This article analyzes the candidacy of president Barack Obama for 2012 presidential elections in United States, in the light of ongoing challenges to his citizenship status. Discusses in detail, the arguments for and against the validity, legality and constitutionality of president’s U.S. citizenship.
This article analyzes the candidacy of Barack Obama, the incumbent president of United States and projected Democratic party candidate for 2012 presidential elections. It has an special emphasis on middle class taxes, payroll tax cuts extension, and the current state of start-up and early stage small business financing in America.
This video analyzes Republican nomination process in the light of 2012 presidential elections in United States of America. Provides special focus on jobs and taxes. Discusses related policies, role of government, reforms needed, and proposals being forwarded by different candidates.
This video focuses on Republican nomination process for 2012 presidential race in United States, in the light of current situation regarding economy and jobs. Discusses the current employment numbers, and progress and weaknesses in economy. Gives a look to the prospects in 2012 elections.
This video analyzes the U.S. economy and housing crisis in the light of 2007-2008 financial crisis, 2012 presidential elections and Republican party race for nomination. Discusses the recovery under Obama administration and current numbers.
This article analyzes the job growth and economy, in the light of current presidential election campaigns. Adds a historical perspective to recent decline in U.S. productivity. Discusses in detail, how big corporations are thwarting small businesses, start-ups and early stage businesses, by cutting off the financing and other critical resources,to these businesses.
This article focuses on U.S. drug prohibition laws, their pros and cons, cost, results and future, in the light of 2012 presidential race in United States. Analyzes the history of drug prohibition in United Sates, with special emphasis on their success and failures.
This article analyzes the recent developments in U.S. politics, regarding presidential elections 2012, after the victory of Newt Gingrich in South Carolina Republican primary. Discusses the most popular arguments forwarded by leading candidates in this race. Focuses on jobs and economy.
This video is the fourth in a series on U.S. healthcare and immigration reforms, their need, urgency, roadblocks, cost and consequences. Provides a historical perspective to the issue and gives it a scholastic touch. Analyzes the positive and negative roles played by immigrants in United States.
This video performs a detailed analysis of the need, hurdles and different views regarding comprehensive healthcare and immigration reforms. Analyses these very important issues in the light of political interests, national security, and economy and financial problems, country is facing.
This video is the second in a series on Healthcare and Immigration Reforms in United States, in the light of election campaigns for 2012 presidential elections. Performs a bipartisan analysis of needs for reforms, different proposals and solutions, and the healthcare reforms under Obama and Democratic government.
This video analyzes the Republican primaries in Iowa and New Hampshire, and discusses the possible outcomes in South Carolina, and Florida, as well. Brings into focus the possible implications of these results on general, congressional, Senate and House races, and presidential elections, this year.
This article is the fourth in a series on incumbent president and projected Democratic Party nominee for 2012 presidential elections in United States, Barack Obama. It analyzes his policies, record, achievements, failures and challenges. Provides a historical perspective to his presidency.
As the news broke today of the death of Osama Bin Laden, so too thousands of US citizens celebrated a significant victory in the war against terror. The known fundamentalist leader and mastermind of the September 11th attacks was captured and killed in a stand off in the Pakistan capital of Islamabad, after nearly a decade of research and the gathering of intelligence led to US special forces discovering his whereabouts and attempting to apprehend him.
The news was delivered globally this morning, prompting extreme emotion in the western world and in the US in particular. As many citizens gathered outside the World Trade Center and in Washington, there was a feeling that at least partial justice had been handed to the victims and families of those who have lost their lives in abhorrent terrorist attacks. However, while this is a significant step in combating those who perpetrate terror and fundamentalist principles, it should be remembered that the threat to civilized society still remains prominent beneath the social fabric.
The Importance of Recent developments
Osama Bin Laden became a revered and much respected figure in fundamentalist circles after the September 11th attacks of 2001, and his death marks something of a watershed in the war against terror. Its significance is especially important given the reported lack of a natural successor to his role, as any organization is liable to become rudderless and vulnerable without a recognized or charismatic leader. It maybe that recent events make Al Qaeda weakened in the face of renewed pressure from the US and similar nations, and provide an opportunity to take a significant stride towards world peace.
Stem cell research is a topic that has prompted much debate throughout the US in the last decade or so. In particular, it is the use of embryonic cells that has created the most historical discussion, with its opposition claiming that this practice is in direct disregard to legislation which prohibits the creation or the destruction of embryos for the purposes of research. The Bush administration of the US moved to curtail public investment into embryonic stem cell research, forcing private investors to contribute in reproducing the requisite cells.
