http://thelibertybelle11.blogspot.com/2008/12/money-money-moneyis-that-what-its-all.html

This was an effective use of quotes from an author as well as pointing very relevant points. If this was to be writing today the author would have added the auto maker’s bailout since it is a prime example of executives asking for help from the government. I will say that the reasons why these executives are paid a lot are not just their personal choice but also because many times the salary is set by the board of directors. I will say that I wish the source used would be more factual and less emotional. The terms used; “Lords of the Corporate Collectives, effete snobs, ect” tend to get in the way of the points he is trying to make. I personally think that the reason that the execs are paid so much is because they can be. This is not just a state side issue as some of the richest people in the world live overseas with some of the poorest country.

I agree with the author’s point that the best way is to not involve the government, but that they understand that there might not be another way. No solutions were given which would have been nice in this article. I liked in the closing statement where the author says, “Our country was founded on highly admirable principles, but actions speak louder than words”. It is very true that actions speak loader then words, but we must be careful on what actions we take. If we destroy the company leadership then a company will follow. Everyone needs a leader, and leaders need people to follow or nothing will get done… I just wish that we could find good leaders and give them the followers to make a difference.

There has been a lot of discussion on cell phones being found in jails, especially when jails are supposed to monitor almost all of the communication that occurs between inmates, and others. They check mail, limit phone calls, and tap the phone calls made. I personally understand “where there is a will there is a way” but I’m impressed by the fact that these inmates have been able to receive cell phones. With these cell phones inmates in Brazil have planned riots, Canadians have continued business in illegal sectors, and some Texans arrange killings of eye witnesses. In war the first thing to victory is to knock out the enemy’s communication, and needless to say the United States has lost ground in the fight to control prisons because of this breakdown in the control of communication. Many wonder how inmates gain access to cell phones in the first place. The truth is that sometimes guards themselves smuggle them in. Guards are paid sometimes over $2,000 (more then a months salary) for a cell phone. Some inmates have friends through SIMM cards over the fence of a jail so the inmates can use the phones. The criminals have gone to great lengths to hide these phones, hiding them sometimes inside them selves. Jails are starting to see that it is almost impossible to stop cell phones from coming in so they are moving from defensive, to offensive. They are starting to set up anti-cell phone (Cell phone jamming equipment) technology to stop the use of cell phones. I personally believe that jailers play a constant game of cat and mouse. The inmates have nothing better to do then to think of these things, while the jail keepers have families and sometimes other jobs to think about.

Aleyda’s post in my mind was well laid out with good theory on how the system could be improved as well as putting a few number data to driver her point home. The setup of the article made sense with at first stating why early voting was worth the trouble then moved on to explain what the issues where, and finally moved to how to improve the system, while the whole time putting her opinion in it to drive her point home. The solutions she came up with hold a lot of merit, the only criticism to her solutions would how to control the security of it, the further you are away from the souse the harder it is to see if it is accurate. Aleyda did a good job of not only talking about the strain on the voting system, but the strain on the voter as well. This was a well done article that might have been a little better if she would have been able to tie in the political ramifications her policies would have. She touched on it a little but more on “more voting”, “a stronger voice of the people”, ect would have been more (sorry to be repetitive of the word) of the icing of the cake.

There has been a push in the political arena for a “stronger” 2nd amendment right. It started back in June of this year when the Supreme Court ruled that it was unlawful for the District of Columbia to have a ban on having a hand gun in the home. This is came as a surprise to many in the DC government who called a special session of government and created new laws “banning” guns again. In a new turn of events the House of Representatives have passed legislation to force the District of Columbia to repeal many of the banning laws set up by the DC government. For example this repeal will target the DC laws banning semi-automatic pistols, the requirement of having the firearm disassembled (or secured with a trigger lock in the home), the extensive process for getting a gun registered and licensed (multiple visits to the police station, ballistic testing, fingerprinting, not including the written test on the district’s gun laws). This bill has bi-partisan support and passed 266-152. Some opponents to this bill lost some of their ammunition two days later when the FBI report came out stating that the top 3 cities with the highest murder rate where the cities with some of the strongest gun restrictions (Detroit, Baltimore, and DC). The top 3 cities for robbery are Detroit, Philadelphia, and once again DC. This information is in contrast to a drop in violent crimes nation wide (it has never been lower since 1974). As I was investigating this issue I read on the NRA, (yes, I know they are bias, but they do have some good points), that during the presidential debates gun laws did not come up. I know that they were mentioned in the republican nomination debates (I think that republicans like their guns more then most democrats do). On a personal note; I think that Texas has a good policy. You are required to have a permit and pass a shooting test to prove that you know how to use a handgun safely. I would prefer that it would not cost so much (the permits and classes cost as much as a handgun sometimes). I believe that if you are using a handgun for personal defense you should have the right to keep it loaded and prepared in case the worst happens. I agree with the House of Representatives decision to change the over stringent laws on DC gun control. I see this as good example of the national government stepping in to defend the rights of a city population. Many have said that it just makes it easy for criminals to get guns, in truth when you make laws to disarm the public, you only disarm the good citizens, while enabling the bad citizens with power to do what they want.

