The tax takes 6.2 percent of a person’s income and uses it to pay for Social Security benefits. The proposed cut would drop this down 2 percentage points and would benefit over 160 million Americans. The cut will also not have any effect on a person’s future Social Security benefits.

Congress passed an extension of this tax cut right before they took their holiday break but that extension only lasts two months. It will expire on Feb. 29. If the policy is not renewed it would raise the taxes for those 160 million Americans. Four million Americans may even lose their unemployment insurance benefits.

House and Senate meetings began on Tuesday to figure out how to finance the 2 percent tax reduction.

“We should be able to get it done,” said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz). “The Joint Select Committee identified a lot of good offsets and so the opportunity for us to get it done is there.”

Other Republicans are also optimistic about the extension. “There’s a broad agreement on doing the payroll tax holiday through the end of the year. Republicans and Democrats agree on that,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. “The problem is the paying for it.”

Republicans want to include job creation measures. Part of those measures is to create the Keystone pipeline, which would stretch  from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. Republicans also want less environmental regulations for businesses.

The Democrats’ counterproposal is to place additional taxes on millionaires. The fear is that the ideological differences will lead to brinkmanship. But even Republicans leaders believe they will overcome these obstacles.

“We are in a formal conference with the Senate, and I’m confident that we’ll be able to resolve this fairly quickly,” said Speaker of the House John Boehner.

But Republican confidence rests on the assumption that Obama will agree to make the concession of the pipeline. No agreement has been made yet.

Obama may need to compromise considering the payroll tax cut is his “most pressing matter,” according to his spokesman Jay Carney. Obama plans to fully push for the extension in Congress in the upcoming weeks.

“This is a make-or-break moment for the middle class, and those who are struggling to get into the middle class,” said Chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers Alan Krueger. “While the continued expansion is encouraging, faster growth is needed to replace the jobs lost in the recent downturn and to reduce long-term unemployment.”

Expanding the payroll tax cut would be “key to avoiding recession,” according to Mark Zandi, the chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, a financial risk management firm.

The economy will be the biggest determining factor for the 2012 elections. If Obama and many Americans want to retain their current living situations, Washington must make the necessary compromises to get the economy rolling.

The president asked an online town hall questioner Monday to send him her husband’s  résumé, insisting he wanted to look into why the man remained out of work despite his background as a semiconductor engineer.

“I meant what I said, if you send me your husband’s  résumé, I’d be interested in finding out exactly what’s happening right there,” Obama told the questioner, Jennifer Wedel of Fort Worth, Texas. He told Wedel that according to what he was hearing from industry, such high-tech fields are in great demand and her husband “should be able to find something right away.”

Wedel told Obama that despite what he said, her husband had been out of work for three years. She wanted to know why foreign workers were getting visas for high-skilled work.

The exchange came as Obama appeared in a live video chat room known as a “Hangout,” part of online search giant Google’s social networking site Google Plus.

He was answering questions submitted via the Google Inc.-owned video site YouTube, as well as interacting live with Wedel and four others in the Hangout.

The post-State of the Union session was part of the White House focus on social media. In past such events – with Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and earlier YouTube sessions following previous State of the Union addresses – Obama answered questions that had been submitted via online networks. But Monday’s event allowed him to interact with a selection of his questioners, leading to more substantive exchanges as they pushed him on his stances.

Wedel’s insistence that the president’s claims about the demand for high-skilled workers weren’t being born out for her husband led to the president’s offer to take a look at his résumé.

“I’ll have to take you up on that,” she told him. And Obama came back to it after covering a range of issues in the 45-minute session, telling Wedel, “Remember to send me that information!”

Obama got a variety of questions on the economy, and defended his policies on small businesses and innovation.

An Occupy protester sent in a video saying she was out of work and asking Obama: “I need help. I’m 53. What am I going to do?”

The president’s response, in part: “The most important thing I can do for folks who are out of work right now is grow the economy.” The president was also asked about online piracy. Congress recently delayed action on legislation cracking down on online piracy after opposition from Internet companies including Google.

Obama said he thought it was possible to protect intellectual property that creates jobs in the U.S., while still respecting the integrity of the Internet as an open system.

More than 133,000 questions were submitted and voted on by YouTube users. Google officials selected the questions to ask based in part on those results.

Organizers said the No. 1 voted question was about the potential extradition to the U.S. of Richard O’Dwyer, a British student accused of setting up a website that gave people access to films and TV shows for free in violation of copyright laws.

Obama said he wasn’t personally involved in the case but the administration wanted to ensure that intellectual property is protected “in a way that’s consistent with Internet freedom.”

Former Senator Rick Santorum grabbed 13.3 percent of the vote.

Rep. Ron Paul claimed that he is not backing out of the race after posting only 7 percent of the vote. 

Prior to this win, it seemed as though the wheels were coming to a halt for Romney.  After a recall from an earlier Iowa victory and a devastating blow in South Carolina.  For many candidates, these factors could have been rather detrimental. Certainly for Mitt Romney, the latter loss may have brought about painful comparisons to the 2000 John McCain campaign.

However, cutting his losses in South Carolina, the former Massachusetts governor realized that Florida had to be a must win.

Not only would victory look better, but the state’s winner-take-all issue is vital as well.  To obtain this goal, Romney had to face up to one of the bitter realities of modern day campaigns: the negative attack.

When Romney began his quest for the presidency, he preferred to stump with the sense of optimism.  He generally attempted to point to America’s greatest strengths and future potential.

When it would come down to criticism, it would be saved for President Obama. It sounded rather naive at times, but for the first couple of months it carried him forward.

Once Gingrich began to make a comeback, Romney realized he had to take further action.  He moved beyond the issues, attacking the public past of Gingrich, questioning his tenure as Speaker of the House in the 1990s and the time he worked for Freddie Mac.

According to The New York Times, the Romney campaign aired an ad that referred to Gingrich making a profit from the housing crisis while other Floridians suffered.

Meanwhile, in the Gingrich camp, the mood remained somewhat mixed.  Several, including the former Speaker of the House, went into the Florida primary with a sense of optimism.  Gingrich began to imply that the Romney camp was beginning to run scared, according to The New York Times.

But as the week continued, it was Gingrich who seemed to be on the defensive. The first mistake came from an ad attacking Romney by portraying him as anti-immigrant, meant to appeal to Cuban Americans.

This was sharply criticized by Sen. Marco Rubio, the popular Cuban-American senator who remained neutral in the primary, “I didn’t think it was accurate.”

Then Gingrich slipped up in what should have been his specialty, a debate forum.

Addressing the current state of the space industry, he proposed that he would establish a colony on the moon during his presidency.

In response, Romney looked at his opponent and said that he would fire any advisor who proposed such a policy.

