Wednesday, April 13, 2016

RCL#5: Advocacy project


For my advocacy project I will be sticking with something I know, I will be advocating for action against careerism in politics. 

I deliberated for a while on a possible new topic but I kept coming back to this.  I think the reason was I had already put in so much time and though into picking a topic for my advocacy essay that this was and still is something I feel passionately about.  The medium I will be using for this project is still up in the air though but I have narrowed it down to two choices.

My first choice is to build a website, because this seems like a method that there can be a lot of user interaction.  My only trepidation is I have never built a website before.  I am hoping it is not too hard I will be investigating a few different web design website and fiddling around.  If I find creating a website to be out of my comfort zone I have a fall back plan.

The fall back plan is to go with a method I am well practiced in, iMovie.  Through high school and college I have used iMovie for numerous project there would be no learning curve for input images sound or even audio recording.  All I would have to do is plan out how I would present my topic.

Sometime a challenge is interesting though and can yield the best results.  This is why I am straying away from iMovie to begin with because it just seem plain and boring while a website holds a lot of potential upside if I can develop the site well.  After looking at some example advocacy projects there is defiantly a high standard of web design ability in past CAS classes I will have to uphold.  A learning experience is a good thing though.

Wednesday, April 6, 2016

CI#5


Who will win the democratic and republican presidential nomination?  First I will start with the democratic race.

It is now the beginning of April and there is still two candidates in the race for the democratic nomination.  This would have been the biggest surprise of the primary if it were not for Trump.  It seems that for the last three years Hilary Clinton had been appointed as the next democratic presidential nominee.  It seemed like she was 100% locked in to win it... except the perfect storm is roaring in politics that makes candidates like Hilary Clinton, career politician who represent the establishment the enemy.  Compounded by the controversy that has surround Clintons stint as Secretary of State, there is now a vary small chance that Clinton losses to none other than Bernie Sanders. 

No candidate this primary cycle has received the kind of excitement that the crazy man from Vermont, Bernie Sanders has.  He was fighting an uphill battle all along going against the political machine of the Clintons.  Only one other person had the fortitude to every try to challenge that and it was Martin O’Malley.  Who is that you wonder... exactly he did not last long in the race.  Bernie on the other hand has been tapping into the emotions and feeling of a group that is usually not targeted by politics. A young liberal generation who feel the government should make more things free and take away from the billionaires (Trump LOL).  Image a general election of Trump Vs. Benies it would be the most intriguing presidential race every. 

Even with all the hype around Bernie there is still no chance in my mind that he secures the democratic nomination.  The election was predetermined long ago by the super delegates and the establishment supporting Hilary Clinton.  It is a corrupt process on the democratic side, if Bernie can keep winning states like he did is Wisconsin he may secure the popular vote but that doesn’t matter.

On the republican side things are really interesting because of the high probability of a brokered convention. The only candidate who has any shot of reaching the required number of delegate is Donald Trump.  Yes, Donald Trump.  The other two candidates, Ted Cruz and John Kasich, are simply trying to force a brokered convention with one of the candidates Kasich only winning one State, the state he is governor of Ohio by a slim margin over trump.  That one win for Kasich though could be huge because it prevented trump from securing the sixty-six delegates from Ohio.

I think there will be a brokered convention with Trump falling just short of the required delegate count.  It would be unimaginable that the republicans would insert there own candidate.  That would be suicide in the general election. And there is no way they will want to back Trump or Cruz.  It is a conundrum to say the least.

With that I predict that Trump will secure the nomination in a brokered convention, and if he does not, well it will be bad.  The general election will be Hilary Clinton Vs. Donald Trump.   They are the antithesis of one another.  A career politician whoses every word is measured with extreme tact and strategy, while the other could give a dam about what he says.  All the polls say Hilary would beat Trump in a general election.  There is something called a response bias in polls and while these polls are well run republicans have a hard time admitting they will support trump.  I think it will be  a close race.  This summer and fall will be vary interesting. 

