"Is torture a legitimate means of combating terrorism?"

1st answer: yes. I picked this topic because I knew it would be hard. I very much support peace and am a slight pacifist, but sometimes I think as a nation we have to take the necessary steps to protect ourselves (even if this includes terrorist torture).

2nd answer: yes...though the argument about torture being "un-American" made me blink a bit, I still feel that a means of protection means a whole lot more than living up to an ideal.

3rd answer: YES -- “torture: any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person.”... but aren't these terrorists doing this to innocent people? I feel there should be repercussions for their actions, rather than just being held in a jail cell like any normal prisoner on tax payer money. How are we supposed to get knowledge out of these people just by messing with their psyche? The Geneva Convention doesn't even allow you to do THAT. "And finally, in June 2006, the Supreme Court ruled that terror suspects were entitled to protection from 'outrages upon personal dignity, and in particular humiliating and degrading treatment,' as outlined in the Geneva Conventions."

4th answer: I don't know!--"This is the country, after all, that helped liberate Europe from the Nazis; the country that reacts in horror to the notion of political prisoners—and what they likely endure—in China and to accounts of Saddam Hussein’s chemical attacks on Kurdish civilians. It is the country that ensures the freedom of speech and assembly. It is also the country where—and this is critical to the torture debate—one is presumed innocent until proven guilty." Gosh I hate that this game plays is such a devil's advocate.

5th answer: No--"Whereas the strong will endure, the weak will say anything—including falsehoods—to stop the pain." This is true. I believe in torture as a means of PUNISHMENT when it is sure someone has committed a crime. For instance, if you murder someone in cold blood, personally I think it's wrong that instead of facing the same death you gave that person, you sit in a jail cell on death row for 95 years soaking up tax payer money.

6th & final answer: Yes--they presented a situation under a time-crunch in which the terrorist suspect wasn't tortured and a bomb went off injuring thousands...though this is a far-fetched hypothetical situation... it still gave me the creeps to think that my torturing ONE person to gain information thousands of lives could be saved.

Question #3

If I had to vote right now, this very day, I would vote for Barack Obama. I wouldn't vote McCain because I don't support his health care policies. I think forcing businesses to pay taxes for their employers when they become sick is a bad idea. I'm no expert but to me I can see way too many loopholes to be found by the businesses. I think this would only hurt the "average joe" American worker, whether they work in a factory or behind the desk of a local business.
Another thing which I lean more towards Obama with is education. The reason I have to pay to attend this private school is because my parents were dissatisfied with the public education system. I think every parent should have the right to send their child to a public school of their choice and find comfort in the fact that their children are being well-prepared for life. That being said, this is not the reality of today. Example in case: myself.
One of the reasons I would be swayed to vote Obama is because he represents that one important, six letter word: CHANGE. I'm not saying this inherently makes him a better candidate, but in my mind he is so associated with that word that I feel like if I voted for McCain there would be no change (this is probably thanks to the media...). I think there are a lot of things that need to be modified in the world we live in and I know they won't all happen overnight, but I don't feel that Obama's "inexperience" will leave him unable to make the modifications necessary. In fact, I don't really consider him to be inexperienced at all. I think the media plays him up to be inexperienced because he isn't 78 years old like John McCain (again, another tactic by the media to influence voters).
Again, Obama is my choice if I had to vote in this election. Part of me is almost relieved that I don't have to vote because I am really not sure who I would pick. I would want to do a lot more research on the topic (yes, even more debate watching and newspaper reading) before I made a decision. It really scares me to think that 32% of our nation decide who will be the next leader for all 100% of us. Voter turnout is a whole 'nother can of worms.
Back to the case in point: If I had to vote, I'd vote Obama.

"Town Hall" debate style

Despite the more intimate setting of this "debate" (if you can even call it that)...these two are still talking about what they did in the past compared to one another, rather than what they're doing (note the use of the present tense) now.
"You're not interesting in hearing politicians pointing fingers" -Barack Obama. You said it Mister...so why talk about it? I can't decide if I like the style of this debate or not. I'd also like to know how the audience members were picked. I think the tension level of this debate is higher than that of the other one...not because one candidate is on the defense more than the other, but because both candidates are in such close proximities of one another. There's no podeum for them to hide behind here.
I think this style of debate is a lot more informational than when the candidates are speaking in front of thousands of people. I feel like at least the candidates aren't allowed to go off on tangents (at least not as badly) and that they're being held responsible for actually answering the questions...because the people who are asking them are right there in the audience hanging on their every word.

