THE ENDLESS CONFLICT OF PALESTINE......

     War between Israel and Palestine have been going on since without any realistic resolutions to the conflict.  It's obvious that earlier decisions are not working.  If Israel and Palestine cannot come to a mutual resolution, I think that a third party must step in and lay down the framework of future in which both can co-exist.  Up until the 19th century the land where Palestine is located lived in peace.  In the 19th century Palestine was inhabited by a multicultural population (86% Muslim, 10% Christian, and 4% Jewish).  The late 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries was when the conflict between the Jews and Arabs began.  Both were eager to carve out a homeland for themselves.  After WWI and the defeat of the Ottoman Empire (1917) at the hands of the British,  the Balfour Declaration was born.  This supported the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine and protected the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities.  The agreement between Chaim Weizmann (World Zionist Organization) and Faisal seemed at first to be a step in the right direction.  But following the Franco-Syrian war (1920), Amin al-Husseini, who was the head of the Palestine Arab national movement, declared the Jews sole enemy of Palestine.  Violence between the two continued until WWII.  In 1947 the United Nations, who took over the issue from the British, adopted Resolution 181(Future Government of Palestine).  This resolution would terminate the British Mandate (by August 1948) and implement a plan to partition Palestine into an Arab state and a Jewish state.  The Jews accepted this plan but the Arabs immediately rejected it.  On May 14, 1948, the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel was proclaimed.  Shortly after, the Arab countries declared war on the newly formed state of Israel beginning the Arab--Israeli War.  This war brought about the                        

1949 Armistice Agreements which established boundary lines between the two combatants.  Over the next 50 years things got worse between the two.  After years of military occupation, repression,  confiscation of land, the rise of the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization), and the Intifada (1987-1993), the Oslo Accords took place.  The Accords were the first direct, face-to-face agreement between Israel and the PLO where the future of the two parties would be agreed upon.  In 1995 the Accords suffered a major setback when Ytzhak Rabin (Israel Prime Minister and signer of Oslo Accords) was assassinated.  This war has been going on up until present day without any relief in sight.  After the Oslo Accords failed, a second Intifada (2000) broke out and intensified Israeli-Palestinian violence has been going on until present day.
         There are those that favor a "1-state solution".  With this solution either side must evict the other population so that they can re-establish their control over the entire territory.  The borders would be erased and put Israelis and Palestinians together. This would mean more fighting and violence.  Arabs would eventually outnumber the Jews and is a sure recipe for disaster.  There is also the Bi-National solution.  This would mean two major nationalities would compete against each other for political power.  This differs from a "1-state solution" because there would be no side facing expulsion or ethnic cleansing.  Israel wouldn't go for this because its politics and national identity would be compromised.

        The "2-state solution" makes the most sense.  This solution allows both Israelis and Palestinians to have their own independent states and rule their countries differently.  It's the only solution that makes sense and creates the most viable option to bring long term peace.  For the Palestinians, the "2-state solution" means a return to the pre-1967 borders when the West Bank and the Gaza Strip were free of settlers and military occupation.  For the Israelis, they would have a legit homeland and be able to have a national identity.  They would be free to practice their political and cultural views.  It would put an end to the pointless and endless fighting and violence.  

OBAMA + THE GOP == IN HOUSE CHAOS

After all was said and done on Wednesday (Nov. 5) morning when the elections were over, President Obama was scrambling about trying to get his ducks in a row.  The White House confirmed reports that the president was reaching out to Democratic and Republican lawmakers late Tuesday night.  The biggest and most obvious question that's on everyones mind is if the Republicans and Obama can put their differences aside and keep the government moving and pass some useful legislation.  The outcome of the elections Wednesday are sure to bring many changes to Capitol Hill.  The Republicans took control of the United States Senate.  They also now hold 246 seats in the House of Representatives and that's their largest majority in the House since the Truman Administration.  This election gives the Republicans control of both houses of congress for the first time since the 2006 elections.  The Democrats had a tough night and most think it is accredited to Obama’s doing.  Many Democrats are unhappy with President Obama.  Representative Steve Israel, Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told MSNBC that the Democrats had a “pretty ugly night”.  One of or possibly the biggest shock for the Democrats was that the Republicans won more governors’ races than expected(Illinois and Maryland).  Its pretty clear that it was a tough election night for President Obama and the Democrats.  President Obama called Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell(KY-R) on Wednesday to congratulate him on his parties victories.  McConnell is likely going to be named the majority leader come January when the Republicans take over the Senate.    

