77 Cents For Every Dollar

“Many victims of pay discrimination who didn't immediately realize they were being paid less than others will have no remedy, even though the discrimination continues with every paycheck,” Kennedy said. With women earning only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men, the nation needs strong laws against pay discrimination. This is not what Congress intended when we passed the landmark Civil Rights Act of and we need to restore full protection against wage discrimination. Because of this wee need to change this rule to ensure that any future violations of pay discrimination does not happen, also we need to make sure that any company planning, or that already does, partake in these practices knows that they will be rightfully punished for their illegal actions. Even though I agree that this law needs to be amended, I do feel as though if after 19 years of working you don’t know the people around you make more then you maybe need to be talking at work more, or should have talked with management earlier in your employment. If you take this long to bring up a law suit against you employer, then maybe you don’t diverse to get any more money for the job you have been doing, because you don’t show any initiative in the things that need to be done, and maybe they were right to pay you less money.

Read the story for yourself:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PETIMO1&show_article=1&catnum=3

Romney: Military Needs More Troops

I think that Romney is on the right track suggesting that we entered into the Iraq situation with to few troops and we need to send more troops over there to ensure that we don’t suffer any more casualties. I also think that he was on the right track when he talked about how wee need to keep our troops in Iraq until the problem “we” have created is solved, and if we where to bring the troops home I would only create future problems that could be worse than the ones now. Even though I agree with what he said, with regards to the troops, I don’t think it was the best thing for him to say this late in the presidential candidacy process, mainly because most Americans don’t feel that way; they want to bring the troops home and to send more would be sending them to their death. Also when he said he wanted to give president Bush’s plan a year of “wait and see” that is putting limitations on it and by doing so that year may not be long enough for the new troops to solve the problem and then we are right back here…with no solution in near sight.

Read the story for yourself:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PESHKG0&show_article=1&catnum=3&image=large

"Law and Order" Star Runs For Presidency

It looks to me like all and every possible candidate seems to be coming out for this election, which means that there is no strong candidate and does not bode well for the top candidates for presidency, mainly because these new people are only taking away their votes. Although it seems like the election for governor of Californian, in which everyone believed they could have won, Fred Thompson has a legitimate reason to run, he was once a US senator and knows how the government runs and how the get things done in congress. He, does however, supported campaign finance reform, oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, elimination of funds for the National Endowment for the Arts and a constitutional amendment to ban flag desecration. He also favored a ban on a late-term abortion procedure and voted against requiring criminal background checks for purchases at gun shows. Do we really want a person as president that wants to ruin Alaska and ensure that any and everyone can own a gun? I think not…so lets hope that this is just a ploy to get him re-elected for a senate position down the line.

Read the story for yourself:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PERD200&show_article=1&catnum=3

Thomspon accounces run at presidency:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Snw7_6mJf5c

Bush Takes On Opponents of Immigration Deal

I think this bill does provides to much freedom for illegal immigrants in this country right now, even though Bush claims that the purpose of this bill isn’t amnesty for illegal immigrants he surely doesn’t say that it is not an added part: “a path to citizenship for some 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country.” This bill also shifts the system for awarding permanent residence status to give more weight to education and skills and less to family reunification, while conservatives have derided the plan for allowing illegal aliens to legalize their status. On the other hand if this bill was to pass I think it would make immigration issues in the United States a clearer cut issue, in which those who provide a service to this country are allowed to stay and those who don’t are sent back to Mexico.

I think this sums up all the problems that are going to appear due to this bill:

“But Mr. Bush and his allies on Capitol Hill are at a significant rhetorical disadvantage: conservative opponents can capture their objection to the bill in a single word — amnesty — while supporters are forced into the complex weeds of policy and the nuances of legislative language.”

Read the story for yourself:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/us/29cnd-immig.html?ei=5065&en=14d081ab7d03c8a7&ex=1181102400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
Bush on the immigration bill:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=nSdm_c07uUU

Edwards: Move Past 'War on Terror'

"We need a post-Bush, post-9/11, post-Iraq military that is mission focused on protecting Americans from 21st century threats, not misused for discredited ideological purposes," Edwards said in remarks prepared for delivery. "By framing this as a war, we have walked right into the trap the terrorists have set—that we are engaged in some kind of clash of civilizations and a war on Islam." Everything that Edwards is saying above is true wee, as an American government, need to focus on how to protect out citizens and then if that is accomplished we can focus on other worldly matters. The government needs to protect out soldiers fighting in Iraq, and by having there to fight a “world” war they aren’t even fighting for their loved ones at home, they are now fighting to save Bush and things need to change. I think that Edwards needs to change his mind on this issue of the war being a lost cause, not only do his opponents Obama and Clinton feel opposed to him, but by saying this many of the Americans who have soldiers in Iraq are feeling like he is crapping all over their efforts. Also, I think that Edwards needs to recognize that we can’t just “move past this war” and focus on Americans in the 21st century…this war is going to define the America of the 21st century and it needs to be handled with and not forgotten about.

Read the story for yourself:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PA5VM80&show_article=1

John Edwards Anti-War rally:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=n-Mj436fGqY

Finally Congress Cracks Down On High Gas Prices

On Tuesday, this week, the House voted to allow the government to sue OPEC over oil production quotas, while on other hand the White House said that this was a bad idea and could threaten gas prices in the future. The measure would change antitrust laws so that the Justice Department can sue OPEC member countries for price-fixing, and would remove the immunity given a sovereign state against such lawsuits. In think that the House is nuts in wanting to sue OPEC mainly because they supply over 40 percent of crude oil to the United States, if this bill was to pass OPEC could cut of the United States from all oil supplies forever. “The White House objected, saying that might disrupt supplies and lead to even higher costs at the pump.” On the other hand OPEC needs to be put in their place and know that the world has other alternatives to them, even though they may not be recognized now, but eventually OPEC needs to lower their prices of the United States will go else where. “We don't have to stand by and watch OPEC dictate the price of gas," Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers said, Nevertheless, the House felt it was important to take on OPEC, the major player in oil production.

Read the story for yourself:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070522/ap_on_go_co/congress_energy_1

Democrats Retreat With Iraq Pullout Bill

Recently President Bush told Democrats in congress that he was going to veto their bill that stipulated a retraction date for all the troops in Iraq, because he said if we eave before the job it will have all been for nothing and leaving Iraq in shambles will only create more problems. After this had happened, which we all knew it would, the Democrats in congress have decided to take the retraction date out of their bill and focus more one the money we spend in Iraq and other things in the same area. I think by doing this the Democrats have accepted defeat and in doing so they let down the people of America, who supported their bill, and would have done all they could to see it pass. Also, by only focusing on the money involved in the Iraq war they have accomplished nothing that they set out to initially do; along with letting down the American citizens they also let down the troops in Iraq who are fighting in a losing effort. Maybe, though this was a good idea, to take out the retraction date, because if they left it in their any bill that was attached along with it would have never passed. What they should have done was continue to push the bill, seeing how Iraq is eating up enough of tax payers money, and just wait until a Democratic president was elected and have him approve the bill.

Read the story for yourself:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/washington/22cnd-cong.html?ei=5065&en=2d27446ebbab5252&ex=1180497600&adxnnl=1&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1179893468-HfH2WyJWhNvE7MixBYIWkQ

Criticisms of the Iraq bill:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=p8vxieZlGNU