan failed and around 183 people were killed. What did the owner have to say about this incident? According to a CNN article, "Tata (the hotel owner) was hopeful that the attacks would unite Indians behind a common goal of preventing a similar tragedy." It is a good thing that the owner believes that people will come together after this misfortunate event. 9/11 is another tragedy, which brought people together. Families helped other families heal; people were there for each other. What we can ask ourselves is why do we have to wait until tragedies happen in order to unite? Why can’t we all come together as one? If we all work together to form a strong nation, no one will be able to bring harm or cause distress to the nation. I believe that a country should not wait for tragedies in order to become one connected and close community. If the government has to interfere in any way and help increase common unity, so be it. People also come together in happy times, the 2008 elections is one good example. When Barack Obama won, people gathered around wherever they were able to in order to watch his speech. Here at Wheaton, a large group of students watched Obama's speech in an auditorium all-together as one. A good sign that people are coming together and getting more involved with one another is the idea of having social networking sites. Facebook and Myspace are two social networking sites that have worked to help people meet and make new friends over the Internet around the world. Some people rely on social networking sites in order to make friends and become part of a community.

Write or Remain Silent: Consquences of Serving our Country

2008-11-29T17:45:00.000-05:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081129/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/soldier_stress;_ylt=At9c8iCb2QWrsMx40i1kdDuyFz4D Write or Remain Silent: Consquences of Serving our Country

Consquences of Serving our Country

2008-11-29T17:44:00.001-05:00

About time people are noticing that our soldiers are being harmed mentally. 15,000 soldiers are said to be coming back home in January, after many psychologist agreeing that soldiers are being unhealthy. Based on an article in Yahoo it stated that out of every 10 soldiers 4 have been deployed more than once. That is almost 50%. The significance is can we imagine seeing death and being in tension because you feel that someone is going to kill you at any moment. This is what are soldiers are facing, on top of sleep desperations. Psychologists are now trying to seek a time line where our soldiers should come home for their insanity. Some suggestion for help is to have psychologist to come to the bases and talk and interact with the soldiers. Now, we are improving for the first time every soldier that comes back is going to therapy for 90-120 days. Some effects that the soldiers might face when returning in January is headaches sleep disorders, memory loss, irritability, relationship strains, and other forms of stress disorders. I don’t care who you are, but people are not made to be in that stress environment for long. We are human beings and seeing people die in our faces and be in so much tension is detrimental to a person health and insanity. About 85% of soldiers will get better from these problems with help of psychologist help, but those 15% are going to need more help. I hope we can get our soldiers the proper help they deserve and need. My friend just got left to the army and one thing I am afraid of is never seeing him again. However, now that I know about the effects of going to war I am afraid that he will never be the same person I once met.

How much of a recession is it if people are killing each other to spend money?

2008-11-29T16:09:00.002-05:00

On Friday morning, “black Friday”, one Wal-Mart employee was killed while trying to open the front door (Nieves). The mob of 2000 people that had formed outside, arriving since Thursday evening, surged through the doors as they were unlocked and the stampede trampled the man (Nieves). It took several minutes for people to stop the crow and give aid the man who was taken to the hospital and pronounced dead (Nieves). A pregnant woman was taken to the hospital after the minor altercation is rumored to have had a miscarriage according the blogosphere (Finstock).

It takes a large desire to spend money to kill a man who stands between you and the perfect Christmas gift. This overwhelming desire to spend is great for the economy. It is true that the black Friday turn out wasn’t what many stores had hoped this year, but with people spraining ankles and trampling each other to get sweater vests and George Forman Grills at low prices shows the recession mind set has not settled in. When the American people decide that it is time to stop spending all together then the American economy is in trouble. The media’s constant babble of how badly the economy is doing would, it seems, denture people from spending their money, or at least be a bit more lack luster about doing so. It is true that people were rushing through the doors to try and save money by getting good deals on products, but they still bough them. My most sincere condolences to all people adversely affect by the shopping battle, but I am glad the American commercial machine hasn’t decide to call it a day, stay home and wait for the rain to stop.

Works Cited

Flinstock, Bobby. "If nobody died in the procurement of my gift I don’t want it." If nobody died in the procurement of my gift I don’t want it Pointless Banter. 28 Nov. 2008. Pointless Banter. 29 Nov. 2008 http://pointlessbanter.net/2008/11/28/if-nobody-died-in-the-procurement-of-my-gift-i-don’t-want-it/.

Nieves, Rosalina. "Wal-Mart worker dies in rush; two killed at toy store." Wal-Mart worker dies in rush; two killed at toy store - CNN.com. 28 Nov. 2008. CNN. 29 Nov. 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2008/us/11/28/black.friday.violence/index.html.

Obama's Cabinet

2008-11-28T22:19:00.008-05:00

In the past few weeks, many of us have heard rumors on President-elect Barack Obama's Cabinet choices, but haven't really taken a close look at these advisors. Obama has announced many of these positions, and "will have nearly named his entire Cabinet by Christmas." In this blog post I hope to introduce you to each of the announced Cabinet members, and give you a sense of who they are.

