As many of you know, on Thursday the Vice Presidential candidates had the opportunity to strut their stuff at the debate in Kentucky. The candidates debated nine different issues throughout the heated 90 minute discussion.
The debate started with a current hot issue, the conflict in Libya. They opened debating rumored intelligence failures in the United States and how it affected the security of the ambassadors in Libya. Biden began this section of the debate by saying that the people behind these attacks will be apprehended and brought to justice. He then continued saying that the US government will correct the lapses made with intelligence gathering. Biden then said that since the President's most important job is protecting the nation and its people making the modification of errors made by the government the administration's utmost concern. Biden then assured the people that Obama has lead with a steady hand and with a clear vision and will continue to work hard internationally if reelected.
Ryan echoed Biden saying that the Romney team mourns the loss that has resulted in Libya. However, Ryan argued that the Obama administration addressed the Libya conflict too late, waiting two weeks after it happened before addressing the outraged public. Ryan promoted having Marine security guard ambassadors in volatile countries where terrorist threats are evident. Ryan then stated that he believed the conflicts present in the Gaza Strip and Libya symbolize Obama's foreign policy failures and relations crumbling. Ryan said that the United States needs to stand up for the values of America and not allow foreign nations to infringe upon the rights of their citizens. He used this logic to assure the audience that Romney was opposed to cutting the defense budget if he were to take office.
Ryan was then asked if he thought Americans should apologize for offensive acts, like burning the Koran in Afghanistan. This question was born out of the fact that Romney wrote a book called No Apology: The Case for American Greatness, in which he writes that the US Army should be expanded to 100,000 Army soldiers and Marines with updated Nuclear weapons and defense systems. With this knowledge, Ryan said that we should apologize for the poor behavior of some of the soldiers in the Middle East who acted offensively, but that we should not apologize for the American values that we live by and uphold.
The debate then continued on to the issue of Iran. Both Ryan and Biden said that they will prevent Iran from becoming owner of nuclear weapons no matter what, but the debate focused on the "how" they would ensure this promise. Ryan said the he and Romney had been fighting for sanctions to use military force in Iran since 2007, for Ryan, and 2009, for Romney. The administration however, according to Ryan, has opposed them every step of the way. Because of this Ryan says that Iran is now 4 years closer to owning a nuclear weapon. It was also pointed out by Ryan, that Congress was able to overrule the administration, thanks to bipartisan efforts, to get needed sanctions. Ryan then asserted that the only way to a peaceful end is if the leaders of Iran change their minds but that this will not occur because the current administration lacks credibility on the issue. Ryan said that Romney would bring credibility to the issue in order to ensure that this conflict will end peacefully. However, Ryan looked a little foolish when asked if he had a plan that would end the Iran conflict by the spring because he said that timelines are debatable and that in reality it would probably take longer for Iran to amass weapons. In defense, Ryan said that a possible arms race in the Middle East would be worse than war because an arms race would spread weapons throughout the region filled with terrorist organizations.
Biden, on the other hand, says that sanctions are crippling for world relations. He assured the viewing public that the US intelligence agencies have evidence that Iran is still a long way away from nuclear capabilities. Biden then reinforced his statements by saying that the world is united against Iran no matter what. However, Biden reiterated that war is always the last option for the Obama administration.
From the Iran issue the debate continued to the economy and job creation. The unemployment rate just fell below 8% for the first time in 43 months. Because of this news, the question posed to the VP candidates was if they thought it was possible to get unemployment to under 6% and how long it would take them to do so. Biden began this section by admitting that he did not know how long it would take to get unemployment under 6%. Biden did assure the viewing public that he and Obama would try to decrease the tax burden of the Middle class. During this section of the debate, Biden focused mostly on how both Romney and Ryan had made comments about the American public not taking responsibility for their lives. Romney said that 47% of Americans did not while Ryan said that 30% of Americans are takers. Because of these comments, Biden said that both Romney and Ryan need to take responsibility for their actions themselves.
Ryan pointed out how the United States was going in the wrong direction economically right now and that if we continue this trend, we will limp into a larger recession. After saying this, Ryan referenced Romney's five point economic rescue plan. With this plan, the United States will (1) become energy independent, (2) open trade in Latin American and China, (3) make sure people have good skills and better ranked schools, (4) get a balanced budget, and (5) champion small businesses to create jobs to correct the economy. The ultimate goal of this plan is to drop unemployment below 6% and get the economy growing creating new jobs.
The debate then took a turn to Medicare and Social Security. The question posed was whether or not both of these programs would be changed in order to survive. Ryan said that both of these programs would need to be reformed for the younger generations (54 years and younger). Ryan said that, if elected, Romney will keep the disassociation of these programs from happening by giving younger people a guaranteed coverage option when they become eligible. This option will subsidize premiums for the supported peoples. This would ensure that the lower class of Americans would be guaranteed total coverage. This plan also gives the insurance choice to the citizen instead of the state, as Obamacare would do.
Biden supported Obamacare, saying that it stopped the overpayment of insurance companies. He also pointed out that Obamacare was supported by known retirement organizations, like the AARP. Biden said that Obamacare would extend the life of Medicare to 2024, giving seniors more benefits by not privatizing social security.
The next issue tackled was taxes. A simple question of who would pay more, or less, was asked. Biden upheld Obama's stance saying that Middle class will pay less, while people making $1 million or more will pay more. Biden also said that under Obama, Bush tax cuts for the wealthy would be allowed to expire, while the tax cuts for Middle class would be extended permanently. Biden then said that the Romney/Ryan promise of 20% tax cut promise could only work if privileges for the Middle class were cut, leaving the Middle class without programs like Medicare, social security, and other entitlement programs.
Ryan supported Romney's economic ideas, saying that the economy must be allowed to grow, creating more jobs. Ryan then asserted that there are not enough rich people and small businesses to tax in order to pay for Obama's spending. For this reason, Ryan said that tax reform was needed. Lower tax rates across the board were promised as well as closing loopholes for the higher class to make sure that the deficit is not raised. Ryan also promised that taxes on the Middle class would not be raised. However, when asked how the 20% tax cut was possible, Ryan was able to give no specific plans. He just said that bipartisan agreements and efforts would be needed based on the current framework had.
