Bush has taken America to the biggest level of tyranny and abuse ever. Sarah is absolutely correct, where has the fourth amendment gone? President Bush isn't fighting for freedom, or to protect the American people! The Bush administration is out to turn America into George Orwell's vision of 1984, a mechanically controlled society, manipulated by fear and abuse from the state.
How did we let this happen?
Patriotism doesn't mean to follow your leader to the damnation of your country, Patriotism is to stand against people like Bush. Disobey when you feel systematically raped by the government, that's true patriotism.
Original article taken from:
http://sarasworldofpolitics.blogspot.com/2007/11/fourth-amendment.html
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
private prisons
The privatization of prisons has become a growing business in corporate America with stocks selling like pancakes on Wall Street. Players such as Corrections Corporation of America and Wackenhut Corrections, with over 264 privately owned correctional facilities across the country, are profiting from the imprisonment and misery of human beings. The human rights of prisoners are at stake when there are large profits to be made from their incarceration. Privately owned correctional facilities use their inmates as cheap labor, expanding their profitability through the exploitation of human beings. It is hypocritical for the justice system to punish people for crimes committed, yet they allow corporations to profit from such unfortunate events. In a nation where the almighty dollar has corrupted human values, the line has to be drawn somewhere.
In a country where we have a war on drugs, a war on crime, a war on terrorism, isn't it hypocritical on our part to profit from crime? American justice clearly states that we have zero tolerance for crime; of course tolerance is lowest when your skin is black or brown and have little money to afford a good lawyer. As Americans, we have to examine the values that we hold and see if profiting from misery is in fact, an American value.
The question shouldn't be how we can profit from social decadence, but instead, we should look for ways to repair our justice system and find smarter ways to deal with crime. It seems as if the U.S is selling every aspect of our lives to corporate hands; from social security to the mercenaries we are hiring in Iraq to fight our war, it's all in the name of money. As people who believe in democracy, we have to ensure that our rights are intact, even when we are being handed off to the corporate machine.
In a country where we have a war on drugs, a war on crime, a war on terrorism, isn't it hypocritical on our part to profit from crime? American justice clearly states that we have zero tolerance for crime; of course tolerance is lowest when your skin is black or brown and have little money to afford a good lawyer. As Americans, we have to examine the values that we hold and see if profiting from misery is in fact, an American value.
The question shouldn't be how we can profit from social decadence, but instead, we should look for ways to repair our justice system and find smarter ways to deal with crime. It seems as if the U.S is selling every aspect of our lives to corporate hands; from social security to the mercenaries we are hiring in Iraq to fight our war, it's all in the name of money. As people who believe in democracy, we have to ensure that our rights are intact, even when we are being handed off to the corporate machine.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Illegal Immigrants don't have the right to dream
In the article "The Dream Act Died" by Martha Ramirez, Ramirez tells us about the unfortunate fate of the Dream Act which fell short of a couple of votes from becoming a law. Basically, the Dream Act would give students whose residency status is classified as illegal, a chance of a higher education. I believe and agree with Ramirez, that without this bill being passed, thousands of underage illegal immigrant students are being denied the chance of a better future.
The reality is like this, illegal immigrant kids did not choose to be "illegal aliens." Why is America punishing them for the decisions they had no control over? These kids come to this country by the choices their parents make. These kids grow up in this country speaking English, pledging allegiance to the American flag, learning to live by American standards, yet they are still treated unequally. How can America be so cold hearted against someone that has embraced the American life as his or her own? A majority of these illegal alien students strive to be the best at school, but when they reach the age to attend college, their dreams fall apart. Many people opposing the Dream act argue that it's like granting illegal aliens amnesty. How are you gonna grant amnesty to a child who hasn't committed a crime? Is searching for a better future and having dreams a crime for which we should punish these people? These are kids we are talking about, kids who might not even know their native language, but do know the Star-Spangled Banner. These are kids who know their bill rights, yet they might not even know much about the laws of their country of origin.
