Political Cartoon Two

This week's cartoon featured in The Washington Post is definitely targeting the automobile makers and factories in Detroit, Michigan who think they deserve a huge bail out from the government from a depressing debt. The cartoon shows tires marks in circles off of a road and a car marked "Detroit" crashed into a tree with a man climbing out with a bottle in his hand saying "I have a plan!" Then there is a small man in the corner that might represent a Congressman, or some significant other, who doesn't seem to care. The man inside the car seems to be a CEO of an auto company who has been living life gloriously, not having to worry about money or problems, until now with the entire economy crashing.

I do not think that the auto companies should be bailed out for any reason whatsoever. They aren't going to make any money from the people even if they get bailed out. What the government needs to do is figure out a way to bail out smaller successful businesses who in turn would be able to pay for things such as a new car. The auto companies say they need money for production and jobs, but why do you need production if you aren't selling anything to begin with!? Keeping jobs on the other hand is semi reasonable, but sorry, they shouldn't get anything handed to them because a lot of Americans are losing jobs. If anything, bail out businesses at the bottom, or even at the middle, but most definitely not at the top.

Political Cartoon One

The political cartoon I picked is created by Tom Toles from The Washington Post. The picture clearly features Laura and George Bush leaving with their bags packed while The White House is burning with "Global Warming" written in the flames. Laura Bush asks "George, did you remember to turn the stove off?" and his atonishing reply is "Off??"
What I interpreted from this cartoon is that nothing that President Bush did helped to stop global warming and if anything, his policies and reforms just contributed to it. It shows that his irresponsibility led to the burning down of The White House and the flames polluting the air is further contributing to global warming. I think it is funny how Toles drew Laura Bush much larger than George, who is portrayed as a tiny rabbit-looking character. Maybe this is also showing how over the last several months, Laura Bush has been much more active in the country than our own President. Way to show him up!

volunteeringgg

Sooo the other day I contacted Caitlin Currie who is an organizing manager for the Herndon/Reston Barack Obama Campaign for Change!!!! She gave me an address of a woman in Herndon, Jennifer Boysko, who was using her home as a type of headquarters for volunteering throughout the Herndon area. I arrived at her home, which was conveniently two streets over from mine, around 10 AM and right away partnered up with a woman from D.C., Aurie, who came to help with the campaign. We were given a huge folder with directions to our target neighborhood, a list of registered voters who had previously voted Democratic or not Republican, and a stack of Democratic doorhangers with information for the area's voting place. Aurie and I immediately worked out a game plan for who was going where on which street. For example, if two streets were parallel or circle to each other, we would each take one street, go up the even side, and come back on the odd side, then meeting at the car so we could move on. We equalled out the work and had a great strategy for the two times we went out. The first neighborhood we did was Cuttermill, on streets like Bayshire Lane, Jeff Ryan Road, and Mistyvale drive, which took about two and a half hours. The second time we went out, our area was branched off of Sterling Road and Crestview. This also took about two and a half hours. Inbetween the two outtings, we went back to Ms. Boysko's house for a break; we ate lunch with the leaders and other volunteers, chatted about the amazing impact of volunteering on campaigns and how well Barack Obama has done in the election so far, and we prepared to depart for the second time. Although it was tiring to walk up and down streets for six hours, it was an awesome experience; meeting Obama enthuiests and other volunteers that come from so far away to help out in our town.

Election Week Six: Picking the Winner!

With the 2008 election for president right around the corner, meaning tomorrow November 4th, I'm am confident to announce that Barack Obama will most definitely win! Throughout this election, both candidates have had equal shares in polling data, but within the past couple months, with victorious debates and campaigns, and numerous publicity ads, Barack Obama has significantly risen above John McCain. As for electoral college votes, so far Obama has 286 votes, McCain has 157, and there are still 95 undecided. Even if McCain receives a majority of the swing states, Obama is still going to lead, and I think he will win with over 300 electoral votes. To take a guess of popular votes in the country, I'd say Obama will have around 65 million votes or about 55% of overall votes on the ballots. I think McCain will only have around 50 milli0n, if that, or only 40% of votes.

