The evironment

I agree with most of what you say. The evironment is very important and we need to take care of it in order to sustain human life. I do think the government needs to do more to help the evironment be passing laws to cut gas dependence.
http://atxfog.blogspot.com/2007/11/environment-and-future.html

Who wins in 2008? Who cares!

As the next presidential election comes up in 2008, I find myself wondering if whoever I vote for truly matters. Does it really matter to the average American if we elect Clinton, Obama, or Giuliani? Who among us can honestly say that they have it bad in America right now or in the past? Would they rather be somewhere else?

What I am trying to say is to the average American, their life would change very little due to what president is elected now. Natural disasters and terrorist attacks will happen regardless of who is president. The president can not lower taxes; simple economics will show that the country probley could use more tax dollars, or at the very least tax dollars more wisely spent. The country has problems, but it is up Congress to help fix the problems.

In conclusion, I honestly fell that whoever wins the presidency will do the best job they can, and will truly try to help and lead the American people. It would probley help if a Democrat gets elected, since that is the majority in Congress right now. It really doesn’t matter which democrat as long as he or she can win the mind and heart of Congress. Then, maybe we can finally get something done around here.

How fast is too fast for capital punishment

I agree with you about the death penalty, but I do see flaws in our justice system that faster executions would kill people that should not be put to death for their crimes due incompetent legal counsel, police or prosecutors who suppressed evidence and judges who gave jurors the wrong instructions.

According to wikipedia, “67% of capital convictions are eventually overturned; seven percent of those whose sentences were overturned were acquitted. Ten percent were retried and re-sentenced to death. The remainders typically end up with lesser sentences, up to and including life imprisonment”.

In conclusion, I disagree with your idea of faster executions. I believe having a death penalty with an appeals process is a good thing. Sometimes the courts get it wrong. I also do not agree with one of your facts, “Many murders are premeditated.” All murders must be premeditated, it they are not premeditated they are murder and are not punishable by death. I again agree with your last statement that, “There would be no words that can explain the loss of your loved one”. I would not want a person who was incorrectly convicted of murder of my loved one to be executed.

http://bnationalreport.blogspot.com/2007/10/death-upon-texas.html

How the media has ruined Halloween.

In my government class today my teacher asked the class what we were afraid of when trick-or-treating these days. When I was younger I remember that the biggest fear on trick-or-treating was the legendary razor blade in an apple. But now the biggest fear is a sex offender will abduct you while trick-or-treating. I find it interesting how the media has changed the under lying of fear on Halloween from death to sexual assault.

If you watch the news around Halloween time you see nothing but stories about what is being done about sex offenders during Halloween. Sex offenders are not allowed to give out candy or leave their porch lights on; for fear that the sex offender will abduct your children. It seems the media has found a new Freddy or Jason. But this villain is very real, according to the media, and is sitting at home just waiting for your child to ring the bell. I find this whole over hyping of the danger of sex offenders on Halloween ludicrous.

Now don’t get me wrong, I think sex offenders are dangerous. But they are not abducting children by the bus load on Halloween. The media, in my opinion, is no longer concerned with the idea of razor blades in apples, when they can play up the danger of sex offenders on Halloween. Ten years ago there wasn’t this outcry about the danger of sex offenders on Halloween. Do we honestly think they all just sprung up in the last ten years? To me it just seems like another tactic by the media to over hype a story and to try to feed on the fears of the American people.

In conclusion, sex abuse and sex offenders are what sell these days. From all the CSI special victims this and that, to news shows that set up potential child abusers, such as, “To catch a Predator”. America seems fascinated with sex offenders, and the media will continue to play upon this fascination. Maybe it is just me, but when I young I was more afraid of getting a razor in apple, then getting attacked by a sex offender. And maybe that wasn’t such a bad thing.

