ISIS truly does put the "isis" in Crisis

My former colleague, Jacob Hope, recently wrote the article, "ISIS puts the "isis" in Crisis", which talks about the extreme terrorist organization, ISIS’ (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria). He argues that it is important to be knowledgeable on the events going on due to ISIS, to reduce the atrocities that have or can occur. There are so many lives that are taken away because of this group that people all over the world need to be aware of and keep up with because we never know where the next attack could be. I agree with him that we really need to be more informed on this and take action on preventing any more of their attacks to also impede any more innocent lives being lost.

 

He informs us on how the organization of ISIS started, which aids in letting the reader know why they are like they are and why one of their biggest aims is the United States. They were founded in 1999, but not until recently have they become more known due to their morbid attacks. Isis has repeatedly demonstrated that it is much more than a transnational terrorist organization, they have grown command, control, propaganda and logistical capabilities, proved its ability to take and hold strategically critical territory at the heart of the Middle East.(The Guardian) 

Hope informs the reader that as a result of the attacks occurring, for example, the attack on Paris, more countries have become involved on the problem and are looking for ways to take them down at all cost. Again, I agree with him in the sense that even though everyone does want to take down ISIS, it is not easy they have conflicting and crossing allegiances, which indeed, make it an extremely sensitive and dangerous situation. 

Enough is Enough!

As the majority of the people know, Donald Trump, (excuse my language) is a huge asshole. His extreme desire to become president has fully brought out the real him, he makes insulting remarks on topics that in some cases have no correlation on his run for president. For example, as mentioned by a CNN article, his comments regarding hispanics, calling us all rude names, categorizing us all as Mexican drug dealers and insulting Jorge Ramos, a hispanic reporter when he attempted to ask him a question on a press conference he had. He has insulted other reporters as well, for example the disabled reporter Kovaleski from the New York Times, mockingly moving his arms insulting his chronic disease that impedes movement of his arms. Donald Trump has also made offensive comments directed towards Women, Asians, Muslims, African-Americans, the list goes on and on, yet people are still for him on becoming president? People cannot vote for a man who has no morals and says such things, especially during Presidential Debates. Those who are on his side and will vote for him to become the next president have to open their eyes and realize he is not even close to a good candidate, he's supposed to set an example of a great American with great morals, but he does the total opposite, the only thing he has is money, to run his presidential campaign, other than that he's just a huge jerk.

The Government Really Never Fails, In Failing Us

In Brandon Foley's blog post, "The Government Fails Us Yet Again", he argues that the United States does not protect its citizens from disease and that the government should socialize medicine. There are so many other topics/problems that they seem to have more debates on, that aren’t in some cases, close to important as health care. I agree with him because I also believe that we should develop a type of Universal Health Care policy that will facilitate getting treated and could lead to having a healthier nation. 

He mentions that the government puts more attention on topics like legalizing marijuana, rather than focusing on socializing medicine, and uses his credibility to support his claim. To support his thought, he tells us about an experience of an ex-coworker, who, due to not having insurance or having to pay high medical bills, has to pull out his own tooth, "drugged" up on whiskey. This really succeeds in showing, how we really do need to socialize medicine because it has gone to an extent to where people will chose to try and do the job themselves, rather than paying the high prices at doctors/dentists/hospitals, who in many cases is much more harmful. Foley also supports his point by giving a personal experience of when he became very ill and then had to pay a rather large amount of money due to medical bills, even after having insurance.

The United States, is one of the only developed countries of the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development who does not provide its citizens with this type of health care, which is ironic since we are also the country that spends the most on health insurance, yet our health care is the least efficient. There are many diseases and viruses that could be prevented from spreading or causing too much harm if only health care was provided to everyone. People would be able to seek help whenever they needed to, not fearing having to pay ridiculous amounts of money on medical bills or being turned down. Many deaths would also be prevented, since tens of thousands of people die due to not being able to afford medical help.

Foley does mention that even if it might not be the best type of healthcare that can be provided, at least it will be something and then brings in how countries who have this policy, also have the option to find "better" doctors/hospitals. I agree with his point, where he says that Socialization has helped much of society, using schools because, as a result, more people are able get educated. Therefore, like my fellow classmate, I agree that the National Government should socialize medicine so that there are easier, less expensive ways of getting treated and because, "...it is their duty to provide for the American people." 

Yes for Universal Health Care in the United States

To have the best health insurance in the United States you must obviously make a lot of money to be able to afford it. Healthcare here seems to be more of a privilege for people, only available to those who can afford it, rather than it being available for everyone. Other countries however have in place a type of healthcare that provides its citizens with medical help whenever and wherever they need it. This is known as Universal Health Care, which according to the World HealthOrganization, is defined as, “Ensuring that all people can use the pro-motive, preventive, curative, rehabilitative and palliative health services they need, of sufficient quality to be effective, while also ensuring that the use of these services does not expose the user to financial hardship.”  The United States should put into effect a Universal Healthcare law so that public health is improved and to decrease mortality rates.

Having Universal Health care in the United States will benefit the nation as a whole because we would be a much healthier country. The United States, as stated in ProCon, is one of the only developed countries of the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development who does not provide its citizens with this type of health care, which is ironic since we are also the country that spends the most on health insurance, yet our health care is the least efficient. There are many diseases and viruses that could be prevented from spreading or causing too much harm if only health care was provided to everyone. People would be able to seek help whenever they needed to, not fearing having to pay ridiculous amounts of money on medical bills or being turned down. Many deaths would also be prevented, since tens of thousands of people die due to not being able to afford medical help.

