Rachel Maddow- MSNBC The Rachel Maddow Show

In this video clip, Rachel Maddow of the Rachel Maddow Show discusses and analyzes racism in political parties.
After watching part of her show tonight, I would say Maddow leans to the left. I say this because many of her points support the left but I would like to point out that she appears to me as more moderate especially when compared to the likes of Larry King and Bill Maher. I like that she interjects her opinion but she doesn't act like she is "better" or smarter than the right like other left talking heads do. Like the O'Reilly Factor, Maddow's show definitely is an opinioned show that presents news stories. Overall, I didn't really like Maddow. Although I liked how she did not speak to the viewers in a condescending way, her show was just not interesting to me. I watched about 30 minutes of her program and it was more or less the same all the way through, she basically reported story after story with very little in studio guests or interviews. Maddow's show does not keep the viewer interested or engaged and in my opinion this is certainly a problem for the show when the host is not that attractive.

Bill O'Reilly- Fox News: O'Reilly Factor

In this clip, Bill O'Reilly is opening his show, as he always does with the "Talking Points" segment. The clip shows Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi at a union rally in Pittsburgh talking to steelworkers about ways to make life more fair in the United States. O'Reilly proposes that many of the things that Pelosi is saying are fundamental ideas of socialism.
Although O'Reilly claims that his show is independent and fair, I think that it definitly leans a little to the right. O'Reilly almost always sides witht the right on the various issues he discusses and it is rare when he says anything positive about the left. I think the show is certainly opinion based. The show reports on daily news stories but not in the manner of a typical evening news show (e.g. CBS evening news, NBC evening news, etc.) Almost everytime O'Reilly presents a news story, he will have a panel analyze the story and give their opinions, so it is an opinion based show. Overall, I like Bill O'Reilly. He is well spoken and tells it like it is. He doesn't sugar coat anything and he says what he wants to say. I think he does a great job in regards to keeping the viewer interested in the program. His show is setup in different segments so it keeps the audience entertained and engaged.

10 Most Awkward Political Gaffes

Dale Peterson 2

Dale Peterson

Jerry Brown attack ad

Meg Whitman - Tough Business

California Gubernatorial Race

On November 2, California will elect a governor to replace current incumbent Arnold Schwarzenegger (R). The winner will serve a four year term from 2011 to 2015. Currently, this is hotly contested race. Former Governor and Presidential candidate and “old-school” liberal Jerry Brown represents the Democrat ticket while EBAY billionaire Meg Whitman will battle for the Republicans. Major issues dictating the election include education, jobs, balancing the budget, illegal immigration and the environment. Both candidates pledge to create new jobs and to curb excessive spending. Meg Whitman takes a sharp stance on illegal immigration. Ms. Whitman believes in applying all of her resources to stop the influx of illegal immigrants from Mexico. On the other hand, Jerry Brown vows to look out for the environment. In his environment plan he promises to promote renewable and efficient energy, cut unhealthy air pollution, and protect California’s Coastline.

                Most recently, the campaign has gained national attention when word got out that one of Mr. Brown’s campaign strategists called Ms. Whitman a whore during a phone call. This controversy sparked an on-air debate between Whitman and Brown. In the debate, Brown apologized to Whitman but said the word was taken out context and it also is not as offensive to women as the n word is to African Americans. Ms. Whitman rejected this idea and said it was unacceptable for one of Brown’s strategists to use such language. The most recent poll numbers show that Brown has a slight lead over Whitman leading 50% to 44% but 4% of the vote was undecided. It looks like this contest will come right down to election day.

Fast Food Poll

My “universe” was the senior class (110 Students)

I interviewed 8 members of the senior class four from each gender. Also, these people were randomly selected at lunch, but some brought lunch and some bought lunch.

Hypothesis: The majority of the senior class likes fast food and eats it at least once per week.

1.       Do you like fast food?

A.      Yes- 50% (55 students)

B.      No- 12.5% (13 students)

C.      Indifferent- 37.5% (41 students)

2.       What is your favorite fast food chain?

A.      McDonald’s- 50% (55 students)

B.      Burger King- 0% (0 students)

C.      Subway- 25% (27 students)

D.      Other- 25% (27 students)

3.       Would you rather eat fast food or a home-cooked meal?

A.      Fast food- 12.5% (13 students)

B.      Home-cooked meal- 87.5% (96 students)

C.      Indifferent- 0% (0 students)

4.       How many times per week do you eat fast food?

A.      Zero- 12.5% (13 students)

B.      Once- 50% (55 students)

C.      2-3 times- 25% (27 students)

D.      4-6 times- 12.5% 13 students)

E.       Daily- 0% (0 students)

5.       How many times per month do you eat fast food?

A.      Zero- 12.5% (13 students)

B.      Once or twice- 25%(27 students)

C.      4-8 times- 50% (55 students)

D.      Every day- 0% (0 students)

E.       Other- 12.5% (13 students)

Do you think there should be regulations restricting a person’s fast food consumption?

