In the mist of all current issues, Donald Trump decides to question President Obama’s birth authenticity. As Donald Trump starts his hype about his 2012 race for President, he uses Obama’s doubt of legitimacy as a trampoline to obtain some popularity. "I am so proud of myself because I've accomplished something that nobody else has been able to accomplish," said Trump, in regards to getting Obama to show his birth certificate. Personally, I relate Donald Trump as that rich kid everyone knew in high school, the one who had everything, materially speaking. Unfortunately, did not have many true honest friends. I relate this to Trump because to me it seems as if Americans can read through him, we need someone with transparency as our President. I think that Trump is not making an honest attempt to gain the presidency on his merits. Seems to me as if he’s gaining popularity and momentum from other issues.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Commentary: Still, America?
Still, America? by Steven Satterlee
Hey Steven-
It seems we share the same concept of U.S. politics. As you mentioned, Trump is seeking to gain the presidency in 2012, that’s pretty bad. However, it’s not nearly as bad as the thought of Americans actually casting their vote for him. This country and our fascination with the public image is what Is dragging us down more and more. I will not discredit Trump is his successful monetary career, however, that does not mean he is capacitated to run a country with a real social and global crisis as we’re suffering currently. With more diverse issues erupting, we need a leader with a non-capitalist mindset, otherwise we might experience what we lived with Bush during his reign. In conclusion, I believe the American audience is not in tune with the “big picture,” or the realities that we’re facing. Also, in order for our nation to prosper once again, we as citizens must do our job and really make a conscience effort in electing a capacitated individual for president.
Emmanuel Gomez
Hey Steven-
It seems we share the same concept of U.S. politics. As you mentioned, Trump is seeking to gain the presidency in 2012, that’s pretty bad. However, it’s not nearly as bad as the thought of Americans actually casting their vote for him. This country and our fascination with the public image is what Is dragging us down more and more. I will not discredit Trump is his successful monetary career, however, that does not mean he is capacitated to run a country with a real social and global crisis as we’re suffering currently. With more diverse issues erupting, we need a leader with a non-capitalist mindset, otherwise we might experience what we lived with Bush during his reign. In conclusion, I believe the American audience is not in tune with the “big picture,” or the realities that we’re facing. Also, in order for our nation to prosper once again, we as citizens must do our job and really make a conscience effort in electing a capacitated individual for president.
Emmanuel Gomez
Commentary: A Govt. based out of Hollywood
"A Government based out of Hollywood" by Steven Satterlee
Hey Steven-
I totally agree with you when you say that our government is based out of Hollywood, from the yellow journalism exposed on online news to the dramatic headlines in our local paper. The fact is most Americans, like me, are under the idea that our National government is turning a blind eye to our needs. With so much invested in over seas, U.S. officials seem to be monitoring their interests more than their responsibilities. As long as there’s a correlation between politics and capitalism, this nation will not be going in the direction many of us want it to go. Like you mentioned Steven, I’m sure our Founding Fathers did not envision this country as it is now.
Hey Steven-
I totally agree with you when you say that our government is based out of Hollywood, from the yellow journalism exposed on online news to the dramatic headlines in our local paper. The fact is most Americans, like me, are under the idea that our National government is turning a blind eye to our needs. With so much invested in over seas, U.S. officials seem to be monitoring their interests more than their responsibilities. As long as there’s a correlation between politics and capitalism, this nation will not be going in the direction many of us want it to go. Like you mentioned Steven, I’m sure our Founding Fathers did not envision this country as it is now.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Where's Uncle Sam?!
Most of the times as individuals we see or hear about national events and never make it relevant to our lives. However, the big buzz of Washington’s disagreements in regards to our Federal budget, will hit really, really close to home.
Locally, the Federal government funds the LBJ Library, the Museum on the UT campus, and several parks; such as Big Bend National and the LBJ Historic National Park. A Federal shutdown would force more that 800,000 Americans to stay at home while an agreement is reached in Washington.
Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn III released a message “to military members and civilian personnel outlining that activities in support of national security would continue in the event of a shutdown. They include operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Japan as well as Libya-related support operations.” As an individual I cannot imagine the hardship that can fall on all these Americans that solely depend on the goodness of Uncle Sam.
