Giving Credit When It's Not Deserved?

In the blog "Give credit where the credit is closed (minded)...," my fellow classmate Wade, writes that President Obama's "triumphs should be regarded and applied to as the further greatness of this country." He writes, "Our President is the symbol of change and potential fairness/equality for every single American." Although, Wade explains that he doesn't agree and approve of all President Obama's policies and decisions, but he does believe that "the president and his party's "agenda" is a sign of positive and bigger steps in a direction of stabilizing this country's nationwide handshake of mutual respect and catapulting global friendship."

On the subject of President Obama, I couldn't disagree more with Wade. Okay yes, President Obama is our first African American president, and maybe he is a "walking cultural landmark," but can that make him a good president? I'm all for the U.S. having a non-white president in office as long he or she is fit for the job. Wade says that he's "not interested in what his birth certificate states." If Obama didn't have anything to hide, why wouldn't he show his birth certificate. Only American-born citizens can become president. If President Obama isn't a natural born citizen of the United States, he shouldn't be allowed the presidential seat.

Wade also states, "President Obama is a sentient collection of hope, change, and inspiration." Hope? During elections, Obama gave many Americans hope. He promised that he would make more jobs and fix our economy. Has he done that? I don't think so. His hope is looking more like "false" hope. Change? Well yes, Obama is the first non-white president, that's a change. Going against the public opinion to try and pass socialized healthcare anyways, that's a change. More government spending which means a rise in taxes for American citizens, that's a change. He sure did promise "change." I just think Americans assumed it would be good change. Inspiration? Yes, President Obama has inspired many people. I'll give it to him. He's the first African American president. He's an inspiration to many minorities in our country. Congratulations, President Obama! You know, he's even inspired me. I am inspired to to truly fight for what I believe in, which opposes President Obama's beliefs. I am inspired to vote because I want to know that I had a part in trying to change his "change." President Obama, thank-you so much for being an inspiration!

So Wade, I guess you are right. Obama really is a collection of (false) hope, (lousy) change, and (surprising) inspiration.

Props to Arizona

Opponents of Arizona's new immigration enforcement law protested outside the state capitol building in Phoenix, Arizona, Sunday. Critics of the law say that it will encourage racial profiling by law enforcement and endanger civil rights in the state. Supporters say it is a necessary get-tough measure by Arizona officials in the face of ineffective federal enforcement efforts along the violent and lawless border with Mexico.

Arizona is obviously having a problem with illegal immigration. The state requested help from President Obama, and he ignored their request. People in Arizona don't feel safe, and the government officials felt that they had no other choice. It isn't fair for illegal immigrants to come into our country and try to get as many benefits as possible, when there are other immigrants doing it legally. It also isn't fair for legal citizens to have the tax money, that they pay, to be used on illegal immigrants, who don't pay a dime in taxes.

I believe that Arizona is doing the right thing. Legal immigrants shouldn't be offended if they are asked to show their papers. They should be proud to show they did it the right way. And as for illegal immigrants, I believe they should be deported for not trying to come here legally. Our country should do everything possible to weed the illegals out of our country. Props to Arizona for doing what's best for America.

Same-Sex Marriages

In the blog "Gay Marriage Being Counted in the Census Bureau," my fellow classmate, Danielle, writes about the Census recognizing same-sex couples as marriages. Her post opposes this idea of gay marriages.

I honestly couldn't agree more with Danielle. Same-sex marriages are not natural in our society. "God created marriage to be man with women. Legalizing gay marriage and allowing them to be counted as being married breaks that oath and goes against what God created to be." Most people get married to start a family; to have children. Two gay people cannot naturally make their own child.

The Census Bureau field workers are encouraging lesbians and gay couples to file as wife or husband on their census forms. Same-sex couples cannot legally be married, so how can they file as wife or husband?

I feel bad for gays and lesbians. I don't mean that in a derogatory way. I know it must be really hard for them to deal with many people looking down apon them for their way of life. I have some gay friends and I think they are some of the most amazing people I have ever met. But because of my religious views and morals, I still do not find it right for them to legally marry their partners.

Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?

"A person's a person no matter how small." - Dr. Sues

Pro-Life or Pro-Choice? When do you consider a baby to be a life? At the moment the child is conceived? At the moment of the child's first heartbeat? At the moment the child is born? This subject is extremely controversial in our society and government. Should a mother be able to decide if she wants her child to live? Luckily for us, our mothers chose life. Others weren't so lucky.

