Response to "Death Sentence Takes Another Controversial Path in Texas"

Here is my response to one of my classmates' blog:
Although I do understand what your argument was in the case I do not agree with it. It does seem alittle strange that the criminal that killed a man got life in prison while the other criminal who did not directly kil any one got sentenced to death, but it does not mean that it is unfair. Both of these men were criminals and even though one of them did not directly kill somebody, he was partially responsible for that man's death. The two criminals were a team and the deed would not have been done with out both of them. Even though the jury decided two different punishments for the men, they were still the worst types of punishments possible. I wouldn't necessarily say that life in prison is less harsh than lethal injection. Either way, both of their lives are pretty much over. I think that the system works pretty well when it comes to cases like this. They both got a trial by jury and they both should have to deal with the punishment that the jury gave them, no matter what.

State Dinner Crashing

On Saturday night I was with my dad at a diner that played the news on big TVs that were posted everywhere. All the news stations were talking about how a couple who was not invited just walked into a state dinner that was being held at the white house. It turns out that the couple wanted to be on the tv show "Real Housewives of D.C." so they were trying to pull a publicity stunt so they would be picked for the show.I was really shocked that something like that happened. First of all, what kind of grown couple crashes an important dinner held by the president? I was really surprised by how immature and desperate they were to do something like that. Also, I'm sure the government spent a lot of money on security for that night so why were they allowed in? Can anyone just walk right in? Anyone can buy a nice dress and a tuxedo to look nice but that doesn't mean that they aren't dangerous. A lot of important people were at the dinner and even though the uninvited couple was harmless, the situation could have been a lot worse if they weren't.

Blog Response

I completely agree with your response to this article. I think that when people hear "lower taxes" they automatically assume that it is a good thing. I would even probably be one of those people if I didn't know that California also tried lowering the taxes with not much success. With the bad economy and the other problems that our country is going through right now, politicians are probably just trying new things to help our situation. I think that alot of people don't understand that taxes are 100% necessary for a country to stay alive. Taxes are inevitable and overall, they benefit the citizens. Even though Governor Perry is suggesting this despite California's attempt to do the same thing, I don't think that he is only doing it to get votes and supporters. If he wasn;t trying something new then people would be saying that he's not doing enough.

H1N1 Vaccines

This past weekend I was talking to my dad about the "swine flu" and what a huge deal it has turned in to. When the swine flu first started to hit the news, it was not something that I worried about or thought that I would ever have to worry about. As time has passed it definitely has become more common. There is even someone that sits next to me in American Literature class that had H1N1. I nanny part time and since I am around children so much my dad suggested that I get the H1N1 vaccines just to be safe because there are always lots of germs going around in schools. When I tried to make an appointment to get the vaccine I was told that my doctor's office did not have any at the moment but they were supposed to get some soon. I remember reading an article somewhere about prisoners that were getting the vaccine. I do not understand this. If so many people need to be vaccinated and the vaccine is limited, why are prisoners being vaccinated before citizens? I think that it is pretty obvious that this has turned into a much bigger problem than we all expected. Shouldn't there be some sort of priority system?

Food Stamp Crisis

I recently read an article in the Dallas Morning News called "Food Stamp Crisis." The article talked about how the state is doing a horrible job on getting families food stamps who need them. According to the article, the Health and Human Services Commission in Texas is too over whelmed. Towards the end of the article, it talks about how there are 2.8 million Texans who are helped out by food stamps. Even if the state is running behind in the department, 2.8 million is a lot of people. I think that is pretty generous of the state considering that the state is helping them out. It is rude and inappropriate to complain about a service that was created to help people. Another part of the article said that the state needs to hire more people in the department to lighten the heavy work load. Then it talks about how the state is in the process of hiring 250 new people. So what is the problem? If the state is taking steps to help he situation, what is the "crisis?" There is not much else that they can do. I feel like people like to have something to complain about. The author of this article is trying to create controversy over something that is not controversial. The problem is not the state and the food stamps, the problem is people not being grateful and patient when they are asking for help.

Doctors' Referrals Need Austin's Attention

I recently read an article from the Dallas Morning News website called "Doctors' Referrals Need Austin's Attention." The article talks about doctors and medical imaging places. The author of the editorial thinks that it is unethical for doctors to refer patients to those medical imaging if they have ownership in them. He says that patients should be clear that the doctor owns a part of the place that they are being referred to. I think that he is just getting upset and arguing over something just for the sake of arguing. Why does it matter if a doctor owns part of they are referring their patients to? Where else would they refer them to? I can't imagine why a patient would have a problem with being referred to another place or practice that their doctor owns. Obviously there is a reason why they are seeing that particular doctor so they would probably want to go to a place that their doctor is affiliated with. I think that people are too hard on people who are seen as powerful, like doctors. We should stop assuming that people are trying to screw us over all the time.

Saving Christmas

I recently read and article from the Austin American Statesman that I thought was interesting. The article was about a state board meeting that was held to discuss curriculum and religious holidays. One of the topics discussed was the types of historical figures that public school students wpuld be exposed to and taught. The article says that it is the state's responsibility to, "establish the foundation for responsible citizenship in a global society."They are talking about first graders. I think that they are thinking too much into it. No matter what first graders are being taught in school, they do not really have the mental capacity to establish a foundation for anything long term. The article also discusses relegious holidays to be brought up at school. I do understand that it is important to be respectful to other cultures and religions in public schools, but I do not think that it has as big of an effect on students as they think. Just because students are excused from school or because a certain holiday is discussed, does nomean that it will alter someone's religious befiefs. So why is it such a big deal? This article is important to read because everything that is decided in meetings like this could be what are children have to learn and study in the future.