Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley, a Democrat, has always had troubles with the conservatives living in rural Maryland, mainly over his evironmental agenda (which was central in his five years as Governor). O' Malley's evironmental agenda continues to clash with farmers, fisherman, and drillers. He proposed a ban on new septic systems, pushed for Chesapeake Bay cleanup, and withheld state funding from local governments.
Conservatives have always been riled by the governor's policies and agendas, but now, they believe he has overstepped his boundaries. They believe that Governor O'Malley should not be allowed to dictate how all the communities in Maryland are run. O'Malley has now increased taxes (sewer, tolls, and gas).
In a sense, a war between the Democratic governor and his conservative peoples has developed. O'Malley's real power will be tested in the upcoming months with the issues of same-sex marriage, wind development, and higher taxes on transport. The people are split over their feelings about how the governor has controlled Maryland these past five years.
Democrats (and proponents) are 100% sure that O'Malley's policies are for the best of the Maryland people. They believe he is effectively curbing sprawl, improving bay quality, and helping the rural people.
On the other hand, conservatives believe that O'Malley is monopolizing the power and not helping the rural folk at all. They believe that in the governor's goal for helping Maryland, he is stepping on the little people (or in this case, the rural conservatives). Most conservatives say that if he doesn't get his act together soon enough, who knows what will happen at the Iowa caucus.
In a sense, we won't truly know what will happen in the upcoming election. If the conservatives have their way, Governor O'Malley may not be re-elected. Conservatives from rural Maryland have never played a key role in deciding the election for O'Malley, but who knows, that could all change this year.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/gov-omalley-at-war-with-rural-maryland-republicans-say/2011/10/28/gIQAcEZCXM_story.html?wprss=rss_local
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Biggest Issue in Virginia
There are many issues concerning the state of Virginia such as environmental problems with the Chesapeake Bay, its political neutrality for the upcoming election, or perhaps transportation. But to me, the biggest issue is education.
Of course, a lot of money is being funneled into Fairfax County (supposedly the richest county), but not all the schools have been fortunate enough to experience this luxury. Schools like Herndon High School and Wakefield are in dire need of renovation, which isn't scheduled for another 5-6 years. Instead of renovating the entire school itself, the county should take on projects of fixing parts of the school, one at a time (starting with trailers).
I remember when I was taking the SAT a few months back at HHS. There were about 200 kids from different schools taking the exam at HHS. All of these students were complaining about how ugly or ghetto our school looked and were, of course, comparing it to how students from the school must look and act. At that moment, I felt shameful that I went to HHS. Our school has great teachers and good students (well, not all...but a relatively large amount) and it deserves to look better than how it is now (leaky ceilings, broken sidewalks, peeling paint, missing ceiling tiles, etc). Thankfully, our school has fairly good technology such as smart boards and new laptops.
Money should be spent on providing better resources such as technology and textbooks. All schools need either desktop computers or laptops. A television in every classroom that actually works right.
If a school in Northern Virginia in Fairfax County looks this crappy, I wouldn't be surprised if there were hundreds more that looked this way in all of Virginia.
Also, another major fix-up needs to be done about cafeteria food. It's unhealthy. It's greasy. It's disgusting. Students would actually rather starve that eat it. Not all students have the luxury of bagged lunches and must eat food from the school cafeteria. I feel bad for those poor, young souls.
Maybe a little more funding in the right places (*cough* like the education department *cough*) would do Virginia some good.
Of course, a lot of money is being funneled into Fairfax County (supposedly the richest county), but not all the schools have been fortunate enough to experience this luxury. Schools like Herndon High School and Wakefield are in dire need of renovation, which isn't scheduled for another 5-6 years. Instead of renovating the entire school itself, the county should take on projects of fixing parts of the school, one at a time (starting with trailers).
I remember when I was taking the SAT a few months back at HHS. There were about 200 kids from different schools taking the exam at HHS. All of these students were complaining about how ugly or ghetto our school looked and were, of course, comparing it to how students from the school must look and act. At that moment, I felt shameful that I went to HHS. Our school has great teachers and good students (well, not all...but a relatively large amount) and it deserves to look better than how it is now (leaky ceilings, broken sidewalks, peeling paint, missing ceiling tiles, etc). Thankfully, our school has fairly good technology such as smart boards and new laptops.
