Last word......

1.  This class helped me become more aware of the world around me.  I used to read only news that pertained to criminal activity that took place only in the US.  Now I read other articles that show what goes on in other parts of the world and how America is involved.  I have noticed that we are involved in a lot of foreign affairs and it makes me wonder if that’s a good thing or a bad thing.  I also learned from writing these blogs that you really have to look at both sides of the story.  I formed my opinion and stuck with it but the opposing view always made me think about my choice a lot harder.

2. The new skills that I have learned from this class are to always look at the opposing view.  Everyone has an opinion and it is only fair to look at both sides.  If we make judge things too quickly then we will surely lose out on something.  We can make ourselves look like fools from not getting all the facts and forming an opinion too fast.  It also doesn’t hurt to ask questions, this way you can become more rounded. 

3.  I learned that I have a lot to say when it came to these articles.  Currently I don’t vote, but am highly opinionated.  I never paid too much attention to politics and what’s in the news.  My husband is the complete opposite of me and found the articles I had to write about very interesting.  He helped me to become more interested and to have conversations about more important things.  Now we can discuss a lot of different topics and share our opinions to each other.  My performance as a student has always been pretty much focused.  I tend to dedicate myself to my assignments and stress the importance of getting good grades.

4. The only thing that made this class a little difficult was getting my assignments turned in on time.  It is hard enough working 40 hours a week and then having to have an assignment due on a Friday.  I had no time to catch my breath sometimes and expecting my first child didn’t make it any easier.  I wish that the assignments were due on Sunday only because when you work mon-fri it’s nice to come home and forget everything and then wake up fresh on Saturday and then start the homework. 

5.  The skill that I got from this class was the ability to look at the opposing side.  It is hard to take into consideration what someone else has to say once you form an opinion.  I will open my mind a little wider before I give my final answer.

6.  My favorite topic to write about hands down was the death penalty.  I work at a bank and everyone knows the dangers that can come with that.  In between customers I was always looking at the mass most wanted or America’s most wanted websites.  There are so many criminals out that and I feel that some of them get off too easy.  We have so much improved technology that it should be impossible to make a mistake, and yet we have so many unsolved cases and families torn apart becuase of unanswered questions.  Why should criminals have the right to live when their victims had to suffer? We are granting them a longer life and taking away from people in need.  All the money that gets put into housing a criminal could help a poor struggling family. 

Syria

Syria is a country currently with no stability.  Wars are constantly breaking out in the street and innocent people are dying.  People are starving and children are being forced to take sides when they aren’t even old enough to form an opinion.  How has this country become this volatile??  I think that this all started because of three major factors.  The first one being is the presidential regime.  Here we have a country that is supposed to be of a republic nature but instead Hafid al-Assad decided to remain president for a long time without the Syrian people “choosing” him as a leader.  After he passed away the presidency automatically defaulted to his son without a fair election, which has created more of a presidential monarchy than a republic.  The second major factor is the revolution that occurred in the Arab world between Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt.  These countries put an end to the brutal regimes of long presidency.  This created a major effect on Syria, who wanted to create the same atmosphere.  The third major factor deals with the social, economic, and political problems that they face today.  The population is struggling as they fight daily for food and peace and a better life.

Russia and China are among the countries that disagree with this revolution.  They have been stopping any decisions the UN makes to help the revolution because they have the right to veto.  These countries have major strategic benefits to abort the revolution because they support the presidential regime.   Russia, one of President Bashar al-Assad's strongest allies despite international condemnation of the government's violent crackdown on the country's uprising, has repeatedly blocked the United Nations Security Council's attempts to halt the violence, accusing the U.S. and its allies of trying to start another war.  “The United States is outraged that this council has utterly failed to address an urgent moral challenge and a growing threat to regional peace and security,” said Susan Rice ambassador to the United Nations.  France’s U.N. ambassador, Gerard Araud, vowed that this “veto will not stop us” from pressing for Syria to end a crackdown that has killed nearly 3,000 people. 

