Agreein with Chase in his Chasm

In Chase Carney's article, "Chase's Chasm," I must say while I read it, I felt like he had taken my exact thoughts and rewrote them in this beautifully-written article. The two-party system we currently have ruined Americans and therefore America. As Chase points out, our Founding Fathers knew ahead of time that the parties would put a cruel divide between Americans.

I understand that it's part of our wonderful democracy that people can peacefully disagree with each other. However, I'm not sure if Republicans really disagree with Democrats, or vice versa. Citizens now just use their party as a crutch to their own opinions and use the party to voice their personal opinions. That is a counterproductive part of our democracy. There are so many uneducated Americans. Just look at the polls and the general political knowledge of the American citizens. It is extremely low. Then look at party affiliation and it is disproportionately high. What that says to me is that these uneducated people just follow their family or friends, join a party, and neglect to ever really think for themselves.

There are so many different issues: social, economic, domestic, foreign affairs, etc. How can a single party possibly cater to an individual's every opinion???

Left, Right. How about neither

I am currently enrolled in two classes. United States Government – for which I am writing this editorial, and United States History Pre Civil War. While it is very easy to confuse which specific content belongs to which class, it has made it very clear why the United States government faces the issues it is facing today. Ever since the days of our founding fathers, Jefferson and his followers believed in a weak national government with strong states’ rights while Alexander Hamilton and his followers promoted a strong central government. Both of these men had good reasons for their beliefs.
We often find ourselves fighting the same battle today. Should we let the national government interfere in our domestic, social lives, foreign affairs and economy? Strangely enough, while we face those same questions that Jefferson and Hamilton faced, our parties are not split down that clear line that distinguishes central government intervention and government nonintervention. Instead, today’s Republicans favor government’s intervention on foreign affairs and certain social issues, but not our economy and other social issues. Meanwhile today’s Democrats favor government intervention on the issues opposite from what the Republicans favor. Republicans want the United States Army to interfere with international warfare; they want the government to be able to outlaw gay marriage; but they don’t want the government to intervene with the economy or raise high taxes. Democrats want the government to intervene with the economy by raising taxes to finance national financial aid systems; but they don’t want the government to interfere with their choice for an abortion.
It seems to be a very ambiguous political party system, which may explain why so many Americans are scared to completely devote their allegiances to either of these confused parties.

Socialism: AKA the Darkside

In the third Star Wars Movie, just before Obi Wan Kenobi and Anikin Skywalker fight for the first time, Anikin tells Obi Wan that since he is not with him, he is instead his enemy. Obi Wan responds: "Only the syth think in absolutes." Socialism is an extreme solution, and its promoters are only thinking in absolutes.
Now in no way am I saying that Socialists truly represent the dark side and are bad people, but I must Jameson Lebreton's perspective in his article, Loaded Words.
While I wholeheartedly agree that Americans unfairly reject those with socialist ideas, I must disagree with Jameson's view that socialism is not a threat to democracy. A democracy is a government in which the power is primarily vested in the people.
In socialism, the government officials are absolutely in primary control. They divvy up property and money and protections to all the people in an radically simplified way. Jameson is correct in saying that aspects of America already are run in a socialist way - like roads and public schools. But that's what makes democracy a democracy. It is not an absolute. It makes certain institutions private, while other sects of those institutions remain private. A socialist government is too radical and would give too much power to the government too choose how much different amenities cost and how to allocate them. The people lose their say when this happens, and therefore it is without a doubt a threat to democracy.

We, the people, must "use the force," instead of relinquishing it to a fallible government.

Views on American Government

I strongly believe that Democracy is the best form of government. However there are many fundamental flaws within our society and governmental branches that have led to an alienation of our rights and liberties. Overall though these incidents are minor in scope to all the great liberties and freedoms that the democracy offers.

Specifically I believe the recent provisions provided in the Patriot Act are an intrusion to our rights and privacy, thus a threat to democracy. I am not comfortable, along with many Americans, that the government is fully able to search my private records without any retributions. However they have not done this to me in the past and because I really do not harm the government in any way, they will not in the future most likely. Overall the intended provisions of this act are to protect democracy despite its flaws.

