“At the Democratic Convention, an Emphasis on Social Issues”

By Linda María González Paz.-

On Monday, September 3rd. Michelle Obama in North Carolina, was one of the main speakers in a Democratic National Convention, she was talking about her support of same-sex marriage by giving entire backup to those people, and she express herself in this words: “If proud Americans can be who they are and boldly stand at the altar with who they love, then surely, surely we can give everyone in this country a fair chance at that great American dream.” When she express herself, most of the democrats support her, because last year Barack Obama was against this management, but this year he changed his mind, and support them, and it is also as my personal opinion convenience for him, because he can get more votes from those “who are in love” (as they call them).

After all Democrats have emphasize the importance of take care of social issues in the US, because the article explains that the Republican party is focused in economic issues, because Democrats couldn’t handle it that well, in the other hand, Democrats are supporting ideas of social issues, because they know it will be better for them strategically using these issues based on the timing of his personal platform announcement. It is also becoming increasingly apparent throughout this campaign that the democrats are targeting particular demographics of voters through their focus on social issues, for example: gay marriage to target LGBT (lesbian, gays, bisexual, transsexual) community, immigration reform to target Latinos and healthcare to target inner-city families. They are making promises to try and attract the different voters, but whether the promises will be kept is a point of contention.

When Obama´s first rejection of same-sex marriage was approved, wasn´t the right decision, because if he had been a supporter of gay marriage from the start, this would not be new news. It is likely that Obama is saying that he is pro gay-marriage just to attract and keep voters- the younger population, the students, the LGBT population.

Obama recognizes and knows well his followers. His administration knows that taking a stance on a contentious issue like gay-marriage is risky, “Democrats were taking a gamble in focusing on divisive social issues” but they must believe that the older and more conservative voters they lose to this will not outweigh the voters that they will gain.

While many Republicans do vote this way, based on social issues, that is not how they have been campaigning so far for this election. At the Republican National Convention, huge emphasis was put on the broken economy and the increasing national debt. It could be argued that Republicans are playing a blame game and only emphasizing the failures of the Democratic party rather than advertizing their own ideas, with the exception of Paul Ryan, who has proposed a very brave economic recovery plan. However, it is possible that the Democrats are not addressing the economy and are distracting voters with social issue talk for the same reason. The parties are fighting with different tools at this point in the election, and the voters will ultimately decide whether the economy or the social issues are more important.

Source: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/05/at-the-democratic-convention-an-emphasis-on-social-issues/?hp

Reciben diputados electos del PRI, capacitación de la CEDH

Reciben diputados electos del PRI, capacitación de la (CEDH)

Por  Roy José Antonio García Arroyo

Fecha 4 de septiembre de 2012

Fuentes http://www.eluniversalqueretaro.mx/politica/04-09-2012/reciben-diputados-electos-del-pri-capacitacion-de-la-cedh

Reciben diputados electos del PRI, capacitación de la CEDH

Que los nueves  diputados del PRI se van  a implementar en Querétaro sobre los derechos humanos  con el objetivó de capacitarse sobre los derechos humanos (CEDH).

El texto trata de que los diputados deban de especializarse sobre los  derechos humanos porque son los que implementan las leyes para la sociedad y deben de estar preparados para esas leyes y puedan ejercer con soberanía y firmeza porque si un diputado no ejerce correctamente no podrá hacer uso correcto de los derechos humanos (CEDH) también  para la posible realización de iniciativas de ley a favor de la protección y defensa de los Derechos Humanos,  Y los ciudadanos puedan estar tranquilos sobre la justicia que tienen en el país, Esto fue una iniciativa para fomentar áreas para mejorar la Comisión en materia de su reglamento interno. Pues los diputados su labor es hacer su trabajo  con jurisprudencia y  su tarea principal  es lograr avances en la constitución en materia de derechos  humanos y se debe lograr con la ayuda de los diputados que van a ir a los derechos humanos para  lograr su objetivo para que asignen las leyes con firmeza, correctamente y como se debe implementar ya que uno si esa ayuda no sabría como implementar las leyes y lo haría sin conocimiento alguno.

Conclusión

Que los diputados es buena idea que vallan a los derechos humanos ya que algunos no saben como implementar las leyes como se deben y teniendo el conocimiento pueden hacerlo con firmeza y audacia  ya que ellos tendrían el conocimiento de como los ciudadanos se comportan entre ellos y que problemas les ocurre mas. Los ciudadanos solos que necesita que los diputados tengan el conocimiento de los derechos humanos porque luego son tratados de la peor manera que se debe ya que algunos por el color de piel o por como viene vestido los humillan y eso no se debe hacer ya que son gente o ciudadano que también es parte del estado porque ellos no deven de sufrir algún maltrato por el color de piel o genero distinto.

