United States



Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has donated $2.2 million to Chicago’s campaign against fire arms. This has been only one example of politicians going against the National Rifle Association (NRA) since the Sandy Hook incident and even going as far back to the Gabby Giffords incident over 1 year ago. For many Liberals, this has given them a new reason to respect Independent Bloomberg.

Using his super PAC, Bloomberg has been using it to influence the course of political elections using the topics of gun violence and gay marriage. Before this donation, the super PAC had spent $2.1 million on the Democratic Primary. The 2.2 million will surely help the city of Chicago with their horrible gun violence. In fact, earlier this year, President Obama gave a speech in Chicago addressing the gun violence issue. Sadly, just hours after his speech, an 18-year-old attendee lost her life in a fatal shooting.

This shooting is putting even more pressure on the NRA, which has defended the Newtown shooting in saying, “the only thing to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” This has been a controversial statement. With what Bloomberg donated, it is shown that he does not agree. Many New Yorkers don’t. New York City is a fairly liberal city, so it is very understandable why Bloomberg did this, even though he’s an Independent.

Even with politicians starting to back stronger gun laws, guns will not go away. This issue will, without a doubt, be a hot topic for many years to come.

Photo Credit: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2013/02/02/Bloomberg-Anti-Gun-Ad-Super-Bowl



If you don’t remember, former Congressman Anthony Weiner is that guy who, in 2011, tweeted obscene photos of himself to multiple women. At first he denied having ever sent the photos, claiming that his account had been hacked. However, he eventually admitted to the scandal, apologized, and resigned from Congress. Despite his profound apology, the fact that he attempted to lie his way out of a scandal lost him the trust of myriad voters and supporters.

Now, in May of 2013, Weiner has announced his plan to run for New York City mayor. The biggest questions on everyone’s minds are, “does he deserve a second chance?” “After two years can all just be forgiven?” Before the twitter extravaganza, Weiner was known as a hardworking, instinctive politician who passionately supported Democratic viewpoints. “Anybody who underestimates Anthony Weiner’s ambition is a fool. And anybody who underestimates his ability as a candidate is a fool” says retired Hunter College professor Kenneth Sherrill. Determined to make a comeback, Weiner has begun tirelessly campaigning around the city to win back the hearts of his former supporters. Regardless of his personal life, one must admit that he has already put together a legitimate game plan primarily intending to help out New York City’s middle class. His suggestions range from providing every public school student with a Kindle to expanding the city’s new law on paid sick leave to treating carriage horses more humanely.

It’s hard to determine how far Weiner will go in the mayoral election (it’s generally predicted that he’ll make it to at least the second round) and whether or not citizens will ever take him seriously. Although the New York Times recently published an article entitled “Weiner Hits Campaign Trail in Circuslike Outing,” students protested outside of his apartment building denouncing his proposal to easily suspend disruptive public school students, and in an NBC poll half of the people surveyed said they wouldn’t even consider him, there are an astonishing amount of people eager to have Weiner represent them once again. The same survey showed that more and more Democrats have a favorable impression of him, and many of his supporters claim that his political career and his personal life are mutually exclusive and should continue to stay that way.

In my opinion, I believe that one’s personal life and one’s political career are inevitably intertwined, and it’s ignorant to believe otherwise. I’m still unsure of whether or not I trust Anthony Weiner, and if I’d condone his election as New York City Mayor. His twitter scandal- and his decision to lie during the scandal- will always remain in the back of my mind. I’ll leave you with a quote from Weiner himself. He stated, “Look, I made some big mistakes. And I know I’ve let a lot of people down. But I’ve also learned some tough lessons. I’m running for mayor because I’ve been fighting for the middle class and those struggling to make it my entire life. And I hope I get a second chance to work for you.” Would you give Weiner a second chance?


  1. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/22/former-congressman-anthony-weiner-announces-bid-for-nyc-mayor/
  2. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/23/anthony-weiner-new-york-mayor-campaign-scandal/2354263/
  3. http://www.npr.org/2013/05/22/185948424/anthony-weiner-launches-bid-to-become-nyc-mayor
  4. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/nyregion/anthony-weiner-hits-campaign-trail-in-circuslike-outing.html
  5. http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-04-11/racy-twitter-pics-arent-anthony-weiners-only-problem




On Monday February 4th, the news, social media sites, and school hallways were abuzz with talk of one thing, and one thing only- Beyoncé’s halftime performance at the Super Bowl. Teenagers were particularly enamored with the star’s performance. Statuses, profile pictures and cover photos were dedicated in her honor and even I admit to shouting, “She is fierce,” while my friends nodded in agreement. However, members of older generations were not nearly as taken with Beyoncé’s show as we teens. After every person in my history class vehemently praised her, my teacher shrugged and asked us what the big deal was- wasn’t she just grinding on stage? This got me thinking- during her performance, when she wasn’t singing, Beyoncé did spend the majority of her time grinding. Yet somehow, her provocative dance moves made her seem even more confident and strong. I grudgingly admitted to myself that Beyoncé’s strength and “fierceness” stemmed from her using her sexuality for power. But something about this admission didn’t feel right- she didn’t have the same air of someone trying pathetically hard, like Kim Kardashian. Her dance moves at the halftime show felt more like a joyful celebration of her physique rather than an insecure use of her body to gain respect. Therefore, assuming that a girl is confident and comfortable with herself, is it wrong for her to use her sexuality for power?

The way I see it, today in our society a woman has to choose one of two routes if she intends to become powerful: she can use her body to work her way up or she can become the intimidating, masculine, generally disliked “ball-buster.” A perfect example of these two scenarios is the conflict between Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin during the 2008 presidential election. The Saturday Night Live skit featuring Tina Fey as Sarah Palin and Amy Poehler as Hillary Clinton satirized the boxes that women in politics are put into and the absurd labels they are forced to adopt. Throughout the skit Fey winks, giggles and accentuates her stupidity while Poehler, with the look of someone crazed with sleep deprivation, makes snide, ruthless comments about how she wants to be president.

Like any young person I aspire to be successful and influential; however, the available methods of obtaining these goals as a female don’t appeal to me. It’s upsetting to think that I might be deterred from joining the male-dominated corporate world in fear that one of these labels will be forced on me too. Although these values and stereotypes have been socially constructed, the chances of women ever being able to actively change them are slim. Therefore, kudos to Beyoncé for coming off confident and powerful- it’s the best she could do to demonstrate her happiness in a society quick to demean and discriminate against women.
Image from: http://bleacherreport.com


One response to “United States

  1. I strongly agree with the Mayor Bloomberg article. I do believe that there is too much gun-violence currently in the U.S especially Chicago, and the NRA refuses to understand that. This statement”the only thing to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” suggests that though guns are used violently, they are required to stop the bad people who pose a threat. I disagree, no guns will stop bad people from posing a threat. Many liberal states see this view on gun control an such but the more conservative states disagree. I think this topic will be with us for along time. While the NRA decides whether or not to keep guns, people are dying everyday due to gun-violence. Guns must be stopped.

What Do You Think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s