Romney’s change in approach, as well as increased spending, appear to be paying off. Recent polls showed him maintaining a steady lead in Florida leading up to the primary.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Romney’s support ranged across many areas and demographics.

He lead among Hispanics, veterans, men, women (largely put off by Gingrich’s personal life) and even has a slight edge on evangelical voters.

Certainly, Gingrich has hinted that he is willing to take his campaign to the convention, which hasn’t happened in the Republican Party since 1976.

Either way, it should be an interesting campaign, in the weeks and possible months to follow. One thing is for sure, no matter who wins, the party must strongly unite in order to take on the president in November.

When it comes to election, the goal is all too clear: get to the end and come out victorious.  That’s all well and good; it should be the primary goal for these candidates.  But at the same time, I cannot remember the last time where an election had even 50 percent of its time devoted to the issues. Now it seems as though candidates are faced with an endless barrage of attacks.  Don’t get me wrong.  This may sound cynical on the surface, but I believe that negative attacks are sometimes vital. If one candidate tends to disagree with another candidate’s positions, then he/she has a right to attack. That being said, it can only go to a certain point.

In the last 50-some years, we can look at the changes in style of campaigning. The first appearance of negative ads were in 1964, when LBJ aired the infamous daisy ad against Barry Goldwater. By 1988, things had gotten much worse. Both candidates George Bush and Michael Dukakis seldom covered the issues of that year in order to make jabbing attacks at each other. While voters still went to the polls, they nevertheless expressed their discontent for the careless conduct of both candidates. In recent years, this has continued to play out. President Bush and John Kerry both chose to go after the others’ Vietnam War records. There was the attack on Obama about issues ranging from his religion to place of birth.  Meanwhile, the Democrats chose to find any picture of  John McCain with then-unpopular president Bush and claim to be his natural heir, ignoring any of his actual votes in the Senate.

I am still not sure what to expect.  Early on Mitt Romney seemed to be pursuing a course of positive focus. It is true that he attacked Obama, but this was all a matter of his policies as President.  Of course, once Newt Gingrich began to creep up on his lead, negativity seemed to be the only way to go. Fortunately, it seems as though Romney has managed to focus on Gingrich’s public career rather than his three marriages. Likewise, Gingrich has seemed to attack Romney’s record as governor instead of his Mormon faith.  It is signs such as these that give me hope.

If the candidates behave themselves and do their job, I will be happy. Voters have a job too. In today’s society, many seem upset with stories pertaining to gossip. Polls had shown that many Americans either had problems with Romney merely because of his faith and with Gingrich because of his marital history.  Personally, I do not believe that a candidate for public office should be chastised for his/her private life.  If Americans had always done this, some of our greatest leaders would have never been elected. So, at the end of the day, it is just as much the job of the American voter as it is the presidential candidates to understand the serious matters facing the nation and vote on what really counts.

If the GOP wants to finally start building party unity and momentum, Mitt Romney’s victory in Florida should be the signal fire for those who actually care about building strength for the presidential election (which is now only a surprisingly close 10 months away).

And this is why:

Romney can stop dividing his party by ending his carpet-bombing of Gingrich with negative ads. Romney spent over $9 million in Florida, whereas Gingrich spent only $3.8 million.

To be frank, as much as I dislike Gingrich, there is not much honor in resorting to a relentless campaign of television and radio ads tearing apart your opponent (one TV commmercial ended saying “If Newt Gingrich wins, this man would be very happy,” as a picture of Obama showed on the screen).

In 2008, Romney also led all candidates in Florida by spending $5.6 million, followed by Rudy Giuliani at $3 million, and Sen. John McCain at $2.1 million.

McCain, despite spending the least on advertising, still won.

Romney learned from his mistakes and spent more. Not only did he spend more, but he spent more on negative advertising than self-promotion advertisting.

So what does this say about our political culture?

Last week, for those of you who read, I talked about how boring the candidates have become and how the race has almost lost a sort of integrity that past races seemed to have.

This year, especially in Florida, mud-slinging has been rampant. It’s always been present, but Romney may have just clinched the nomination with this looked-down-upon tool.

But, Romney is running by legendary Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis’ famous motto, “just win, baby.”

Romney stepped his finances and advertisements into high-gear, causing the American people to question where to the draw the line on how we should advertise politics and perhaps even how much money we should spend on campaigns.

Should we condemn Romney for his somewhat dishonorable tactics to win Florida then? Romney himself acknowledged that his negative ad blitz was working very well leading up to the primary.

We should not – yet at least. Perhaps this was a necessary evil. Perhaps Newt was hurting his party by hanging on, delaying the inevitable and hurting Romney in the process.

This could create a huge push forward for Romney against Obama. But if he does not live up to his promises, Romney will be branded as a power seeking mud-slinger.

Instead of resorting to mud-slinging to bring down his fellow Republican candidates – and thereby divide his party – he can aim his guns at Obama, which he already started in his victory speech after clinching Florida, “Mr. President, you were elected to lead, you chose to follow, and now it’s time to get out of the way.”

Whatever the case, the GOP needs to make their decision now.

This bipartisan legislation will now move on to the U.S. House of Representatives, and if passed, it will go to President Obama.

Although this legislation does not specifically mention China as a potential violator, officials on both sides of this discussion trust that China is the prime target for this reform.

Those in favor of this legislation believe China to be guilty of currency manipulation, which is simply the purposeful intervention of a government to alter the value of their currency.

This can either be in increasing or decreasing the value of one nation’s currency in comparison to that of another country.

For the case against China, this manipulation – if factually correct – has the effect of generating an artificial value of the yuan and impacts trade by making Chinese exports much more desirable to the U.S., and U.S. exports to China much less desirable; therefore contributing to a greater U.S.-China trade deficit.

Supporting this sentiment, Paul Krugman, a professor of economics and international affairs at Princeton University said in a New York Times column, “We can and should take action against countries that are keeping their currencies undervalued, and thereby standing in the way of a much-needed decline in our trade deficit. That, above all, means China. And none of the arguments against holding China accountable can stand serious scrutiny.”

The proponents of this legislation advocate that this reform legislation will place greater consequences for countries, like China, who they accuse of artificially valuing the yuan.

This depreciation of the yuan, they argue, is creating job loss and an unfair trade deficit in the United States and that this reform will help to provide the U.S. with the necessary legal provisions required to counter currency misalignment, and in effect counter massive job loss and the trade deficits.

Opposed to the legislation, John Soper, of John Carroll’s economics department, said, “Given that 79 senators voted for this, it’s equal stupidity on both sides. They are pandering to the no-nothings in society who are unhappy with unemployment and with an unemployment rate above 9 percent for two years, people start to do really crazy things and congressmen, and senators, are simply reflecting what their constituents want.”

