Fighting the Wrong War

After reading a classmate's blog, I was interested in the idea that it is more pertinent for the United States to be less interested in Middle Eastern democracy, and more interested in things that are happening on our home front. I agree that the tension on the border is something that deserves more attention and resources, and it is especially critical for American border states. Unfortunately, I do not see a change in the near future because so many resources and funding have been dedicated to the "War on Terror," and to abandon it too quickly would aggravate many people. Along with that, there is a lot of hatred for the United States in the Middle East, and our presence there is important to keep a bit of pressure on insurgent groups. I'm not sure that we could abandon operations overseas, but I certainly agree that the "War on Drugs" and border control deserve a lot more attention that either is currently being given.

Taxation With Representation

The tax debate in the Senate has become an extremely heated argument, and is apparently taking a shift into name-calling and finger pointing. I was listening to the radio the other day, and heard some one say that the Democrats are wanting to steal money from the rich because rich people don't deserve to have as much money as they earn. It has to be understood that, in general, the Republican party is mostly comprised of wealthy, upper-middle to upper-class people. On the other side of the table, the Democrats are traditionally, middle to lower-class citizens, and a good portion are people who belong to minority groups (including race, sexual orientation, and idealisms). That said, with the Republicans pushing for tax breaks for people who have a net salary of over $250,000 is ridiculous. I'm not saying that these people didn't rightfully earn their money, but I will say that they have plenty to ante up to pay taxes. The United States, obviously, isn't a Communist or Socialist nation, but I believe that with the economic downfall and monetary deficit, those that can afford to pay a bit more should. It makes no sense to me to put more pressure on families that are struggling to make ends meet while there are multi millioniares driving around in Aston Martins and Ferraris complaining about paying "x" amount of tax dollars. Sorry, but I'd be happy to let Oprah and Donald Trump cough up some extra cash if it gives a chance of our country improving its economy.

Here's a quote from Politico that sums up my argument pretty well:

“All those people out there in the tea party who are angry about the economics of Washington, they really need to look at this, pull back the curtain and realize that you’ve got a Republican Party that is not worried about people in the tea party,” she said. “They’re worried about people who can’t decide which home to go to over the Christmas holidays."


Web Source Citation:
Brown, Carrie Budoff. "Robert Menendez Compares GOP to Terrorists on Tax Talks."
     www.Politico.com. N.p., 3 Dec. 2010. Web. 3 Dec. 2010.
     <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/45934.html>.

Has Anyone Seen My Doodlepad?

Being that The House of Representatives is comprised of 435 individuals who are elected into office to represent the citizens of the United States, it would seem that the people who elected these government officials would have their voices heard and reflected in Washington D.C. It seems however, that this is not the case. Through "gerrymandering," district lines that determine who the districts will include, and therefore, who is able to vote for which candidates. In my opinion, this practice is absurd. Take for example, what we talked about in class: the city of Austin is divided into a gnarled and mangled mess that allows the demographics of Democrats to lose their voice against the Republicans. Legislators play with the map like it's a board game or an Etch-a-Sketch, to come up with what most people should readily recognize as a joke. On the other hand, even if we do recognize the ridiculous nature of the scheme, there is nothing we can do about it as long as the Republican Party has control over the state of Texas. The scary thing is, with the option to screw around with district lines, there is very little chance for change.

Unfortunately, this isn’t a problem in the state of Texas alone, but all across the country. Since I lean pretty fervently towards the Democratic Party, the states that play with the lines to support my party don’t bother me quite so much. Weird, huh? I’d like to say that that was a joke, but it’s not. Most people across the country have exactly the same train of thought. Republicans in Texas probably would like things to keep just the way they are, and Democrats in California most likely aren’t looking to favor their Republican citizens. It would seem that Madison’s idea of stability and longevity is working out pretty well – things are staying the same for a long time.

Pigs in a Blanket

In a classmate's blog "Bacon Anyone?," I thought that the article was a great explanation of what our elected officials are doing to help out Americans. Funny thing is - they're not. They're helping out "Austinites," "San Antonians," and "Houstonians." I'm curious about why the country spending billions of dollars on things that don't practically matter, and not enough on debt, inflation, or what not. Hey, another stimulus?! I'm in... I agree with Blake that there is far too much expenditures going towards building bridges to nowhere, and rural road widenings rather than federal disaster aid, and things that truly matter to people.

Write Wing?

