Following the invasion of U.S on Iraq accusing them of having weapon of mass destruction has created a lot of enormity .Now another attack on another country will be worse and requires more thought since the consequences might be greater. Now the question is whether the plan to attack Iran is going to pull through. Auzy’s post on Attack Iran claims that he believes the president –elect Barrack Obama is going to attack Iran. He says that Barrack Obama, John McCain, and popular media give a definite yes, ‘so long as, they possess weapons of mass destruction or pose an imminent threat to national security.’ Attack on Iran has been long planned. The problem is the U.S have no valid prove of this and should not accuse Iran of supporting terrorist activities without validity or this might end up like the case of Iraq. I agree with Auzy on this, and it could be just a staged plan to start a war and that Obama will only attack when the nations security is threatened
At the outset of Bush's second term, around 2005 Vice President Dick Cheney had something to say. He hinted, in no uncertain terms, that Iran was "right at the top of the list" of the enemies of America, and that Israel would, "be doing the bombing for us." This is without the US military involvement and putting no pressure on them to do it. I ran had issued a threat on Israel and this is why Israel is ready to defend itself first .The USA are using this as a way to involve themselves without having to be blamed on whatever the outcome will be. On The other hand the US has stated that they are ready if the Iran truly proves to be a threat to the US and the world at large if they posses nuclear weapon. It is therefore a duty for our leader to be concerned with the safety of its citizens. U.S. President-elect Barack Obama's administration will offer Israel a ‘nuclear umbrella’ against the threat of a nuclear attack by Iran, as said earlier this week.
This US guarantee to Israel could also be interpreted as the U.S. believing that Iran will eventually acquire nuclear arms. We cannot be sure but we should not be quick to think the US is ready to jump into another war. It is only trying to protect its people. We should also be careful that they do not make the sane mistakes the Bush administration made. I believe the Obama Administration will think things through and whatever decision they may decide will be a smart move.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Monday, December 1, 2008
The US economy
The US economy had been going down in the past years but this year we hit rock bottom. We are then left with the $700Billoin dollar recovery plan that was approved by President George Bush. Well it seems like the money is going up and now its more than the $700 billion recovery plan we had in mind. One is left to wonder how much in the long run will we spent to return our economy into shape?
The US government is spending large amounts of money to restore the economy of US. 770billion dollar is on top of 152billion in tax cuts according to Kent Klein research on voice of America. They have spent large amounts to rescue mortgage lenders Fannie mae and Freddie Mac, the huge insurance company AIG. By removing uncertainty on impending mortgage related losses, a way is paved for the banks to keep lending. More companies have also come out to ask for assistance so they are included in this recovery plan. US citizens are then left to wonder if there Tax will go to these people without themselves seeing how they benefit from this plan directly. The president –elect Barack Obama, economy administration is also proposing stimulating packages estimated to be $300 Billion. It looks like many packages will be coming up and we are not yet sure how much is needed to rescue the US economy and if this plan may work? According to Ms. Reinhart, who has studies the history of financial crises around the world, suggest that the government need to act quickly. She states that ‘the longer crises last, the bigger the bailout’.
It is hard to raise this much-needed money. According to Gus Faucher, the money will come back coming from borrowing money from other countries through selling of bonds overseas. A question if the whole plan will work is also a concern to many. Either way we do not have other choices and actions needs to be taken. What we can hope for is our economy will be brought back in shape if not better than before .As of now the Bush administration and the president –elect Obama’s administration is working their best to confirm that.
The US government is spending large amounts of money to restore the economy of US. 770billion dollar is on top of 152billion in tax cuts according to Kent Klein research on voice of America. They have spent large amounts to rescue mortgage lenders Fannie mae and Freddie Mac, the huge insurance company AIG. By removing uncertainty on impending mortgage related losses, a way is paved for the banks to keep lending. More companies have also come out to ask for assistance so they are included in this recovery plan. US citizens are then left to wonder if there Tax will go to these people without themselves seeing how they benefit from this plan directly. The president –elect Barack Obama, economy administration is also proposing stimulating packages estimated to be $300 Billion. It looks like many packages will be coming up and we are not yet sure how much is needed to rescue the US economy and if this plan may work? According to Ms. Reinhart, who has studies the history of financial crises around the world, suggest that the government need to act quickly. She states that ‘the longer crises last, the bigger the bailout’.
