Citizen's First ?

Does the American Government really put it's citizens first? In light of recent events it has to come into question.With all of the obvious things set aside I.E. the scandals in which our leadership continues to lie to us something else comes up that hits closer to home for most of us. What i'm speaking of is the education crisis. While the Senate just passed an immigration bill that grants amnesty to nearly 11 million illegal immigrants and promises no notion of border control, they were unable to come to a decision on education and college students will see their interest rates nearly double as a result.

Now it may just be me but it seems like the citizens have taken the back seat. As of the passing day a college student could obtain a college loan at 3.4 percent. Monday will approach and will sting just a little more as that number will jump to 6.8 percent!! As if debt wasn't already a notion that deters people from higher education. It is just another instance in Washington where congress waited too long to address an issue. (or maybe i should say an important issue) Congress must come up with a solution after failing to meet their deadline. It's time Washington drops the issues that Americans don't care about (only 3 percent of Americans believe immigration is a pressing issue).  There is a time for things such as immigration, now is not that time. As of right now there are American citizens that are faced with huge financial issues with education.

Take care of the citizens then the illegals. It's time we as the people stand up for ourselves and make Washington take care of the things they were elected to do.

Hero or Traitor: The acts of Edward Snowden

Who is Edward Snowden?            

Hero-a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.

          Traitor-One who betrays one's country, a cause, or a trust, especially one who commits treason.

          Oh my, another post article about Snowden? You Bet! This event is extremely important and it is imperative it does not go away. What makes it so important is that America as a whole is still very split on what Snowden actually is. On one half you have the “He’s a traitor and needs to be put to death!!” argument (Oddly enough this is the side the US Government sides with.) and on the other half you have the “He is an American hero” argument. So just who is Edward Snowden? As almost all of America knows he released confidential information withheld by the US government and the NSA showing evidence on American citizens.

          Now a traitor is classified as someone who betrays his country, with that said did Snowden really betray the country? Betraying the country would be releasing classified information to a foreign or domestic enemy. Snowden however did not release this to an enemy, unless the government or the American people believe otherwise. He released this information to the American public to expose the infringement of their fourth amendment right. (I have provided the link to that amendment at the bottom of this article for anyone who needs a refresher. ) So, was his act a form of treason or heroism? Without a doubt he defied the government, but did so because the government was defying the American people. I personally put myself of the side of heroism. This was a guy who was making over 200,000 dollars a year and was looking at a very nice pension upon his retirement. He put that all on the line with this. He gave up everything he had for the American people to know everything. That classifies more as a hero in my eyes but it’s on yourself to decide. But when making that decision consider this:

 “People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” – Benjamin Franklin

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."- Thomas Jefferson

If those words are true the debate between hero or traitor is actually not a debate at all.

 http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment

Does equality for all really mean equality for all?

    Today our country took a major step in the argument of same sex marriage. Now as i am so , so on this issue i figured i would bring some things to the light. The argument on this moral issue was simple "who are you to judge what love is?" Now that honestly is a very good question, but i don't think it justifies homosexuals being able to marry. The reason this issue does matter is it will now become a gateway for others to justify their reasons for wanting to marry that is widely looked at as taboo in our society.
    The main group it will attract are polygamists, and the argument they will pose will be one that will be virtually impossible to oppose. It will be the same "who are you to judge what love is?" argument. But on top of that in some cases their religion will back them.. How can you argue with a religion that is over 200 years old and they are devout to it, and roll that together with the "who are you to judge what love is?" point and that's a stronger argument than homosexuals had.
    Polygamists wont be the only groups it will ultimately attract however, unfortunately it will also attract groups such as: people who practice incest, pedophiles who want to marry children, and all sorts of other groups. Now granted these things are clearly wrong and you may think i'm taking this to the extreme however it has to be brought up. As outlandish as these claims may seem they are realistic. The same argument of "who are you to judge what love is?". It opens the door people!!! That's all i'm saying. It's time to take a step back and ask how far do you let "equality" go ? And is the concept of of "equality tarnished by a changing society? Marriage was set as a standard you meet the requirements you get married, if you don't meet them you don't. People want to separate this issues from same sex marriage, saying it's not fair to compare those things. Those people will have to answer the same question that won this same sex debate
    "who are you to judge what love is?"

Spend Big Lose Big: The stimulus fail

Let me start this article out with a simple math equation 1x2=2 ,1x(-2)=-2. Now anyone who attended any type of school knows that this is known as a multiplier. Now let's bring that theory to our economy. The stimulus bill though with good intentions was the wrong way to go about trying to fix the economy. And in this article i hope to provide you some insight on to why it was a bad decision.
The Main flaw with something such as the stimulus is that for every dollar you put into that is one more dollar you take out of the market that could be spent in a more productive way. It takes away the markets' ability to take care of itself, which is often referred as the "invisible hand".The Founding Fathers believed in this and to much of their credit it's proven to be right. Unfortunately, our current leaders didn't seem to agree with them. Our current leadership chose the road less traveled and chose to landscape their bill after FDR's New Deal. Now with that statement alone we should've have known the stimulus would fail but hey, why not try it again.
There were Multiple arguments against the bill while it was being debated. One of the more important one was John Mccains' argument. Senator Mccain proposed a stimulus package that would've costed 430 billion dollars. This bill was based on spending cuts,lowering tax rates, and tax reform. The argument ? Well the Keynesian's argued that it didn't spend enough money, which might explain why the actual bill eclipsed a trillion dollars.
In the end the stimulus bill failed to meet even there most optimistic predictions, we actually would have been statistically better off doing nothing at all. The stimulus package was full of "shovel in the ground" projects which just added to the alarming debt burden. One of these projects was actually for a joke machine to be built at a university ($700,000). These projects awarded states who lived outside their means and punished those who did. But all that set aside in fails in comparison to what the wreckless spending in Washington is really doing, and that is committing generational theft. At one point we will have to pay back all of the debt, but it wont be us it will be our children and grandchildren!!! Are we really okay with that? I would like to think not.

Obama's use of the espionage act

The espionage act of 1917 was enacted June 15 of 1917. Since it's beginning the purpose of the act was to prohibit any attempt to interfere with military operations, support U.S enemies during wartime, to interfere  with military recruitment. The act had been argued since it's existence that it is unconstitutional.
     Now it's time to bring it to a more current time throughout history it had been used a total of three times, in Obama time in office it had been used six times. So it raises the question as why? Well Obama has been infamous for using the power of government to criminalize his enemies and praise his allies ( kind of ironic when you think back to his campaign promises).so it's honestly an easy conclusion he is using this weapon to promote fear in the government and media. And up until recently it had worked well, Until now. After a while a tool used in the wrong way loses its edge. The reason for this its that you van only cover up so many lies , and now his admin is starting to feel the pain of the controversies its created.
     The use of this act is used as an attempt to silence the whistle blowers. However after so long its kind of hard to deny the facts. I'll be adding on to this blog citing the exact cases of the act being used in due time. Until then stay informed America! Fight for your rights that the constitution guarantees you, and remain vigilant in the pursuit of justice.
Www.nytimes.com
Www.theblaze.com
Www.dailykos.com