Timothy Geithner (Democrat)- Treasury Secretary. Geithner is currently New York's ninth president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank. He joined the Dept. of Treasury in 1988 and has worked in various administrative positions. He was also the director of the Policy Development and Review Department at the International Monetary Fund from 2001-2003.

Hillary Clinton (Democrat)- Secretary of State. Clinton is a Senator (since 2000), who won the support of many Americans in her run for the Democratic presidential nomination. Clinton would manage foreign affairs as secretary of state. The question has been raised in the constitutionality of this pick; article one, section six of the Constitution says elected officials may not take other government jobs if the salary was raised during their term. This would apply to Clinton. However, I imagine this technicality will be overlooked for the greater good of the American people.

Bill Richardson (Democrat) -Commerce Secretary. Richardson is New Mexico's Governor. Bill Clinton named him U.S. Secretary of Energy in 1998, and he is a UN ambassador, giving him lots of experience in the political field. He taught at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government, became a member of the Inter-American Dialogue, became the first Hispanic to serve in a Cabinet level position, and served in New Mexico's 3rd Congressional District, and was reelected 8 times. He was also nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to free hostages in Burma, Cuba, Iraq, North Koea, and Sudan.

Janet Napolitano (Democrat)- Homeland Security Secretary. Napolitano is the Governor of Arizona (elected originally in 2002). Named one of Time's top five governors in the US, many expected her to make a run for presidency in 2008.

Tom Daschle (Democrat)- Health and Human Services Secretary. Daschle is a former Senator and Senate Majority Leader and Minority Leader (1986-2003). Post Senate, Daschle worked at a law firm, and invigorated his PAC for new leadership.

Eric Holder (Democrat)- Attorney General. Holder is a former judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, US Attorney, and Deputy Attorney General. He has been a legal advisor to Obama throughout the campaign, and was one of Obama's top picks for VP.

Robert Gates (Republican)- Defense Secretary. Gates is the only Republican amongst this group, and served this particular position in the Bush presidency. Before joining Bush's Cabinet, he served 26 years in the CIA and the National Security Council and became the Director of Central Intelligence.

Although this is an extremely partisan group (which could only be expected), I feel that Obama chose very bright, experienced officials. I am interested to get other peoples' reactions to the Cabinet choices. We will see how this group plays out in the coming months.

Fossil Record

2008-11-28T20:56:00.003-05:00

With the Obama administration coming into office many people are excited about change coming to Washington in the form of a younger generation, but just as the cold war dinosaurs are being put out to pasture the United States and Russia have developed differences in opinion over the placement of United States interceptor missile base in Poland and a radar array in the Czech Republic. The United States placed the missile systems in the European countries to defend against the threat of missiles from Iran. Russia felt threatened by the placement of U.S. Missile systems on their boarder and expresses their distaste to Washington, but also began testing new missile systems and preparing ways of defeating the new U.S. missile bases.

On November 5, President Dmitry Medvedev stated that Russia intended on placing Iskander short-range missiles near the Polish boarder, and attempting to jam the missile system electronically. Colonel-General Nikolai Solovtsov declared the nation’s intention to have a new, fully functional missile system 2020.

There have also been multiple tests on missile systems that Russia has been developing recently. The Dmitry Donsky nuclear submarine launched a Bulava intercontinental ballistic missile Shorty after Colonel-General Solovtsov made his announcement conserving the new missile system for Russia. Russia has also been testing the RS-24 intercontinental ballistic missile a new missile, which, according to the Russian military cannot be stopped by any anti-missile system. In 2009 the Russian military intends on performing 13 missile tests nearly twice as many as were done in 2008.

The combined arms build up on the Russian border, missile development, and conflict in Georgia earlier this year are more than slightly reminiscent of the cold war. Because experience of events in the past are helpful for confronting current events that are almost impressively similar I hope that the regime change in Washington doesn’t lead to retirement party for the generation that lived thought the cold war. Who else will be able teach us to duck and cover?

Sources:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE4AR3S120081128

Obama on Spending

2008-11-28T17:19:00.004-05:00

For the last decade, our country has operated as if we have access to unlimited resources, and an endless economy. America seems to have taken on this personality that we can do anything, and as the great nation that we are, no measure can stop us. Unfortunately, this is merely facade. We have gotten ourselves into incredible debt, with the national deficit at $10,655,730,608,95s2.03 set to increase at a rate of 3.86 billion per day since September 28, 2007. Scared? You should be.

Now when Barack Obama becomes president, he has promised to make a substantial impact on the national deficit. And noble as this may be, I have trouble seeing how this can be done considering his platform. An article from the San Francisco Times sums up this dilemma, "President-elect Barack Obama set out on Tuesday to reassure Americans that he intends to restrain spending despite the staggering bills for financial rescues and emergency government spending that seem to mount by the day." President Obama is in a very difficult situation in that he will be faced with the biggest economic crisis of our generation, probably even our lifetime, while also having to satisfy his constituencies with his policies. So how will President Obama rein in spending? He plans to focus on efficiency within the budget, raise taxes on the wealthy, eliminate tax breaks for large corporations and oil companies, cut military spending, and make line-by-line revisions throughout the national budget (this is obviously not a complete list of all the economic changes President Obama intends to make). While these are all excellent ideas, and will help improve the situation, they cannot possibly reverse what has been done to the state of the economy.

