Blog Stage 7 American Circus

It is unfortunate, but none the less true that American politics have fallen far out of the range of reasoned debates regarding legislation and policies, into a celebrity like circus of insults. I am sickened by the way the recent election has been going and will continue to go so it seems.

The previously contesting Democratic candidates slung insults and rants regarding eachothers personalites-not policies. In fact, the two potential candidates did not differ much in political idealogy or policy at all. Thus the entire nation erupted into a circus of posting unflattering photos, bashing each candidates personalities, etc. The fact that at the Republican convention many attendees wore a button that asked "If Obama wins can we still call it the White House?" is absolutely outrageous. How has American politics taken such a turn for the worse? John McCain suffers from very little scrutiny at all, because the media has been so set on the battle between Hillary and Obama. Now that Obama has been named the Democratic candidate many democrats are throwing in the towel because they are so pro-Hillary and anti Obama they have lost track of what they should be voting on-political policy.

Of course personality is important in a Presidential election, but the way the media has turned the attention to the personalites and backgrounds (wives, friends, churches, etc.) of these candidates is ludacris. I feel that very little has been discussed regarding what the Presidential candidates have to offer as far as legislation and what they will actually do for our country, but instead all of the focus has been on slamming their opponents statements.

It is time for American politics to grow up or else we will face the next four years full of bickering similar to teen celebrities from our president whomever it may be.

Blog Stage 6

I agree strongly with many of the statements made regarding teh flaws in America's education system however i see a lot of overgeneralizations in this post which I find a bit unreasoned.
First, I could not agree more that the No Child Left Behind act is a bizarre and ineffective way of dealing with undereducated citizens. Imagine if we as a nation delt with all problems in this way, forcing all of the talented and gifted individuals to humble themselves in efforts to raise the below average up to an average standard. We would end up with a nation of mediocrity, and in fact we may be doing just that. In sports the most talented athletes are rewarded and education should be no different. In career settings the best and most hard working are rewarded not forced to lesser themselves in efforts not to outshine others.

I assume that the author of this post and I are in agreement that standardized tests are a good way to make education trivial and petty, however i disgree that America's education system is the root of all of our nations problems.

I think this post establishes some very important points about the ridiculousness of our nations current educational system. However I believe the overgeneralizations harm the author's argument and I dont know that I would compare the No Child Left Behind act to terrorism.

Thus while I agree that the No Child Left Behind act needs to be improved upon if not completely scratched, I'm not quite convinced I would label it "The Root of All Evil."

Solve the Oil Crisis

With gas prices soaring steadily it is impossible not to feel stressed about the fact that we are running out of oil resources, and in poor relations with the majority of the countries we are in oil trade with. This is one of if not the most dominant threat to the U.S. nation's economy yet we pass up opportunities to solve our problem. I believe it is high time for the United States goverment to create legislation which allows oil drilling off of our coasts (Florida, Texas, etc.)
Currently, the American government does not support this because of environmental conciousness. Logically however, this is just delaying the inevitable. Obviously we are no where near a situation where we as a nation will not be dependent upon oil, thus eventually we are going to be forced to use our resources. I think to a certain extent the global warming scare has people acting out of fear instead of out of logic. This of course is not to say that we should not continue investing in finding other fuel resources, and all the while we must be as environmentally concious as possible, however we must deal with present problems now, especially when an economic crisis is looming.
If the United States government would pass legislation allowing more off shore drilling not only would this create jobs and thus boost the economy but also it would instantly drive the price of gas per barrel down. When our current oil resources became aware that we were beginning to drill off shore gas prices would have to plummet in order for the other countries to remain competitive. We are allowing ourselves to be put in a compromising economic situation for the sake of delaying something we will come to do eventually.
As previously stated, I beliee of course that America should be cautious and as eco-friendly as possible. However, it is time to take charge of our resources and end this economic crisis that is fully preventable.