Money should be spent on providing better resources such as technology and textbooks. All schools need either desktop computers or laptops. A television in every classroom that actually works right.
If a school in Northern Virginia in Fairfax County looks this crappy, I wouldn't be surprised if there were hundreds more that looked this way in all of Virginia.
Also, another major fix-up needs to be done about cafeteria food. It's unhealthy. It's greasy. It's disgusting. Students would actually rather starve that eat it. Not all students have the luxury of bagged lunches and must eat food from the school cafeteria. I feel bad for those poor, young souls.
Maybe a little more funding in the right places (*cough* like the education department *cough*) would do Virginia some good.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Occupy Wall Street protests
Recently, an article was posted in the Washington Post describing the expansion of the Occupy Wall Street protests into mainstream and global prominence. The protests which started on September 17, 2011, with just several dozen people has expanded into a worldwide movement against the global financial system. The whole issue has been brought up over the fact that Wall Street has been colluding with the government in order to control the real estate problems, which rather than have benefits, has forced the economy to dwindle further.
The global movements have been relatively non-violent, not counting Rome and Massachusetts. In Rome, people were out on the streets protesting the mounting debt of the Italian economy. Police were forced to use tear-gas against the violent protesters who were lighting cars on fire. In the United States though, the movement now known as "Occupy Wall Street" has shed light on the troubling economic situation (not only in United States, but in the global economy). Protesters were angered over the government's constant bail out of banks, rather than aiding the people.
This idea is clearly showing the globalization of a movement that started in the United States. People in 900 cities all over the world are protesting about the problems their facing with the economic system. People have become united under a single voice and under a single cause. The article describes a growth in the "international solidarity."
This movement was probably not the best way to combine the efforts of the global population, but it has done just that. People all over the world are protesting in hopes to stand side by side with the protests on Wall Street. Another important note that has come up from the growth of these protests is that there are more people than government officials. The people ultimately make the decisions as they have now realized. The protesters will not stop until they have achieved their goals.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/occupy-wall-street-protests-go-global/2011/10/15/gIQAp7kimL_story.html?hpid=z1
The global movements have been relatively non-violent, not counting Rome and Massachusetts. In Rome, people were out on the streets protesting the mounting debt of the Italian economy. Police were forced to use tear-gas against the violent protesters who were lighting cars on fire. In the United States though, the movement now known as "Occupy Wall Street" has shed light on the troubling economic situation (not only in United States, but in the global economy). Protesters were angered over the government's constant bail out of banks, rather than aiding the people.
This idea is clearly showing the globalization of a movement that started in the United States. People in 900 cities all over the world are protesting about the problems their facing with the economic system. People have become united under a single voice and under a single cause. The article describes a growth in the "international solidarity."
This movement was probably not the best way to combine the efforts of the global population, but it has done just that. People all over the world are protesting in hopes to stand side by side with the protests on Wall Street. Another important note that has come up from the growth of these protests is that there are more people than government officials. The people ultimately make the decisions as they have now realized. The protesters will not stop until they have achieved their goals.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/occupy-wall-street-protests-go-global/2011/10/15/gIQAp7kimL_story.html?hpid=z1
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Report Card for President Obama
In order to grade President Obama accurately, I would have to understand how his role has helped solve certain issues in the United States during his presidency.
First, we have to take into consideration: healthcare. The first major issue that Obama sought to fix was providing universal health care to all Americans. The only problem with this issue is that not all Americans can afford health care. Why force Americans to get health care? It will only require the government to tax more heavily on the American people in order to fund health care for the uninsured. People can't afford to pay even more taxes in such an economic environment. This is majorly controversial issue that I don't see being solved any time soon.
Obama grade: B- (nice effort, but is it necessary?)
In light of the economic downturn, Obama came into presidency at a difficult time. He had set up some major promises to the American people. He first set out to create more jobs for the unemployed through his Jobs plan and his revised Jobs plan. There are two views on the unemployment issue, coming from the Conservatives and the Economists. The conservatives believe that Obama's jobs plan hasn't been effective thus far and the stimulus package hasn't even made a dent in decreasing the number of unemployed workers, so why would it help now? Conservatives have been against the plan from the very start. Economists are idealists. They believe that passing the bill will make a major difference.