Obama has promised his constituents a new health are system in which the government will be forced to spend billions to systemically revamp the program. He has also endorsed investing in new sectors of alternative energy which will cost billions. He also must fund the War on Terror, clean up the Iraq War, and perhaps in his term will have to deal with the new sector of terrorists from the Middle East which looked to attack Westerners and many others in India. He has also promoted education and student payment reform, must maintain homeland security, among many other programs, and provide enormous emergency aid to the economy. And while I hate to be such a skeptic, all of these efforts will cost a lot of money that the United States isn't in a position to give right now. My hope is that Obama's stimulus packages and emergency aid will help get the economy back on track, his plans to cut spending will work, and Congress will be mindful of spending limitations. If not, this country will have to face much bigger problems.

Democratic Infighting

2008-11-28T16:36:00.006-05:00

Since the election of Obama, the Democrats are beginning to experience a majority like they "haven't enjoyed in decades." However, this majority may not provide the sweeping reform it promises. This will be stalled by Democratic infighting on a wide range of issues including but not limited to "climate change, energy, health care, and social security." It seems because of regional divides, personal economic and social interests, and ideological differences of opinion within the majority, the Democrats will create their own grid-lock. This makes sense, the wider the majority, the more factions you are bound to have within it; more people means more opinions. This has been evidenced already through a fight over inclusion into a key committee for Obama's legislation.

This infighting can be viewed in very different lights. It can be seen as a very positive aspect in that it will place a check on vast reform. Not only does it create a more non-partisan system, therefore making President Obama much more popular with the public as a whole, but it also means the legislative branch will be forced to send more time drafting and working out compromises in the bills in order for them to pass. Despite the increased amount of time and effort that would take, I would much prefer a thorough, well thought out bill, over one that is just super popular with the Democrats as a whole that immediately passes without much debate. This infighting can also be viewed as extremely negative due to the slowed legislation process and the fewer number of bills that will be passed on President Obama's agenda. This will likely appease moderates and conservatives who don't fully agree with the agenda in the first place.

But whether infighting remains or not when Obama becomes our country's official president, reports indicate that he wishes to "hit the ground running" in the notable first 100 days (in which presidents typically introduce an enormous amount of legislation to the Congress). Congress will likely sacrifice their internal disputes to make way for Obama's new financial stimulus plan since this is a timely issue of great importance. This is key for a the majority of American families and businesses, and if successful, will greet Obama with an astounding approval rating as he begins in office.

Pardon?

2008-11-27T18:40:00.003-05:00

In a move that all to well exemplified how the presidential campaign went for her, Sarah Pailin stood on camera warring a Burberry scarf and sucking down a latté, or equally outlandishly priced Starbucks beverage, for an interview after pardoning a turkey. What made this a particularly good representation of her contribution to the campaign was after saving a turkey’s, life behind her, seemingly unbeknownst to the former vice-presidential candidate, was the proprietor of the turkey farm killing turkeys. Pailin spoke of the ups and downs of the presidential race, while behind her a man literally was slitting the throats of turkey’s. The best line of the governor’s monologue was after describing how critical the press was of every move on the campaign trail she said “and someone will probably be critical of this too.” Yes, yes they will. But it seemed very fitting, and even a beautiful metaphor of the Katie Couric interview. First Pailin proverbially “pardoned a turkey” by stating that it was possible to see Russia from some parts of Alaska, which is a good one liner totally useless and irrelevant, much like pardoning a turkey, but a decent bit of dirty yardage. Then when she as intervened by Couric the Governor didn’t have the sense to look behind her and see the man sharpening the knife, so she started to talk. By the time she had opened her mouth the turkey famer, or metaphorically the press, had grabbed a turkey, continuing the reference Republican Party, inserted it into a killing cone, slit its throat and let it bleed to death on camera. The biggest difference is of course that the republican party too a little while longer to stop twitching.

The most likely out come of this interview is that Pailin will not disappear from the national media. Think of it as a pilot episode for the coming season of “life as the queen of Alaska” where our heroine talks her way further and further into political hades. Next week what to ware that is function both in the state house and in the frozen tundra while you grip your hubby and zoom around on his supped up snow mobile performing drive by shootings on deer.