When asked if they would increase the defense budget, both candidates gave wildly different answers. Ryan said that neither he, nor Romney, would cut the military like Obama plans to do. He said that if the military is cut, then images of a weak America are invited. Biden said that Obama does not wish to cut the military, but rather that the military desires a smaller, leaner force which are more specialized in their training.
With the debate on the military topic, the debate focused on the issue of Afghanistan. Since we began our military effort, America has lost 2000 troops, reached recruiting goals for Afghanistan forces, and degraded Al-Qaeda. Because of this, the candidates were asked why American should not pull its forces out now. They were asked to explain what more could be done by America in Afghanistan. Ryan answered first by saying that we do not want to loose the gains we have gotten in the Middle East. America does not want the Taliban to come back into Afghanistan the second we leave and gain power. Ryan and Romney both, however, agree with the 2014 plan that Obama has right now for the removal of American forces. Its just that they do not want to see Afghanistan become a launching point for more terrorism after America pulls out. Ryan said that Obama's foreign policy is unraveling as issues continue to remain unsolved in the Middle East. Ryan thinks that the timeline idea is unwise for America because it lessens foreign countries confidence in the US allowing terrorists to plan to revisit the occupied countries the moment American forces are gone.
Biden, however, pointed out how America completed what they wanted to in the Middle East. He said that Americans who were killed have been avenged, Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein have been overthrown, and Afghan forces have been trained and stationed. Because of this, Biden says that the US will pull out in 2014, "Period." Biden said that once we pull out $800 billion will be saved from our budget. He said that it is now Afghanistan's turn to lead and maintain their nation and government. He said that the only way the Middle East (Afghanistan and Iraq) will step up is if we give them a timeline and leaving date, otherwise they will continue to let the US do the work.
From here, the debate moved onto the issue of the civil war in Syria. Since the beginning of this conflict, an estimate 25,000-30,000 people have been killed. It was asked why the same logic used with respect to Libya does not apply to Syria. Biden spoke first, saying that because it is a different country, in a different region, no troops could be sent because it was not in the national interest. The impacts of possible regional war were too great. However, Biden assured the American public that the US government is working with the Turks and other countries of that region to ensure that when Assad leaves, there will be a new, stable government to take its place. America has also been sending over humanitarian and medical aid to the free forces within Syria. They will also ensure that Al-Qaeda will not take over. Biden did say that no troops will be sent to Syria because the last thing America needs is another conflict involvement in the Middle East.
Ryan says that Romney and him are not proposing send troops to Syria, they just would not have "outsourced" their decision to the United Nations. Ryan said that when Obama outsourced foreign policy decisions to the UN, he gave Putin veto power over the actions of the United States and that Romney would not have done that. When asked what he and Romney would do if Assad did not fall, Ryan said that they agree with Obama about trying to contain WMD spread in the Middle East and would send troops, if necessary, to do this. However, Ryan reiterated that he would have changed Obama's initial reaction, responding sooner that Obama had to the Syrian news. He said that intervention has to be in the interest of strategic national security for the US, with concern to our troops.
Ryan and Biden were then asked what role their Catholic views play with concern to the issue of abortion. Ryan began by saying that his faith informs him on everything in life. He then said that the reason he is Pro-Life is because of science and reason, not simply his faith. He believes that life begins at conception, and that the policy of Romney will be opposed to abortion with exception in the case of rape, incest, and the life of the mother.
Biden began by saying that his religion defines who he is as a person. He said it impacts his social doctrine, taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves. Biden said he accepts the Church's position on abortion as an element of his personal life, but refuses to impose it on others who may have different views and religious beliefs. Biden thinks that abortion is a decision of a woman that should be made between her and her doctor.
Then the VP candidates were asked some more personal questions. The first was whether or not the candidates were embarrassed by the tone of this election, tearing down your opponent whether than building up the country. Biden admitted that there are things that happen in every election he's been a part of that he regrets. But he said that the conviction of the candidate must be looked at in order to make an informed decision.
Ryan, on the other hand, seemed to answer the question by tearing down him opponent. He said that the President has offered "hope and change", but has merely turned the debate into an attack on Romney. Ryan then said that if you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone to run from. Ryan's statement almost seemed to validate the question.
In the end, I still do not see a clear winner. There are still two more Presidential debates to come before voting begins. The only winner I can see right now is Ryan best smile. High five Ryan! It may not win you the election, but it will definitely win over a few girl's hearts.
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Perks of Being a Wallflower reveals the reality of the high school experience
Sometimes I wonder what makes a movie a movie. Is it the cast? Or is it the plot line? Is the director's idea for the movie expressed accurately through the acting and special effects? Does the music used throughout the movie communicate the correct feelings to the audience? Or is a movie a combination of all these elements? Well, I believe I have the answer.
After seeing The Perks of Being a Wallflower yesterday, I realized that a movie is what it is due to how it is perceived by the audience. The cast determines how well the script and the plot is portrayed to the audience. The director's image and idea for the movie determines the emotions and how the content of the movie is presented for the viewers. The music communicates the feelings of the characters to the audience allowing them to be drawn deeper into the movie by feeling what the characters feel. All of this was done to almost perfection in Perks of Being a Wallflower as they portrayed the unseen challenges present in high school life for more kids than I think most people realize.
Everyone has memories of that first day of school when you were terrified about how you were going to fit in or be treated because school seemed to define you as a person. Perks of the Being a Wallflower captures the emotions of this experience by following the main character, Charlie, through his first year of high school from first day to the end of the year. The characters embodied by the cast make the movie relatable to every person. You will be able to identify with the cast and their obstacles instantaneously. You will remember a person like Charlie, Sam, or Patrick connecting you to the plot emotionally. This is possible because of the amazing acting talent featured in Perks of Being a Wallflower. With Logan Lerman as Charlie, Emma Watson as Sam, Ezra Miller as Patrick, and Paul Rudd as Mr. Anderson the script is brought to life from book to screen with such ease that by the end of the movie, you will see yourself in the characters one way or another.