Klein's posting

http://www.spectator.org/archives/2008/10/16/searching-for-obamas-95-percen

After looking into the background of Philip Klein I discovered (not much of a surprise) that he is more of a conservative. Believing mostly in a free market economy as well as a strong national defense He has a degree in history and economics. This does play strongly into his arguments about the tax points as well as his government history points. I believe that Klein started his blog well by quoting Obama, “We are going to cut taxes for 95 percent of Americans”. Klein uses this quote nicely as he tries to “discover” how Obama’s tax plan would effect the promised 95%. Klein does a good job by quoting responses from Obama’s advisers. I was impressed with Klein since he did not just quote the person but he states his questions behind the quote. Klein continues by asking for specifies, and did not make a quick post from one comment; he waited till he had multiple comments from the Obama campaign. Klein also has more then one source for his comments. Klein then goes on to test the information he received to see if he got the same numbers that the Obama campaign report. I also believe that Klein did a good job in waiting till the end to state his political opinion till the end. He also did a good job of not bashing “too hard” on just the Democratic Party but he also the attacked the Republican Party. I did like this blog because he did a good job of attacking a political point of view and not attack a person like many other political commentaries. So in my opinion I was impressed with Klein’s blog posting.

Michelle Malkin wrote this commentary on October 1st of this year about her concern that Gwen Ifill would not be a good moderator for the vice presidential debate. Malkin is a conservative columnist, book author and is a contributor for Fox news. The author states that Gwen has political interests for one political candidate over the other. I went to her web page (http://michellemalkin.com/ ) and found a more in-depth version of her Yahoo article http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20081001/cm_uc_crmmax/op_197578;_ylt=AueFtxhlf532sYLocRjYyoT9wxIF ). The website had a link which allowed the reader to see the video response of Gwen Ifill’s actual responce to Palin’s speech. The author makes a few arguments that are well stated, (the book deal, the article of the magazine, and the reaction after the speech by Ifill) but more would be better in my mind. One example of a good argument that she showed the reader was when she was quoting the Ifill’s comment on the Michelle Obama’s speech, and then contrasted that with Ifill’s reaction to the Palin speech. I thought this was a great way of proving her point. Malkin continues by showing quotes from the promotions for her book. The author goes on to tie this book’s success to a political bias which would interfere her role as a moderator. Malkin is an author of a book and can empathies with Ifill’s desire to have a successful book. I thought that the author’s argument on the article that was written by Malkin who wrote in Essence was a weak one. She should have tried hard to pick a stronger part of that article. Malkin goes on to show that Ifill claims that race also factors in her political opinion so a debate from an all white ticket vs a mixed race ticket would also cause her to be bias.

Morales struggles to control Bolivia amid violence


There are strong reasons why I believe that Bolivia is headed for a civil war. President Morales has come into power hoping to change the capitalist country into a communist/socialist country. He has the poor populace while the opposition has the land and money. The problem comes when Morales wants to take all the money and land from the money making areas and give it to the poorer people. I lived in Bolivia when I was a child for about 10 months and fell in love with the Bolivian people. Many people work hard for what they have. The natives who Morales fights for have lived in the mountains for a long time and are very poor since their main sours of income is small farming of coca plants, other vegetables and begging on the streets. They tribal areas work in shifts of begging on the streets while the other group preps the field for planting. Then they all get together to harvest the food and then repeat it in the off seasons. These poor people are uneducated and many are brain damaged by the many years of drug abuse. Morales’ words of Socialistic ideals sounds appealing to these poor people, while those who are educated know that it will spell poverty for them all. The more scary thing is that Venezuela has promised that it will send troops to Bolivia to put Morales back in the presidency seat should something happen. These presidents are destroying their countries for power and money, and both are finding themselves with more and more problems as more and more people begin to have the idea that their freedoms are worth fighting for. I am both glad and sad of the new shown in this article. In one aspect I’m glad to know that the people of Bolivia are stepping up to the plate and standing their ground, but sadden as I know that lives will be lost and suffering will increase.