I think that democracy while being able to voice our opinions has a severe time lag in actually doing so. It is often said that society and its values change faster than government and thus our legislators and executive branch can only respond to problems now that have happened years ago. Debates on abortion, gay marriage, and terrorism while mainly issues more in the past are finally being resolved. It is most likely that the top issues of today will be solved later and probably won't be judged adequately at that.

Yet in other forms of government such as communism or socialism such problems might not even be discussed or addressed period. Even though the fundamental flaws in our democracy make it difficult to judge and voice the concerns of citizens to the upmost possible ability, it still is the best available option to do so.

Coulter's Take on Health Care

From her blog, Ann Coulter posted an article entitled Take Two Advil and Call Me When Your Cancer Is Stage 4 expressing her explicit blunt view on the idea of universal health care.
Ann Coulter is a renown Conservative blogger, so her intended audience most likely are Conservatives looking to learn about the pros and cons of the proposed universal health care system.
Seeing as Coulter is a very popular and strongly-followed blogger, she clearly knows what she's talking about and is quite educated on the issues she writes about in her articles. On the other hand, her opinions may be somewhat biased considering she has made a living off of being an outspoken Conservative and may lose some of her support if she publicizes views that are inconsistent to those held by the Republican party.
In her argument, she takes the approach that health care would be easily affordable if we left it on the free market, instead of being overly cautious and holding hands with the poor. She explains that if we make health care universal, then our insurance will not be suffice enough to cover serious and expensive problems, like chemotherapy, but will instead cover everyone’s minor yet expensive issues.

I must say I strongly agree with Coulter on this issue. As she points out in her article, the free market makes services affordable. For instance, nearly every adult in the United States, rich and poor, own a cell phone. If we hold each citizen accountable for their own personal health, nearly every citizen will work to get the necessary funds. If this accountability is simply thrown on the heads of the tax-payers, those lower-class folks start to lose their will to succeed.

Don't Be Fooled By Obama's 45 Million

"Don't Be Fooled By Obama's 45 Million Uninsured," by S.E. Cupp, criticizes Obama's worries about our nation's health care problem, claiming they are exaggerated. Obama has repeatedly reminded the the US that there are a total of forty five million people who don't have health insurance in America. Cupp explains that these forty five million is a major overestimate, and that Obama's proposed health care plan won't cure the issue. Cupp argues that Obama's plan will bankrupt the government, lower the standard of health care for those of us who are insured, drive out the best doctors, and many patients won't be able to receive the advanced health care they may need to survive. As for the "forty five million," ten million are illegal aliens, and seventeen million can afford to get health insurance, but simply choose not to. So after taking out just the illegals, Cupp explains we are left with just four percent of the population uninsured, and insuring just those four percent could jeopardize the quality of health care for the rest of the country.

I strongly agree with Cupp. The majority of our country is very contnet with their health care plans, and NOTHING should jeapordize that. While I believe we should come up with some health care planfor the uninsured, I don't think downgrading the rest of the health care system is the answer. We need the best doctors, because our health is too valuable to start compromising with.

Clearly, Cupp's audience are Conservatives, seeing as he writes for Fox News. This also shows that he's most likely a credible author, because Fox News is a very prestigious news outlet.

Proposition 98 suspended?

As described in School Funding Law Faces a Tough Test in the Los Angeles Times, by Eric Bailey, Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, is highly considering suspending Proposition 98 - which guarantees public schools 40% of their general budget. This, of course, is as a result of California's $26.3 million deficit. The governor is facing heavy opposition from the California teacher's association. While Schwarzenegger promises to repay these funds as the economy improves, the school systems want payback assurances written directly into the budget plan. In order to officially suspend Proposition 98, two-thirds vote would be needed of the Legislature. The Republicans reluctantly support this, while many Democrats heavily oppose its suspension.