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

RCL#4


For this RCL post I will be analyzing the logic of the organization Mother Jones.  Mother Jones is a non-profit news organization that is extremely progressive in there views.  Their progressive liberal leaning seem to be on display everywhere on the website, from the article selection, to article title and on into the actual material in the articles. They cover everything from politics to food.  As I was searching for a organization to feature in this post I came across many that represented something I disagreed with.  Unfortunately, even though I disagreed with what they were saying these organizations where not to ripe with fallacious arguments and logic.  Or it just was not so blatant.

Mother Jones on the other hand is like a liberal hub of all news presented with a slant that makes my blood boil.  I consider myself to have a moderate view on most issues but the few I have a staunch stance on such as abortion, gun rights and being pro-police officer where being all-around hated on by Mother Jones.  I immediately knew I had found the organization that I would enjoy looking for fallacies in there arguments.

The first article I will analyze “Americans are GorgingThemselves on Cheap Meat” by Jenny Luna appears to be a simple health article, nope.  It is a disguised article on why eating beef is not bad for your health but for the environment.

1) The article opens by saying, “While the Dutch and other nations are advising consumers to cut down on red meat, and it’s estimated that Americans will eat more beef this year than we have in the last decade.” The operative words are advising and estimated.  The Dutch government simply is advising that does not mean that the people of Denmark will eat less meat.  The writer compares an advisory statement to an estimate.  Then later says the Netherlands advises their population to eat no more than 0.9lbs of red meat a week.  Followed by the fact that it is estimated that the US eats 53.4lbs of red meat a year that is really close to the advisement from the Netherlands.  But the yearly total was included to the make the number look bigger. Also, you need to compare apples to apples not apples to oranges.  So why did the author not include what the estimated total consumption of meat in the Netherlands is?  An advisement number means nothing, the US Government could advice the population to eat no meat and nothing would change.  This article uses weak logic and contradicts itself throughout by bring up facts that hurt the argument.  This article is ripe with the fallacy of missing the point.  While also promoting the site progressive agenda by arguing that cows are bad for the environment. 
  
2) “Conservatives Just Lost a Big Weapon Against the AbortionPill” The title of the next article is a logical fallacy in itself. There are multiple fallacies at play such as false dichotomy, red herring, and slippery slope.  The false dichotomy fallacy comes up because it is saying conservatives have just lost and abortion has won, without even going into the argument.  Red herring is what the title is, conservatives are never again mentioned in the article, only in the title to make it appear that a changing of a label on a birth control pill is a blow to conservative, because it makes it more affordable.  The last on is a slippery slope and a weak one at that.  The fact that a two-thirds reduction in the dosage on a birth control pill results in birth control being cheaper and conservatives losing.  The rest of the article simply plays of the fallacies in the title.

If you look through Mother Jones website the articles linked commonly have a common denominator which is supporting the progressive agenda.  It only makes sense that the news outlet that is funded under the umbrella of the Foundation for National Progress.  You cannot fault the group polarizing the news, it gives more sites and organization a niche to cater to.  If all the news sites reported unbiased information there would only need to be one source. 

Wednesday, March 23, 2016

RCL3: Persuasive Essay


Thesis:
Careerism in politics has had many negative affects on the function of the United States governing system; at the heart of its problem is the divergence of the representative’s interest and constituent’s interest.

Justification for this topic:
I want to focus my persuasive essay on how careerism in politics has many negative affects and in particularly, how it affects the relationship between the constituents and their representatives.  The reason I was initially drawn to this was through some articles I came across recently.  Of course, you cannot just read one article and take it for the 100% truth, so I did further research and was able to find similar ideas and supporting facts across a range of sources.  This has led me to my position of being against career politics. 

This topic is one that fly’s under the radar for a lot of people, so I do not know of any major misconception about it.  The only misconception would come form the cliché statement that ignorance is bliss.  That is another reason I am interested in this topic, because it is not so main stream like, gun rights, social equality...etc.  As the writer it is more fun to present material to an unbiased audience, which can only be done when the material being presented in relatively unknown. 