I think this is possible because the director, Stephen Chbosky, is also the author of the book that the movie is based on. The book is awesome, I have already written a review on it, because it touches the reader with the story and the emotions felt by the characters. Since Chbosky directed the movie, an accurate version of the story was portrayed in the movie. It disappoints me when a movie comes out that is based on a book, but does not resemble the book at all. The plot or characters are changed which then changes the whole tone of the movie/book. However, in Perks of Being a Wallflower, this does not occur. The plot is untarnished and the theme stays true from book to movie, a BIG plus for me.
I think the most important part of this movie is the message communicated through the plot, characters, and music. A "wallflower" is a person who sees things and understands them for what they truly are. This is something that I think the world today is lacking. People today go about and see/focus on the superficial surface details of everyday life, not looking any deeper to assess the real problems, or issues, that exist. In Perks though, it is reiterated how at the heart of the issue, there may be problems, but there is also beauty to behold. You just have to look. And as I sat alone in the theater at the end of the movie, I realized, then, how it felt to be infinite.
After seeing The Perks of Being a Wallflower yesterday, I realized that a movie is what it is due to how it is perceived by the audience. The cast determines how well the script and the plot is portrayed to the audience. The director's image and idea for the movie determines the emotions and how the content of the movie is presented for the viewers. The music communicates the feelings of the characters to the audience allowing them to be drawn deeper into the movie by feeling what the characters feel. All of this was done to almost perfection in Perks of Being a Wallflower as they portrayed the unseen challenges present in high school life for more kids than I think most people realize.
Everyone has memories of that first day of school when you were terrified about how you were going to fit in or be treated because school seemed to define you as a person. Perks of the Being a Wallflower captures the emotions of this experience by following the main character, Charlie, through his first year of high school from first day to the end of the year. The characters embodied by the cast make the movie relatable to every person. You will be able to identify with the cast and their obstacles instantaneously. You will remember a person like Charlie, Sam, or Patrick connecting you to the plot emotionally. This is possible because of the amazing acting talent featured in Perks of Being a Wallflower. With Logan Lerman as Charlie, Emma Watson as Sam, Ezra Miller as Patrick, and Paul Rudd as Mr. Anderson the script is brought to life from book to screen with such ease that by the end of the movie, you will see yourself in the characters one way or another.
I think this is possible because the director, Stephen Chbosky, is also the author of the book that the movie is based on. The book is awesome, I have already written a review on it, because it touches the reader with the story and the emotions felt by the characters. Since Chbosky directed the movie, an accurate version of the story was portrayed in the movie. It disappoints me when a movie comes out that is based on a book, but does not resemble the book at all. The plot or characters are changed which then changes the whole tone of the movie/book. However, in Perks of Being a Wallflower, this does not occur. The plot is untarnished and the theme stays true from book to movie, a BIG plus for me.
I think the most important part of this movie is the message communicated through the plot, characters, and music. A "wallflower" is a person who sees things and understands them for what they truly are. This is something that I think the world today is lacking. People today go about and see/focus on the superficial surface details of everyday life, not looking any deeper to assess the real problems, or issues, that exist. In Perks though, it is reiterated how at the heart of the issue, there may be problems, but there is also beauty to behold. You just have to look. And as I sat alone in the theater at the end of the movie, I realized, then, how it felt to be infinite.
Friday, October 5, 2012
First Presidential Debate: What was said and what is truely important
Every four years America is encounters the arduous process of electing a
president to office. What makes this process so difficult is trying to sift
through the candidate's speeches in search of their true views on the issues.
Most of what is said is usually words and phrases meant to appeal to the
audience, but lack true meaning and promise. Well with this last debate, I
viewed a muddy conversation that was filled with much finger pointing, but
little true discussion about the issues. Because of this, I am going to try to
outline and identify how the candidates stand on the important issues of this
2012 election.
This first debate focused on the Domestic Issues of America. As the candidates walked into frame and greeted each other with a firm handshake and bright smiles, I knew that this debate was going to be filled with drama. On a side bar, I always want to know what the candidates say to each other during their greeting and departure at the beginning and end of the debates. Are they truly nice to each other, or is that when they talk smack to their competitor? It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall during that moment.
Anyways, back to the debate, President Obama and Romney started the debate by outlining how they would address job creation for America. With the economy emerging for one of the most troubling economic times in recent history, a large number of Americans (myself included) are having troubles finding a job and retaining it for an extended period of time. Obama addressed this issue first by saying that during his administration 5 million jobs have been created for American citizens. Obama continued by describing how he desires to invest in education and training classes available at community colleges. This would be accomplished through programs like his Race to the Top program that strive to improve skills of the student, resources for the students, and create teaching jobs. If he were to be able to do this, Obama believes that it would spur the economy by providing more qualified workers to be hired. Additionally, Obama said that he would support changing the tax code in order to help small businesses. He desires to lower the corporate tax rate to 25% for manufacturing companies while also closing loopholes for companies that send jobs overseas. Obama said he would provide tax breaks to companies that invested in domestic growth. He wishes to go back to the tax rates held during the Clinton administration, when America last had a surplus.
Romney outlined how he would address job creation in a five-part plan. First, Romney said he would support and encourage the US becoming energy independent. Next, he would open trade in Latin America and China creating more outlets for business opportunities. Thirdly, Romney would make sure that people have good education skills and better ranking schools available nationwide to foster the economic growth. Then, Romney would get the US to a balanced budget. Lastly, Romney said he would champion small businesses to create more jobs for the everyday American. Romney agreed with Obama, and said that he desires to provide tax relief to the middle class. It was pointed out, however, that Romney's plan for compensating for tax cuts by closing loopholes and deductions is not realistic, and that it would actually add $2000 more to the middle class tax burden.