I would give Obama an A- for effort and a C- for follow through. The previous stimulus package gave no serious benefits to the unemployed, but at least Obama is trying to fix this issue rather than sitting idlely by (like the consevatives) watching the unemployment rate increases. We'll see what happens in the future as Congress hasn't yet decided what will happen to the Jobs plan. It will most likely be cut off, but if it manages to get passed, I think it would be a major help.
War on Terror, or should I call it the Overseas Contingency Operation. Clearly, Obama hasn't really focused on this issue at all during his presidency because he doesn't want to be defined by this issue has Bush's presidency was. Obama is more focused on the economic issues at hand and has put off this issue. It was a good idea for Obama to focus on the other issues that are defining American society/economy (but after 4 years, has any real progress come of his focus? If he wants to be re-elected, he needs to turn it around). He did do one important thing: set his sights on getting back the troops. It's been long enough and Obama has realized what his predecessor Bush hadn't.
The main thing that I can remember about this issue that was heavily publicized was the killing of Osama bin Laden, which was a big win for Obama and America. Recently, more focus has been placed on American troops and efforts in other countries such as Libya.
Obama grade: B+
When it comes to whether Obama will be re-elected, we will have to wait till next year to find out. Obama definitely has a high chance of being re-elected unless his Jobs plan fails. The American people will have to reconsider whether they will continue to place their trust in Obama or look to a capable Republican candidate. He has a heavy chance of being re-elected if he keeps up his position to defend the American people, only the question comes to mind: can he deliver on his promises if America gives him another chance?
Obama grade: B
All I can say is...a lot of promises, not a lot of follow through.
First, we have to take into consideration: healthcare. The first major issue that Obama sought to fix was providing universal health care to all Americans. The only problem with this issue is that not all Americans can afford health care. Why force Americans to get health care? It will only require the government to tax more heavily on the American people in order to fund health care for the uninsured. People can't afford to pay even more taxes in such an economic environment. This is majorly controversial issue that I don't see being solved any time soon.
Obama grade: B- (nice effort, but is it necessary?)
In light of the economic downturn, Obama came into presidency at a difficult time. He had set up some major promises to the American people. He first set out to create more jobs for the unemployed through his Jobs plan and his revised Jobs plan. There are two views on the unemployment issue, coming from the Conservatives and the Economists. The conservatives believe that Obama's jobs plan hasn't been effective thus far and the stimulus package hasn't even made a dent in decreasing the number of unemployed workers, so why would it help now? Conservatives have been against the plan from the very start. Economists are idealists. They believe that passing the bill will make a major difference.
I would give Obama an A- for effort and a C- for follow through. The previous stimulus package gave no serious benefits to the unemployed, but at least Obama is trying to fix this issue rather than sitting idlely by (like the consevatives) watching the unemployment rate increases. We'll see what happens in the future as Congress hasn't yet decided what will happen to the Jobs plan. It will most likely be cut off, but if it manages to get passed, I think it would be a major help.
War on Terror, or should I call it the Overseas Contingency Operation. Clearly, Obama hasn't really focused on this issue at all during his presidency because he doesn't want to be defined by this issue has Bush's presidency was. Obama is more focused on the economic issues at hand and has put off this issue. It was a good idea for Obama to focus on the other issues that are defining American society/economy (but after 4 years, has any real progress come of his focus? If he wants to be re-elected, he needs to turn it around). He did do one important thing: set his sights on getting back the troops. It's been long enough and Obama has realized what his predecessor Bush hadn't.
The main thing that I can remember about this issue that was heavily publicized was the killing of Osama bin Laden, which was a big win for Obama and America. Recently, more focus has been placed on American troops and efforts in other countries such as Libya.
Obama grade: B+
When it comes to whether Obama will be re-elected, we will have to wait till next year to find out. Obama definitely has a high chance of being re-elected unless his Jobs plan fails. The American people will have to reconsider whether they will continue to place their trust in Obama or look to a capable Republican candidate. He has a heavy chance of being re-elected if he keeps up his position to defend the American people, only the question comes to mind: can he deliver on his promises if America gives him another chance?
