Obama's Cabinet

And the Cabinet is...drum roll please...wine glasses? No, not that cabinet. I'm talking about THE Cabinet--capital "C."

• White House Chief of Staff: Rahm Emmanuel
  
• Secretary of Commerce: Bill Richardson
  
• Secretary of Defense: Robert M. Gates
  
• Secretary of Health and Human Services: Tom Daschle
  
• Secretary of Homeland Security: Janet Napalitano
  
• Secretary of the State: Hillary Rodham Clinton
  
• Secretary of the Treasury: Timothy Geithner
  
• Director of the National Economic Council: Lawrence Summers
• Chair of the Council of Economic Advisors: Christina Romer
• Director of Domestic Policy Council: Melody Barnes
• Deputy Director of Domestic Policy Council: Heather Higginbottom
  

While I don't know what every one of these people will be doing, I like what I see so far. What am I seeing you might ask? Diversity. Men and women from different backgrounds, all coming together for one thing. I don't think Obama's Cabinet is necessarily any better or worse than previous administrations...and I think the hype over who he was going to pick was slightly ridiculous--too much speculating makes for too much gossip and untruths. I was happy just to hear the final announcements rather than read whole articles on who he might pick. I understand the importance over it, but I still think the media sometimes goes too far. I'm especially interested in Rahm Emmanuel because he was an advisor to Bill Clinton (who I deem as one of the more succesful presidents) and served as an investment banker (in which I sincerely hope he uses his knowledge and power for good).

And the winner is...

Obama! I wasn't surprised, really. The American people followed the trend they've set for every election. When there's: war, dissatisfaction, etc. it's likely that the candidate who offers the most "rejuvenation" or has the most contrast to the president in charge will be the next in the white house.

I remember falling asleep in front of the TV waiting to find out the winner. Truth be told, I didn't even think twice about who the winner was when I woke up bleary-eyed in the morning. Luckily when my mom made sure I was awake, she told me that Obama won. I wasn't sure how to feel.

I was thinking something along the lines of, "Change. Okay... This is happening, right? But what will really happen?" I really didn't know how to feel. I just want my country, our country, to get back on track. I don't care if it's John McCain, Barack Obama, or Chuck Norris who gets the job done, I just want someone to take the reins and drive. I can't predict the future, and I think we're in good hands (Obama's that is), I just really hope our economy can pick back up soon--it's affecting us all in a major way.

Government Pardoning

Government Pardoning

I think if I were President, I would use pardoning. It would depend on the type of case it was. If it was a person who is an apparent real risk to society: i.e. murderers, rapists, gang members, then no I'd probably be a little hesitant to pardon them. But really it all depends on the individual person. I hope I'm not being too naive in my thoughts that everyone deserves a second chance. I'm not saying let loose all of the criminals because they've been in jail for X amount of years, I'm just saying that I like to believe that people can change, and should at least be given that opportunity. This is one of the reasons why I would use the pardon. One of the things that scares me most about the legislative branch is injustice. I know (or at least hope) that most of the people sitting in jail soaking up tax payer's funds deserve to be there. But I also know that sometimes people are wrongly convicted: and this scares me more than anything. We are the United States of America, archetype of freedom, liberty, and McDonald's. Of course we never make mistakes...right?

These people who "slip through the cracks" of the system, meaning they either slip into the cracks wrongfully or there are those who deserve to be in jail for the rest of their life span...are another reason as to why I would use the pardon. I think it should be used with care, but used nonetheless.

Should the voting age be lowerd to sixteen?

While there are some pretty convincing arguments as to why the voting age should be lowered, such as the fact that "there is no magical transformation one undergoes when one turns eighteen," I'm going to have to say that I do not think the voting age should be lowered, at least not without some preparatory testing in lieu of being two years underage. I know there are probably a lot of uneducated adult voters out there who might vote for the wrong reason, or maybe not vote at all, but I don't think lowering the voting age is really a fair add-on to this problem. I think it would be odd to have the voting age be sixteen, but the legal age to still be eighteen. It just wouldn't make much sense to me. While I would love to be able to vote and feel pretty educated on the subject, and I know some of my peers feel the same way, it doesn't mean that ALL sixteen and seventeen year-olds should be allowed to vote. Then again, I'm not sure if testing to see if one is "ready" to vote at that age is a good choice either because then it's kind of reverting back to old ways in making African-Americans take tests to vote (knowing full well the majority of them simply would not pass).

The best thing to do is to leave the voting age at 18. This, I think...well, I hope, is enticing those who are under 18 (like myself) to get involved in politics in every other way possible.