The question that has remained unanswered is whether or not the West and the UN should step in or if we should just let Syria solve their own problems.  I think that the West and the UN should step in because of all the innocent people that are dying.  The only thing we need to be careful of is that we don’t recreate a situation like when we interfered in Iraq and Afghanistan.  The US needs to be more cautious and diplomatic because Syria is more complicated from the support of Russia and China to the Syrian President.  This could create an international conflict between the super powers, which could lead to WWIII.  Any decision of interference must be considered carefully between the US and UN in order to help Syria and not hurt it.  The best thing we could do in the meantime is help the citizens of Syria by providing them food and medical assistance until a decision can be made from the aiding countries. 

Facts:

Russia strongest ally: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/russian-anti-terror-troops-arrive-syria/story?id=15954363

Susan Rice: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russia-china-block-syria-resolution-at-un/2011/10/04/gIQArCFBML_story.html

Gerard Araud: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russia-china-block-syria-resolution-at-un/2011/10/04/gIQArCFBML_story.html

Interview

I chose to interview my manager at work. His leadership skills with his work ethic and employees helped to make him an interesting candidate for my interview. I know that he has very strong opinions on things and I was interested to hear his thoughts on a political level. The key experiences that helped to shape his political identity started with the fact that he came from a divorced family. He said this shaped his view to understand hard work and never giving up. It helped in teaching him the value of giving back to the community and helping others in need. He promotes this in his work ethic as well and helps to set an example for the rest of us.

My manager considers himself to be conservative fiscally/economically but very liberal when it comes to decisions of personal choice. He said anything to do with the economy he has a conservative view and most issues pertaining to personal beliefs and lifestyles he would more than likely have a liberal leaning view. Since we work for a bank he is very opinionated in his views of how we can become a better bank and what has changed that hurts us. He always is positive and upbeat when it comes to keeping customers happy while having a healthy banking environment. Some of the key issues that he values are repealing the health care bill, getting Americans back to work in full time jobs that can actually pay, legal immigration, energy production reforms, removing our military strategically from around the world as needed and corporate tax loopholes to name a few.

Some of the experiences that have caused me to be who I am are similar to my managers. I was raised by my mom along with my brother and sister. We learned at an early age to not take things for granted. We participated in our community by helping with a food pantry and even carrying food to people’s homes. In the winter if my mom saw a child outside without a hat or mittens she would knit some and me and my sister would deliver them to the family. My mom also stop for the neighborhood crime watch and wrote articles for the newspaper pertaining to the safety of the children along with the community we live in. all of this has helped in shaping me in being a strong independent woman that will always help someone in need. My mom is a very strong person and continues to help us in being better every day. While I have learned a lot from my past, my political identity has not been announced. While I may be very opinionated and always looking to do the right thing, I have yet to formally put my thoughts into actions and pick a person to lead our country with the same thoughts as my own. I think that each candidate show a mix of things that I agree with and therefore would be able to side with just one.

I learned that people tend to vote based on how they observe things. The way you are raised definitely plays a huge key in all of this. Everything is based on opinions of others and we have the right to choose and agree with whomever we can relate the most too. People vote for liberals and conservatives based on personal experiences. Voters are going to vote for things that they can see actively being changed. We want to see a difference in a lot of things for example health care and more people finding jobs. If we can actively see a significant change on these items, we are more likely to vote for the person that made this happen. Each city has its own mayor that makes the rules. When we see how this person can change its community then we feel secure and will support him with any other upcoming agenda topics. We then may use this one person as an example of what we trust and apply it outside the box when it comes to voting in the presidential elections. We are going to vote based on some sort of similarity.

Questions asked:

1. How did you vote in the last election? Why?

2. Why do you consider yourself a liberal, conservative, or independent?

3. What life experiences have shaped your political values and identity?

4. Who will you likely vote for in November?

5. What are your key issues that pertain to you, that influence your voting?

6. When you choose a candidate to vote for, do you believe in everything that they support or do you have some margin for disagreement?

7. Do you feel that having a democratic president makes a difference over a republican one?

8. Do you feel that President Obama accomplished a lot in his term and do you think that he should be re-elected?

9. What do you feel is one of the biggest issues that we face today? Have we fixed this or ignored it.

10. What do you hope to see change during the next presidential elections?

"Self Defense....."

