Strong Holiday Shopping!

REcent reports show that some stores are enjoying stronger sales than last year, but there seems to be a pretty big gap in stores that sell luxury items compared to lower end stores this holiday season. Lower income, less educated Americans are still facing high unemployment and are still feeling glooomy about the recession and economy. They are spending less. Upper income, well educated people are feeling more secure about their jobs and don't plan to cut back on speeding this Christmas. Stores like Walmart are not reporting big gains while sores like Saks Fifth Avenue are doing well. Their customers are spending more freely because they feel secure in their jobs and in the stock market. Luxury stores are not even needing to offer many sales to attract customers. Internet sales and shopping center sales are also up this year, but the divide between upper and lower income shoppers is growing, and that is not good for the economic recovery of the entire country.
Over the past years there has been a increase in the economy. This is good because soon people will feel better and start trusting the economy and spend more and that will only bring up the economy more! Consumer confidence will need to rise in all income groups, not just among the wealthy, if the U.S. is to pull out of the recession. I believe that extending the Bush tax cuts for all Americans was the right move by Congress because it will narrow the gap between all income groups. It will stimulate the economy as a whole. Members of the liberal media often try to encourage "class warfare" by reporting on the benefits of "taxing the rich." The mainstream media often has its own agenda, and citizens have to be very media savvy in order to make up their own ideas on this issue. I believe that keeping taxes as low as possible for every income level will help our economy the most. More jobs will be created, and more people in the lower and middle classes will increase their spending. The gap between richer and poorer consumers will narrow, and retail stores in all markets will see bigger profits at Christmas.

13 Americans die from the Taliban

KABUL, Afghanistan — Taliban fighters struck at Afghan security forces Sunday, storming an army recruiting center in the north that sparked a daylong gunbattle, and ambushing a bus carrying army officers in the capital — the first major attack in Kabul in months. At least 13 Afghan security forces were killed in the two attacks, with the firefight at the recruiting center in the northern province of Kunduz ending only after the last remaining militant detonated his suicide vest, local police officials said. The Taliban claimed responsibility for both operations.


Why in the world are Taliban attacking the Afghan security forces? I understand that there are three different groups in Afgan but we have thousands of different groups and we make it work! We come together and make it far for the individual and the group as a whole. I really don't understand why they can't just get along its really not that hard. I think that we should just have all of the firearms taken away from them. Better question how in the world do they get them? I think that they should put a blockade around that country and just wait until they shot up all their bullets and then guess what they are screwed! Ha wow thats a good idea. But are we gonna do that? nope we are just going to keep letting our American Soliders die over their and make the Taliban even more angry with us. I think that the war in Afghanistain should just end that would be a good day.

Teacher doing the school shooting?

The bipolar man who held a Florida school board at gunpoint was frustrated and broke. When his wife was fired from her teaching job and their benefits ran out, he went to the board meeting and said he was prepared to die. Clay Duke killed himself Tuesday after firing at the board members, missing them by mere inches, and exchanging a volley of gunfire with a security guard. A day later, his wife tearfully talked about the man she loved, calling the 56-year-old father a "gentle giant."

what amazes me is that no one died, except for the guy! also you can see from the video's that the teachers didn't even try to hide behind cover until about 30 seconds after he started shooting..., the man shot off 15 rounds and didn't hit one person. Cops think he purposely missed so one of the security guards would take him down eventually the man shot and killed himself after being taking down.

al-Megrahi going home sick

The main Lockerbie bombing al-Megrahi was released from prison recently because he has been terminally ill with prostate cancer. He was part of the bombing that killed 189 americans, our of the 270 that were killed all together. He is suppose to die before December 21, and his beloved friends are expecting any day to be his last. Americans are furious that he was released from prison for what he had done. Britain freed him from prison because they were scared how furious the Lybians would be if he would be held in custoday even while sick.

I agree with what the Britains did. They should release the guy because he is dying and he still has family that wants to see him. Like when people get the death sentance people are able to visit their soon to be passed away family. Maybe they could have watched him, by putting him on probation, and have the police monitor him will he is out. Making he does't talk to anybody he isn't suppose to. Since he is dying of something non-man inforced they should have the right to see him. I don't agree with the Americans being angry for this decision. Evan if he did something horrible, you have to understand that he is still human and that he should get to enjoy his last days of his life. Also be with his family and get the love and close care he needs. I think it was the right one, and even though he did do somethign bad he still deserves rights.