A Comical Slap at Obama Supporters

2008-11-27T18:21:00.005-05:00

This video is a light-hearted slap at Obama supporters. It mocks their extreme enthusiasm and their "pathetic" post-election lives. Even if you're an Obama supporter, you'll most likely still get a kick out of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bCuEXrU-yQ

More on the Mumbai attacks

2008-11-27T16:16:00.006-05:00

To reiterate and expand on what Alysi said, Mumbai, India is currently a chaotic scene. With 125 dead, and over 327 wounded, two Mumbai hotels, the Oberoi and the Taj Mahal are surrounded with fear and panic. Officials are currently trying to seek out the remaining gunman and hostages still located in the hotels. Authorities were also able to find and secure 8 kilos of RDX, "one of the most powerful kinds of military explosives," suggesting that the gunman may have wanted a more dramatic ending to their terror spree. Gunmen also wreaked havoc in a building known as the Chabad House, where several Jewish families live ad the Cama Hospital for women and infants, though this fourth location has been secured and resolved.

But who is responsible for such violence? Indian news outlets were contacted by a group calling itself the Deccan Mujahideen. Analysts know very little about this group, and are not yet sure on whether it is a break-off from a current terrorist organization, or if it is completely new. Indian Prime Minister Singh has suggested that the attacks were conducted by people from outside the country, with subtle finger-pointing at Pakistan. But regardless of the location of the group's origination, intelligence organizations believe the group was also responsible for the two significant terrorist attacks on India in the past.

But what is their motivation for such attacks? "The group has declared open war against India in retaliation for what it said were 60 years of Muslim persecution and the country's support of U.S. policies." The group even made an effort to pick out and kill Americans and British. When I read that a terrorist group is motivated to kill hundreds of people justified by India's support of the U.S., I get a little nervous. This emotion likely spawns from the next logical step- to attack to U.S.

Both Bush and Obama have made statement condemning the terrorist acts, and Obama was quoted saying, "The United States must continue to strengthen our partnerships with India and nations around the world to root out and destroy terrorist networks. We stand with the people of India, who democracy will prove far more resilient than the hateful ideology that led to these attacks." It seems Bush has fully handed the reins over to Obama on this issue. Though Bush is still the official president until January 20, 2009, the news has certainly treated Obama as the man in charge. Obama's quote was right at the top of the page, with Bush's much further down and shorter. Also, when searching for the U.S.'s response to the India attacks, articles about Obama were plentiful, while statements of action or opinion by Bush were much more difficult to find. This makes sense, Bush is an extremely unpopular, lame duck president, who likely won't start any grand global expeditions in his last months of office. Thus, Obama is left the current co-president, and man of action.

Attacks on India- Please no more battles!

2008-11-27T12:31:00.001-05:00

Besides the United States facing terrorist problems so is India. Terrorist attacked two well known and famous hotels (Taj Mahal palace and Tower Hotel). With many Britons and Americans staying in the hotel people are wondering if there is a connection to Al Qaeda. They attack on Wednesday taking over the hotels with grenades, guns, and explosives. They first started to attack 10 specific sites and went on to the hotels. With about 119 people dead and 288 wounded it is becoming a battle that is unpredictable. Witness state that they are still plenty of people stuck in the hotel. President George Bush is being asked to help in the situation. I do not think that is a good idea. The U.S. is already facing problems and attacks from terrorist to become involved in something that is out of our hand. People are finding ways to escape without the help of the police officials, so this shows me the officials are not doing their job if people are finding ways to escape without being hurt or capture. The U.S. does not need to be another hero. We need to learn how to let other countries face their own battles. Yes, there are Americans and Britons in the hotels but here are Italian, Japanese, Australian and German. So why do the other countries not go and help. However, this is not the first time Mumbai is attacked. In 2006 a group of terrorist also attack people and killed 187 people. My condolence goes out to the people of India who are in danger but I am tired of hearing that the U.S. is involved in another countries business. I think our country should have learned the lesson that we need to mind our own business. Sometimes that is the only real help people can give.

Your Help is Needed!

2008-11-25T13:40:00.007-05:00

In West Virginia, there is a beautiful, old-growth forest on a mountain that is in danger of being completely destroyed. Coal River Mountain is being targeted by the Massey Energy Co., headed by CEO Don Blankenship, for mountaintop removal coal mining.

Now, who is Don Blankenship? Only one of the most worst examples of corporate bribery and strong-arming for favors in the history of the United States. Some examples:

He has spent millions to place a favorable judge on the West Virginia Supreme Court so he could end a lawsuit.
He has spent another couple million to buy another judge when he was caught in Monaco with the other one.
He has spent millions on smear campaigns to get his guys elected to judgeships and other positions of power.
He has been named THE SCARIEST MAN IN AMERICA WHEN IT COMES TO THE ENVIRONMENT!!!!!
He was responsible for the deaths of the miners in the Aracoma mine, because of the hundreds of safety violations that were ignored.
He makes $15 million a year, and spends $9 million of it on bribes and strong-arm tactics to get his way.

Now, he wants to destroy an area that has been settled by farmers dating back to the Revolutionary War. Not only will he destroy a historic community, he will ruin the environment. Mountaintop removal mining is easily the most destructive form of mining, as it completely reduces everything around it to mounds of acidic rubble.