It is hard to raise this much-needed money. According to Gus Faucher, the money will come back coming from borrowing money from other countries through selling of bonds overseas. A question if the whole plan will work is also a concern to many. Either way we do not have other choices and actions needs to be taken. What we can hope for is our economy will be brought back in shape if not better than before .As of now the Bush administration and the president –elect Obama’s administration is working their best to confirm that.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Finally prayers that had long being awaited for were aswered when Obama was pronounces the president elect on Nov 4th 2008.History has been made as Obama is pronounced the first black president of America.this goes to Answer Yohannes blog question; does race matter?
I supposrt him when he says that it was uncertain if people were going to vote for Obama or not purely on race or what he claimed to deliver to the American people.Change was surely witnessed when he won the election proving that race,which had been a long time strungle was not an issue anymore.He got many votes from different people around the states who did not care much about his colour skin but what he truly had.This opens up a way for anyone to do and to be anyone he or she wants to without the dividing line of race,religion,gender,and class.For sure a new door has been opened and this awaited day that our black ancestors had been waiting for has reached.we surely did, we surely can and surely will go somewhere.
I supposrt him when he says that it was uncertain if people were going to vote for Obama or not purely on race or what he claimed to deliver to the American people.Change was surely witnessed when he won the election proving that race,which had been a long time strungle was not an issue anymore.He got many votes from different people around the states who did not care much about his colour skin but what he truly had.This opens up a way for anyone to do and to be anyone he or she wants to without the dividing line of race,religion,gender,and class.For sure a new door has been opened and this awaited day that our black ancestors had been waiting for has reached.we surely did, we surely can and surely will go somewhere.
Monday, November 3, 2008
US EConomy
US economy is a very touching issue to all. If anything, it affects everyone directly and indirectly. Following the great depression of 1930’s, recession was seen as the greatest economic threat. This is a period where slow economic growth and high unemployment is experienced. To strengthen the economy the government used to spend heavily on itself or cutting taxes to encourage consumers to spend more hence foster rapid growth in money supply. Strong fear of inflation in 1970’s led to government to concentrate more on inflation than recession. They began to limit spending, there were no tax cuts and there was increasing growth in money supply.
It is no doubt that some past experiences on the economy have taught the economist what to avoid in future like the mistakes of the great depression, so we don’t go back to the same crisis. We are currently in an economic crisis numbered by many mistakes. Fortunately or unfortunately, we are heading to the polls as the election approaches in just few days. We carry deep fears about the economy and how the next elected president will further us away from this crisis. We have to choice wisely bearing in mind the warnings about the potential fallout of Obama and McCain presidency each with their different policies on how to save the economy.
Economy is done under certain policies. In 1960 the government used the fiscal policy, which they seemingly had great faith on. This is influencing the economy by manipulating the government revenues. The downside was: high inflation, high government deficit and high unemployment, which weakened the faith on this policy. It was then that the monetary policy became prominently used.
The two candidates have their policies, but can we be sure that the economy will be safely returned to normal and even improved. Experts say the candidates tax plan won’t narrow the income gap and don’t have high priorities on budget deficit and other long-term issues. Barack Obama is accused of being a socialist while McCain allegedly want to further enrich the rich. McCain has attacked Obama that he wants to ‘spread the wealth’ by raising taxes on high income Americans though he himself has not publicly rejected the progressive tax system requiring the wealthy to pay a larger share than the middle and lower class. On the other hand, obama has not publicly rejected Reagan’s economic doctrine that he attacks McCain for where the high taxes ultimately affect the middle class. Either way the American voters have a great deal of risk on who they want to be the next president of America. We can only hope for the best.
It is no doubt that some past experiences on the economy have taught the economist what to avoid in future like the mistakes of the great depression, so we don’t go back to the same crisis. We are currently in an economic crisis numbered by many mistakes. Fortunately or unfortunately, we are heading to the polls as the election approaches in just few days. We carry deep fears about the economy and how the next elected president will further us away from this crisis. We have to choice wisely bearing in mind the warnings about the potential fallout of Obama and McCain presidency each with their different policies on how to save the economy.
