Is it really necessary?

I agree with your post whole heartedly. I feel that it is unnecessary for an individual to demand proof of someone else's place of birth. That documentation, if in question, should have been provided at the time of innauguration. Now, is irrelevant.
Regardless, though, it proves Donald Trump's arrogance. His wealth will only get him so far in life. When running for president, he must realize that it will come down to his merit.
Is he personally going to pour millions of dollars back in to our economy to help minimize the deficit? I doubt it.
Now is a time in which our current president has won himself more votes in reelection, and his running mates will take whatever means necessary to deface him.
Its sad, really. Our elections resemble children on a play ground. (Although, not as cute!)
If Donald Trump wins presidency, it will be based on his reality show popularity, and not his actual political knowledge. I guess in times like these, it will work in his favor. This being the time of smuck TV and all.

Comment in reference to question of legal birth certificate

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7858773018505581346&postID=1356318846402044990&page=1&token=1305324637411

What is it all coming to?

         Over the past several months, my son's education has emphasized a standardized test.  The children must take a "Benchmark" test in December and March in preparation for the TAKS test that they completed over the past week. Even though his grades on his report card have been some what decent, there has been so much of an emphasis on this test that his nerves have been tested, and his concentration on other areas have been lost. When I was in school, we took a test in the 3,5,7, and 10th grades. But is was not an emphasis of our every day learning. It was simply a test that we had to take. In the 10th grade, the test determined whether or not we had learned the information necessary to obtain our high school diploma.
        Is is truly necessary that each state is required to teach according to these tests? I believe that teaching children according to these tests have decreased the amount of education that our children are receiving. According to the "No Child Left Behind Act", one of the purposes of the act is ,"ensuring that high-quality academic assessments, accountability systems, teacher preparation and training, curriculum, and instructional materials are aligned with challenging State academic standards so that students, teachers, parents, and administrators can measure progress against common expectations for student academic achievement;" No where, does the document mention the funding of the school.  A better question is who sets the state's standards? What are the common expectations? Although I am not against the original intent of the Act, I must say that the emphasis has now been placed on the "exemplary" rating of the school, and our children's education is suffering. Now, more then ever, children are less prepared for places of higher education and must spend their first semesters in remedial classes to assist in bringing them up to college standards.
          I feel it is essential, in order for our future generations to receive a beneficial education, that the emphasis not be placed on a standardized test. That the emphasis be placed on our children actually learning, academically and socially, skills that they can carry with them in to their adult lives. I think it is sad that the government has enforced these rules on our education system, and that this is what it is all coming to.


***For the original documentation of the No Child Left Behind Act, please refer to www.2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pgl.html#sec1001

Planned Parenthood

I do essetially feel that Planned Parenthood is an important program. It provides birth control to individuals who my not have that outlet, and provides education to young teens who may feel that they cannot confide in their families.
However, I do not necessarily feel that it is up to the American Public to directly pay for this program. But, then how would Planned Parenthood receive its funding? It's a very difficult situation in which many people aren't sure how to approach the topic. I think that regardless of an individuals stance on abortion, the purpose of planned parenthood is to help in decreasing the amounts lives that are ended and to increase education about premarital sex and pregnancy preventatives. For the Government to cut funding would be detrimental to areas that truly benefit from these efforts.

And The Benefits Are.........

Have you ever wondered why over the last twenty years there has been such an increase in cancer and other debilitating illnesses? Why with all of the cancer research and fundraising there is still no found cure? Is it all a game in which individuals serve as the playing pieces?
I personally believe that the medical industry serves as a financial provider for the government. Why is it that the United States is the LEADER in cancer? It is all a financial game. Do I think that the United States is purposely allowing individuals to become ill for financial gain? Not necessarily, but I believe that there is a cure, and that we would rather attack an individual's immune system at a pretty costly price tag then serve the true purpose of actually healing them.
I think that the Food and Drug administration approves the methods in which our foods are processed, and that it all has an effect on the ways our bodies function.
Pretty strong opinions, huh?
About three years ago, I had strep throat. I received an antibiotic and had a horrible allergic reaction to it. I had never had this type of reaction before. I stopped taking the medication, and refuse to take medication now. I changed my nutrition habits and have not been ill sense.  I started doing research and have found severe evidence supporting the ideas of consuming foods in their most natural state.
 It is essential, in my opinion, to read labels and educate yourself when it comes to making decisions in regards to nurtition.
Do your research, and you be the judge. Can we cure ourselves? Or continue to pour millions of dollars a year in to a lost cause? Who are our Health Care benefits truly benefitting?

Where are our priorities?

In a time in which millions of people are losing their homes, lands, places of business, schools, and children, our news media decides to do what? Oh, that's right, talk about oil drilling.
What a convenient time, lets add stress to America's people as their hearts go out to the millions effected by the Tsunami.  According to http://www.mediamatters.org/, Hardeep Dhillon writes a commentary titled, "Fox Interrupts Earthquake Coverage to Push For Oil Drilling."
Nice, isn't it?
Wall Street Journal's Steve Moore plays an interesting roll in the video clip. He says that gas prices are the number one thing on America's mind, and that, " I mean, the way I put it is Jenna is that every time we can drill for oil here in the United States every barrel, that's one less barrel we have to get from these countries like Saudi Arabia, like Iran and Iraq, like Libya that some so much turmoil." However, he goes on to say that this idea conflicts with the Presidential Policy on moving ahead.
Shouldn't it be the roll of every great Leader to have their Country be completely self-sufficient? I know the roll of a mother is to have her child be self-sufficient. Why does the same rule not apply here?
The author, Hardeep Dhillon concludes his argument by saying, "However, Moore is right about one thing - the "bigger issue is what we are doing in the long term." Unfortunately for Fox News and Moore, "drill, baby, drill" is just not going to cut it."
And unfortunatly, the demand for gas is only going up as we appraoch the Summer months, and so are the prices. But, the timing of the argument was not appropriate because people were attempting to gain information about the Tsunami, and not be troubled by the continuing oil debate.

Source: http:///www.mediamatter.org/blog/20110311022

Who are we really hurting?

With all of the recent news and legislation about school districts needing to cut costs across the board, who are we really hurting? It is evident, that answer is the kids.
Our kids are going to be the one's who suffer when attempting to help the nation repair it's economic deficit. Time magazine reported on one story about Rhode Island school districts sending out notice letters to some 2,000 teachers who are about to be out of work. So what is it that those children will have to look forward to next school year? Over crowded classrooms? A teacher to student ration of 40:1? I'm sure that will help to increase the education level in the United States.
There are already so many issues in our education system: we teach to a standardized test, we have dropped discipline in the schools, etc... It is not a wonder that the United States education system is really starting to fall behind in comparison to other nations education systems.
It's sad really. Not only are we going to be lacking in those areas, but now extracurricular activities are going to be affected. The staff will not be there to coach the children, lighting for gym' s is no longer going to be an option, and now at an age when children are the most influenced, they are going to be left with nothing but a lot of free time. Children need structure, and what better way to provide it then by providing organized activities.
I really hope the legislation stops and thinks about just how detrimental these new budget decreases actually will be.

Time Magazine: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2055436,00.html