A.      Yes- 12.5% (13 students)

B.      No- 75% (82 students)

C.      Indifferent- 12.5 % (13 students)

Analysis: I think that my poll did somewhat prove my hypothesis. According to the poll, half the senior class likes fast food. Although this is not a majority it is as close as possible to a majority. Also, the poll shows that 87.5 % of the senior class eats fast food at least once per week. This is an overwhelming majority. I think my poll is accurate for the most part, but some of the questions and answers could have been worded better which I believe would have changed the results. I tried to make my sampling random but I also wanted both genders to be equally represented. I think the sampling size (7.2 % of class) was adequate. I think my results could have been skewed because often times when I was polling someone they would see my tally sheet and see what other people had voted. Due to this I think some people who would have voted for a less popular choice were more inclined to vote like everyone else did.

Question 3

On question 3 I would vote YES, to reduce the state sales tax to 3%. At first glance, I initially thought this was a great idea and decided I would definitely vote yes. After I thought about it more I began to realize if this tax was reduced to 3% then the state legislature would most likely raise the income tax. I personally, would rather see a higher sales tax than income tax because sales tax taxes everyone the same. After thinking it over awhile I decided that I would still vote yes because I still believe in lower taxes no matter what the tax is.

                While reading about Charlie Baker’s proposals if he were to be elected governor I found that he opposes lowering the tax to 3% but is in favor of lowering it to 5% and lowering the state income tax to 5%. I think this is a better option and a better compromise. However, I don’t believe this would pass through the state legislature so, this did not change my decision to vote yes on question 3.

                I would vote yes for a variety of reasons. Mainly, rolling back this tax to 3% would promote business throughout the state especially near the New Hampshire border, where retailers would now be more competitive with their NH counterparts. It would also increase sales on the southern border because we would now be attracting shoppers from NY, Conn., and RI. Rhode Island shoppers spending money it Massachusetts would likely increase the most because they face a 7% sales tax. According to the Alliance to Roll Back Taxes, rolling back to 3% would produce 32,929 productive and sustainable jobs. Creating jobs that are productive and sustainable is never a bad thing. This rollback would also give back roughly $700 dollars to each taxpayer in the Commonwealth. This extra money put back into the people’s pockets would most likely be spent on Massachusetts businesses which would furthermore strengthen the state’s economy. Lastly, the tax cut would reduce government spending by 5% and would force the state government to spend more wisely and responsible. This would reduce government waste, bureaucracy, and full pensions for government workers at age 54. In my opinion, voting YES on question 3 is the best option we have right now.  

40b is a Scam

With regards to Initiative #2 I would vote YES which would repeal the state law allowing the issuance of a single comprehensive permit to build housing that includes low-or moderate income units. I would vote yes on this proposal for a variety of reasons. One reason I agree with the initiative is because it would force developers to go through the proper channels to receive the appropriate permits to build. Often times these houses are being build on land that would otherwise not be built on because of zoning laws. These developers are building without any regard to local regulations or the environment. Another reason I am for this proposal is because this law is enabling developers to get rich while not actually solving Massachusetts housing problem. Most of the time developers will apply for 40b housing, but only build a few units as 40b and the rest as regular units. In these cases the developers are making a huge profit off of the normal units but still only need the one permit to build because some of the units are 40b. An interesting statistic that I found from the 2009 Massachusetts Housing Report Card is that in the last seven years 40b projects have produced more total units that the previous 37 years (since 40b went into effect) combined, but have produced less affordable units when compared to other programs. Massachusetts Inspector General Gregory Sullivan has called the 40b law a “pig fest” for developers and has also said it “represents one of the biggest business abuses in state history”. In conclusion I would vote yes to end this misuse of taxpayer’s money that is making the developers rich while Massachusetts still ranks 49^th out of 52^nd (this includes District of Columbia and Guam) when it comes to affordable housing.

Rep. Brad Hill - Discussing his oppositon to the recent alcohol tax.

