Palin for President...

This political cartoon depicts what Sarah Palin's Presidency would look like

It is far too early in the game to tell who will be running in the 2012 presidential campaign, but I will say however that there is an increasing amount of buzz surrounding the prospect of Sarah Palin running.

     This Alaskan mom is a figure of the media if you ask me, and highly unsuited for the Presidential office. However, her lack of qualification for the job just may earn her a spot in the running because she will keep the media happy, and will be an easy opponrnt for whomever does earn the Republican Nominataion.
Republican strategist Mike Murphy who has worked on the campaigns of Senator John McCain, former and former Massachusetts Governor  Mitt Romney, believes that the person most likely to take the nomination will not be clear until the end of 2011. For now, the only thing that is certain is that there will be plenty of Republican candidates looking out to take over the Presidential seat form Obama.I highly doubt it will be Sarah Palin.

Source: Memmott, Mark."GOP Consultant: Smart Republicans Hope Palin Runs". National Public Radio.28 December, 2010. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/12/28/132409855/gop-consultant-smart-republican-opponents-hope-palin-runs>

Are the Dog Days Over for Michael Vick?: President Obama a Man of Forgiveness

Michael Vic, punished for animal cruelty

     Michael Vick, a former quarterback for the Atlantic Falcons served 18 months in prison after pleading guilty to holding dog fights in 2007. Now that he is released, and his suspension from the NFL has been lifted, many wonder if it is fair to give him a second chance. He has signed with the Eagles, and looks forward to picking up his football career again.Part of the terms of his release is that he cannot own a dog until 2012, and he expresses interest in getting one.
     This situation seems to have hit the political arena when President Obama recently spoke out against second chances. Predident Obama called the owner of the owner of the Eagles, Jeff Lurie, to discuss Michael Vick.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton said that President  Obama "of course condemns the crimes that Michael Vick was convicted of,but, as he's said previously, he does think that individuals who have paid for their crimes should have an opportunity to contribute to society again.” This statement leads me to believe that Presdient Obama believes in human potential. I agree with Obama, bec asue I believe that crimes should be punished, but everyone deserves a chance to reform. this relates to my political stance on the death penalty. Finally, this shows that the President is fulfilling his duty  as a leading visionary for the United States is setting a good example, and a national figure of moral behavior.

Source:
Xuan, Thai. "Predient Obama supportive of second chance for Michael Vick".CNN Politics.27, December 2010. <http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/27/president-obama-supportive-of-second-chance-for-michael-vick/>

Bad Boys Bad Boys What'ya Gonna Do? What'ya Gonna Do When the FDA Comes for You?

Senator Max Baucus's look says 'OH NO YOU DIDN'T'

     Senators Max Baucus, Democrat, and Charls E. Grassley, Republican raised new questions about experimental use of a Medtronic device in spinal surgery on veterans and soldiers at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center from 2002 to 2004. The FDA had declared that this technology was sound for certain surgeries, but it was not apporved for spines. There was an experiment at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, in which three doctors performed back surgery on roughly 22 veterans, with each doctor performing about seven surgeries. This looks suspicious becasue such a case would not need to be reported if the research touched less than 10 people being tested, and the fact that they divied the soldiers out between doctors shows that they were trying to get past the FDA regulations.
     What makes this case disturbing is that there is evidence to show that those soldiers being treated were not properly informed of the risks of the surgery, and that they did not receive proper followup attention. Also, the whole operation was a pretty shady move that involved money coming under the table for the the Medtronic company itself.
     I feel that the Senators are justified in their investigation of this experiment, and that the FDA is there to look out for the greater good of the American Citizens. It is not right to do testing, especially on our soldiers, if it is not properly approved by the Government. Testing and research is imprtant in today's socety, and technology had proven to save lives, and improve them; but this kind of testing should not go under the radar, or be fueled by medical corporations that want to make money. The senetors are looking out for the soldiers along with patients in years to come by investigation.

Source:
Wilson, Duff."2 Senators Raise Questions on Use of Medtronic Device" New York Times.27, December 2010.<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/28/business/28device.html?ref=us>

Jon Stewart Uses Comedy for the Better, the 9'11 Bill

Jon Stewart, a popular political comedian brought about public awareness for the 9'11 bill that promised to give health care benefits to those firemen and workers who were the first responders to the terrorist attacks on September 11th 2001. The bill was ratified a year ago by the House of Representatives, and has been sitting around in the Senate waiting to get passed by the Senate. The Republican Senate, on December 10th, 2010 allowed to bill to filibuster, or basically be talked to death. What is so disheartening about this situation is that the bill was trumped by a tax bill that was apparently 'of greater importance'. 