For the Senate Race, it is almost obvious to everyone that Mark Warner will win. Not only because he has a huge lead in the polls over his competition, but he has a good reputation as governor and he's a heart warming kind of guy.

In the two local House Races, I think the winner of the 10th District will be Republican candidate Frank Wolfe, with leading votes in the polls and once again a good reputation with the public. In the 11th district, Democratic candidate for H.O.P., Gerry Connolly, will probably win since polls show he has a lead and he has had only a few ads, but more than Republican Keith Fimian.

currenntt eventt sixxx

An article written in the Washington Post by Michael Abramowitz titled, “Accuracy of Polls a Question in Itself,” is about the assumptions made within polls and how they could be wrong. The McCain campaign is complaining of how the national polls are inaccurate and making Barack Obama overconfident. The Gallup polls have been around for 60 years and hardly have ever been wrong, if anything the people of America are being inaccurate. How can you accuse a poll of being wrong, when every poll in the nation has about the same, stable results, Obama is going to win. McCain’s campaign has hopes of taking great measures and increasing their poll results, and they infer that this election will resemble 2004’s. McCain’s campaign is trying to say that the only reason Obama is up 15 points is because of the African American voter increase in the South. So what? That’s what happens when people like who’s campaigning for presidency, the majority should win. About a week ago I noticed Obama upping his television ads, about every other commercial was for Barack Obama. But recently within the past week, McCain has fired back and increased his television ads as well, butting out Obama’s. The final voting comes down to the several Swing States left, but from what I have read, Obama has a lead in most. I don’t think McCain will have a close chance of winning the presidency.

Election Post 5: Swing States

There are many reasons that there a still a few swing states in the Presidential election this year. Over the past few decades, people have become less reliant on political parties to base their vote off of. So it's narrowed down to the individual candidate's profile and what policies are most important to a person voting. In this years election, main factors that affect voting are: one, there has never been a black president, so people are hesitant to vote for Democrat Barack Obama, which should have nothing to do with his race; two, the Republican Vice President that John McCain nominated is female, and many American's fear that Sarah Palin is not qualified for the job; three, our ecomony is facing it's biggest crisis since the Great Depression and whoever wins President will decide on the course of action for the country, it will either be a positive or negative impact but that cannot be based on each candidate.

According to a USAToday article, the current swing states for the 2008 election are: Washington, Oregon, Florida, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, California, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Wisconsin. Iowa and Missouri. It is said that McCain's "maverick" appeal will help him win New Hampshire and other states because of the number of unaffiliated voters. However, in the Southern states that are up for grabs, Obama is making a huge impression upon the large African American population, and those who have been unlikely to vote in previous elections. One struggle Obama has, especially in a state like West Virginia, is his inability to compromise with the working class whites who are a big part of the electoral vote. One surprising state that has voted Republican strongly since 1964, Indiana, is actually shifting towards a Democratic vote.

Election Post 4: Polling

When it comes to polls for the 2008 Presidential Race, the data is close but shows a lead for Barack Obama, with John McCain trailing shortly behind. Most of the polling data I looked at, from random polls on websites to actual News polls, they all compared similarly and provide a fairly accurate voice of America. The most popular poll I viewed was the Gallup Daily of Registered Voters, which, as of October 21st, showed Obama leading 52% to McCain's 41%. The Washington Post/ABC News conducted a telephone poll from October 17-20 with a national random sample of 1,534 registered voters. Even with a margin error of +3% or -3% points, Obama is favored more among American's than McCain. One of the questioned basically asked, "If the election was held today which candidate would you vote for?" Among those who responded to the poll, by October 20th, 53% was for Obama and 44% was for McCain; compared to a poll taken September 29th when Obama had a lead of 50% and McCain was 46%. For the most part, all the polls that are being conducted have had the same results and show an increasing or steadying lead for Barack Obama.
In the Virginia Senate Race, according to the Real Clear Politics poll, averaging votes from October 3-19, former Governor Mark Warner has a lead of 59% to Jim Gilmore's 32%. A poll taken by SurveyUSA from October 18-19, showed Warner leading greatly with 60% to Gilmore's 36%. In this race especially, the percent error of +3% or -3% will not affect the expected outcome of who will most likely win the Senate position in Virginia.

