I agree with you,I believe any process in peace is worth taking. Former President Carter made the decision to help the process of peace and to attempt to resolve things with out military action. Some may look at Carter saying he is jepordezing the process by possibly being a target of Hamas. But as we see Carter has made it out safe and Hamas is willing to take a peaceful solution. Sometimes I wonder who we should consider terrorist when we inflect just as much terror.
Carter Meets with Exiled Hama's Leader
Monday, May 5, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Media Elections
Everyone knows it, but every election has given in the powers of the media. No matter which candidate is in the lead, popular, age, sex, religion, and in which party they are from; the media controls what we think and makes us believe what they want us to believe. Polls play a big part in the election but no matter who is in the lead, if the media wants ratings they will post videos, clips, news stories so that we can feed to the endless information we crave.
First I'd like to bring to attention, John McCain. According to polls he is leading against both candidates of the Democratic party. Whether or not that is true, I can't tell you because I haven't read a single story on John McCain. Every other news article is currently focused on the "fight" between Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama. Even when there are Articles on Sen. John McCain they are honestly boring or obvious.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a proud Democrat and sometimes more media coverage is a good thing, but when it gets bad, it'll get worse. Recently I've been a victim of gathering too much information and it seems that every article I've read or watch has been building a momentum of negativity. Each candidate for any election has the right to attack and defend but when the media plays it hurts the future of our nation.
Tonight is the Pa. Primary, even though Sen. Clinton has won, the media has posted titles like " Sen. Clinton clings on to hope" or " Sen. Clinton survives another day" very rarely you'll see a great big VICTORY!!! So it doesn't matter who is a Democrat or Republican, in the long run, the media can set up stories to be posted to build up someone or break them down.
To be fair, this has happened to Sen. Obama as well, the stories of Sen. Obama's pastor has been well known to a lot of people prior to the time the media blew it over. In one side, we can say its good to be informed but when things are repeated over and over to bring about ratings and profit and not bring cause to the election it is no longer a battle between candidate vs candidate, but a battle between candidate vs media.
As I've stated before I am also a victim of the media, and seeing myself repeatedly being sucked in to it. My only suggestion I can give is think before you believe what you read, and take your time before you let your emotions get to you.
First I'd like to bring to attention, John McCain. According to polls he is leading against both candidates of the Democratic party. Whether or not that is true, I can't tell you because I haven't read a single story on John McCain. Every other news article is currently focused on the "fight" between Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama. Even when there are Articles on Sen. John McCain they are honestly boring or obvious.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a proud Democrat and sometimes more media coverage is a good thing, but when it gets bad, it'll get worse. Recently I've been a victim of gathering too much information and it seems that every article I've read or watch has been building a momentum of negativity. Each candidate for any election has the right to attack and defend but when the media plays it hurts the future of our nation.
Tonight is the Pa. Primary, even though Sen. Clinton has won, the media has posted titles like " Sen. Clinton clings on to hope" or " Sen. Clinton survives another day" very rarely you'll see a great big VICTORY!!! So it doesn't matter who is a Democrat or Republican, in the long run, the media can set up stories to be posted to build up someone or break them down.
To be fair, this has happened to Sen. Obama as well, the stories of Sen. Obama's pastor has been well known to a lot of people prior to the time the media blew it over. In one side, we can say its good to be informed but when things are repeated over and over to bring about ratings and profit and not bring cause to the election it is no longer a battle between candidate vs candidate, but a battle between candidate vs media.
As I've stated before I am also a victim of the media, and seeing myself repeatedly being sucked in to it. My only suggestion I can give is think before you believe what you read, and take your time before you let your emotions get to you.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Hilary for President
Although it is easy for people to say, "its time for a female president" or the like. My reasons for agreeing with Kris on Hilary for president is different. Hilary was one of the original people to suggest universal health care, although her plan has changed since it tells you how strong she feels about it. Sen. Obama has one punch line that he uses to attack Sen. Clinton is that he didn't vote for the Iraq war. But if you read Sen.Obama's book "The Audacity of Hope" he also believed in the Iraq war and believe that the Bush administration was honestly trying to do there best, but was approaching it the wrong way. We as humans always reject the idea of war, unless it is in our interest, as do Republicans and Democrats. Voting for a war with limited information, or not voting on a war with limited information are equally wrong. Also the determination she has showed during this election has proved to be fit for a president, not only has she defended negative attacks, but have admitted to mistakes. Something that Sen. Obama has yet to do.
