Spies?

            In an article titled, “Guantanamo Bay Spies,” Osi goes address the issue of the U.S. government converting the prisoners into spies. Within the article, Osi describes how some of these prisoners were treated. For example, the prisoners were “given real beds, private kitchens and showers, pornography for those who ever wanted it, and paid millions of dollars by a CIA account code-named pledge.” He also goes on to describe how the U.S. is training these prisoners to go and act as spies. One specific example given is that the U.S. would use these spies to go undercover and gather information from Al Qaeda. Osi then gives his piece of mind by exclaiming he disagrees with the government’s tactics.

            I completely agree with Osi’s side. I believe it is wrong and it is incredibly foolish to carryout these plans. These prisoners aren’t in Guantanamo Bay because of minor misdemeanors or crimes. These are prisoners who are essentially terrorists and are a threat to our country, and trusting these people would just be putting our country in jeopardy.

            I believe the only thing Osi’s argument is lacking are more facts or, if they are available, information on spies that have actually underwent a mission and came back. However, I do not believe the lacking of these facts or information hinders Osi’s article by any means. It is still a great article with valuable information because not many people know about this situation. His targeted audience, the general population of America, should be informed of what is going on and should definitely consider the actions the government is taking.

Big Brother?

            According to an article in PolitiFact.com, America has over 900 bases around the globe today. We have military personnel in over 145 countries and military bases in over 35 countries. Not only do we have an extreme amount of military personnel and bases in many countries, we have a numerous amount of embassies around the world. America, as of today, has 294 embassies in various countries. These numbers have to raise an eyebrow on every American’s face.

            In Germany alone, the U.S. has 48,000 active-duty personnel, which runs up the cost to around $4 billion. This does not even include the military personnel costs, which is $3.9 billion. Add those two numbers up and we’re spending roughly $8 billion in just Germany. In South Korea, there are about 28,500 U.S. soldiers. Because the U.S. must provide housing to military troops, this racks up the dollars to about $7 billion for military personnel. In Japan, there are about 50,000-stationed troops. The U.S. spends roughly $2 billion just on non-personnel costs. Imagine how far that number would jump up if personnel costs were included.

            With over 290 U.S. embassies globally, this allows for an ideal location to attack for those who oppose and despise America. There have been over 30 U.S. embassy attacks and that number is growing as the days go by. Because the U.S. embassies are symbolic, they are extremely vulnerable to attacks. There have already been countless hostage situations, along with suicide bombings.

            It is clear that the U.S. is trying to play the “Big Brother” role in many different nations. However, is it our duty to impede on another country’s will even if they don’t want it? The answer is obviously, no. We spend billions of dollars, possibly even trillions, on the foreign bases and U.S. embassies we have established. The number of deceased troops keeps rising from attacks against these bases, along with U.S. workers in the embassies due to attacks. It is clear that we are not wanted in most of the areas we occupy; yet we feel the need to intrude and force people to assimilate to our way of life. Americans would in no way, shape, or form allow China to establish military bases or embassies on our soil. I believe if we focused on our country and not try to poke our nose in every other country, we would be far more prosperous.

Financing Education is Like Financing a House

           

Maria Fernanda, a colleague of mine, addresses the issue of student loans in her blog U.S. Events. Maria is exclaiming that the government should “make a better plan in student loans” and “do something about the [increasing] interest rate on students loans.”

            Let me start off by saying I 100% agree with her argument being made. Why? Because I am her targeted audience and what she is saying applies to my life as well. I had no idea tuitions were rising again on July 1^st, nor did I know that the federal government profits from student loans, although; that doesn’t surprise me that they have their hands in the student loans. Maria is completely right that the increase in tuition rates and interest rates are outrageous. All that will do is: add more numbers to the category of those who can’t afford to pay off their student loans after college, and scare more people away from college.