Obama grade: B
All I can say is...a lot of promises, not a lot of follow through.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Discrimination Against Unemployed
The article speaks about how the unemployed are being discriminated against in their search for jobs. The unemployed workers are not recieving jobs at various companies because of their lack of having a job. Companies are more interested in works who already have a job, or have been unemployed for only a short period of time. The unemployed are losing opportunities/jobs because of their unemployed status. Obama's jobs bill seeks to ban companies from discriminating against unemployed people and to prohibit unemployment agencies from disqualifying applicants based on their unemployment.
Of course, having a job shows companies that they have good work ethic and are skilled, but not having one shouldn't be the deciding factor on how to disqualify a worthy candidate.
Obama's previous jobs plan made no difference to the American people (the number of jobs weren't increased), but doing nothing will not help the unemployed either (*cough* Republicans *cough* Why don't you come up with something, instead of sitting on your high horse looking down on the menial workers?).
The unemployed need an opportunity to recieve employment, but Obama's jobs bill will most likely not go through because of the heavy resentment toward it from the Republicans. If the bill fails, according the the article, Democrats will remind voters that they tried and that it wasn't their fault that the bill was denied. Is trying really enough to make the difference? So many families are trying to make ends meet and this jobs bill could majorly help them, but without it and without any other helpful measures, more and more people will be unemployed and more likely will stay unemployed.
Side note: Parties lines are extremely bothersome. Why the hell should it matter whether your Republican or Democrat, when it comes to helping the American people? In a time like this, when there are so many umployed people, the parties need to work together to come up with a decision rather than arguing constantly. Arguing isn't going to help anyone.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/unemployed-seek-protection-against-job-bias-084916836.html
Of course, having a job shows companies that they have good work ethic and are skilled, but not having one shouldn't be the deciding factor on how to disqualify a worthy candidate.
Obama's previous jobs plan made no difference to the American people (the number of jobs weren't increased), but doing nothing will not help the unemployed either (*cough* Republicans *cough* Why don't you come up with something, instead of sitting on your high horse looking down on the menial workers?).
The unemployed need an opportunity to recieve employment, but Obama's jobs bill will most likely not go through because of the heavy resentment toward it from the Republicans. If the bill fails, according the the article, Democrats will remind voters that they tried and that it wasn't their fault that the bill was denied. Is trying really enough to make the difference? So many families are trying to make ends meet and this jobs bill could majorly help them, but without it and without any other helpful measures, more and more people will be unemployed and more likely will stay unemployed.
Side note: Parties lines are extremely bothersome. Why the hell should it matter whether your Republican or Democrat, when it comes to helping the American people? In a time like this, when there are so many umployed people, the parties need to work together to come up with a decision rather than arguing constantly. Arguing isn't going to help anyone.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/unemployed-seek-protection-against-job-bias-084916836.html
Guns
I am all for increased gun control laws, if that means keeping Americans safe.
For a AP Gov't assignment, we had to learn about how an act or bill affected the United States. I researched the Brady Bill. The Brady Bill was a mandate that required all individuals to complete a background check and follow the waiting period before recieving a gun. These checks were needed in order to make sure certain individuals weren't a threat to citizen safety.
I really had no stance on this issue because I didn't really understand the full depths of it. Now that we are learning more about how certain political issues are affecting the public and how different people feel about this issue, I have made up my mind.
I think that we need stricter gun control laws, so that incidents like what happened in the VT massacre and in Tucson don't happen again. The federal government needs to be stricter in their decision to give guns out to people. In the VT massacre, the shooter had been mentally ill. He had completed the background check and the waiting period, but failed to complete a test on his mental health. It was recommended by the court that he complete treatment for his condition and then he was administered a gun. He did not complete the treatment. The court didn't follow through to make sure that he did. So many innocent people died in that situation that could have been stopped if the government had kept closer tabs on the people they allow to have guns.
Giving guns to every single person in the United States doesn't solve any problem. The government is just making the problem worse. People will become reliant on the use of guns for everything. Plus, shouldn't the American people feel safe enough to not need guns? What is the government doing with our tax dollars? They should be making sure that the police force is able to help the American people to the best of their ability. It's the government's job to keep people safe.
Of course, people should be able to take care of themselves, but then it comes to question: why do we need government then (if it's every man for himself)?
Yeah, so that's most of my opinion on the issue.