Jon Stewart is a comedian, but his political power is undeniable. When he got wind of the Republican filibuster, he spoke out against it on The Daily Show. He sat with four first responders from 9'11 and discussed their health issues with them on television. These men lived that day, and are still facing the challenge that it brought about. The smoke and toxins still linger in these patriots' bodies, and they suffer from heart problems and Cancer. Treatment for such ailments are incredibly expensive,  and the last thing that these men need to hear is that the bill protecting them is being shoved aside. I believe that Jon Stewart underestimated his power as a comedian and that he is a true advocate journalist. His influence has birthed public awareness and uproar regarding this bill, and the hypocrisy of the Republican members of Congress. He uses his personal attachment to 9'11 as a jump start for positive civic reform and awareness. His actions parallel those of influential journalists in the past. Our society is more likely to listen to him than a politician, and I am glad that he is advocating for the brave men and women of 9'11. 

Source: BILL CARTER & BRIAN STELTER. "In ‘Daily Show’ Role on 9/11 Bill, Echoes of Murrow".New York Times.December 26, 2010.<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/27/business/media/27stewart.html?pagewanted=1&ref=politics>

Health Care Reform, Up and Down and All Around

The threat of a Republican filibuster, or the Republicans opposition to a Heath Care Rformation

Nothing says Hoiliday Season like a fresh new heathcare policiy straight from the poilitical oven. Last Christmas Eve, in a dramatic turn of events, Senate passed the new Heath Care Reform piece of legislation amid the winter festivityies. Also in January, 2010, the election brought about a shift in power because the Democratic vote needed for a super majority left with the liberal man, Senetor Kennedey, who was replaced by Scott Brown, which left the bill in a great threat of a Republican filibuster. The Democrats had no choice but to push ahead, and have the bill on the President's desk by March.  As the Obama administration jumped for joy, and asserted the important impact that this plan will have on the county's economic, and social vitality, others off in other meetig plotted against the legislation, planning to nip its political bud. The conservative Republicans basically began filing roughly twenty lawsuits against the policy caliming that it was unconstitutional. This uproar is resultant of the "individual mandate" that would take opporation in 2014, which would make it law that everyone must purchase health insurence or else pay a fine. Many people feel that this health care measure is somewhat communist, but that is an ignorant statement. Peolpe do not want there to be beuriucratic involvement in the healthcare system. The beauricratic system would make it more difficult for healthcare policies to be passesd becasue of the many poeple involved in a beuracratic system. Some calim that the government knows nothing about heath care. However, the policicy is very liberal by nature, and looks out for the common good of the American citizens. 
Theda Skocpol, a Harvard government and sociology professor and co-author of the new book Health Care Reform and American Politics: What Everyone Needs to Know, commented : "Americans are ideological conservatives but operational liberals. That's been an established principal in political science and the study of American public opinion for 50 years." So basically, if you ask someone if they want small businesses to get enough money to be able to support their workers with heath insurance, then the average citizen would most likely answer liberally, but on the other hand, if you ask them if they want the government or the market to tell them what to do they will answer more conservatively. What makes this issue over health care reform so evident in current politics is the effort to change some of the policies present in the law. With the Republican-led house, the law is likely to lose funding for certain aspects and the required heath-insurance "mandate" may be declared unconstitutional.

Source:

Rovner,Julie."The Year In Health Care Policy: A Topsy-Turvy Ride".27 December 2010.NPR.<http://www.npr.org/2010/12/27/132262508/the-year-in-health-care-policy-a-topsy-turvy-ride:>

Lationo Liniage, Leaders of Tomorrow

Julian Castro Mayor of San Antonio

The citizens of San Antonio, Texas are primarily of Latino decent. Their mayor, Julian Castro  exemplifies the politician of tomorrow. This 36-year old mayor did not look much different from those whom he addressed at a rally over a San Antonio school bond earlier this year where he asserted: "We have an obligation, in this year 2010, to ensure that a whole new generation of young people has the best facilities, the best opportunity, to succeed in our schools (...) We need this bond issue for the future of our young people."