The problem with polling is obviously there's a chance of affecting an outcome of an election. For the Senate race, there may not be a difference since Warner has such a major lead and I don't think enough people would vote differently to push Gilmore into office. However, with the Presidential Election, since John McCain is shortly behind in percentage, there may be a significant amount of people who change their minds to vote McCain into office. Personally, I think Barack Obama has a strong and confident lead in the race, and I think he is more convincing, trustworthy, and reasonable for America to vote for.

currentt eventt fivee

On October 19, in Baghdad, the Iraqi parliament called for American troops to depart by the end of year 2011. The United Iraqi Alliance is insisting that Iraqi government have more power in the decision of punishment for U.S. soldiers accused of wrongdoing. It has been observed that American Troops rarely leave their bases except for on official missions, so there are no worries for any legal prosecutions. Lawmakers in Iraq were trying to claim some jurisdiction on the rules of American Soldiers but the Pentagon insisted on having sole control over U.S. troops in foreign countries. Although the United States has accepted the compromise, the Bush administration has not yet set a direct date for U.S. troops to leave Iraq and claims it should be based on security circumstances, which will be worked out mutually. I agree that decisions should be made mutually and civilized; it would hopefully end the war peacefully. There is reason for other countries to control our army even though we are in their territory; they still belong to the United States. My personal theory is ending the war as soon as possible and bringing our troops home. It’s terrible that we continue to loose dozens of soldiers each day, especially for the past few years, and we haven’t really gotten any where.

current eventtt fourrr

An article by Walter Pincus from the Washington Post talks abouts the tension between the Pentagon and intelligence agencies over building U.S. satellites in space in the future. Two important departments have traditional tension on this issue: Intelligence Agencies want to gather strategic information for policymakers and the Defense Department fathers tactical information for war fighters. The National Reconnaissance Office was once a secret agency and is in charge of designing, building and operating intelligence satellites funded by the national intelligence budget. A recent secret multibillion dollar satellite project was cancelled and brought to attention by Congress who's members voiced concerns over future U.S. intelligence gathering from space. This problem is described as bureaucratic which needs to set priorites on 'what intelligence is collected and by whom', 'which agencies will process it', 'how quickly it is turned into integrated reports', 'who sees the information', and 'how it is archived for later use.' This is a costly issue although the programs are jointly funded out of separate budgets, but is a major issue dealing with the future of intelligence. I could really care less and I don't think it's necessary to provide so much funding for exploring outer space.

Virginia Senate Election

Our local election for Virginia's seat in the Senate has certainly changed with the retirement of Republican John Warner who served five terms and has chosen not to serve a sixth. The candidates up for election are Mark Warner - Democrat, Jim Gilmore - Republican, Bill Redpath - Libertarian, and Glenda Gail Parker - Independent Green.

Mark Warner: Former Governor of Virginia; Chaired National Governors Association; Co-founded Nextel company; bi-partisan approach to politics

Jim Gilmore: Recent Former Governor of Virginia; Former Attorney General of Virginia; Recognized authority on homeland security; President of USA Secure; Former Chairman of Republican National Committee.

Bill Redpath: Chairman of U.S. Libertarian Party

Glenda Gail Parker: retired Air Force officer; Business Woman

A few of the biggest issues rising in the Virginia Senate are: alternative energy in which Warner is trying to bring significant attention to; offshore drilling in which Gilmore is arguing for; and Virginia Taxes in which both candidates have strong opinions on. Although Gilmore has a good history of cutting taxes, Warner's campaign states that Gilmore has used up almost $6 million of Virginia's budget.