            The only thing I would add to her argument is the use of links to sites with data about student loans, tuition rates, and government profits from student loans. This way her facts don’t seem as if they are just coming from the air, it also establishes more credibility. Other than that, there are no further revisions needed. All of her targeted audience, college students, will agree that these increased rates and tuitions are hurting us. America can’t preach and stress enough of how valuable education is to our country. Yet, we continue to raise tuition prices and interest rates? Yeah, that makes sense.

The Pursuit of Happiness?

                                                                                                                                  

            Time and time again the U.S. Government has tried to shutdown abortion. For more than 200 years, there has been an ongoing battle between those of “Pro-Choice” (supporters of abortion) and “Pro-Life” (those against abortion).

            Let’s take a very brief look into past abortion trials and tribulations: one of the biggest abortion cases was Roe v. Wade in 1973. The Supreme Court’s decision made it possible for women to get safe and legal abortions in all states, as well as, terminating state laws that made abortion illegal. Recently in 2003, President Bush signed a law that put a federal ban on abortion procedures. However, the NAF (National Abortion Federation) challenged the law immediately and was successful in blocking the law.

            Teen pregnancy is a major issue in today’s society. About 820,000 teens in the U.S. become pregnant each year, and of those 820,000 pregnancies, 80% are unintended. The worst part of teen pregnancy is the effects of it. The U.S. spends approximately $7 billion each year because of teen pregnancy costs, only 1/3 of teenage mothers graduate high school, only 1.5% of teen moms have a college degree by age 30, and 80% of single teenage mothers end up on welfare. The evidence clearly shows that teenagers are not prepared to raise a child. Although, abortion does not solve the problem of teen pregnancy and the catastrophic effects, it does offer an alternate life for teens facing the problem.

            There are about 1.2 million abortions each year in America, of that 1.2 million, 51% of abortions occur at 24 years old or younger. If abortions were banned, our whole country would be affected. You may ask, “How in the heck would our WHOLE country be affected by banning abortion?” Well, let me explain. For starters, if abortions were banned, then this would mean no alternative route for teenagers, as well as, women in their 20’s who are barely established and still pursuing their education/career. The number of teenage mothers would take a dramatic increase, which would decrease the amount of teenage mothers finishing high school and obtaining a college degree. This would then lead to fewer professions such as: doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc. With the production of fewer professions, our nation’s growth would take a hit. Along with our nation’s growth, our economy would suffer as well. The $7 billion spent on teen pregnancies would see an increase as well.

            Pro-life advocates may argue, “Well, they can always put the child in a foster home.” However, foster care is NOT the right solution. According to, Children’s Rights Organization, in just the past year about 650,000 children were in foster care. Half of all these children have “chronic medical problems,” children have “developmental delays,” and 80% of all children have “serious emotional problems.” Another example why foster care is not the option is: “In 2011, 11 percent of the children (over 26,000) exiting foster care aged out of the system. Research has shown that teens aging out of the system are highly likely as adults to experience homelessness, poor health, unemployment, incarceration, and other poor outcomes.”

            In our Congress, there are 20 women out of 100 members in the Senate and 78 women out of 435 members in the House of Representatives. While in class, Professor Seago made me realize: how could MEN decide on a topic that dealt with specifically WOMEN? These men in Congress can in NO way, shape, or form relate to women and abortion. So to have them try and regulate abortion blows my mind.

            The bottom line is that abortion should be legal and there should be no questions about it or attempts to dissolve it. Thomas Jefferson once said we are “endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Getting rid of abortion would also be stripping women of their “Rights” and “Pursuit of Happiness.” Every woman should have the freedom of choice and be able to choose their own paths.

            In a commentary, “Republicans Have Done Real Damage to the Economy,” Dave Johnson goes over the past, present, and future damages of the government shutdown.  The repercussions of the shutdown are being brought into the spotlight, and Johnson is pointing the blame at the Republicans.  

            The targeted audience of the commentary would be those who oppose the Republican Party. This is because Johnson’s argument specifically attacks the Republicans. The argument being made is that because of the selfish powers of the Republican Party, consumer confidence levels take a plunge, which further damage our beaten up economy.