The article we have this week is in regards to Trayvon Martin, or I should say his murder case.  This story claims that the man held responsible for Trayvon’s death, George Zimmerman, acted out in self defense.  This topic is very controversial because we have to examine the aspect of self defense as well as the fact that race is a possible issue.  A young man lost his life in an accusation that he was “up to no good.”  We also have at hand here the Florida law of “stand your ground” and the fact that the police, according to the parents, who were doing a poor job and had to entail a federal investigation.  So the unanswered questions are who is guilty and how should they be punished. While Trayvon can’t say his side of the story, maybe the evidence can and George Zimmerman can be convicted of a crime, or for a “right” gone “wrong.”



Self defense indicates that one protects oneself or property from the harm of others.  George Zimmerman claimed self defense, but he followed the victim.  We have records of the 911 call that he made and the dispatcher clearly telling him to not follow the kid.  He enacted anyway.  This should clearly put him as the suspect in a murder case.  He wasn’t defending anything he was interrogating an innocent kid and looking for trouble.  The “stand your ground law” indicates that a person may use force in self defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first.  The 2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE indicates:

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony

More than 919,000 concealed weapons permits have been issued to Florida residents as of March 31, according to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, which is charged with licensing weapons in the state.  In Zimmerman's case, he was licensed to carry a concealed weapon despite a prior arrest for assault on a law enforcement officer and domestic battery complaints by a former girlfriend.  They only thing that they will do now is take away his permit to hold a concealed weapon, he is allowed to keep any other guns he may own.  This isn’t justice, just a simple slap on the wrist saying you can’t hide your gun.      

We have an innocent boy, with no criminal record, and a man who has been arrested before for assaulting an officer, and we allowed him (on the night of the murder) to walk away without being charged.  The question we were asked was whether anyone was guilty and I would have to say that the guilty person is Mr. Zimmerman.  He assumed that the kid was up to no good and followed him, despite being told not to, and then he kills him with a gun.  He is 100% guilty of his actions and should be charged and not even be allowed to claim self defense.  Florida really needs to fix the laws they have at hand because it makes it possible for many people to walk away after committing murder.  I guess it’s easy to say “I didn’t do it” when you have weak laws that protect you from your actions. 

self defense-stand your ground

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

2011 Florida Statutes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

919,000 concealed weapons; Zimmerman’s case

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/13/us-florida-guns-idUSBRE83C1IV20120413

Afghanistan



 

Can the US win the war in Afghanistan?

The war in Afghanistan has been going on for over a decade.  We invaded the Middle East shortly after the 9/11 attacks, and from this war we have only been able to spend millions of dollars and watch thousands of innocent people die.  Throughout the years Americans have slowly lost their faith that this war will end.  The only notable thing that has been obtained was the death of Osama bin Laden.  We have had examples of prior wars, such as the Soviet-Afghan wars, and we have learned nothing from this.   The geography of the country plays a big part on their success by being a trap in wars along with the Afghan guerilla forces.  Nowadays the Taliban plays a sick game of hide and seek with the US by hiding in the mountains while luring the US troops into other territories.  They are able to remain hidden while the US troops remain trapped on their bases due to the fact that they don’t know where to start.  Another thing that is hurting the US in trying to win the war is the fact that we have countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia that are supposed to be our allies but are secretly helping the enemies.  The strong religious background enables this to happen.  We ended up searching for Osama bin Laden for ten years in the wrong country because of this.  This has also made it impossible to distinguish between the civilians and the guerrillas. 

What would victory look like?

I think that if the US was actually able to end the war in Afghanistan that democracy would be spread.  People in Afghanistan would stop being afraid of things and there would be a lot of changes.  Women would be allowed to get an education, children would stop being trained to become killers, buildings could be built and societies would be able to prosper.   A country would be able to rebuild themselves with our help and would become better because of it.  Innocent lives would not be lost and our troops would be able to return home to their own families.  We would also save a lot of money and could go back to helping our own country.

What will it take to win?

I think that in order for us to win we need to have the cooperation of our allies to capture those people who insist on the continued fighting.  There is no need for people to have to die every day.  The article that was posted about Sgt. Bales was a tragedy.  19 innocent people were killed and this man is to blame.  He has become mentally unstable.  We need for our troops to be of sound mind and keep the focus on ending the war, but unfortunately the longer they are there, the more unhealthy they become.  We need negotiations, diplomacy, and acquiring more allies would help to solve this problem. 