    It is estimated that every 30 seconds, a Latino turns eighteen in America. This number is startling. To think I thought I was a minority Mexican 18-year-old woman of American society. I am pleased however, that this statistic is prompting officials to invest more money, time, and energy into brightening the future for the astounding number of Latino youth in our country. With the recent profiling that became an issue of topic in Arizona, it is imperative that the Latino youth of America be provided with good, strong leaders and role models such as Julian Castro. Apparently Castro comes from a family of political activists. When he was a child, his mother would bring him to the polls with her so that he could see the importance of voting and being an active citizen. I distinctly remember being young and going with my own mother to vote. My mother, who is a fair skinned Norwegian/Northern Italian woman, once asked for a sticker that said "ya vote" because she wanted to show me how cool it was that they were making them in Spanish. The woman working at the poll booth looked at her and asked her in an accusatory tone why on earth she would want a sticker in Spanish, and my mom vigorously replied "Because my husband and children are Mexican and proud of it!" To this day, I am proud of that sticker, and it was by my mother's example that I too want to be an active member in society, and a strong Latino woman. I hope to see more government officials like Castro. Who knows, perhaps someday I will be up there with him.

Source:
http://www.npr.org/2010/12/12/132013036/latino-mayor-might-be-a-glimpse-of-things-to-come

"How Do I Speak Up When I Don't Even Know How To Speak Down?" : If you see something, say something Wallmart shoppers of America!

What is considered out of the ordinary and worth reporting? 

     Picture a mother of two pushing her cart through Walmart as one of her kids tugs her arm toward the toy isle, the other begs her to get an slushy from the snack bar. She is annoyed at the holiday crowds rushing past her, and begins to tune out her children as she makes her way to the dog food isle. She is thankful for the sale on Purina, hence why she and millions of others pack into the store like cattle. All of a sudden an announcement sounds over an intercom, something to the effect of "remember Walmart shoppers, if you see any suspicious activities, please report them. If you see something say something". This is the voice of
Secretary of Homeland Security Janet A. Napolitano. These messages are part of the campaign to make people more alert and aware of their surroundings. It has been evident in years past, that some of the greatest threats to homeland security have been foiled by average people on the lookout. For instance, once there was a smoking car in the middle of times Square which came to be noticed by a street vendor. His perceptiveness saved lives that day. The announcement that sounds in Walmart is part of a bigger campaign that is also sounding in The Mall of America, and areas of Public transit.

      So here is the issue. The children turn to their mother after hearing this announcement, "Mommy are there bad people here" . The mother tells her children that they have nothing to worry about, but she is reminded to be on her guard at all times. However, at what point does she become desensitized to this announcement, and start believing her own words of consolation? Also, do these announcements invite her to openly invite people to partake in racial profiling? Everyone will respond differently. I feel that it is a good thing to keep people on their toes, but I do not believe in racial profiling. Heightened security is a good thing. Some may argue that these announcements will alarm people and make them live in fear, even in places as seemingly safe as a superstore. Some people do not feel comfortable reporting others because they do not wish to judge. Others judge too quickly and offend others. What the Secretary of Homeland Security is trying to accomplish through theses announcements is to arm people with awareness so that they do not have to fear, and they can fight fear itself. She wants us to look out for unattended packages, and abandoned smoking cars rather than judging the guy next to you on the train because he dresses differently than you.

Source: 
http://www.npr.org/2010/12/11/131991345/wal-mart-shoppers-homeland-security-wants-you

Precarious Printers! Terrorist Attacks Thwarted Just in Time

The bomb construction inside of the printer toner found in London

        An international alert ensued on October 29th in response to terrorist attacks aimed at the united States. I remember logging onto my email account, and seeing the headline that read "President Obama Announces terrorist threats thwarted" and immediately feeling that heavy wight of insecurity I feel when I recall the attacks made on the United States in September, 2001. These recent attempts at attacking our country were part of the Al Caida terrorist agenda, stemmed in the Arabian Peninsula.