Giuliani the savor of New York

In the New York Times article, "Giuliani sells New York as the town he tamed" by Adam Nagourney, Nagourney shows that Giuliani is using his success as mayor of New York City as a springboard to his presidency. According to Nagourney, Giuliani is not using 9/11 as much for his campaign as of late. Instead, Giuliani is trying to show voters all the good he did for New York City before 9/11. New York had a horrible reputation in the early 1990's as a crime ridden town with no hope in site. Giuliani is hopeful voters will look at his whole resume instead of what he did during and after 9/11.

I think Giuliani is doing the right thing in trying to show he was an effective leader before and after 9/11. Giuliani is quoted, “I got elected and re-elected honestly not because the people of New York City agreed with my ideas,” “They didn’t. They agreed with my results. ” This statement shows that Giuliani was able to overcome a mostly liberal city and still get elected, by promising to get things done. As Giuliani stated, not everyone agreed with his ideas, but were pleased with his results.

In my opinion Giuliani is using his experience in a major city that dealt with drugs, welfare, murders, and prostitution to demonstrate he can handle the work load of a president. Giuliani helped New York recover from its horrible image of the early 1990s. Giuliani was also instrumental in his leadership after 9/11, which most Americans remember him as a shinning light in darkness.

In conclusion, the article is helpful in outlining Giuliani's experience as a public official. Not only after the tragic events of 9/11, but also as a mayor who was able to pull New York out of its image of a crime ridden city. A man who was able to come up with tough answers to tough questions. A man who every American can get behind, because he gets results.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/us/politics/15giuliani.html?pagewanted=2&ref=politics

Tase him, Bro, Blog Stage #3

In the article, “Tase him, Bro” conservative author Ann Coulter takes shots at liberals in this country by stating that “Democrats should run Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for president. He's more coherent than Dennis Kucinich, he dresses like their base, he's more macho than John Edwards, and he's willing to show up at a forum where he might get one hostile question -- unlike the current Democratic candidates for president who won't debate on Fox News Channel.” Coulter seems to take delight in turning the recent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaking event at Columbia University into a “free speech” fiasco between liberals and conservatives.
Coulter displays her displeasure with Columbia president Lee Bollinger’s statement of “Columbia's [has a] long-standing tradition of serving as a major forum for robust debate” defense of having President Ahmadinejad speak at the University. In this article Coulter attacks Bollinger numerous times. Coulter uses some examples of universities “selective” free speech by stating, “At Syracuse University last year, when liberal hecklers tried to shut down a speech by a popular conservative author of (almost!) six books, College Republicans began to remove the hecklers. But Dean of Students Roy Baker blocked them from removing students disrupting the speech on the grounds that removing students screaming during a speech would violate the hecklers' "free speech." They had a "free speech" right to prevent anyone from hearing a conservative's free speech” and “When Minutemen leader Jim Gilchrist and his black colleague Marvin Stewart were invited by the College Republicans to speak at Columbia last year, the tolerant, free-speech-loving Columbia students violently attacked them, shutting down the speech.” Coulter fells that liberal universities only want to have speakers who share their liberal point of view. This in her opinion is dangerous and UnAmerican. Coulter feels that every speaker should be given a forum like President Ahmadinejad received.
In conclusion, Ann Coulter is very passionate and upset on the way liberals treat opposing view points. At the end of the article, Coulter uses the following quote: “Tolerance of opposing views means we have to listen to their anti-American views, but they don't have to hear our pro-American views.” Coulter thinks that liberals will not listen to any “free speech” they feel doesn’t agrees with their liberal views.

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

Antiwar activists tatics backfired

"Who bears blame for anti-war failures?," by Dan Gerstein outlines the failing tactics of the antiwar movement. In this article, Dan Gerstein argues that the attempting bullying of the antiwar activists to "turn up the heat on moderate Republicans and separate them from the president" has failed. According to Mr. Gerstein the tactic of separating moderate Republicans from Bush by running more hostile ads against Republicans up for reelection in 2008 failed and alienate the moderate Republicans and pushed them closer to the president. I found this article interesting because it shows that both sides of the war (anti and pro) need to come to a sensible solution to the war and bullying tactics never work.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1899106/posts