Although this legislation is bipartisan and passed with a safe majority in the Senate, some still have reservations about the possible repercussions of this legislation. China is the United States’ fastest growing export market, and many fear that this reform act is sending a message that will begin a trade war with China.

For instance, Soper said, “If this goes through, the first thing the Chinese will do is pass similar foolish regulations.  Tit for tat. Retaliation is the first response after the shot over this bow and who will that help?  We [the U.S.] are a signatory in the World Trade Organization, and these types of restrictions put us in violation of the WTO.”

This concern over a potential WTO violation is echoed by those in the Cato Institute who indicate that treating currencies that have been artificially undervalued as an actionable subsidy will in all likelihood fail to comply with the rules of the WTO.

It is clear that this legislation calls into question a greater gamut of concerns than simply jobs and trade deficits.

The U.S. relationship with China will be affected if President Obama does sign this legislation into law; yet at this point it is still up to the House to decide if the benefits outweigh the potential costs of reform and if the justification provided in the legislation is applicable to China’s alleged offenses.

It contains 50 states that are distinct in their own way, but perhaps none are more distinguishable than California.

The largest and most diverse in population, it has led our nation with its many innovations.

Once again, it did not fail to break form by introducing yet another first.

On Saturday, Oct. 8, California Gov. Jerry Brown successfully signed the California DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) Act into law.

This will enable youth students in the state,  who are undocumented immigrants, the ability to attend state schools while receiving state aid.

Brown shot down the notion from critics that he was introducing a form of affirmative action, claiming that it “ducked a costly legal battle,” as reported by The Wall Street Journal.

The law is not technically new because it is an addition to another one established in July 2011.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the law is scheduled to take effect as of Jan. 1, 2013. The actual figures for California’s DREAM Act are quite decisive.

It has been estimated by the California Department of Finance that there would be some 2,500 students eligible for these grants.  With a program that is subsidized around $1.4 billion, the bill for this program is expected to cost nearly $14.5 million.

Aside from the economic citations (although not disregarding), the law has and is expected to bring about both praise and controversy.

The bill was initially shot down last year, and it draws considerable attention due to California’s widespread diversity throughout the state, including a large population of Hispanics.  

The 2010 U.S. census found around 37.6 percent of the population in California was Hispanic.

The state’s other youthful demographics have expressed their distaste with the bill.

Indeed, the same day the bill was signed into law, protest broke out at the University of California, Berkley, according to The New York Times.

While California is the first state to pass legislation pertaining to the immigrant education concern, it is not the only state to reevaluate the matter.

In both Alabama and Illinois, the state governments sought to face their own immigrant situations.

Alabama passed legislation to check the legality of public school students.

In Illinois, the state passed a law similar to the California law.

Although these two states acted differently in their approach to the immigration issue, they nevertheless demonstrate the growing significance of the matter.

The demonstrations quickly turned violent as protesters and security forces clashed creating the deadliest spark of violence in months.

Most of the clashes were between the protesters and military personnel. However, some perpetrators, assumed to be thugs, are believed to have implanted themselves amidst the Copts and provoked the security forces igniting a deadly response.

Egypt’s Coptic Christians, who make up about 10 percent of Egypt’s 80 million residents, accuse the ruling military council, which has been in power since February, of being too lenient on extremists by failing to criminally prosecute those responsible for the acts of violence against the church.

Sectarian tensions have greatly increased since the toppling of President Hosni Mubarak earlier this year. Christians are worried as ultraconservative Muslim ideology – which was banned under Mubarak’s regime – spreads across the country.

“What is taking place is not clashes between Muslims and Christians but attempts to provoke chaos and dissent,” Prime Minister Essam Sharaf said.

According to various news reports, some security officials dressed in riot gear and marched along with civilian Muslims chanting, “The people want to bring down the Christians.”

Accounts of the violence also spread through social media. Hani Bushra, an Egyptian-American, who was attacked in Egypt on Sunday, gave his account of the events via a Facebook note, “Suddenly a mob came to the police saying ‘Christians where are you, Islam is here.’ They were not stopped by anyone and were cheered by army units.”

On the other hand, some Muslims stood side by side with the Copts supporting their cause chanting, “Muslims and Christians are one hand.”

Eyewitnesses claim that security forces fired tear gas, rubber bullets and even live ammunition into the gathering crowd in an attempt to disperse them.

“I saw civilians running past my window as troops fired wildly into the crowds,” Nigel Hetherington, an eyewitness told BBC.

Some of the protesters were run over by military vehicles in retaliation to the killing of at least two security officials. Egypt’s Health Ministry estimated the death toll at over 23 and said there are about 200 wounded.

Gruesome pictures of victims who were crushed by armored military vehicles circulated on the internet and news quickly reached Egyptian-Americans living in the U.S.

“My heart breaks for Christians in Egypt. If this kind of blatant murder happens in a western country, it would be an atrocity and political jargons would be thrown around, so sick of the hypocrisy about human rights,” said Mary Abdelmalak, an Egyptian native, a recent John Carroll University graduate and a current pharmacy student at The Ohio State University. “The question becomes, are we, the so-called generation of ‘change,’ going to stand up and make a difference this time around?”

Earlier this year, Egypt was added to the list of countries named to be the worst violators of religious freedom by the United States commission on international religious freedom.

Egypt is going through a sensitive transitional phase as the first post-Mubarak parliamentary elections are scheduled for next month. Sharaf’s cabinet stressed that it will not allow any interference into Egypt’s democratic future claiming that the igniters of this incident are the enemies of the Jan. 25 revolution.

Hazem el Beblawi, the deputy prime minister and who also serves as the finance minister, resigned early Tuesday morning in protest of the government’s handling of the crisis, unconfirmed reports of the entire government’s resignation have circulated around the web.

According to Al-Ahram, a state sponsored newspaper, a cabinet spokesman later clarified that the government has not submitted an official resignation, but has placed the matter under the disposition of the military council.

Obama has been pushing Congress to pass the bills arguing that it would be mutually beneficial. South Korean President Lee Myung-bak left his country to personally meet Obama on Thursday regarding passage of the South Korean FTA.

The agreement would remove 95 percent of the tariffs on U.S. exports which should significantly increase U.S. business confidence by allowing them to trade more freely with the 12th largest economy.

The South Korean FTA is expected to support 70,000 American jobs. It is also expected to produce $13 billion annually for the U.S. However, the U.S. will also be required to end tariffs on 87 percent of South Korea’s imports as well.

One of the sectors the FTA is supposed to benefit the U.S. is the auto industry. U.S. auto makers only exported 7,450 vehicles to South Korea in 2010.