The area has already been studied as a possible wind farm - more jobs, longer-lasting energy benefits, and the environment would be preserved. Now that Blankenship has his sights set, it is only too likely that he will force his mining through. But we need to stand up against him, and his kind. We voted Barack Obama into office, saying NO! to the Bush years of buddy rewards - let's not lose that ideal now. You can start by SIGNING THE PETITION. But you can also CALL WEST VIRGINIA GOVERNOR JOE MANCHIN at 1-888-438-2731. Tell him not to let Blankenship have his way. Tell him to put a hold on the mining permit. Because we can't let this happen - it would be a repudiation of everything we voted for when we voted Obama inot office.

For more information, and links about the background of this issue and Blankenship, visit The Daily Kos.

Globalization= Global Citizenship

2008-11-23T15:10:00.003-05:00

As I was analyzing the effects that globalization was having on the world we live in and trying to relate it to a paper I was writing I came to the realization that globalization is creating a heightened sense of global citizenship.

I was browsing through some Facebook groups earlier today and I found one called "Support Freedom of Media in Egypt" which is a group devoted to fighting censorship in the Egyptian media. I was interested to find that the group featured members from all across the U.S and the world. This didn't completely take me by surprise considering I had done some digging around on Facebook groups earlier this week and discovered some similar information, but it really got me thinking. This is a problem, that not too long ago would have been a problem that the Egyptians would have to solve on their own, but now, this problem that previously would have only affected Egyptians has now turned into a problem that affects EVERYONE.

This realization brought up a memory of someting I had learned in my International Politics class: that through globalization we are now witnessing the creation of a "global village" where the importance borders and cultural diffences are being muted and we are all coming together into one community. This "global village" works together to protect and work towards common goods that everyone can benefit from. This seems strikingly similar to what I witnessed within the group trying to prevent censorship in Egypt. First off, we are all coming together despite borders and cultural differences and working together. Secondly, we are all organized in an effort to protect a common good that is being encroached upon in Egypt: free media. To me this all sounds the bell that globalization is spreading and that the "global village" is more than just a theory devised by political scientists. I personally look forward to a world where we all work together as one and are all global citizens rather than citizens divided by national divides.

Bad example of web usage for Millennials

2008-11-22T18:34:00.002-05:00

A 19 year old college student committed suicide via live video-streaming a couple days ago. This student notified people through a body building website then provided a link to a video streaming website so people could watch. While he was streaming, some members of the audience egged him on, some tried to talk him out of it, and some debated whether or not the dosage was high enough to kill someone.

The body was found several hours later when someone watching notified the body building website who then traced the IP address and notified the police. The camera was still rolling as the teen lay dead on his fathers bed.

A professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio said "Bigg's very public suicide was not shocking; given the way teenagers chronicle every facet of their lives on sites like Facebook or Myspace."

That attitude towards our generation is ridiculous, of course the way he did it was shocking, why would you broadcast an attempt to kill yourself? I think this adult does not understand our generation, while we may constantly update people on our lives, it is not a logical next step that if you want to kill yourself, you put it in live feed.

The way the Millennials are using the web is increasingly changing, but I hope it never escalates to a place where this kind of thing is common.

Protect Our Sidewalks!

2008-11-22T15:22:00.002-05:00

Princeton passed thier own Proposition 8 to protect their sidewalks from freshmen. After all, traditional values are important!

Number Crunching

2008-11-21T16:17:00.002-05:00

While doing some digging around on Facebook I managed to crunch some numbers and I was quite surprised by some of the information I was able to uncover. I utilized the adervising section of Facebook to get a hold of the amount of users and millennials in the U.S and abroad. I found that around the world there are approximately 74, 057, 840 millennials who use Facebooks. Out of the approximate 120 million total users that accounts for 61.7% of the total Facebook community. This stat was slightly surprising to me. I initially was anticipating the number of millennials on Facebook to be much closer to ninety or ninety-fice million. If this were true then millennials would constitute approximately seventy-five to eighty percent of all Facebook users.

Another stat that took me by surprise while I was crunching the numbers was how many millennials from abroad are from abroad. I figured that there would be a rather significant amount of users from outside the United States, but the fact that 41% of millennials on Facebook (not including the United States) were from other countries. Despite how the U.S apparently makes up about one-third of the total millennial population on Facebook, I was truely expecting the number of U.S members to dwarf the numbers of members from abroad by a much greater amount.

One final point of interest was how many Facebook members from abroad are members of political groups in support of Barack Obama. As I was scrolling through the group titled "Barack Obama (One Million Strong for Barack)" I decided to take a look at their list of members. I only looked through the first fifteen pages of their list and found members from twenty different countries that included: Japan, Sri Lanka, Poland, the Philippines, Morocco, South Africa, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Singapore among many others. This really caught my attention because I found it intriguing to see how many Facebook members from abroad are taking a serious interest in American politics and how many are organizing with millennials within the U.S in support of a particular candidate.