       The explosives were packaged and shipped to Synagogues in surround areas of Chicago, Illinois. Luckily these packages were detected before reaching American soil. One was discovered in London. The bomb was hidden inside of a printer toner cartridge. The other was discovered by FedEx in Dubai, India. These threats are a reminder that America is a target, in terms of terrorist action, and that there is a need for heightened security measures world wide. However, it is also comforting to know that the explosives were detected, and that there has been no serious attack executed on the continental U.S. since 9/11. Therefore, our homeland security, and the support of our allies has been strengthened by such threats. Perhaps now people will not be so quick to dismiss the capabilities of the guy working the copy machine.


source : http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1010/29/sitroom.02.html

Democratic Congressional Leaders Face the Jobless Jungle

This political cartoon reflects the outcome of the 2010 elections nationwide with the Democratic Congress members being flushed down the political toilet. 

In the November, 2010 elections, I registered Democrat and I was pleased that my Gubernatorial vote was fruitful with the election of Jerry Brown in California. However, it was disappointing to discover that the election showed a major shift to the right in Congress. Presently, many Democratic politicians face unemployment, and knew so mid election. This reminds me of when I was at Loretto High School, and we knew that our school was closing down, and all of the teachers scrambled to find jobs before they knew that they would be unemployed at the end of the year and the school's closure. Some teachers had connections at other institutions around Sacramento, including Jesuit High School, St. Francis High School, and Christian Brothers High School. I remember distinctly how hard it was for them knowing that they were going to be unemployed and they were worrying about their families, and would often come to teach, and show how upset they were, and they were competing  with each other for jobs elsewhere. The whole thing was a mess.

       The situation in Congress reminds me of this, because I feel that the Democrats must have been worried in their final stretch of employment, and probably did not work efficiently knowing that they could be easily replaced in the coming weeks. They scrambled to try and scoop up jobs. One man, Johnathan Lipman, who was a communications director for Democratic Representative Melissa bean of Illinois, was searching for a job whilst holding his newborn child in mid-November, knowing what the election results would hold. Lipman actually was hired as the communications director for the Senator of New Hampshire. This just goes to show that whether you are a teacher, or a political official, jobs are not permanent, and when unemployment in out of your control, it is important to try to seize opportunity. There are still teachers for Loretto that are unemployed, and this saddens me greatly. Like these teachers, there are many unemployed Democrats greatly effected by the Republican trend in the November elections.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/us/politics/12dems.html?ref=politics

"Call all you want but theres no one home And you're not gonna reach my telephone" Why these Lady Ga Ga lyrics are applicable to U.S. /Chinese Relations, and North Korea

This political cartoon depicts growing suspicion surrounding the sketchy relationship between the United States and China in terms of who thinks they are in control. 

Recent reports indicate that relations between the United States and China have taken on a chilly nature. Last Monday, December 6th 2010, President Obama conversed with President Hu Jintao about North Korea. president Obama had been attempting to get a hold of him for thirteen days. The President of China was "unavailable" to speak. This reaction indicates that the relationship between The United States and China may not be as friendly as it has been previously perceived. Many believe that the U.S. has a huge influence on Chinese actions due to their economic ties to us, but now some are not so sure of this. This situation is similar to a time when a U.S. plane had to make an emergency landing in China, and their government would not answer the telephone due to inward debate. It is evident that there is still much debate taking place in China over how to act in response to North Korea's opening fire on South Korea. This whole situation is messy because South Korea is our ally and North Korea is theirs. If there were to be open warfare between North and South Korea, then the U.S. would have to step in, and nuclear warfare could potentially ensue. China does not want American military action dear their soil, and they will try and keep us away. However, rumors of China's seizure of the global initiative during our recession in 2008. Time will tell what is to come, hopefully China will heed the phone messages of President Obama, who asks for China's control of their ally.


Source :
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/world/asia/07china.html?pagewanted=2&sq=korea%20v%20south%20korea&st=cse&scp=3

Young Seth's Suicide Causes National Discussion

     A young boy, Seth Walsh, recently committed suicide after being tormented for his sexuality. The kids who bullied him did not understand him, and they viewed him as different. Seth's grandparents, Judy and Jim Walsh are peaking out. They want Seth to be remembered as more than that homosexual boy who hung himself. They spoke to the LA times about Seth: "When he smiled, he smiled with his whole face. His eyes twinkled. it wasn't just the smile. You got it from the eyes and the beaming of the face. He really meant that smile for you".  Though Seth's death is not directly a political issue, it serves as an example of how a lack of social tolerance can lead to lethal ridicule.