The debate then continued on to the issue of federal debt. Romney began this section of the debate by saying that he thought of debt as a moral issue. It should not be the desire of a moral person to spend more money than they have available, and then pass the debt of their economic errors down to the younger generation. Romney outlined the common sense three step method to fix the federal debt: raise taxes, cut spending, and expand the economy. Romney said his test for reformatting the economy would be to ask himself whether or not a program in question was worth borrowing money from another country to finance. If it does not pass this question, then Romney would get rid of the program. He also said that he would take different programs, and if they can be run at the state level, would move them there. Thus, in Romney's eyes, he would make the US government more efficient by combining programs and cutting the number of employees.
Obama explained his method of dealing with national debt by first saying that when he entered office, he inherited a huge debt from two wars being paid on a credit card, tax cuts, and programs unpaid for during an economic crisis. Obama then said that he restricted 77 programs, cutting $1 trillion from the budget, and put forth a $4 trillion deficit reduction plan. {I cannot guarantee that these statements are totally true. There has been a lack of fact checking during this election.}
The debate then turned to the issue of entitlements. Obama ensured people that the government knows the necessity of social security and Medicare for elderly people nationwide, and that these two benefits are strengthened by not overpaying insurance companies. Obama also said that the money set aside for social security and Medicare is used to decrease the medication costs and hospital fees. However, Obama did not address the fact that the probability of social security and Medicare being available for younger generations is extremely low.
Romney, on the other hand, is not proposing any changes to the current social security or Medicare systems, but is offering an optional alternative for people to select if desired. Romney said that every time Obama decreases the amount of money given to insurance companies and hospitals, the number of people that can be treated decreases because of the lower funds available. Therefore, Romney and Ryan proposed a voucher program, called Premium Support, in which a voucher is given to a person so that they can get insurance no matter their health status. Through this program, however, there is the possibility that Medicare could in fact collapse, due to accumulated costs, putting seniors at the mercy of private insurance companies after all. The voucher program still keeps the option open for younger people if they have no other way of obtaining insurance.
Then, the hot button issue of healthcare/Obamacare was hit upon. Romney began by making it clear that he supported the repeal of the Affordable Care Act. He proclaimed that Obamacare would in fact cost more money than traditional insurance costs putting more of a strain upon the American citizens. Romney also did not like how Obamacare puts in place an unelected board that tells people what kind of treatment they will be allowed. Romney also cited that 75% of small businesses said that under Obamacare, they are less likely to be able to offer their workers insurance. Romney believes that a healthcare plan needs to be crafted at the state level in order to suit the state's needs individually. He believes that if a healthcare plan is enacted at the state level, then the problems of the state will be able to be focused on while decreasing costs to the people. However, Romney was unable to describe how he will replace Obamacare if he is elected. He was unable to outline any details and instead said that is was "complicated".
Obama tried to explain the purpose of Obamacare more clearly. First, he said that if you currently have health insurance, the government would not take over. You can keep your own healthcare provider and doctor. Obamacare just tries to make sure that the insurance companies don't take advantage of you and offer rebates if the company spends more administrative time on your case than care for you. Secondly, if you do not have health insurance, a group plan is created through Obamacare that allows you to benefit from group rates 18% lower than the private market. Obama also clarified the issue of the healthcare board within Obamacare, stating that it is a group of healthcare experts who determine how costs can be decreased for the betterment of the public. Romney, however, did point out that if Obamacare is passed, up to 20 million people could loose their insurance provider, and 30% of Americans could be dropped from their coverage. {Fact check this. I do not know if these figures are correct.}
The debate moved on from here to the issue of the role of government. Obama gave the presidential response, saying that the government's job is to keep the American people safe. Obama said the government is also to create opportunity and gateways for its citizens, while fostering the education of every citizen. Romney echoed many of these sentiments, quoting parts of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. While protecting life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, Romney said that he would ensure that the American military would be second to none. Romney also included the idea that the government should maintain its commitment to religious tolerance and freedom.
Lastly, the candidates talked about the issue of partisan gridlock that the American government has been experiencing recently. Romney said that he would sit down with members from each party on his first day in office in order to discuss issues and challenges that need to be addressed. He said that throughout his term if elected, he would work on a collaborative basis as he has done as governor of Massachusetts. This, however, could be a more difficult task than Romney thinks.
Obama assured the public that he takes ideas from anybody, no matter their party affiliation. He cited Obamacare, stating that it originally was an idea from a Republican, and grew through bipartisan efforts. Obama, however, asserted that sometimes a person has to say "No" and stand up for their beliefs when it comes to ideas they are passionate about. This shed some light on the difficulties that the US government has experienced in the past months between the President and Congress.
With closing remarks from both candidates about how the spirit of the country inspires them daily, the candidates ended their first debate with unsure messages. At times, this debate reminded me of a fight between two teenage girls over a boy they both liked. Due to the bickering and incessant talking when they were told to stop, Obama and Romney left me more confused at the end of the debate than I was at the beginning. There are two more debates between the Presidential candidates and on between the VPs. I will cover all as non-bias as possible. I hope this helps y'all understand, and if you have any comments, just post them. Thanks and Gig Em.
This first debate focused on the Domestic Issues of America. As the candidates walked into frame and greeted each other with a firm handshake and bright smiles, I knew that this debate was going to be filled with drama. On a side bar, I always want to know what the candidates say to each other during their greeting and departure at the beginning and end of the debates. Are they truly nice to each other, or is that when they talk smack to their competitor? It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall during that moment.
Anyways, back to the debate, President Obama and Romney started the debate by outlining how they would address job creation for America. With the economy emerging for one of the most troubling economic times in recent history, a large number of Americans (myself included) are having troubles finding a job and retaining it for an extended period of time. Obama addressed this issue first by saying that during his administration 5 million jobs have been created for American citizens. Obama continued by describing how he desires to invest in education and training classes available at community colleges. This would be accomplished through programs like his Race to the Top program that strive to improve skills of the student, resources for the students, and create teaching jobs. If he were to be able to do this, Obama believes that it would spur the economy by providing more qualified workers to be hired. Additionally, Obama said that he would support changing the tax code in order to help small businesses. He desires to lower the corporate tax rate to 25% for manufacturing companies while also closing loopholes for companies that send jobs overseas. Obama said he would provide tax breaks to companies that invested in domestic growth. He wishes to go back to the tax rates held during the Clinton administration, when America last had a surplus.