Los diputados le servirán esos cursos o enseñanzas sobre los derechos humanos (CEDH)  para que ellos no fallen a en su trabajo cuando este empentándolo y les  quede correctamente todo  los ciudadanos este agradables de su labor y su trabajo.

People Don’t Vote When No One Asks Them To

By Alexander Freitag. –This text is basically talking about the importance of the young latino vote that is crucial in the elections, altough many times they are ignored in some issues. The latino population is actually small but they are growing very fast in the US society and they are becoming obvious targets for national campaings.

The text is showing us some studies by the National Conference of State Legislatures, the percentage that latinos represent in the elections. Later on, the author tells us how his experience was knowing Rey Saldaña at Standford University. He continues speaking about his inexperience in politics but he took some advices with his partner Saldaña from political veterans. The author says that he rapidly understood some important issue at play, in conclution it was said that spending precious money of the campaign on latinos, was a waste of time. But they ignored the "rules".

They had to do anything different to compete because everything was against them. Their oponent was supported by the mayor of San Antonio and they had much more money to do their campaign and easily to get votes.

The author´s and his partner Rey´s campaign target the latinos, instead of putting them away. He explains us how they used traditional techniques to contact young latinos and their families. Technology played of course a important role. They did anything to contact them, for example using facebook and hosted events, everything designed to attract younger residents. He saw with Ray that the concerns of the younger latino voters were not much different from their other citizens and neighbors.

At the end, they obtained the interest of the young latino voters. Another important point in the campaign was to take personal interaction with the neighbors and they increase the voters in the elections. At the end, Ray won convincingly. As in the text says, Latino communities can´t be represented by one voice.

Topics like immigration, health care, unemployment and opportunities are very important for the voters that should be taken by the candidates.

The text conclude with a quote from Willie Velázquez who says: people don´t vote when no one asks them to.

 

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/03/people-dont-vote-when-no-one-asks-them-to/?ref=politics

 

U.S. Is Near Pact to Cut $1 Billion From Egypt's Debt

By Thomas Cummings

This article from the New York Times describes the ongoing debate to determine exactly how the United States government will assist Egypt economically as it is still in the infancy of democracy and in economic turmoil. The author, Steven Lee Myers says that “the Obama administration is nearing an agreement with the country’s new government to relieve $1 billion of its debt as part of an American and international assistance package intended to bolster its transition to democracy” (par. 1). However, the U.S. is not the only member of the international community willing to help. Saudi Arabia and Qatar have provided “emergency infusions” of nearly 3 billion dollars while China has offered Egyptian President Morsi a 200 million dollar loan (par. 17).

Details of the U.S. assistance are yet to be determined. The administration is considering whether or not to simply wave the debt or to swap it for training and infrastructure projects in Egypt to create jobs and attract private investment both foreign and domestic (par. 21). The motives of this assistance program can be questioned but some officials consider it “an opportunity to reshape a relationship that for decades was focused more on arms sales and security than on economic prosperity for a broad group of Egyptians” (par. 14). This is a good chance for the United States to reinforce a positive relationship with this increasingly influential state in the middle-east.

Ideology can be defined as “the main link between fundamental beliefs and action” which serves as a way to legitimize authority (Dr. Cano). In Egypt economic instability created unrest which eventually led to its revolution in 2011. Now however, with a new democratic system and its first president elected by popular vote, it is assumed that the authority of the state will be considered legitimate by its people. This also means, interpreting the ‘rational action flow chart’, that with a leader who represents the belief system of the Egyptian community and with a solid ideology any action the state decides to take will more likely be legitimate. With the authoritarian regime that Egypt had before, the belief system represented was only that of one single leader or group of elites. Now Egypt has the tools necessary to make a rational decision in an effort to achieve its preference of economic stability and growth.

Democracy, it has been said, is like a tree; it cannot be simply bought but instead must be planted and cared for until it grows strong enough to bare fruits. In this case, the tree has been planted and it is being cared for by several members of the international community who will later be ready and waiting to pick its fruits as an economic and political ally.

“U.S. Is Near Pact to Cut $1 Billion From Egypt’s Debt”. Myers, Steven Lee. 3 de septiembre de 2012. The New York Times. < http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/04/world/middleeast/us-prepares-economic-aid-to-bolster-democracy-in-egypt.html?hp>.