Four in 10 say marriage is becoming obsolete

More people are accepting that getting married isn’t needed to start a family. The Pew Research Center did a study involving marriage, divorce, and single parent families. About 29% of kids under the age of 18 live with a parent that was never married or is divorced. The Pew study shows that 39% of Americans say that marriage is becoming obsolete. The Census Bureau says that unmarried partners that are living together jumped 13% from last year. They believe that people are less likely to marry right now because it is hard to find jobs with steady income. Although things aren’t looking good right now for marriage, it’s not going to disappear anytime soon. 67% of Americans still believe in marriage and the traditional family.
I believe that marriage is an important part of having a successful family but I don't think it's the only way to have a functional family. My older sister is a single mother and she is raising her daughter very well. Sometimes I think it'd be nice for my niece to have a father figure but she is also doing fine without it. Thankfully, I don't think that marriage is ever going to go away. I look forward to getting married someday and starting my own family. It's understandable that couples that are living together are afraid to get married because they don't want things to start off on a bad note; trying to find or hold a job for enough money to survive. Marriage is still an aspiration of most people under 18 and it's not going to go away.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40239472/ns/health-behavior/

Issue #2 Medicare

It is saying that we want to reform the Medicare system in the new health care to make sure the doctors worry more about quality than quantity. Before doctors got paid about 5 to 10 percent less for helping a medicare patient and they accually got paid more if they missed diagnosid a patient. So their patient would have to keep coming back and they would get more money that way. So in some places medicare started a "pay-for-preformance." So doctors got paid more if they were better to there patients. If they helped patients and tell them how and what they should do to lower your blood level for example; Medicare would accually pay the doctor about 1.5 percent more than they do with usuall patients. They noticed that when they started this in some hopitals it improve the quality of care, like some had 1,300 less deaths from heart attacks sense they started the program. Though they think you should not have to get paid more to get the quality health care as somebody else.



I think we should reform the medicare program to make sure everybody on Medicare has "pay-for-preformance." If doctors are willing to work better and hard to get the right information and diagnoses why wouldn't you pay them a little bit more! Everything is based on money, of course if you have a opportunity to make more money you will take it and now that they now about you have to give it to them or their work will probally slip alittle bit more towards those patients. Then also to support my reasoning to back the new "pay-for-preformance" the medicare system so far is going in the crapper. It is going to go bank rupt soon if we not change the current way it is run. Becuase of the programs right now it is costing America to much to cover the current plan. We need to look back out bushs plan that cut about &70 million dollars. We need to try to have some thign more drastic than that to help recover this system! But the Medicare should be reformed to help keep the program going and to be in proved in a overall aspect.


Those opposed to this idea think that federal officials "do not have the capability, the understanding, the knowledge or the training" to be able to set standards for the quality of medical care. They think it will become "cookbook medicine." They don't want the government to undermine legitimate doctors' autonomy and judgement. Another argument they use is that doctors are supposed to provide "quality care" at all times, and it's not something that should be a bonus.
I agree with the opposing side. It's great to reward doctors for good work, but if my life is in someone's hands, I'm expecting them to do their best because that's the job they chose, and because it's my health and life. It's not like getting a gold star in first grade because you wrote something in cursive, it's someone's life and they should be expected to do their absolute best all the time. If doctors are doing something above and beyond, outside their job then yeah, they should have some kind of compensation, but for just doing their job they should get their usual.
John McCain's view on healthcare: http://www.johnmccain.com/issues/post/reforming-health-care-in-america/

Issue # 1

http://kellimontbriand.blogspot.com/2010/11/issue-1-comprehensive-vs-incremental.html

Issue # 3

http://emilyewblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/issue-3-safe-to-eat.html

To much money is going to this endless war

One of the biggest contributors to the National Deficit of the United States comes from war. When the nation is at war with another country, the President is in command of the U.S. armed forces and the war fund. For this reason, the blame for creating a larger national deficit is often associated with the President. But, Congress has the power to approve funding of the war through the Federal Government. This is known as "the Power of the Purse". However, when Congress introduces higher taxes to fund war efforts, they might find it harder to get rid of them when they may seem unnecessary. For example, former President Bush was in favor of funding the war efforts, but many of the people did, and still, believe that the war in Iraq was dragging on for far too long. If Congress tries to make changes in the war policy to reduce war funds, but the President is in favor of the war, the President could veto the policy and allow the war fund to continue. Then, does this make the President responsible for the national deficit or Congress?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_deficithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_the_purse

