Current Event assignment 4: Why Rick Perry's Presidential Bid is Toast

I remember back when Governer Perry was one of the frontrunners in the presidential race. Now, people have almost forgotten about him. The man had a real chance to get elected, but he didn't. CNN Democratic Strategist James Carville agrees. Rick Perry is Toast. According to Carville Perry is the worst debater of all time. That is part of the reason that he is almost out of the presidential race. The man is not capable of arguing, which is almost a prerequisite for becoming president. A person who cannot argue that his bill is the best choice, can't be a politician let alone president. In the beginning Perry seemed like a formidable opponent for Romney, but now the media barely covers him because people find him boring. His time is up, and now people are starting to forget about him. Carville thinks that Perry has embarassed himself to the point where he seems incapable of running Texas as well. Carville thinks that Perry is definetely out of the presidential race, and is just kidding himself by thinking otherwise.
I totally agree with Carville. Perry is a goner. He had his chance, but he blew it and now he's out of the race. He had some real potential to be the presidential nominee, but the debates destroyed him. The GOP debates on CNN were some of the most terrible and embarassing for Perry. They other candidates just chewed him out. I feel a little sorry for Perry, because he showed such promise at the beginning of the race, but now he's just a memory.

To see the full story, follow the link below:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/28/opinion/carville-rick-perry/index.html

Question of the week 4!

So the biggest political issue facing Virginia.......I'm going to have to say the economy. I know a lot of people that have been hit hard by the reccession, so I think that the biggest problem right now is the economy. I think the economy will be the biggest turning point for voters in Virginia. The candidate that has the best plan to fix the economy is the one that is going to get the votes. In a lot of places around Virginia, People have been hit hard by the economic downturn. Something needs to change. Unfortunately, what Obama has been doing hasn't really been helping us yet, so we need a new plan, one that will get families economic relief, before they starve.

Question of the Week 3

So I posted this before, but turns out that I didn't really understand the question so here is the revised version!

Health Care- Well I'll have to give obama a B+ on this one considering that he did get healthcare passed. This is something that many presidents have tried and failed at, and Obama finally did it. Unfortunately, it is a rather unpopular program so there is still work to be done. I support Obama, and I think that his healthcare plan is a good idea, but needs work.

Economy- Unfortunately, I'll have to give Obama a B- here. The unemployment rate is at an all-time low, and Obama's approval rating is also at an all time low. I give him credit for his effort, but he's just not delivering what the US needs. I think that his jobs plan and such are steps in the right direction, but he needs to go further.

War on Terror- From me Obama gets an A or A- on this one. The one big thing that he has going for him is the death of Osama bin Laden. It was probably one of the biggest hits on Terrorism that the US ever dealt, and it rid the world of one of the most dangerous leaders on the planet. We've also been handling situations in other countries decently (ie. Libya), so I think that Obama is doing pretty good here.

Reelection bid- I'm going to give Obama a B+ on his reelection bid. There are two reasons for this. One, he was not the nations worst president. His programs did work, and he did deliver on most of his promises, but then again he wasn't the best. He could have handled the economy much better than he did. Two, his opposition is rather divided. There are so many republican candidates that the entire party is split. I don't think that one candidate can get enough support from everyone to beat Obama.

I've been an Obama supporter from the start, and I think that given the circumstances, he's doing a pretty good job. Of course there is room for improvement, but he's not doing too bad.

Current Event #3: Conservative group backs Cain's '9-9-9' plan

So Herman Cain has this plan. It's called the 9-9-9 plan. Cain plans to replace the current tax system with a flat 9% income tax, 9% corporate tax, and 9% national sales tax. Conservatives are beginning to lighten up to this plan, and are saying that it will lead to an economic boom, but some  conservatives are worried about the sales tax addition to the plan. They think that it will "suck" income out of Americans.

Personally, I'm a liberal so I don't really think that tax-cuts are going to get our economy back to where it was. The government needs more revenue, not less. Although I don't advocate taxes that are too high, I do think that taxes are something that the government needs to sustain itself in the hard economy of today. I don't see how when we're in a large amount of debt, tax cuts are going to do anything other than make Americans feel better about themselves. Sure, tax cuts will take less money from normal Americans and will make them feel better, but in turn it will take money away from the government which kind of needs it right now. I also don't really like the 9% sales tax idea very much. 9% is no small sum. A 9% sales tax when buying a car could equal $1000 or more! So I don't really think that Cain's 9-9-9 plan is a good idea at this time.

