The final editorial...for now

The editorial, tilted Food for Thought, was quite informative. It commented on President Obama’s new idea on food safety. The President is hiring some new faces to help head the FDA, or Food and Drug Administration, in hopes that new management will help tighten up legislation concerning food regulation. The author commented on how Congress always seems to call for reform policies right after a food scare, like the contaminated peanut incident a while back, but never seems to follow up on all of its big talk. The author makes it clear to the reader that he/she believes that the change Obama’s team hopes to bring will be a positive step in the right direction for the Nation’s food industry.
The author makes a good point. After the peanut scare, many Americans hoped that the Government would step in and make the food of America safer to eat. Congress had given the idea to the people that something would be done. The fact that the new President is finally trying to clean up the food industry is a good sign to the citizens of this great country that the United States of America has a President who is willing to back his words with action. Now all Congress has to do is confirm his nominations so “they can get to work.”

Week 5 of the editorials

This week’s article, titled A Moral Stand, was a call for action. The author asked President Obama to make a decision concerning stem cell research. Obama had recently pronounced that “federal funding” could “go forward on a much broader scale”. However, the author of the article points out that the President’s decision was too vague to be of any substantial help. What the author truly wants is for the President to make a choice, no matter what it may be, and explain it to America.
I agree with the author that it is not too much to ask of the President to make a clear decision concerning this issue. I understand that Mr. Obama needs to be a little fuzzy about some of his specifics, because he does not want to upset any of the American citizens with his decision. However, he needs to let his country know just where exactly they are going on this path we call stem cell research. It is a difficult position that the President is in, and I, for one, am glad that I do not have to make this decision.

The 4th of 6 Editorials

This week’s editorial, Mr. President, Time to Rein in the Chaos, was about the nation’s economy. The author, Andrew S. Grove, commented not on the “what of the Obama team’s efforts but on the how”. Grove claimed that instead of trying to tackle too many “monumental problems” like the economy and energy and environmental policies, the federal government needs to tackle one issue at a time. Speaking from forty years of business experience, the author asked our president to “Rein in the Chaos” and make some decisions.
I whole heartily agree with Mr. Grove. It is always difficult to be the leader of a new order, and I think we definitely have the right man for the job. However, we have spent many months experimenting with the economy. It is time for a decision, a decisive course of action. No matter what the path may be, the country needs the President to lead us down it.

Editorial num. 3

This week’s editorial was about the University of the District of Columbia. It was titled Rejuvenating UDC. The University wants to become a standalone community college. However, UDC has been falling apart and is unsure how to fix itself. Well, that is not entirely true. The new President of the University, Allen Sessoms, proposed a “series of startling new ideas” for UDC. However, many of the students at the school are not anxious to back the plan because it would involve a “massive increase” in their tuition. The author also wanted to mention that furthermore, the Mayor of D.C. is not Mr. Sessoms’s biggest fan. With all the hurdles that the school must face, no one is very sure about what will happen to UDC.
Personal Opinion: I believe that if UDC wants to make a change, now is the time. There is an old saying that goes something like “there is no time like the present”, and I believe that there is a lot of truth in that. It is a shame that the proposed changes have to come at such a high price. However, if the University really needs them to better itself and to make the school more respectable, then I say that the students should buck up and pay. College is expensive. Period. If the students are not happy with where they are going, then they have the ability to go somewhere else.

The 2nd of MANY editorials

For this weeks editorial, I chose something a little different; a little, oh, I don't know, nutty. The article was titled More Than Peanuts. That's right, we're talking actual nuts (good play on words, right? haha) The main topic was about regulation in the food industry. The writer attacked Stewart Parnell, the president of the Peanut Corporation of America, for caring more about making “$$$$$” than the health of the consumer. His corporation is being blamed for the recent salmonella outbreak that “has been linked to nine deaths and 637 illnesses”. The author of the editorial claims that if the government creates newer, stricter regulations, than it would be less likely for another episode like this one to occur.
Personally, I believe that it's a shame that some CEOs of major corporations put money over the customer. I agree with the author of the editorial that tighter regulations would force these money-hungry presidents to run a cleaner business. However, I’m unsure about how necessary these new rules are. Funding these regulations would cost America money that it just doesn’t have right now. But, I will admit that if saving a few more lives from certain peanut death means spending an extra few dollars in taxes, I for one will be the first to give up a dollar for the cause.

Here We Go Again...

Last week I read an editorial in the Washington Post about the bipartisanship of Congress. More specifically, the article discussed how the old style of politicking during President Bush’s term is going away slower than some people had hoped. The article focused on the newly proposed stimulus bill and the troubles it was facing in both houses. Some of the congressmen were still not going along with the ideas of the new President, and their disagreements about the bill were causing some problems.
Personally, I agree that there are still some politicians who are not completely sold on some of President Obama’s economic plans. However, I do believe that there will always be a few politicians that disagree with a proposed bill, no matter who proposes it. That is just the way our government is designed to work. The idea that not all congressmen are going to agree with a new stimulus bill is an example of the checks and balances of the American system of government. If every congressman agreed with whatever the President proposed, what would be the point of having them in the first place?

political cartoon #4

This week's cartoon depicts an exaggerated version of the "shoe" incident. The man behind the podium is President Bush; and instead of being attacked by one shoe, he is being assaulted by tons of them. The caption at the bottom of the cartoon describes the emotions that many of us might have felt when we first witnessed the "shoe" spectacle.
While I, and many others, find this cartoon to be hilarious and good-natured fun, others may find it insulting. No one wants to have a shoe thrown at them. The fact that people all over the world are laughing at the event might lead some to believe that the former are making fun of America. Where do you stand? Do you find this comic insulting, or just plan funny. I, for one, can't stop laughing.