Iowa Caucus Results

This week I read an editorial from the Los Angeles Times about the results of the Iowa Caucuses and how they may affect the election of the next president of the United States. The leading candidates were Barrack Obama and Mike Huckabee. This article pointed out that while the caucus had some unexpected winners, it made evident that there were some clear losers. The most evident was Hilary Clinton who came in third, which was very surprising, considering all the time and money she spent campaigning in Iowa. On the Republican side, the caucuses resulted in a big defeat for Guiliani. The surprising thing about Huckabee’s victory was that he did not do as much preparation for Iowa as many of his fellow candidates. Although it is not likely that Huckabee will be successful in New Hampshire, the author of this article made the point that the voters of Iowa seemed to be more concerned with the personality of the candidates, rather than their reputation of being a “front runner”. The fact that the winners were unexpected definitely leaves the door for president open and the race is not over yet. Although its just a bunch of people from Iowa’s opinion, this caucus definitely plays a big part in the opinions of voters across the country and how they will cast their ballot.
I believe that the author of this article makes a valid point that while this caucus will not necessarily reveal the results of the next presidential election, they always seem to have interesting turnouts. Whether than declaring a definite winner, it displays who will really struggle in the election, because national polls can only show so much and people can change their minds frequently.

Teenage Pages should stay out of Washington

In the Washington Post this week there was an article about two Pages who had oral sex in a public area of the Capital Hill Dormitories. The pages used in political offices are usually juniors in high school. The ones caught in the act were dismissed. However there is criticism that there has been some lax oversight in supervising these pages. Also in 2006, Florida GOP Mark Foley was forced to resign after it was shown that he sent sexually explicit emails to his male pages. In both of these cases there were people who claim to have been unaware but were obviously enablers in both situations.
I believe that in order to solve this problem, high school students should not be allowed to work in government offices. Don’t get me wrong, it is great to be able to do summer internships and learn more about a career as a government official. However, I feel that if sex scandals become an issue among minors, who are involved in the government, something is terribly wrong. People who are not old enough to vote are assisting government officials and acting immaturely in way that reflects on the reputation of the government as a viable source of power. There will always be sex wrapped up in politics, but I think adding teenagers into the mix is just asking for trouble. Although I’m sure the pages who were dismissed are the exception and not the rule when it comes to teen assistants, I feel it is better to let them go completely.

The Clinton Women Take On Iowa

This week I read an article in the Los Angeles Times about Hilary Clinton’s new campaigning strategy in Iowa. While Barrack Obama was there with Oprah, Clinton tried to show a new side of herself by bringing her mother, Dorothy Rodham and her daughter Chelsea Clinton. She also tried not to bash her fellow candidates as she has done in the past. When given the chance to condemn Obama, she has said that “all the Democratic candidates were capable”. With the media attention devoted to Oprah, Clinton used the day to make a more personal, direct appeal to voters. The crowds listening to her speeches, held in an elementary school gym, numbered only about 100-150 people. She also set aside large blocks to time to take questions, shake hands, pose for pictures, and sign autographs. Her mother and daughter came along with her to show the kinder more approachable side of Clinton. In some polls, about half of the respondents have said that they dislike her. While making a speech about helping families to overcome the cost of long term elder care, she mentioned that her mother is living with her, showing how she could relate to the topic.
I think it was smart for Clinton to bring along her family with her to Iowa. I also believe it was smart to choose her daughter and mother rather than her husband. This is because it shows her more caring side and makes her more relatable. The only unfortunate thing is that a lot of the media was not around to see this change in personality because Oprah also happened to be there. As for the people who did get to see Clinton in action, perhaps it will boost her chances of wining the Iowa caucuses.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-clinton9dec09,1,4318860.story

35 Miles Per Gallon Standard

This week I read an article from the Los Angeles Times about a bill that has the potential to greatly effect our environment in a positive way. Congress is proposing a measure providing for a 40% increase in fuel efficiency for new cars and light trucks by 2020 for a fleetwide average of 35 miles per gallon. This bill is expected to include a requirement that greater amounts of homegrown fuel such as ethanol be added t the nation’s gasoline supply. It also is likely to include a measure requiring utilities to generate more electricity from cleaner sources such as the sun and wind. Most Republicans seem to have complaints about this bill because they feel that it would lead to lighter, less safe vehicles, threaten auto industry jobs and limit customer choice. However, higher gas prices have many people thinking that this bill will probably be passed. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers expressed support for the measure on Saturday.
I think that this measure is an important one and will have a strong impact on our environment. The United States needs to become a more fuel efficient country. I believe this bill forces auto makers to become creative and find ways to make fuel efficient cars more accessible and better. I think the other aspects of the bill are good too, using sun and wind energy. Cutting down on the amount of oil we use could help the prices to go down and will also be better for the environment so I really hope President Bush doesn’t veto it.

