May 13, 2015


"Injustice," according to this commentary, it is very common to say that the government needs to take the steps in order to solve the poverty levels of the society, but there are many factors that are interrelated with the political system. The United States is  a capitalist country in which there are many  interest groups involved at almost every political level. These groups lobby the government to get what they want at any cost. They do not care much about the increasing level of poverty in the country.
The government takes care of these big corporations because they supply the money and have the power to lobby many important factors within the government. These actions only benefit the wealthy while leaving the lower class to suffer the consequences. In order to make a difference we need to get informed and take action. By sending letters to the representatives and senators we can put pressure on the government about issues that matter to us and affect our everyday lives. Communities need to unite and stand up to put a stop to higher taxes on property and on low minimum wage. Having more money for higher education and helping people get informed we can put a stop to the increasing poverty in the United States.
Injustice is that the wealthy are getting wealthier while the poor are getting poorer. The poverty line is increasing in population and the lower income class are getting the bad end of the deal. The reason being that they don't have to money or power to lobby like the wealthy do; but there is more than one way to influence the government. The big corporations are doing everything they can to get what they want, while the low income class sit there and let everything pass them by. The injustice only exists because people don't take action.

April,28,2015
 According  USA Today and the editorial opinion, "Court's decision on gay marriage would  mark a profitable shift to inclusion." That is a big controversy that has being dividing many people for many years. There are  many pros and cons, where religion principles and politics are deeply involved.

Pros, since the beginning  the founder fathers faced the conflict of religions and politics,  and  they established the religion freedom to prevent future conflicts related to that issue.  But now the Court of Justice needs to take charge  and solve the big issue about gay marriage that many states like New York passed the same-sex marriage bill in June 24, 2011. But later on the Court of Justice  ruled same-sex marriage unconstitutional in 06/26/ 2013 and the decision was 5-4 vote.  However, the same issue  is on the table again, the court looks  if the case is constitutional or unconstitutional  and  base on the 14 amendment, " No states should deprive any person of life, liberty or property, with out due process of law, nor deny to any person with its jurisdiction the equal protection of laws."  So, gays are requesting  their constitutional rights of "equal protection of laws."

Cons are deeply involved with the principles of religion. According to the bible a marriage should be formed by a man and a women as the base of the family. Because of society’s vision of marriage as an institution centered around having children and encouraging parents to stay married and bonded to their children. So many of the politicians and judges of justice face a big conflict when they need to decide between the law and their principles base in their religion. And it is a very changeling decision  because those rules and regulations are interfering each-other today.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court for once may solve this national conflict and lead the country in a good way, that everyone could live peacefully.

April 14, 2015
Safety vs Lesbian/Gay Discrimination: What is More Important?  According to this argument the country should have safety priorities, and that is the way it should be.  But the problem starts at home, meaning the country. If a country is divided by politic interests and religion believes is impossible to survive in time of crisis. So, the country must be unified in order to be successful, then  it needs to separate religion from government interests. Inside problems should be solved in order to be united and prepared to solve safety national problems.

First of all, at the origin of the country the founder fathers stipulated in the constitution; the separation of religion and states.  It gives the region's freedom to the general population. There is not need of new regulations or laws against sex's preferences or religion, such as the recently passed by the state of Indiana.  It is a big scandalous in all the media, causing a big controversy and it could open the door to a widespread discrimination.

Second, the senator Tom was trying to minimize the problem of the Lesbian/ Gay Discrimination. By telling them  that they should be thankful of living here and not living in Iran where they can be kill.
Every country has its own laws and every people should be respectful of those laws, starting for respecting each-other is such issues as religion and politics. Every head is a world, everybody is a unit person. So Lesbian/ Gays have the right to be respected as another human being in this country.

In conclusion, domestics issues should be solved in order to be united and ready to protect the country from foreign countries. A country is like a big house, if the members of the house are divided are easy to defeat. But if the members of the house are united  there are more chances of being successful as a family. So gays/lesbians or others are members of this big country and they deserve respect as a another member of this big family. Unification is the clue to solve all problems of this beautiful country.

April 3, 2015.
The President Barack Obama Should Not Be Impeach?
There are many controversies about if the president should be impeach or not, but the logic indicates that he should not be impeach for a few reasons.

First, Obama has a short term in the White House. There is not worth it to start an impeachment if the process is going to take time and money, while he is going to finish his second term in a little while. Even though, the Republicans are the majority in the House of Representatives and the Senator. They have the power to impeach the president, but according to the Senator David Vitter, the Republicans do not have any plan to initiate an impeachment against the President Obama or the Vice-president Biden and their working team. Not because the Republicans are good catholic members, but because they do not want Mrs. Hilary Clinton to win the lottery ticket for the 2016's presidential elections.

Second, there are not really high crime levels on his actions, as the Article #1 of the Constitution requires for removing the president. Although, Obama surpassed his limitations on the Obama health care and the executive immigration order, those reasons are not bad enough to impeach him. He tries to help people most in need as the President Roosevelt did with his New Deals of the Great Depression of the 1930s. Even though, the Supreme Court was not agreed with Roosevelt’s actions because he surpassed the powers given by the Constitution, at the end one of the Supreme Court’s judge shifted to his side, and two more retired and he replaced them with lawyers that were having his ideologies. That helped Roosevelt to keep going with his New deals for his four terms, been the most successful and respected president of the United States.  So, President Obama deserves the same opportunity as  the Ex-president Roosevelt.