The Other Wes Moore Project

1.  Both of the Wes Moore’s grew up in similar situations. The author of this story is raised by his mom along with his two sisters.  The other Wes is raised by his mother along with his brother who goes back and forth between his mother and fathers house.  They both act like protectors and “man of the house,” being that one lost his father at an early age and the other never knew his.  They both had points in their lives where school was unimportant because of the pressure from their neighborhoods and the struggle to fit in. 

These two men grew up in poor neighborhoods and had to struggle with drugs and gangs living all around them.  They both had enough influential people in their lives to help to guide them, but their stubborn ways had other paths for them.  When I read this book it was a little confusing to distinguish between the two because of their names and similar situations.  You definitely have to re-read some areas to find out who we are focusing on. 

2.  For the author of the book, his turning point was when he was sent to military school.  He was failing his classes in school from what appeared to be boredom.  He takes advantage of the fact that he is the only boy and his mother’s threat of sending him to military school is just to scare him.  He crosses the line when he hits his sister in the face causing her lip to bleed.  He was taught at a young age that you never hit women and he pushed too far.  When he first gets to the military school he hates it and is mad at the world.  He tries to escape and eventually succumbs to his surroundings.  He grows to love it and appreciate the second chance he was given and is able to fulfill his dreams and make something of himself.  From military school he attends Oxford University and easily moves on through life with accomplishments he never thought he would have achieved. 

 The other Wes Moore had a lot more to struggle with.  He became a father very early on in life with two different women.  When he saw how bad off his second girlfriend was with her drug addiction, he realized that he couldn’t take it anymore.  He wanted out of the drug business and wanted to make something of himself.  He joins the job corps and realizes that even though he missed a lot of school he is able to catch up and get his GED.  He is able to pick a profession that he is good at and makes him happy.  He becomes skilled in carpentry and is inspired to build a miniature house for his daughter.  He unfortunately buckles under the pressure of trying to take care of his mom and his four kids and returns to his old habits.

3.  The author of the book started out well with both parents.  Even though he was very young when his father passed away, he learned very important lessons from him.  His mother knowing what it feels like to struggle wanted the best for her son.  She was abused by her first husband and knew that was not the way to live.  After the passing of the second husband she knows that the best way to raise her kids was with the help of her parents.  Wes grows up with strict rules highly enforced by his grandparents.  He is respectful and also attends a private school far from the neighborhood.  His mother wants the best for him, and after he falls behind she surprises him by sending him to military school.  He is surrounded by people throughout his life that want to help and to see him succeed.

The other Wes grows up with a mother who is struggling with doing the best she can.  She has two sons from two different fathers.  Wes feels at a young age that he is the man of the house and needs to protect his mom.  When he sees her crying, he refuses to leave without an answer.  His mother got pregnant at 16 but retained her goals of attending school and being the first to go to college.  Her mother passes away when her firstborn is young and her father is an alcoholic.  Her second son, Wes has a father who is an alcoholic too.  He visits his father’s mother despite his father never playing a part in his life.  His mother works all the time and his brother falls through the cracks and becomes involved in drug dealings.  With no positive male role model, Wes looks upon becoming just like his brother, Tony, which his mother and Tony fight against every day.  Unfortunately he becomes a father at a young age to four kids and relies on the drug business to pay for all his financial burdens.  He hits an all time low that sends him to life in prison.

4.  This book shows that human behavior is highly influenced by both nature and nurture.  In both cases nurture takes place with the mothers working hard to try and raise their kids the best they can.  They try to provide for them but from working so hard they miss some of the signs that show when the boys start falling down.  The nature part is the impact that the neighborhoods have on these kids.  The author tries to play it cool with the neighborhoods kids even though he goes to a better, fancier school then they do.  This causes him to slack off and get into minor indiscretions, such as the spray painting incident.  The other Wes falls even harder with his mom being gone all the time and drugs being easily accessible.  He feels like this is the best way to make money so he can keep up with the latest gear, just like his brother. 

There are similar patterns between these two boys.  They both start off as innocent bystanders in a harsh community.  The best they have is what their mothers can provide and the rest they need to figure out for themselves.  The first Wes panics the first time he gets in trouble with the police.  He cries and prays that his mother will never find out.  Military school helps him to become a stronger person, despite the issue he faces when the car tried to run him down and he is stuck in the face with something hard.  He learned that fighting back is not the answer.  The second Wes had the crap beat out of him by his brother who was doing the best he could to protect his brother and help him to not end up like him.  Wes never gives up on trying making money and unfortunately ends up with the same fate as his brother of life in prison for a crime gone wrong.