In Dave Lindorff’s article “Don’t Act, Don’t Lead: Obama Stiffs Gays in the Military Yet Again,” the author indulges into the world of gay rights and activism as well as the political query regarding whether or not President Barack Obama is working towards honest policy or trying to be people friendly. When the question coming to whether or not Obama is “stiffing the gays,” I’d say he isn’t. It’s not Obama or his singular position that is promoting or demoting gay rights and support that is directly affecting the “don’t ask, don’t tell” legislature. In my opinion, it is the American public as a majority. Enter stage: gay rights marriage, gay rights to adopt children, gay families being able to be artificially inseminated, and on goes the list. Sad thing is, there is more active legislative action on the idea of whether or not homosexual men and women are apt and capable – God forbid brave and courageous enough- to serve and protect our country, rights and freedom. I agree with Lindorff’s outrage that the simplicity of President Obama’s attempts for short term compromise, but to me it fails him in the right that millions of Americans hoped him to make his promised change that we unfortunately aren’t seeing in the horizon.

Dave Lindorff’s blog, being leaned towards the left winged Democrats, surely doesn’t seem so confident in our President. He is undoubtedly trying to reach like-minded left wingers, but his - implicit – but halfhearted- insults of the issue at hand isn’t as strong as it should have come across. This may pique the interest of some gay activists passing through, but in my opinion, Mr. Lindorff missed the boat in a substantial argument that could have concreted an amazing structure of a debate.

That’s my PoV

 

And my source:

Lindorff, Dave. Weblog post. Don’t Act, Don’t Lead: Obama Stiffs Gays in the
     Military Yet Again. Can This Be Happening, 14 Oct. 2010. Web. 15 Oct. 2010.
     <http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/252>.

Ruth Marcus on Stephen Colbert's Congressional Appearance

When I first saw the title for the Washington Post opinion article "Stephen Colbert becomes another circus of Congress's making," I assumed it was going to be some Republican with a hot head complaining about Colbert's humor. After I started reading the article, I was surprised to see that Colbert was invited to testify in front of Congress regarding immigration issues. Of all people I'd invite if I were having a party, it surely wouldn't be one that was notorious for picking on and making a mockery of my friends and myself. But maybe that's just me...

Ruth Marcus writes about what she seems to think are mistakes made by Congress of having celebrities come in to testify, or simply to peak the interest of the Representatives on various issues. She gives a few other examples of these instances, and one that I found particularly hilarious was Elmo from Sesame Street coming in to talk about music education. She makes a valid point that although bringing in celebrities in hopes of piquing interest and raising ratings or coverage, it doesn't do much good for political interests in the end.

Through subtlety and lingering hints throughout the article, it is obvious to me that Ruth Marcus is no rookie in the game of politics, and probably wrote it in hopes of reaching not only the common public, but probably some of the members of Congress as well. If things in our government are going to change for the better, then inviting a guest speaker in that you know is going to be overly satirical and obnoxious for the setting, probably isn't going to help. From the article, the author reports Colbert saying "Maybe this ag jobs bill would help, I don't know. Like most members of Congress, I haven't read it." Although this is funny, I’d agree with Ruth that this kind of presentation and mockery probably doesn’t need to be included in our law making process.

Source:
Marcus, Ruth. "Stephen Colbert becomes another circus of Congress's making."
     Editorial. The Washington Post 29 Sept. 2010: n. pag. The Washington Post.
     Web. 30 Sept. 2010. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/
     article/2010/09/28/AR2010092804802.html?nav=hcmoduletmv>.

Many U.S. States are Palms Up for Internet Sales Tax Dollars

In an article on MSNBC's website, I read that many states are cracking down on collecting tax dollars on items sold on the internet. Many adults regularly purchase items online, and to me, it's always been sort of an extra 8% discount on top of what online retailers offer versus local retail stores. I’ve always been under the impression that if you are purchasing something from across state lines, then sales tax is not applicable. Apparently, that’s not the case. The article stated that if the retailer doesn’t add the tax onto the transaction, then the consumer is responsible for filing a form with the revenue office and paying the percentage on top of the transaction amount. How likely would we really be to buck up and pay that extra 8+%? Not very. That is unless the crackdown issues more strict mandates or punishments for nonpayment.
This article is worth reading if you too are confused about the sales tax payment requirements, or if you would like to find out how to report your purchases and pay up.

Source:
Johnson, Alex. "States working harder to collect online sales tax."
     www.msnbc.com. N.p., 17 Sept. 2010. Web. 30 Sept. 2010.
     <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39159604/ns/business-personal_finance/>.