A wide range of Federal departments financially support Austin. Paying for everything from health care services, aid for public schools, tuition assistance and university research. For the 2009 Fiscal year, Travis County received $17.8 billion; Williamson County got $1.38 billion; and Hays, $645 million. The statewide total was $227.1 billion in federal support.
As a taxpayer and a citizen of the United States, I hope our elected officials can come to accordance in regards to our Federal budget, otherwise this is becoming a despairing deception.
Article: Federal government shutdown would reach Austin
Author: Juan Castillo
Austin American Statesman
Sunday, March 13, 2011
HB 1202. Regressive Politics?
In a very eye-openning editorial, Ruben Navarrete Jr explains the new ideology behind illegal-immigrant integration.
As we know, the great state of Texas is heavily influenced by an overwhelming population of illegal-immigrants. As we know their labor is cheaper, and therefore contractors get more bang for their buck in the construction industry. However, as cheap labor benefits those above, its hurting the “American” standard of living. Texas State Representative, Debbie Riddle is proposing HB 1202, a radical new bill that awards punishment to those who employ illegal-immigrants. Such punishment can be up to 2 years in prison and up to $10,000 in fines. Ok, it seems like a good attempt to stop the intrusion of illegal-immigrants to come work in the U.S. Not! HB 1202 permits people to hire illegal-immigrants “for the purpose of obtaining labor or other work to be performed exclusively or primarily at a single-family residence. Wow, that would mean that as an American citizen I would have the right to hire an illegal-immigrant to help me with house chores, baby-sitting, etc. Then again, they can’t be hired by a contractor to make serious money?
I concur with Mr. Navarrete when he says “the United States has two neon signs on the U.S.-Mexico border: "Keep Out" and "Help Wanted." Americans can't decide what they want to protect more -- the border or their standard of living. Usually, the latter wins out.” As Texans we have to decide whether we must assimilate illegal-immigrants into our great state, legally, or simply “be tough” on immigration law as we are for terrorism. In my opinion, Mrs. Riddle is proposing a regressive bill that will only poison our society with more racial profiling and inhumane acts.
As we know, the great state of Texas is heavily influenced by an overwhelming population of illegal-immigrants. As we know their labor is cheaper, and therefore contractors get more bang for their buck in the construction industry. However, as cheap labor benefits those above, its hurting the “American” standard of living. Texas State Representative, Debbie Riddle is proposing HB 1202, a radical new bill that awards punishment to those who employ illegal-immigrants. Such punishment can be up to 2 years in prison and up to $10,000 in fines. Ok, it seems like a good attempt to stop the intrusion of illegal-immigrants to come work in the U.S. Not! HB 1202 permits people to hire illegal-immigrants “for the purpose of obtaining labor or other work to be performed exclusively or primarily at a single-family residence. Wow, that would mean that as an American citizen I would have the right to hire an illegal-immigrant to help me with house chores, baby-sitting, etc. Then again, they can’t be hired by a contractor to make serious money?
I concur with Mr. Navarrete when he says “the United States has two neon signs on the U.S.-Mexico border: "Keep Out" and "Help Wanted." Americans can't decide what they want to protect more -- the border or their standard of living. Usually, the latter wins out.” As Texans we have to decide whether we must assimilate illegal-immigrants into our great state, legally, or simply “be tough” on immigration law as we are for terrorism. In my opinion, Mrs. Riddle is proposing a regressive bill that will only poison our society with more racial profiling and inhumane acts.
Editorial from CNN.com
Ruben Navarrete Jr.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Obama abolishing God?
A very deep analysis written by Sam Guzman, found in The Christian Science Monitor, states that Obama’s recent bureaucratic actions are enabling the Federal government of the rights to define moral values. Mr. Guzman, an essayist and columnist who works writing grants for a non-profit organization, critiques president Obama in his “abandonment” of the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996. The Defense Marriage Act of 1996 is a law that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It also forbids the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage. However, president Obama called it “unconstitutional and unfair.”
The Christian Science Monitor
February 25, 2011
Sam Guzman, Opinion.