For a AP Gov't assignment, we had to learn about how an act or bill affected the United States. I researched the Brady Bill. The Brady Bill was a mandate that required all individuals to complete a background check and follow the waiting period before recieving a gun. These checks were needed in order to make sure certain individuals weren't a threat to citizen safety.
I really had no stance on this issue because I didn't really understand the full depths of it. Now that we are learning more about how certain political issues are affecting the public and how different people feel about this issue, I have made up my mind.
I think that we need stricter gun control laws, so that incidents like what happened in the VT massacre and in Tucson don't happen again. The federal government needs to be stricter in their decision to give guns out to people. In the VT massacre, the shooter had been mentally ill. He had completed the background check and the waiting period, but failed to complete a test on his mental health. It was recommended by the court that he complete treatment for his condition and then he was administered a gun. He did not complete the treatment. The court didn't follow through to make sure that he did. So many innocent people died in that situation that could have been stopped if the government had kept closer tabs on the people they allow to have guns.
Giving guns to every single person in the United States doesn't solve any problem. The government is just making the problem worse. People will become reliant on the use of guns for everything. Plus, shouldn't the American people feel safe enough to not need guns? What is the government doing with our tax dollars? They should be making sure that the police force is able to help the American people to the best of their ability. It's the government's job to keep people safe.
Of course, people should be able to take care of themselves, but then it comes to question: why do we need government then (if it's every man for himself)?
Yeah, so that's most of my opinion on the issue.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Political Party
Question of the Week
What Political Party are you most closely aligned with? Why?
So, we took several quizzes and I ended up getting: Post Modern, Slightly Republican, Liberal, Centrist leaning toward Libertarian. I don't know what side I am currently leaning toward, but I am an Independent. Now, I know that there are several definitions of being an "Independent." I think both parties are correct on certain issues and when voting time comes, it will be those issues that will be my deciding factor. When I'm old enough to vote, I will definitely vote based on the issues at the time (Obama better change something about Healthcare).
I know that some of you may be thinking, "Oh, she doesn't know which side she's on. She can't make up her mind." Okay, cool your jets. It's not a bad thing that I can't decide at the age of seventeen which political party I will be voting for, for the rest of my life. I'm weighing my options. I'm not going to blindly vote Democrat or Republican without looking at what issues they plan to change. Whether the candidate is Democrat/Republican is not my concern.
Alright, since I'm a self-proclaimed Independent, most of you don't know what my views on certain issues are. If were Republican or Democrat, some of you would already have your mind made up about me.
Abortion: Pro-life (at the moment)
Gay Rights: Pro
Death Penalty: Against
Guns: Against
Environment: Against (only if excessive funding is spent on trying to stop Global Warming)
Funding Stem Cell Research: Pro
Legalizing marijuana: Against
That's all I feel like listing at the current moment. I may add more if I feel like it.
Sorry if my indecisiveness bothers you.
Side note: Some of you (or maybe it's just me) may have noticed that the timing on my posts is off. For some reason, it keeps defaulting to pacific time. Haha, that's punny. I might actually leave it that way because my blog is called "Turning Back Time" and it's literally turning back time. Hahaha.
What Political Party are you most closely aligned with? Why?
So, we took several quizzes and I ended up getting: Post Modern, Slightly Republican, Liberal, Centrist leaning toward Libertarian. I don't know what side I am currently leaning toward, but I am an Independent. Now, I know that there are several definitions of being an "Independent." I think both parties are correct on certain issues and when voting time comes, it will be those issues that will be my deciding factor. When I'm old enough to vote, I will definitely vote based on the issues at the time (Obama better change something about Healthcare).
I know that some of you may be thinking, "Oh, she doesn't know which side she's on. She can't make up her mind." Okay, cool your jets. It's not a bad thing that I can't decide at the age of seventeen which political party I will be voting for, for the rest of my life. I'm weighing my options. I'm not going to blindly vote Democrat or Republican without looking at what issues they plan to change. Whether the candidate is Democrat/Republican is not my concern.
Alright, since I'm a self-proclaimed Independent, most of you don't know what my views on certain issues are. If were Republican or Democrat, some of you would already have your mind made up about me.
Abortion: Pro-life (at the moment)
Gay Rights: Pro
Death Penalty: Against
Guns: Against
Environment: Against (only if excessive funding is spent on trying to stop Global Warming)
Funding Stem Cell Research: Pro
Legalizing marijuana: Against
That's all I feel like listing at the current moment. I may add more if I feel like it.
