Should Kids Write Their Own Holiday Gift Lists? by KJ DELLANTONIA in NEW YORK TIMES

Title says all. Should Kids write their own holiday gift lists?
KJ Dellantonia, the author of this article, is writing as a parent who also has young kids of her own. Her opinion of course, is how the title explains all. Dellantonia doesn't agree with the idea of a holiday list because of the fact that it would bring kids' hopes up for gifts that is just unbelievable. This article was written for those people who are contemplating what is best for their children, whether "spoiling them rotten" by using a holiday list is the best or not. I believe Dellantonia was writing this article because she wanted to ask for an opinion of the public whether it would be best in the interest of the children, to allow them to write their own holiday gift lists. She wanted to persuade people that maybe allowing this to happen could habitually affect their child in a way where they grow higher expectations when it comes to the winter holidays. The tone throughout this whole article, I feel, is a little of a questioning to the readers, whether it would be better for kids to do specifically this or that. Reading through the article, I personally compared it to the book, "Parenting with Love and Logic" by Foster Cline and Jim Fay. According to the book, when it comes to gift giving, it gives five rules:
1. If your child shows little appreciation for gifts, give less.
2. All kids should be equally loved and treated equally. however, equal treatment does not always mean equal gifts.
3. Don't buy into marketing hype.
4. Be creative about opening gifts.
5. Teach your child the joy of giving.
Ironically, what the article has been saying is against many of the rules the book has given. According to the book, gifts are supposed to be given as a reward of a child's accomplishments. However with Christmas, gifts have been nothing but a overdone ritual that just results in a child becoming spoiled with many unearned gifts.
Here's the link to the article: LINK from the NYTIMES articles.
Tell me what you think.

How About Better Parents? by Thomas L. Friedman through New York Times

Thomas L. Friedman wrote an opinion article about how Parents these days should be raising their kids.
Throughout the article, Friedman used claims and statistics to show how much a Child's academic progress can improve just by a parent's involvement in their kid's life.
Friedman wrote this article because he felt that it was necessary for people to understand that Teachers are not the only people to blame when students are not doing very well in school. Friedman claims how a great teacher will undeniably create a path for the student's future, however the parents must also do their job by preparing and creating the path of their kids first in order to be prepared for the future.
Friedman wants to express his concern with the students' academic success. Hence, he created this article to inform the public about how to create a kid who will be more socially acceptable and have a higher advantage when it comes to succeeding in College.
Friedman is obviously disappointed in the level of dedication is students today. Therefore, he wrote this article with a sense to uplift, or show how hope is not lost with a certain students future.
He claims how a Parent's dedication alone can help a child truly be ready for their future.
Here's my question regarding the article. Just like Friedman explained, it is shown that students tend to do better with a parent's involvement in their life. However, to what extent?
Can a student be affected in a more negative way if parents get involved a little too much and in more of a dictatorial action? Friedman claims that parent involvement is everything. So what's the boundary? When are things taken too far? When do things get so bad when people start calling it child abuse?

Click on the picture above to find the link to the article!

What the Costumes Reveal: By Joe Nocera; New York Times

This Opinion article, written from Joe Nocera, isn't just about a costume party. It's about a parody. "Mocking. Ignorant. Disgusting." Was how Joe described Steven J. Baum, the leader of a mortgage and forclosure service.
In this article, Joe interviewed people who worked under Steven with an anonymous name and revealed the behavior of the staff and the boss of the mortgage company.
Steven's mortgage company is one of the biggest forclosure company in New York. However, Joe uses evidence to describe what really goes on behind the scenes.
It was supposed to be a holloween party, however it wasn't a regular holloween party, it was a parody. Baum had his employees dress up in costumes to imitate homeless people and mock the people who lost their homes to forclosure.
There were a total of 6 pictures all revealing what the staff were doing in the party.

Many people who lost their homes through forclosure give testimonies on how terrible and merciless Baum's company was to them. Joe claims that Baum's Company carries no sympathy for those who lost their homes and mercilessly attacked and pressured the people while mocking them at the same time.
Baum is currently denying everything, claiming how he never allowed any parties in his work place.
However, the pictures are undeniable.
Joe claims how a huge law suit could be filed against him and how he could lose his money, his company, and his respect.
In my opinion, all of this is awful.
The economy is so bad, people are losing their jobs and their homes, and for people from the mortgage company to be acting like that, including the boss, is disgusting.
They should be helping the people get out of their housing crisis, not mocking them.
I hope this man honestly loses everything he has, how disgusting.
Here's the link to the article: LINK
Tell me what you think.

U.S. Troops to Leave Iraq by Year’s End, Obama Says: by Mark Landler

According to New York Times,
Mark Landler talks about how Obama finally decides to have the US troops leave Iraq at the end of this year. Landler wrote this article because the final moment has arrived of what America would do about the war in Iraq. The decision has been made, Obama has made the conclusion, and the answer: is to have the troops come back home.