To demonstrate the imbalance between the two economies, Korea exported 560,000 vehicles to the U.S.

But even if Korea no longer has tariffs on U.S. exports, there is no guarantee they will buy more U.S. cars.

According to a U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) report, “The Korean market has long been perceived as preferring domestic over imported passenger vehicles, which could make Korean consumers less sensitive to changes in price and increased availability of imported passenger vehicles.”

Still, the House has been pushing to get the FTAs on the docket.

The House Ways and Means Committee approved all three agreements this week. David Camp, a Republican and chairman of that committee, said, “With zero jobs created last month and the unemployment rate hovering around nine percent, we must look at all opportunities to create American jobs.” 

Obama has also strongly supported the bill, saying, “These agreements will support tens of thousands of jobs across the country for workers making products stamped with three proud words: made in America.”

Even though the bill has a lot of support from Republicans and Obama, there is still a healthy opposition. The Democrats on the House Ways and Means committees had disagreements about the Colombian FTA.

The Senate may even spark a bigger debate.

“I want everyone within the sound of my voice to understand that I do not like the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, the Korea Free Trade Agreement or the Panama Free Trade Agreement,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “I will vote against them.”

Trade interests groups have also rejected free trade agreements because they think they ultimately hurt U.S. economic interests.

“We don’t have a free trade agreement with Great Britain, which could actually buy American products,” said Auggie Tantillo, executive director of the American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition.  “Instead we have this penchant for doing free trade agreements with countries that are low-cost manufacturing centers. Why? Because multinational companies aren’t looking at this and saying, ‘It will be great to make things in Ohio and send it to South Korea.’ No, they’re looking at this and saying, ‘It will be great to make things in South Korea and send it to Ohio.’”

Regardless of whether the Free Trade Agreements are good or bad for the economy, they are being debated in Congress this week, and hose debates will be heated.

This time it will be Obama and the Republicans versus the Democrats. How that plays out in the 2012 elections remains to be seen.

But for me, there seems to be a common thread which rounds them up and sews them together – confusion.

Republicans were dismayed Tuesday morning by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s decision not to run for the presidency when they have three (at the minimum) other candidates that seem to take week-long terms as the party’s banner carrier.

Protesters have swarmed the financial district of New York City for the past three weeks, claiming grievances and declaring demands against the government and corporations while they have no leader or formal organization – or what seems like a definitive, rational plan.  The numbers of moderate Republicans and Democrats in Congress is shrinking with every elected Congress, leaving the political middle ground a barren wasteland.

Even the commander-in-chief himself seems panicked in the last year of his term, proposing large-packaged legislation that must be passed entirely as is, or not at all, in an effort to prove to voters in 2012 that they can remain confident in his ability to pass legislation. Obama has even grayed considerably since assuming office. The “hope” sentiment of his campaign is more than just gone, people seem to have forgotten the iconic slogan.

According to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, 75 percent of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track, while 19 percent believe we’re on the right one, opposed to last year at this time when 35 percent had a positive outlook – which are still not great numbers.

A phrase from literature that has been the center, which ironically has been the centerpiece of my education this semester, comes storming to the front of my mind: “It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing,” Macbeth says as the end is nigh for him.

America needs a slap in the face. It’s not just Republicans, corporations, Obama or Democrats. With the presidential election a mere 13 months away, it’s important to stay informed on who to vote for. But it’s even more important to realize that whoever is elected to office isn’t going to change everything right away.

We shoot ourselves in the foot with this idyllic naïveté that is evident in the protesters on Wall Street, whose intentions are good, but demand very irrational reforms while lacking any knowledge of how simple economics work: money and the solution to economic and social problems don’t grow on trees.

By selecting a new favorite candidate every other week, the Republicans show how they want a knight in shining armor to come and save the country that they perceive as the sinking ship from the storm that is the Obama administration. This division and uncertainty, “this tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,” must stop and can stop. And we can’t rely on others to come along and save the day for us.

As John F. Kennedy said in his inauguration speech, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

Following in the footsteps of the people in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, Syrians have taken to the streets to voice their opinions and advocate change.

Eyewitnesses say peaceful protests are being squashed by anything from live ammunition, to nail bombs, to fighter jets used by the Syrian army and the security forces. Opposition activists and organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have put the death toll anywhere from 3,000-5,000, including hundreds of women and children.

The violence has prompted many western nations including the United States and United Kingdom to call on President Assad to step down.

While the Obama administration has called on Assad to step aside, the international community is having difficulties deciding on action.

“The international community is not in consensus,” said Mona DeBaz, John Carroll professor of Middle East politics, “The U.N. is having trouble agreeing upon condemnation and sanctions against the regime, let alone significant action. With China and Russia (two of Syria’s biggest allies) having veto power, it is tough to see any serious resolution being passed that would hurt the regime. The sovereignty of the regime must be kept in mind as well.”

In this photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, Syrian army soldiers carry the coffins of their comrades who were killed in recent violence in the country, during their funeral procession at the military hospital in Homs, Syria, on Saturday, Oct. 1, 2011. A Syrian rights group says government troops have retaken most of a rebellious central town after five days of intense fighting with army defectors who sided with protesters. (AP Photo/SANA)

Despite the disagreement among the international community, the U.S and European Union have imposed sanctions on the oil sector and freezing assets of top Syrian government officials.

As the violence continues, the main question amongst the opposition has become whether or not to take up arms.

Several members of the Syrian army have already defected and started the Free Syrian Army.

Yet, despite their best efforts, the Syrian army has proved to be too strong for the defectors, according to several activists.

In spite of the ongoing violence in the country, the Syrian government has remained defiant.

“These [reports] are blatant lies. This is the problem we are facing today in Syria: a massive campaign of disinformation and lies,” said Imad Moustapha, the Syrian ambassador to the United States.

The Assad regime has put blame on religious extremists and armed groups who seek to destabilize Syria.

Syrian troops arrested more than 3,000 people in the past week in the town of Rastan, which has seen the much of the violence of the uprising recently, The Associated Press said Monday.

Over the past week, the military fought hundreds of the Free Syrian Army who sided with anti-Assad protesters in Rastan. The fighting demonstrated the increasingly militarized nature of the uprising and heightened fears that Syria may be sliding toward civil war, according to The Associated Press.

The crackdown has continued with many deaths occurring amongst both anti-government protesters and pro-government citizens, however the question remains: What is the future of the Assad regime?

“In the beginning, they were not calling for the fall of the regime, they were asking for freedom and general reform,” DeBaz said. “They [the government] messed up. The brutality has caused Syrians to ask for the fall of the regime. Can Assad implement enough reforms to stay in power bearing in mind the violence? Only time will tell.”

