Abortion?

When the word abortion is set off, everyone has different thoughts or arguments about it. Even when we have a political campaign, matters like this is a huge debate. But why? Matters like abortion and same-sex marriage should be kept as a personal issue not a political issue. Yet, this kind of matter is listed on our constitution. Is it really necessary to bring such personal matter into our government or politics. Due to the Supreme Court case Roe V. Wade, Abortion was legalized if it’s in the first trimester. Also, due to this 9^th amendment was set out, which was to protect a person’s right to privacy. Abortion is a really easy word to say, but for us women it’s a really tough decision. Thinking that a life is inside them, and due to some reason it has to be ended. It becomes really harsh on women. One way I’m glad that abortion was legalized, but yet don’t feel necessary that it should dragged into our government or politics. 

Let's bring the Equality!

When we say the word marriage, we automatically think of a man and woman bonding together, but we never think man and man or even woman and woman bonding together. Our nation is known for its freedom of speech and equality. Well I think now the time has come where we step up and give everyone their equal rights. According to my opinion, everyone is entitled to equal rights. Same-sex marriage should be allowed, people need to respect everyone’s decision even if it is different from their own. They have just as much right to the benefits of marriage as everyone else. In this article http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/06/maine.same.sex.marriage/index.html , Senator John Baldacci in Maine signs the bill for legalizing same-sex marriage. Not just Maine, but even New Hampshire signed the same-sex marriage bill. With this, it leaves the state of Rhode Island to be the only New England state to not have this law. Same-sex marriage in Rhode Island is still pending.

         When ever this kind of bill is passed, the news becomes shocking and thrilled. Is it really that big of deal? I think that same-sex marriage should be allowed throughout the nation. What difference does it make to us, it’s not us getting married, our values and moral aren’t being influenced by it, then why such chaos. When people talk about not allowing same-sex marriage, I think they are talking from the religious point of view. But again, this does not affect our life, why not just give those who want same-sex marriage their rights.

 

 

 

 

 

YES. I AGREE!

I agree with the author’s opinion about the relationship with the Cuban government and the United States. Families in Florida and Cuba have been separated from each other for many years because of the policies that were put in place to prevent Americans from going to Cuba. I believe it is up to President Obama to take the first step into trying to make a change in policy that helps the relationship between United States and Cuba. However, we should receive the same treatment in return. The recession in the United States is still occurring and opening up trade with Cuba will help boost the economy, especially in the southeastern region of the United States. This is a very sensitive matter because it can also risk the chance of more drugs flowing into the United States.

If both countries start to communicate and begin negotiations to help each other out then it will be the benefit for both governments. In this time, President Obama has to do all he can to get the economy boosted and becoming friendly with Cuba is a step in the right direction.

http://smilemuniza.blogspot.com/

Recession

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/opinion/01wed2.html

The article is about the spending that has occurred in the state of New York. The editor talks about the budget that the state government (democratic controlled) has and how they are putting the money to use. While the government did use the budget to crack down on drug users, they also spent money on useless projects like the Empire Zone program. The editor attacks the Democrats saying that they do not control their spending. The stimulus money helps reduce some of the 17 billion dollar deficit; however, that was not a long-term solution. The projects the government funds are helpful like the senior centers, but they also give money to some useless clubs. The governor of New York also has given money to Sheldon Silver (Assembly Speaker) who believes in giving money to other Democratic friends.

            I agree with the author when he strikes the Democrats way of spending in New York. The Democrats still insist that future reforms will come within 2 – 3 years; however, they have been saying that for years. The Democrats are continually spending money which has been raising the states deficit. The state of New York cannot expect to be able to control the deficit with just stimulus money because I agree that it will not help them in the wrong term. It’s not fair to the taxpayers because some of the money goes to gun clubs which is utterly ridiculous. If many of these taxpayers knew this then they would protest against where their tax money is going into. Also some of the budget money going to Democratic friends is also terrible spending. It’s an abuse of powers by the assembly speaker which only help out the party. They only seem to care about spending for their own benefits. Something in the state of New York has to be done because as of right now it is awful.

Bank Failure!

This article is about the banks that have failed and the Obama’s administration trying to revive them. The author claims that the administration’s assumptions are invalid, and he highly doubts that it will work. Over time, the government could finance over a trillion dollars for these banks. The first assumption the government makes is that the loans will be repaid back to them with interest; however, there is no guarantee that the banks will recover again. The government offers loans that are enormous, so even if the banks have another loss then the government’s purchased assets would become a huge loss. The author asserts that if the banks start to work again then it will just be a transfer of money from the government to the bank investors. The editor wants the bank rescue to be done on known situations instead of assumptions that are currently being made by the government.

            This article has a different view than other articles about the banks and their rescue by the government. I actually agree with the author here because so far the government is expecting that when the banks come back to full force then they will get their money back with interest. That is not the case because it can very well continue to fail, thus leading to huge government losses. It also seems like the banks are not properly spending the money where they should (For example: AIG). Some banks spent the money on super bowl parties, huge bonuses for CEOs, etc. I do believe the author’s idea of separating the working and failing banks, firing the executives of the failing banks, cleaning out the shareholders, and the government trying to rework these banks is the best way to go about it. Its safe and the risk involved with it is much less than the risk the government is taking right now.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/24/opinion/24tue1.html?ref=opinion

"they just don't get it!!"

The article calls out the Republican Party for the actions they have committed during the economic recession. The article states that the Republicans are too into an ideological warfare than actually trying to get the country back on track. In a poll taken by New York Times and CBS News, 63% of the polled said that Republicans were against the stimulus package because of the political views instead of whether it would help the country. If states changed a few policies then they can receive federal aid, but Governors believe that they will lead to direct state taxes.
I think this article is very opinionated with not much input from the other side of the story. I can tell that the article is very anti-Republican and an attack against Governor Bobby Jindal for rejecting some of the stimulus money to help the unemployed in Louisiana. It also seems like the person who wrote the article is from the North claiming that states from the South still have not entered the 21st century. The article is very narrow-minded about writing the whole truth and changed the facts around to make the Republican Party seem like they are bad. There were many reasons for why the Governors of the South rejected some of the stimulus package, but it was not mentioned in the article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/opinion/24tue1.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=what%20part%20of%20stimulus%20they%20dont%20get%20it&st=cse

Stimulus means big boost for some industries

As most of us have heard about the stimuli package being passed by the congress, well this article actually shows who will be the benefiting from it. Industries such as: Constructions, homebuilders, alternative energy, and automakers. The constructions industry will benefit in two ways, one by hiring people back who were laid off and the other is by putting billions of dollars into new bridges, roads, ports and etc. In homebuilder industry, homebuyers are expected to get 10% tax credit of their house value for up to 15,000.  Alternative energy is given lots of funds for improving its alternative energy products and increase efficiencies in buildings. In this, $14.4 billion is given to government energy efficiency and renewable-energy programs, $4.5 billion for a smart electricity grid, and $2.9 billion to weatherize modest-income.  In Automakers industry, the cost of new cars will be cut and due to this the interest payment and sales tax will be tax-deductible. It looks like due to this stimulus, not just industries, but even we will be benefiting from it. This will be a great opportunities for new jobs and also for employees who were laid off.

http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/299237/