(In response to Hilary for President ballad)
(In response to Hilary for President ballad)
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Original Editorial
Voting turn out in America has been relatively low compared to other nations. I believe that in a time that every aspect of life as a American can be critical, it is important to make voting a great part of American life. While making voting compulsive or mandatory is not the best answer, voting and feeling that your voted counted means a lot.
There are a few things that have been suggested and some I believe will make voting worth the time of the average voter. First, many people believe that their vote makes no difference, by allowing registered voters to track their vote to see where it went, who else voted like them, giving them information on other representatives that believe the same. We can do the research ourselves but having a place, site, or information base we can go to will make it more interesting.
Voters or non voters always feel like they get noting out of voting. If they vote for the unfortunate candidate that drops out of the race or the winning candidate that takes the seat, their is no achievement. To prevent this, I believe those that vote should get a voting "report card". Not base on grades but to show the candidates that won, and why they won, and the candidate that lost and why they lost. This will improve average voter awareness. Although this may make voting seem like a game, it will help voters have a competitive thinking process which makes them want to learn more about who they are voting for.
Often or too often I believe voters feel unrewarded for their efforts of voting. I believe those who vote should get rewarded one way or another. Using their rights to vote and making democracy work has gone unrewarded for too long. Voting should be rewarded with small tax cuts if you consistently take out your time away from work, spend more money on gas to get to your voting destination. When you vote you are pretty much working for the government to make sure the right people are in charge. If thats not worth paying you then why give big company tax cuts?
Lastly I believe voting registration should only take place when you move to a different area or every 5 years or so. I truly believe that every American out there wants to vote, but normally the registration process turns people away. If voting registration, and voting process can be made easier by limiting the steps and the duration of processing, voting can be made right again.
There are a few things that have been suggested and some I believe will make voting worth the time of the average voter. First, many people believe that their vote makes no difference, by allowing registered voters to track their vote to see where it went, who else voted like them, giving them information on other representatives that believe the same. We can do the research ourselves but having a place, site, or information base we can go to will make it more interesting.
Voters or non voters always feel like they get noting out of voting. If they vote for the unfortunate candidate that drops out of the race or the winning candidate that takes the seat, their is no achievement. To prevent this, I believe those that vote should get a voting "report card". Not base on grades but to show the candidates that won, and why they won, and the candidate that lost and why they lost. This will improve average voter awareness. Although this may make voting seem like a game, it will help voters have a competitive thinking process which makes them want to learn more about who they are voting for.
Often or too often I believe voters feel unrewarded for their efforts of voting. I believe those who vote should get rewarded one way or another. Using their rights to vote and making democracy work has gone unrewarded for too long. Voting should be rewarded with small tax cuts if you consistently take out your time away from work, spend more money on gas to get to your voting destination. When you vote you are pretty much working for the government to make sure the right people are in charge. If thats not worth paying you then why give big company tax cuts?
Lastly I believe voting registration should only take place when you move to a different area or every 5 years or so. I truly believe that every American out there wants to vote, but normally the registration process turns people away. If voting registration, and voting process can be made easier by limiting the steps and the duration of processing, voting can be made right again.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Flip Flop?
We live in a age of information, sometimes too much information. Often times we take for granted what technology has done for us. Today I suggest using that advantage that our nations pass lacked. Today I suggest using that advantage to find out more about who you should vote for.
During the last few months the Obama sensation has caused the media to focus more on what he's actually saying and what he stands for. Sen. Obama has such great orator skills that maybe even Hitler may be jealous of. His hopes for better days are laced with false promises, or promises made to those who want to hear the right answer.
