Justin's comment on rachels blog

I agree with you on this issue, teachers in public schools now teach for TAKS unless you are in AP courses. Fortunatley for me my aunt came up with a way to teach around the TAKS test and still help with SAT's and ACT's so i know all about this issue. She's actually a pretty common name in the education industry and now works for Bill Gates as his educational consultant and she says that since the state has put so much pressure on the schoools now the teachers(mostly in regular classes) have to teach for the TAKS test, in which doesn't help our kids out because SAT scores are dropping and its harder for kids to stay in school, but I like your blog and I think its a very important issue, and I dont think your picture is inappropriate or offensive, and no i'm not just saying that because i'm a guy

Perry for re-election

This article is from the Austin American Statesman website http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/04/18/0418perry.html and it is about how Gov. Rick Perry decided to run for re-election in 2010. This is important because now this causes a little bit of a battle between the Republicans since there is two others running. One of those running is Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and I believe he has a better chance than Sen. Hutchison because of him being the Lt. Gov. but I still think Gov. Perry has the best chance since no one really hates him and he hasn’t really done a whole lot to piss off the public. When the ballot comes out for the 2010 election I will be voting for Perry because I like the way he governs even though it is a weak Governor but still I like the guy. The article basically says that since Perry decided he will run again that kind of sets the standard of the other candidates will have to live up to. Neither Hutchison nor Dewhurst flinched at Perry's comments, though Republican Roger Williams, the former secretary of state, said he won't try for governor if Perry does. I do agree with Williams because that would be intimidating since the guy has won the past two times. All in all I think Governor Perry will win just because he’s the incumbent and he has won the past two times he has ran.

Justin's commentary on Shane's blog

This is a very well written editorial by Shane Finnegan, I like that he's basically pointed the finger to the government to do something about the growing drug addicts and the industry. Although I would put a little bit more facts like quote some one or a newspaper article. I do agree with you drugs are becoming an even bigger deal than people thought it was going to be. Drugs have always been a big deal but today they are a serious issue that needs to be dealt with by the government. But like I said I liked the editorial and if you added some quoted facts then it would be perfect, good job.

Jackson on Big spending

For the politicians that are “Big spenders” this recent allegation could mean cracking down on spending. In a recent article I found that a house candidate is accusing a rival candidate of “Big spending.” To some this may seem like a new issue but big spending has been going on for some time. The American publics’ eyes were closed to this through loop holes in the system, like benefits or contributories. Candidates need basically one tool to campaign and campaign effectively and that’s money, some research was done with the presidential primaries and the researchers found that Sen. Obama “Raised” more money in one month than Howard Dean raised in 14 months. People need to realize yes a good portion of this money comes from fundraising and things of that nature but the other part comes from loop holes. A lot of politicians were once lawyers so they know the system, how it works, and the loop holes to go in when it comes to particular situations. If the federal government is serious about cracking down on candidate spending then they need to look far back into the roots of America. Big spending has really gotten out of hand in the past few decades and if the candidates stay on the same path they are on we could see bribes and maybe even hits made on other candidates. The federal government really needs to start cracking down on these things or pretty soon like as in a few decades from now we could have absolute chaos when it comes to elections.

Democrats seek compromise on Michigan, Florida delegates

This article is very well written and provides numerous facts and information useful in the up coming elections. In the article it states, "I'm going to let the leadership of both states see what they think is the best approach," she said. "I think it would be a grave disservice to the voters of Florida and Michigan to adopt any process that would disenfranchise anyone, and I'm still committed to seating their delegations, and I know that they're working with the Democratic Party to determine how best to proceed." Well of course Sen. Clinton is going to let the leadership of both states see what the best approach is because she won both states so far. Do I think they should campaign again in those two states, yes because it’s the states fault they held their primaries in January and no the national party shouldn’t pay the voting cost. Why? Because like I said it’s not the democrats’ fault that the states held their primaries early. It also talked about how much money the candidates raised, Sen. Obama raised over 55 million dollars in one month and Clinton raised 36 million. Obama has the upper hand in that because he can now use that extra money he has over Clinton to advertise and to further use campaigning methods. The article gave us a little blurb of information it said that Obama raised that money in the shortest month of the year and Howard Dean back in 2004 raised 59 million in 14 months. That shows people are either more involved this time or they just don’t want to see another Clinton run for president. As I states earlier this is a very will written article and shouldn’t be looked over, here is the url link http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/07/0307campaign.html read this article it isn’t obnoxiously long and it will give you a lot of information.

Texas a make or break state for Democrats

This article is a very well written and well thought out article. Although it is well thought out it does seem contradictory in its self. Usually Texas isn’t a big democratic state and now in this election it is different when candidates say that Texas is a make or break state. I do believe that along with the demographics of Texas changing that we will become a key essential state to win while running for office. Up until just recently Texas has been a big Republican state and we still are but our population is changing exponentially and so we could see a change in the type of state we are. By type I mean key essential and Democratic. I say those two because with our population growing it will become necessary to win Texas just because of our population. I believe we will turn from a major republican state to a Democratic state because of all the immigrants and pour(not singeling anyone out) people living in Texas. Since the Democratic party looks out for the people the more pour and needy we have to more they will be inclined to vote for a Democratic candidate. This article is I think to be a little premature because as some might say Texas is a make or break state it could turn out to be a flop. But I do like this article because of its foreshadow of how Texas will become a key essential state in this election and for many more to come. I strongly suggest that you read this article because we as Americans and Texans need to know more about how important our state is to an election and how it could make or break a candidates campaign.

Texas a make or break state for Democrats
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/02/13/0213texpres.html

Prop 15 barely spueaked by in Travis County

I found this Article in the Austin American Statesman website, it was discussing how proposition 15 barely skimmed by when voted on. The article said that the proposition only passed by a vote of 50.29%, it also said that 50.16% of the people in Travis county voted against it. Why is that bad you ask? Because we need to research cancer extensively to be able to find either a cure or at least know more about cancer. If there was a cure for cancer and if it was affordable then there would a line out the door at the doctors office. A good example is the HPV vaccinations, finally scientists have come up with a solution to the four most common and deadly cervical cancer. Without research we would have never found those vaccinations and if we research more cancers then hopefully we can come up with some cures to cancer. I think you should check this article out its not long but its good.
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/politics/entries/2007/11/07/on_election_day.html