YES on 1; Repeal the Alcohol Tax

               If I were eligible to vote on November 2, I would vote yes on question 1. A yes vote would repeal the 6.25 % alcohol tax that was implemented in the Commonwealth just over a year ago. Before the bill was signed into law there was no sales tax on alcohol, although there was an excise tax. My main justification for voting yes on this initiative is because I believe it would stimulate business in liquor and convenience stores especially those abutting the New Hampshire border. New Hampshire, “land of the free”, does not have a sales tax on any goods. According to Massachusetts State Representative and Minority Whip Brad Hill of Ipswich, businesses in his district have experienced between a 20%-40% decline in sales since the tax was implemented. This is not a statistic that anyone wants to see when we are trying to build the economy back up. What is remarkable about this is that Rep. Hill does not represent any border towns which mean the decline in business for border stores is even greater. Another point I would like to bring up is that alcohol in the Commonwealth is already taxed. There is a “hidden” excise tax put on alcohol in this state before it even reaches the shelves. I believe that the sales tax on alcohol is an unfair double tax and should definitely be repealed.

                 Opponents of this initiative would argue that repealing the sales tax on alcohol would cause an increase in alcohol abuse in the state. I don’t believe this will happen. Before we had this special tax on alcohol Massachusetts did not have any serious alcohol abuse problem so there is no reason to believe that this would happen if the tax was repealed. And for those citizens of Massachusetts who do have alcohol abuse problems, I believe that they will continue to buy the alcohol no matter how high the tax is, so repealing it would not be an issue. Other opponents are fearful of a decline in aid for schools, towns, fire departments, police departments, etc. My opinion is that these public necessities will always be funded and that a decrease in state revenue would force the state legislature to be more fiscally responsible. For example, instead of spending $3.5 million on the Pioneer Valley bike paths (those must be really nice bike paths) like the state did in 2008 they would take that money as well as monies usually allocated for other wasteful earmarks and put it back into the schools and towns.

                In conclusion, Massachusetts should definitely vote YES on Question 1. If you believe in thriving small businesses and a booming economy you should most certainly vote YES on Question 1.

A Lexus in Every Garage

                A Lexus in Every Garage by George F Will of the Washington Post was an intriguing article. In the article Will analyzes the upper class in the United States. His main point in simple words is that rich people in America are running out of things to spend their wealth on.

                One fact that Will cites in the article that I thought was very interesting was that America’s richest 1 percent of households own more than half of the nation’s stocks and control more wealth (16 trillion) than the bottom 90 percent. This column was written back in 2007 when we had increased oil prices and Will explains how when the richest 20 percent account for 60 percent of the consumption in the United States gas prices have very little effect on how much gas someone buys.

                Later, Will introduced positional goods. According to Will, positional goods are enjoyments such as “elite education” or “exclusive” vacations or properties as well as certain clothes, jewelry, and cars. Will explained that now there is so much money “sloshing” around that almost anyone can buy these goods. Because so many of these people can afford these so called positional goods the positional value of the good is significantly decreased. For example, 94.3 % of Japanese women in their 20s own a Louis Vuitton item. Obviously since such a large percentage of Japanese women own one of these items it is not as luxurious to own of these items and therefore the positional value goes down.

                In closing, Will says that philanthropy may be the new thing to do among the wealthy. He explains that because of the increased consumption of “positional goods” is resulting in declining enjoyment of vast wealth, then giving the wealth away may be the best “revenge”.

 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/10/AR2007101002116.html

Trucker

1.       In my opinion the trucker will vote Republican. I say this because I get sense that the trucker likes limited rules and regulations. Basically, he doesn’t want someone else telling him what he can do. He runs his own business and he wants to be the one who makes the rules not the government. Secondly, this trucker has worked hard his whole life to achieve his idea of the American Dream. In his view he has worked extremely hard to achieve his success, so I infer that he would lean closer to the “liberty” side than to the “equality” side. Lastly, he is a Texan, so that explains a lot right there.

2.       As stated by Michele Lamont in her book The Dignity of Working Men, she says that men like the trucker who can “look out for themselves” often focus more on social and moral issues than economic issues. So, social and moral factors will be the most decisive in how he votes.

3.       Different people measure success in different ways. For example, an extremely poor person may think as themselves as successful if they one day own their own home but a wealthier person may measure success by being the CEO of a fortune 500 company. Other people do not just measure success by money or wealth. These other people sometimes measure success by happiness. Similar, to people who measure success by wealth some people measure success by social status.