Evidence shows that just before hanging himself, Seth had gone to the park with a friend, and some other kids. The kids apparently upset and bullied him. He called his mother, upset, asking her to pick him up. He hung himself in his back yard.
     Kids are cruel, and often times they reflect what they have been taught at home or in school. In California, there have been many homosexual civil rights cases brought to the political surface. Among the most notable are Harvy Milk's story, and the controversy surrounding proposition 8, the proposition which retracted entitlement to gay marriage.
     I believe that the political buzz and the history surrounding homosexual marriage is part of the reason behind the cruelty that Seth faced. People who were strong proponents of Proposition 8 were concerned that being gay would become socially acceptable and would threaten the foundation of the nuclear familial structure taught to children. Being gay is socially acceptable, but when so many people publicly  demonstrate hatred toward homosexuals, kids are learning more about hatred than love. By preventing open discussion and acceptance of a lifestyle in classrooms, kids such as Seth gain an unspoken stigma, and are viewed as different. His story has caused national discussion.There is much discussion right now between scientists and the state court to determine is a choice or a genetic trait. When this question is answered, can the haters really discriminate against people? It would be the same as abusing someone because of their hair or eye color. I feel that there should be more education for the younger generation about love, tolerance, and acceptance in schools and in social arenas. The hatred and abuse inflicted upon Seth exemplifies this need. There is much discussion right now between scientists and the state court to determine is a choice or a genetic trait. When this question is answered, can the haters really discriminate against people? It would be the same as abusing someone because of their hair or eye color.

Curwen, Thomas. "Teenage Torment" . Los Angeles. The Sacramento Bee. 10 October, 2010.

One Month Away from Election Day: Illegal Immigration could Tip the Scale...But in Who's Favor?

Whitman's illegally immigrated house keeper of nine years, Nicandra Diaz Santillan speaks out. Her public address led to a venomous debate with brown; the race is on for Governor.

     Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown continue to fight to get ahead in their race to become the next Governor of California. Sure, neither of them wield super human strengths like the terminator in battle, but they know both have impressed their parties well enough to keep the polls fairly neck and neck. Brown and Whitman had their first debate at the Mondovi Center at University of California, Davis. Topics discussed included: job creation, California water distribution, the death penalty, and the U.C. budget cuts. Neither candidate appeared to surpass the other in terms of having a better argument. They were different. Meg Whitman stuck to her seemingly scripted opinions, while Brown spoke mildly off the cuff. He even had viewers laughing. Whitman's public apology, that regarding her voting inconsistencies,  was discussed. Some speculate that if Whitman has barely voted in California, then she must not have an accurate understanding of California politics. The first debate was interesting, but the race became far more interesting when Nicandra Diaz Santillan entered the political arena. 

     Santillan  publicly expressed her story the day after the first debate. Basically, Whitman was her employer for nine years. When Santillan came to her asking for help to receive legal papers in order to stay in the united States, Whitman told her that she would try and contact her lawyer. Then Whitman came to Santillan telling her that she could be of no help to her, and than she was let go. Santillan was devastated when Whitman allegedly told her  "I cannot help you. And don't say anything to my children. I will tell them you already have a new job ... and from now on you don't know me, and I don't know you. You have never seen me, and I have never seen you. Do you understand me?" Now Whitman is seen as a cruel person, and this scandal will have a negative effect on her campaign.


     Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman had a second Debate on October 2nd, 2010. When illegal immigration was discussed at this debate, the tension was so thick between the two candidates, that one would have to cut it with a knife. Whitman foolishly blamed brown for her housekeepers honesty, saying:
 "You should be ashamed for sacrificing Nicky Diaz on the altar of your political ambitions". Whitman has absolutely no evidence that Brown is behind Santillan's public address. Brown responded to Whitman's accusation saying:    
"Don't run for governor if you can't stand up on your own two feet and say, 'Hey I made a mistake' ". Whitman said that the person elected needs to crack down on employers who hire illegal workers. Brown said responded to this by pointing out that she didn't crack down on herself. It is unknown who actually prompted Sanillan's public address, but there is no evidence that it was brown. I agree with Whitman that it would be cruel to force someone to  speak out in order to gain a good political image, but I believe that that is not the case here. I believe that Santillan spoke out on her own accord. Brown was right to point out that Whitman cannot own up to her own actions. Illegal immigration provides for a heated debate in California at this time. For this woman to voice her suffering is a brave thing to do, and an action that will tip the scales in this election. Whitman tried to make brown look like the bully when she blamed him for the scandal. But all she did was dig herself a deeper hole. I think illegal immigration is an important issue for the candidates to discuss because it is a California issue. Santillan provided a face for the issue, no matter which way one looks at it. Her story is heartbreaking, and groundbreaking in this election. We shall see which candidate wins the Latino vote after this scandal.

