Bush Reveals All

"I sat back in my seat and absorbed her words. My thoughts clarified: The first plane could have been an accident. The second was definitely an attack. The third was a declaration of war," the former president writes.


This is a quote from former President George W. Bush, which can be found in his new memoir that was released yesterday, Nov. 9. The memoir, Decision Points, outlines Bush's personal reflections on the years of his presidency. 


According to sources who have already read the book, Bush discusses his decisions on topics ranging from the War on Terrorism to Hurricane Katrina. It appears that he gets down right personal, having little shame admitting what he considers to be his mistakes.


From the aforementioned quote alone, it is obvious that the memoir includes some very powerful writing. As his presidency included instances  and situations of difficulty and confusion, this book hardly shields readers from the challenges that resulted from making decisions based on those events. 


From a public relations standpoint, I think President Bush released this memoir at exactly the right time. For one, he is well over two years removed from presidency. Thus, many of his non supporters have had a chance to "cool-off" and have little reason to be frustrated with him or think about him at all for that matter. Also, with President Obama lagging in support polls, many disappointed citizens might be looking elsewhere for answers.


So, if you have been looking for some insight into President Bush's mind or if you have ever asked yourself why it is that he made the decisions he did, you may want to consider reading this book. And in case you are wondering, the memoir is 481 pages long.


I am curious to know how many people will actually read it. I also wonder who the primary audience will be--longtime Bush supporters or anti-Bush critics? Either way, I assume the purpose of him writing it is to clear up any misconceptions throughout his presidency. 

Statistics in Politics

It has been a really long time since I have gotten excited about math. In fact, throughout elementary and middle school I even referred to myself as a "math person." You know, one of "those people" who truly gets math and even enjoys it. But, everything changed my junior year of high school. I decided to take AP calculus, and as far as I knew it, my days of enjoying math were officially over.

But, I am finally excited about math again! So why am I suddenly reminiscing over my past of enjoying and then eventually despising math? After all, this is supposed to be a blog discussing politics. 

Well I am currently enrolled in a statistics class, and this recent New York Times article discussing the Texas governor race caught my attention. 

Seeing as how not every citizen nor even University of Texas at Austin student has taken statistics, I would assume that not everyone knows how to correctly interpret the information given in the article. Thus, I will now take my newly acquired statistical knowledge and do my very best to explain the results from this poll. And in case you haven't noticed, I'm very fairly excited that I actually have the skills to do this! 

Just in case you aren't already aware, the two candidates in today's election are current Texas Governor Rick Perry and Bill White. And according to the article published Oct. 29, Governor Rick Perry is likely to get 49 percent of the votes, while Bill white is expected to get 37 percent.  The poll surveyed 637 likely Texas voters. 

When you read a poll, it is very important to read that small, but important information usually included towards the bottom of the results. This is called the margin of error. And the margin of error for this particular poll was +/- 3.8 percentage points. But what exactly does that mean? 

To put it simply, the surveyors believe that the true number of people who will vote for Perry is 49 percent. But, the problem is that because it is not economical to survey the entire population of voters, this sample cannot give an absolute correct number. 

Thus, to find a more accurate number, you will need to add and subtract the margin of error to the expected percent for each candidate (3.8 for this particular poll). So we should really expect between 45.2 and 52.8 percent of people to vote for Perry and 33.2 and 40.8 percent of people to vote for White.

Because these intervals do not cross, we would not expect the candidates to receive the same amount of votes. If the intervals were to cross, the percent of people voting for each candidate could be the same. Thus, according to the results from this particular poll, we expect Governor Rick Perry to receive more votes than Bill White. 

The polls are now officially closed, and it will be interesting to see if this statistical poll has correctly predicted the winner in the Texas governor race. I hope you all voted. Happy election day! :) 

So What if The Man is Gay?

In case you hadn't heard, there is an openly gay man running for the House of representatives out of Rhode Island. According to an article published at CNN.com, the current mayor of Providence, David Cicilline, is the front-runner in the House race. 


So why did this story make national news? It is probably not because the mayor of a large, capitol city is now furthering his career by running for a seat in Congress. In fact, men and women run for office and move up the chain of politics all the time. 


The article is published simply because the front-runner candidate happens to be homosexual. And if you read the article, you will quickly learn that his homosexuality is not preventing him from gaining supporters. 


