1/12/14
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/12/gates-dont-ask-dont-tell-fight-was-only-time-obama-showed-passion-for-military/?intcmp=latestnews
Recently, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates sharply questioned Obama's passion for anything military related, besides his repealing of "Don't ask, don't tell." Gates said he was disturbed by the lack of any emotion or passion when it comes to the military. He also went on to compare him to previous president George W. Bush. He said that Bush was generally very unemotional except when dealing with military matters like the giving of the Medal of Honor. There were numerous people that defended Obama saying otherwise.
As for my opinion on this matter, well it's not something that chalks up to be that big of a deal. I don't think it really matters too much what President Obama is passionate about. I guess you could hope that cares about our military personnel and how are military actions can effect our country but it's not something that is of upmost importance. I guess if Bush liked the military more than Obama that's fine. You just want the President to give focus to everything that needs to be given focus not just what he personally wants to focus on, if that makes sense.
Sunday, January 12, 2014
Impeachment for Christie?
1/12/14
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/12/impeachment-dems-escalate-nj-bridge-probe-as-others-defend-christie/
There are now Democrats saying that Chis Christie should be impeached for the incident involving the lane closures that happened on the George Washington bridge last fall. The apparent reasoning for the lane closures was an act of political revenge. Chris Christie claims that he had no knowledge of what was happening with that incident at that time. He has also fired his top aid who did have knowledge of this. The New Jersey governor says he is very embarrassed by what has happened. People are saying that if he can be proven to know about the situation he should be impeached.
Here is the thing, I really doubt Christie is going to be impeached. It is very hard to prove that a certain person had specific knowledge about something. You have to have hard evidence and that is hard to come by. In my opinion I am not really sure that he did know or was involved directly in this mess. If he was then he definitely be punished for something so unprofessional and quite frankly, illegal. You also have to wonder if this will have any effect on his running for the president 2016.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/12/impeachment-dems-escalate-nj-bridge-probe-as-others-defend-christie/
There are now Democrats saying that Chis Christie should be impeached for the incident involving the lane closures that happened on the George Washington bridge last fall. The apparent reasoning for the lane closures was an act of political revenge. Chris Christie claims that he had no knowledge of what was happening with that incident at that time. He has also fired his top aid who did have knowledge of this. The New Jersey governor says he is very embarrassed by what has happened. People are saying that if he can be proven to know about the situation he should be impeached.
Here is the thing, I really doubt Christie is going to be impeached. It is very hard to prove that a certain person had specific knowledge about something. You have to have hard evidence and that is hard to come by. In my opinion I am not really sure that he did know or was involved directly in this mess. If he was then he definitely be punished for something so unprofessional and quite frankly, illegal. You also have to wonder if this will have any effect on his running for the president 2016.
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Utah Not Recognizing the Marriages
1/8/14
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/08/utah-governor-says-state-will-not-recognize-gay-marriages-amid-court-battle/
In the middle of all the battles in the courts concerning same sex marriage in our state of Utah, Governor Gary Herbert says the state will not recognize any of the couples that were married after Dec. 20. There has recently been a stay passed so for now gay marriage is on hold. More than 1300 couples were married after Judge Shelby ruled Utah's ban on gay marriage unconstitutional. The state agencies that would normally give services to normal married couples are barred from giving any help to the couples that were legally married after the ruling. Gay rights activists are furious with the Utah government and some say that the governor is discriminatory for not giving them basic rights and protections. One example of something that gay couples cannot do is get their names changed on their driver licenses because the state won't recognize the marriage as legal.
I am very down the middle with this issue. I see what the problems the gay rights groups have with this. They feel cheated because they were allowed to legally be married and now the state won't recognize this. Back where they were before. I kinda think that its unfair for them, but at the same time the state got a stay on the ruling and are going into the appeals process. So if no one else can get married then maybe wait to let the ones that did get married to see if their marriages really will end up being valid. The whole process has been very sticky and confusing.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/08/utah-governor-says-state-will-not-recognize-gay-marriages-amid-court-battle/
In the middle of all the battles in the courts concerning same sex marriage in our state of Utah, Governor Gary Herbert says the state will not recognize any of the couples that were married after Dec. 20. There has recently been a stay passed so for now gay marriage is on hold. More than 1300 couples were married after Judge Shelby ruled Utah's ban on gay marriage unconstitutional. The state agencies that would normally give services to normal married couples are barred from giving any help to the couples that were legally married after the ruling. Gay rights activists are furious with the Utah government and some say that the governor is discriminatory for not giving them basic rights and protections. One example of something that gay couples cannot do is get their names changed on their driver licenses because the state won't recognize the marriage as legal.