Jerry Brown just may have gained a lead after Whitman's scandal 

 

Source : McLaughlin, Ken. "Whitman and Brown Pound Each Other in the Second Debate" . Bay Area News Group. 2 October, 2010. <http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_16236975?source=most_emailed>

Lethal Injection: Why the Killer Gets a Choice

    Judge Jeremy Fogel, a U.S. district judge opted not to halt the execution of murderer-rapist, Albert Greenworth Brown. Brown is one of the seven hundred and eight inmates on California's death row. Unlike most of his his fellow inmates, Brown has exhausted all of his appeals. Brown was convicted of aggravated murder when in 1980, he raped and murdered a fifteen-year-old girl named Susan Jordan. He committed this crime just after being released on parole after rapping a fourteen-year-old in 1977. Brown's actions deserve punishment. For years, people have questioned the morality of Capital Punishment.

Corrections officials have built a new new lethal injection chamber that is four times larger than the original gas chamber used for executions in the past. The facility was unveiled on Tuesday.

      Brown petitioned Fogel's court last week to try and gain an outcome similar to his inmate's, Michael Morlaes. In 2006, Fogel put a halt to to the execution of Morales because he felt that he needed to deeper investigate the processes of lethal injection because Morales claimed that it was against the Constitution. The Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Fogel found that conditions were too cramped in the gas chamber where the lethal injections were issued, and that there was insufficient training of the those administering the execution. For this reason, Fogel prompted corrections officials to make conditions better. However, Judge Fogel does not feel completely good about using the three injection method to execute the killers.
     Judge Fogel did not halt Brown's execution, but he did give him a choice between the one injection method, and the three injection method. It is customary in California to use the three injection method, but his research shows that there are is a possibility that it causes the person great pain and suffering. Only Washington and Ohio have used the one injection method, but they have reported it to be effective.
     The Judge's decision to allow Brown a choice resulted from official's insurance that the one injection method would be ready for Brown by Wednesday, the upcoming date of his execution. Although it was considerate of the judge to allow him to choose, it is still widely speculated that the lethal injection is inhumane and immoral.
     It is a constitutional right for people to be spared from cruel and unusual punishment. Thirteen criminals have been killed by Capital Punishment in California since its reinstatement in 1976. I beleieve that murderers
deserve to be punished, but I do not fully support the death penalty. Some say that it is more practical to persecute and execute those terrible offenders instead of financially supporting their life imprisonment. I believe that it is wrong to kill, and that no matter how hard we try to make their induced deaths less painful, we will never understand how much the person is suffering. Judge Fogel was right in trying to make it so that Brown will be allowed the presumably least painful form of execution by giving him the choice of methods. Capital punishment is controversial because it is a matter of government supported life or death.

Source: Williams, Carol J."Judge Clears Way for Killer to Die" . Los Angeles Times. The Sacramento Bee. 25, September.2010

Legal Marijuana: Perhaps a Stoner's Throw Away in California

     On the California 2010 ballot, voters will have the option to vote for or against Proposition 19, the proposition to legalize recreational use of marijuana throughout the state. As of right now, there is no clear way to determine what the outcome of this election will be. Both those who oppose the substance legalization and those who support have fair arguments, making the division on prop 19 very close.
     Those in favor of legalizing Marijuana see its ratification as a means to increase state-revenue. If the drug were to become legal, people over the age of 21(the same legal drinking age in California) could possess up to one ounce of marijuana for personal use. Californians could grow marijuana gardens that measure up to 25 square feet on their private properties. Should prop 19 pass, cities and counties would be responsible for   deciding  whether to allow sales and taxation of marijuana within their boundaries. Some argue that it would limit crime because people would be growing the marijuana legally. Finally, in regards to the argument for prop 19, is the idea that drug trafficking and violence would decrease in the boarder towns of Mexico. For years, Mexico has been advised to legalize marijuana because it would allow for government control of its production, and decrease the activities of drug lords and the crazy boarder violence. If California were to pass prop 19, then there would not be as big of an issue with boarder control because supply and demand would make it so that cities such as LA and San Diego would no longer be fueling the illegal drug trafficking from Mexico. The president of Mexico asks for  there to be international drug regulation, and the passing of prop 19 could indeed help support this.