“Police Chief in Southern Afghanistan Survives Attack That Kills 4 Civilians”

By: Kevin-Chris Gründel

From: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/29/world/asia/afghan-police-chief-escapes-attack-that-kills-4-civilians.html?ref=world

An assassination attempt on the 27^th of August on the chief of the police force of Kandahar Province by the Taliban failed, but took four innocent lives. The target, Gen. Abdul Raziq, is conducting an offensive against the Taliban in the south and already faced several attacks on his life. The locals of Kandahar province respect Gen. Raziq, as his archaic crudity has resulted in improved security in the region.[1] 

While Afghanistan`s official title is the “Islamic Republic of Afghanistan”, it is questionable how realistic the democratic part of the hybrid regime is. Therefore we skip to analyze the Islamic aspect of the hybrid regime and focus on the democratic part of the title. A Republic is not synonymously a Democracy, but both contain core elements which are found in a democratic ideology, which is here shortly verified.

Theoretically, a democracy is not single ideology, but it implies ideas that make it a significant classical system of governance. This system influenced and combined ideologies from the Antique until today. The core aspect is the “rule of the people”, so the regime in Afghanistan must at least follow four principles to be in the range of the democratic ideology factors. First, the sovereignty of people must be ensured which forces the authorities to gain their power by the legitimating of their ruled people via elections. This implies that the authorities must represent the will of the people. Secondly, this includes ruling of the majority of the people. Thirdly, their public issues must be solved effectively by voting. Fourthly, every citizen must have an even chance to get elected as an authority, which ensures political equality among the people.[2]

Herein we compare the theory with the real situation in Afghanistan by using this news article. Following the first principle, clear elections ensure an authorized ruler to represent the will of the people. This is not the case in Afghanistan as people are threatened with violence to vote at all.[3] This leads to the failure of the second setting of a democratic ideology, the reign of the majority. There are even cases in which the winners list is published before the elections in Afghanistan are started.[4] The question of the third setting is thereby answered, as well. Voting does not solve public issues, as free and peacefully voting cannot be ensured at all. In addition, issues are often “solved” by the use of force. This point is strengthened by the fragmentation of the state itself.[5] The last aspect is therefore not ensured, as well. There is no political equality between the citizens, which is underlined by the obligatory financial bribe in the voting procedure to win elections.[6]

This clearly shows that the theoretical ideology ideas, combined in democracy, are not realized in the political practice of Afghanistan. Even though the state is called a Republic, it is only this way on paper.

By these factors, the part of “Islamic” isn’t analyzed at all, which would question the title of republic even more as Afghanistan is theoretically a not workable hybrid regime of democracy and religious fundamentalism.

---

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/29/world/asia/afghan-police-chief-escapes-attack-that-kills-4-civilians.html?_r=1&ref=world (Aug 28th 2012)

[2] J. Richard: Political Ideologies. An Introduction. London: Hutchinson & Co., 1984, p. 154-181.

[3] http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/afghanistans-parliamentary-elections-candidates-everywhere/ (Sept 20th 2010), http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/25/world/asia/25afghan.html?pagewanted=all (Sept 24th 2010)

[4] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/25/world/asia/25afghan.html?pagewanted=all (Sept 24th 2010)

[5] http://www.economist.com/node/21560606 (Aug 18th 2012)

[6] http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/afghanistans-parliamentary-elections-candidates-everywhere/ (September 20th 2010)

Collapse of New Bridge Underscores Worries About China Infrastructure

By Anna Zdancewicz

According to a report published by the New York Times on August 24, 2012, a 9.6-mile (15.4 km) bridge over the Songhua River in China collapsed yesterday killing three people and injuring five more. A portion of the massive Yangmingtan Bridge plummeted nearly 100 feet (30 meters) taking four vehicles with it. Xinhua news agency, an official news agency in Beijing, reported that this was the “sixth major bridge in China to collapse since July 2011” (Bradsher). What’s more appalling then the event itself, perhaps, is the Chinese government’s response to the incident. According to officials, the Yangmingtan collapse was the result of overloaded trucks; an excuse used for the previous bridges as well.

The online response has been vicious, and postings are suggesting the 9-month-old bridge collapse is the result of government corruption. Using outlets such as Sina Weibo, one blogger stated “Corrupt officials who do not die just continue to cause disaster after disaster” (Bradsher). Another quips “Tofu engineering work leads to a tofu bridge” (Bradsher).

China’s infrastructure issues have been under fire even before yesterday’s events, however. July 23, 2011 a standing high-speed train was rear-ended by another incoming train after it failed to stop in Wenzhou, Zhejiang Provence. 40 people were killed and 191 others were injured (Research). High-speed rail, since its creation, has been China’s emblem of technological success, yet an investigation of the event revealed issues with the signaling equipment that resulted in the crash. The blame was mainly placed on various safety inspectors and China’s Railway Ministry deputy chief engineer Zhang Shuguang (Research).

