Discrimination by big name condom manufacturers??
Whenever I go to the store, I spend a lot of time in the condom aisle, just as I'm sure all of you do. During the course of these excursions, I have come to realize a few things. First, I was a bit taken aback by the sheer variety of choices available, from extra large to extra thin, to condoms with ribs or bumps, to condoms that appeared to be literally charged with orgasms. There were even condoms designated as "his&hers" to improve the experience of both sexes, an idea I'm sure is completely novel and unprecedented (everybody knows men don't enjoy sex). However, there were relatively few condoms of the non latex variety, and the ones that do exist are  boring and uninspired (none were charged with orgasms, that's for sure). Trojan, the largest condom manufacturer in the US, produces 8 times as many varieties of latex condoms as polyurethane ones. As many as 8.2% of people in the US may have a latex sensitivity issue, and this population segment is hugely underrepresented in the market, especially in an economic climate where you can find non-gluten just about anything despite the fact that as few as 3% of the population actually has a gluten intolerance. Condom companies need to really punch a hole in this demographic and stop discriminating against the 8%.
source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluten_sensitivity
http://www.trojancondoms.com/Product/ProductListVert.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latex_allergy#Those_at_greatest_risk

Matt Stemper blog post 2

In the article “Would a U.S. strike in Syria violate international law?” the authors Jon Greenberg and Louis Jacobson, make very clear arguments for both sides of the story. It is clear by reading the article that if the United States decided to strike Syria it would be against international law, however in the United States Constitution, it states that Congress can violate international law if it is in the nation’s best interest. No matter if it is in our constitution or not, it would still be deemed illegal on the international stage. In the past the United States has not cared about this, but the author makes the argument that if we do strike and it was deemed illegal, then we would lose a lot of credibility. If we were to say another countries actions were illegal, they wouldn’t have to listen to us because we are being hypocritical. The Authors seem to think that the USA is going to act in their best interest, whether that is strike Syria and turn a shoulder to international law, or not strike and keep our credibility. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/12/would-us-strike-syria-violate-international-law/

Getting Rid of Chemical Weapons

In light of the uproar regarding the use of chemical weapon attacks in Syria, many of called for the dismantling of chemical weapons. This article by PolitiFact examines the three most common methods by which the obsolescence comes about. Discussing these three methods, is an environmentalists by the name of  Paul Walker. The three methods are incineration of the weapons, neutralization using water to slowly cause the mechanisms and toxins of the weapon to self-destruct, and the ignition of the weapons in a controlled setting using water to capture the toxins. The implicit claim made by Walker was the latter method was the least desirable owing to it's arduous process and slow time frame, as well as the use of water to trap to the toxins. The author then proceeds that this method would also be least effective in Syria owing the large amount of manpower required to dismantle weapons using this method and the logistics of employing a workforce of the size in the middle of a civil war.

Abducted Georgia girl, 14, found safe, authorities say

The news I read which is from foxnews.com entitled “Abducted Georgia girl, 14, found safe, authorities say.” This news talked about the latest progress on the case of the abducted 14-year-old Georgia girl near Atlanta. 

Joshua Rhett Miller, the author of the news claims that the abducted Georgia girl, Ayvani Hope Perez, was found safe. First of all, Miller uses the quotation of Clayton County Police Chief Gregory Porter to convince that  Perez is safe and Police has detained two suspects and kept watching other suspects. In addition, both Porter and Rick Maxwell, the FBI Atlanta Field Office’s special agent in charge, claimed the reason for the kidnapping was not clear yet. Maxwell also mentioned that the relationships between the offenders and Perez’s families were unknown. What’s more, the author gave more information about the girl’s mother: Perez’s mother was arrested on drug trafficking charges in 2012, although it was dropped soon. Finally, some backgrounds were mentioned, which said that offenders took away Perez because they wanted money and jewelry but Perez and her mother didn’t have any.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/09/17/police-14-year-old-girl-abducted-during-home-invasion-near-atlanta-all-out/#ixzz2fI7P1hhH

Probe launched over claim that elite Capitol Police unit blocked from Navy Yard massacre

I read the article that claims about the late intervention of the Capitol Police at the scene of the massacre in the Washington Navy Yard. According to the author of the article, there are numerous sources that show that the tactical team of Capitol Police has been told to leave the scene until it is safe. As an example, the BBC reported that the “lives may have been saved if the team could have intervened” whenever they arrived. The author claims that the tactical team could have stopped the violence if they stepped in earlier. The Capitol Police and the House Administration Committee says that they are investigating about this allegation thoroughly. Furthermore, the different order of safety postures to the Senate and the House when the incident occurred makes more suspicious about unsatisfactory response of the Capitol Police. However, an official with the Capitol Police union denies this allegation because the tactical teams are always trained hard to prevent active shooter situations, which demonstrates the late intervention of the tactical teams as a nonsense. According to the article, the board will find out the fact no later than October twenty-first.

