President Obama likes his golf. According to CNN, the president has played golf more times than former President Bush in his entire 8 years in office. That's pathetic.
The position of presidency is not one of mere celebrity status and leisure, President Obama. Please stop playing golf! People still need jobs. There is a massive oil spill off the southern coast. North Korea wants to duke it out with South Korea (potentially). Why are you playing your 18 holes at Martha's Vineyard, yet again? You are not made of money. You are using taxpayer's money to travel back and forth and waste hundreds of minutes playing a round, two rounds, three rounds of golf.
One interesting note is that President Obama likes to take his time when he plays. President Bush was noted to be quite quick in his golf games, but oh no - not Barack Obama. He takes his time sizing up the distance, finding lost balls, licking his finger and putting it to the wind to see what direction it's blowing, etc. I was kidding about the last one. It's interesting when the New York Times, not exactly the most conservative paper around, reports on Obama's love of golf. They may not mean to put him in a bad light, but it does. Oh yes. It does indeed.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Same Treatment
It's interesting to see that the American people always seem to do the same thing in a time of crisis. Point fingers at whoever is in charge.
This time, it's not President Bush who takes the heat, but President Obama. I'm referring to the Gulf oil spill. It's been going on for over a month now, and like I said before, the most we've done is put a cement block around it. President Obama claims he is open to suggestions and ideas, but he hasn't acted on any. Many agree that the United States has lost its opportunity to be the hero and save the day, but we still ought to try our best to clean up this huge mess. Literally.
This oil spill is affecting ecosystems, coastlines, fishing industries, oil prices, etc. You would think that being as advanced technologically as the world is - especially the United States - that we would have some kind of emergency back up plan to deal with potential disasters such as this. And yet. Here we are.
So, President Obama, I'm not sure I feel any sympathy for you for all the pointed fingers. President Bush had to deal with that for 8 years. Now it's your turn. Good luck with that, sir.
This time, it's not President Bush who takes the heat, but President Obama. I'm referring to the Gulf oil spill. It's been going on for over a month now, and like I said before, the most we've done is put a cement block around it. President Obama claims he is open to suggestions and ideas, but he hasn't acted on any. Many agree that the United States has lost its opportunity to be the hero and save the day, but we still ought to try our best to clean up this huge mess. Literally.
This oil spill is affecting ecosystems, coastlines, fishing industries, oil prices, etc. You would think that being as advanced technologically as the world is - especially the United States - that we would have some kind of emergency back up plan to deal with potential disasters such as this. And yet. Here we are.
So, President Obama, I'm not sure I feel any sympathy for you for all the pointed fingers. President Bush had to deal with that for 8 years. Now it's your turn. Good luck with that, sir.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Really Now
When I read about people stealing things, cheating on things, etc. I shake my head in disappointment, "tut tut" a little, and move on. But when I read articles about people stealing wheelchairs of a young, disabled child, I have to say - I get a little irked.
Pardon my language, but what kind of eejit would do something as petty as steal an 8-year-old child's wheelchair when that child is disabled and needs the oxygen tank attached to the wheelchair and all the other special attributes that was specifically designed for this child on this wheelchair. Why. Why?
Why are there people in the world who do such lame things? It's just like my questions I pose to you, reader, about issues like child molestation, child rape, murder, etc. I know I'll never have substantial answers to these questions but I still wonder.
Which gets me thinking about my school. This year, there have been a number of incidences of what one may call "immoral" actions - theft, vandalism. I must say, my school has never had an issue like this in the past 5 years I have been here, but suddenly students think it's amusing to pull pranks like this. I don't really find these pranks to be pranks - who's laughing? It frustrates me that justice isn't always served to those who have done the crime, but what can we do? Why do some demonstrate integrity and common courtesy, while others seem to be oblivious to it?
What is the world coming to...
Click HERE for more information on the wheelchair article.
Pardon my language, but what kind of eejit would do something as petty as steal an 8-year-old child's wheelchair when that child is disabled and needs the oxygen tank attached to the wheelchair and all the other special attributes that was specifically designed for this child on this wheelchair. Why. Why?
Why are there people in the world who do such lame things? It's just like my questions I pose to you, reader, about issues like child molestation, child rape, murder, etc. I know I'll never have substantial answers to these questions but I still wonder.
Which gets me thinking about my school. This year, there have been a number of incidences of what one may call "immoral" actions - theft, vandalism. I must say, my school has never had an issue like this in the past 5 years I have been here, but suddenly students think it's amusing to pull pranks like this. I don't really find these pranks to be pranks - who's laughing? It frustrates me that justice isn't always served to those who have done the crime, but what can we do? Why do some demonstrate integrity and common courtesy, while others seem to be oblivious to it?
What is the world coming to...
Click HERE for more information on the wheelchair article.
New and Fresh
In the 21st century, things such as iPads, iPhones, iPods, laptops, webcams, and vaccinations are part of what most people have come to recognize as the "norm".
In policy debate at the high school level, this year's past topic was: "The United States federal government should substantially increase social services for persons living in poverty in the United States." One of the "impacts" that was discussed during the debate was the fear of nanotechnology and bioterrorism. Those are always hot topics in policy debate, no matter what the resolution is. Though these topics and debates are essentially theoretical and purely for the benefit of education and experience, one of the greatest impacts most often discussed, in my opinion, is the outcome of a "nuclear war".
There are several articles published right now online about the new discovery of being able to control an organism with artificial genome (or DNA). To inject a synthetic DNA into a foreign organism and still have the organism function is astounding to me; I suppose I am in awe. And yet, I'm worried. These new creations and discoveries always bring about more arguments over ethics vs. science, along with worries about the future usage of these discoveries if placed in the wrong hands. How does anyone know if something is beneficial or not to human kind? At this point, I think that all discoveries, no matter how "morally sound" the initial motive might be, can be abused in some way. This new ability sparks interest because the potential use of this experiment could bring a revolution of weaponry, energy, or medicine.