5.  The thing that I like about the book was the similarities between two strangers.  I have always found it fascinating when I meet a person with the same name as me, or born around the same time.  You can’t help but wonder what else could be in common aside from a name.  I like that the author was so intrigued by the fact that another man with his name could be so similar and yet so different, I like the fact that he reached out to this stranger to find out who the “Other Wes Moore” was.  He also tries to imagine what it would have been like if they were in each other’s shoes.  I have often wondered what it would be like to be someone else, to live in a different time, a different situation, to have a different family.  He almost gets to experience that feeling because of how much they have in common.

The only complaint about the book was that it got a little confusing differentiating between the two Wes’s.  Having the same name made it hard to keep track of who was who and who was doing what.  Other than that I really enjoyed reading this book.  It is sad how hard their lives were growing up, and it really makes you appreciate what you have in life.  It is also amazing how they both end up completely the opposite of each other.  I wonder if fate would have been the same if they actually knew each other growing up.  Would one have influenced the other?  Could they both have ended up the same?  

Corporations Vs. Citizens

The issue at hand is whether or not corporations have the same right as citizens when involved in choosing our political candidates.  Well a corporation defined by dictionary.com is “an association of individuals, created by law or under authority of law, having a continuous existence independent of the existences of its members, and powers and liabilities distinct from those of its members.” The answer is right here!!  It’s an association that exists independently from its members.  I would consider it more like a thing than a being the first amendment talks about the freedom of speech.  It doesn’t say anything about bribing other people and other corporations so that they can have their way.  How would that make them equal when one has the upper hand?   

Of course there are always two sides to a story.  Citizens United, as already noted are a non-profit conservative media company.  When looking at their website they claim that they are “an organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizens' control. Through a combination of education, advocacy, and grass roots organization, Citizens United seeks to reassert the traditional American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security. Citizens United's goal is to restore the founding fathers' vision of a free nation, guided by the honesty, common sense, and good will of its citizens.  If this is what they truly believe in, then why did they try to get the Fahrenheit 9/11 banned when Michael Moore was only trying to let the people see the truth behind the Bush family and elections?  That movie was a way of alerting people to connections that people with money can have.  We saw the connections that were made and we were left to make our own decisions to make.  Then Citizens United contradicted themselves by making their own documentary, this time attacking Hillary Clinton.  So at this point they are only trying to make freedom of speech ok for corporations and not individuals such as Michael Moore. 

Justice Stevens believes that “... the patronage system was a misuse of government power; the government has a duty to act impartially.”  This shows that the government needs to act fair and not rely on other sources to sell them out.  The citizens of this country are hard working people with only their voices as their weapon and if corporations want to be treated the same then they should only use their voices without the influences that money has to offer.  Corporations use their numbers against the citizens.  As pointed out by Susan Mckevitt, “We have to get back to one person, one vote, and not have it be millionaires count and the common people don't,"

From everything I have read my decision stands firm that corporations don’t have the rights of individual citizens.  As previously stated one person one vote is the way it should be.  Not a corporation with hundreds of members.  Each of those members needs to act independently in order to be fair.  Corporations use their power and money to influence decisions made that leads to the people we have running the country.  How is that considered equal when each individual only has their opinion and their voice to offer?  The Preamble to the constitution states “We the people,” not “We the corporations.” 

Facts:
“Organization dedicated to restoring government…”
http://www.citizensunited.org/who-we-are.aspx

Justice Stevens “patronage system is a misuse….”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130198344

Susan Mckevitt “one person one vote….”
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/315246/petitioned-warrant-articles-decry-citizens-united-case?SESSc32f76032d4fb31db2659f73b6732bfa=google&page=full

Justice is served??