Romney outlined how he would address job creation in a five-part plan. First, Romney said he would support and encourage the US becoming energy independent. Next, he would open trade in Latin America and China creating more outlets for business opportunities. Thirdly, Romney would make sure that people have good education skills and better ranking schools available nationwide to foster the economic growth. Then, Romney would get the US to a balanced budget. Lastly, Romney said he would champion small businesses to create more jobs for the everyday American. Romney agreed with Obama, and said that he desires to provide tax relief to the middle class. It was pointed out, however, that Romney's plan for compensating for tax cuts by closing loopholes and deductions is not realistic, and that it would actually add $2000 more to the middle class tax burden.
The debate then continued on to the issue of federal debt. Romney began this section of the debate by saying that he thought of debt as a moral issue. It should not be the desire of a moral person to spend more money than they have available, and then pass the debt of their economic errors down to the younger generation. Romney outlined the common sense three step method to fix the federal debt: raise taxes, cut spending, and expand the economy. Romney said his test for reformatting the economy would be to ask himself whether or not a program in question was worth borrowing money from another country to finance. If it does not pass this question, then Romney would get rid of the program. He also said that he would take different programs, and if they can be run at the state level, would move them there. Thus, in Romney's eyes, he would make the US government more efficient by combining programs and cutting the number of employees.
Obama explained his method of dealing with national debt by first saying that when he entered office, he inherited a huge debt from two wars being paid on a credit card, tax cuts, and programs unpaid for during an economic crisis. Obama then said that he restricted 77 programs, cutting $1 trillion from the budget, and put forth a $4 trillion deficit reduction plan. {I cannot guarantee that these statements are totally true. There has been a lack of fact checking during this election.}
The debate then turned to the issue of entitlements. Obama ensured people that the government knows the necessity of social security and Medicare for elderly people nationwide, and that these two benefits are strengthened by not overpaying insurance companies. Obama also said that the money set aside for social security and Medicare is used to decrease the medication costs and hospital fees. However, Obama did not address the fact that the probability of social security and Medicare being available for younger generations is extremely low.
Romney, on the other hand, is not proposing any changes to the current social security or Medicare systems, but is offering an optional alternative for people to select if desired. Romney said that every time Obama decreases the amount of money given to insurance companies and hospitals, the number of people that can be treated decreases because of the lower funds available. Therefore, Romney and Ryan proposed a voucher program, called Premium Support, in which a voucher is given to a person so that they can get insurance no matter their health status. Through this program, however, there is the possibility that Medicare could in fact collapse, due to accumulated costs, putting seniors at the mercy of private insurance companies after all. The voucher program still keeps the option open for younger people if they have no other way of obtaining insurance.
Then, the hot button issue of healthcare/Obamacare was hit upon. Romney began by making it clear that he supported the repeal of the Affordable Care Act. He proclaimed that Obamacare would in fact cost more money than traditional insurance costs putting more of a strain upon the American citizens. Romney also did not like how Obamacare puts in place an unelected board that tells people what kind of treatment they will be allowed. Romney also cited that 75% of small businesses said that under Obamacare, they are less likely to be able to offer their workers insurance. Romney believes that a healthcare plan needs to be crafted at the state level in order to suit the state's needs individually. He believes that if a healthcare plan is enacted at the state level, then the problems of the state will be able to be focused on while decreasing costs to the people. However, Romney was unable to describe how he will replace Obamacare if he is elected. He was unable to outline any details and instead said that is was "complicated".
Obama tried to explain the purpose of Obamacare more clearly. First, he said that if you currently have health insurance, the government would not take over. You can keep your own healthcare provider and doctor. Obamacare just tries to make sure that the insurance companies don't take advantage of you and offer rebates if the company spends more administrative time on your case than care for you. Secondly, if you do not have health insurance, a group plan is created through Obamacare that allows you to benefit from group rates 18% lower than the private market. Obama also clarified the issue of the healthcare board within Obamacare, stating that it is a group of healthcare experts who determine how costs can be decreased for the betterment of the public. Romney, however, did point out that if Obamacare is passed, up to 20 million people could loose their insurance provider, and 30% of Americans could be dropped from their coverage. {Fact check this. I do not know if these figures are correct.}
The debate moved on from here to the issue of the role of government. Obama gave the presidential response, saying that the government's job is to keep the American people safe. Obama said the government is also to create opportunity and gateways for its citizens, while fostering the education of every citizen. Romney echoed many of these sentiments, quoting parts of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. While protecting life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, Romney said that he would ensure that the American military would be second to none. Romney also included the idea that the government should maintain its commitment to religious tolerance and freedom.
Lastly, the candidates talked about the issue of partisan gridlock that the American government has been experiencing recently. Romney said that he would sit down with members from each party on his first day in office in order to discuss issues and challenges that need to be addressed. He said that throughout his term if elected, he would work on a collaborative basis as he has done as governor of Massachusetts. This, however, could be a more difficult task than Romney thinks.
Obama assured the public that he takes ideas from anybody, no matter their party affiliation. He cited Obamacare, stating that it originally was an idea from a Republican, and grew through bipartisan efforts. Obama, however, asserted that sometimes a person has to say "No" and stand up for their beliefs when it comes to ideas they are passionate about. This shed some light on the difficulties that the US government has experienced in the past months between the President and Congress.
With closing remarks from both candidates about how the spirit of the country inspires them daily, the candidates ended their first debate with unsure messages. At times, this debate reminded me of a fight between two teenage girls over a boy they both liked. Due to the bickering and incessant talking when they were told to stop, Obama and Romney left me more confused at the end of the debate than I was at the beginning. There are two more debates between the Presidential candidates and on between the VPs. I will cover all as non-bias as possible. I hope this helps y'all understand, and if you have any comments, just post them. Thanks and Gig Em.