On a lighter note, it's good to know that states such as California and Texas, have made the dream Act into a reality for these students who only want a shot at a better life. These students will someday be productive citizens of this society. If we deny these kids the chance of an education, how is that going to benefit anyone in the long run? If anything, helping illegal immigrant students to become somebody, will bring more prosperity to this country. They are just kids, not criminals.
link to article (blog):
http://marthagovernmentportal.blogspot.com/2007/10/dream-act-died.html
The reality is like this, illegal immigrant kids did not choose to be "illegal aliens." Why is America punishing them for the decisions they had no control over? These kids come to this country by the choices their parents make. These kids grow up in this country speaking English, pledging allegiance to the American flag, learning to live by American standards, yet they are still treated unequally. How can America be so cold hearted against someone that has embraced the American life as his or her own? A majority of these illegal alien students strive to be the best at school, but when they reach the age to attend college, their dreams fall apart. Many people opposing the Dream act argue that it's like granting illegal aliens amnesty. How are you gonna grant amnesty to a child who hasn't committed a crime? Is searching for a better future and having dreams a crime for which we should punish these people? These are kids we are talking about, kids who might not even know their native language, but do know the Star-Spangled Banner. These are kids who know their bill rights, yet they might not even know much about the laws of their country of origin.
On a lighter note, it's good to know that states such as California and Texas, have made the dream Act into a reality for these students who only want a shot at a better life. These students will someday be productive citizens of this society. If we deny these kids the chance of an education, how is that going to benefit anyone in the long run? If anything, helping illegal immigrant students to become somebody, will bring more prosperity to this country. They are just kids, not criminals.
link to article (blog):
http://marthagovernmentportal.blogspot.com/2007/10/dream-act-died.html
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
scare tactic
In this newly redefined twenty-first century America, fear has become the main oppressor of freedom. We have an all-out-war against the evils that might contaminate our way of life, spreading the seed of fear through all its citizens. Our system tells us how scared we should be from the outside world by creating an alarmist scale in which color represents the terror alert. Slowly but surely, our freedom is being plucked away, leaving us wondering how democracy will be defined in the future. Big Brother is watching, people are hypnotized by the media, and those who question authority could be labeled as terrorists. Is that a scary thought or am I just being paranoid?
Who does the world really view as terrorists to begin with? I believe the answer to that would be Americans. We are the ones that bombed Hiroshima, we are the ones that lie in order to wage war, we are the ones that hide our true intentions in the name of the democracy. So why do we fear this unseen enemy we call terrorists? Simple, we don’t. They just wants us to believe we are at constant danger so the common people could be easily manipulated into the agendas of those in power. What better weapon of control than to feed fear by the spoonful to a country obsessed not by what is affecting their lives, but by the nimrods that illuminate their television sets at night. Fear plus distraction from what really matters equals less freedom for the common man, simple equation.
Who does the world really view as terrorists to begin with? I believe the answer to that would be Americans. We are the ones that bombed Hiroshima, we are the ones that lie in order to wage war, we are the ones that hide our true intentions in the name of the democracy. So why do we fear this unseen enemy we call terrorists? Simple, we don’t. They just wants us to believe we are at constant danger so the common people could be easily manipulated into the agendas of those in power. What better weapon of control than to feed fear by the spoonful to a country obsessed not by what is affecting their lives, but by the nimrods that illuminate their television sets at night. Fear plus distraction from what really matters equals less freedom for the common man, simple equation.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Empty words for a nation in despair.
This critical time of war, deception, and the near future presidential elections has set the stage for the public to demand answers from those in power. Elizabeth Sullivan, contributor to The (Cleveland) Plain Dealer, claims that the presidential candidates have been avoiding the tough questions and sugar coating their answers. These are the same candidates that gave the public hope for change in America and are now playing good old vague politics.