         Obama and McConnell have not seen eye to eye in the past.  Obama said that the two of them are willing to put any problems between them aside with the hope of working together to pass legislation on priorities that they both can agree on.  All this means is that McConnell will force the president to approve such legislation as the Keystone Pipeline.  Approving the pipeline is just the beginning.  Senator McConnell was quoted saying "We haven't had an energy bill in seven years, we need to embrace the energy revolution thats going on in our country, promote it."  Without a doubt that means more fracking, which has been proven unhealthy for us and our planet.  McConnell claimed that Obama launched a war on coal. Along with the pipeline  and fracking, McConnell plans to make coal competitive again.  Republicans also plan to gut Obamacare.  Ted Cruz(TX-R) was quoted on election night saying "We need to suspend Obamacare. We need to repeal it altogether because it is not working."  It took the better part of a year for the American middle/lower class to get their health insurance situated.  Now the GOP wants to tear Obamacare apart piece by piece.
           The Republicans ran up the score so bad on election night that the Democrats needed the "mercy" rule.  They have positioned themselves to control all levels of legislation for years to come, especially if new president in 2016 is a Republican.  Having a Republican run Senate and House has an upside too.  The GOP plans on revamping America's foreign policy.  The main focus should be disarming ISIS.  The Republicans and President Obama need to get together and set a plan in motion.
Senator John McCain(AZ-R), the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, claimed that he has already began discussing a new national-security agenda with Republicans Bob Corker and Richard Burr.  They are likely to be named the incoming chairmen of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. If these moves are a sign that the government is gonna use the military for what it's there for and put boots on the ground in Iraq and Syria to stop ISIS before something tragic happens on U.S. soil then it is the right move.  The Republicans, Democrats, and Obama have to get together and agree to put our nation's welfare first.  If the parties can't put forth a bi-partisan front and work together then America, our nation, will fail.                      

GUNS IN AMERICA : DON'T WANT TO LIVE WITH THEM, CAN'T SURVIVE WITHOUT THEM.......

          Gun control/rights in the United States of America is a controversial problem.  A poll conducted by Economists/YouGov in 2014 shows that 39% of American households own guns, which holds a five percent increase over the number of gun owning households in 2012.  Even though some states laws on guns are similar as others, each state has its own unique laws.  It's like there's 50 small different countries within 1 big country with their own laws.  For this reason, understanding gun laws in the U.S. is a very difficult situation.  All states in the U.S. fall under the United States Constitution.  The 2nd Amendment in the Constitution gives the citizens the right to keep and bear arms.  Every state may have its own laws regarding gun control/rights, but they are also regulated by the United States Federal Government (Bureau of AlForbes reported that "the U.S. is the most violent core economy in terms of gun related deaths.  It is also the leader in gun violence at school campuses."    As with any hot button issue in America,  politics play an important role in remedying the problem, or making it worse.  Although I have strong feelings toward the lack of gun control in this country, I also believe that law-abiding citizens should be able to protect themselves and their family when and if the situation calls for such action.
cohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives).  In 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that individuals can own a gun for personal use.  It seems like it is only getting easier for someone to have guns out in a public place.  Guns and gun laws is a serious problem in the U.S.  Kenneth Rapoza of

          My beliefs on guns and gun control/rights encounter opposition on both sides of the political arena.  Liberals believe that individuals do not need guns for protection because it is the role of local and federal government agencies ( law enforcement and military).  Adolf Hitler said "to conquer a nation, first disarm its citizens."  It is widely believed that ultra-liberals want gun rights taken away so they will be a step closer to having a police state.  In a perfect world that would work, but we clearly do not live in a perfect world.  They harp on the fact that the 2nd Amendment does not give you the right to bear arms, but in fact allows the state to keep a militia (National Guard).  Liberals think guns kill people.  Guns kill children.  Conservatives think that there are too many gun laws.  They do not want a ban or limit on semi-automatic weapons, nor a limit to the amount of bullets that clips and cartridges hold. In 2004, President George Bush and the Republicans allowed the original assault weapons law (Bill Clinton,1994) to expire.   Most conservatives or "extreme conservatives" have no problem with assault weapons.
          Guns are extremely dangerous, but guns do not kill people, people kill people!  I've had a first hand account of just how dangerous guns can be when they are in the wrong hands.  Having said that, I believe that it's our constitutional right to own and carry firearms.  But in order to have that right,  and not have the 2nd Amendment infringed upon, Boston University performed a complex study on gun violence and gun ownership in America.  The study confirmed that widespread gun ownership in America has fueled gun violence.  Whether we are talking about massacres such as: VTech(Apr. 16, 2007), Columbine(Apr. 20, 1999), Sandy Hook(Dec. 14, 2012) or solitary shootings like Trayvon Martin(Feb 26, 2012) and Michael Brown(Aug. 9, 2014).  There clearly is and always has been a serious problem with guns and gun violence in America.   The only way to fix or at least slow down the problem is to reform and strictly enforce gun control/rights with laws that will make people think twice before acting.  I fear that no matter how strict the laws and severe the punishment, gun violence in America isn't going anywhere.  It's an imperfect solution in an imperfect world.

there must be a complete overhaul of the current laws that congress has in place.  The current laws are followed poorly, so before we make new laws, the government needs to enforce the current ones. The U.S. government has to make it harder for the average, private citizen to purchase a gun or ammunition.  I think it starts with background checks. Presently, you can buy a gun at a gun show without having a background check performed.  We need a law that mandates strict background checks and waiting periods for all gun purchases, regardless of if its bought at a store or gun show.  I agree that assault rifles and auto-matic weapons are dangerous.  Weapons like that should be reserved for the military.  But whether it's a handgun or an assault rifle, both can kill you just as easy as the other.  With that being said, if private citizens are going to be able to own and keep assault weapons in their homes, they should be heavily regulated by strict laws.  The amount of guns in American households is steadily increasing(2012-- 34%,  2014--39%).  The amount of gun violence in America is also increasing each year.  In 2012, Professor Michael Siegel and two coauthors from