Recent polling data has shown a clear Democratic favor with Mark Warner leading an average 59% to Jim Gilmore's average 30%.

current event threeee

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post wrote an article about “Supreme Court’s Direction Hinges on Who Wins ‘08 Races; A McCain Victory May Tilt Balance.” The Supreme Court is fairly balanced with four liberals and four conservatives, and one justice in the middle, Anthony M. Kennedy. It is likely that if Democratic Senator Barack Obama is elected president, then three justices of the Supreme Court will step down: David H. Souter, Ruth B. Ginsburg, and John P. Stevens. The ages of these three justices are 69, 75, and 88; seriously way too old for important decision makers, so I would say it’s not a bad thing to bring in new justices. However, people are afraid that Obama might make the wrong decision of who takes new seats in the Supreme Court. Law expert John McGinnis states, “What you really want to do in reshaping the court is change the median justice.” Which also makes sense, to change up what decisions might be made, instead of just changing “one conservative for another” and etc. He also says in order for McCain to appoint someone closest to his “ideology” would be to nominate a woman or a minority, who would be more difficult for Democrats to oppose. I don’t think that is a good approach for choosing someone for such an important role as Supreme Court Justice. McCain claims he would appoint judges “who have a proven record of strict interpretation of the Constitution of the United States.” Although that might be the most important aspect of a justice, there also needs to be concern for opinions on the environment, economy, and natural human rights.

America's debacle & so called "debate"

I honestly haven't paid much attention to the issues in this year's election, nor the views of either candidate. I pretty much just read what I have to read, and write about it expressing my opinions. Until recently, when the biggest and most important national issue of our time began to rise, since the Great Depression in the 1920s, 30s, and 40s. The $700 billion bailout grant of Wall Street is crumbling our entire economy and affecting every single American citizen age 5 to 95. Personally, I think it's all ridiculous. There is no way Americans can be responsible for paying the money to bail out stupid elite economists. Aside from the crashing stock market and increasing gas prices, it is already a struggle for most Americans to survive and take care of a family. How can ANYONE afford to pay more taxes?? Except for the over-paid "Wall Street Ballers", as MTV called them in their hit show, "Fabulous Life Of..." According to the show, with research and comparison, nobody makes more and spends more money than the highest ranking investors and financiers of Wall Street. SO why should we have to bail out the richest people in the country? Why can't they all just give a portion of their outrageous salaries and bonuses to our economy? Because that would be too easy, and our country, government, and economy has turned into a complete debacle!

When I first heard that McCain was thinking about choosing not to take part in the debate because he wanted to focus more on the economic crisis, I thought to myself, what a chicken! [not the exact words I would use] On the other hand, Obama said he was capable of participating in the debate, AND taking care of the economy. Of coarse he just said that to look better than McCain, and it worked. After the Presidential Debate Friday night, my opinion on who won the overall debate was Barack Obama. When it comes to the candidates performances in the debates, I thought it was rude how they both would interrupt, bicker, and talk over each other. But I thought it was a poor tactic of McCain to not make any kind of eye contact with Obama, possibly in fear of becoming nervous or outraged. It was also an annoyance how he continuously referred to his age, 72, his experience, and how trustworthy he is. It seemed as if both candidates were talking to the camera's, never "debating" with each other and McCain talked like he was lecturing Obama. They never directly answered a question that was asked, they stated the problem and then sort of went around it and got distracted on certain policies. AOL held a poll September 30Th on which candidate was more on the offensive. Out of 23,120 voters, %62 said McCain was on the offensive all night. Obama's quote towards McCain has always been, "He just doesn't get it", while McCain's new quote towards Obama is, "He doesn't understand about the world." How swift and smart of McCain to simply use synonyms of Obama's quote. Both candidates realize they have different views, obviously, but it's not necessary to call each other unintelligent or inexperienced. It seems to me that in this election, the two candidates just continue to bash each other in a childish and unprofessional manner. I suppose that is the reason why I cannot choose who I would vote for, otherwise I would simply write down Obama's name because I strongly dislike McCain.