Sen. Obama has pointed his finger numerously at Sen. Hilary Clinton for voting for war in Iraq. Although Sen. Obama did not vote for the war in Iraq he did nothing when given the chance to oppose it, and yet to do anything to this day to oppose it. Along the way he has voted to approve every war appropriation the Republicans have put forward, totaling over 300 billion. To me if I oppose something I wouldn't agree on spending an extra 300 billion on it. Sen. Obama has made many unclear statements on his position on war. Some of which his own political team cannot answer.
In politics and especially running for president I feel it is very important to know where you stand on every issue not just give people answers they want to hear at the moment even though your position different. After doing some research I found that Sen. Obama a civil rights leader of our time supported the reauthorization of the Patriot Act of 2005, something most civil rights leader still frown upon. In almost every perspective he fails in comparison.
Lets start with Nuclear Regulation, Sen. Obama has boasted that he passed a bill enforcing the reporting of all nuclear leaks. By the time the bill was passed the bill had weakened at every stage, amended with language to protect the nuclear company based in Illinois. To add to the controversy, since July 2007. Sen. Obama's Campaign has received over 200,000 in financial contributions. Why would someone give 200,000 to another person trying to make there life more difficult?
Continuing on that sense, when asked on his position on NAFTA, Sen. Obama said " I don't think NAFTA has been good for the American People, I never have". In 2004 Sen. Obama suggested we should pursue more trade deals like NAFTA and called for more trade protections on NAFTA. It seems as though the very things he is against he also help create and supported. When given the opportunity to regulate NAFTA from companies using loop holes to not give workers protection they have the right to, IE: Minimum wage and Right to Organize.
The series of double sided, flip flopped position continues with health care. A real issue targeting over 45 million Americans today. Sen. Obama voted against the single payer health care system which would have cut a third of the money spent in health care today and would make many more Americans eligible for Health care. A annual savings of 300 billion demolished so his own health care could take the spot light.
In the game of politics, there will always be deceiving and corruption, and since the 1860's involve big business. Sen. Obama talks about being the usher of hope and change but he has been linked to all of those he speaks out against. Its one thing to change your mind on daily decisions and another to change your decisions to gain political gain while defying your opponents when you do just the same.
Obama Craze
During the last few months the Obama sensation has caused the media to focus more on what he's actually saying and what he stands for. Sen. Obama has such great orator skills that maybe even Hitler may be jealous of. His hopes for better days are laced with false promises, or promises made to those who want to hear the right answer.
Sen. Obama has pointed his finger numerously at Sen. Hilary Clinton for voting for war in Iraq. Although Sen. Obama did not vote for the war in Iraq he did nothing when given the chance to oppose it, and yet to do anything to this day to oppose it. Along the way he has voted to approve every war appropriation the Republicans have put forward, totaling over 300 billion. To me if I oppose something I wouldn't agree on spending an extra 300 billion on it. Sen. Obama has made many unclear statements on his position on war. Some of which his own political team cannot answer.
In politics and especially running for president I feel it is very important to know where you stand on every issue not just give people answers they want to hear at the moment even though your position different. After doing some research I found that Sen. Obama a civil rights leader of our time supported the reauthorization of the Patriot Act of 2005, something most civil rights leader still frown upon. In almost every perspective he fails in comparison.
Lets start with Nuclear Regulation, Sen. Obama has boasted that he passed a bill enforcing the reporting of all nuclear leaks. By the time the bill was passed the bill had weakened at every stage, amended with language to protect the nuclear company based in Illinois. To add to the controversy, since July 2007. Sen. Obama's Campaign has received over 200,000 in financial contributions. Why would someone give 200,000 to another person trying to make there life more difficult?
Continuing on that sense, when asked on his position on NAFTA, Sen. Obama said " I don't think NAFTA has been good for the American People, I never have". In 2004 Sen. Obama suggested we should pursue more trade deals like NAFTA and called for more trade protections on NAFTA. It seems as though the very things he is against he also help create and supported. When given the opportunity to regulate NAFTA from companies using loop holes to not give workers protection they have the right to, IE: Minimum wage and Right to Organize.
