Monday, November 30, 2009

Bristol Palin's Boyfriend


Bristol Palin's former boyfriend Levi Johnston has decided to pose for the pornographic magazine Playgirl. He figures doing this will further his fame and bring in some good money for him. He recently did the shoot, which is supposed to be on Playgirl's website. He didn't do any full frontals (thank God) much to the disappointment of those who like Playgirl magazine.

http://us.cnn.com/video/?/video/offbeat/2009/11/17/moos.palin.levi.watch.cnn

This video is half of what I just mentioned. The other half is of Sarah Palin being "contradictionary." I feel that CN didn't care about Kerry's contractionary-ness (and he was running for President at the time) but now they think about it with Palin, who isn't even the governor anymore. There is some hypocracy here.

As to Levi Johnston posing for Playgirl....I feel that it is morally wrong and a morally cheap (yet easy) way to make money. This won't be a good example for people, especially the baby and when that baby grows up. But it did get him more fame, which seems to be what he wanted.

Friday, November 20, 2009

GM's 60 Day Guarantee



General Motors is trying to get consumer confidence in their products back up. So they are doing a plan to where one could go buy a GM car and be able to keep it. If after 60 days, they didn't like it, they could return it and get their money back. GM has had 222,000 people go for this deal, and so far only 200 have returned their cars. However, there are some restrictions. The car must be kept for thirty days. One may return it between 31-60 days. If there is more than $200 damage to it (dings, scratches, etc) you can't bring it back. Also, you can't put more than 4000 miles on it. If one decides to return the car, they also don't get things back like sales tax, rebates and discounts.

http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/11/20/driving-up-the-deals-gms-60-day-guarantee/?test=latestnews

My opinion: Hopefully GM cars and trucks are getting better and more reliable. I generally like them and feel that they have quite a history. However, poor management and crappy reliability has made people wary of the big three: GM for issues like computer controlled stuff and fit and finish, Ford for fit and finish and thirsty engines, and Chrysler for fit and finish and reliability, especially with transmissions. So now, all of these are supposed to be revamped. GM seems to be more ready to stand by their cars, but I guess only time will tell if they are any different or not.

Thursday, November 19, 2009

9/11 Trial


Over the past couple of days, there has been a debate as to whether to try the 9/11 terrorists in a civilian court or in a military court. Some people feel that the terrorists should be tried militarily, and some believe that they should be tried in a civilian court. However, as of today, they will be tried in a civilian court. Attorney General Eric Holder made that decision. They will be tried in New York City. America is generally split down the middle of this issue. According to a Fox News Poll, about 52% of people polled think that the suspected terrorists should be tried in a military court. However, 40% think that they should be tried in the US Court System. Republicans tend to favor a military trial, while Democrats tent to favor a trial in a civilian court. Independents are generally more supportive of a military trial. So now the 9/11 terrorists will be tried in a civilian court in New York City.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/19/fox-news-poll-percent-think-trial-military-tribunal/

My opinion: I feel that since what they did is an act of terrorism, and what we called it was an act of terrorism, then we should try them in a military court. They are not civilians, they pulled a military operation and killed lots of innocent Americans. Hitler's top aids/friends/gestapo were all tried militarily (International Military Tribunal), and so should these terrorists.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

EPA Emplyees Silenced Over Cap and Trade


Some EPA employees made a video about their opinions of President Obama's administration's plan to use cap and trade legislation to fight climate trade. These EPA employees Laurie Williams, and Alan Zabel are a married couple and have worked for the EPA for over 20 years. They were approved to make a video by their bosses in San Francisco, and they made the video in their own time. Cap and trade works like this: companies are issued emissions limits, or caps, which they can then trade -- as a means to fight climate change. The video stated that "Cap-and-trade with offsets provides a false sense of progress and puts money in the pockets of investors, we think that these restrictions might not be constitutional." They released the video and wrote an editorial for the Washington Post, but now EPA Director Lisa Jackson ordered that they remove the video, or disciplinary action will follow. When questioned about it, the EPA released a statement that said that they welcome free expression, but they want Laurie and Alan to emphasize that they are speaking for themselves and not the EPA. Some people have called this incident censorship.

