Fear and Freedom

This is a commentary of Edmundo Burciaga 's blog titles "Scare Tatic".

I definitely agree that American citizens live in unnecessary fear that defuses our freedoms. People are willing to believe almost anything, especially when told to believe so by such a high power. Our government hides so many things from the public, this gives us every reason to constantly question them. Why should we immediately consider everything they say? We shouldn’t. We shouldn’t let manipulation control what we are able to do. Most people don’t have the ability to rationalize, or think logically and that causes them to look ignorant to a logical thinkers eyes. The down side, though, to being the rational thinker is that you’re view is a minority.

You can read Edmundo Burciaga 's "Scare Tatic" at the following link:
http://politicalvice.blogspot.com/2007/10/scare-tactic.html

The US National Government-stage 5

The United States national government is viewed as the most powerful nation in the world, the best off. But what did it really take to get there? Manipulation. There are very few people in the America who truly look after the whole without their own best interests in mind. Most all of our leaders in the past have proved this by making empty promises to win votes. You may argue that they had good intentions but whether or not that is true they didn’t follow through. That’s the important part. People have become so good at convincing others of whatever they want. It’s not good to have someone like that have great power, but they are the ones most likely to get it. The government can solve many problems and fix things for many people, but when it comes to the bigger more important things, like immigration and healthcare, they avoid it at all costs. The fact is that there is no possible way to make all people happy. There will ALWAYS be someone who doesn’t like the decisions you make. That’s when you need a leader who doesn’t care what his citizens think of him personally. He goes in there and get what needs to be done to fix the problem. There will be many people who hate him for his decisions at the time but it will be for the better good of the nation.

The government problem solving skills are very black and white. What do we do about immigration? The government will say either let numbers in or keep most out. The truth is neither is going to do a significant good for the immigrants, and letting so many in only harms America. They can do the harder job. Rather than letting a million immigrants in a year go to their home and make it better. That way they are happy and so is America. Really, helping a million immigrants a year is barely making a tiny dent but to make a better home where they are, they can help themselves and each other and make their home a better place to live.

That’s not to say government is all bad, they do plenty to help America and other nations and also we do come across some pretty amazing leaders every now and then, like Franklin D Roosevelt for example, pulling us out of the Great Depression.

In general, though, America is pretty well off and I rather be living here than in a third world country.

veto the veto to veto

President Bush decided to veto the expansion the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (or S-Chip). The S-Chip program basically is a program that provides insurance to poor or middle class children who can not afford a private plan. The expansion encourages families to drop their private insurance plans and enroll in S-Chip.
The author of this editorial believes that the House should veto Bush's decision and continue the expansion. He says that its more then just dropping your private plan to let the government pay for it.
I agree with his points, the families would all be paying appropriate premiums and co-payments, so its not JUST the government covering all costs for you. Another defense the author made was that in vetoing the S-Chip expansion parental unemployment or death was not considered. If either of those were to happen then the child would no longer be covered, but through the S-Chip there would be no risk. The down side to that is that some families who CAN afford private insurance would stay on the S-Chip for those benefits which would cut costs for those who really need it. Also, children's health is important regardless of your income. But i do believe that there should be restrictions, or limitations. That way its fair to the people who can afford private insurance, and therefore have to pay full price. Even though there are always exceptions, the wealthy earned their income, where as people who are less wealthy, as unfortunate as it is, did not necessarily work hard enough to earn appropriate coverage.
So rather then to veto Bush's veto, like the author suggests, i think that the bill should be revised. Do expand the S-Chip, only, expand it less with more limitations.

All Crime is Local in '08 Politics

I read an interesting article in the New York Times about the increase in concern for local crime being recognized. A local murder in Newark drew national attention.Tom Tancredo (presidential candidate) blamed local officials and loose border security because a chief suspect was an illegal immigrant. That is closer than any presidential candidate has come to making crime a priority in a campaign over concerns about terrorism and the war in Iraq. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg argued that Americans have a much greater chance of being killed by crime than by a terror attack. Polls in this article show that certain local cities believe crime should be a number one priority because the crime rate has been increasing. Thr United States Justice Department reported that violent crime had increased 1.3 percent from 2005 to 2006 after rising 2.3 percent the year before. I definitely agree that crime should be a higher priority because if we cant protect our citizens in their own homes first then no one will feel safe. I think this is a good article to read because it shows the importance of local problems becoming more dominate.

Here is the link to the National, New York and Philadelphia polls on crime locally verses nationally.

Worries About Crime: National vs. Local