This article is for the people who have heard Obama talk about his decision with the war in Iraq. Whether the people agree or disagree however, is up to the opinion of the readers. This article was written to simply inform the public about the current situation and explain what the President plans on doing and how he is going to do it.
It's quite simple: Obama is taking out the troops because of the agreement America has made with Iraq since the inner war has started. The article explains in great detail how Obama had negotiated with the Bush administration, how he had a videoconference with the Leaders of Iraq, and how he mentioned the remorseful death of Col.  Muammar el-Qaddafi.
The article also expresses a slight hint of hesitation and anxiety regarding the sudden aborting of the troops. The author expresses this by talking about how people are arguing whether or not Iraq would be able to stand on its two feet after all the wars and conflicts it had with the Taliban.
In my opinion, I feel half half about the troops leaving Iraq.
It is great for America because the soldiers will finally be able to return home to their families and recieve praise from their Country. However, on the other hand, those families who lost their loved ones in the war would probably feel angry, zealous, and exasperated by the dismissal of the troops. In addition, who is to say whether or not Iraq is really ready to defend itself without the US aid?
Is Obama's decision going to be a blessing for America and a curse for Iraq? Or is it going to be the other way around?
Tell me what you think.
Here's the link to the article: LINK

The Lease Is Up, and Now, So Is the Rent by Marc Santora

The subject of this article is basically about how the apartment buildings of New York has been increasing their price of rent at an incredible speed. Around 2007 was $2,500.00 for a spacious apartment that had two bedrooms and one bath. Currently, the rent has been doubled to an astounding $5,000.00. People have been claiming how the brokers have been running out of money, hence the drastic increase of prices for rent. They say since our threat of bankrupcy for America is so near, banks have been demanding more cash to try and sustain their inventory of money to keep the economy in New York going. The audience for this article would be people who are either renting in New York and are feeling outraged by the sudden increase for the price of rent, or this would be a warning for the people who are planning on living or renting in New York. The places are not only New York but several other places like New Jersey, Boston, Chicago, etc.
The purpose of this article is to inform people on the incontrovertible raising of prices on renting or buying homes or apartments in New York or other major cities.
The tone of the article is quite obvious. The author is showing his disgust and suprise at the sudden raise of prices. The author is setting a tone where is he is informing and warning people about the rent prices and persuading people how the rent prices in New York are unreasonable and rediculous.
My personal opinion, I believe there's nothing to be done with a situation like this. Home value and prices will go up and down according to the economy, so people can't just tell the banks to stop raising the prices, the banks have a reason for raising rent prices. They raise rent prices because they are running out of money, and they are running out of money because people didn't pay the banks back after all the money they borrowed. Overall, I believe the rent price increase is reasonable. Although I don't like the idea, it's the situation of the bank that matters, and without the bank, America is completly screwed.

Here's the link to the article: LINK
This article is from New York Times.

What do you think? Please tell me your opinion.

Stutterer Speaks Up in Class; His Professor Says Keep Quiet by Richard Perez-Pena

The title of the article says all. This article explains an unusual experience of a 16 year old attending college classes at Montclaire State University. The boy named Philip Garber Jr. raised his hand the whole time during the 75 minute lecture session, yet the professor, Ms. Snyder, refused to call on him. Beforehand, Ms. Snyder suggested to Philip that he either ask questions after class, write down the questions and give them to her afterwards, or find her some other time. Ms. Snyder claimed that Philip's speaking was "disturbing" and "inadequete."
She claimed that Philip's stuttering in class was "disruptive" for her whole class, which is why she suggested that he would be better off staying quiet rather than asking questions.
Philip decided to speak up about how unfair and discriminated he felt to the college dean, who in turn suggested that he just switch out of class.
Philip Garber was a boy who has been home schooled his entire life, and the college experience of being scolded shocked him to no end.
His parents, both angry and distressed, argued that the teacher was not giving him the equal oppurtunity that every student should have.

“What about a kid who’s got a thick accent and has to repeat everything?” asked Philip’s father, also named Philip, the managing editor of two small newspapers. “I don’t think you’d tell that kid he can’t talk.”

“I understand that it can be hard to listen to someone who stutters, but the answer can’t just be to shut him down,” said Philip’s mother, Marin Martin, a nurse.

Even Philip's classmates in college agreed that the way Philip was treated in the classroom was not right and unfair on his end.

"Two students in Ms. Snyder’s class, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid alienating their teacher, said that Philip did take up more time than the other students, but not egregiously so, and that his contributions were solid. They said they did not know what happened between him and Ms. Snyder, but did notice the day he held his hand up for most of the class and never got called on."

 The article then thoroughly explains the psychological behaivor behind stuttering, however psychologists find Philip's case very healthy because of his desire to participate and speak despite his differences.