I am very down the middle with this issue. I see what the problems the gay rights groups have with this. They feel cheated because they were allowed to legally be married and now the state won't recognize this. Back where they were before. I kinda think that its unfair for them, but at the same time the state got a stay on the ruling and are going into the appeals process. So if no one else can get married then maybe wait to let the ones that did get married to see if their marriages really will end up being valid. The whole process has been very sticky and confusing.
Monday, January 6, 2014
Enrollment For Obamacare
1/6/13
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/06/obamacare-enrollment-figures-still-far-short-administration-own-goal/
There is once again debating and discussing about Obamacare. Now people are arguing over whether the amount of people signed up so far is a "failure" or if it just doesn't really matter. There are so far 2.1 million people have been signed up to private state or federal plans when the goal for the end of December was 3.3 million. There is also a goal of 7 million to be signed up by the end of March. Some say that is not enough of the 20 million uninsured plus the other people that had their policies canceled. But there are those like Gene Sperling (National Economic Council Director) says it doesn't matter what the number is but that we have as many signed up as possible. White House Spokesman Jay Carney also says it doesn't matter how matter but who it is that are signing up. A lot of sick people have signed up because it benefits them the most. The young and healthy will most likely be the last to sign up.
Does it really matter how many people are signed up through Obamacare? Well there are definitely multiple sides to this question. One is that Obamacare is not reaching the goals that its own supporters set up. That's fact. Who really knows if it will ever get as many people as it was hoping to get. But I do think that the bigger deal is who is getting signed up. I am not a supporter of Obamacare but if you are someone that would benefit from it then why not use it if it's there for you to use? The sick and people without insurance definitely need to be helped so it is really good that they are the ones signing up right now. Up to this point there have been a lot of issues with rolling out Obamacare, and it is not making its goals. So I am curious to see how it is going to do from here on out.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/06/obamacare-enrollment-figures-still-far-short-administration-own-goal/
There is once again debating and discussing about Obamacare. Now people are arguing over whether the amount of people signed up so far is a "failure" or if it just doesn't really matter. There are so far 2.1 million people have been signed up to private state or federal plans when the goal for the end of December was 3.3 million. There is also a goal of 7 million to be signed up by the end of March. Some say that is not enough of the 20 million uninsured plus the other people that had their policies canceled. But there are those like Gene Sperling (National Economic Council Director) says it doesn't matter what the number is but that we have as many signed up as possible. White House Spokesman Jay Carney also says it doesn't matter how matter but who it is that are signing up. A lot of sick people have signed up because it benefits them the most. The young and healthy will most likely be the last to sign up.
Does it really matter how many people are signed up through Obamacare? Well there are definitely multiple sides to this question. One is that Obamacare is not reaching the goals that its own supporters set up. That's fact. Who really knows if it will ever get as many people as it was hoping to get. But I do think that the bigger deal is who is getting signed up. I am not a supporter of Obamacare but if you are someone that would benefit from it then why not use it if it's there for you to use? The sick and people without insurance definitely need to be helped so it is really good that they are the ones signing up right now. Up to this point there have been a lot of issues with rolling out Obamacare, and it is not making its goals. So I am curious to see how it is going to do from here on out.
Sunday, January 5, 2014
Benefit for Unemployment
1/5/14
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/01/white-house-jobless-benefits-should-be-first-new-legislation-2014/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/05/hill-democrats-and-republicans-set-2014-agendas-with-midterm-elections-in-mind/
One of the first things congress will be debating and trying to sign this new year is an extension or some kind of benefit of insurance for the unemployed. 1.3 million Americans have recently seen their unemployment insurance cut off, something they need desperately as they try to find jobs. (This according to National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling) This cut off was due to failing to extend aid in the budget deal last December. They will be holding a preliminary vote on the issue tomorrow. House Leader John Boehner argued that no agreement will be made unless there are cuts somewhere else to offset the cost. There is pressure on the Republicans after Obama came out and supported this as well. Marco Rubio R-Fla. says that what we need is to help the people acquire skills to get out of poverty over just handing them money.