Occupy Wall Street protestors painted their faces to resemble zombies and marched through the financial district, Monday, Oct. 3, 2011, in New York. The protests have gathered momentum and gained participants in recent days as news of mass arrests and a coordinated media campaign by the protestors have given rise to similar demonstrations around the country. (AP Photo/John Minchillo)

Some members indicate that the original plan was to mimic the protests that occurred earlier this year in countries like Spain, Egypt, and Israel. Although this protest began in New York’s financial district as a group of college students, the movement has spread across the country to reaching cities on the west coast.

This newly found nationwide support of “Occupy Wall Street” came after several hundred protesters were arrested in their attempt to reach Union Square this past Saturday.

In their journey to reach their destination of protest, they blocked the Brooklyn Bridge and were met with resistance from the NYPD.   The tactics of the NYPD were seen by the protesters, who thus far have a commitment to non-violence, as an aggressive affront to their peaceful campaign.

On Monday, the protesters took to a more creative form of peaceful action. Many dressed up as “corporate zombies,” with full make up while pretending to eat fake dollar bills.

Regardless, this escalation in the events surrounding this movement have encouraged some to travel to New York to take part, while others in cities like Columbus, Ohio and Los Angeles have been inspired to lead demonstrations of their own.

The specific 1 percent the campaign is protesting against is in reference to banks and the insurance and mortgage industry.

While many in the group, and in the country in general, have frustrations surrounding the recession and may blame those that were in charge of the institutions that contributed to the financial downturn, Larry Cima, an economics professor at John Carroll, said “They [those involved in the demonstrations] do not think about this, but there are new people in the banks and other institutions that they are protesting and that the people, who largely mismanaged, are gone.”

This leaderless group welcomes people of all genders, race, and political affiliation and utilizes social media outlets, such as Twitter and Facebook, to organize.

The majority of the demonstrators are in their twenties and are for the most part unemployed. Although this group does not have a uniform message, many are advocating for a more equal economy. One demonstrator went so far as to indicate that he held communist ideals.

In response to such proposals for economic reform, Cima said, “If you look at the facts and look at Japan and its economic wonders and how it rose up from the ashes, or Western Europe, which is an industrial marvel built on capitalism, you will see that capitalism works and that these people do not know what they are talking about.”

In addition to the movement’s denouncement of the current state of the economy, there are also those present in the group that also decry U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, the U.S. state of the environment, and various other situations in America.

Regardless of the message or the opinion of the group, the media coverage surrounding the campaign is mounting and more events are planned throughout the country.

Despite this, it is still unclear whether this populist group will span into a lasting movement or have a mainstream political impact.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Greece’s deficit this year, which is approximately €18.69 billion ($25 billion), is about €1.68 billion higher than the prjoected deficit. For 2012, Greece has set its sights on a deficit of 6.8 percent of GDP – roughly €14.65 billion.

These numbers came as no surprise to the global economy, though. Additionally, Greece’s reaction to the report also came as no surprise. The country yet again fell short of its intended goal and is implementing more new austerity measures.

It is important to note that global economists speculate further austerity will only push Greece deeper into recession. Nonetheless, the prime minister of Greece, George Papandreou, assured all in attendance at Sunday’s meeting. According to the Wall Street Journal, he said,  “I want to repeat that we will be unswerving in our goal: to fulfill all that we have promised to ensure the credibility of our country.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel reacts during the debate about eurozone bailout fund at the German parliament Bundestag in Berlin, central Germany, Thursday, Sept. 29, 2011. Germany's lower house of parliament votes on plans to expand the powers of the eurozone bailout fund.(AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)

Although this is a promising statement, Greece is not alone in this battle. The rest of the EU must decide on a proactive stance.  And it seems the EU is starting to deliver.  Up until recently, the eurozone seemed to be complacent with Greece’s weakening condition.

But now the wealthier nations are making a stand. After all, the longer Europe waits to fix its problems, the worse the problem is becoming. The stronger nations of Europe are on board with the austerity route and providing the bailout.

But experts say austerity is not the key, growth is. Jean-Paul Fitoussi, professor of economics at the Institute of Political Studies in Paris, told The New York Times, “If there is no consumption, no reason to invest, difficulty in accessing the credit market, where is the growth? The only engine that is functioning in this view is the engine of depression, and this will worsen the sovereign debt and deficit problem.”

He went on to say it is true that austerity and recession will eventually lead Greece to a stable economy.  However, it is nearly impossible to do it in the time Europe plans on. If the eurozone collectively continues with these austerity measures Fitoussi says France will most likely also fall into recession.

Two of the wealthier nations that are on board with the bail out are Germany and Finland. The New York Times reported  late Sunday Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany rejected allowing Greece to default.

The chancellor warned the fallout would have simliar consequences to the Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. bankruptcy in 2008 – the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history at $600 billion. Finland, on the other hand, has taken a much more cautious path. The Times also reported that Finland is demanding it receive collateral from Greece before they donate any aid to the struggling country.

Nonetheless, Europe seems to be making a firm decision; something the global economy is not used to.

The nearly $450 billion proposal is designed to help jump start the economy. But it appears that with the divided Congress it will be impossible for Obama to gain the necessary support in either chamber.

President Barack Obama speaks about the American Jobs Act, Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2011, at Eastfield College in Mesquite, Texas. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

In the House, Majority Leader Eric Cantor believes the bill is dead. Cantor told reporters, “I think at this point Washington has become so dysfunctional that we’ve got to start focusing on the incremental progress we can make.”

The bill does not appear to be doing much better in the Senate. In fact, it’s not even at the top of the docket.

Instead, the Senate plans to focus on a Chinese currency manipulation bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he will introduce the jobs bill later in October but it is not expected to pass. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin admitted that it is unlikely that Democrats have the 60 votes to avoid a filibuster. Reid voiced his disgust by saying he hoped Republicans would stop “rooting for our economy to fail for the sake of politics and help Democrats put this nation back to work.”

Meanwhile, Americans have been becoming increasingly frustrated with the 9.1 percent unemployment rate, and the partisanship that currently dominates Washington. The Wall Street protests that have spread across the state and the nation are rooted in economic concerns.

Still, Obama is ambitious about the bill. In addition to national commercials advocating the legislation, he is traveling the country trying to persuade Americans to convince Congress to pass the bill.

From Ohio to California, Obama has been visiting depressed economies and important swing states preaching his jobs bill.

The president visited House Republican Jeb Henslarling’s Texas district on Tuesday. Henslarling is the co-chairman of a House “supercommitte” dedicated to exploring ways to reduce the federal budget deficit. Those visits have been putting some pressure on Congress to support the bill.