War has always been a drain in the wallet ever since the existence of war. I think that too much money that we do not have has been spent on war, creating a greater national deficit. Joe Weisenthal, a writer for Business Insider, writes: "We have spent a trillion dollars at war, often financed by borrowing from overseas. This, in turn, has short-changed investments in our own people, and contributed to record deficits." To keep our economy from crumbling, we must understand why the U.S. is descending into debt. Where does the money come from? It comes from the people who channel their money to the Federal Government through taxes laid by Congress. Then, it is used by the President to fund the war. During wartime, there is a balance of power between Congress and the President. The President can claim war against another nation, but only by having a reasonable war fund, created by Congress, would doing so be rational. So, when a greater national deficit begins to build up, who is responsible? Because the President could veto a decision to end a war fund, some people would probably say that the President is responsible. But, if Congress creates a war fund policy with an set expiration date on it, this would prevent the President from perpetuating the policy to fund the war and, ultimately, creating a greater national deficit. Does this make Congress responsible then? Members of Congress, as well as the President, are always at the mercy of the people during re-election. Therefore, everyone: Congress, the President, and the people, are all responsible for the national deficit.

Democrates try to get the seniors!

Democrats came up with a last minute pitch before the election to give those with Social Security a 250 dollar bonus to make ends meet as the cost of living goes up. This check would be given out to 58 million people. A problem with this proposal is figuring out how this 13 billion dollar cost is going to be paid for. Obama hasn’t offered any suggestions as to where the money is coming from, and the Senate rejected this pitch because they thought it would just add 13 billion dollars to the 12 trillion dollar federal debt.

I think this is the Democrats way of trying to survive the election. In a way, Democrats are bribing the seniors and others with social security to vote Democratic because they will magically give 58 million people 250 dollars each. Democrats have no way of paying for this proposal and it is just going to add billions of dollars to our trillion dollar debt; that is something that will hurt the U.S. rather than help it. Democrats just started putting effort into this proposal now which shows that they aren’t really trying to find a solution for social security, but they are just creating a temporary “quick fix” that will get seniors on board with the Democratic Party. In the long run, 250 dollars will help for a months time at max, and then seniors on social security will just be back to struggling.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39736338/ns/politics-decision_2010/

Issue #1 Matthew Pappenfus

The Commander in Chief of the U.S. has the right given to him by the constitution to direct the U.S. Armed Forces, on the other hand, Congress has the right to approve or deny the way the President spends money when it comes to war and any other federal spending. This way the people can elect those that represent what they believe and then congress can monitor federal spending in a way that makes the people happy. The taxes that the general public has to pay is the reason the government has money to spend so they should have a right to control where it goes. The war in Iraq caused the United States' spending to skyrocket. The budget deficit reached $412 billion in 2004 which was an all-time high.The other point of view is that the people originally elected the president and the president being the Commander in Chief should have the right to spend money on war in whichever way he thinks is best without having to worry about congress interfering. The president and congress fighting about how to spend the money when it comes to war will only distract us from the goal and end up losing us the war.

I believe that although we elected the president, congress should still have to monitor his financial spending when it comes to war because that way the American people will still be able to control the government's actions. We vote for the people inside congress, so if congress have some control, it is more the people voice than his. It is for us the people, who run the goverment. Like John Locke believed, the people have the right by the constitution to elect those that share similar beliefs, but we also have the right to remove those same people from government if we do not like what they are doing. The money paying for the war is coming from the people which makes it their business too. Scott Sipprelle, a republican running for a seat in the house in New Jersey agrees that more needs to be done to control how the tax payers dollars are spent. Here is the article explaining his plan for this to become a reality.