The VP Debate

Technically I'm supposed to blog about the debate...but in all honesty I feel asleep after question one. However, watching 30 minutes of "The O'Reilly Factor" before the debate was really interesting. According to O'Reilly if Sarah Palin could pull off a decent, respectable debate...where she looked like she knew what she was talking about, then the American people would give her a break and take her as credible. Geraldine Ferraro had great advice to give Palin before the debate began, "Know your stuff" were her words. I'm not sure Palin really does...which is potentially a HUGE PROBLEM.

In all frankness I don't think the VP should really matter when picking the presidential candidate. Constitutionally speaking, they really have no role...other than to make the deciding vote when the Senate is tied (which has only happened once or twice). I don't care about Joe Biden. I don't care about Sarah Palin. All they do is cheerlead for Obama and McCain. They just reiterate what the candidates stand for. Yes, they are technically Vice Presidents... but in my opinion they shouldn't determine who you vote for.

Elite School & Political Cartoons

I found this political cartoon to be pretty hilarious. We've been talking a lot in class about whether or not it was right for McCain to jet off to Washington in contrast of attending the debate. Luckily he managed to fit time into his busy schedule for both of these, but I saw this cartoon online and found it to be a pretty hilarious representation of both of the candidates and recent issues surrounding the debate (FINANCIAL CRISIS ring a bell?) If you can't read what McCain's briefcase says...it is: "Washington or Bust." Pretty hilarious if you ask me. Who does McCain think he is? Some almighty problem-solving being...Allah? Oprah, perhaps? None the matter, as of right now he is still an Arizona senator trying to make it all the way to Pennsylvania Avenue. Rushing off to Washington to solve everything was an over-zealous move that he made in order to try and sell the American people the idea that he can get his hands dirty to fix things...which is great but...is it really realistic to say that one man is going to do all of this in a few days?
As far as elitist colleges and universities go, I mostly agree with what Steven Goodman had to say. It doesn't matter whether you're better off at Harvard or Yale if you're hoping to become the next president...but the fact of the matter is that the Ivy League schools will always have a coveted air about them--isn't that their point? Beside the fact that they have some of the largest endowments in the nation, people want to go there because of status. "I went to Harvard Law School" sounds a heck of a lot different from "I went to Roanoke College to study law." Now, does it mean that you are inherently better off going to Harvard over Roanoke? Not necessarily, but it does mean you will be seen as "better" than everyone else as Goodman talks about and those around you will probably be wary of your presence in the courtroom if they know you studied at Harvard.

I would vote for....

Obama. Not just because I was the one to make the speech supporting his beliefs, but because I think he has his mind in the right place when it comes to environmental and energy issues. I think Obama would focus more on getting new types of energy jumpstarted, where I think John McCain wants to focus to much on clean coal energy sources...which to me seem to be a bit of a waste anyways because that is not a renewable resource...at least not for long. Obama's "green jobs" will also help with the economy--something we seem to truly need right now.

Based on the one issue of environment and energy, I'd vote Obama...

McCain's RNC Speech

Surprisingly, I liked a lot of what McCain had to say. I always considered myself an Obama supporter but after actually listening to McCain I can honestly say that I would have no idea who to vote for...should I have to vote in the 2008 election.

I think it was important for McCain to strike on the point that he is not a supporter of war. For some reason I had always associated him with pro-war sentiments in my mind. "I hate war," were his exact words.

Interestingly enough, I was watching a FOX special on Sarah Palin and I really like her too. I think she knows her stuff. She started at the bottom and worked her way up. Not only did she start small and climb the ladder, but she's a mom on top of it all. I think she was a good choice for McCain because she adds an aspect that he did not have in his campaign before. I think a lot of people are taking her as a joke because she's a woman...who also has a 17 year old pregnant daughter...but this in fact makes her all the more qualified: she knows what it's like to raise five children, deal with a pregnant daughter, have a mentally challenged child, buy groceries for her family, pay a mortgage...she's HUMAN. I think this is incredibly important to balance out McCain's "maverick" affiliation.

Once again, McCain promised something in his speech that made me unenthusiastic to hear. It was his plan to increase tax exemption for families...giving them back more money by the time taxes are filed. This sounds like a great idea in theory...but does the budget really allow for this to happen? Won' t the economy in turn suffer if American people are offered tax exemption. Not to be a devil's advocate, but KNOW THE BUDGET JOHN MCCAIN!!!

All in all I liked his speech. If I was voting I would pay very close attention from here on out to John McCain and Barack Obama. The choice would not be an easy one to make.

"In the end, it matters less that you can fight. What you fight for is the real test."
-John McCain