Obama continued that pressure by calling out Republicans on Saturday in his weekly radio address. “Are they against giving tax cuts to virtually every American worker and small business in America?” In response, Cantor argued that Obama’s “all-or-nothing approach is just unacceptable.”

If Obama cannot convince Congress to pass the complete bill, he is prepared to work on piecemeal legislation.

Obama has called for Republicans to “tell us what it is they [Republicans] are not willing to go for, they should tell us what it is they are prepared to see move forward.”

Incremental legislation could still yield potential economic benefits. Mark Zandi, a prominent economist who estimated the bill would produce 1.9 million jobs, said that just passing the payroll tax cut could create 750,000 jobs.

Cantor was a little more optimistic about cooperation on that portion of the bill, claiming that “certainly it’s part of the discussion.” However, it is unclear exactly when and if that portion of the bill will be advanced as piecemeal legislation.

What’s most alarming for the Democratic Party is the disconnect between Obama and the Senate.

The economy is going to be the number one factor in determining Obama’s chances of re-election.

He has clearly made this jobs bill his primary focus. But if he is having difficulty with the side of Congress the Democrats control, it will be very difficult for the bill to pass.

Everyone saw the obvious, such as the back and forth of perhaps the two most vivid candidates in the past month, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

What no one was expecting was the stunning victory of Georgia’s Herman Cain over Perry in the Florida Straw Poll in September.

This threw the race into another spin.

For Herman Cain, 65, the news continues to be surprisingly good. Not long after his Florida victory, he took another surprising lead in the Midwest Straw Poll.

The reasons for this possible success may have to do with the fact that he has gained so much approval from the tea party movement.

As the former chairman and CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, Cain’s business background has left many optimistic that he would understand the fiscal concerns of the U.S.

His unwavering conservative views,  as opposed to the questionable beliefs of Perry, have also granted him trust among conservative Republicans.

Yet, Larry Schwab, of John Carroll’s political science department, believes his candidacy remains a long shot.

“Herman Cain has run an excellent campaign and is the biggest surprise among the Republic candidates,” Schwab told The Carroll News.  “However, I doubt that he will be successful in the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary. Rarely do candidates with little experience and little name recognition win in the primaries and caucuses.”

Gov. Perry also had a lot to handle in September.

Aside from what was viewed to be rocky performances in the debates with the other candidates, Perry also had to face his past record.  He alienated many social conservatives with his support for state mandated STD vaccinations.

Then there were the charges by Romney hinting that Perry was a do-little governor in a state where the government is very hands off.

The governor managed to dance around these issues for the most part and maintained his lead in the polls.

Then another issue came about that was difficult to escape.

According to The New York Times, the Perry family owned land designed for hunting in west Texas, which was supposedly nick-named “Niggerhead.”

Questions arose as to whether Perry’s father and the governor himself changed the name of the land upon purchase in the early 1980s.

With the answer unclear on Perry’s ethics have been brought into question by some.

Just as it seemed that no one else could declare their candidacy, increased speculation developed regarding New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

The 49-year-old governor, who has held office since 2010, has received much attention do to his unwavering fiscal stance.

A Wall Street Journal article released Monday said, “The governor spent much of the week deliberating the logistics of a late bid.”

Inevitably, however, Christie announced the next day his decision to stay out of the race.

According to the Wall Street Journal, in announcing his decision, the governor said, “The deciding factor was that it did not feel right to me, in my gut, to leave now, when the job isn’t finished.”

Presently, the race in the GOP camp is centered around Perry, Romney, and more recently, Cain.

Indeed, the possibility of other late entries is unlikely at this point, due to the heavy spending already by the Perry and Romney camps.

As for Cain, further success seems unlikely, but history has shown that candidacies such as his own may gain surprising momentum – one example being Eugene McCarthy in 1968.

McCarthy’s grassroots’ support enabled him to bid a convincing argument against the Johnson administration’s policies and carried him to the convention, albeit unsuccessful.

Cain may be able to build this momentum among the tea party members, if he wishes to make his bid a reality.

As for the general election, things may be looking up for the Republican aisle.

According to a joint ABC News-Washington Post non-partisan opinion poll, the numbers are 37 percent for Obama.

Of those who were polled, 55 percent voted for the Republican candidate.

Known as the “Increase Diversity Bake Sale,” they are charging different races different rates. $2 a cookie for whites, $1.50 for Asians,  $1 for Latinos, $0.75 for blacks, and a quarter off for every woman.

It is incredibly racist – and the students running the sale will be the first to tell you so.

They are using the sale as a political satire of sorts in protest of California Senate Bill 185 that would allow the University of California and California State University to consider “other relevant factors” in selecting students for admission. In other words, the bill gives permission to state universities to take into account race and gender during the admissions process.

The sale is seen as a direct metaphor by the students as how they, and many others, see the bill. Goods or services are being offered to others based solely on race and gender. They, in turn, are doing the same thing with their “Increase Diversity Bake Sale.”

Although the sale might be an extremely clever and accurate satire, the only argument I can think of against it is it may not work effectively as they may want.  Instead of the spotlight being on Senate Bill 185, it will be on how a bunch of conservative college kids protested in a socially divisive manner.

I do not believe it should be interpreted as so, but I do understand why it is seen that way by a majority of people.

But what is admirable about this is this student group had the gall to do this on a very liberal college campus.  Seeing conservative activism is nice for a change – a breath of fresh air in the not-so-diverse political culture surrounding the average college student. Conservatives are incessantly portrayed as ‘the Man” by our demographic, politicians that only care about big corporations and oil.

Yet these young conservatives have chosen a noble fight that is truly an injustice.

Now, true, there are high school students applying to schools that are short on funds should receive some financial aid. Whether they get in or not should not be based on solely their sex or ethnicity. That is an injustice, akin to separating whites and blacks from the same drinking fountains during the Civil Rights era.

Diversity is often a misconstrued concept, especially on college campuses. Forcing diversity is in effect doing the opposite of what is intended – it divides and creates injustice.

Of course there is nothing wrong with being white, black, a woman, gay or hispanic. Giving preferential treatment to any of those is as unjust as denying any of them rights you would give to any of the others.

These students and their university, for allowing it to happen, should be applauded for recognizing the validity behind the bake sale’s point in a world forever increasing in unnecessary political correctness.

They will have to wait until 2015. But that delay has not stifled the excitement.