In our post 9/11 “brave new world,” the people want to hear resolutions to our current state of mayhem in Iraq. Peace in Iraq should be the primary focus of the candidates. Instead, they shift our emphasis on such an imperative issue with other divisive issues such as gay rights and abortion. Really, is gay marriage going to ruin America like the Iraq war soon will? At times, it seems that people in power take the rest of us for imbeciles.
Subsequent to the Bush administration taking over our lives, haven’t we been lied to and misled enough? The true issues that will define us as a nation have to be prioritized instead of “beating around the bush” with nonsense. Presidential candidates are starting to lose their substance on the issues that they felt so strongly about when the race began.
Elizabeth Sullivan puts the presidential debates into context-- “..the debate is stale, the questions pro forma and the answers rehearsed.” I couldn’t agree more.
What does America need? Consistency, true leadership, and truth. Is asking for the true character of the candidates’ to be revealed too much to ask for? Please, some one give us one direct answer!!!!
Original article taken from The Austin American Statesman October 17, 2007.
Link:
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/10/12/1013sullivan_edit.html
In our post 9/11 “brave new world,” the people want to hear resolutions to our current state of mayhem in Iraq. Peace in Iraq should be the primary focus of the candidates. Instead, they shift our emphasis on such an imperative issue with other divisive issues such as gay rights and abortion. Really, is gay marriage going to ruin America like the Iraq war soon will? At times, it seems that people in power take the rest of us for imbeciles.
Subsequent to the Bush administration taking over our lives, haven’t we been lied to and misled enough? The true issues that will define us as a nation have to be prioritized instead of “beating around the bush” with nonsense. Presidential candidates are starting to lose their substance on the issues that they felt so strongly about when the race began.
Elizabeth Sullivan puts the presidential debates into context-- “..the debate is stale, the questions pro forma and the answers rehearsed.” I couldn’t agree more.
What does America need? Consistency, true leadership, and truth. Is asking for the true character of the candidates’ to be revealed too much to ask for? Please, some one give us one direct answer!!!!
Original article taken from The Austin American Statesman October 17, 2007.
Link:
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/10/12/1013sullivan_edit.html
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Plan for Iraq? Sorry, not on the menu.
The war in Iraq has been an issue of high controversy ever since it started. There has been a lot of criticism towards the Bush administration for the course of action they’ve taken, especially from the Democratic party. Now that the 2008 Presidential elections are getting closer, the question on everyone’s mind, as Eugene Robinson puts it, “Who has a plan for Iraq?” Really, who does?
Mr. Robinson, contributor to The Washington Post, makes an excellent argument bringing up this subject after the Presidential debate on September 26, where none of the leading Democratic candidates could pledge to have U.S troops back home by the end of his or her first term. I mean, weren’t Democrats ranting about how much of a failure this war has become, giving the American public hope of the war coming to an end if they were elected? There’s evidence in Mr. Robinson’s argument to conclude and point out the inconsistency of the candidates’ past stands on this issue and their present stands as the election gets closer.
One the points brought out by Mr. Robinson was on Hilary Clinton’s change of heart about the war. In the beginning, she voted to authorize the war. Later on, she decided she was against this issue and defended herself from critics saying that President Bush pulled the wool over her eyes. Yet, recently she voted for a Senate resolution encouraging Bush to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group. Why would Hilary Clinton vote for something that might give the great warrior Bush the justification for another war? That seems a tad bit shady if you ask me.
When Senator Obama was asked what would be the outcome of Iraq during his first term, his response was, “It’s hard to project four years from now.” I mean, as a candidate for the Presidency, it is his responsibility to project four years from now if not who will? Mr. Robinson clearly points this out to emphasize the true motives of Mr. Obama if he is elected. Does he see a long term presence of U.S troops in Iraq or doesn’t he?
As for John Edwards, once passionate on his opposition about the Iraq War, couldn’t foresee the troops back home by 2013. Where did all the passion go Mr. Edwards?
