Brown backs court phone tap use

•February 7, 2008 • Leave a Comment

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7229200.stm

 This issue over allowing the tapping of phones in the U.K. is similar to the controversy over the Patriot Act a few years ago in the U.S. The main question in this debate is what is more important:  civil liberties or public safety. If this proposition is refused, some important cases could go unsolved, but experts don’t think that many cases depend on this method of information intercept. If this resolution is passed, however, the government could potentially catch some terrorist plots before they even occur. Unfortunately, the government could also take this further and use it as a foundation to gain more control over the people and deprive them of their civil liberties. I wouldn’t mind supporting this act as long as law enforcement only used it in cases when it was critical instead of using it on every case or even worse, just random civilians. Overall, I don’t think this will exactly be a dividing issue in the U.K.

My Super Tuesday Predictions

•February 5, 2008 • Leave a Comment

Well, it’s pretty late…so late that it’s already super Tuesday! Since I just finished my FRQ, I should hurry this up and get to bed.

 My pick for the Republicans is John McCain. He has great credentials, and no one can deny him that. Out of all the candidates, Democratic and Republican, he is without a doubt the most qualified. (I still prefer Obama, though). Mitt Romney will put up a tough fight, but I believe McCain will prevail because of one important factor:  Romney is a Mormon. I’m not saying anything against Mormons, and Romney’s religious affilliation should have nothing to do with the election results, but the fact of the matter is that the one of the Republicans’ primary voting bases is the evangelicals, who won’t want a Mormon in power. Unfortunately, that’s just how it is.

As far as the Democrats go, I think it’s going to be a much closer race between Hil-dog and Obama. However, I believe Obama will prevail. His resolutions seem much more concrete than Hilary’s, who just seems to have changed her opinions to appeal to the public ear. Obama has stated what he wants, and if he’s elected, that’s exactly what he’s going to do. Americans tend to like that simple resolute mindset. However, I’m not totally sure on this one. We’ll see how this turns out very soon.

Hmmm…Iraq…

•January 25, 2008 • 2 Comments

In the most recent Democratic debate, Clinton and Obama outlined nearly identical policies concerning the major thorn in the side of the U.S., Iraq. The only major difference between the two was the timeline. While Clinton claimed she would start withdrawing troops within her first 60 days of office, Obama merely stated we would withdraw our troops as soon as possible.

 Even though he didn’t give an exact timeline, I believe Obama is the best candidate to remedy the Iraq situation. He (and I) opposed the war from the beginning and was not mislead like most other politicians were. However, the reasons for war are behind us now, and we must look to the future, not dwell on past idiocies. Just because he didn’t give a specific timeline doesn’t mean he’s not going to do anything. Hilary Clinton, however, has changed her opinion in order to win over the public. She also agreed with the war when it began.

 …So what about Edwards?

Although he’s the only candidate who wanted to pull out a large number of troops immediately, he’s also the candidate who wants to provide the Iraqi government with the least diplomatic aid of the three front-runners. I like his idea of immediate action, but the least we can do is help Iraq get back on its feet after we screwed it up so bad.

With all the facts in place, Obama is the man for the job.

Democratic Debate in Myrtle Beach

•January 22, 2008 • 1 Comment

During the Democratic presidential debate in Myrtle Beach, Clinton and Obama went for each other’s throats in the beginning and continued to squabble throughout the evening. While Clinton and Obama babbled like a pair of brainless monkeys, Edwards sat back and made himself look like a downright prince by pointing out the childishness of the other candidates’ behavior. Although he handled himself well, Edwards couldn’t really get involved in the brawl because of the harsh criticisms flying between the other two. The comments quickly became very personal and laced with malice. One of them would make a claim, and then the other candidate would deny it and fire back another accusation. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. All the while, Edwards just sat back and looked pretty for the cameras even though he was given little opportunity to outline his own policies. I would say none of the candidates truly won this sorry excuse of a debate. It just looked like a major catfight. Personally, I will vote for whichever Democratic candidate is nominated as none of the Republican candidates have any concrete plan of action for Iraq, which was a major topic in this debate. While Hilary Clinton gave a specific timeline for the withdrawl of our troops, Obama left his response open-ended, saying we would withdraw as soon as possible. However, I tend to agree with Obama on other major issues, so he is my first choice for president.

 All in all, there was no real winner, but Obama and Clinton made their policies known.