In Mr. Guzman’s analysis he says, “This decision is more than political. By implication, President Obama is saying that the idea of marriage as being solely between a man and a woman is indefensible. By calling the Defense of Marriage Act unfair, he is saying that gay marriage is a fundamental right.” As his analysis continues, Mr. Guzman finds it ironic that “those who most strongly advocate the separation of church and state will just as strongly advocate the government’s intrusion into an issue that has historically been an issue reserved for religious institutions to bless and define. It is ironic, but not surprising. For we have essentially abolished God and any trace of divine authority from the public sphere. And what has filled the void (for something always fills the void)? Government. It has taken on the role of God, and only too gladly.” In to conclude his article, Mr. Guzman that historically, when a “government ceases to be the defendant of inalienable rights; it leads to tyranny and slavery.”
In my opinion, Mr. Guzman’s analysis of Obama’s bureaucratic actions, haves many interesting and truthful points. Starting with the important fact that by Obama no longer defending the DOMA, he is giving a lot of policy reform to same-sex marriage laws. As Mr. Guzman says, “gay marriage [will become] a fundamental right. In accordance to him, I also believe many agnostic individuals do place and honor our Federal government the same or above “God.” However, I don’t concur with Guzman’s beliefs when he says that when a “government ceases to be the defendant of inalienable rights; it leads to tyranny and slavery.” Perhaps this was true historically, but I don’t think this would be the case, considering it’s “modern times.” Going into the Christian Science Monitor I was aware that there would be a more bias approach to editorial and articles, something I found to be true. This columnist’s article is very important to me as a government student, but more as an individual because moral values and divine rights are the origin of this nation.
In my opinion, Mr. Guzman’s analysis of Obama’s bureaucratic actions, haves many interesting and truthful points. Starting with the important fact that by Obama no longer defending the DOMA, he is giving a lot of policy reform to same-sex marriage laws. As Mr. Guzman says, “gay marriage [will become] a fundamental right. In accordance to him, I also believe many agnostic individuals do place and honor our Federal government the same or above “God.” However, I don’t concur with Guzman’s beliefs when he says that when a “government ceases to be the defendant of inalienable rights; it leads to tyranny and slavery.” Perhaps this was true historically, but I don’t think this would be the case, considering it’s “modern times.” Going into the Christian Science Monitor I was aware that there would be a more bias approach to editorial and articles, something I found to be true. This columnist’s article is very important to me as a government student, but more as an individual because moral values and divine rights are the origin of this nation.
The Christian Science Monitor
February 25, 2011
Sam Guzman, Opinion.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Democracy in Egypt?
A very interesting article found in todays The Washington Post, shows how the U.S. government is actively blue-printing how to establish a democratic control in Egypt.
As it’s no new news, the Egyptians are still in their attempt of revolting against it dictating government. In Obama’s statement he says that “Too many Egyptians remain unconvinced that the government is serious about a genuine transition to democracy, and it is the responsibility of the government to speak clearly to the Egyptian people and the world. The Egyptian government must put forward a credible, concrete and unequivocal path toward genuine democracy, and they have not yet seized that opportunity” This passage of Obama’s statement notes not only how urgent the matter is to the Egyptians, but also as for Americans. It is of high importance that the U.S. government establishes a democratic government in the North African – Middle Eastern part of the world because many other nations will be influenced and perhaps can follow in the example of Egypt.
I believe this article is important because it is perhaps foreshadowing what is to come in a new Egypt. All if, of course, if Mubarak doesn't not resign, then hopefully the need for violence is not needed.
As it’s no new news, the Egyptians are still in their attempt of revolting against it dictating government. In Obama’s statement he says that “Too many Egyptians remain unconvinced that the government is serious about a genuine transition to democracy, and it is the responsibility of the government to speak clearly to the Egyptian people and the world. The Egyptian government must put forward a credible, concrete and unequivocal path toward genuine democracy, and they have not yet seized that opportunity” This passage of Obama’s statement notes not only how urgent the matter is to the Egyptians, but also as for Americans. It is of high importance that the U.S. government establishes a democratic government in the North African – Middle Eastern part of the world because many other nations will be influenced and perhaps can follow in the example of Egypt.
I believe this article is important because it is perhaps foreshadowing what is to come in a new Egypt. All if, of course, if Mubarak doesn't not resign, then hopefully the need for violence is not needed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)