I have some roughly worded potential topics form my paper below.  There is some much material that could be covered a challenge will be deciding what my most potent topics are and focusing on those, while also having to consider what set of topics will work well to promote logical progression and flow through my paper.

Potential Topics:
1. How the current system promotes career politicians
2. How effective can elected individual be if their income is dependent on their government positions?
3. How they can be influence by PAC's and Lobbyist
4. Low voter turnout in state and local elections almost ensures the incumbent re-election. (Presidential election is an exception to the lobbyist and PAC influence)
5. Entering politics should be because of a passion to change and help better the US, not to just have a long lucrative career.

Book Citation:
Katz, Alyssa. The Influence Machine: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Corporate Capture of American Life. New York: Spiegel & Grau, 2015. Print.

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

CI#4: Presidential Candiates


The 2016 Presidential primary race is coming towards its close.  The voting has started and the fields have shrunken. The question that remain are not about who the democratic nominee will be, the odds have always been in Hilary Clinton's favor, she has all but secured the nomination. The question is will Donald Trump win enough delegates to avoid a contested convention? 

For Donald to secure the primary he has to secure a total of 1237 delegates at the moment he has 673. That leaves another 664 for him to win uncontested.  The other two republican candidates are gaming for a brokeredconvention.

One of the three remaining candidates is John Kasich.  Kasich is the governor of Ohio and until the primary in Ohio, he had not won a single state.  By staying in the race he was able to slim beat trump in Ohio, which deprived trump of 66 delegates.  While Kasich does not even have a mathematically possible shot at securing the nomination even if he wins every delegate left available he will continue to run.  This is in an attempt to take delegates away from Trump. 

Kasich is considered the last establishment candidate in the republic race.  The establishment hates Ted Cruz but they also hate trump.  It is a strange mix of individuals left and republican elites do not know what to do.  It seems kind of cheap for Kasich to stay in the race when his only goal is to try to force a brokered convention. 

A brokered convention is when Republican Parties delegates decide who will be the nomination.  This is how a normal election works, but in the brokered election delegates are protected to change who they vote for from what the people they represent have already decided.  It is a vary complicated process apparently the party rules transcend the states rules so delegates do not have to follows the states decision once there is a contested convention. Delegates can even vote for someone who was not even running the primary, for example the name Paul Ryan has come up for a potential nominee if there is a brokered convention.  

These contested conventions have happened in the past but usually when there are two candidates who are neck and neck, not when there is just one candidate that everyone is trying to stop.  It would surely be political suicide for the Republican Party to deny trump the nomination if he continues to clearly be the front-runner but just falls a few delegates shy of the magic number.  

It is surely a strange election cycle this year on both sides.  While the political elites of the country do not like Trump the people have shown they support him more than the other candidates.  Even if there is brokered convention I think the establishment will just bite there tongue and go with Trump.

There is not much going on for the democratic side except for the fact of how much support Bernie Sanders has managed to gather.  It is clear he will not be the nominee but it still raises question will Bernie’s supports rally to get politicians like Bernie in office, or is this a short lived phenomenon.  This same question can be asked about the Trump phenomenon.  Has he actually changed the Republican Party or is he just running at the perfect time and was in the perfect position being a reality TV star and well known across the nation?

There is still a lot of drama to be had in this election cycle, but as the primaries just keep rolling it will be interesting to see if established politicians will start to embrace Trump or continue there Hail Mary of an attack against his everything.



Wednesday, February 17, 2016

RCL#2: Minority representation in TV


In the film and TV industry where is the diversity?  Do networks have the obligation to cast 
women and minorities in major role?  That is the question this blog post will be examining. 

Many people are completely blind to this issue, not because they do not care, just simply due to the fact they never though about it.  There are some things in life that you just accept and do not question for me the constitution of movie and TV show cast never sparked my attention, at least not there lack of minority representation.  What did spark my attention was who is playing that super hero or to be shallow, dang that female actor is hot.  It was never where is the black james bond or the Mexican whatever. 