In conclusion, Obama should not be impeach because he will be done in short time, and his right or wrong decisions about the preventive Obama health care reform and the executive immigration order, have not reached the high crime level that the Constitutions of the United States requires to be impeach by the Congress members. On the other hand, Obama only took charge of something that should be done a long time ago, since president Nixon's  period.  For any government his/her people should be first than anything else. The majority of the Congress members are catholic, but they do not apply what they preach or learn in the church because they not worry about the preventive health care  which is a big issue, or better opportunities of life for the general population as they should.

On March 3, 2015 AMERICAblog, published an article called, "Hilary Clinton did  not keep a public email account at the State department." That was supported by the New York Times reported. This is a strong criticism about why  did Hilary Clinton  not follow the federal Records Act?  The author's criticism is that the violation of the law is acting against her, and it is causing  many problems to her political party.  This issue will help her to decide to step up or  to retire for the upcoming 2016 candidacy.

First of all, the writer exposes Hilary Clinton to offer sensationalism because she is a political celebrity.  However,  he knows by firsthand how the government works because he worked for the President Obama's reelection campaign in 2012.  Also, he has a degree in Political Science and high honors in Political Cognition. The writer says that all government's workers should keep email at the state Department for safety, or other way they could be hacked as Clinton's email.

Second, the writer gives the public a general knowledge by  given the pros and cons of the Clinton's issues.  The pros may be that the public know her behavior  because  there was a big scandalous about her emails.  He suggests that, with that in mind  the public may decide not to support her due to  her actions. He suggests that one of the cons will be the political implications  maybe against her Democratic Party, favoring the Republican  Party.

In conclusion, the writer's soft journalism presents Hilary Clinton's behavior which is acting against her. On the other hand, he gives to the public a general idea of the behavior of the politicians' today.  It makes the public to think about the politic party they are going to pick for the upcoming elections of 2016, which it is going to be difficult because there are no many good choices. The public favored Hilary Clinton  with 59 percent  in 2014, but today do who knows it?

There is an editorial  opinion published on February 25, 2015 by The Washington Post, " On immigration policy, the GOP is out of touch with the rest of America." The author says that the CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS are so busy and excited with the partial government shutdown-targeting the Department of Homeland Security and its employees that they missed the American's opinion about the illegal immigration. The author shows an internal conflict within the national GOP where the antagonist is represented by the CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS blocking the protagonists executive immigration's order.

The author presents a clear and well supported arguments  that why the antagonist is out of touch whit the rest of the Americans.  He presents  a link of a survey where 60 percent of those surveyed supported  the legalization of illegal immigrants, and that  the majorities in all 50 states favored  a path to a citizenship.  He also mentions that the Americans are more united about this issue that for the same-sex marriage or abortion.

The author audience is the Americans, and his purpose is to wake up the public because the antagonist is ignoring this. The authors suggest that the  CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS are doing what they want to do,  not mattering that they are affecting not only the Department of Homeland Security's employees and their families. But, also millions of immigrants  and their families who are in the limbo.  He presents a well supported evidence and logic about the subject to claim that the antagonist uses immigration issues to control the protagonist and the nation, and he says that this is "the recipe for political marginalization."

I am totally agree with his opinion.  Looks like the republicans still thinking that the power is only for one race, and they are resisting to share it.  They  always reject anything proposed by the president or the opposition. They do not think,  that for the Americans, the GOP is only ONE, and should function as ONE. They need to find and should work on  an agreement quickly because this  conflict  is hurting and diving the American public even more.  However, the big question is if the GOP or part of it is not doing what the Americans want, what is the whole purpose of having a GOP?  There will be many political implications specially for the republican party on the future presidential elections. The Americans should be wise when the time to vote comes in order to choose a better government.

According to Austin American Statesman on Thursday evening, February 12, 2015 "Open Carry, Campus Carry bills  advance to Texas Senate." If  an open carry bill becomes a law, the gun owners would be allowed  only to carry concealed handguns at the state colleges and universities. There are many people that support the open carry or concealed gun, but there are many pros and cons that the senate need to consider before approving any law related to carry guns, specially students.

First of all,  one of the pros of carrying a gun is to protect yourself and your loved ones. But the legislators and the people whom are supporting this law need to plan this issue real well before approving it which will be given a license to carry a gun to the students. This law needs to request  a course  in order to prepare the students about the level of responsibility that brings to carry a gun, and a psychology test needs to be done in order to determine if the person is really prepared to carry a gun for self defense.

Second,  one of the cons of carrying a gun is that this could be in the wrong hands and do more damage than good as happened in the case of children that have been killing each other. Another example is the Virginia's shooting where many students were killed by one student who was not mentally well.  Carrying guns at the state's colleges and universities could generate more violence among students. That for any disagreement will fight each other. And take it to another level when they combine alcohol and drugs, which is very common among college students.

In conclusion, the pros and cons above need to be consider before this bill keeps advancing in the senate because the consequences could be very serious for the present and future generations of college's students and the communities. The senators need to be really careful with open carry, campus carry bill  because violence generate more violence, and it is going to be hard to stop it. Or what do you think?