Response to "High Time for Change"

I agree with the Home of The Brave History’s article “High Time for Change” that the federal government should decriminalize marijuana. Not only does it not make any sense, but all evidence points to positive effects of legalized marijuana. First of all no negative effects can be found from a medical standpoint. Not only is the drug not a physically addictive drug, but it has actually been found that it can be GOOD for health purposes, for example, medical marijuana. On the other hand, two legal substances, alcohol and tobacco, not only are physically addictive, but can both lead to death. Moreover, they can harm the third party, as in drunk driving and second-hand smoke, in contrast to marijuana which has no effect on the third party, but only the individual. The only negative effect one can find of marijuana is the illegal drug trade, which is dangerous. Drug trafficking not only results in gangs and violence, but the incarceration of many Americans. The legalization of marijuana would not only eliminate the danger of the illegal drug trade, but halt the imprisonment of a substantial number of potential harmless drug offenders. It is baffling when drugs like salvia, a hallucinogen, are legal and marijuana is not. It seems that “The War on Drugs”, at least in the terms of marijuana, is the prosecution of the uninformed against the individual’s clear right to personal freedom.

Roe vs. Wade Must End

The biggest crisis going on in our country today is not the war we’re fighting in Iraq or the deeply established racism; it’s the crimes we’re allowing to be committed against our own flesh and blood, legalized abortion. There were approximately 1.37 million abortions in 1996 alone. Simple put, it’s way past time for the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision to be overturned. Not only is legalized abortion an invasion of the unborn babies’ right to life, but it’s an invasion against the innocent, those who clearly can’t stand up for themselves.

Even though I don’t think I will ever be able to truly understand the position mothers whom choose abortion are put in, I believe that legalized abortion must stop. I agree with the new South Dakota proposed ban which exempts rape, incest, and the health of the mother. These are all reasonable, moral predicaments which the right of privacy of the mother should be protected. Not like the excessive amount of abortions that are nonchalantly being performed today despite the clear invasion of the right to life of the baby.

In today’s society there are abundant methods of birth control that sexually active women have the choice to use. I believe that it’s more than irresponsible for them pass up these options if they are not ready to have a child. Abortion has to stop being used as a means of birth control. This is because it is simply not. It is the killing of a child, unborn or not, which does not constitute as the typical meaning of birth control, but more like life control. Individuals with the help of the current law have to be held accountable for the outright slaughter of their own young.

Is Obama Truly the Best?

I agree the Barack Obama is a great guy. He is the best friend everyone dreams of. He represents a new age of America where everyone works together to make crucial changes. However, I am also unsure of whether Barack Obama is fit to be the president of the United States. A job that takes more than charisma and character, but the skills to be in charge of the entire government system affecting, in return affecting every single citizen in the country. The presidential race is not a popularity contest, wherein Mr. Obama would trump over all his running mates, but a decision that will affect generations to come.

As for that he has great policy that is strictly on opinion basis. The Iraq War seems to have been extremely “mishandled” as some have put it, but to take the troops home immediately seems like a premature idea. Everyone wants what best for our troops, but could pulling them out right away eventually result in loosing all that they have spent many years working on? Again, this goes back to the point of Obama’s experience. Even though the idea of pulling out the troops seems great in theory, is it really going to be best for America in the end?

Health Care Reform Needs to go to Extreme Measures

With roughly 47 million uninsured Americans in 2006, the country doesn’t seem to be doing enough to retaliate against this insurmountable crisis. Moreover even though health care plays a large role in the main policy issues of the 2008 election, none of the candidates are proposing the drastic changes that are essential to the welfare of the American people.

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama’s plans contain the type of revolutionary change we as Americans need. First off, Barack Obama’s plan only includes mandatory health insurance for those under the age of 18, adults are given the choice to buy or decline. This is just not acceptable for a country of our stature in this day and age. Isn’t good health one of our basic rights? Doesn’t it fall under life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Second of all neither of their proposals addressed the outrageous cost of health insurance- an indispensable human liberty. The main solution to fund it is to renounce the Bush tax cuts. Also, Americans paying for health care are taxed in order to subsidize the poor. So basically this calls for a classic Robin Hood situation, not unfamiliar in the American government system. Instead the government needs to take the initiative and make the radical turn needed to re-invent the entire health care system.

We have many wonderful health care examples to look at. The majority of countries have a much better system than us. For example Canada spends only $3,165 per capita on health care, compared to over $7,000 per capita in the United States. (Source: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Why can’t we learn from the numerous other countries that seem to have this thing down, instead of trying to come up with a system from scratch? If the wheel’s not broke don’t fix it. And if it is, well then give it up and get a new one.