"Ultimately, voters vote for candidates who are going to help improve their lives, said Robin Brand, deputy executive director of the non partisan political action committee, Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund. "It doesn't matter if you're gay or lesbian," she said. "If you've demonstrated that you've helped improve people's lives on the issues they care about, our research shows that being openly gay or lesbian is really secondary to that."


I find it so interesting how this article seems to be defending not only Mayor Cicilline but every other gay politican running for office. Throughout the article, there are incorporated quotes  from political supporters who have no issue with the candidate being gay. Well isn't that obvious? 


If Mayor Cicilline is up by double digits in the polls, isn't it obvious that his homosexuality is not preventing him from getting supporters. It is as though the author of the article is defending something that needs no defending. And If sexuality really isn't an issue when it comes to electing a politican, then why bring it to light by publishing an article that's only purpose is to point out the fact that the man is gay? 


It's quite clear that the issue of gay rights is trending right now in all aspects of society. But, is it really necessary to publish an article entirely based on a man's sexuality just because it fits in the category of a trending topic? 

Excited Soliders Getting Ahead of Themselves?

If you walk through The University of Texas at Austin campus today, you may notice a little more purple than normal. You might wonder to yourself why everybody seems to be confused into thinking they go to TCU all of a sudden. So where did all the burnt orange go?

Well if you log into your facebook account, you will probably get some answers. In fact, I would bet that you have a few friends whose status' say something to the extent of "Wear purple today...support gay rights."

It is pretty apparent that gay rights is a hot topic right now. Students all across the University are wearing purple to support the cause. Many are reaching out in response to recent nationwide suicides by young, gay students. But the issue of gay rights is also being addressed in the military. A New York Times article discuss recent changes pertaining to the armed forces.

Federal Judge Virgina A. Phillips made a controversial, landmark ruling last month that overturned the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the military. Her ruling overturned the policy on grounds that it violates the equal protection and First Amendment rights of service members.

Judge Phillips' ruling is a huge success for those who have been working hard to get the policy overturned. These policy opposers are finally seeing real political action to support their goals.

But ever since the ruling, it has been widely known that the Department of Justice would likely submit an appeal. This appeal will take time. Thus, since Judge Phillips' ruling, armed forces have been ordered to stop enforcing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

Many ex-soldiers who were honorably discharged because of the policy are taking advantage of the recent ruling and are attempting to reenlist. This must be very exciting for these men and women who have the opportunity to work in the field they love again. But, they should be cautious not to get ahead of themselves.

If the Department of Justice's appeal is successful and the supreme court's ruling is reversed, it is possible that the newly enlisted soldiers could find themselves in the very position they were in a few years back.

I'm not saying that these soldiers shouldn't get excited about the possibility of being able to openly serve their country. But the fact is that for the time being, it is just a possibility. And I believe that being discharged from service on two separate occasions would be difficult for anyone to handle.

A Continuous Debate of Gun Rights

 I recently stumbled upon an article while scrolling through the New York Times politics section online.  It was titled "More States Allowing Guns in Bars." (http://nyti.ms/bjAS3l)

To summarize, the article says that due to two recent Supreme Court rulings, there are now four states with laws that explicitly allow loaded guns in bars (you must still have a permit). The states include Tennessee, Arizona, Georgia and Virginia. The rulings overturned handgun bans in both Washington and Chicago. This ruling certainly stirs up continuous debate about the topic of gun control.

As a University of Texas at Austin student, the article's title alone quickly caught my attention, given the incident that occurred on campus a few weeks ago. For those who are not familiar, a lone gunman came onto campus with an AK-47 and committed suicide on the 6th floor of the Perry-Castaneda Library. For a more in depth summary, see this article: http://lat.ms/bAOM0b

Interestingly enough, the New York Times article references Texas' Governor Rick Perry's opinion about guns on The University of Texas at Austin's campus. Not only does he believe that guns should be legal on campus, he goes as far to argue that armed bystanders might have stopped the gunman.

But stopped the gunman from doing what? Killing himself? So instead, an armed bystander would be the one responsible for the young man's death? I understand that this is a very controversial subject. Gun rights/gun control in general is a very controversial subject. But, Governor Rick Perry's stance on the issue really caught my attention.

I think it is important for all University of Texas at Austin student's to be informed of the current Texas Governor's stance, especially with the upcoming elections. Would students being allowed to carry handguns on campus make you feel safer or more threatened? And depending on your answer to that question, is this issue alone enough to make you question your vote for Governor on Nov. 2?