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Texas A&M v. SMU: Changes needed for a winning result
In a couple of minutes, Texas A&M will be playing in their second game of the 2012-2013 football season against SMU in Dallas. With this being their second game during their first season as part of the SEC, TAMU's football team needs to strive to make a few adjustments in order to come out on the winning side of this game and season.
First, Texas A&M needs to learn how to balance their veteran's experience with their rookie's talent and promise while on the field. While playing against Florida last weekend, Johnny Manziel, Texas A&M's freshman quarterback, demonstrated how much talent and potential he has in his position on the football team. His speed, fearlessness on the field, and determination ensure that Manziel will be an excellent leader on the team, however he needs to learn how to perform consistently throughout the game. During the Florida game, Manziel had a phenomenal first half leading the Aggie team to a ten-point lead at halftime. However, during the second half, Manziel controlled the game for little time, leading to a Florida win. I think this can change, however, if some of the veterans on the team mentor Manziel by giving him some advice and support. Team comradery can go a long ways into having a winning season, and I believe A&M is one school in which strong comradery exists.
The Aggie football team must remember to always keep their mind in the now. Focus must be put on the next game, learning from mistakes, but moving forward to the next obstacle. The Florida loss is behind them, and while different lessons can be taken from that game, the Ags must now concentrate on beating the SMU Mustangs. I hope that the football players will not let their minds get muddled with regrets from last week and will instead try to prove everyone wrong by beating the next team they come up against.
One lesson that I think can be taken from last week's game is that the Aggies need to change their tactic of play depending upon each team they come up against. The Aggies have shown that they can play an amazing first half, but after half time their performance is a bit lackluster. The Ags need to be able to play a good first half and then go into halftime, assess the tactics of the opposing team, and then make the necessary changes to their game plan to be able to go out during the second half and attack the opposing team with new vigor. This is what Florida was able to do, and look how that turned out for them. A&M needs to not be the team able to play one half well.
I think A&M also needs to work on their rushing game. Last week it seemed, as through almost every play was a passing play. The Aggies need to develop both an amazing passing and rushing game in order to be a legitimate threat to other SEC teams.
The last thing that Texas A&M, as a whole, needs to work on is keeping up the fan base during the season. Texas A&M Aggies, current and former members, need to continue to uphold and demonstrate the Aggie Spirit to other SEC teams and fans. The Aggie values, traditions, and behaviors are what make Texas A&M the university that personifies friendliness and hospitality. This became evident when a fan from Florida posted an article in which he described the positive experience he had while visiting College Station with his son for the game. This is something that needs to be continued so that A&M will continue to be heralded as an amiable college campus.
These are all things I hope that A&M will succeed at accomplishing. So Thanks and Gig Em!
First, Texas A&M needs to learn how to balance their veteran's experience with their rookie's talent and promise while on the field. While playing against Florida last weekend, Johnny Manziel, Texas A&M's freshman quarterback, demonstrated how much talent and potential he has in his position on the football team. His speed, fearlessness on the field, and determination ensure that Manziel will be an excellent leader on the team, however he needs to learn how to perform consistently throughout the game. During the Florida game, Manziel had a phenomenal first half leading the Aggie team to a ten-point lead at halftime. However, during the second half, Manziel controlled the game for little time, leading to a Florida win. I think this can change, however, if some of the veterans on the team mentor Manziel by giving him some advice and support. Team comradery can go a long ways into having a winning season, and I believe A&M is one school in which strong comradery exists.
The Aggie football team must remember to always keep their mind in the now. Focus must be put on the next game, learning from mistakes, but moving forward to the next obstacle. The Florida loss is behind them, and while different lessons can be taken from that game, the Ags must now concentrate on beating the SMU Mustangs. I hope that the football players will not let their minds get muddled with regrets from last week and will instead try to prove everyone wrong by beating the next team they come up against.
One lesson that I think can be taken from last week's game is that the Aggies need to change their tactic of play depending upon each team they come up against. The Aggies have shown that they can play an amazing first half, but after half time their performance is a bit lackluster. The Ags need to be able to play a good first half and then go into halftime, assess the tactics of the opposing team, and then make the necessary changes to their game plan to be able to go out during the second half and attack the opposing team with new vigor. This is what Florida was able to do, and look how that turned out for them. A&M needs to not be the team able to play one half well.
I think A&M also needs to work on their rushing game. Last week it seemed, as through almost every play was a passing play. The Aggies need to develop both an amazing passing and rushing game in order to be a legitimate threat to other SEC teams.
The last thing that Texas A&M, as a whole, needs to work on is keeping up the fan base during the season. Texas A&M Aggies, current and former members, need to continue to uphold and demonstrate the Aggie Spirit to other SEC teams and fans. The Aggie values, traditions, and behaviors are what make Texas A&M the university that personifies friendliness and hospitality. This became evident when a fan from Florida posted an article in which he described the positive experience he had while visiting College Station with his son for the game. This is something that needs to be continued so that A&M will continue to be heralded as an amiable college campus.
These are all things I hope that A&M will succeed at accomplishing. So Thanks and Gig Em!
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
We Will Never Forget
September 11, 2001. Every American can remember where they were that day and exactly what they were doing when they found out the World Trade Centers had been attacked.
I was in 7th grade and had just walked into choir. All around me eighth graders were talking about some program they had watched during their previous class. Apparently a plane had been flown into a building, the details were not mentioned. I thought it was just something pertaining to a specific eighth grade class. Possibly a movie, or just a sick sadistic joke one of the eighth graders was telling.
Then the choir director walked in. She took a seat in front of the choir and looked down at her hands. A silence rarely heard in the choir room spread and settled over the forty, or so, seventh and eighth graders. Mrs. Allen, the choir director, announced that we would not be singing that day. She then informed those of us that did not already know, that a plane had crashed into one of the World Trade Centers in New York. I was thrown into a state of disbelief. The unimaginable had occurred.