Sign of the Economy

2008-11-21T10:52:00.002-05:00

You can't open a newspaper, or turn on the TV, or listen to the radio, or look at a blog, without hearing about how the Economy is In A Downturn, and we Might Be Facing A Recession. All those experts, saying the same thing. Well, they might actually be right. In an article in The New York Times, the shoe-shiners in Grand Central Station are saying that business is down. And when shoe-shining business is down, you know the economy is doing badly. It's one thing when the average, middle-class teachers and journalists and computer technicians start cutting back on their daily Starbucks runs. But when the real-estate guys, the bankers, and the stock brokers start cutting back on shoe shines, that's when we can start worrying. These are guys that used to get a shoe shine every day, like clockwork. Now, they're down to only once a week, maybe twice at most.

On a plus side for the shoe-shiners (and environmentalists), their repair business is up. Instead of buying a new pair of shoes, people are much more likely to get the shoes repaired - cheaper and good for the environment.

Clinton as Secretary of State

2008-11-21T10:19:00.003-05:00

An NBC report published today claims that President-elect Barack Obama will nominate Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State after Thanksgiving. According to the report, Clinton will not reject the offer, meaning she will have to relinquish her her position as New York Senator. The report points out the underlying view of some Democrats, government insiders, as well as the general public, that Clinton is too independent and politically ambitious to work effectively with Obama as Secretary of State. They also allude to many Democrats', including Obama, admiration of Clinton's talent and experience.

Clinton may be ambitious, but so is Obama, so is every politician that seeks to become president. Aside from that, what this gives the Democrats right now is the two most influential politicians working together in the White House. If Clinton does indeed take the nomination, it forms a very formidable cabinet, at least from the image perspective. If they stay together, it will be difficult for the Republican party to mount for serious contention in the next election, if it wasn't already hard enough for them.

Obama's move is smart for two reasons. First, the Hillary Clinton supporters who so desperately wanted a woman president were once again disappointed when Obama decided to pass on nominating her for the Vice Presidential position. Nominating her for Secretary of State would have possibly been the next best position to nominate her for. The Clinton supporters will at least be happy to see her in such a high position. Second, this move will hopefully temporarily stunt Clinton's great ambition to become president, until Obama two terms are over. It doesn't usually happen that someone from the same party challenges the existing president in the primaries, it is not a popular move. However, if anyone could pull it off, it would certainly be Hillary Clinton especially after she made it this close to the presidency. This move might allow for her to step back on the political ambition until Obama is finished. Or she could break off regardless of how Obama does in his first term and challenge him in 2012. But it would be an all or nothing move. If she wins, she will have pulled off the first victory over an incumbent of the same party. But if she loses, it could resonate poorly within the Democratic community and greatly affect her chances if she would ever want to run again, say in 2016 which she very possibly could win.

Extension of jobless Benefits

2008-11-20T18:48:00.001-05:00

It is obvious that America has faced one of the worst financial crises. In response, to the horrible economic climate the senate has voted to extend unemployment benefits by seven weeks in every state. The bill calls for benefits to be extended by 13 weeks in states with an unemployment rate of at least 6 percent. President Bush announced that he will sign the bill, which was approved by the House in October. In September, Bush had threatened to veto a broader stimulus bill that included the extension of jobless benefits. In most states, unemployment benefits are paid for a maximum of 26 weeks. Ironically, the Senate vote came on the same day the U.S. Department of Labor reported that the number of people filing for unemployment insurance had reached a 16-year high. U.S. job losses have been increasing. This month, the Department of Labor reported that the economy lost 240,000 jobs in October, bringing the total number of jobs shed in 2008 to nearly 1.2 million. The unemployment rate rose to 6.5 percent, a 14-year high, last month. Companies reporting layoffs in past week include Citigroup, which slashed 20 percent of its work force, or 50,000 jobs, the biggest cut by a corporation in 15 years. Financial services firm Fidelity Investments announced that it will cut 1,700 jobs and Sun Microsystems reported that it would lay off 6,000 people, or 18 percent of its work force. (To see actual article: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/20/senate.jobless/index.html)
This problem is so terrible; the problem is not solved so until it is many people will continue to lose their jobs. The economy determines whether or not many families can afford to live or simply just get by in this chaos. This is the least the government could do by not fixing this problem when it wasn’t so bad. But wait until many people are unemployed to actually do something profitable. It won’t make a difference because the problem is maintaining a job where increasing the duration of benefits may not be enough for many families or anyone for that matter.

Obama Poised to Rebrand America?

2008-11-20T16:26:00.002-05:00

Obama is confident to restore America's image internationally so now everyone is waiting to see his efforts in action. This task will not be so easy for Obama to complete; he has his work cut out for him. America's notorious image has declined in every region around the world. Obama's victory as president of the United States represents America starting over in terms of fixing America's problems. America's reputation has taken quite toil thanks to opposing factors such as the Iraq war. Dick Martin, author of Rebuilding Brand America states, “Changing America's standing in the world was going to be the work of a generation, and it would have to start with some kind of grand gesture that demonstrated that things were changing. His election in itself is that kind of grand gesture." To many people like Martin, Obama is an incarnation of change and is admired for that quality. Police estimates that more than 200,000 people came to watch Obama's victory speech. Bush's presidency was very much unpopular so for America's image to be restored by Obama is very much hopeful.
Obama’s efforts to change America’s image is a movement in its self because it was so easy for America to “mess up,” it is hard to actually rebuild. Being president is a job that is not suppose to be easy and requires so much work. Although Obama’s efforts seem too good to be true, it was also too good to be true for him to be president and he did it. It was a challenge to persuade America that the right man for the job would be African American. Obama’s approach is to include Americans with his process as well still be cautious. The faith Obama have given Americans is exactly how he works. Now all we can do now is wait to see that process that we are promised.