This poster implies that Prop 19 could be part of  a peaceful solution to the drug wars in Mexico

     On the opposite end of the spectrum, people argue that passing Prop 19 will increase crime rates in California. It is argued that car accidents would increase with an increased amount of citizens driving under the influence of the drug. Others argue that it would be difficult to prevent people from being high in the workplace. Morally, people argue that it is not a good message to be sending to children and young adults to make this drug legal. Some feel that prop 19 will promote drug abuse. Some say that it is sinful to use a sinful substance to earn money for the state.People also fear that it will create issues with the illegal smuggling of drugs to other states. It this becomes an issue, then it could become a national problem with interstate commerce.
     There is much debate surrounding prop 19 and it remains one of the more controversial topics on the November 2nd ballot. Candidates from both the Republican and Democratic parties are opposed to its validation. Perhaps they fear persecution from those strongly opposed to the issue. I remain neutral on the topic. I do not support drug abuse, and I do not support the younger generations of California getting mixed messages about drug use. But I also feel that if it were to be legalized, it would need to be treated like alcohol, and have laws enforced just like alcohol abuse. There would need to be serious traffic laws, age qualifications, and workplace authorities set up. I feel that there does need to be an end to the drug wars in Mexico, because the violence has gotten out of hand and is devastating. I feel that if prop 19 can help put an end to drug wars, than it is worth considering passing. I understand that it is immoral to condone drug use in order to collect revenue through taxation. With all of this being said, it is understandable that  recent polls indicate that the vote is pretty evenly divided. Hopefully whatever happens, young ones will know that drug free is the way to be.

Indivisable

     Yesterday was September 11^th and the ninth anniversary and the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. There has been a considerable amount of controversy surrounding proposed construction of an Islamic Cultural Center near the sight of the Twin Towers in New York City. Vociferous groups who oppose the building of the Islamic Cultural Center, argue that it is irreverent for those who lost their lives in the  Towers due to the terrorists, who they claim, were Muslim . Thousands of lives were lost on September 11^th, 2001, many of which were Muslim. People of all colors and religions were killed that day, therefore this argument proves poor. It just so happened that this year, the Muslim holiday, Eid al-Feit  fell on September 11^th. Out of respect for the day of reverence, many American Muslims pledged to hold prayer services and service projects instead of celebrating. On the opposite end of the civil spectrum, a preacher in the South Terry Jones, declared September 11^th: “International Burn the Quran” day. This zealous preacher wished to make a statement against the Muslims and was furthering protests against the building of the Islamic Cultural Center in New York. 

  President Obama  said the U.S. is at war with al Qaeda and its allies, but it "never will be at war with Islam.''

      President Obama stated that burning the holy book of Islam would cause our soldiers danger over sea. Yesterday his speech at the September 11^th memorial spoke of what it means to be American. He said that what the terrorists wanted to do on 9’11 was threaten America, he said they wanted to threaten what we stand for and to divide us . The president said that if we continue down a path of religious intolerance, as demonstrated in the threats by the preacher to burn Korans and the national objections to the construction of the cultural center, then the terrorist will have succeeded. The president calls us to remain true to American ideals. He said that we are, in the words of the Pledge of Allegiance “One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all”. Obama asserted that we must remain a nation that shuns religious intolerance. I believe that the President was right in saying so. The pastor, thankfully, did not follow through with burning Quran.  I hope people consider the words of Obama, and remember that America is a place of religious and cultural tolerance, and I fully support the building of the Islamic Cultural Center because everyone is entitled to their house of worship and community, and because September 11^th   

^{weighs heavy in the hearts of people of all Americans, no matter what religious affiliation they belong to.}  

