Syrian Refugee Update

As you may have read in my early blog post of the Syrian Refugee crisis,  there has been hundreds of thousands of Syrians fleeing their country due to civil wars, corrupt government and terrorism and other foreign countries have opened their countries to welcome tens of thousands of refugees.

However, a few months ago the United States was receiving much criticism for not being as welcoming and opening up our country to nearly as many refugees and having an extensive screening process for anyone we do let in. Why was this being done? To prevent the possibility of basically welcoming terrorists into this country that could portray himself or herself as a refugee and then basically be welcomed into our country. The media was harsh on the government and their decision to be selective and take extra caution even though it was to ensure the safety of Americans.

In the wake of recent events surrounding the terroristic attack in France killing over 100 people and leaving many more wounded, ISIS claimed responsibility for this terroristic attack and it was found that one terrorist got into certain countries by claiming to be a Syrian refugee. I think this was an eye opening finding for not only American but countries all over the world who have been generous in allowing hundreds of thousands of refugees into their countries. Since then, many state governors have come out publically saying that their state will not accept any refugees, Georgia is among those states. Michigan and Alabama were the first to refuse any refugees and many states have followed suit. Now, the acceptance of Syrian refugees will be even more limited and strict because of recent events.

Now, it is not fair to assume every Syrian refugee is a terrorist but there is a great risk that comes with inviting many foreigners to seek shelter in our country. What do you think bloggers, is it a good or a bad thing for these states to refuse any acceptance of Syrian refugees?

Read more about it here: http://abcnews.go.com/US/states-refuse-accept-syrian-refugees-wake/story?id=35231800

People are Going "Crazy" Over This Sweater

Trending in the news media and social media recently are customers attacking Target for selling a sweater that they claim in poking fun of mental disorders. The Christmas themed sweatshirt has OCD standing for Obsessive Christmas Disorder and people are outraged.

I think it can be collectively agreed upon that mental illnesses are serious and should not be made light of. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the country that suffer from a mental illness or has a close loved one that suffers from mental illness. Mental illnesses are truly a life altering disorder that can affect how someone lives their daily lives and even completing simple, every day tasks.

The fact that people are upset about this sweatshirt is not surprising to me, especially in today’s world where it is hard to do or say anything without offending someone. What surprises me is that this shirt is offensive but no one makes a big deal of other shirts that commonly stem from mental illnesses.

There is a shirt that says “ My Name is [insert your name] and I am a wine addict”. Clearly this is making light of alcoholism, a serious illness that effects many people and families in this country and has even resulted in taking the lives of people. No one targeted this shirt for making fun of alcoholism; reviews even say how “cute” and “relatable” this shirt is.

Is it okay to make light of mental illnesses, alcoholism and addiction? Absolutely not. Obviously that is not the intentions of the shirts being sold and no one was meant to be hurt or insulted but I think the double standard in today’s world is just growing bigger. How can it be such a huge deal for one store to sell a shirt, but other shirts that say “addicted to pizza” “Coffee addict” and such are acceptable and being sold like crazy.

What do you think bloggers? Is the double standard of the media getting out of hand?

Ben Carson Touching on Political Experience

Politicians are known for dodging important questions and giving vague answers when confronted about certain situations. You will hardly hear “straightforward” be a characteristic used to describe a politician (except Trump maybe). This was made clear during the most recent Republican debate when the candidates were asked about their biggest weakness. Many candidates turned it into talking about their strengths, saying they didn’t have a weakness or completely ignored the question altogether and talked about some of their ideas and policies they would have as the future President of the United States. Now, I get it… these debates are crucial and they want to appeal to the public and will do whatever they feel is best to be able to accomplish that.

However, in a way this creates a gap between the candidate and the people. It makes them seem unrelatable in a way because they will portray themselves as above having a weakness. It is hard for the American people to fully relate to someone who claims to have no weakness and when they avoid the question it brings up a hint of suspicion. Earlier this week, Republican candidate Ben Carson bridged that gap and answered the question many people, no matter what political affiliation they have, have been asking. ‘How can you run for President with no political experience?’

People have been surprised how the two Republican front runners are those who have no political experience, and then there is Carly Fiorina not too far behind them who also has no political experience. News media, journalists, social media and Americans have all questioned this and presented this as a weakness to the candidates that they have only indirectly touched on…until recently.

Ben Carson made a Facebook post earlier this week got that a CRAZY amount of attention. Hundreds of thousands of comments, likes and shares…people loved what Ben Carson had to say in retaliation to the remarks about him not having any political experience. Also, he did it in a way that respectful and not centered around bashing other politicians. It would have been easy for him to say, “Well look at Obama and all his mistakes. He had experience and still increased our debt and etc etc.” but Ben Carson didn’t do that. He focused on himself and explained why not having political experience didn’t make him a bad candidate, just a unique one. The fact that he took his weakness and tackled it head one while also not disrespecting anyone else made him widely known and praised for this post. He also used history to his advantage by saying this in his post:

“Every signer of the Declaration of Independence had no federal elected office experience. What they had was a deep belief that freedom is a gift from God. They had a determination to rise up against a tyrannical King. They were willing to risk all they had, even their lives, to be free. Today we find ourselves with an entire class of politicians. No one in Philadelphia, during that summer our nation was born, dreamed that service was a career with a pension”

Doesn’t matter what your political party is, it is hard to argue with that statement above. What do you think bloggers, Could we have a successful President with no political experience? Is this really a good or bad thing?

Read Ben Carson’s entire Facebook post here: https://www.facebook.com/realbencarson/posts/549786315187839