Monday #14 Keystone pipeline #3

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/opinion/nocera-the-poisoned-politics-of-keystone-xl.html
In this article, Joe Nocera shows some of the deeper problems with the Keystone pipeline. He starts out by telling that Canada has switched to trying to send the oil over to China, not America. He also says that Obama really had no choice but to reject the pipeline, whether he had wanted to or not, because approving it would make him lose the support of environmentalists, who make up a large part of his core support. He also says that knowing this would happen, rejecting it put the republicans at a position of greater power because they could condemn his act saying it kept out much needed jobs. He finally said that this has freed up Canada to do more business with others, not just with America.

Monday #13 Keystone pipeline #2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-keystone-pipeline-rejection-is-hard-to-accept/2012/01/18/gIQAf9UG9P_story.html
In "Obama's Keystone pipeline rejection is hard to accept", the editorial board that wrote that Obama's rejection of the idea goes against his Job's Council. They also said that it doesn't help fight global warming at all, and instead just makes the oil most likely to go to China in tankers, causing the possibility of an oil spill. Thirdly, one of the major arguments of it was that it could damage a vulnerable area, but the Canadian Government agreed to possibly change the plans to go around that are. Finally, they said there were easier, cheaper, and more effective ways to try to wean the country off of gasoline usage than stopping this pipeline, such as a higher gasoline tax. This is relevant to my life because this will probably set the stage of the next election, which would decide which direction the country goes in.

Monday #12 Keystone pipeline #1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rejecting-the-keystone-pipeline-is-an-act-of-insanity/2012/01/19/gIQAowG6AQ_story.html
In this article, Robert J. Samuelson claimed that rejecting the plan for the pipeline hurts the country. For one thing, the environmental protection that was gained by rejecting the pipeline would be minimal, as it wouldn't stop Canada searching for more oil. It also hurts the relationship between the U.S. and Canada, because both countries could be helped by this. The pipeline also would have created a large amount of jobs for people in the U.S., and could have preserved other jobs in refining oil, which is something the U.S. needs. Finally, it could possibly give the U.S. a possibility to export some oil products, which would also help the economy. Samuelson also claimed that this was done more to try to help Obama get reelected than in the countries support. If these are true, it affects my life because the rejection of this plan may have hurt the economy even more, which is something everyone is living under.

Monday #11- Steve Huntley columnist #4- Synthesis

Based on the columns by Steve Huntley that I've read, he commentates on politics from a conservative viewpoint. Every one of his articles either looks favorably on one of the candidates for the Republican Parties nomination, or criticizes one of Obama's actions. From what I've read, he is very against Obama's policies, even titling one of his columns "Obama's Political Goals Bad for Us All". Despite being against Obama's policies, he isn't antagonistic, and condemned the booing of Michelle Obama at a sporting event in Florida. His conservative viewpoint affects his articles, as they are naturally biased towards conservatives, focusing mostly on Republican successes, and Obama's failures. He doesn't just cover the political campaigns, but also focuses on some important events that are happening throughout the world.

Monday #9- Steve Huntley columnist #3

In this article, Steve Huntley claims that Obama's actions don't back up his speeches. He claims that Obama is being hypocritical when he talks about the need for action of creating new jobs, yet is delaying large construction projects that would generate jobs, such as the Keystone pipeline. He also thinks that there needs to be a fundamental reform in Washington in taxes and closing loopholes to restrict lobbyists. Finally, he thinks that Obama's pushing temporary fixes that aren't effective.

Monday #9- Steve Huntley columnist #2

In "Obama's political goals bad for us all", Steve Huntley expresses his opinion that Obama has been trying to do the wrong things and isn't helping the country. He believes that Obama hasn't been doing what the voters wanted him to do, and instead of promoting bipartisanship, has been widening the gap between Democrats and Republicans. He conveys this by providing a fairly one-sided approach to Obama's policies and didn't show both the good and the bad. Also, he used terminology such as "spread the wealth around" and "income redistributive model of European welfare states" which would cast an unfavorable light on the Obama administration.

Monday #8- Steve Huntley columnist #1

Steve Huntley of the Chicago Sun-Times, writes in this column about how he agrees with Newt Gingrich's policies on Iran. He believes that if it comes down to it, America should attack Iran to keep it from developing Nuclear weapons. He also acknowledges that if it happens, it wouldn't be a singular quick attack, but a prolonged series of attacks. Iran has a more developed military and better defended Nuclear plants than Syria or Iraq who had their nuclear programs derailed by Israeli attacks. He also thinks there could be other ways to derail their program without too much violence by restricting their oil imports.