My opinion: I feel that this is borderline censorship. Yes, they should make it clear that they don't represent the EPA in this regard, but they have every right to make a video proving something wrong that they feel is wrong.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/17/epa-employees-silenced-criticizing-cap-trade/

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Colorado Taxes and Budget


Governor Ritter has thought about taking away tax breaks in order to balance the state's shortfall of revenue of $1.3 billion. The Supreme Court ruled that state governments can do this without voter approval. So Governor Ritter to eliminate 13 tax breaks and credits to balance next year's budget. He plans on doing this by getting rid of tax breaks and credits for businesses and by limiting conversation easement credits for three years, among other things.

http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/content/gen/breaking-news/index.html?p=11097

My opinion: I think big businesses do better when they have tax breaks. It allows them to run well and gives them incentive to do things correctly. I do not think that taking away tax breaks is a good idea. Maybe Governor Ritter should just spend less.

Federal Deficits Really High


In other news today, the totals for the deficits for the month of October and the year have come in. October cost $176.4 billion, and deficit for the 2009 budget year was $1.42 trillion. October was the 13th straight month to show a monthly deficit, and it was the fifth largest monthly deficit ever. Obama's administration expects this years deficit to reach $1.5 trillion. Economists are getting concerned that all this government borrowing will push interest rates higher as the economy begins to recover. China is beginning to get concerned about all of the U.S.'s debt, especially since they have bought lots of U.S. Treasury securities. Timothy Geithner told reporters that America will tackle its deficits as soon as our recovery is more secure. Republicans are upset with the Obama administration for not dealing with the deficits. The debate will get more intense as Congress is expected to decide on whether to raise the government's debt limit, which is currently at $12.1 million.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/12/federal-deficit-sets-october-record-billion/?test=latestnews

My opinion: I feel that the U.S. is spending way too much money. If individuals are in lots of debt, and they never get out of it, things happen like the bank takes their possessions. The government needs to stop spending so much money. They shouldn't do what Germany did when they were forced to pay for WWI.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Free Speech Rights and Hasan


In the news today, it appears that free speech rights prevented the authorities to deeply investigate into Hasan's (the terrorist who attack at Fort Hood) emails. He apparently sent emails to an imam (a person in an Islamic leadership position) seeking "spiritual and religious guidance." These emails were discovered, and were sent to the authorities including the Department of Defense, however little was done, because they didn't want to be "crucified" by investigating further, and it didn't seem like religious guidance was a big deal. Some people have wondered if that Hasan was treated lightly because the military and government didn't investigate this as much. However, investigators don't have any evidence that he was treated lightly.

Also, Religion plays a role, however big or small is to be debated, in this shooting. He apparently yelled God Is Great in Arabic. Some people feel that his religion has nothing to do with the crime he committed, while others believe that it played some role.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, an anti gun advocate, claims that guns were the driving factor of the attack. He feels that America loves guns so much that we see them on a daily basis. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence feels the same. They think that the solution to gun violence isn't to arm more people with guns.

My Opinion: (Oh no!) I feel that Hasan committed a terrorist act, even though he isn't a "terrorist" in the traditional stereotype of "belongs to the Taliban or other such group." I feel that he was wrong in doing this and that his punishment should be carried out to the fullest extent of the law. I feel that the government didn't want to do much because of what happened when "We the People" heard of "wire tapping." People forgot that it was for our safety. In this case, the emails should have been looked at more closely. If it came to nothing, great. If there was something dangerous in them and it was dealt with then, it might have saved some soldiers lives and wounds. It would have saved the families of the soldiers a lot of heartache and stress. I don't know if Religion was an aspect of it, but I do feel that he is a radical, not a peaceful Muslim. If people are so into gun control, and so against guns, then how come cities that ban them have a higher crime rate than cities that don't ban guns. I think there should be rules to get guns, but it shouldn't be extremely regulated or banned. I know that if I was a robber and I wanted to rob a house, but I knew that there was a gun in the house and that the owner could use it well, I would probably not go there. However, if there was no gun at the house, I would be more inclined to go rob it. Even if you ban guns, there are still ways to kill people. That won't change. I also feel that the media has been very "politically correct" in reporting this story. Since when is doing something this awful just a "post-traumatic stress disorder?" This is an act of terror and violence. If it's just post-traumatic stress disorder, then how come I don't go crazy and shoot people right around finals time? If I did that, I would be arrested and thrown in jail. The media needs to be not so politically correct and report the news.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/10/coverage-fort-hood-shooting-press-dodges-religious-component/

Yes, I did get that article from Fox News.
David Webb