Now that this problem has been brought up during award season, through many news outlets, I do see the constitution of a cast differently.  I now pay attention to, purely out of curiosity, how little minority and females are represented in major roles.   To me it has not affected the quality of the films, but who know maybe diversity would add quality to productions.

In an article published by NPR this problem is discussed not just from a layman observation, but also with stats that illuminate the disparity in the TV and movie industry between white males and everyone else.  

“If you want an accurate picture of ethnic and gender diversity in the United States, don't look to Hollywood (Ralph Bunche).” This statement is of the conclusion of Ralph Bunche from UCLA, who conducted a study of minority representation in Hollywood.  Some of the most telling statistics that came out of the study where about lead roles and directors.  Lead actors are 83% white, writers 88% white and Show creators 94% white.  There are many other stats that compare ratio between minority groups but these three are the most telling the problem.  The US population is about 50% white but the film industry in almost 90% white. 

Let extricate gender from the problem and solely talk about ethnicity or culture views, which is what these statistics are doing.  It is shocking.  Even though I will admit I never was aware of this disparity before doing research for this blog.  It is almost a knock on my observation abilities, since I was unable to notice this. 

My favorite genres of movies are super hero movies and when I think about who plays each lead I cannot think of one non white lead.  Superman (Henry Cavill) white, Batman (Ben Affleck) White, Ironman (Robert Downey Jr.) white.... and many more.  The argument can be made these actors have always been white, so it would be weird to have a black superman.  This is one of the greatest obstacle in Hollywood their deep rooted tradition of this is how we do things.

Recently though, especially on TV shows, diversity has been creeping in, mostly for comedic effect unfortunately.  On shows like modern family the Gay couple, Cam and Mitchel are used to add a layer of comedy that can only come from gays.  While Gloria, a Columbia female is used for the same purpose, to add diversity to the potential jokes that can be played off of stereotypes.

While diversity is starting to creep into popular TV shows like modern family, Blackish and others.  The diversity is not true in my opinion; it is simply being incorporated to be made fun of, to make the shows more entertaining at the expense of people diverse culture.  There is nothing wrong with making fun of people background, it what drives comedy shows.  This unfortunately is one of the only outlets for group of non white actors, Kevin Hart (Comedy), Ice Cube (Comedy)...etc.  Of course there are exceptions to the rule like Morgan Freeman but they are few and far between.

Studies have also shown that diversitymake movie and TV shows more money so I expect Hollywood to catch on soon enough to this.  It is a long hard process though since Hollywood and the entertainment industry has such a deep-rooted history in the exclusion of all but white men.  IT will take some time but it is taking positive step forward. 

Two possible deliberation questions are:
            1. How is TV affect by the lack of diversity?
            2. Why are minority actors missing from major roles?

Article



Wednesday, February 10, 2016

RCL#1:Social Media Comments Sections

TRUMPS INSTAGRAM POST


For anyone who may be living under a rock, and is unaware that recently the New Hampshire the presidential primary’s were held.  The results...  Trump and Sanders winning by a land slide.  Within hours of the results being tallied, and Trump and Sanders being declared the winners, social media and in particular the comments section were blowing up.  I will discus some of the comments on a simple picture Trump posted on Instagram saying thank you to those who voted for him, in the caption. 

Scatter throughout the thousands of user comments on Trumps post are some of the different ways people approach commenting on a post. People will be motivated or compelled to comment on something for many different reason I will use some example to illustrate the main reason.

1. Support- Many people will be compelled to comment on something they support by acting as cheerleaders praising the person or idea being depicted.  Cheering has no negative part to it is a simple statement of support.
            -EX: farder54-"@c_magic311 Big Don I thank you so very much for winning yesterday..."