It seems that the reality is setting in on the candidates: One of them is about to inherit a huge mess. By the way Democratic candidates are speaking now, the end of the war is just as vague as it has been during the Bush administration. Where has the great passionate vision of the Democrats gone? Or was their passion a crock of political trickery?
Who has a plan for Iraq? Clearly, no one does.
Link to original article:
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/09/30/0930robinson_edit.html
Mr. Robinson, contributor to The Washington Post, makes an excellent argument bringing up this subject after the Presidential debate on September 26, where none of the leading Democratic candidates could pledge to have U.S troops back home by the end of his or her first term. I mean, weren’t Democrats ranting about how much of a failure this war has become, giving the American public hope of the war coming to an end if they were elected? There’s evidence in Mr. Robinson’s argument to conclude and point out the inconsistency of the candidates’ past stands on this issue and their present stands as the election gets closer.
One the points brought out by Mr. Robinson was on Hilary Clinton’s change of heart about the war. In the beginning, she voted to authorize the war. Later on, she decided she was against this issue and defended herself from critics saying that President Bush pulled the wool over her eyes. Yet, recently she voted for a Senate resolution encouraging Bush to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group. Why would Hilary Clinton vote for something that might give the great warrior Bush the justification for another war? That seems a tad bit shady if you ask me.
When Senator Obama was asked what would be the outcome of Iraq during his first term, his response was, “It’s hard to project four years from now.” I mean, as a candidate for the Presidency, it is his responsibility to project four years from now if not who will? Mr. Robinson clearly points this out to emphasize the true motives of Mr. Obama if he is elected. Does he see a long term presence of U.S troops in Iraq or doesn’t he?
As for John Edwards, once passionate on his opposition about the Iraq War, couldn’t foresee the troops back home by 2013. Where did all the passion go Mr. Edwards?
It seems that the reality is setting in on the candidates: One of them is about to inherit a huge mess. By the way Democratic candidates are speaking now, the end of the war is just as vague as it has been during the Bush administration. Where has the great passionate vision of the Democrats gone? Or was their passion a crock of political trickery?
Who has a plan for Iraq? Clearly, no one does.
Link to original article:
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/09/30/0930robinson_edit.html
Thursday, September 20, 2007
The Jena Six
A year ago, in the small town of Jena, Louisiana, six black high school students were charged with attempted murder after beating a white student unconscious. The case has sparked questions about racial bias in the judicial system. Local civil rights groups objected to what they saw as a throwback to the worst kind of Deep South justice, sparking numerous demonstrations in Louisiana and all over the Nation. Through the internet, black radio shows, and all sorts of media, the word about this case has spread like fire, reaching its peak during this Thursday’s demonstrations in the town of Jena. Who would have thought that a schoolyard fight would bring about such sensitive questions about racial discrimination like this one did.
Lawyers dealing with the case say that the attention the teens have received has caused the prosecutors to reduce the charges from the outrageous attempted murder charges to aggravated assault and conspiracy. Michael Bell, one of the six teens accused, is the only one that has been detained and charged with these charges. Mr. Bell was imprisoned since the fight in December and is still being held in custody.
I believe that the justice system, the school, and parents should focus on the events leading to such a tragedy and do the best to learn from this and find a solution. Justice should serve its purpose not focusing on the color of anyone’s skin, but on the facts and the crimes committed.
Article taken form the New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/us/19jena.html?ref=us
Lawyers dealing with the case say that the attention the teens have received has caused the prosecutors to reduce the charges from the outrageous attempted murder charges to aggravated assault and conspiracy. Michael Bell, one of the six teens accused, is the only one that has been detained and charged with these charges. Mr. Bell was imprisoned since the fight in December and is still being held in custody.
I believe that the justice system, the school, and parents should focus on the events leading to such a tragedy and do the best to learn from this and find a solution. Justice should serve its purpose not focusing on the color of anyone’s skin, but on the facts and the crimes committed.
Article taken form the New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/us/19jena.html?ref=us
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