Sorry if my indecisiveness bothers you.
Side note: Some of you (or maybe it's just me) may have noticed that the timing on my posts is off. For some reason, it keeps defaulting to pacific time. Haha, that's punny. I might actually leave it that way because my blog is called "Turning Back Time" and it's literally turning back time. Hahaha.
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Obamacare
OBAMACARE
Back in August, part of Obama's healthcare law was declared as unconstitutional which halted the law in its tracks. This declaration didn't completely strike down the plan, but it will have major effects on the official Supreme Court ruling (which is expected to be in June 2012). The Obama administration is pushing for an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court after the declaration by the appeals court. But in the few days since the administration called for an appeal, 26 states have already vetoed the law.
Universal healthcare will be the most important issue for the upcoming 2012 election. President Obama has been working toward getting his law passed since 2010, but the law has hit major roadblocks. With the 2012 election coming soon, Obama needs to get a win in order to get reelected.
The issue of universal healthcare has been extremely controversial. The liberal minded are seeking to expand healthcare in order to provide coverage to all citizens and residents of the United States. Passing the law will require states to provide healthcare coverage to all of its legal residents which will increase their burden.
The idea of universal healthcare doesn't mean that the government will be paying for the expensive healthcare for all citizens and residents. It just means that all citizens are required to have healthcare, which is where the American people have to question, how will they pay for it? Where will the money come from? Will current citizens who are hard at work have to fund the healthcare vendetta through taxes, just as with Social Security? Then again why should people who cannot afford healthcare, be forced to purchase it?
Americans fear that if the law goes through, their expenses for insurance will go up while the overall healthcare coverage will go down.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/business-group-appeals-health-law-supreme-court-143800340.html
Alright, just one for assignment left to do.
Back in August, part of Obama's healthcare law was declared as unconstitutional which halted the law in its tracks. This declaration didn't completely strike down the plan, but it will have major effects on the official Supreme Court ruling (which is expected to be in June 2012). The Obama administration is pushing for an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court after the declaration by the appeals court. But in the few days since the administration called for an appeal, 26 states have already vetoed the law.
Universal healthcare will be the most important issue for the upcoming 2012 election. President Obama has been working toward getting his law passed since 2010, but the law has hit major roadblocks. With the 2012 election coming soon, Obama needs to get a win in order to get reelected.
The issue of universal healthcare has been extremely controversial. The liberal minded are seeking to expand healthcare in order to provide coverage to all citizens and residents of the United States. Passing the law will require states to provide healthcare coverage to all of its legal residents which will increase their burden.
The idea of universal healthcare doesn't mean that the government will be paying for the expensive healthcare for all citizens and residents. It just means that all citizens are required to have healthcare, which is where the American people have to question, how will they pay for it? Where will the money come from? Will current citizens who are hard at work have to fund the healthcare vendetta through taxes, just as with Social Security? Then again why should people who cannot afford healthcare, be forced to purchase it?
Americans fear that if the law goes through, their expenses for insurance will go up while the overall healthcare coverage will go down.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/business-group-appeals-health-law-supreme-court-143800340.html
Alright, just one for assignment left to do.
New TV Shows
WOOHOO. Second blog post. I felt like adding more information to my blog since all it has is this boring dead roses background and one blog post.
RANT!
Well, not really a full-fledged rant...more like my opinion--just completely uncensored (alright, slightly sensored for the sake of the young readers).
So as you've read in my last blog post, I've procrastinated the past two days away (Fri/Sat). Yesterday, I spent most of my time watching all the new tv shows that I'd missed and I was competely surprised at how good the new tv shows are this season. Too bad I actually don't have time to watch them.
PAN AM: B+
From my understanding, it's a tv show about the life of the stewardesses and pilots on Pan Am flights, back in their heyday. The trailer for the tv show seriously didn't do it any justice. I thought it was going to be a completely boring tv show, but I was surprised that I actually ended up liking it.
THE PLAYBOY CLUB: B+
Yes, the show is a little derogatory toward feminism (but that's what the time period was like). It definitely has got some strong points. I actually like the characters in the tv show. I don't actually know if I'll watch the show again, but I thought the first episode was awesome--the right amount of espionage and drama.