            Johnson immediately attacks the Republicans by claiming: “Republicans believe that a bad economy works for them at election time.” He gives evidence of the past and present damages caused by the government shutdown. His first point is that in 2011 when the Republicans threatened to send the country into default, the consumer confidence took a plunge. He claims, “In Debt-Ceiling Déjà Vu Could Sink Economy” Bloomberg reported that, “Growth in nonfarm payrolls decelerated to an average 88,000 a month during the three months of the debt-ceiling impasse, compared with an average of 176,000 in the first five months of 2011.” Consumer confidence plunged to a 31-year low.” Johnson then goes on to discuss the damages done by this year’s government shutdown. He begins by stating this year the damages are far worse than the damages done in 2011. For example, “Standard & Poor’s ratings agency has done some early calculations of the damage and says, “the shutdown has shaved at least 0.6% off of annualized fourth-quarter 2013 GDP growth, or taken $24 billion out of the economy.” He goes on even further and blames the Republicans for “the 2013 job-loss from the sequester cuts to be estimated at only 800,000 jobs, but the 2014 job-loss is estimated to be 1.6 million.” These are just a handful of studies that Johnson uses to put the damage of the economy on the Republicans’ back.

            Johnson uses great sources such as: “The New York Times,” The Government Accountability Office, The Bipartisan Center, and many more that provide good evidence and studies. These sources help his credibility, however, the only thing hindering Johnson’s argument is his very biased view. First off, the commentary is a “left-leaning liberal blog.” Secondly, the way he points the blame at the Republicans is in a very disliking tone. For example, “Republicans have been obstructing…everything,” “That’s just those two pieces of Republican damage to our economy,” and “Republicans still have one power: the power to destroy. And they will use that power until we take it away from them.” This is the only reason why Johnson’s credibility gets knocked.

            Overall, his commentary proposes an overall successful argument. He provides good use of studies that show solid evidence of the damage done to the economy. Although, he is using an extremely biased view, the evidence shows that due to the Republicans threatening and actually shutting down the government, they caused our GDP to fall up to 4% and cause the economy to take a tremendous plunge.

            An editorial found in The New York Times, “The Cost of the Shutdown,” argues that many Republicans are claiming the government shutdown as “an opportunity to show that less spending isn’t really so bad.” However, that claim is false and the shutdown will actually cause more spending and damage the economy.

            The editorial’s targeted audience is not to just those who oppose the government shutdown, but a vast majority of every American. The argument is being made to explain how the government shutdown will not only harm us, but our economy as well. And if we are being informed that we are in harms way, it keeps the audience engaged with the editorial.

            Many Republican officials are claiming that the government shutdown is doing no harm, and that during the shutdown there will be “less spending.” The author, however, is arguing that the shutdown is indeed causing harm and hurting our economy. The statement is backed up by facts about the past government shutdown between 1995 and 1996, and also with facts about the current situation. In the past government shutdown between 1995 and 1996, it “cost the Treasury $1.4 billion over 26 days…equivalent of $2.1 billion in today’s dollars.” These are head turning numbers to have just occurred within a 26-day span. According to “the research firm IHS Inc. [ it ] estimates that the shutdown will cost the country $300 million a day in lost economic output.” Not only will we have to spend billions of dollars because of the shutdown, millions of workers are not getting paid.  We also have “ the cost to the economy from the lost productivity of the 800,000 furloughed workers and the delayed paychecks to the more than one million “essential” employees who are still on the job.” The author could have cemented his argument by stating military veterans might not receive their benefits as well. I believe that military families are more politically up-to-date and are more inclined to read this article, which would bring more support to his argument.

            The argument is successful because it makes people realize what the government shutdown is actually doing to our economy. If our economy is in a downward spiral, potentially our nation is in a downward spiral. We are already in a major economic deficit, so we should not be adding to this deficit due to the “single-minded crusade” of some Republicans. Many people are blind to what the government shutdown affects are, however, by reading this editorial many eyes will be open to the negative affects of this dire situation.