Issue #2: What We Can Afford

http://heatherseventblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/issue-2-spending-what-we-can-afford.html
Issue #3: Social Security

http://theresasocial.blogspot.com/2010/10/issue-3-social-insecurity.html

US warns the Americans in Europe of possible Terrorist Attacks

Today, there was a State Department travel alert warning Americans living or traveling in Europe of potential terrorist threats. Americans are urged to "take every precaution to be aware of their surroundings and to adopt appropriate safety measures to protect themselves when traveling." It is said that "the potential for terrorists to attack public transportation systems and other tourist infrastructure," is high. While the warning seems pretty scary, it is not a formal travel warning, meaning it does not restrict travel. The warning is due to current information saying that al-Qaida continues to plan terrorist attacks. U.S. and Europeans security experts have been worried for days that attacks in public places with assault weapons were/are being planned. Also, Osama bin Laden may be behind the terror plots according to U.S. intelligence officials. However, as of right now, many Europeans and members of the Obama administration view the travel alert as an overreaction.

If I was traveling to Europe, I think I would want to know if top officials were concerned of there being terrorist attacks. Then again, if there really wasn't an extreme high risk, when I was in Europe I wouldn't want to be limiting myself to not getting the full experience because I was too worried of there being a terrorist attack. However, I do think it's pretty pathetic that we have to worry about such things as terrorist attacks. I have absolutely no comprehension on why people would want to kill others and why people do the crazy and horrible stuff they do. I'm also not too sure about the fact that Osama bin Laden might be behind the planned attacks... we have been chasing him for so long now, and to not find him, and for him to still be alive after so many years. I don't know... I really don't know what to think of that. In my lifetime I would love to see a world where if you want to go travel the world, you can, and you can with no worries of absolutely anything. You won't have to worry about your things getting stolen, or people not being kind, or of terrorist attacks... you can just enjoy what the world has to offer. I know that's probably a fantasy, but just think about it. Wouldn't that be great?

Obama getting taken over by Palin

Both became nationally recognized as Washington outsiders with limited governmental experience. Obama was an Illinois state senator when he gave his 2004 convention speech, and he was elected to the U.S. Senate later that year. Palin had served less than two years as Alaska's governor before running with John McCain in 2008. Prior to that she'd been mayor of Wasilla for six years.
I don't think that Palin will ever be the person that Obama is becasue she doesn't have the intelligance that he does and she doesn't know enough about government to become president. Palin believes that she would be the best president ever but everybody in the states knows that she wouldn't be because she would take to much control of her power and run this struggling country into another depression.

9 Americans die by a Helicopter crash

The helicopter crash killed nine American troops in Afghanistan on Tuesday they were coming from the NATO-led force in Afghanistan's south. The helicopter just got done having a firefight against the Taliban in Afghanistan's Zhari district on August 20. The Taliban claimed to have shot down the helicopter in Zabul province but NATO said there were no reports of hostile fire.

The incident made 2010 one of the worst wars for foreign troops. This year to at least 529 troops have already died and last year the death total for the whole year was only 521.

the BP spill is finally filled

The well is dead. Finally.

A permanent cement plug sealed BP's well nearly 2.5 miles below the sea floor in the Gulf of Mexico, five agonizing months after an explosion sank a drilling rig and led to the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history. Says the HARRY R. WEBER, posted on yahoo!

I think BP will never be able to pay back the people on the coast because it was such a desaster. And even though the oil spill is plugged, there is still a crap ton of oil that is in the sea that will keep killing th ocean life and kill the things on the coast and the habitat. BP shouldn't even think they are done, because they shouldn't be able to leave until this whole mess is cleaned up!

One Christian Pastor will cause 9-11 again

As thousands of Afghans protested, a Florida church's Pastor plans to burn the muslim holy book, the church's pastor said he won't follow through with the burning if he is able to meet wiht the people who are planning on building the mosque planned near ground zero in New York.
In Afghanistan, at least 11 people were injured Friday in protests.



To me I think the people that are building this mosque are just plan stupid. The 9/11 event happened nine years ago and it was a major event. One that will take time and to forgive the country that did. Yes we blame the people and the group that did it but it is the country that couldn't stop them from doing this!! I am mad at all of the people still, after wars people here weren't just mad at the people who were in the war, we were mad at Germany. And for people to say that we shouldn't be that way, they are wrong. The pastor just feels strongly about 9/11 and for them try to show peace by building a mosque by ground zero, it is not the time or place to do this! If people do want it here and will do stuff to prevent it from happening. You should probally avoid building there and listen to us!