The current government and its leader Barack Obama is in favor of the research however, and imposed rules in 2009 that allowed these privately funded cells to be used and tested in a controlled and well managed working environment. Subsequently, the Federal court last week gave Mr Obama’s administration the go ahead to continue their funding of embryonic stem cell research, lifting a previous injunction due to the ambiguity of the existing legislation on public spending in the US.
A Matter of Individual Opinion
It is thought that those who oppose embryonic stem cell research may well take their appeal to the supreme court, so the matter is likely to rage for the foreseeable future and beyond. It is a matter of individual opinion, with the previous administration of the US opposed to its practice and the more liberal government of Barack Obama in support of both the research and their role in funding and facilitating it.
As Barack Obama visited the ravaged southern state of Alabama this week, he was confronted by a scene of structural devastation and a local government stretched beyond their means in attempting to support afflicted individuals and families. An estimated 300 people were killed in the series of storms and tornadoes that swept across the southern state belt line last week, with Alabama the most seriously affected ahead of other states including Tennessee, Mississippi and Georgia.
As the local government pleaded for more assistance from their federal counterparts, it drew a sharp focus on the perspective of issues in the US, and also highlighted the problems faced by the government as they try to run a progressive and harmonious country. Tragedies such as the one which beset the southern states of the US require instant and significant attention, and subsequently become a priority regardless of the other relevant issues across society.
The Birther Movement and Political Manoeuvres
As the suggestions of the ridiculous ‘Birther’ movement and speculation concerning Mr Obama’s eligibility as president were finally laid to rest this week, so too a rather ugly chapter of political gamesmanship was consigned into history. However, it was unsettling to see an insignificant and covertly malicious suggestion create such an effortless controversy, regardless of its barely disguised motives of racism and political discontent
With the discussions continuing to rage concerning budget reductions and the correct policy of taxation in the US, the issue of fairness within a democracy is coming under an increasing focus. It is something that is entirely subjective to each individual and their own circumstances, and yet is often cited as reasoning when debates ensue about democratic policy and government rule. The issue of subjectivity is something that is difficult to incorporate when attempting to enforce a policy or law within a democracy, and can lead to complication in terms of the decision making process.
Taxation is a case in point, especially in the light of the suggestion that the US government will increase the tax liability of the rich in order to relieve the burden on lower income individuals and households. Backed by Barack Obama, it has instantly won the approval of an estimated 72 percent of the US society, who are in favor of focusing on the top two percent of earners in the country to reduce the vast national deficit. This is where the issue of fairness becomes important, and influences the thinking of voters and government officials alike.
The Processes of a Democracy
Democracy affords each individual member of a society a voice and opinion on any prevalent social issue, which can influence a government in imposing legislation and policy. However, a government cannot satisfy the requirements of each independent voter, and so must therefore make a decision that best suits the opinions and interests of the vast majority of it citizens. This is a slight anomaly that can complicate the process of a democratic regime, as some individuals can unreasonably expect that a democratic government should cater their their specific wants and needs.
Barack Obama has been forced to face several questions surrounding his exact origin of birth since his inauguration as US President, which either reflects a genuine concern or a unwelcome prejudice that lies beneath the surface of the social fabric. As Arizona governor Jan Brewer this week vetoed a bill that would have required presidential candidates prove their eligibility for office, America took a positive step towards challenging the concept of eligibility and also towards focusing their issues on the key issues that currently bight the US.
Although other states are moving forward with similar bills with a view to enforcing them, they are less likely to succeed in the wake of Jan Brewer’s decision and the inevitable protests against racial prejudice, repression and a specific interpretation of eligibility. Given the Arizona states reputation for backing more radical legislation concerning immigration, their stance came as something as a surprise to those who dispute the merits of the the so called ‘Birther’ bill, and raised relevant questions concerning both the existing law and exactly which qualities are important when running a country.
The Right to Set Presidential Qualification Requirements
Of course the US constitution does afford states the right to determine how its representatives are elected, while also allowing them to ensure that their candidate meets existing constitutional qualifications. What it forbids is any state attempting to impose new legislation that forces qualified candidates to refrain from standing for election, as this addition of criteria is unconstitutional and opposes the democratic foundation of the US. What has further confused recent issues is that the relevant article in the US constitution is open to interpretation in terms of being a natural citizen of the United States.