CNN Posts Final Results

2008-11-19T20:33:00.004-05:00

Cnn has posted all of the results. The results include who different age groups voted for, the number of electoral votes, and who males and females voted for. Click here to view the Final Results.

New York Times Finally Endorses Welles Position

2008-11-18T13:20:00.004-05:00

In another example of our blog's reach, the New York Times yesterday made its support known for the Colombian Free Trade Agreement. It did so by using a line of reasoning very similar to a post I made about a month ago. While you might think that I would be angry at the New York Times's poaching, I'm just happy that they've seen the light. Now if only President-Elect Obama can be convinced...

Dog Racing Banned

2008-11-18T01:05:00.003-05:00

I was for keeping the dog tracks open. I wasn’t against the dogs because I knew that there had never been one charge of abuse brought forward in all the years they had been opened. I certainly wasn’t worried about owner George Carney because he has plenty of other businesses from owning hotels, restaurants, the Brockton Fair to name a few. I was worried about the fact that voters could put a business out of business, and that still bothers me. I was also worried about all the people who would loss their jobs and would be unable to get another one. I was also worried about the town of Raynham and all the surrounding towns. Shutting down the track was going to have a profound affect on these communities. I was not alone in this fear because all of the surrounding towns voted to keep the tracks open. The people of those towns felt that the vote should not have been state wide but rather it should have stayed in the communities affected. They have a point since the voters who aren’t affected voted to close them down. But now that the votes have been counted, I’m not so sure it was the worst thing that could have happened. The tracks won’t close until 2010 so at least that gives the workers and towns a little bit of time to works things out. More importantly, Carney has been trying to get slot machines into the track for years but has been shut down. Now this ideas has been brought back up again and maybe it will be passed so people will keep their jobs and the towns won’t be so hurt. Slot machines will bring even more money to the towns and even millions to the whole state. Governor Deval Patrick has been trying to bring gambling to Massachusetts so wouldn’t this be the perfect solution. The site is already there and the surrounding communities would welcome it and the rest of the state would benefit. It is a win-win situation, especially for the dogs.

A Regional Party No More: Republicans on the Run

2008-11-17T09:41:00.006-05:00

Upon seeing this chart on the New York Times website this morning, I am curious to see Obama feels about it. The truth is that one of the major parties is essentially reduced to regional-party status, and it is the Republican Party. One of the easiest ways to gauge Obama's performance this year is in individual states this year - and get a sense of trends evolving in that state - thus compare his improvement over Kerry since the last election cycle in 2004. For example, Obama outperformed Kerry in both South Carolina and Montana among other states.

It seems the West loves Obama, especially in the most populous areas. Obama won Colorado by 8 points, Nevada by 12 points, and New Mexico by 12 points. Obviously, those are dramatically better numbers than Gore or Kerry put up in their races in 2000 and 2004 respectfully, and Bill Clinton had only one performance in these states that more or less matched these, an 8-point 1992 victory in a three-person race in New Mexico. He won nailbiters in Nevada both elections, and lost Colorado in 1996. Obama did slightly worse than Clinton in much of the rural West, oddly enough but again, far better than either Gore or Kerry. The improvement in the West is amazing and if it keeps up, experts believe that Arizona, Montana and maybe the Dakotas will be swing states in 2012, while Nevada and New Mexico will be blue states well past the next cycle.

What about moderately blue states? They liked the ticket and Obama won all of them by double digit margins. For those who forget what these states are, they are the following: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wisconsin. Unfortunately Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New York showed the least improvement but that is perhaps of their high margins when Kerry ran in 2004.

However Obama did lose ground from what I can determine from the chart in every single Southern state except for Georgia, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. You know what these states have in common? They all have fairly large black populations (and in Texas' case, a large Hispanic population), and they also have experienced great population growth in the last decade, and have a generally better educated, more affluent, more urban and suburban white population than seen in other Southern states. Arkansas is the state where Obama performed the worst this entire year losing it by 20 points. Even Kerry did better, but still lost it by 9 points.

Apparently, the areas which showed the least improvement for Obama - or showed improvement for Republicans - are in Western Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio, West Virginia, rural Missouri and Kansas, much of the rural South, and McCain and Palin's home states. Without speculating on why those areas are the most resistant to Obama's candidacy relative to those of less successful Democrats, it seems that those are the areas Democrats have to focus on going forward, and experts and myself would concur with that point. It's clear, though, that whatever the reason, the white rural South - and demographically and culturally similar areas in the lower Midwest and Appalachia - are regions where we should be focusing on building the party. The Republicans are now reduced to being essentially a regional party; the South is the only region where McCain won by less than 10 points. It's now our job to find a way to sell a Democratic message in their Southern stronghold.