Probe launched over claim that elite Capitol Police unit blocked from Navy Yard massacre

The Century Long Effort to De-Tax the Rich

            The news link on our course blog is to a September 18, 2013 Mother Jones article by political blogger Kevin Drum, but it is actually a connect to a review by David Cay Johnston at the news website and online journal The Prospect.  This essay by Johnston discusses the new book by Pulitzer prize-winning sociologist and author Isaac William Martin. Here Martin adds his voice to the debate over class warfare in the subject work entitled Rich People’s Movements: Grassroots Campaigns to Un-tax the One Percent, Martin argues that the conservative Tea Party movement is merely a facade for people who don’t want to pay their full tax bill. Martin further claims that the group is not really a modern phenomenon but rather a simple repackaging of an old concept, otherwise known as paranoid-special-interest masquerading as public conscience. He scoffs at the mantra of the alliance which is that trickle-down economics benefits the financial health of the poor by taxing the rich less. To prove his point, Martin enlists an expansive body of data including historical, political, social and economic information. He adamantly disagrees with the ideas of Lipsit and Raab, who argued in their 1971 publication The Politics of Unreason, that such benign attempts to massage the system in one’s favor are nothing more than “cultural baggage.”  However he concurs with historian Richard Hofstader that this type of activism has its roots in the early twentieth century.  Both Martin and Hofstader believe that the formal origin of the movement is linked to the adoption of the 1913 16^th Amendment, which adjusted the system of direct taxation.  Finally, he logically concludes that the continued marketing investment by heavyweight financiers like the exorbitantly rich Koch brothers, gives it an unfair advantage over grassroots proletarian efforts with less capital available to sell their message.

http://prospect.org/article/we-shall-overwhelm

In the article "Probe Launched Over Claim That Elite Capitol Police Unit Blocked From Navy Yard" by Fox News the author claims from credible sources within the Capitol police department that an elite tactical unit responded to the scene of the deadly shooting at the Washington Naval Yard was turned away by supervisors. This would be highly controversial due to the fact that police responding to an incident could have saved lives and instead were ordered to stand down by a supervisor. This is bound fuel the fire of the conspiracy theorists as well as those with differing views than the current administration. The elite unit arrived on the scenes minutes after the calls of an active shooter were received. There may be many reasons why the team was turned away jurisdictional issues, due to the fact that military bases are Federal property but then the Capitol police defend Federal property. Fox news and its contributors to this article provide no reason for why the team may have been turned away. In my opinion the news should report the facts even if you have to wait to break a story and get ratings. This article raises some serious questions though regardless if all the facts are not know, why was this elite team turned away if they could have saved lives?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/18/probe-launched-over-claim-that-elite-capitol-police-unit-blocked-from-navy-yard/

Hunters trade shots over deer breeding, killing methods

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/09/15/hunters-trade-shots-over-deer-breeding-killing-methods/

 

I read an article about deer breeding and killing methods. The author states the more and bigger the antlers, the more valued the deer is in hunting circles. According to the article, there are two ways to hunt deer and sell their antlers. The hunters who utilize the old-fashion way stalk the deer through the woods and hunt them for their big antlers. The other method, however, utilizes a modernized approach by genetically cloning deer with enlarged antlers. The people who utilize the older method criticizes deer breeding groups that breeding deer for bigger antlers is an immoral behavior. People who hunt wild deer also said that the deer has to have a fair chance to escape. It means there is a code of ethics. However, according to other deer breeding groups, both killing deer in the wild and killing them in an enclosed space are the same. Laura Caroll, who owns the deer breeding company, also said, "They have the right to do that because it isn't to hunt. They just want the head to mount on their wall." In my opinion, the critics are claiming that one method of killing deer is not same from another way of killing deer, but the result is same. Both are killing deer and have the purpose of selling their big antlers.