But who (or what) is really to blame for China’s infrastructure problems? One would be naïve to simply dismiss a total of six bridge collapses within the last two years. To answer this question, it is imperative to look at the regime itself and what drives China today.

The ruling political party of China is the Communist Party of China (CPC). It is the founding and ruling party of the state and maintains a unitary government as well as centralized military and media. In addition, the economy is built under the notion that the state does all the central planning in order to maintain “absolute social equality” (Heywood 108). Opposition is absolutely prohibited and dealt with in often-severe ways.

The very set up of the Chinese government makes it easy for corruption to be rampant, a fact which has been acknowledged by the ones in power themselves! So when China introduced its $586 billion USD economic stimulus plan focused on infrastructure, red flags should have been waving left and right (Barboza). Sure, the plan looked good on paper: It was a way for China to avoid the global economic downturn, but the government’s huge and fast push for building bridges, railroads, and other structures left room for too many mistakes.

So, when it is all said and done, one must ask oneself what is more valuable: A government’s desire to push it’s country into economic prosperity? Or the lives being taken as a result? The answer is clear.  

Works Cited

Barboza, David. "China Unveils Sweeping Plan For Economy." The New York Times.    The New York Times, 10 Nov. 2008. Web. 25 Aug. 2012.

    <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/world/asia/10china.html>. Bradsher, Keith. "China Bridge Collapse Raises Infrastructure Concerns." The New
    York Times. The New York Times, 25 Aug. 2012. Web. 25 Aug. 2012.     

    <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/world/asia/collapse-of-new-bridge-underscores-chinas-infrastructure-   

    concerns.html?_r=2>.
 Heywood, Andrew. Political Ideologies: An Introduction. Houndmills, Basingstoke,
    Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. Print.

 Research., Sharon Lafraniere; Mia Li Contributed. "Study Cites Blunders In China    Train Crash." The New York Times. The New York Times, 29 Dec. 2011. Web. 25 Aug. 2012.   

    <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/world/asia/design-flaws-cited-in-china-train-crash.html>.

Romney: Cold but Cool

by Joseph Dickens-Gavito

On August 24th, 2012, The New York Times in its article titled “Romney in Crisis: Two Dark Spots in Fortunate Life” emphasized on the need for Republican Mitt Romney to show some sort of sensitive side now that next week he will officially come to be his party’s candidate in the upcoming presidential elections.

Thus far, the Republican Party has depended on a campaign displaying how they can repair the struggling economy through both Mitt Romney’s and, nominated vice-president, Paul Ryan’s business and economic know-how. Nevertheless, I agree with the article that, as the election closes in, the inevitability to show a sensible candidate who is in touch with the ordinary citizen’s needs is getting greater. Previous presidential candidates have understood this and have had moving campaigns with the objective of bonding with the voter. John McCain had a solid profile, being a war veteran who endured torture, but was ultimately topped by Barack Obama and his biracial, around-the-world family struggles. But what can a man who has always had it all in his life do to attest a connection with the ordinary American?

Romney and his aides will have to resolve if they are to use the only two difficult moments in the candidate’s life, as it can either show an ordinary man susceptible to hardship or further confirm Romney’s privileged economic standing. The first trying moment in Romney’s life occurred when he was a Mormon missionary in France and was a driver involved in an accident where one of his passengers perished. Romney was also wrongly pronounced dead but returned to duty immediately with only a broken arm. This story shows a man keen on getting the job done, no matter how crushing his atmosphere might be. But it also shows Romney’s religious past, something he has to some extent avoided and portrays him as perhaps an indifferent individual.

His second life-changing incident occurred in 1998 when Romney’s wife was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Romney concealed his pain and rarely spoke on the subject. He thoroughly researched the disease, did household chores, accompanied his wife to treatment and leisure activities she fancied, and even deliberated on building an elevator inside his home to make things easier. His wife overcame her illness, but even this emotional story gives us a glimpse of his family’s access to the best of medical care and their lavishness, as demonstrated with the elevator extravaganza. It also ratifies the idea of Romney as a devoted companion, yet a private person incapable to share his feelings when needed.

Not bonding with the voter might work in country like Mexico, where the presumed President-elect was the least empathic of the three candidates and enjoyed more of a rock-star lifestyle. But in the United States, where voters want to feel like they know the candidates personally, not being in touch with the general public might just ruin your odds of becoming president. Romney does appear like a man ready to be president. He looks like someone who will remain “cool” and get the job done no matter what, and that is just what the United States requires. Then again, having been born in a privileged family with a fortune at his disposal and showing little sentiments, if any, can prove too much for the Republican candidate. His team need to expose him as the answer but also as a man, and this will not happen by only taking off his corporate-suit tie and rolling up his sleeves.