All in all, I think Michael Moore is going in the right direction on America’s needs in health care. His proposal is this: 1) Every resident of the United States must have free, universal health care for life. 2) All health insurance companies must be abolished. 3) Pharmaceutical companies must be strictly regulated like a public utility. (Source: michaelmoore.com) Although, his plan may seem rather extreme to many people, we cannot accept anything less than what our surrounding countries have shown us is possible.

Lack of Primetime News Coverage Is Forewarning to Future of Media

My Commentary is based on the article "TV Networks Resort to the 'Crawl' Instead of Real News Coverage" written by Alessandra Stanley in the New York Times on March 5, 2008. This article is about how on Tuesday night primetime television did not showcase the election report of the Ohio and Texas primaries. Instead they left the political coverage up to the cable networks, and continued on with their less than notable scheduled television dramas. The article criticizes that the election report did not get the news coverage it deserved, and got shoved into the background.

I agree with the article’s criticism of the under covered election report. It’s interesting that despite MSNBC’s turnout of 8 million viewers of the Democratic debate last week (as the article states) the primetime shows remained, with only sparse coverage, including crawls. Why would high viewer rating not be a good enough reason? Perhaps primetime television does not feel journalistically liable to do so.

On another note, this compares to what Jon Stewart was saying about the theatrics of the media. Last Tuesday was not news with some entertainment (the primetime shows like “Jericho” and “Big Brother”), but pure entertainment with some secondarily significant news (the election report) sprinkled in. However this secondarily significant news could easily have been the make or break it point in this Democratic nomination, therefore quite possibly deciding America’s future president.

Referring back to Jon Stewart, while researching the topic I found an interesting article (The Daily Show is as substantive as the "real" news) comparing the substance of the Daily Show’s news coverage to traditional news programs. Researchers found the content to be very similar in substance, a quite frightening discovery. Something is wrong when the news media cannot seem to outdo a show on Comedy Central. The standard of journalism has clearly fallen off a cliff. I think it’s time for the viewers to take some of Jon Stewart’s advice to the media and “hold their feet to the fire.” News media has the responsibility to report the hard news necessary to produce an informed democracy of American citizens, and the citizens need to only accept the best.

Clinton in No Way Giving Up, Only Continuing in the Fight

The article “What Was Clinton Saying? Caucus Readers Interpret” written Katharine Q. Seelye in The New York Times Politics Blog, discusses the closing lines of the Austin Democratic debate. When asked what her most difficult challenge in life was Hillary Clinton sort of chuckles that she has indeed faced many personal challenges. She goes on to say that none of these compare to the challenges that the soldiers and many ordinary American citizens face. Next, she declares that she is honored to run with Barack Obama. She states that no matter what happens in the election everything will be fine for her and Mr. Obama, but that she hopes the American people will be able to say the same. The article interprets this conclusion as her conceding and “going out gracefully.”

Contrary to the opinions of the article, I do not believe that Mrs. Clinton’s closing remarks in the Austin debate were in any way an indication that she was giving up. My interpretation of her answer is vastly different in that I see her finally succeeding in getting her point and story across to the American people.

First off she shows her down-to-earth side when she sort of smirks over the fact that she had gone through some crises in her life referring to her husband’s sex scandal. She then continues to say that this is nothing compared with many American’s lives, again showing that she in sensible and empathizes with many.

I think the most significant statement she makes is when she declares that the goal in her life is to give Americans the same opportunities she was blessed with. This is a very effective comment, only pulling voters strongly toward her and making her more likeable as someone who’s fighting for the interest of the people as a whole.

In her final comment she states that she knows that she and Mr. Obama will be fine despite who wins the nomination but she questions if the American people will be. I think this was a subtle, but successful way to promote herself to the voters. She is saying that there is a threat in choosing Mr. Obama and proving herself to be the better choice.

I felt that in her speech there was more of a sense of hopefulness in the upcoming primaries than that of valedictory. Furthermore, I don’t think the recognition of Mr. Obama served as her conceding to him, but moreover her feeling secure in her place in the election and confident in herself. If anything the friendly interaction with Mr. Obama was a way to show people her genuine side and sort of underdog status to sway them for her, not to give the voters to Mr. Obama.

Congress Votes for a Stimulus of $168 Billion

Congress Votes for a Stimulus of $168 Billion

Yesterday, February 7th, Congress passed a bill for a 168 billion dollar stimulus plan in order to attempt to cut short the current recession. The plan not only includes payments for Social Security recipients and disabled veterans, but also tax rebates for middle income families. Even though there was resistance from Republicans on approving a larger Democratic package, it took only two weeks to pass the plan after President Bush had called for it. The article is worth reading because like Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. said “We are making history. What has passed the Congress in record time is a gift to the middle class and those who aspire to it in our country.” We learn about expansionary fiscal policy in economics but rarely see real life examples due to the length of time it takes to put fiscal changes into effect, political pressures face by those who develop fiscal policy, and entitlements like Social Security. This is plan is hope for the future of the economic welfare of America.