This week’s topic is such a controversial one.  On one hand we have people saying that yes we should kill criminals that have preyed on innocent victims and left life scarring effects on families and loved ones.  Then we have people saying that the death penalty is wrong because then it makes us just as wrong to kill someone, a life for a life, and the ones who have to issue the execution are also scarred for life.  So what is the answer to this question?  If we use lethal injection as a tool for justice then we are setting an example to others and possibly preventing more people from committing similar crimes.  If we allow people to sit in prison and “think about what they have done,” then you are allowing them to live their life while others were not spared.  Not only do they get to live, but get the taxpayers to pay for their life behind bars.  They may not be able to live freely in society, but technology has allowed them to keep up with everything that is going on.  Many prisoners have access to TV, internet, and phones allowing them to connect with the outside world.  Even those who are on a tight lock down have managed ways of communicating beyond bars through a system of codes and can therefore have outside sources fill their places and continue to kill.  I think that the death penalty should remain as an example to others.  I believe that it does help in many ways to stop violence.  With today’s technology and advances in the criminal investigation world, we are better able to target killers allowing us to finalize our decision to execute them without the feeling that we have killed an innocent person.  Honestly, if you really think about it, the lethal injection is still an easy way out for criminals. 

Many people are against the death penalty for a variety of reasons.  Gandhi once said, “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”  He is pointing out that two wrongs don’t make a right and he is correct in some aspects.  But if wonder if the people who are against the death penalty have ever put themselves into the shoes of a person who has lost a loved one in a tragic way.  A man comes in and kidnaps your eight year old daughter.  He then rapes her, tortures her, and then viciously kills her.  He then hides her body in an undisclosed area hoping she will never be found and then he goes home and pretends like nothing happens.  That family is now frantically searching for their little girl and are tormented by the thoughts of who took her and what did they do.  Months later her body is discovered and this family will never again be the same.  The innocent life of this child has been taken.  When the murderer is discovered, all evidence points to him and he gets to sit in prison for the rest of his life.  The family gets to sit there and think about how this man is just laying in bed in a prison that feeds him, gives him medical care, and allows him pleasures such as books, games, and tv.  Is it right that the murderer gets a chance at life after committing such a heinous crime?  Desmond Tutu is quoted saying “To take a life when a life has been lost is revenge, not justice.”   Using the example from above, revenge would be defined if the family went out themselves and hunted him down to kill him themselves in the same manner as the little give.  Justice plays a role by allowing this murderer to die in a more humane way by lethal injection.  All he has to do is simply lie down while toxins are put in his body and he is put to a permanent sleep.  How is that revenge?  Albert Camus, a French philosopher once said, “Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders.”  Well sometimes we have to weed out the criminals and rid the world of them.  We have pests all over the country such as insects and mice that constantly are killing crops which leads to people suffering.  We solve this problem by killing them with pesticides and other means to protect our crops.  We purposely plan out the deaths of these creatures when they were put on this earth and are doing what their DNA tells them to in order to survive.  The premeditated murder of innocent creatures is ok while ridding the world of criminals isn’t?  Where do we draw the line? 

I have to agree with the death penalty because I think that it helps to set standards.  We make examples out of people and crime goes down.  How are we setting a good example to society when we allow people to have a “life” in prison?  There are many shows about prison life that show us what goes on.  Some prisons allow people to access to things like computers, books, and TV.  Others that are more strict allow inmates only 30 minutes of time outside and other than that they are confined to a small cell with nothing.  The thing that people also see on these prison shows is that the people behind the bars are still committing crimes! You would think that being sentenced to life behind bars would teach them a lesson and try to have them turn themselves around.  Instead they are digging themselves into deeper holes, which only makes society try to find other solutions to help them become less violent and takes the focus off of people with real problems like homeless and medical.  Our state funded money gets spent more on trials and programs for prisoners then it does for people who actually deserve life.  The death penalty helps in controlling the prison population, sets an example for others before they commit a crime, and serves as justice for victims’ families.  Technology has allowed us to correctly identify criminals allow for less error of killing and innocent person and lethal injection allows for a humane way of disposing of the criminals.

Facts:

Gandhi-“an eye for an eye” http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/30302.html
Camus-“capital punishment..” http://www.antideathpenalty.org/quotes.html
Tutu-“…Not justice”  http://www.antideathpenalty.org/quotes.html

It's not easy being green.....

Hmmm what’s more important, the environment or the economy….. Well they are both green, they are both important, and both apply to people.  The environment is the world in which we live our lives and the economy is what motivates us to keep on living.  So if they both have a significant impact on us, then which one should we consider in saving first?  Without the environment we wouldn’t have an economy.  The environment provides us with resources we use in our daily lives and without it we would be in a barren place and the economy wouldn’t matter.  Let’s look at Africa for example.  Here is a country that has little economy because the environment around them provides little.  It is a place with massive desserts, little water sources, and scarce amounts of food.  People work very hard and use the resources that they have on hand in order to survive. .  So I think that we should work on fixing the world around us and then the economy will fix itself. 

