Comments on "Balancing Pop Culture and Governing"

On Briana McClellan's post,  "Balancing Pop Culture and Governing", she states that the president has every right to reference pop culture and even discuss the issue with the youth's obsession with the glamorous life that it is Hollywood. I agree with Briana that the president has every right to make references and or talk about other subjects that does not involve politics, as long as he has a purpose to help the nation.

There is an issue when it involves kids and idols. While there are people who actually have achieved great things and helped others in need, kids only want to be like the celebrities they see in movies, partying and basically achieving nothing in society. Children are choosing to grow up like people that shouldn't even be considered idols. This is what the President was talking about and the backlash to it seems too exaggerated. The President has every right to address this issue and I believe Briana was right on cue about it. The facts she used to back up her argument and even mentions the constitution helps her argument stand. The President was trying to reach children by warning them on their idols, which this to me seems harmless. He was doing his job, after all, children are the future.

Gay Marriage

I honestly believe that the LGBT community should be allowed to marry whoever they want. Gay marriage is something that is constantly talked about in today's society, and yet no one has achieved an agreement towards the topic. It is a constant debate between conservatives and people for gay marriage, a debate that can get people frustrated and angry. This is an issue, in the fact that is has not been legalized in the entire country.

Marriage gives couples a lot of benefits that are denied to gay couples. Certain benefits such as sharing a health insurance plan are not given to couples who are not married. If one of the partners would become ill and does not have health insurance, the other partner would not be able to help due to the law.

Gay couples are also restricted to adopt and have a less chance of having permission for adopting a child than a straight married couple would. Both of these, an many more examples hurt the LGBT community and the individuals who are denied marriage simply because of their sexual orientation.

The usual arguments against gay marriage are about how we as a society have lost the meaning of marriage. A few days ago I was watching an interview with Rick Santorum, explaining how to him marriage is an institution about a man and a woman getting married for the purpose of having children. 

In his words, marriage is only for procreation. If that is the case, then many straight couples, who unfortunately cannot have children, would be stopped from getting married. Others don't even want children, and end up never having any, and according to the "definition" of marriage, they should be denied marriage. 

  

By this definition, there would be a lot more restrictions than just people who favor the same gender. Homosexuality is not new and will never disappear. The LGBT community wants gay marriage to be legalized and I agree with them. Why should we deny them their right to get married?

Education Equals Money Commentary

      Fernanda states in "Education Equals Money" the struggles and unfairness the student loans is put upon the college student. She makes a very convincing argument and because of it I am 100% on her side. I am also a student who is struggling to pay for my education, to the point where I have nothing left in my wallet after my monthly payment. The fact that many can relate to this issue helps gain an audience who will agree with every word in the editorial.
      
      To hear that the government profits of the loans of students is enraging and leaves a bad taste in the people's mouth. It feels like we're getting punished for wanting an education by getting us involved in a vicious cycle of expensive tuition and high interest loan rates. Fernanda's arguments is right on cue about all the issues involved in this. She talks about the 6.8% interest rates, how the government receives 63 cents for each students taking a student loan, the debt that takes decades to relieve oneself from, and how on top of it all, we the students, seem to be the only group to not benefit from the situation. The argument is filled with a lot of emotion which actually helps the argument that the student suffers from student loans. The fact that many in today's society are affected by debt, especially because of student loans, will prove the point that student loan interest rates are a huge issue. An issue that desperately needs to be fixed for the future of the country.

Who Gets To Decide?

The national government should not allow only old conservative men to decide what the best is for women and their reproductive rights. I've heard absolutely ridiculous arguments from these men that prove women should have choices when it comes to their bodies.

Both contraception and abortion where touchy subjects during the 2012 election and are still as of today considered controversial. Republicans such as Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock went about the issue in the wrong way which ended costing them the election, and women such as Wendy Davis’ courageous filibuster against the conservative congressmen of Texas, to save women’s rights.

I agree that abortion is a controversial issue and understand the conservative's reason for wanting to ban it. What I don't agree with is the people making the decisions seem to be ignorant in the matter. I agree most of the times that abortion should not be the way to go for unwanted pregnancy.

The issue here is that many women get raped in today's society and in result get pregnant over the unfortunate incident. These women should be allowed to make the choice they feel is best for themselves and their mental state. We should not force them to have their rapist’s baby for our beliefs.

To point out how clueless some can be, Republican Representative of Missouri, Todd Akin made his most infamous speech on rape and pregnancy, “It seems to be, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, it’s reallyrare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut thewhole thing down”.

