Rising Problem With Immigration

In a classmates’ blog, she talks about the heavy issue with immigration in our country. Over several decades, illegal immigration has dramatically increased and it is only debilitating our economical system more and more every day. Due to immigration, we are faced with the high cost of overpopulation, education, and welfare. As the amount of undocumented or illegal immigrants increases, our resources become dispersed among a larger population, leaving the tax expenses uncovered by the appropriate users. She states some very valuable points on the growing issue with immigration, and how more citizens should be concerned with the gravity of its affects. However, I would have suggested she would have been a just a little bit more thorough with the proposition to deport all illegal aliens, at least through my perspective. I like to believe that people look up to this nation for the endless opportunities of success that are available through freedom and rights, and while those rights should be earned; we must realize that some people make sacrifices just by coming here, legally or illegally. The necessity to deport as a first resort to solve the issue should be disregarded simply because this matter can be solved in a way to benefit both parties. Overall, my classmate made some pretty strong pointers an arguments on the way illegal immigration is and should be approached, nice job.

Gay Marriage is Just Another War

With a reputation of “the land of the free,” you would think that America would be the last nation to disapprove and prohibit gay marriage. Well unfortunately, this is far from reality and the truth is we’re probably the first to act so strongly against it. Up to this day, nearly sixty percent of the states in America have banned gay marriage. These twenty-nine out of fifty states range from coast to coast with a few gaps in between. The more I think about it, the more I get confused with they way our political system has evolved.

We might have won many wars overseas and at our borders, but within the thick walls of our nation, we are losing the most crucial one of all, prejudice. It seems like no matter how hard we fight and run, prejudice is always just around the corner. People are always judging, and others are always listening. With a just a pinch of ignorance and an extra teaspoon of gullible adolescent minds, the perfect recipe for prejudice is instilled back into history. I guess most politicians and half of the residing citizens can’t make the connection with the similar incidences in our recent past. It took many mistakes for us to finally realize that discrimination against African-Americans was unjust and simply immoral. Now, we are falling back to old habits, and discriminating against another group, homosexuals. Although they might not be a race of their own, they are a group of people, with hearts, families, and lives just like the rest of us. They are born no different than any other human being on this earth and deserve the right to happiness, freedom, and even struggle by their own will, not by ours. It makes no sense to create these barriers on gay marriage, when yet other states and even other parts of the world tolerate it. By passing these ludicrous laws, we are only diminishing the true meaning of what this country was initially founded on, freedom and peace.

Safety at School is now in Question??

Safety at School is now in Question?? Reading this article really does worry me, as well it should worry those who actually have kids. Heather's blog makes a pretty steady arguement implying the lack in trust we should have in schools at this point. She based her topic of child abuse and negglect on an article titled "State finds child abuse and neglect at school." It is extremely sad to think we have reached a point where children can't even be somewhat safe in schools. As parents and adults, the people of this economy put enormous trust in the political system, in which we pay our valuable tax dollars towards neccesatites such as education. Our expectations are high, as well they should be, and morally corrupted schools like in this case is just another blow to our heavily set standards. Heather made her standpoint clear and fully supported it with a fair arguement.

Should Torture Be Condoned?

Unfortunately, we live in a world of instability and unpredictability that continuously challenges the decisions we make in our day to day lives. Although people’s malicious actions can’t always be monitored or accounted for, they should at least induce severe consequences to encourage others not repeat those unfortunate mistakes. Personally, I believe that torture should be condoned when it involves heinous crimes, committed by foreign or domestic criminals who potentially threaten the safety of individual and national security. I understand that procedures such as this one need to have a strong foundation of circumstantial regulations to emphasize the importance of boundaries. Therefore, my proposal for condoning torture should only be applied in the case of life threatening matters, primarily involving suspects withholding critical evidence that jeopardizes the lives of citizens.
As we all know, terrorists have always posed a threat to our nation and the rest of the world. From past experiences, we have come to learn that any negotiation made with terrorists only gives them more power to consequently threaten us again in the future. When captures are finally made, sometimes we are still left with an abundance of gaps in between facts and evidence that only further inhibit the level of security the government can provide for the American public. Although any form of torture might oppose popular moral values, isn’t it at least worth the security and safety of Americans? Shouldn’t the government intervene and be given the opportunity to protect the public at any cost? After all, American troops risk their lives and put themselves in a dice-roll with death not knowing when danger will take its tragic toll, all for the protection our country. Why is it that we have come to accept the losses of American lives during wars, but yet not been able to condone a tactical form of protection that could possibly send stronger message to those who challenge our power and safety? If we as a society can accept cost of protecting the public, then condoning torture should not even be a question.

Commentary: Obama Should Listen to Biden

On the topic of commentary, I decided to direct my attention to Julian E. Zelizer’s article titled “Obama Should Listen to Biden.” As a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School, Zelizer is more than qualified to speak his opinion on such matters concerning politics and government. He has written numerous articles on our current state as a nation and will soon publish a book about Democracy, terrorism, and national security.