In my opinion, I tend to lean slightly on the side of the Republicans with this issue. Yes we don't want these unemployed people to suffer but I think that they can just take advantage of the system. No, not everyone does take advantage but there are those that do. Help them out a little by getting them what they need to be employed again. I also think that if we do extend the benefits that we need to offset with cuts in another area. I don't like the thought of just giving out money from nowhere. We will have to see how it plays out in Congress and see which side gets what they want.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/01/white-house-jobless-benefits-should-be-first-new-legislation-2014/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/05/hill-democrats-and-republicans-set-2014-agendas-with-midterm-elections-in-mind/
One of the first things congress will be debating and trying to sign this new year is an extension or some kind of benefit of insurance for the unemployed. 1.3 million Americans have recently seen their unemployment insurance cut off, something they need desperately as they try to find jobs. (This according to National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling) This cut off was due to failing to extend aid in the budget deal last December. They will be holding a preliminary vote on the issue tomorrow. House Leader John Boehner argued that no agreement will be made unless there are cuts somewhere else to offset the cost. There is pressure on the Republicans after Obama came out and supported this as well. Marco Rubio R-Fla. says that what we need is to help the people acquire skills to get out of poverty over just handing them money.
In my opinion, I tend to lean slightly on the side of the Republicans with this issue. Yes we don't want these unemployed people to suffer but I think that they can just take advantage of the system. No, not everyone does take advantage but there are those that do. Help them out a little by getting them what they need to be employed again. I also think that if we do extend the benefits that we need to offset with cuts in another area. I don't like the thought of just giving out money from nowhere. We will have to see how it plays out in Congress and see which side gets what they want.
Thursday, January 2, 2014
Al Qaeda Resurgence?
1/2/14
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/02/civilian-death-toll-in-iraq-highest-in-years-fueling-concern-about-al-qaeda/
2013 has ended and looking back at the violence in Iraq during the past year there is major concern that Al Qaeda is making a violent resurgence after some steady and lower key years. According to the UN 7,818 civilians were killed throughout 2013. There is concern that the US hard fought gains to get more peace for Iraqi civilians is now going to waste. Troops were pulled out in 2011 and the levels of violence stayed lower for a while. Some are urging the United States to get involved again but there is not a lot of desire for us to go back there. Tensions between the Sunnis and Shiites (different branches of the Islam religion) have also risen over the past year. This has created contention between different government officials.
It is a little worrisome that violence seems to growing in Iraq again. It just shows that how hard you try to keep terrorism and violence down it is impossible to completely stop it. I did read that the US is still helping Iraq in different ways than supplying troops. They continue to discuss various things with officials of Iraq and supplying arms to the government. I don't think going back into Iraq would accomplish anything. We don't have an appetite or good reason to go in so I don't think we should really even consider it at this point. We will have to watch and see what Al Qaeda continues to do during 2014.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/02/civilian-death-toll-in-iraq-highest-in-years-fueling-concern-about-al-qaeda/
2013 has ended and looking back at the violence in Iraq during the past year there is major concern that Al Qaeda is making a violent resurgence after some steady and lower key years. According to the UN 7,818 civilians were killed throughout 2013. There is concern that the US hard fought gains to get more peace for Iraqi civilians is now going to waste. Troops were pulled out in 2011 and the levels of violence stayed lower for a while. Some are urging the United States to get involved again but there is not a lot of desire for us to go back there. Tensions between the Sunnis and Shiites (different branches of the Islam religion) have also risen over the past year. This has created contention between different government officials.
It is a little worrisome that violence seems to growing in Iraq again. It just shows that how hard you try to keep terrorism and violence down it is impossible to completely stop it. I did read that the US is still helping Iraq in different ways than supplying troops. They continue to discuss various things with officials of Iraq and supplying arms to the government. I don't think going back into Iraq would accomplish anything. We don't have an appetite or good reason to go in so I don't think we should really even consider it at this point. We will have to watch and see what Al Qaeda continues to do during 2014.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)