Source : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oIdZS6l2Wg

Sayonara Dr. Laura

     Radio talk-show psychologists  jumped for joy singing "Ding-dong the witch is dead" after discovering that their vial competition, Dr. Laura Schlessinger resigned. Dr. Laura, for years, has had the reputation of an inconsiderate, condescending, bully. When callers came to her for psychological assistance  via live radio, they were slapped around and spoken down to. Dr. laura recently resigned after controversy sprung up after she made racist remarks on air. When an African-American woman, Jade, was hurting due to family and social skepticism regarding her marriage to a caucasian man, she phoned Dr. Laura to discuss her feelings, and to ask how she should react to the people in her life, including her husband, who were causing her pain. Schlessinger responded to the woman's sound issue saying : "If you're that hypersensitive about color and don't have a sense of humor, don't marry out of your race". She continued to belittle Jade's situation when she said that she was being too sensitive to people's use of the word N*****. She continued to spew the word on live radio eleven times. Shortly after the show aired, she apologized publicly to Jade, but screamed to the world that she was the one victimized in this situation. What Dr. Laura said on her show was clearly racist and opinionated, which is why I believe that General Motors and Motel 6 were justified in their pulling their sponsorship from her radio show. Schlessinger appeared on Lary King Live, where she asserted that her 1st Amendment rights are in jeopardy. She spoke directly about her sponsors leaving her after the whole ordeal: "I want to be able to say what’s on my mind and in my heart and what I think is helpful and useful without somebody getting angry, some special-interest group deciding this is the time to silence a voice of dissent and attack affiliates, attack sponsors. I’m sort of done with that." She also stated that she would now be able to express herself using different forms of media which include her blog, YouTube channel, and television. 

     Dr. Laura's claim that her First Amendment rights, which include freedom of speech, are under attack is a load of bull. Yes, she is getting reprimanded for what she said, but I feel that she is more concerned about her funding running dry. She is free to say what she wants, but that does not mean that there will not be consequences. The companies are free to support whoever they want at their own discretion, and the government is not the one telling them to retract their funds. Therefore her 1st Amendment right is in working order. She said racist comments that were hurtful, and quite frankly stupid. I feel that her switch to  online media has to do with her keeping up with a new economic opportunity, rather than staying with the ship which she sunk herself. She does not want to stay with the penniless program because she will suffer economically, not because her "freedom of speech" is in danger. I am glad that she is off radio, and that the 1st Amendment allowed for others to express their opinions and take her down. Sayonara Dr. Laura. 


Holms, Linda. "Good News, Dr. Laura: Your First Amendment Rights are Still Yours" <http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2010/08/18/129275433/laura-schlessinger-gets-back-the-first-amendment-rights-she-always-had>

Stunted Growth

      Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the Federal District Court ruled that President Obama's administration's policy regarding stem cell research is justifiably illegal. The judge asserts that Obama's federal financial support of embryonic stem cell research is a direct violation of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. This is an annual law passed by Congress which prohibits federal funding for any “research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death.” The Obama Administration put its policy into action in 2009, when it granted large sums of money to stem cell research across the country. At its conception, Obama asserted that his policy was not an infringement on the Dickey-Wicker Amendment because  "the federal money would be used only once the embryonic stem cells were created but would not finance the process by which embryos were destroyed". Judge Lamberth believes that the funding of stem cell research will do nothing but destroy embryos, therefore he overruled the policy. (Harris)

Judge Lamberth (a Reagan appointee)  strikes a pose outside of Washington

      This ruling comes as a shock to many medical research centers and universities across the nation. There are four different effective types of stem cell research: embryonic, adult, umbilical cord, and induced pluripotent stem cells. Although many have moral objections to embryonic stem cell research, its potential surpasses the others, because of the cells' immaturity and ability to be manipulated into endless possibilities. Embryonic stem cells are obtained primarily from fertility clinics, where excess embryos are likely to be destroyed regardless. This ruling will indeed stump the growth of scientific research in order to protect human life. Destroying an embryo stunts the growth of human life, but doesn't is denial hinder the advancement of the miraculous medical treatment which allows humans to thrive? I fully appreciate the immorality of destroying embryos, but if Obama's  funding were to be used to make it so embryonic stem cells could indeed be created without destroying life, then perhaps the Judge was too quick in his... well judgment. On the bright-side the reduced funding of embryonic stem cell research is, in fact, protecting life and forcing the advancement of adult stem cell research. Lamberth's decision remains controversial, not due to abusing judicial authority, but because one's moral fixation may have reduced, if not diminished vital scientific growth in the eyes of certain critics. 

Embryonic stem cell under research

Harris, Gardiner. "U.S. Judge Rules Against Obaama's Srem Cell Policy" . New York Times<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/24/health/policy/24stem.html>