Zelizer’s intended audience for this particular commentary is the American public, and perhaps even Barrack Obama himself. America’s involvement can candidly influence political representation. Also, we are the ones that would be directly influenced if President Obama decided to send 21,000 more troops into Afghanistan. Furthermore, Obama is the foremost person that can decide whether to repeat the mistake of Lyndon B. Johnson in the Vietnam War, or to avoid and correct what former President George W. Bush has done. Zelizer is not directly concerned with what decision Obama makes, but instead stresses that Obama should listen openly to his inner circle of friends and close advisors; to their opinions in the alternatives to keeping Americans safe. In his commentary, Zelizer uses the consequences of disregarding alternatives and the absence challenging authority as prime examples to support his opinion. Back in the 1960’s, Democrats made the vital mistake in waiting until after the war was initiated to publicly raise challenges against a set of decisions. Repetition once again presented itself during President Bush’s term, when Democrats regrettably failed to induce Bush with more vigorous challenges on the war with Iraq in 2003. In my opinion, Zelizer has successfully addressed the majority of the concerns related to the current decisions of President Barrack Obama on behalf of the war in Afghanistan. Although the goal to satisfy everyone is highly unfeasible, the most any president is keep his options open for the sake of America. In fact, the worst he can do is fall prey to the sense of misjudgment and disregard. Evidently enough, history’s continuous occurrences provide a steady backbone for present and future issues on any matter, often offering substantial advice waiting to be heard.

High Cost of Death Row

The author of this editorial found in the New York Times, targets his argument towards the attention of politicians and most importantly, us the taxpayers of course. Politicians like Carolyn McGinn, a republican state senator in Kansas, made a crucial point in the decision to replace capital punishment with a less expensive alternative, life without parole. Senator McGinn stated that the state had not executed anybody in more than 40 years, therefore, the high cost for such a useless measure was simply debilitating our economic state and budget more than improving it. Later in February, she introduced a bill to replace capital punishment with life without parole. Taxpayers are the most relevant part of the puzzle because they are the ones putting out millions a year, for the death row inmates. In the editorial, it is made clear that eliminating the death row and replacing it with life without parole would save "us" hundreds of thousands of dollars. If our government followed New Mexico’s lead, we, as a nation, could spend more money and time focusing on schools, health care, hospitals, and government agencies.
The author also makes a valid argument with enough substantial evidence against maintaining capital punishment, and instead abolishing it. At first, I was mortified and a little skeptic of what the possible outcome would be without such law, but I soon realized that with or without it, we the public were still paying a price, literally. Up until now, I was completely oblivious to the real cost of death row versus the cost of holding inmates for life. The difference in numbers completely influenced my new perspective in this matter. In Florida, the cost for keeping prisoners on death row cost an extra $51 million more than maintaining them in cells for life. In North Carolina, about 43 people have been put to death since 1976, with the average cost estimating nearly $2.16 million per execution. Over at Maryland, between 1978 and 1999 only five executions have been made, costing the state approximately $186 million. In the golden state of California, death row cost taxpayers $114 million more a year than imprisoning convicts for life. Since 1976, only 13 people have been executed in this state, with the average cost of $250 million per execution. Looking at the high cost of capital punishment at our expense can makes you wonder about other alternatives we could benefit more from.

The author of this article is credible because they are an editor for the New York Times, one of this country’s leading popular newspapers. Their publication must be profusely read and peer edited before it can be published to the public. Therefore, their credibility is validated.

New Government Policy Imposes Strict Standards on Garage Sales Nationwide

"Americans who slap $1 pricetags on their used possessions at garage sales or bazaar events risk being slapped with fines of up to $15 million, thanks to a new government campaign" - Diane Macedo. I’m almost positive you are just as shocked as I am to hear the idea of a policy such as this one. That leads me to my first question, WHAT THE IS THE GOVERNMENT THINKING!? I am open to both perspectives to this matter, but you may want to consider the impact of expanding the limits on government intervention on certain issues. Some may argue that this is critical measure of safety that should be taken despite personal inconvenience. Well I have one word of advice, don’t fall under pressure. It slowly begins with a campaign, then the adoption of one policy or law, and soon enough we find ourselves trapped within the cell walls of extreme regulations. Policy after policy, our rights gradually begin to fade away into superior hands. My second question derives from the severe penalties the government tends to impose on households. The article lists certain fines with the tied amount according to the laws violated. My second question is, why are we being fined or penalized for something we didn’t even produce? We become most vulnerable when we start to believe and agree with EVERYTHING the government wants us to believe. If we don’t show any initiative now, we are in for a RAW awakening in the near future.

Take a look at this article whenever byou get the chance!

New Government Policy Imposes Strict Standards on Garage Sales Nationwide

The First Official Post! very creative