For the rest of the class Mrs. Allen allowed everyone to talk out their emotions. She also let students with parents on scheduled flights call their families to make sure that everything was okay. During that class hour, the second WTC building was crashed into by another commercial jet. It was at this time that I, even as a twelve year old, knew that life was taking a drastic turn. Things would not be the same on September 12th as they were on September 10th. However, even though I was privy to all this information, no other teachers would talk about the occurrences in New York throughout the rest of the day.
Once I arrived at home after school, I turned on the television to see continuous news reports about the attacks in New York. I also became informed about additional attacks that had occurred as the day continued. The Pentagon was crashed into killing an additional hundred people. The White House was also targeted, but had not been reached because of the brave members of a fourth plane that had been grounded in Pennsylvania. I was sent into a spell of shock mixed with fear and sadness. Living close to a major airport did not help either. I heard the loud rumble of jet engines from the air above my house, which sent chills down my spine. I sat on the couch in my living room not knowing what to do next.
Yet, the impact of the 9/11 events had a small effect upon me. I lost no family members on that day. My life was not threatened by a highjacked plane. Yet, I saw classmates shed tears because they were not able to contact their parents who had boarded a plane that morning, or were in New York on business. I saw the heartache the 9/11 attacks caused, and every year I remember it.
September 11th has cast a scar upon American history, but it has also created another moment for every citizen of the United States to come together and support your fellow neighbor who may be hurting and feeling the pain life can sometimes foster. So today and tomorrow and every other day that you continue to live with the privilege of representing America, think of those who died in the 9/11 attacks and those who gave their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I was in 7th grade and had just walked into choir. All around me eighth graders were talking about some program they had watched during their previous class. Apparently a plane had been flown into a building, the details were not mentioned. I thought it was just something pertaining to a specific eighth grade class. Possibly a movie, or just a sick sadistic joke one of the eighth graders was telling.
Then the choir director walked in. She took a seat in front of the choir and looked down at her hands. A silence rarely heard in the choir room spread and settled over the forty, or so, seventh and eighth graders. Mrs. Allen, the choir director, announced that we would not be singing that day. She then informed those of us that did not already know, that a plane had crashed into one of the World Trade Centers in New York. I was thrown into a state of disbelief. The unimaginable had occurred.
For the rest of the class Mrs. Allen allowed everyone to talk out their emotions. She also let students with parents on scheduled flights call their families to make sure that everything was okay. During that class hour, the second WTC building was crashed into by another commercial jet. It was at this time that I, even as a twelve year old, knew that life was taking a drastic turn. Things would not be the same on September 12th as they were on September 10th. However, even though I was privy to all this information, no other teachers would talk about the occurrences in New York throughout the rest of the day.
Once I arrived at home after school, I turned on the television to see continuous news reports about the attacks in New York. I also became informed about additional attacks that had occurred as the day continued. The Pentagon was crashed into killing an additional hundred people. The White House was also targeted, but had not been reached because of the brave members of a fourth plane that had been grounded in Pennsylvania. I was sent into a spell of shock mixed with fear and sadness. Living close to a major airport did not help either. I heard the loud rumble of jet engines from the air above my house, which sent chills down my spine. I sat on the couch in my living room not knowing what to do next.
Yet, the impact of the 9/11 events had a small effect upon me. I lost no family members on that day. My life was not threatened by a highjacked plane. Yet, I saw classmates shed tears because they were not able to contact their parents who had boarded a plane that morning, or were in New York on business. I saw the heartache the 9/11 attacks caused, and every year I remember it.
September 11th has cast a scar upon American history, but it has also created another moment for every citizen of the United States to come together and support your fellow neighbor who may be hurting and feeling the pain life can sometimes foster. So today and tomorrow and every other day that you continue to live with the privilege of representing America, think of those who died in the 9/11 attacks and those who gave their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Deaflympics: Why the deaf community separated themselves from the Paralympics
The Paralympics is often seen as a sport forum that provides the opportunity for people with different types of disabilities to congregate in order to compete against each other on an international level. However, there is still one type of disability that is not fully represented at the Paralympics. Deaf people are not fully represented at the Paralympics because of the costs necessary in order to provide each with a translator and to ensure that gunfire and buzzers are adequately transmitted for the hear impaired athletes. Because of this inadequate representation of handicapped athletes, a viewer can begin to question how adequately the Paralympics represents athletes with disabilities.
The Paralympics has six different categories into which the athletes are sorted before competing, however, the IPC does not set aside a group for the hearing impaired. In order to compete in the Paralympics, a deaf athlete must also possess another disability that meets a Paralympic classification in order to be added to a category for competition. Originally, deaf people were included in the Paralympics, but disassociated themselves in 1924 in order to cater the games more specifically to their needs. After this the Deaflympics began and is hosted the year after the Olympics and Paralympics. It ensures that visual cues are used on the playing fields, lights are used to begin races, and fans cheer by waving since the competitors cannot hear verbal chants.
Yet, challenges are still faced by deaf athletes and coaches. Communication remains to be a difficult hurdle to overcome. Translators are necessary in order to convert the English language into sign language for those with hearing impairment. Unfortunately, translator fees can amount to large sums for individual athletes and teams as a whole. Another challenge faced by the Deaflympics is the lack of support it receives from the IOC. While the IOC has fully supported the Paralympics since 2001 allowing for needed changes to be made to the Olympic Village in preparation for the Paralympic competitors, no helping hand had been extended to the deaf athletes. They are expected to be able to address the problems they face on their own.
I think that the deaf athletes are entitled to equal representation and opportunity. To leave behind an athlete that has a disability making communication and competition extremely difficult is deplorable. Just because a person cannot hear does not mean that they are any less worth the effort to provide for. Think of a child or teenager out there who cannot hear. Do you think they should be discouraged from try to learn and compete in a sport just because they cannot hear the start whistle? No. They should have the same opportunity to become a successful athlete as an able bodied person. The deaf community should also have the ability to popularize more deaf athletes to become role models for young people nationwide who are growing up without the ability to hear.