I would recommend anyone who is interested in this subject to read Zell Miller's book, 'A National Party No More.'

Rallies

2008-11-16T12:56:00.002-05:00

Proposition Eight is easily the most controversial law passed by voters in a long time. Not only does it draw in the religious side, but the civil rights argument as well. The ban on same sex marriage was passed in Fl, Ar, and Cali. The response to these results have been great in number, and not just in those states, but across the country.

I know there was a protest held in Providence advertised by the school that students could attend. I myself did not go, but I imagine there was a fair number of students that participated. This site was no isolated incident, they are happening in many cities.

The protesters were of course met with counter-protests. The protestors against the passage of the ban had signs with sayings like "All you need is love", "Love and Unity not Hate". Those protesting the protest had counter sayings such as "Theres nothing civil about a man marrying another man".

This issue is very heated, and only expected to become more split as time goes on. The site that planned the rallies in California, Join The Impact, says they will be holding future rallies in increasingly larger numbers.

What Happened to The First Amendment?

2008-11-15T16:56:00.003-05:00

Proposition 8. Arguably one of the most controversial laws passed by voters in this country. Also, one that has highlighted so much that is wrong in this country, at a time in which so much went right. Such a paradox: Barack Obama, an African-American, elected president, at the same time that marriage rights are forcibly taken from homosexuals.

Here's the thing that frustrates me most about Prop. 8: it is literally unconstitutional. It says it right there, First Amendment in the Constitution, Separation of Church and State. Everything about Prop. 8 is the Church getting their hands dirty in the State's cookie jar. It was put up by the Church, funded by the Church, organized by the Church, and voted for by the Church. And the weirdest thing is that the most vocal and powerful Church that helped pass Prop. 8 was the Mormon Church. According to an article in The New York Times, the Mormons "made up 80 percent to 90 percent of the early volunteers who walked door-to-door in election precincts" and "as much as half of the nearly $40 million raised on behalf of the measure was contributed by Mormons". But the Mormons are polygamists, and the law defines marriage as "one man and one woman", not "one man and a dozen women"! Well, as long as it isn't two men, or two women, right? Because that would be a sign of the Apocalypse!

So, back to the Constitution. It says, Religious Freedom - no interference by government, no imposition by other religions. I'd say the Church making a law defining marriage definitely imposes upon me and you. Dan Agin, in an article in The Huffington Post, puts it quite well. He writes, "It's one thing for clergy to impose values on their own flock - - it's something quite different for clergy to impose values on people outside their flock." Well said, sir! I'm not a member of the Catholic or Christian or Mormon or any other Church, and I don't need them telling me whom I can legally marry!

Well, there's a bright side to this debacle - the country is up in arms over the law, and things will be changed. There are a lot of people, homosexual or heterosexual or transexual or bisexual or whatever you feel like calling yourself, who are pissed off and not letting this issue go away. Through the tools of Facebook and other social networking sites, people are protesting all over the nation. Today, there was a protest held in Rhode Island, on the steps of the State House (kudos if you went!) at the same time as other protests at every state capitol in the nation. Trust me, this infraction of our civil and religious rights will not be forgotten, and it will be fought to the end. Look out for new referendums or legislation or court cases that tackle this issue head-on. They will be coming.

Hope Wins

2008-11-13T19:04:00.002-05:00

History has been made! The first African American President, Barak Obama is elected. In this time of war and economic crisis, Obama has inspired a generation. It wasn’t too long ago that most American had never heard of him. But to hear his speeches you quickly realize that this man is special and will do great things. He already has. First he got the entire country excited about the election for the first time in many years. More people voted; even more adults voted for the very first time. More college students voted and got involved and more African Americans voted. It is hard to believe that it was just over forty years ago African Americans didn’t have the right to vote. We all know who Martin Luther King, JR. was. We studied him in school. He have heard his “I had have a dream speech.” We all know about the civil rights movement, and we celebrate Martin Luther King Day every year. But until this election it really didn’t hit me not only how far we have come, but that it wasn’t long ago that African Americans Couldn’t vote. It didn’t hit me that it was in my parent’s life time not my grandparents’ life time. If Martin Luther King had lived he could have seen how all his work and dreams have been realized. Not only can African Americans vote, they can be President. It was amazing to see the reaction from people around the country when Obama won. To see grown men cry was moving. To hear African American women say that now they can tell their children that they really can grow up to be whatever they want. To see every color, every religion standing side by side cheering was inspirational. Martin Luther King’s dream has truly been realized. This country is united and ready to move forward. And finally to see people from other countries all over the world cheer and be excited can only give us hope for a better world. It was time for change and time for this country to hope again. This is a great day to be an American.