In the mid-to-late 1800s, abortion was made illegal in the United States, but in 1973, with Roe vs. Wade, abortion was legalized once again. The US government made it legal to murder innocent victims. A child could be killed just because their mother doesn't want to deal with a "burden" of having a kid. A baby has his/her first heartbeat 18 to 25 days after he/she is conceived. Most women haven't realized that they are even pregnant by this point. Why does our government give a women the right to choose life or death for another human being?

In my opinion, I don't understand how anyone in their right mind could have an abortion. I also don't understand how our government thinks it's alright to keep it legal. Why do we have all the rights we can think of, but a small baby doesn't even have the right to choose to live? Something seems wrong there to me. If anyone ever asked me if i was against abortion, I would automatically say "yes" even though I didn't know all the reasons why I believed that. I just knew that's what my parents would have wanted me to say. Recently though, I watched the Silent Scream and I now understand why I am pro-life. If everyone took the time to watch this video, I don't think abortion would be legal.

Poor Congresspeople. Not.

In "What Happens to Health Care Vote in the House when everyone knows each vote is 'the' vote?," Ann Althouse writes her blog for voters who care about the Health Care proposal. Ann Althouse is an American law professor and blogger. "How intense! I almost feel sorry for them. Almost," says Althouse of members of the House. Althouse blogs that there are 431 members of the House and Nancy Pelosi needs 216 votes to pass the Health Care proposal. But as of today, Arcuri's decision to vote against health care has brought the number of yes votes down to 215, one below the number needed to pass the bill. Althouse questions if the members will "worry that angry voters will say this thing passed because of them, or say that the angry voters will say it failed because of their vote."

I wonder what happens with the final outcome of the health care proposal, if there is a final outcome. Arcuri's decision to change his vote to no makes me very happy. I don't think this health care proposal is right for our country. Obama and Pelosi are trying to push it through without caring about the voters opinion. These Congresspeople have a tough road ahead of them. I'm happy I'm not one of them!

Mitch Daniels for 2012?

In "A Republican Surprise," Ross Douthat says that Mitch Daniels, governor of Indiana, would be "the best president of any of them." During George W. Bush's first term, Daniels was the director of the Office of Management and Budget. And according to Douthat, Daniels "has become America's best governor." By directing his opinion towards Republicans, he is casting light on a possible candidate who might not be too well known by American voters. Douthat says he's not sure if Daniels would be able to win the 2012 elections, but he'd be the best choice. Douthat quotes Daniels from CPAC, "I think a lot of Republicans are over-reading all of this ... They're a little ahead of themselves, a little too giddy." "He’s admired by elites, but unknown at the grass-roots level. He’s a social conservative, and his gubernatorial campaigns have played the populist card successfully — but he lacks the built-in constituencies of other candidates," says Douthat on Daniels. Douthat goes on to say, “unlike the Republicans at the health care summit, he balanced criticisms of Obamacare with candor about the problem of the uninsured. “’This is a very real issue, and we were determined to have a constructive approach to it — but one that would be affordable.’” Can Mitch Daniels come from underneath and surprise everyone? It’s possible. I think Ross Douthat makes some very reasonable points. I had never heard of Mitch Daniels before CPAC. I am interested to see what becomes of him in the next few years before 2012 Presidential Elections. I haven’t made up my mind if I agree with Ross Douthat yet. I need to learn more about Mitch Daniels. Maybe he has enough experience to run our country, but maybe he has some hidden skeletons in his closet.

Democrat Dilemma?

With re-elections in November and Democrats already trying to defend several open senate seats, Indiana Senator Evan Bayh (Democrat) announced that he would not run for a third-term. His open seat gives Republicans an opportunity to grab another senate seat. Bayh, known as a moderate Democrat, recently showed to be ahead 20 points in polls. This unexpected decision by Bayh is appeared to be personal, not political. Will Bayh’s decision create a dilemma for Democrats? His decision of retirement came after Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd (D) and North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan (D), who both announced their plans of retirement in January. Democrats now have to try much harder to keep hold of these seats. Indiana Republican Party Chairman Murray Clark told Fox News that he considered Bayh to be “formidable.” Now with the Democrats feeling “vulnerable,” Bayh’s retirement could possibly be a “game changer.”

I do believe Bayh’s retirement, along with Dodd and Dorgan, will be a “game changer.” These retirements will change the senate for better or worse. It will be interesting to see the results in the November elections.