According to a 2009 study from Harvard researchers, "Lack of health insurance is associated with as many as 44,789 deaths per year," take note that this was years ago, imagine how much higher the rate has become. There are thousands of people who are left to die due to lack of health insurance because they aren't able to afford it, and even if they go to the hospital for help, they are neglected because they aren't able to pay the medical bills. For example, in a documentary called Sicko, a woman took her daughter to the hospital because she had a high fever but since she didn’t have any health insurance they refused to care for her 3 year old daughter and she passed away. Yet, in France, a woman with a similar problem had her daughter cared for at no cost due to their Universal Health Care law.

It is extremely crazy, how we think our country is so great yet we tend to care more about problems outside of the country instead of helping the people here to be the best nation in all aspects, we can be. We recently had a large expansion of health insurance coverage as a result of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obama Care, which as said in a P.N.H.P article, if it is to work effectively, will insure an additional twenty-six million more Americans by 2024. The United States pay way more money on health care than any other country, yet the health insurance here, people's health and deaths due to our "great" yet poor system, are worse than those countries who pay much less. This type of health care system has proven to be successful in countries who have it and it’s crazy how we, the U.S doesn’t have it, yet other undeveloped countries do. Many people are still hesitant for the U.S to adopt this policy because taxes will rise but I mean come on, it makes sense to pay extra every year knowing that you are able to go to whatever hospital or doctor and not get neglected help. The United States should establish a Universal Health Care policy so that our nation as a whole is much healthier and to decrease mortality rates caused to not being able to afford health insurance.

Cited Sources:

Andrew P. Wilper, Steffie Woolhandler, Karen E. Lasser, and Danny McCormick, et al.,                           "Health Insurance and Mortality in US Adults," American Journal of Public Health,                       Dec. 2009

Hanning, Hedda. "We Need Universal Health Care Coverage for All." We Need Universal                Health Care Coverage for All. Web. 30 Oct. 2015.

Kliff, Sarah. "8 Facts That Explain What's Wrong with American Health Care." 8 Facts                  That Explain What's Wrong with American Health Care. Web. 30 Oct. 2015.

 "What Is Universal Coverage?" WHO. World Health Organization. Web. 30 Oct. 2015.

Do Presidential Debates Really Matter?

In an article from Washington Monthly, "Do Presidential Debates Really Matter?" by John Sides, he does a successful job in arguing why Presidential Debates are inconsequential. He brings in evidence from past elections, where polls have stated the same, if not very similar results as to who is more likely to become president, before and after the debates. Even though, these debates are one of the highest viewed televised campaigns and new information is brought to their attention, it is highly unlikely to change the voters mind. He believes that the reason is because the campaigns occur close to the day of election and whomever the voter is set on voting on, just by learning other things they like from another candidate, they will not change their mind. The author states that although there has been some cases where these debates changed the outcome, it wasn't by a lot and it was only a push in the already,most likely to win, candidate. Sides aims his article for everyone who is eligible to vote and/or watches he presidential debates, because it is them whom the information would be more relevant.
The author effectively presents why he believes that the presidential debates rarely, if ever change the outcome of who is elected president. He brings in good evidence from various political scientists and analysis that were done regarding the topic during every election. He also does a great job in providing examples from past presidential debates and elections to add more credibility to his argument. Lastly, ending his article, in a way restating his argument saying, "What history can tell us is that presidential debates, while part of how the game is played, are rarely what decide the game itself."  (¶ 15)

The federal government’s incredibly poor, misleading argument for marijuana prohibition

In the article from the Washington Post, "The federal government’s incredibly poor, misleading argument for marijuana prohibition", by Christopher Ingraham, he argues that the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy created weak arguments for why marijuana should remain to be illegal in their blog. The author tries to make his point by repeatably mentioning how, the effects marijuana has on people are the same as those alcohol and tobacco have, yet these two substances are still legal. He gives us information from the arguments the ONDCP published on their blog, then states why the points they are trying to make are "weak". Credibly, he succeeds in proving why the points given in the blog were inadequate because even though, for the most part, he compares the effects of marijuana to alcohol and tobacco, he brings evidence regarding the argument to prove his point every time. Ingraham aims to everyone for his audience but for the most part, those who support the legalization of marijuana since it would be them whom the article is aimed for because they would be the ones who's attention is grabbed the most.
The author does a great job in proving why he believes the argument made by the ONDCP is feeble. Ingraham brings in sections from the blog, then compares it to how it would have the same effects as other, in some cases, worse substances, yet they are still legal, and also brings in statistical evidence, justifying his points even more. He ends his article using a quote from the blog against them, that says that there should be science and evidence when trying to prove a point, not ideology, yet that is exactly what they are doing.

Top Democratic Donors urge Joe Biden to seek White House

Whether or not, Vice President Joe Biden, will be running as one of the Democratic Candidates for the Presidential Election of 2016 is one of the biggest concerns for those of the Democratic Party. As a CNN article reports, there is a letter from a group of Democratic Donors urging Joe Biden to join the Presidential Race and pledge their support if he does. The letter states that, "In our opinion, the next president must be Joe Biden. If he announces he's running, we're all in. It's a campaign we know we will win." They are greatly encouraging him to enter the race for the next President of the United States and have gathered almost fifty of the top Democratic fundraisers and activists insisting him to run, giving him their full support. The article also discloses that there is even an outside group of supporters called, Draft Biden 2016, who have been preparing groundwork, including setting up infrastructure in key states. The Vice President just has to say that he’s in before it's too late, his campaign funds will be given to him immediately and he will have the absolute support of these Democratic Donors, and once he's in, surely, many more. 

This article is extremely worth the read, especially for those of the Democratic Party, as it mentions why they are willing to offer Vice President, Joe Biden, their full support as well as reasons behind his doubt for whether he'd be running for President or not. Furthermore, it is very important to stay in touch with this topic, because in about a year, he could be the next Democratic President of the United States, following President Barack Obama.