Although Philip went through a lot of trials because of his speaking problem, he took a speaking class and is now starting to speaking much more fluently. However, it requieres much concentration.
Philip also joined, "Our Time Theater Company" a group for people who stutter.
The comment Philip made after the ordeal between him and Ms. Snyder was,

"I’ve been very lucky to never have been teased, bullied or anything, but some people who stutter completely stop speaking because of that kind of abuse,” Philip said. “People don’t think of it as a legitimate disability. They just need to learn.”

It's embarrasing to believe that even people who can't speak well enough are discriminated even in places like the classroom. A place that was supposed to be a safe and comfortable environment for kids to learn. It disgusts me how a well respected professor could treat a student, a 16 year old, like a mute.

Tell me your comments about it.
Here's the link to the article: ARTICLE

Thank you for reading.

With Deaths of Forests, a Loss of Key Climate Protectors: By Justin Gillis.

The problem has been evident for the past 8 years when Al Gore announced the presence of "Global Warming" Effects to the entire world. Now, the world has been suddenly "changing" for the worst.
As the world increasingly uses fossil fuels on transportation devices like cars or buses, or natural gas on home-put devices like heating gas and the AC, scientists say the future habitability of the earth may be at stake. Since people have been carelessly putting carbon dioxide into the earth's atmosphere, the environment has been evidently rotting away.

Out of all the problems we are facing, the biggest would  be the death of the forests.
A beetle population in Western Montana overpopulated the forests and started  killing all of the trees in the everglades. These beetles were originally controlled due to the harsh winters of Montana, however because of the sudden increase of heat on the earth, the winters no longer kill and control the insects. In return, the beetles are now killing every tree in the everglades in which we heavily depend on.

The asian long horned beetle

In addition, in Texas, Colorado, Africa, and Australia, the unbearable heat killed many trees and started forest fires that wiped out all of the remaining forests and fields.
This has been the worst heat blast in world's history.
The problem with this is, the fewer the trees, the fewer the oxygen. Therefore the level of carbon dioxide that we humans create would increase and literally, "envelope" this world.

 "For, while a majority of the world’s people now live in cities, they depend more than ever on forests, in a way that few of them understand (gillis)."

Just like what the quote from the article is explaining above, even though the majority of the people live more in the city than the country, it doesn't mean that we still don't have the need for trees. In fact, we need trees even more because of that fact.

"Scientists have figured out — with the precise numbers deduced only recently — that forests have been absorbing more than a quarter of the carbon dioxide that people are putting into the air by burning fossil fuels and other activities. It is an amount so large that trees are effectively absorbing the emissions from all the world’s cars and trucks (gillis)."

Trees have been effeciently absorbing the majority of the emissions from our cars and trucks, which is why they are the very reason our earth is still breatable and habitable to this day.

In my opinion, I believe at this point no matter what we do and no matter how much we recycle, we will not be able to restore the earth's environment to its formal position.
I believe too much damage has been done to this world, and I believe the minute we started using fossil fuels was the day our environment was doomed.
Anyway, though many are concerned for our environment and the effects of global warming, I still don't believe people right now care enough to actually do something for this earth. I believe everyone will only talk about how terrible the conditions are but just go back living their own life.
At least, that is my opinion.
Let me hear yours.
Here's the link to the article: ARTICLE

Thank you for reading. Please comment.

Afghan Peace Council Chief Killed in Attack on His Home: By Alissa J. Rubin and Rick Gladstone

In Kabul, Afghanistan, the effort to restore peace with the Taliban was hopelessly destroyed as the most prominent Afghan Official, Burhanuddin Rabbani, was assasinated Tuesday night by a suicide bomber who managed to hide bombs under his turban and set them off once he gave Rubbani one last embrace.

Burhanuddin Rabbani

Afghanistan's 10 year effort to restore peace with the Taliban was been ruined because of this sudden  devastating attack on the Afghan Government.
The Afghanistan Government is currently investigating how and why the culprit commited. Ironically, Rubbani wasn't the only man who has been assasinated.
Others who have also tried to reach for peace with the Taliban and held a high position in the Government were also assasinated. For example:
"In July, President Karzai’s powerful half-brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, was gunned down by a trusted associate in the heavily guarded compounded in southern Afghanistan where he would receive visitors each day. Days later, Taliban gunmen stormed the home of another Karzai ally, the former governor of Oruzgan, Jan Mohammed Khan, and opened fire."

Afterwards, the Afghanistan Government immediately inverted suspicion to the Pakistan's Military Spy Service, in which evidently opposed the peace between Afghanistan and the Talibans.

"Suspicion also fell on Pakistan’s military spy  service, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, which has gone to great lengths to halt efforts to broker a peace deal between the Afghan government and the Taliban that did not give Pakistan a substantial say."

Death and madness have been inevitable in the middle east countries. I personally believe peace and order will not happen if the Afghan Government attempts to obtain peace with a terrorist group without the opposition of surrounding countries that have also suffered conflict and lost lives to the Taliban. Without the proper communications and agreements from each and every country, there will be no end to unnecessary war.

This leads to the article, Press here: Article
That is my opinion. If any of you object, you can comment on my blog below.
Thank you.