How are we ever supposed to know when science should stop pushing the boundaries or limits of knowledge? Are there any limits? There are so many pieces of literature that always caution those who seek to reach too far beyond what is safe, and the outcome is death or some other dire consequence. But do these words of wisdom from literature stand true?
Click HERE for more information about the artificial genome.
In policy debate at the high school level, this year's past topic was: "The United States federal government should substantially increase social services for persons living in poverty in the United States." One of the "impacts" that was discussed during the debate was the fear of nanotechnology and bioterrorism. Those are always hot topics in policy debate, no matter what the resolution is. Though these topics and debates are essentially theoretical and purely for the benefit of education and experience, one of the greatest impacts most often discussed, in my opinion, is the outcome of a "nuclear war".
There are several articles published right now online about the new discovery of being able to control an organism with artificial genome (or DNA). To inject a synthetic DNA into a foreign organism and still have the organism function is astounding to me; I suppose I am in awe. And yet, I'm worried. These new creations and discoveries always bring about more arguments over ethics vs. science, along with worries about the future usage of these discoveries if placed in the wrong hands. How does anyone know if something is beneficial or not to human kind? At this point, I think that all discoveries, no matter how "morally sound" the initial motive might be, can be abused in some way. This new ability sparks interest because the potential use of this experiment could bring a revolution of weaponry, energy, or medicine.
How are we ever supposed to know when science should stop pushing the boundaries or limits of knowledge? Are there any limits? There are so many pieces of literature that always caution those who seek to reach too far beyond what is safe, and the outcome is death or some other dire consequence. But do these words of wisdom from literature stand true?
Click HERE for more information about the artificial genome.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Think Twice
Now that I think about it, I don't like SB 1070, the law that gives police the right to stop anybody they suspect as an illegal immigrant. Earlier last week, I didn't support or oppose it but I believed that the police were only doing their best to protect the laws of this country. But now that I've thought about it some more, read more on the law, listened to more opinions about the law, I think that it's unfair.
It legitimizes racial profiling and actually forces federal officers to engage in racial profiling. So how much really is this law helping people? I'm not so sure anymore.
Another interesting topic is Meg Whitman! I'm helping out in her campaign for Governor of California, and my 3 hours of participation thus far has been quite interesting.
The polls show that recently, Whitman and Poizner's race for the Republican nomination is getting tighter and tighter! Right now, I'm not so sure what their policies are but I'll be sure to give you my opinion tomorrow night, so keep your eyes out!
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Asian-Pacific Heritage Month
So. It's Asian-Pacific Heritage Month.
It's kind of like Black History Month...right?
So why don't I see Disney movies or television shows about it on Disney Channel? For Black History month, there was That's So Raven specials, The Proud Family specials, movies such as The Color of Friendship and more! So, where's all the Asian love? Yeah, not so much. Instead there's a very stereotypical Asian Disney Original movie from a couple years back called Wendy Wu: Homecoming Warrior. Now all little kids will think, "Oh, Chinese people! Asian people! They do ninja moves!!". Yeah, not so much kids.
I just find it a bit irritating that Asian-Pacific Heritage Month isn't as big of a deal as something such as Black History Month. Asians have worked and struggled significantly here in the United States, and it's only right to commemorate this culture, too, right? Or maybe I'm just being bias because I AM Asian. Nevertheless, my point stands. I want to see more YELLOW FEVER! (<--- Joke).
It's kind of like Black History Month...right?
So why don't I see Disney movies or television shows about it on Disney Channel? For Black History month, there was That's So Raven specials, The Proud Family specials, movies such as The Color of Friendship and more! So, where's all the Asian love? Yeah, not so much. Instead there's a very stereotypical Asian Disney Original movie from a couple years back called Wendy Wu: Homecoming Warrior. Now all little kids will think, "Oh, Chinese people! Asian people! They do ninja moves!!". Yeah, not so much kids.
I just find it a bit irritating that Asian-Pacific Heritage Month isn't as big of a deal as something such as Black History Month. Asians have worked and struggled significantly here in the United States, and it's only right to commemorate this culture, too, right? Or maybe I'm just being bias because I AM Asian. Nevertheless, my point stands. I want to see more YELLOW FEVER! (<--- Joke).
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
I Choose You! [Pikachu]
President Obama has nominated his second Justice to the Supreme Court - Elena Kagan. After watching her press conferences and Wikipedia-ing her credentials, I must admit that her experience is quite impressive: Dean of Harvard Law School, clerk under Justice Thurgood Marshall, teaching law at the University of Chicago, etc.
But the debate sparks over her sexual orientation - the first openly gay Supreme Court Justice?
No doubt this will impact decisions for her Confirmation. But, that gets me thinking. Is President Obama nominating such unique and diverse Justices for the sake of nominating people who not only have excellent experience but also are "the first ______ Justice"? Such as the first female Hispanic woman or the first openly homosexual Justice? I can't help but notice that President Obama is quite big on his interpretation of "change." Even my Obama-supporting peers can agree that it's quite odd that President Obama always happens to select the most diverse people to serve the United States. Not that there's anything wrong with that - but I do hope that these kinds of attributes aren't what make these candidates special. Instead, I wish that President Obama would select these nominees solely on the basis of academia and judicial experience; but I'm not a utopian thinker, I know the real facts.
It's quite apparent to me that President Obama seems to have a goal to leave behind a striking legacy, one of "hope" and "change". Perhaps he wants to be remembered throughout history like Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, or Reagan, and not be forgotten. But I really don't know what lines he will cross to be "remembered"...do you?