Economy is done under certain policies. In 1960 the government used the fiscal policy, which they seemingly had great faith on. This is influencing the economy by manipulating the government revenues. The downside was: high inflation, high government deficit and high unemployment, which weakened the faith on this policy. It was then that the monetary policy became prominently used.
The two candidates have their policies, but can we be sure that the economy will be safely returned to normal and even improved. Experts say the candidates tax plan won’t narrow the income gap and don’t have high priorities on budget deficit and other long-term issues. Barack Obama is accused of being a socialist while McCain allegedly want to further enrich the rich. McCain has attacked Obama that he wants to ‘spread the wealth’ by raising taxes on high income Americans though he himself has not publicly rejected the progressive tax system requiring the wealthy to pay a larger share than the middle and lower class. On the other hand, obama has not publicly rejected Reagan’s economic doctrine that he attacks McCain for where the high taxes ultimately affect the middle class. Either way the American voters have a great deal of risk on who they want to be the next president of America. We can only hope for the best.
Friday, October 17, 2008
McCain on the road?
One of the blogs that I found interesting was from the smirking chimps. RJ Eskow writer of this article on claims that McCain’s negative campaign is damaging his chances and his final debate took him even more negative. Wonders what his strategy is. He tries to reach out to both McCain and Obama’s supporters.
The author makes interesting points that easily win his audience. He shows his credibility by use of certain examples and evidences; his presentation of facts and the way he presents his work .He also is able to support his claim by use of humor and other mannerisms.
He supports his claim that McCain is becoming more negative in his campaigns. He agrees that He may have seemed to improve in the third debate by being lively and didn’t wander aimlessly but the truth is, according to Americans, he’s not capable of fixing the economy. The debate further ‘ convinced them that... they don't like him, either. Whaddya expect? They told him through the polls that they don't like the meanness -- and in response he got meaner.’
The author also gets his support from other conservatives who believe that McCain is going the wrong direction. He says, “so many responsible conservatives like George F. Will (and less responsible ones, too) are condemning this campaign.” They say they had come along way to restore respectability but it could easily go back to the way it was.
The use of coded language by McCain when addressing the crowd doesn’t help his campaign as the author points it out. He uses “an activist catch-phrase ("schooling as THE civil rights issue") and mock women's health” referring it as ‘extreme pro-abortion position.’ This draws in negativity from the people on both side of school choice and reproductive rights issues.
The author then tries to explain why McCain could be acting like this. He implies he might be having other agendas in mind and that is ‘Paint Obama as an extremist, a terrorist plant. Stir up hatred. Lay the groundwork for arguing that the election was stolen.’
Use of humor is seen in the authors article .One instance is, ‘the Palinites have taken over the campaign, forcing McCain to do their bidding. ("Lassie, go tell Mom and Dad! The bad people have taken Grandpa!”) The use of this certainly draws the readers to the article.
I believe the author has presented his work well by supporting his claims showing he is credible. He also presents his work that attracts the readers and creates a good argument.
The author makes interesting points that easily win his audience. He shows his credibility by use of certain examples and evidences; his presentation of facts and the way he presents his work .He also is able to support his claim by use of humor and other mannerisms.
He supports his claim that McCain is becoming more negative in his campaigns. He agrees that He may have seemed to improve in the third debate by being lively and didn’t wander aimlessly but the truth is, according to Americans, he’s not capable of fixing the economy. The debate further ‘ convinced them that... they don't like him, either. Whaddya expect? They told him through the polls that they don't like the meanness -- and in response he got meaner.’
The author also gets his support from other conservatives who believe that McCain is going the wrong direction. He says, “so many responsible conservatives like George F. Will (and less responsible ones, too) are condemning this campaign.” They say they had come along way to restore respectability but it could easily go back to the way it was.
The use of coded language by McCain when addressing the crowd doesn’t help his campaign as the author points it out. He uses “an activist catch-phrase ("schooling as THE civil rights issue") and mock women's health” referring it as ‘extreme pro-abortion position.’ This draws in negativity from the people on both side of school choice and reproductive rights issues.