It is a known and accepted fact that Barack Obama’s preferred policy with regards to tax is to increase the liability of the wealthy, while easing that which rests upon the shoulders of low and middle income households. This is a measure that is apparently well supported within the US government, with a vast majority of Republicans, Democrats and Independent representatives all in agreement that individuals or households who earn more than $250,000 per year should bare the brunt of plans to reduce the national deficit.
Not only this, but US citizens also seem to agree that this is the most positive step that their government can take with regards to taxation. The New York Times recently revealed in a poll that an estimated 72 percent of adults approve of increasing federal taxes on households earning $250,000 per year or more, which is a significant portion of the voting demographic in the US. Though this suggests that the government and its subjects are in accordance, there are economic and ethical issues concerning such a practice within a free and democratic land.
A Thriving Economy
From a purely practical standpoint, there are two significant reasons why increasing the tax liability of the rich would be either inconsequential or potentially detrimental to the economy. Firstly, given the effects of the global recession and subsequent recovery, there are a paucity of individuals and households who earn more than $250,000 in the US. This means that by targeting this demographic as opposed to imposing a 1 percent increase on each level of household income, the government will acquire far less reveneue over the next decade than they have the potential to.
For those who only retain a passing interest in the current affairs of the US, they may well be aware of a certain level of hostility that presently exists between the government and its citizens. As online and television media continue to report the closing of schools, budget cuts and a continual rise in poverty across the southern belt line of the country, it is easy to assume that the nation is currently trapped in a cycle of slow economic growth and increasing social frustration.
However, to those who keep their finger pressed firmly against the pulse of US developments, there is a growing impression that the nation is faced with one of the most challenging sets of domestic circumstance in its recent history. Given the US states efforts to integrate cultures and reduce a debilitating national deficit simultaneously, they are faced with difficult confrontations with several factions of society, each with their own concerns about the future of the country and its direction.
The Perils of Contemporary Democracy
While some of these concerns are valid, others appear to be based on ill considered or disagreeable values, and herein lies the significant battle that democracy is forced to wager on a regular basis. Each individual or section of society has an audible voice, afforded to them by the privileges of democratic rule, and this remains intact regardless of the validity or potential consequence of their assertions. With the country in a seemingly permanent state of transition, this state of affairs is likely to worsen before it begins to foster the society it desires.
The paths of economic recovery are often traversed with understandable caution. Although 2011 is promising to continue the positive trends in employment and job creation displayed at the close of 2010, there is still and underlying sense of apprehension amongst consumers and households. With this is mind, it is logical that many citizens and family units within the US are still keen to make financial savings where possible and also secure the best possible value for their hard earned money.
It should not necessarily follow that those in a relationship would be best placed to make financial savings, but the course of union can boast many economic benefits. From the pooling of income and resources to a diverse combination of money making skill sets, a romantic coalition or family unit may well be able to strive towards a shared goal or aspiration. As well as the benefits of boasting a wider strength and range of skills, tax legislation and legal documentation is often designed to support the concept of marriage in the US.
The Financial Truth for Married Couples
There is much consternation about the financial benefits of marriage, and the marriage penalty that was first implemented in 1969 has caused many to believe that marriage or union is conducive only to financial loss. However, the fact remains that even before the government introduced legislation to tackle the effects of the marriage penalty in 2001, there are statistics to suggest that couples were still in a more favorable financial position than those of a single disposition.
Given the recent reports concerning proposed economic prosperity for 2011, it was logical that Barack Obama would cite the literature in his weekly address to the US. He identified the positive trends that have been established in job creation and reduced levels of unemployment, and suggested that these figures herald the beginning of a brighter year ahead for the country. His speech was an exercise in accentuating the positive, and an attempt to capitalize on the growing optimism in US society.
Although these reports suggested a level of economic growth that was underwhelming when compared with economists predictions at the close of 2010, there was still clear progression and improvement in the fiscal circumstances. Unemployment dropped from 9.8 to 9.4 percent throughout the last month of 2010, and although it has been suggested that this is due chiefly to the fact that many stopped looking for work during the festive period, the government is keen to assert that this is a portent of things to come.
The Wider Picture for the Growth of the US Economy
It is widely known that the condition of the US economy in 2012 could well be the deciding factor in Barack Obama’s prospects for a second term in office. It is all too apparent that a large and disproportionate amount of responsibility for the economy falls on the shoulders of the president and his representatives, which is especially concerning given the size and capitalist nature of the country. It is arguable that the responsibility for such a diverse economy should be more equally spread, with businesses and individuals being encouraged to take control of their own financial health and well being.