The series of double sided, flip flopped position continues with health care. A real issue targeting over 45 million Americans today. Sen. Obama voted against the single payer health care system which would have cut a third of the money spent in health care today and would make many more Americans eligible for Health care. A annual savings of 300 billion demolished so his own health care could take the spot light.
In the game of politics, there will always be deceiving and corruption, and since the 1860's involve big business. Sen. Obama talks about being the usher of hope and change but he has been linked to all of those he speaks out against. Its one thing to change your mind on daily decisions and another to change your decisions to gain political gain while defying your opponents when you do just the same.
Obama Craze
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Gamble?
I believe there are many things in life that require gambling, taking risk to gain ultimately. Gambling on a potential President is not one of those. Don't get me wrong, I am all about change for the better and by far not a conservative, But gambling on a potential President not only puts my future at stake but also my peers, my family, and future generations to suffer. The time for change is now, but can we believe in someone that hasn't accomplished enough? Eight years ago a potential president nominee and now currently holds office promised change, things changed but not all for the better. The United States and the world is facing so many problems at the moment, war, economic issues, unemployment, health security, global warming and civil rights issues; to depend on a single trump card to take care of all these crisis is indeed, wishful thinking.
We can say taking this gamble and risk can reap in wonders for our later generations, so they don't have to suffer as we did, or can have a brighter future than we had, But can we live knowing we gambled on something so precious? I can not, and will not gamble on a X factor.
Also, the author suggest that "America..Now IS Broke" To believe that America is Broke and still suggest Gambling on a President, The highest authority of our Government, is the same as suggesting we play Russian Roulette and hope we don't get the bullet.
Instead, I suggest voting on facts and credentials, not words and personality. Its okay to believe in change, and to believe we have hope but believe those that have done more than talk.
Gambling on Obama
We can say taking this gamble and risk can reap in wonders for our later generations, so they don't have to suffer as we did, or can have a brighter future than we had, But can we live knowing we gambled on something so precious? I can not, and will not gamble on a X factor.
Also, the author suggest that "America..Now IS Broke" To believe that America is Broke and still suggest Gambling on a President, The highest authority of our Government, is the same as suggesting we play Russian Roulette and hope we don't get the bullet.
Instead, I suggest voting on facts and credentials, not words and personality. Its okay to believe in change, and to believe we have hope but believe those that have done more than talk.
Gambling on Obama
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Why John Edwards Couldn't Win.
The Edwards Campaign: What went wrong?
During a time like Super Tuesday, it seems that everyone is caught up with trying to find out who's in the lead. As for me I've decide to take this time to figure out why John Edwards didn't lead and dominate this presidential campaign. There are times in history that the better candidate didn't win because of miscommunication with the common citizen.
The article above analyzes various points of views on why a candidate with good intentions, bullet proof credentials could still fail. The author suggest that John Edwards had a good intention but promoted the middle class as a "losing side" and special interest groups as "winning side" bringing upon a divide as though it is as clear as day. Which might be true, but the common man or woman doesn't want to believe that they are on a losing side if any side at all.
I believe this article is important to our society because we often glorify the victors so much that we forget those that contributed just as hard or at times more than those that succeeded.
During a time like Super Tuesday, it seems that everyone is caught up with trying to find out who's in the lead. As for me I've decide to take this time to figure out why John Edwards didn't lead and dominate this presidential campaign. There are times in history that the better candidate didn't win because of miscommunication with the common citizen.
The article above analyzes various points of views on why a candidate with good intentions, bullet proof credentials could still fail. The author suggest that John Edwards had a good intention but promoted the middle class as a "losing side" and special interest groups as "winning side" bringing upon a divide as though it is as clear as day. Which might be true, but the common man or woman doesn't want to believe that they are on a losing side if any side at all.
I believe this article is important to our society because we often glorify the victors so much that we forget those that contributed just as hard or at times more than those that succeeded.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)