Stage Eight: Comment on a colleague’s work #2

I am going to do my commentary on B Paxton Tex Gov 2306's Blog Stage 7 which summarizes Proposition 1 and Proposition 2 of Georgetown, TX. Just a recap: Proposition 1 was to widen the road on Williams Drive, which, if you live past Sun City as I do, is absolutely necessary. Proposition 2 are for parks and recreation projects. It was actually quite an amusing blog, and made me do some research because I was curious as to whether or not these Propositions passed, and according to Wilco.org, fortunately it looks like they both did. Proposition 1: 13,521 voted for it and 7,167voted against it and as for Proposition 2: 11,994 voted for it and 8,787 against it.

Stage Seven: Original editorial or commentary #2

          I would like to comment on the impact religion has on Texas' government. Texas is bound to so many current laws which are completely outdated as well as based too strongly on traditional religious morals. In the state of Texas, one must acknowledge a supreme being before being able to hold public office. This is absolutely ridiculous. Whatever happened to separation of church and state? Also, homosexual behavior is a misdemeanor offense. Yet another law based on the traditional morals and values of Christianity which subjugate non-followers. And, of course, I have saved the best and most debated, well-known issue for last: Texas’s no liquor sales on Sunday.
          These outdated laws have been activated to preserve Christian business owners from competition on their Sabbath day. However, these laws do not protect other religions such as Jews and Muslims, whose Sabbath is Saturday from competition on their Sabbath day. It is unfair and discriminatory, if one religion has this much power over a state, it oppresses all other religions and those who do not follow under the same traditional Christian beliefs.
          Although some laws which used to require Sunday church attendance vanished in the nineteenth century since they debased a citizen’s right to religious freedoms, some specific laws are still in existence in Texas. Up until 1985, it was illegal to sell house wares. However, this gives me hope that one day we may live in a state, or country for that matter, which can have laws completely free of the oppression of traditional Christian values and morals.

Blog Stage Six

Little to like about BIG Texas, I agree with you on the facts that you presented about people not voting but even though there were a lot of people in this country who did not go out and vote for one reason or another but in the end it is everyones right to also not vote as well. Just because you are an American does not mean that you have to go out and vote because its time to. The fact of being American is you have the choice for either or. All you can do is just stand up for what you believe in and if that means not going to vote so be it people are making too big of a deal about voting, change, and making your voice be heard. If people dont want to go vote then so be it.

Stage Five: Original editorial or commentary #1

          Of course, after recent historical significant events, which happened just over a week ago today, I thought it appropriate to write about the election of Barack Obama as the 44th president of the United States. Now, this subject might be a little touchy, however I think I would like to voice my opinion on the matter anyway. I know that this blog is supposed to be about Texas government, however, I hope the president of the United States is classified under Texas government, although I know most Texans tend to think Texas could be its own country.
          Anyway, beside the point, I think that the people who voted Barack Obama into presidency, for the sole reason of his race. Rappers like Nas, who is thirty-five years old, yet this was the first year he decided to register and vote. I hardly doubt this is a coincidence. Also, at this year’s Black Entertainment Awards ceremony, Sean Combs, formerly known as “P Diddy,” told the crowd that they had the chance to vote in the first black president. Not support Obama because of his qualifications, but simply because of his race.
          The thing that bothers me the most is that it seems as if no one really cares about Obama’s qualifications or whether he is the very best candidate. I found plenty of sites in which people openly admit that they are, “voting for Barack Obama because he is black.” I just think that in a country that I am hoping can one day be colorblind, this is making matters much worse. By putting so much focus on his race, and calling white people who do not vote for him “racist” are putting racism before qualification.
          I would just like to propose just one thought, can any of you imagine the outcry if someone went publicly and said: “Vote for McCain because he is white.” The truth is, I support Obama, I just condone those who support him for all the wrong reasons.

Stage Four: Substantial commentary or criticism #2

The article I chose to critique is entitled, “Don't vote straight-ticket,” from DallasNews.com. I would say that the author’s intended audience is directed toward voters of all shapes and sizes, republican, democrat, libertarian, independent, anything. I think that the author did a very good job of trying to write an editorial about the importance of being knowledgeable about who people are voting for, rather than just voting for a particular party. The editorial then gives an example of a judge who was elected as a Democrat, re-elected as a Republican, and is now up for election as a Democrat again. Obviously there is something wrong with that picture since most people do not just suddenly wake up one day and change from Democrat to Republican, then back again. People should be aware that sometimes a title is not everything, just because someone shares the same political party, does not necessarily mean they stand eye to eye on every idea. The editorial conveys to the reader information regarding voting and four important reasons why people should not vote straight-ticket which are: “You might miss an important issue, all candidates are not created equal, there is plenty of info to guide you, and that justice is blind to party affiliation.” Which I think is necessary information and something voters should most definitely take into consideration. The editorial also gives the reader a website to find more information on candidates to help decide on who to vote for. The main thing I like about this editorial is the fact that it is unbiased and the main point is just to try to inform voters to no vote blindly based solely on a particular political party.

Stage Three: Substantial commentary or criticism #1

The editorial I chose to critique is entitled, "California, You Got Nothin’" by Forrest Wilder who is an Austin, Texas- based journalist. He is a reporter with the Texas Observer and freelance writer for progressive news sources. He tends to focus on a more liberal audience. The editorial introduces the audience to an event this week in which the Republican Party of Sacramento County in California had to pull from its Web site after even the Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is also a republican, considered completely and totally inappropriate. The website included some highly offensive content, comparing Barack Obama to Osama bin Laden. The editorial then claims that California has nothing on Texas’ anti-Obama propaganda which compares Senator Obama to Hitler. Now, I agree with the author and his sarcasm. It is absolutely ridiculous for people to compare Obama to Osama, (even though the line was rather catchy: the only difference between Obama and Osama is BS, get it? The second letter in each name). Anyway, the author thinks that idea is absolutely ridiculous, and it is, however, Hays County Republicans take it even that much further linking to a website called Faith Freedom International which has an essay that compares Obama to Osama, to Hitler, to Stalin, to Khomeini, to Mao and to Kim Jong Ill. Now the funny thing is, Obama is a democrat, which is about the farthest thing from a dictator. Not only that, but the website accuses Obama of suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. The article I chose then jokes that not only is Obama as a “Hitleresque communist Muslim who worships himself when he’s not, ya know, pallin’ around with terrorists…” It is ridiculous how low some republicans are going just to try to prove a point. Blatantly lying about things and making outlandish and bizarre claims only make the accusers look bad.

Stage Two: Article introduction and colleague’s blogs

The article touches on Senator John McCain and Sarah Palin’s newly aggressive assault on Senator Barack Obama's character, practically accusing Obama of molestation in regards to his supporting of age appropriate sex education as well as Sarah Palin's accusations of Obama as "palling around with terrorists." It basically touches on the fact that the republicans are trying their best to slander Obama's name with the two worst things you could be in the United States: a pedophile and a terrorist. I think it's worth a read because all I seem to see, especially in All-Hail-McCain-Texas, is about Obama and his terrorist past and connections with friends and that apparently McCain is a holy saint. The article then proceeds to spell out a summary and link to some of McCain’s shameful moments in history regarding a man named Charles Keating who cost many taxpayers billions in the past. I just think that with voting coming up, it’s a good idea to look into both sides, since Obama’s faults seem to be the more often publicized.

Full Article:
http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Blogs/News?oid=oid%3A682874