Another controversial speech made by another Republican was from Indiana Senate candidate, Richard Mourdock, who trying to justify banning abortion, stated that "even when life begins in that horriblesituation of rape, that is something that God intended to happen". Both of these statements prove that these men cannot make the decisions for issues in which they are ignorant about.

Wendy Davis, a Democrat Senator of Texas, gained popularity after her filibuster in 2013, against the Anti-abortion law planning to pass in Texas. She filibustered for 11 hours straight against a room full of conservative Republican men. The filibuster throughout the entire 11 hours was on topic and intelligent unlike many in the United States Congress.

What this all proves is that when it comes to Reproductive rights of women, people in charge of making those decisions should be informed in the issue. More women should be involved in the discussion of contraception and abortion. After all, this issue is about women.

"Tea partiers: 'Cut spending! 'Which Spending? 'Uhhh...'" Critique

Laura Clawson's post on the Daily Kos blog, Tea partiers: 'Cut spending!' Which Spending? 'Uhhh...' is about Clawson's opinion on the Republicans’ ideas on Budget cutting. Clawson's intended audience is more on the Democratic liberal side, clearly shown by the insults on the Tea Party and conservative Republicans. It is no secret that to attract an audience with a political party, most of the times you’ll succeed in getting their attention by bashing the other party. She uses her bitterness emotions towards Republicans to capture her intended audience’s attention. Clawson's claim is that Republicans are being "ignoramuses" and naïve when it comes to Budget cuts. Her argument is backed up two things, her bitterness and her evidence of other people statistics and quotes from Republicans themselves.

The evidence that Laura Clawson provides are Business Insider's founding and quotes from Republican members to support her claims. The founding of Business Insider’s by Brett LoGiurato presented the budget cut ideas of the Tea Partiers and what they think should happen instead of raising the debt limit. Many of the participants had no idea how little the cuts they suggested would help the country. Clawson even provides links of where she got her evidence to support her facts. The quotes she uses are straight sayings from members of the Republican Party. The quotes she uses make the GOP members sound cold, selfish, and ignorant, helping her claim and argument. Clawson’s emotions also help her argument win the minds of people who are angered by the GOP and Tea Partiers.  She insults the other party and questions their intelligence at every turn. To some people, this might be bothersome, but to a lot, this will get their rage going and support her side.

Her argument is very convincing on how she handled her evidence. She can end up convincing a lot of people with her evidence, and most importantly, rage. It’s easy for the media to convince people now a days with emotion and constant negativity. It is clear Clawson has a political agenda of trashing the political party she does not agree with. It’s obvious that’s how strongly politically involved people work and they will try nonstop to gain support for their party, and crush their opponents.

"Obamacare mandates threathen religious freedom" critique

John Kennedy states his opinion on “Obamacare mandates threaten religious freedom” about the new affordable health care act. John Kennedy makes the argument that Obamacare is threatening everyone's religious beliefs due to the "forced" nature of the mandate. John Kennedy, as stated in the article, is a serious Catholic business owner. The author argues that his religion is in danger by all the options offered by Obamacare. Contraceptives and sterilization, which are both required by Obamacare, are a known controversy in the conservative side, which they truly believe it violates the first amendment. Kennedy is relying on his audience to be conservative religious folks so he can have a bigger impact in spreading his voice and gain sympathy. Although he gives reasons to why he believes the mandate violates his faith, he is simply going on his emotions and not facts. He states that the mandate will violate his faith, destroy his business with fines, cause unemployment, and cut out employees’ health benefits. However, he does not back up his reasons with evidence on how it will happen or how. His lack of evidence dismisses his argument to have significance and therefore hurt his point. The author’s logic is faulty and it’s based on his beliefs alone. He believes that the mandate will violate his faith, but the health care act has nothing to do with the employers’ religion. What an employee does on his or her own time should not affect the employer, his or her faith, or the business. The author will of course get support from strictly religious people who also might be on the same situation. However, convincing anyone who is taking the opposite stand will be unlikely.

House Republicans Cut Food Stamps

The article "House Republicans Pass Deep Cuts in Food Stamps" by Ron Nixon, states that the House Republicans have passed a bill that would cut 40 billion dollars in over ten years from the food stamp program to help get the country out of the recession. Even though most of the Democratic Party objected to this, the bill was able to pass through the House. The Republicans say the reasons for passing this bill are to help with the debt and to help the American people by "motivating" them to find a job and be financially stable without the government's help. According to the bill, it places a lot more restrictions to welfare and related programs that benefit people with financial need. Republicans believe that this bill will support citizens to get back on their feet. The Democrats believe that the bill will just place millions of unfortunate families in poverty and affect the innocent children in those homes. I recommend to anyone to read this article because it’s important to know what our Representatives are doing, and if they are looking out for our best interest or their own.