Kids For Cash.

These judges were supposed to be the people that carefully decipher what constitutes as breaking the law and what does not. These judges were making poor decisions and were trying to make quick decisions for their own benefit of making more money. They were sentenced to 7 years in prison, and not be able to have a position of “public trust” 10 years after their sentences. In my opinion, they should not be able to have that position at all, considering that they have broken the trust of the public so greatly.

These extremely corrupted judges are the reason for so many inmates in the prisons. The prisons are so crowded and probably the reason for all of the danger that goes on within the prison walls. The inmates are crowded into small cells in an over populated prison, obviously there is going to be fights, riots, etc. It is because of the judges, and the corruption that goes on behind closed doors, that the judges make poor decisions and incarcerate people that might not deserve it.

In my opinion, the judges were let off easy. If I was the judge sentencing them, I would put them to life in a prison they wrongly overpopulated.

Venezuela and USA.

Although the article raises some interesting points on how great of a president Chavez is, it does not seem to have any for Obama. The article is very one sided.

All it really talks about is how Chavez is doing so much better at running a country then Obama is. The truth to the situation is, no one is perfect. I'm sure Chavez hasn't miraculously made life so much better, he had to work for it. As for Obama, it is not like the USA was really doing much better with its previous president.

The article does have some truth to it though, we never read about how Obama is making drastic changes by building houses for homeless, and taking people out of poverty. It really raises the questions as to what exactly is he doing to help ? He has made all of these promises to raise the economy within the USA, but he honestly did not have a lot to work with when he started.

I believe that for the article to really have an impact it needs to show more of the two sides instead of just one.

                      

Canada's Bank Bailout.

Canada is in a financial debt crisis of about $64 BILLION. This is the biggest debt crisis in Canadain history.

The basic gist of what is being said is the banks in Canada are going bankrupt and in order to keep the businesses running they have rearranged the system to take the money from the CMHC (Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation).

As the prime minister, Stephen Harper has already stated, “this is not a bailout… this will cost the government nothing.”

How are we planning to pay out our own government, if they are not willing to come up with the money, instead they just rearrange the system in order to suit their needs. But it is not like the entire bank system is being changed. It was only changed for the big corporations so that more money could be generated. If I was to go to a bank, it would still be in the same systems as it always has been.

What really should be happening is that the government should let the banks go bankrupt and then have them owned by the people of Canada, this way our country won't be in a state of financial crisis.