I hope that the Deaflympics continues to operate in order to give deaf citizens the ability to compete at an elite world level. I also hope that the IPC can turn its eye back to the deaf community and set aside money for them so that the deaf may be allowed to compete in the future. Living without the capability to hear can be more of a disability than the average person thinks. Let us not allow our ignorance cloud our vision.
The Paralympics has six different categories into which the athletes are sorted before competing, however, the IPC does not set aside a group for the hearing impaired. In order to compete in the Paralympics, a deaf athlete must also possess another disability that meets a Paralympic classification in order to be added to a category for competition. Originally, deaf people were included in the Paralympics, but disassociated themselves in 1924 in order to cater the games more specifically to their needs. After this the Deaflympics began and is hosted the year after the Olympics and Paralympics. It ensures that visual cues are used on the playing fields, lights are used to begin races, and fans cheer by waving since the competitors cannot hear verbal chants.
Yet, challenges are still faced by deaf athletes and coaches. Communication remains to be a difficult hurdle to overcome. Translators are necessary in order to convert the English language into sign language for those with hearing impairment. Unfortunately, translator fees can amount to large sums for individual athletes and teams as a whole. Another challenge faced by the Deaflympics is the lack of support it receives from the IOC. While the IOC has fully supported the Paralympics since 2001 allowing for needed changes to be made to the Olympic Village in preparation for the Paralympic competitors, no helping hand had been extended to the deaf athletes. They are expected to be able to address the problems they face on their own.
I think that the deaf athletes are entitled to equal representation and opportunity. To leave behind an athlete that has a disability making communication and competition extremely difficult is deplorable. Just because a person cannot hear does not mean that they are any less worth the effort to provide for. Think of a child or teenager out there who cannot hear. Do you think they should be discouraged from try to learn and compete in a sport just because they cannot hear the start whistle? No. They should have the same opportunity to become a successful athlete as an able bodied person. The deaf community should also have the ability to popularize more deaf athletes to become role models for young people nationwide who are growing up without the ability to hear.
I hope that the Deaflympics continues to operate in order to give deaf citizens the ability to compete at an elite world level. I also hope that the IPC can turn its eye back to the deaf community and set aside money for them so that the deaf may be allowed to compete in the future. Living without the capability to hear can be more of a disability than the average person thinks. Let us not allow our ignorance cloud our vision.
Monday, September 3, 2012
Inspiring Paralympic story that touches the hearts of all
Not all athletes who compete in the Paralympics are born with their impairments. Some athletes experience traumatic, life altering accidents that they then overcome in order to compete at an elite level in the Paralympics. One example is Martine Wright. This British mother was a victim of a terrorist attack, and, post-recovery, trained in order to become an inspiring addition to UK's female sitting volleyball team.
Life changed for Wright on July 7, 2005. Having woken up late, Wright rushed out the door and boarded the subway train instead of driving in order to get to work on time. This, unfortunately, was the same day four Osama bin Laden inspired terrorists bombed three trains and a bus in the London area. Wright was on one of the trains targeted. After the explosion, she was trapped in the entangled metal wreckage of the train and was the last person to be evacuated from the scene. The debris from the train had sliced through both of Wright's legs forcing doctors to amputate both of her legs above the knee after she arrived at the hospital.
After surviving this life altering injury, Wright began rehabilitation where she learned to play disabled sports. After finding her niche in sitting volleyball, Wright trained long and hard and earned her place on the Paralympic sitting volleyball team for the United Kingdom. Wright demonstrates how individuals can take the steering wheel in their own life and go extraordinary places having come out on the other side of this experience a member of the Paralympic team.
I think people everywhere can take Wright's life and triumphs as an example of how to overcome the trivial challenges met in everyday life. This mother was able to survive a terrorist attack in order to represent her nation in an international arena. Wright said, "If I can inspire people at home, whether they're disabled or able bodied, just to go out and pick up a ball...then my job is done." (Kingston, Gary; Vancouver Sun; August 31, 2012) This serves as an inspiration to go and make something more of your life than just settling for the norm. I know that after I read this story, I want to be able to impact as many people as Wright has through her life.
As the 2012 Paralympics continue, more stories of competing athletes continue to arise teaching people worldwide that individuals are not defined by the events that happen during their lives, but by what decisions they make to better their lives after experiencing dramatic turning points.
Life changed for Wright on July 7, 2005. Having woken up late, Wright rushed out the door and boarded the subway train instead of driving in order to get to work on time. This, unfortunately, was the same day four Osama bin Laden inspired terrorists bombed three trains and a bus in the London area. Wright was on one of the trains targeted. After the explosion, she was trapped in the entangled metal wreckage of the train and was the last person to be evacuated from the scene. The debris from the train had sliced through both of Wright's legs forcing doctors to amputate both of her legs above the knee after she arrived at the hospital.
After surviving this life altering injury, Wright began rehabilitation where she learned to play disabled sports. After finding her niche in sitting volleyball, Wright trained long and hard and earned her place on the Paralympic sitting volleyball team for the United Kingdom. Wright demonstrates how individuals can take the steering wheel in their own life and go extraordinary places having come out on the other side of this experience a member of the Paralympic team.
I think people everywhere can take Wright's life and triumphs as an example of how to overcome the trivial challenges met in everyday life. This mother was able to survive a terrorist attack in order to represent her nation in an international arena. Wright said, "If I can inspire people at home, whether they're disabled or able bodied, just to go out and pick up a ball...then my job is done." (Kingston, Gary; Vancouver Sun; August 31, 2012) This serves as an inspiration to go and make something more of your life than just settling for the norm. I know that after I read this story, I want to be able to impact as many people as Wright has through her life.
As the 2012 Paralympics continue, more stories of competing athletes continue to arise teaching people worldwide that individuals are not defined by the events that happen during their lives, but by what decisions they make to better their lives after experiencing dramatic turning points.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)