There are many people out there, however, that believe that the economy is the thing that needs fixing first.  Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann calls the Environmental Protection Agency "job killing."  She believes that the economy and the environment are not equals.  The idea of telling people to be more environmentally friendly is a hard sale to make when the unemployment rate has become so low.  Newt Gingrich points out the rises gas prices and how he would like to fix them.  He claims that he could reduce gas prices to as low as $2.50 a gallon; reason being that, "the price of gasoline is becoming a genuine crisis for many American families. If it continues to go higher, it will crater the economy by August.”  So here we have examples of people who are for the economy, which we won’t have if the environment falls out on us. 

So how do we fix it?  First, tie environmental rescue to economic recovery, by "greening the bailout," as columnist Tom Friedman of the New York Times has put it.  We need to put more emphasis on helping the environment in order to help the economy.  If everybody played a part, even if it is a small part, we can make a difference.  I know, based from personal experience what we can do to make a difference.  I work at a bank and my manager decided to place more of a green effort on our branch alone.  We made sure lights were shut off when not needed, we recycled paper and cardboard boxes, and we kept the heat at a constant temperature as well as a few other things.  By making these adjustments we were able to see a significant difference month after month on our budget report, helping our branch and company to save money.   This helped us to see how much we have an impact on change and helped each of us to become better in our own lives.

 

 Facts:

-Tom Friedman-“greening the bailout”

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1847409,00.html

-Newt Gingrich- “gas prices could crater the economy”

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/gingrich-gas-prices-could-crater-the-economy-by-august--20120304?mrefid=election2012

-Michele Bachmann- EPA is “job killing”

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2011/08/the-environment-vs-the-economy-in-2012.html

To know or not to know, that is the question...!

The question that is at stake here is whether or not “we the people” have the right to know everything that our government keeps hidden from us.  Most people are going to answer yes to this question, partly because it’s in their DNA to want to know everything and partly because we live in a world where information is easy to access.  It is in human nature to learn and acquire new information, but to what extent?  Should we have the right to privy information if that means that we are harming someone else?  I think that we have earned the right to know what is going on in the world around us just so as it doesn’t harm another person.  We should only have information that helps become aware of situations so that we are able to better protect ourselves.   

The debate that we have here is whether or not we are affecting people’s lives by releasing certain information.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the document release "puts people's lives in danger,” which is something that Erwin Griswold disagrees with.  He commented, “"I have never seen any trace of a threat to the national security from the publication [of the Pentagon Papers].... There is very rarely any real risk to current national security from the publication of facts relating to transactions in the past, even the fairly recent past.” (This comment, however was made before the 9/11 attacks in 2001 and Wikileaks emerged in 2006)  I think that President Bush would also disagree with putting people’s lives in danger using 9/11 as an example.  He obviously didn’t think that our nation was at risk otherwise he would have done more to prevent attacks from happening.  There are resources telling us that he and intelligent agencies knew about upcoming attacks, but stopped investigating.  Had information been released, people would have been more aware as well as prepared to take on 9/11 and maybe nearly 3,000 American lives would have been spared.

So here we are.  Does information help us or hurt us? I believe that we should have the right to information that our government hides from us.  When I watched the Fahrenheit 9/11 movie it first shows us President Bush becoming the president and then it shows us information about how the Bin Laden family and the Bush family are “connected.”  I wonder if people had known about this beforehand if we would have still elected him as president.   This example goes to show how knowledge is powerful and how it can affect our decisions.  The only guideline I have to add to this is that the person or people supplying the information remain unharmed.  Wikileaks is a provider of such information and are only accessing their rights of freedom of speech and sharing with others information that all should know.  If the government didn’t act so shady, people wouldn’t be as curious to know what we don’t know. 

Facts:

1) Hilary Clinton “puts people’s lives in danger” (the nation article)

2) Erwin Griswold “no trace of threat…” (the nation article)

http://www.thenation.com/article/156835/wikileaks-and-government-secrecy

3) Intelligence agency knows about upcoming attacks

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4582.htm