“We’re so excited. We believe it’s the response to our demands, the first step in our long struggle to get our rights,” said Hatoon Al-Fassi, a professor in Ridyah, the capital of Saudi Arabia. Many are hopeful that this will lead to other reforms. For example, Saudi Arabia is still the only country in the world that prohibits women from driving. Less than 48 hours after King Abdullah’s speech, a woman name Shaima Ghassaniya was found guilty of driving. She will receive at least 10 lashings.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, right, arrives at the Saudi Shura Council, or advisory assembly, ahead of delivering a speech in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Sunday, Sept. 25, 2011. Saudi King Abdullah has given the kingdom's women the right to vote for first time in nationwide local elections, due in 2015. (AP Photo)

Saudi Arabia has often been criticized for lagging behind the rest of world in its treatment of women. For example, women were not allowed to attend school until the 1960s. Even now, women cannot make the decision to pursue an education on their own. Male family members must give a woman permission to go to school, or to travel, or even to receive health care.

Even if women tackle those obstacles and manage to acquire an education, it is a nightmare for them to find employment. Roughly 58 percent of the student population in Saudi Arabia is female, but only 16 percent of women are employed.

But it is important to not be ethnocentric. Saudi Arabia has a much different culture. It is dominated byWahhabism, an extremely conservative view. The Wahhabi movement was largely responsible for getting the Ottoman Empire out of Saudi Arabia and helped form the modern state. Consequently, the movement is very influential in Saudi Arabia.

Wahhabism is not mainstream Islam.

It is a very literal and conservative reading of Islam that has left some Islamic scholars puzzled. Zeki Saritoprak, of the John Carroll theology and religious studies department, said, “I don’t understand why they have waited so long … Because in Islam, woman has a very important place, the Prophet made it very clear that man and woman are equal.”

But even with that conservative view, the condition of woman in Saudi Arabia is “not as bad as it seems,” said Saritoprak. While women may not have much public power, they do have “a lot of influence in the household.” But Saritoprak insists that they do need more rights and believes that it may be possible.

But even with the king’s support, there is no guarantee of additional reform.

It will be difficult to have equal treatment of women as long as the conservative clerics have tremendous influence over the king’s policies. However, Saritoprak views that the power of Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia is fading.  Women’s suffrage is a testament to that.

External forces may also help influence the king towards equality. For example Turkey might have an influence. “Turkey shows how an Islamic country can be ruled democratically,” said Saritoprak, and Turkey has “very good relations with Saudi Arabia.”  That, combined with the pro-democratic Arab Spring, may have substantial influence on Saudi Arabia’s treatment of women.

Regardless of further reforms, this is certainly a step in the right direction.

Whether Saudi Arabia continues to promote equality cannot be determined, but as the world continues to respect these rights and the citizens’ of Saudi Arabia continue to see that, it will be harder for the religious conservatives to hold sway over the population.

For Shane Bauer, his fiancée Sarah Shourd, and their friend Joshua  Fattal, their 781 days  in Iranian prison were anything but joyous, but rather a fight to retain their sanity.

The ordeal began on July 31, 2009, when the three hikers were arrested for illegally crossing into Iran.  The three had been traveling through the Kurdish territory of Iraq when they claimed to have accidently crossed over the border. Upon making this mistake, they were soon arrested by Iranian border guards. This proved to be only the beginning of their dreadful ordeal.

For the next year, the three were held in solitary confinement.  The guards placed the men in one section of the prison, while Shourd was kept to herself.

For the next year, the three dealt with the horror and turmoil of the abhorrent Evin House of Detention.  Despite these factors, the three Americans refused to be broken.

By September 2010, Shourd was released due to declining health.

Freed American Shane Bauer, center, meets his father Al Bauer as his fiance Sarah Shourd looks on upon his arrival from Iran, in Muscat, Oman Wednesday, Sept. 21, 2011. After more than two years in Iranian custody, two Americans convicted as spies took their first steps toward home Wednesday as they bounded down from a private jet and into the arms of family for a joyful reunion in the Gulf state of Oman. (AP Photo/Sultan Al-Hasani)

Meanwhile, the other two were left to squander at Evin for another year. They continued to keep up the fight for justice.

There was a lot that could have made them insane;  such as the “screams” they could hear from other prisoners, according to The Wall Street Journal.

They performed daily exercise routines with water bottles to keep them fit, and at some points conducted hunger strikes for better rights in their detention, as reported by The New York Times.

Just as a battle was being fought in the prison, it was also ensuing internationally.

First there was the matters concerning Iran’s own complicated government. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at first seemed as if he desired the return of the two other hikers.

But he also had to face a strict judiciary, led by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was strongly against the hikers’ release.

After months of debate, and intervention from American and Omani diplomats, the two were released on a bail of $1 million. The long months of harrowing solitude for the men had finally come to an end. After spending a few days reunited with their families in Oman, the prisoners arrived in New York City on Sunday.

Following their return, they vocally bashed their former captors.

“From the very start, the only reason we have been held hostage is because we are American,” Fattal said, The Wall Street Journal reported.

They referred to the time in prison as the worst thing to ever happen to them.  Despite the struggle of the past two years, these men seem destined to move on with their personal lives.  Bauer and Shourd intend to marry, with Fattal as best man.

As for the relations between the U.S. and Iran, it can be said that the future is confusing at best.

While the arrest of the hikers, accused of spying, damaged an already tense relationship, the release helped to stabilize the situation.

Instead, the conflict between Khamenei and Ahmadinejad has the U.S. wondering who really has power.

Judging by this leadership conflict and a functional government, Iran may or may not be the ominous threat the U.S. may believe it is.

In a report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on regional and state employment, 26 states and Washington, D.C., reported increases in unemployment, while only 12 reported unemployment decreases from July to August.

The national unemployment rate remained the same at 9.1 percent from July to August. At this point last year, though, the rate stood at 9.6 percent.

This report comes right after President Obama’s proposal of The American Jobs Act earlier this month, in which the main goal, according to the president, is to “put more people back to work and put more money in the pockets of working Americans.”

Most of the unemployment growth has occurred in the West and in the South.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, leading the nation in unemployment rates is Nevada, with 13.4 percent. Next highest is California, with an unemployment rate of 12.1.

Many states leading the nation in unemployment are also in the South.

South Carolina (11.1 percent), Florida (10.7), North Carolina (10.4), Mississippi (10.3), Georgia (10.2), and Alabama (9.9) are all within the top 10 highest rates of unemployment.

Georgia alone has lost 29,000 jobs since last year, and lost 18,200 last month alone.

California has had a 1.2 percent increase in the past year, but its jobless rate is still higher than post-recession levels.

Since 2009, Nevada, California, Florida, Mississippi and Georgia have all still seen unemployment grow since the recession.

Michigan, perhaps hit hardest by the fallout of the auto industry, has recovered nicely since the recession. In 2009, Michigan had a jobless rate of 13.8 percent. Since then, it has fallen to 11.2 percent.

Ohio’s unemployment rate has fallen 1.3 percent since the recession ended.

