Protect the Captial

This blog is called the "DPS plan would put x-raysa nd metal detectors at Texas capitol entrances" by Scott Henson. Scott writes about the DPS plans are to put metal detectors and X-Ray machines at the entrances of the state capitol to help support in "gun detection." Scott disagreed with this decision on this plan. He does not want to see the culture at the city hall to dramatically change. Scott is saying that if they have metal detectors and x-rays at the capital, this would cause the people to form a line and the shooter could fire off shots outside the capitol. This would affect innocents' lives to be in danger while waiting to go through the metal detector. He thinks that it would be a waste of time for security to mess with the visitors with metal detector.

He presented a schedule to show that the Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security will join together with the House Transportation Committee to talk about the DPS plans. He wrote how this idea was considered after 9/11 but a man fired off a gun at the capital and backed up this by a presenting a article.

I like how the writer expressed his opinion. I think Scott's credibility is all right. He gave us a link where he got the data and told us some information about it. He used it to back up his statement.

I think that it is a good and bad idea about this. It is a good idea that we can feel protected at the captial, but people do visit there and also childern. There is a lot schools do field trips. I think it would scare the childern everytime they go. On the other hand x-rays and metal detectors would make people feel safe when they go. It would make people feel better by thinking that there won't be a man firing his a gun at the capital.

A Nasty Fight

This editorial is called "Don't forget the nastiness when politicians make nice" by Ken Herman, American-Statesman writer. He wrote about how the candidates will be mean and nasty to each other but later after the election is over, they will be all nice and still be friends.

He wrote about the GOP gubernatorial debate on Friday night on January 29, 2010 and the campaign ads. He thinks that Rick and Kay didn't mean to say all that mean stuff about each other throughout the campaign.

The author gives questions to let the readers really think about it. He states that according to all the TV ads are saying negative things about mostly about Kay or Rick. He also assumes that readers are Democrats. He said, "What should be your favorite political comment of the year (so far) came on the Democratic side."

Then Ken Herman gave his opinion that "maybe intellectual honesty demands that the loser not endorse the winner. But reality dictates that the loser will abruptly pivot to the any-Republican-is-better-than-any-Democrat mantra and endorse the winner." He goes on talking about how Hank Gilbert was endorsed by Farouk Shami and now Gilbert is endorsing Shami for governor. Then he asked about Gilbert twisted things around by saying Shami was trying to be the nomination while he was a gubernatorial candidate and Ken Herman was not surprise about that.

I think that it is wrong what Gilbert did because he was very rude to Shami because he endorsed Gilbert and I think it is a right thing to do for Farok is to support Shami. It is like "you scratch my back and I'll scratch your back." When Gilbert twisted things around it was a mean and backstabbing thing to do. I think that when you are going up against someone in an election and the other person won.

I think that this editorial analyzed the campaign and it makes you think that the candidates are trying their very best to win by taking any dirt they could find on the other candidates to be governor. It is depending on the person to be nice with a fake smile after an election. It is their choice. I think that they should be friends and not let an election ruin a friendship. It would be nice have connections. There is nothing we can do to change that. It is human nature that we try everything in our power to win, if it means that we need to find any evidence that can hurt the other candidate's chance to win. I think it is a good thing to be friends with your opponent that you lost to or just put a fake smile because it will help to support that you are a good person.

A Battle for Governor

There is an article called "Perry stands ground on his record" by Jason Embry and Corrie MacLaggan is about U.S Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Gov. Rick Perry and Wharton businesswoman Debra Medina are attacking each other. It also talks about the candidates’ discussions and their responses in the debate.

It seem that this article is mostly talking about Gov. Rick Perry defending himself and how Hutchison and Medina are picking on him and making him look bad to the public. Perry is trying to make him look good and not let Hutchison and Medina's statement affect his chances on winning the election. In article, it states that Perry defended himself on issues like him "being pro-life."

According to the article, it looks like Perry took a shot at Hutchison. He said in "Washington, [she] had failed to secure the Texas-Mexico border." Medina took a shot at Perry.

I think this article is worth reading and interesting because it is showing how three people are attacking each other and making the other candidates look bad the public’s eyes to win to be governor. It makes you think who you really want for governor.