To see the full story click on the link
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/14/conservative-group-backs-cains-9-9-9-plan/?hpt=po_bn1

Current event post #2, Bachmann and Cain dodge religion question

Ok, so being a nonchristian, I believe in a firm and distinct seperation of church and state. To me, the way that we run this country should not be dependent on religion. Religion should be something private and sacred, not public and commercialized. So when I read this news story, I was a a bit annoyed.

The news story was about Mitt Romney being a Mormon. Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann both refused to talk about Romney's religion to the press. The press accused them of dodging the question, and they both said that Mitt Romneys religion was inconsequential to the upcoming election.Then some pastor said that while he thought that Romney was a good and pious man, he thought that most Americans would prefer a "Competent Christian."

To begin, I really don't like it when the press writes stories like this. It makes them seem desperate for a story. Really? Why does Romney being a Mormon matter?  I'm a liberal-leaner, and I don't really like Romney, but I would not stoop so low as to attack his religion. To me religion has no place in politics. America is a free country, and it has so many religions that to talk about someone elses religion doesn't even make sense.

For once, I totally agree with Cain and Bachmann on this point. Romney's religion should not even be talked about. If people want to undermine Romney then they should talk about his political stance on issues, not his religion. Freedom of religion is guarunteed in the first amendment, and nowhere in the constitution does it say that a person must be either protestant or catholic to run for president, so I think that it was wrong of reporters to ask these questions because it puts the people who were asked in an awkward position and it also has nothing to do with the upcoming election.

to see the full story follow the link below
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/09/bachmann-cain-duck-question-on-romneys-faith/?hpt=po_t2

Question of the Week 2

I'm not really a political guy, so I don't really know all of the intricacies of US politics, but the one issue that I tend to take a stand on more than any other is the management of the federal government and the raising of the debt ceiling.
As I said in the last policial question, I tend to have more liberal leanings. On this issue I definetely side with the liberals. While I agree that raising the debt ceiling isn't the solution to our problem, I think that something is far better than nothing. Better to have the debt ceiling raised than cause a government shutdown. I think that a government shutdown would be a disaster right now. The American people are already so worried about their jobs and money that if the government shut down it would be like a sealing of their doom. If the government can't find a solution, then who can?
Personally, my family is pretty rich so we haven't really been hit by the recession so far, but I take a particular stand on this issue because I know that the economy needs to get better. I think that at this point its time to try something new because what we have been doing hasn't been working. I'm not saying that the conservatives are wrong, but I do think that a liberal solution will be the one that will get us out of this crisis. When I go out into the world after college, I don't want to be in a world of economic depression, so I think that we need to think of something, and do it fast.

Current event assignment 1, US kills Anwar al-Awlaki

So, yesterday we apparently went in and bombed this guy named Anwar al-Awlaki. This guy was a real leader in al-qaeda, so it should be a good thing that we killed him. The only problem is that this guy just happened to be an American citizen, and the bombing also happened to kill another US citizen. There are a lot of people that say that the US should not have taken this action. It goes against both US and international law. People like Ed Husain, think that the consequences of such an action greatly outweigh the advantages. Not only was the man an American citizen, but the killing was done 8 kilometers away from a town. It was a major risk to kill the man when we did. Overall many people are depricating the attacks. Moreover, many of these outspoken critics are future presedential hopefuls, such as Ron Paul.
However, the US may have acted I believe that the deed is done and that further criticism is only going to hurt the unity of the US. I can't say that morally and lawfully, the deed was good, however the man did present a significant threat to US security. I personally am a very big advocate of human rights and peace and all, yet I cannot find overwhelming weight in the arguments of the critics. While I agree that the man should have had some sort of a trial, the lack of that only is not enough to sway me to become a critic. I have to say that on this issue I am neutral.

To see the article click on the link below:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/30/politics/targeting-us-citizens/index.html?hpt=po_t2