Dodging Bullets: Commentary on "Gunning Down Elections"

I agree with Kyle Grier and believe that something should be done by the government to make it more difficult to obtain a gun. A gun is an object that is supposed to be used as a helpful tool, but just like cars, if they are not used properly and for the right reasons, they could turn into an extremely dangerous weapon that could kill a large sum at people once.

            I also agree that it is too easy to access a gun. According to the article, about 40% of gun sales occur without background checks. What if 40% of drivers on the road didn’t have a license?

 I believe using a gun should be treated just like using a car; one would have to go through classes and through a process in order to receive documentation that allows them to legally use a gun, so if someone really wanted to obtain a gun, they would willingly go through a long process and examination in order to do so.  

            I know that the regulation of guns is a touchy subject, but it is a subject that must be addressed. There are people who believe guns should be totally outlawed, and people who believe that strict regulation of guns is a violation of one’s Second Amendment rights. A medium needs to be found between these two groups of people. There have been several massacres that have occurred because a mentally-ill person got a hold of a gun, but at the same time, there have been occasions when a person’s life was saved because they were able to defend themselves with a gun. Considering the amount of gun-related issues the country has had recently, politicians should take this issue seriously and find a solution to this very important problem. 

Stay Focused: Commentary on "To Repeal or Not to Repeal"

            In Elizabeth Linton’s editorial, she discusses the repealing of the Obama Healthcare bill and how obvious the outcome was because of the fact that the majority of the House belongs to the Republican Party. She brings up that Republicans claim they are doing what is best for the American people, but in reality, they are making decisions based on party lines.

            I agree with Elizabeth when she says that “focus needs to be brought back to the well being of the people”. Representatives are putting a lot of their effort into defeating the opposing party rather than putting effort into bettering the country. Obama’s Healthcare bill does some positive things for Americans such as not allowing pre-existing conditions to be a factor in whether or not someone can receive health insurance, but because the bill came from a Democratic President, it was denied without being considered. If Republican House members actually cared about the well-being of the millions of Americans living without health insurance, then they would ignore the fact that the bill was created by someone who belongs to the Democratic Party, be non-partisan and make a decision that would benefit Americans.

            Like Elizabeth, I would like to see our government “working to take care of its people in a responsible way both fiscally and physically, rather than taking shots at the other side of the political aisle.” It would benefit everyone if when making decisions, the decision-makers in our government would ignore who belongs to what party and focus on improving the country. 

Southern Hospitality

The NAACP recently held their national convention in Houston. It’s obvious that African-Americans take pride in President Obama for being the first black President.  One would think that because of the approaching election, the President would speak at the convention to encourage people to vote Democratic at the next election, but that wasn’t the case; Obama was a no-show, but some politicians did come to speak at the convention. They certainly weren’t as revered as Obama, but Joe Biden and Mitt Romney were welcomed in very different ways.

            Most African-Americans affiliate themselves with the Democratic Party, and there is a high concentration of them living in the South, and when people think of the South, they think kind people, good food, and Southern Hospitality, but that isn’t quite what Mitt Romney received….

            When the Republican Presidential candidate took the stage, he must have felt uncomfortable; he was about to be speaking in front of a mostly Democratic crowd against Obama, but that was okay, he was going to be speaking in front a crowd of respectful adults, right?

That was dead wrong. When Mitt Romney took the stage and began discussing issues such as Obamacare, he received a heaping dose of Southern Hostility; he was booed and heckled. On the other hand Vice President Biden received a warm welcome. Right now you might be thinking “This is crazy? Why would the members of one of the most respected organizations in the country be acting like this?” Good question. Why would an adult act like this at a serious event?

            Many people denounced the behavior of NAACP members, but many failed to think deeply about this situation. How is Mitt Romney being booed much different from the time when a Congressman yelled out “You lie” during one of President Obama’s addresses? What happened to freedom of speech and the right to protest? They still exist. So why are these members being criticized? Many people, regardless of political affiliation, express their dislike for the ideas of an opposing party in several different ways.

            Is this a double standard? At such a crucial point in American history, people feel as if it is important to express their beliefs. Whether these beliefs are expressed in an uncivil or a civil manner, everyone has the right to emphasize their moral beliefs. Before you go out and criticize a group for something as harmless as making a little noise, think about all the people that take extreme measures like making threats and committing acts of violence. 

Love It or Leave It.

Obamacare. Some believe it’s the best idea ever conjured in a human brain, others don’t care, and some feel that passing the Affordable Care Act will ruin the United States to the point where they have no choice but to move to Canada. After the Supreme Court recently voted to uphold the majority of the Act, some may be renewing their passports and buying winter coats in preparation for the journey north, but they may want to stop and think…

The title of this editorial alone, “Hate Obamacare? Don’t Worry, Here Are Some CountriesYou Can Move To” by Dan Treadway, caught my attention. I found it ridiculous that someone was actually going to suggest different places to live after the passing of this law. As I read on, I figured out that the title was a sarcastic, harsh remark towards the authors intended audience, opponents of the upholding of Obamacare.

Treadway, an associate blog editor for the Huffington Post, has also written for The Daily Texan, the Texas Travesty and The Onion and won a scholarship for excellence in college journalism and was a finalist in a national essay writing contest, and is also a dual citizen of the U.S. and Canada which makes him credible.