2.Opposition- Have you ever just seen or heard something that compelled you do something about it.  To some people the mere sight on Donald Trump compels them to voice their opposition to him and his ideas, albeit not always in a smart manner.  A lot of the times opposition is displayed by not just directing opposition at the person or idea but to everyone who may support that idea, making broad generalization.  A lot of the times the user that post these type of comments in real life would never have the courage to say what they type.
            -EX:obnoxious.jay "Kill yourself"

3. Commenter v. Commenter- These type of comments are not fueled by what the post is actually about... they are fueled by what commenter have already said.  The same sentiments can be invoked from comments as the original post, sentiment of support and opposition.  Usually opposition is what drives the war of words that is the comments section, often inappropriate and demining language is used.
            -EX: Sawyer2636 @fueled_by_ryden “It’s funny how trump haters are mainly sexually confused teens illegal aliens,      foreigners, and liberal with severe mental issues.  None can vote and all are irrelevant”
            ‘’
            ‘’
            ‘’
            tylersaurus @sawyer2636 “it’s funny how Trump supporter make sweeping generalization and assume that their      perception of reality is the absolute truth.”

These different ways of commenting on a post albeit on Instagram, Facebook or some sort of news article are usefully vary demining and aggressive.  The reason behind people’s poor Internet behavior is because there is nothing personal at stake.  You do not have to look you opponent in the eye and say it; you can hide behind a shield that is the Internet.  You do not face the consequence of voicing these brazen and base comments online as you would in a personnel setting, as say our CAS 138T classroom.  People are free to be polarized and not worry about offending anyone because they are detached. 

For many the comment sections are simply a necessary evil that goes along with most media post that can be viewed commodiously, but to some they consume and can actually hurt people.  When typing something online you should think to yourself, would I want my mother to read this... ? The old saying the type of person you are is determined by how you act when nobody you know is watching.  If that saying rings true for acts on the Internet then there are a lot of immoral characters on the Internet.
                                    




Wednesday, February 3, 2016

CI#3: Presidental Candidates


A hotly debated topic for the United States for the past few years has been immigration.  What effects does it have on United States society and how to reform it?  It seems that every presidential candidate has a certain idea on how to go about immigration reform.  No ones proposed ideas have gained as much attention negative and positive as Donald Trumps reform idea.

It seems for the past four or five months when you turn on the news you are almost ensured a new soundbite from Donald Trump of him saying something blunt and controversial.  Hear are few of his quotes on immigration.

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems to us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."-Trump Presidential Campaign announcement

 

-       "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on." — Campaign Press Realsese

 

-       "Build a wall with a big beautiful door for legal immigration." —GOP Debate, August 2015

 

-       "Our leaders are stupid, our politicians are stupid, and the Mexican government is much sharper, much more cunning. [So] they send the bad ones over because they don’t want to pay for them, they don’t want to take care of them.” —GOP debate, August 2015

 

Of course when all you hear are these soundbites, Donald trump sounds like an ignorant bigot, and it is easy to become polarized against or for him.  As with anything you have look into the whole story though.  You cannot just read the cover of a book and decide if you like it.  In political campaigns candidates are just trying to say or do something to draw public interest.  What you see on the news is never any actual information about a candidate and his policy.  It is always a shell of his/her ideas that the news uses to try to polarize people.  When people come on as guest for news programs all the anchor wants to do is ask question to try and get a controversial or polarized answer out of them.  This is the same strategy used by candidates.... Donald trump is just the best at it.

The problem with immigration is that it hurts the people who are the worst off in the United States; low-income minorities, who end up competing with immigrant for jobs in the labor and service markets.  Why would an employer pay an America citizen more to do the same job illegal immigrates will do at a much lower price.  They will not.  Immigration in the US provides an over supply of labor in the US market. 

Trump wants to completely shut down illegal immigration by increasing boarder security.  While also ending many of the legal benefit these illegal have such as protection in sanctuary cities and end birth right citizenship.

The term “Sanctuary City” applies to cities that do not allow municipal funds or resources to be used to enforce federal immigration laws. These restriction of resource usually do not allow local police to investigate  the immigration status of suspected people, or federal Immigration and customs enforcement (ICE).  These cities are effectively legally breaking the law.  Which is a place were illegals can come to take advantage of the birth right citizenship law.