currrent eventtt 2

The most recent popular topic in our government has been the proposal for a $700 billion dollar bailout in our economy; “the most sweeping government intervention into the nation’s financial markets since the Great Depression.” Today, on September 29, the House of Representatives rejected the proposal, with a 228-205 vote, refusing to grant the Treasury Department the power to purchase this much money. Within the House, 95 Democrats and 133 Republicans opposed the bill, while 140 Democrats and 65 Republicans supported the controversial grant. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California delivered a “partisan” speech at the end of today’s debate, stating that the $700 billion is in need because of “the costs of the Bush administration’s failed economic policies.” House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio claimed that Pelosi’s speech “poisoned” the conference, and other leaders claimed that her speech “turned off” many Republicans. President George W. Bush was very disappointed in the refusal vote, but is still willing to address the economic issue right away. John McCain’s senior policy advisor Doug Holtz-Eakin issued a statement, after the bill had been rejected, that blamed Barack Obama and Pelosi. Republicans knew that had little support for the bill, but there is no reason for either party to act childish and blame one another, it doesn’t do any good. It is said that no lawmaker wants to approve a large bailout that was made necessary by the “mistakes of Wall Street financiers and the mortgage industry.” Aside from the rejection of this grant, other economic troubles arose today with news of Citigroup purchasing Wachovia Bank, and the Dow Jones Industrial average in the stock market had dropped by a significant amount of points. Although the bill was denied, if nothing is done soon to save the financial depression in our economy, the outcome is going to be a lot worse. But I don’t think taking money out of every American’s pocket is the answer; the majority of American’s cannot afford it anyways.

currrent evennttt

While reading current political events from The Washington Post newspaper online, I found an interesting article titled, “Obama Backers from D.C. Go West: Volunteers Target Voters in Winchester.” This article jumps out at me is because it is involving Barack Obama and takes place close to our area, besides, the few others I read about John McCain seemed boring to me. The story in this article takes place in Virginia, where almost 300 people carpooling in cars, vans, and buses, traveled from Washington D.C. to areas west and south such as Leesburg, Manassas, Centreville, Woodbridge, Winchester, and Fredericksburg, to recruit Obama voters. The diverse group of Democratic volunteers, including teachers, students, teenagers, lawyers, etc., knocked on over 80,000 doors, facing much rejection but also many who were interested in learning more about the Barack Obama Campaign. I think these volunteers were definitely challenging themselves, since the state of Virginia has not voted Democratic in a presidential election in over 40 years. I also think it is great to have such a large crowd that is willing to take time out of their daily lives, to put forth such an effort to raise votes for Barack Obama. Voicing their opinion on such a major event in our history and for the future shows others that political activism does not just involve donating money, for example. This article was great to post because it may increase the efforts of those who may be afraid to go out and campaign for Obama and it has a chance of increasing the votes for the Democratic Party.

who would i vote for???

First of all, I don't know much about the two candidates in the 2008 election for Presidency and honestly, I don't care too much either. From my perspective, neither candidate deserves to be president. Obama doesn't have a lot of experience and in a major national crisis, I don't think he'd make the right decisions for our country, and I think there's a chance he could lead us into more and more problems in our economy. For the Republican candidate, I seriously think McCain is too old and if anything were to ever happen to him, I think Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin wouldn't be strong enough to handle the duties of presidency, and putting a female into office is a BIG step for the United States. I am in no way trying to be sexist, but I just don't think a female should be in charge of our country and from personal experience, females have WACKY emotions and can be very unstable. Especially some of the drama within her personal life that has been brought into the media, do we honestly want all that into the white house??? I don't think so.
Although I dislike both candidates, for the exact opposite reasons, if I was 18, I would probably vote for Barack Obama. He caught my attention through the Democratic Convention, when he made his acceptance speech. The way he spoke and addressed the audience was impressive to me and from an upfront appearance, he seems like the better candidate.
Obama's belief on same sex marriage is that "marriage is between a man and a woman" but he also believes that it's against an Americans rights to be banned from loving someone of the same sex. Obama voted against a Constitutional amendment proposed in 2006 that wanted to ban gay marriage and he also supports civil unions for gay couples. Who's to tell a person they cannot love another person? Since when is government in charge of the love life of an American? I think it would be wrong for the Constitution to have an amendment banning gay rights and I believe that it is a person's freedom to make their own decisions, and it is NO ONE else's business what they choose.