The author argues that opponents of the Affordable Care Act may feel that universal health care is not right for our country, but moving to Canada would not be beneficial in avoiding it considering Canada has provided universal healthcare since 1966. He also adds that other countries have poor healthcare, high risks of catching infectious disease, and abuse human rights and compared to America have far worse standards of living. He supports his argument by stating that America “spends much more per capita on health care than any other nation in the world”. Treadway uses biting sarcasm to support his argument declaring “there’s really no reason to suffer through the grave injustice of universal healthcare when there is such a robust sampling of countries that…will happily allow you to not experience Obamacare… many have been plagued by poverty, unemployment and civil war, but how is living in those conditions that different from life under the Obama administration?”

I agree with Treadway’s argument because I believe that no government can please everybody. There are some people that believe that the Affordable Care Act will do good for our nation and some who believe otherwise, and that is the same situation for government issues; there are supporters and naysayers. Compared to countries like Haiti, where there are 25 physicians for every 100,000 people, our country is doing something good by trying to provide everyone with healthcare. This act is meant to try to help people and improve the standard of living for some, so I think we should give it a try. 

"You break it, you own it"

Almost everyone’s been to one of those stores with very expensive items; the stores that only sell things made of glass or those stores that sell old, fragile antiques. I know I have. When I was young, I went into one of those stores with my parents and my younger, hyperactive sister. As we entered, the shopkeeper warned us: “If you break it, you buy it.”

President Obama is using a similar ideology when it comes to addressing the economy. In this article from Time by Jon Meacham, Obama is using the “Pottery Barn Rule” to put the blame on President Bush and Republicans for ruining the economy.

Something that caught my attention in this article was the fact that most Americans agree with the fact that George W. Bush is responsible for the current state of the economy. I would have thought that since there has been a lot of criticism regarding President Obama’s work with the economy, that Americans would blame him for the economy’s current state.

The author’s intended audience was voters and those who are interested in politics. He is credible because, according to his profile on Time, he is the author of a Pulitzer Prize-winning book, runs a website devoted to current affairs, was an editor for Newsweek, and is an editor-at-large for a PBS station.

Using ethos, Meacham argues that "Americans don't care as much about the past as they do the present and the future" and that the people want a "President that fixes things, not a President that whines about the task at hand". I disagree with the latter of these statements because the economy was at a low when President Bush left office. A copious amount of money was spent on things such as the Iraq War over the course of 8 years. President Obama has been in office for less than 4 years. It is impossible to reverse 8 years worth of damage in less than 4 years. As for the first statement, I also disagree because the past paves the way for the present and the future. Without a past, there is no future. If Americans do not care about the past, that means the do not care about the Constitution that gave American citizens their rights or the wars that have been fought to ensure freedom, which is obviously not true. 

Meacham later proves that he is wrong by providing data from a Gallup poll that shows that Americans blame Bush more than Obama for the economy’s weakness.  He also says something that I totally agree with: we are going to be hearing a lot about Mitt Romney talking about Barack Obama and Barack Obama talking about the “Pottery Barn Rule” until November.

"The Private Sector Is Doing Fine". How These Six Words Started a Riot.

As Economic Concerns Mount, President Obama Says, ‘The Private Sector Is Doing Fine’
http://swampland.time.com/2012/06/08/as-economic-concern-mounts-president-obama-says-the-private-sector-is-doing-fine/

In the article posted above, it's a Friday morning in Washington D.C.; the President has been busy trying to improve the lives of American workers and prevent the European Union's economy from collapsing. He enters the briefing room, a place that isn't unfamiliar to him, and begins to inform his audience of his plans and the tasks that he's currently trying to complete. Somewhere in the middle of this briefing, someone asks President Obama about the current state of the nation's economy and he responded, and somewhere in his response were the words "the private sector is doing fine". Six words. These six words have fueled several arguments and other backlash towards the President. This article is worth reading because it illustrates how a simple statement from the President is being used against him in campaigns for rival Mitt Romney. Something interesting about this article is the way Obama's statement is related to statements made in 2008 by him and his opponent John McCain regarding the economy. This article is relevant to me because there are less than six months until Election Day 2012 and every statement made by the candidates has the potential to change a voters mind. Even though I won't be of legal voting age, I have several friends that will be able to vote. I chose to blog about this article to highlight how cutthroat politics can be. A simple six word statement caused Republicans to produce responses to show the public that he is wrong and have the potential to change a person's mind. 

Me, Politically

Considering I'm too young to vote, most would assume I have no political opinion. The complete opposite is true. I keep up with politics as best as I can because I know that our political leaders have an effect on our lives. Presidents that have influenced my political beliefs include Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Although some of the decisions that these Presidents have made have been poor, I consider these men to be extremely influential. According to the Pew Research Centers News IQ Quiz, I am fairly knowledgeable about current events in politics, outscoring 59% of the public. I would be considered a "New-Democrat" according to the Pew Research Center. I am both Catholic and an environmentalist. I am religious, but not intolerant. I consider myself a liberal and I believe people have the right to do as they please as long as it is moral to them. I believe all Americans, regardless of what their ideologies are, are entitled to equal rights.