REVENGE: A+
Alright. I love this tv show already and its only had two episodes so far. I totally love the idea that one outsider-girl (main character, Amanda Clark) can take down all of her deceased father's ex-friends and co-workers as payback for what they did to her family. I love the main character because everyone thinks she is sweet and innocent, but then the viewer actually gets her side of the story and sees that she's not so innocent after all.
HART OF DIXIE: C
Eh, it was just...eh. The tv show is about a doctor who gets kicked out of her job (the one she's dreamed about forever) and is forced to move to a little town to take over a practice. Frankly, I found that it lacked some real substance, but I will continue watching this show only because my favorite OC-actor, Rachel Bilson, is the lead.
THE SECRET CIRCLE: B
It was extremely interesting. Some of characters really creep me out though (especially the father). I really hate the fact that basically all the side characters are being killed off one by one. As long the tv show doesn't turn into some 90210 or Gossip Girl-reject, I'll continue watching.
I'll probably end up editing this post later in the week to add other tv shows that I should watch.
Any new tv show recommendations?
RANT!
Well, not really a full-fledged rant...more like my opinion--just completely uncensored (alright, slightly sensored for the sake of the young readers).
So as you've read in my last blog post, I've procrastinated the past two days away (Fri/Sat). Yesterday, I spent most of my time watching all the new tv shows that I'd missed and I was competely surprised at how good the new tv shows are this season. Too bad I actually don't have time to watch them.
PAN AM: B+
From my understanding, it's a tv show about the life of the stewardesses and pilots on Pan Am flights, back in their heyday. The trailer for the tv show seriously didn't do it any justice. I thought it was going to be a completely boring tv show, but I was surprised that I actually ended up liking it.
THE PLAYBOY CLUB: B+
Yes, the show is a little derogatory toward feminism (but that's what the time period was like). It definitely has got some strong points. I actually like the characters in the tv show. I don't actually know if I'll watch the show again, but I thought the first episode was awesome--the right amount of espionage and drama.
REVENGE: A+
Alright. I love this tv show already and its only had two episodes so far. I totally love the idea that one outsider-girl (main character, Amanda Clark) can take down all of her deceased father's ex-friends and co-workers as payback for what they did to her family. I love the main character because everyone thinks she is sweet and innocent, but then the viewer actually gets her side of the story and sees that she's not so innocent after all.
HART OF DIXIE: C
Eh, it was just...eh. The tv show is about a doctor who gets kicked out of her job (the one she's dreamed about forever) and is forced to move to a little town to take over a practice. Frankly, I found that it lacked some real substance, but I will continue watching this show only because my favorite OC-actor, Rachel Bilson, is the lead.
THE SECRET CIRCLE: B
It was extremely interesting. Some of characters really creep me out though (especially the father). I really hate the fact that basically all the side characters are being killed off one by one. As long the tv show doesn't turn into some 90210 or Gossip Girl-reject, I'll continue watching.
I'll probably end up editing this post later in the week to add other tv shows that I should watch.
Any new tv show recommendations?
Procrastination
It's 9:15 on Saturday night and I've completely procrastinated my day. I'm currently watching Mean Girls while writing this blog, so I'm going to assume that this one blog post will take me an hour to finish. Procrastinating will definitely be the death of me.
For those of you who are actually spending your time reading this, I should introduce myself but I'm not going to. If you read through my blog posts that are yet to come, you'll get a better understanding of who I am. So, until then. But if you truly cannot wait any longer, I suggest you check out the "about me" section on this page (which I will update...when I'm not procrastinating).
Alright, I'm going to cut this blog post short because I'm dying of hunger and I should actually get started on my homework.
EDIT:// I just realized how utterly boring and girly my background is. I'm going to have to change that.
For those of you who are actually spending your time reading this, I should introduce myself but I'm not going to. If you read through my blog posts that are yet to come, you'll get a better understanding of who I am. So, until then. But if you truly cannot wait any longer, I suggest you check out the "about me" section on this page (which I will update...when I'm not procrastinating).
Alright, I'm going to cut this blog post short because I'm dying of hunger and I should actually get started on my homework.
EDIT:// I just realized how utterly boring and girly my background is. I'm going to have to change that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)