Substantial Commentary or Criticism 2

In the New York Times editorial Justice 5, Brutality 4 the author criticizes George Bush and the American Congress for allowing such glaring intrusions on the rights of the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
I agree with the author of the editorial that it is wrong the way George Bush and the American government deny humanity to the prisoners who are assigned to carry out their sentence in Guantanamo Bay. However, although I agree with the author's intentions I find that he or she makes several bad or flawed arguments throughout the editorial.
First, the author sites the constitutional law habeas corpus and says that rights can only be denied in a situation where there is danger to "public safety." Not that I disagree that these prisoners should be treated with humanity and basic rights, but this is a weak argument because I think most would agree that presumed terrorists are a threat to public safety. If there is any situation where it would be justified to strip someone of their rights to protect the public, dealing with a presumed terrorist is certainly at the top of the list. Therefore I find this aspect of the author's argument to be faulty.

The author also fails to take into consideration the difficulties in trying to apply the rules of the American Constitution to non American citizens. While I firmly believe something should be done to grant these prisoners rights, it is difficult to treat them and try them according to the American Constitution, because they are not American Citizens. Many of them are simply soldiers from Iraq/Afghanistan and they did not actually break any laws, but simply were serving according to their own countries laws. Thus how can we give them a speedy trial when they haven’t technically broken any American laws? In my opinion the author of this article fails to recognize or mention the difficulties incorporated with problems such as these.

In conclusion, I certainly agree with the author of this editorial’s viewpoint regarding the brutality prisoners in Guantanamo Bay face, however I do not agree with the arguments he or she uses to support her stance.

Substantial commentary or criticism #1

In Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post's editorial "The Hitler Analogy" Applebaum discusses the fact that labeling various politicians or political activities as similar to Hitler or the Nazis has become overused and purposeless.

Applebaum cites several instances of faulty and over hasty comparison to Hitler which cause me to really consider her point of view. She brings up that in any political argument, a "Hitler analogy" kills the argument, instead of broadening it. The reason Applebaum states, which I have to agree with, is that society-any society-almost unanimously agrees that Hitler was evil. Of course, there are many people across the world that supported, and still support Hitler and the Nazi movement, however the majority of people presumably do not, and even among supporters there are many who would not make their beliefs known publicly. Thus, when engaged in political discussion all one must do to end the discussion is compare their counter to Hitler. Naturally, this forces an unfair position upon someone, because it is uncomfortable to try to defend your stance once it’s analogized to Hitler without defending something you believe to be evil. Applebaum is correct in stating that it is an unfair argument.

I do disagree that it is a pointless argument though, because there may be some situations where it is truly beneficial to examine history and compare it to what events we are currently going through in order to make better decisions. Thus, in some distinct cases I would concede that the argument is useless, however I disagree strongly that we should throw away the argument and all agree to never again bring up Hitler or the Nazis!

I appreciate Anne Applebaum’s argument because it does bring up something we all should consider regarding the logic and legitimacy-or lack there of -of Hitler analogies, and I agree with many aspects of her argument while still disagreeing that her statement can be made into a blanket statement for all uses of Hitler analogies.

Libertarians Stronger Than Ever?

In Julie Bosman's New York Times article "Libertarians Dream of Being the Tie Breaker," Libertarians are portrayed as stronger and more capable of impact than ever. This article discusses how Ron Paul not only gained support for the Libertarian party in mass amounts, but also how many Libertarians are aiming to keep McCain out of office through stealing away Republican votes in the upcoming election.
Though it has become obvious that John McCain will be the Republican Party candidate, Ron Paul did gain 1.1 million votes in the primaries, and the article points out that in Libertarian stronghold states Ron Paul gained 20% of the Republican vote. Clearly there is a Libertarian movement occurring.
With the growing number of interest in Libertarian ideals, many Libertarians hope that by rallying people to vote for their candidate Bob Barr and in turn ruin McCain's chance at being elected.
This article discusses a number of important issues and good news for Libertarians, but is relative to citizens of all political parties because the Libertarian movement will inevitably impact the number of votes for the Democratic and Republican candidates possibly shifting power away from one to the other.