While in a sanctuary city illegals can have children which are then due the Birth rich citizenship law legal US citizens.... This is a major problem with the system.  The US is a favorable place for illegal immigrant to venture to because of its lenient and immigration policies. 

While Donald Trumps Ideas on immigration may not be the best or the smartest course of action to pursue; some form of action is definitely necessary in the US to reform immigration.  It is a good time to do your own research and form your own opinion.

Friday, January 29, 2016

This I Believe

I was unable to upload a mp3 file to Blogger.... apparently it is not allowed on this blogging medium.  So here is a link to my TIB. You may have to sign into a gmail account to view the file.  It is on Music Player for google drive

This I believe... not everyone can be equal.  All my life I have been aware of how people are different, which is not a bad thing.  When I was young I was aware of how my twin sister was different from me.  She possessed talents I did not; she was an artist and possessed a level of social intellect well beyond me.  Would it be right of me to envy and want to take from my sister her social and artistic intellect?  No, it is okay to be unequal.  This belief that there should be equality in every aspect of our lives is dangerous.

I remember back to my time in high school, as a student and as an athlete. I was motivated both by a drive to be different and be better than my peers.  In sports these inequalities are what make you the winner or the loser.  In school it is what motivated me to develop my college application better than those I was competing against.  The concept of inequality fosters competition and drive, which increases performance.  While conversely, equality kills motivation and drive.  

If I would have known that myself and my other high school classmate mates would all get into the colleges we wanted, I would immediately lose motivation to perform. My performance in school would no longer be incentivized.  A world of inequalities raises motivated, driven people.  If it does not motivate you to go out and perform in whatever way you are gifted there is something wrong with you.  

For society to function a lack of equality has to be present.  Everyone cannot be equal.  Not everyone is born the most athletic, or the prettiest, or the smartest, or any combination of these traits.  These inequalities are not decided by society but they lead to different opportunities in society.  How much sense would it make to have hiring equality in the fashion world.  Would an unattractive model be able sell clothing or represent the company well?  Would a five foot four un-athletic individual make a good NBA player?  Would someone who is not the brightest make a good NASA physics?  The answer is no.  People posses different abilities.

My Dad has been telling me since I was a little boy, “ You were created by God with a purpose, and everyone was created with a purpose.  Find what you were intended to do.”  I have not found what I intend to do, but what I do know is not everyone will be able to do what I decide to do, and that is perfectly acceptable.  As I will be unable to accomplish what many others can.  This does not mean I should feel insulted by my lack of equality in these certain areas, and others should not be insecure about what they are not good at.  

Inequality is what makes us human; disparity between intellectual traits and physical traits within the human population makes us diverse. Diversity is something, which is commonly hailed as being good and epitomizes the uniqueness of the human population.  Highlighting how not everyone can be equal which is an often-unheralded gift to the human race that has allowed it to accomplish many great things.  

Equality is a double-edged sword, it sounds great but is impractical. Equality I believe is an argument given due to corrupt human nature, to take what you want the easy way, by evening the playing field.  The only place where equality is not an evil idea is in the category of human decency and respect.  Everyone should command equal respect from his or her peers and self.  This respect should be award regardless of income, performance, race or abilities, this is the only place in society equality has a place.

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

CI#2: Presidental Candidates


A civic issue that has been in the news recently is how to make college more affordable?  One presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, has been claiming to make college free for everyone.  How would this work? And what are the issues  with such a statement? 

According to Bernie the US is being crippled by the fact that not everyone is able to go to college.  He says it is the best interests of the United States as a whole to invest in the future... which is the next generation of workers.  Along with many people not attending college because of financial reasons, many student graduate college with mountains of debt.  The financial burden of college is carried with many students for years and even decades. 

The question is when you dig deeper into Bernie’s policy proposals what is in their.  How are things paid for, how do you qualify for free college?  Not everyone qualifies for free college under Bernie’s plan, on those from low-income families. 

