The issue behind war dollars is whether Congress should be able to use their power to control the president's military policy. Although the president is commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces, it is Congress that gets to approve the federal budget and the funding of the war. As of now, the president is spending billions of dollars on the war effort and people are wondering if Congress can step in and somehow stop it. More than $600 billion dollars was spent in 2008 for defense, including the money spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. This excessive spending on the war is adding to the already massive national debt and it is a heavy burden on the American people.
I think that Congress shouldn't have the power to control the president's military policy. The president may not do what the people want, but he is doing what he thinks is best for our country. I mean, he was elected by the people which is approval enough for doing what he feels is right. Although, I think that Congress should be able to limit the spending because it has gotten out of hand, the president ultimately should have the power to spend as necessary. James Madison wrote about the three branches of government, "should not be so far separated as to have no constitutional control over each other." I agree with this statement that there needs to be a system of checks and balances so that each branch can prevent or stop abuse from another branch.
Article Link: http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Separation_of_powers_under_the_United_States_Constitution
Issue #2 Spending What We Can Afford- http://mayaseverson.blogspot.com/2010/02/issue-2-spendin-what-we-can-afford.html
Issue #3 Social Insecurity- http://anielsen10.blogspot.com/2010/02/social-insecurity.html
Friday, February 19, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Suicide bomber strikes U.S. base
Thursday, February 11, 5 soldiers were wounded when a bomb went off at a United States base in the Pakita province of Afghanistan. Spokesman Roullah Samoun said that a suicide bomber somehow got into the base and set off the bomb in the "sleeping area" of the base around 9 p.m. Officials don't know how the bomber got into the base but it was determined that the attacker was wearing a uniform that Afghan border patrol usually wear. There is still being investigation.
I feel that if Americans are willing to go overseas to defend our country, they should be protected. I mean people slip up and there are accidents, but there is no reason for 5 soldiers to be dead. Obviously the person should not have been there and security should have been better in protecting these people.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/02/11/afghanistan.suicide.attack/index.html?iref=allsearch
I feel that if Americans are willing to go overseas to defend our country, they should be protected. I mean people slip up and there are accidents, but there is no reason for 5 soldiers to be dead. Obviously the person should not have been there and security should have been better in protecting these people.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/02/11/afghanistan.suicide.attack/index.html?iref=allsearch
Thursday, February 4, 2010
U.S. missionaries charged with kidnapping in Haiti
Ten Americans are being held in Haiti for kidnapping thirty three children. The Americans were missionaries from Idaho and said they were taking the children over the border to a place where they could stay until they had built a new orphanage. Nobody thought that they had done anything wrong, but some of the kids weren't even orphans. Some of the kids parents willingly let their children go with the missionaries because they promised a good place and a better life for them. Turns out it is illegal to take a child out of Haiti without government approval. None of the kids had documentation and so it was ruled kidnapping. The judge of the case has 3 months to decide whether they should be prosecuted and so for now they are being kept in Haiti.
I find this article sad. First of all, I do believe that the Americans had no intentions of kidnapping the children. They honestly were just trying to help out in the midst of all the tragedy in their country. But, I do find the missionaries to be kind of careless and not very smart. They should've thought about what they were doing. If there was an earthquake in California and somebody from Maine tried to bring 20 kids to some place I'm pretty sure that people would be looking at them funny asking them what they are doing. You just don't take kids, especially to a different country and with no papers. Its common sense. Plain and simple, what they did looks bad. They may have not meant anything by it but that doesn't matter because what they didn't looked wrong.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/04/haiti.arrests/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+Top+Stories%29
I find this article sad. First of all, I do believe that the Americans had no intentions of kidnapping the children. They honestly were just trying to help out in the midst of all the tragedy in their country. But, I do find the missionaries to be kind of careless and not very smart. They should've thought about what they were doing. If there was an earthquake in California and somebody from Maine tried to bring 20 kids to some place I'm pretty sure that people would be looking at them funny asking them what they are doing. You just don't take kids, especially to a different country and with no papers. Its common sense. Plain and simple, what they did looks bad. They may have not meant anything by it but that doesn't matter because what they didn't looked wrong.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/04/haiti.arrests/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+Top+Stories%29
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)