Should he be a criminal?

In this Vice article, the writer tells us of a story that will make readers cringe. Omar Khadr, an unassuming young man from Canada, was arrested in Afghanistan nearly 11 years ago under the assumption he killed an American solider with a grenade. The arrest was never substantiated until Omar confessed after years in Guantanamo Bay under abhorrent conditions. The circumstances leading to this confession were shaky, at best. He was offered the chance to transfer his prison time to Canada if he confessed to the crime. One can see how terrible this situation is and why there are so many protests to release this man.

While I will not comment on whether or not he's guilty, you can see how this situation reeks of forced confession and false arrest. It's easy for soliders, in the heat of the moment and especially after their comrade just died, to try and bring justice to man who wronged them. This time, justice was not brought. It shows us the possibility that there are many more innocent people in Guantanamo Bay; they are being tortured to confess to crimes they did not commit. While I agree that terrorists who kill Americans should be locked away, situations like Omar's are ridiculous. If we want the world to side with us, especially in the countries that we occupy during conflicts, we need to conduct ourselves better overseas. If not, we only fuel the groups out to destroy us and turn people against us.

Link to article: http://www.vice.com/read/omar-khadr-war-criminal-child-soldier-or-neither

Republicans to withdraw from defunding

Based on this article and a few others, we can see the overwhelming sense that the Republicans are trying to defund Obamacare. This tactic attempts take funding from the Affordable Healthcare Act and gut some of the legislation. This writer, Julie Roginsky, is calling for the Republicans in congress to stop these actions. While I don't agree with the whole disagreeing with Obamacare, Roginsky is right. Republicans need to put their eggs in other baskets. Trying to fight the corner-stone of Obama's platform is just time wasted. 

The Republicans are still recovering from their loss last year and putting all their time into Mitt Romney (not a terrible candidate, but they could have done better). Now, the Democrats control a majority of the Senate which makes it even harder for the Republicans to have an effective presence in Congress. But spending their energy on the monolithic legislation that is Obamacare, is simply bad politics.  

Introduction

Hi, everyone.

I'm not here to sway people one direction or another; nor do I want to feed false information. As a disclaimer: if I appear to be providing information that cannot be backed up or opinions presented as fact, please call me out. There's nothing worse in politics today than lying or misuse of information, and I want to hold myself to that same standard. I am here to provide counter evidence for the media's elaborate paintings. They have a huge palate to choose from and create wonderful, exemplary portraits of politicians and legislation. The problem with these paintings is they are not realism, they are abstract. The biggest clue is the continual rant against "socialist" Obama. While he is certainly liberal and legislation like Obamacare are more socialist, he is comparable to policies of the preceding president: George W. Bush. Bush had very comparable military expenditures and introduced legislation like "No Child Left Behind" which instituted more government standards on schools. 

Now, I haven't done enough individual research (yet) to really make assertions about either president; my point is that we, as citizens, must become skeptical. Not only should we be skeptical to the institutions that oppose us, but also skeptical to our own identities. 
                 "Do not allow yourselves to be deceived: Great Minds are Skeptical[...]There                    is nothing more necessary than truth, and in comparison with it everything                        else has only secondary value.This absolute will to truth: what is it? Is it the                      will to not allow ourselves to be deceived? Is it the will not to deceive?[...]                      One does not want to be deceived, under the supposition that it is injurious,                    dangerous, or fatal to be deceived."
This quote by Friedrich Nietzsche represents what I am trying to convey. In a society where we regard truth so highly, we have become burdened by acceptance. We no longer challenge each other on the level of honesty. Instead, out challenging has become more ethological (e.g. "Who are YOU to make that claim?). The next time someone makes a point or claim, lets all vow to take some time researching that point. I'm not talking about spending countless hours on wikipedia or the library trying to find why they're wrong. Instead, try find why they're right. If you can't, then the claim is unsubstantiated (you can usually make educated guesses as to which claims are unsubstantiated), or you can prove their point and learn something.