The controversy arises as always with the question of money.  What will Bernie do to fund this idea and what will be the consequences?  On the Bernie Sanders webpage he has a whole section dedicated to showing how much each of his proposed ideas cost and how he proposes to pay for them.  For his proposal of subsidizing and socializing higher education he has tagged it with be paid for by a tax on Wall Street Speculation-which he says will raise 300billion a year. 

What this tax does is it reduces the tax break that wall street and banks receive for incurring risk.  When a bank gives a loan their risk is the possibility they will not get back the money they loaned.  Incurring risk is how the economy grows; there is no risk free investments (the closest thing is government backed bonds).  So what this tax will do is tax every single person that has any form of investments in the stock market, bond market, or derivative markets. 

This is a clever way to increases taxes on everyone except the lower class who have no money to invest.  Sanders regularly champions the fact that he is taking from the RICH(only the rich) and giving to the poor and middle class, this is not the case.  He is raising taxes on everyone is ways that are just not commonly known.  Taxes like income tax will be reduced for the middle and lower class, but these tax breaks will surely be made up through other taxing programs, started by Bernie. 

If you go to Sanders website and look at how he plans to pay for his policies you will find a bevy of programs that will strengthen the government and IRS hold on the people. 

Also as education is concerned, in an economic sense supply determines demand.  What happens when the number of individuals in the work force with a college education go up.  The value(Demand) of that education goes down.  It is not true that more educated people will lead to more jobs.  There is a fixed number of jobs and those are created by the people Bernie is going to hurt the most with his policies. 

Unfortunately, the proposals Bernie makes all sound great, but we do not live in a utopia things do not work as well in practice as they do in theory. 

There are things that can be done to reform education but the drastic measures of making is relatively free is not the way to go.  The place for reforming higher education should be on reforming the student loan program.  The US government profited over 110Billion dollars in recent years on student loans.  Student loans should have a reduced interest rate. 

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

CI#1: Presidental Candidates


This being the first Civic Issues (CI) post, I will be explaining what my series of five posts will be centered around. 

For my CI blog I hope to be able to not just tell you about a civic issue but to foster a interest in learning more on your own.  In a series of short blog post it would be impractical to go into any more depth than is needed to simply make you, as my readers aware of the issue. 

My approach to this blog will be to examine five different civic issues that have been permeating social media due to the actions/beliefs of a presidential candidate. For my first one I will be talking about the issue of government transparency, which has been highlighted by the Democratic presidential candidate Hilary Clinton.

Recently two actions have come to the public's attention on Hilary Clintons actions while she was Secretary of State under Obama, first the Benghazi incident and her personnel email server.  Which has been found to have been active in sending and receiving classified information.  In both these instance it has taken a few years before much information is made known about them.  As it turns out Hilary Clinton in the early stages of both investigations made statements that contradict what has been revealed through the investigations.  She continually made statements to try to miss -construe what actually happened. Through these two investigation it has is becoming apparent how much she actually lied.

Its not that this strategy is uncommon in politics, what is uncommon is that these actions are actually being investigated and a blind eye is not being turned.  This facts leads to the logical question, how many incidents similar to these are out there?  How many people in authority are simply choosing not to investigate?

The e-mail servers are significant to the transparency issue in the government because nobody in the government even knew about this.  A lot of times the people are the ones information is withheld from, but in this case the government-to-government relations are not even transparent.  How can transparency expected to be practiced between the government and its’ constituents if this is the case?

For many people who wonder why the email server issue is such a big deal it can be seen in the punishment of former Army General and Director of the CIA David Petraeus. Petraeus was given a $100,000 fine and will never be able to hold a high-ranking government job again.  This came about by simply having some old top-secret information in his personnel archive at his house.  Then letting his biographer look at the information. 

The FBI investigation is still ongoing in Mrs. Clintons case, but if the presidents set from the David Petraeus case is any indication of a possible punishment.  Hilary Clinton could be ousted from politics.