Nutrition Considered in Farm Bill

This week I read an article from the LA Times about the farm bill being passed through congress and how it should be altered to provide more nutritious meals for public schools to help prevent obesity. The farm bill sets the nation’s agricultural agenda every five years. The urge by parents, nutrition experts and physicians, to rewrite the bill delayed it until next year. This will give the advocates more time to educate people in wanting to revise this bill. In previous years, the issue associated with the farm bill was over subsidies, but now nutrition has become a major concern. The $288 billion bill would spend more on fruits and vegetables. Ann Cooper, a food coordinator at schools in Berkley, claims “If we want to significantly impact the long term health of our children, we need to change the food in the center of the plate, the entrée. The farm bill negatively impacts the entrée by subsidizing food we don’t necessarily eat, like corn and soy. There’s so much fat hidden I these highly processed foods that end up on our kid’s plates”. Senators Lautenberg and Lugar want to expand a pilot program that began with the 2002 farm bill that provides elementary schools with fresh fruit and vegetables for snacks. The program, which started in four states now serves 175,000 students in 14 states.
I believe that it is a good idea to revise this farm bill because obesity is a significant problem in our society today and will impact the lives of future generations. I believe school meals should be nutritious because some poor students may not get the nutrition they need at home so anything that would help is important. It is also important that money goes towards healthier food instead of subsides for farmers who do not produce foods that are healthy.

Freedom of Speech Taken Too Far

Please excuse this late post, I was on Kairos :)

This week I found a current even that has to do with the protection and violation of the first Amendment of the Constitution. A Kansas church was preaching that U.S. combat deaths in Iraq are God’s just punishment for America’s tolerance of gays and lesbians. A federal jury in Baltimore ordered Westboro Baptist Church to pay $11 million in damages to the family of a Marine killed in Iraq. Members of the church had picketed outside of the funeral of a soldier carrying offensive signs that read “Fag troops” and “God hates you”. The jury found that the protestors were liable for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. This ruling does not conflict with the first amendment because it does not require anyone to put up with intentional insults or trespassing on private property.
The family of the soldier did have the right to collect damages from the church because they were trespassing on a private ceremony and stating things that they knew would intentionally harm other people. It is one thing to have a different view from others around you and express it. But to provoke others with your beliefs at inappropriate times, such as a funeral, should not be allowed. People use the first amendment as an excuse to say whatever they want and cause offense to others, but a line should be drawn of when it’s not appropriate to make these kinds of comments.

Think You're Not Organized? Check out the Reagan Library

So we've all been to the Reagan Library at least once for a school fieldtrip. You might recall seeing the array of items presented to Reagan as gifts over the years of his presidency. They all looked so valuable and cared for behind the glass, but apparently they weren't being watched that carefully, considering that the library is uable to find our account for tens of thousands of valuable mementos. About six months ago, an archivist was accused of stealing from the collections and was fired. Of particualr interest is whether the artifacts that are unaccountd for include pieces from a large collection of ornamented Western belt buckles given to Reagan over the years by admirers who knew of his attachment to his ranch. The audit found that the Reagan library was unable to properly account for more than 80,000 artifacts out of its collection of some 100,000 such items, and "may have experienced loss or pilferage the scope of which will likely never be known". It also found numerous storage lapses, such as artworks stacked on top of one another, and sculptures and vases unwrapped and lying on their sides on open shelves, in an area prone to earthquakes. National Archives spokeswoman Susan Cooper said the agency welcomed the audit and was taking its findings very seriously. Part of the problem is that the presidential libraries originally did not have the same strict preservation guidelines used by most museums.

I think that it is pretty embarassing how bad the organizational system at the Reagan library was. Not being able to account for 80,000 out of 100,000 is quite the accomplishment, but not one I would brag about. There should definately be some kind of regulation in how national artifacts should be stored and identified so that this does not happen again. I honestly dont think that missing belt buckes is a national disaster, but I do understand that they have emotional value and should be taken care of.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-reagan8nov08,1,6698948,print.story?coll=la-news-politics-national&ctrack=2&cset=true