The author then tries to explain why McCain could be acting like this. He implies he might be having other agendas in mind and that is ‘Paint Obama as an extremist, a terrorist plant. Stir up hatred. Lay the groundwork for arguing that the election was stolen.’
Use of humor is seen in the authors article .One instance is, ‘the Palinites have taken over the campaign, forcing McCain to do their bidding. ("Lassie, go tell Mom and Dad! The bad people have taken Grandpa!”) The use of this certainly draws the readers to the article.
I believe the author has presented his work well by supporting his claims showing he is credible. He also presents his work that attracts the readers and creates a good argument.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Palin Meets Test
With the issues going on the bailout and the upcoming debate between senator Sarah palin and Joseph Biden it was surely a busy week. Now that the debate took place people have their own opinion on how each performed. Peter Baker writes an article about the debate. He claims that Sarah Palin got out of the debate luckily unscathed. According to his article Palin meets test, from Newyork times he describes the debate as a test, which Senate Palin was able to put up well as less expected. He compares it to the previous interviews she had done. He uses evidences and certain facts and figures to prove. This goes ahead to show his credibility.
Peter Baker first mentions was what palin was going up against. That is Senator Joseph Biden, ‘who has been debating on the floor of the United States Senate for the past 36 years.’ This is unlike Palin. He mentioned that she never stumbled in response to some questions even though she didn’t have ‘breakthrough moments.’
The author also mentions how Palin kept her image whom her fans. This was the “folksy hockey mum.” He gives certain instances to support this. With the Phrases “like ‘darn right,’ ‘doggone it,’ ‘you betcha’ and ‘God bless her.’ The author says that Palin was able to comfortable talk about domestic issues and besides some instances where Biden was able to rise up; she was aggressive and kept going.
Well the author was able to show his credibility by sharing both sides of the story and the some few down falls for Palin. He mentioned that at one point she ‘confused the name of the newly confirmed commander of U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, calling him McClellan.’ Although this happened Palin was probably able to manage and stay focused at the debate. This goes on to support the author’s claim that Sarah palin had a great test that she managed to emerge largely unscathed.
Peter Baker first mentions was what palin was going up against. That is Senator Joseph Biden, ‘who has been debating on the floor of the United States Senate for the past 36 years.’ This is unlike Palin. He mentioned that she never stumbled in response to some questions even though she didn’t have ‘breakthrough moments.’
The author also mentions how Palin kept her image whom her fans. This was the “folksy hockey mum.” He gives certain instances to support this. With the Phrases “like ‘darn right,’ ‘doggone it,’ ‘you betcha’ and ‘God bless her.’ The author says that Palin was able to comfortable talk about domestic issues and besides some instances where Biden was able to rise up; she was aggressive and kept going.
Well the author was able to show his credibility by sharing both sides of the story and the some few down falls for Palin. He mentioned that at one point she ‘confused the name of the newly confirmed commander of U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, calling him McClellan.’ Although this happened Palin was probably able to manage and stay focused at the debate. This goes on to support the author’s claim that Sarah palin had a great test that she managed to emerge largely unscathed.
Friday, September 19, 2008
DOES IT MEAN WE CAN'T VOTE?
One of our given rights is the right to vote. We may personally decide to vote or not to, but we know we have that right. What happens if this right is taken away? Especially taken away by an individual? Well I had a chance to come across an articles from the Austin American statesman
The articles talks about libertarian presidential nominee Bob Barr who wants to sue both republican John McCain and Democrat Obama.he seek to remove them from the ballot in Texas. Crazy! Yes it does sound crazy. The reason to this action is that he claims both candidate failed to file their ballot paper before the deadline, which was 70 days before the main presidential election. He also says that both did not met the requirement of Texas law that both candidate to submit a "written certification" of their nomination before the deadline. The lawsuit was filed at the state's supreme court in Austin, states.
This raises an alarm. What does this mean? As i first read this, i thought to myself if this means that the Texans cannot participate in the elections since there are no ballot papers for the people we eagerly waiting to vote for. Does this take away our right to vote? well lucky for us Ashley Burton, a spokesperson for the Texas Secretary of State's office, responded that Both parties had made their filings with their office and other supplimented them and they will be in the ballots.
If it had to go the other way i think our right to vote wiould have been violeted.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