Image from The New York Times

The Cleveland region specifically has fallen approximately 1.1 percent since June 2009, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Historically, the Rust Belt has been the region that has seen the more difficult end of unemployment issues.

It seems since the recession in 2007, that trend may be shifting towards the Sun Belt and out west.

Michael Chriszt, an official from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s research department explained to The New York Times why Georgia remains at an unemployment stalemate, “For a long time we tended to outpace the national average with regard to economic performance, and a lot of that was driven by, for lack of a better word, development and in-migration. That came to an abrupt halt, and it has not picked up.”

South Carolina’s unemployment woes can be attributed to a still-recovering construction and manufacturing sector.

Richard Kaglic a regional economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Va., told The Times, “The state’s lingering troubles reflect what happened when its construction and manufacturing industries were hit hard by the recession.”

It’s also interesting to note a report released by the Census Bureau earlier this month that said poverty rose to a record 46.2 million Americans (15.1 percent) in 2010.

In 2009, the year the recession ended,  42.9 million Americans were in poverty, 0.8 percent lower than in 2010.

According to the Census Bureau, poverty rate grew the most in the South,  with a 1.2 percent increase, followed by the Northeast  and Midwest (both grew 0.6 percent), and then the West (0.5 percent).

The South’s poverty rate grew double that of the next closest regions from 2009 to 2010.

Surprisingly, despite the high rates of employment in the West, it still has the lowest poverty rates.

Obama’s jobs bill seeks to tackle both of these problems. The success of his presidency as well as the success of his campaign for 2012 could very well be tied to what he accomplishes with this issue in the final year of his first term.

According to The New York Times, the euro Stoxx 50 index retreated 2.9 percent. The FTSE 100 shed 2 percent in London, and the DAX dropped 2.8 percent in Frankurt.

Some expert economists believe that leaving the Eurozone and going into default may be the best route for Greece. The Wall Street Journal said “exiting the eurozone and re-adopting the drachma would enable Greece to devalue its currency versus the rest of Europe, and help it become more competitive, perhaps spurring economic growth.”

Greece, which has no intention of leaving the eurozone or file for bankruptcy, is working frantically with other eurozone countries to work out a deal to avoid default.

It is certain Greece can not afford to keep borrowing money to pay off their debt and it seems that bail out packages and extreme austerity measures are not falling into place as Greece would like.

One reason may be because of European political figures fear unpopularity if they supported these extreme austerity measures.  If this is the case, it remains to be seen how long politicians and the citizens of Greece will allow this slow crawl to economic destruction to go on.

Nonetheless, this dragging catastrophe must be dealt with quickly – Standard & Poor’s recently downgraded Italy’s credit rating from A+ to A.

Greece’s economic troubles continue to spill even into the world economy by causing uncertainty in by causing banks to reduce lending and hold onto cash – a major factor that continuously is brought about when discussing Greek debt: financial contagion.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has voiced their concern about this. Olivier Blanchard,  the chief economist of the IMF, said, “The world economy has entered a dangerous new phase. Markets have clearly become more skeptical about the ability of many countries to stabilize their public debt. Fear of the unknown is high.”

The IMF predicted a slower economic growth than it did earlier this summer for both the U.S. and Europe. According to The Associated Press, the IMF predicted the U.S. economy to grow just 1.5 percent in 2011, and 1.8 percent in 2012. In June, the IMF predicted a growth of 2.5 percent for this year and 2.7 for 2012. This is a significant down grade and should not be taken lightly.

The New York Times reported “Merrill Lynch estimates the shock to growth in Europe [...] would be troubling, with overall output contracting by 1.3 percent in 2012.”

The IMF also predicted a growth decline in 2012 for the eurozone, but not as severe as Merrill Lynch’s 1.3 percent contraction for next year.

The IMF projected 1.6 percent in economic growth for 2011 in Europe, and 1.1 percent in 2012.

Last June, it predicted 2 percent for this year, and 1.7 percent for next – a 0.6 percent decline from their original 2012 projection.

Despite these effects of financial contagion in Europe, stronger economies in other countries such as China and India have been predicted to help the global economy to grow by 4 percent, according to the IMF.

According to The Associated Press, these stronger economies should be able to offset most of the finanical trouble in the U.S. and Europe.

“It is wrong that in the United States of America a teacher or a nurse or a construction worker who earns $50,000 should pay higher tax rates than somebody pulling in $50 million,” Obama said Monday during a speech at the White House – a more than reasonable proposal.

But is that really the case? Do higher-income Americans pay lower rates than lower-income Americans?

A study by the Congressional Budget Office begs to differ. In 2007, households in the lowest fifth of income paid 4.7 percent of their total income in taxes. The second fifth paid 10.8 percent, the third, 14.8 percent, the fourth, 18.3 percent, and the fifth, 26.8 percent.

According to this study, higher-income Americans pay a much higher rate than lower-income Americans.

Another report by Tax Policy Center, a non-partisan, private research firm in Washington, D.C., points out that 46.9 percent of Americans in 2009 had a zero or negative individual income tax liability, which – in lay man’s terms – means  that 46.9 percent don’t pay any sort of income tax, or are liable for so many deductions that cancel out any net gain from the income tax.

1.5 percent of households making over $1 million did fall under this category.

So, yes, there are a few high-income Americans who some how do not pay income taxes.

But that 1.5 percent looks a whole lot less of a problem juxtaposed to the fact that 58.3 percent of Americans making less than $75,000 don’t contribute to the income tax fund.

“I reject the idea that asking a hedge-fund manager to pay the same tax-rate as a plumber is class warfare,” Obama said on Monday. “This is not class warfare. This is math. The money has to come from somewhere.”

So where is the money coming from Mr. President? There’s a 1.5 percent chance that a hedge fund manager making more than $1 million a year is paying less than a plumber making $35,000, assuming that plumber isn’t in the 47.5 percent of Americans making between $30,000 and $40,000 that don’t pay taxes.

Ideally, should everyone be paying the same tax rate? I think everyone agrees that the poor should not pay higher than the rich, and a few believe the rich should pay higher rates than the poor.

Does this deficit reduction plan bode for a bigger debate than deflating the deficit?

Is Obama’s statement purely political and aimed at getting him re-elected for 2012?

Should rich Americans share a larger percentage of the load than their lower-income countrymen? Maybe, maybe not, but the money has to come from somwhere.

Thousands have been gathering peacefully for months in protest of Ali Abudallah Saleh’s lengthy presidency.

Saleh has ruled Yemen since 1990, and was president of North Yemen for 12 years prior to the country’s unification.

The protests heated up this week in the capital, Sanaa, resulting in the injury of more than 200 people and the deaths of 60 more.

Four of those deaths were children.

It began as a peaceful protest on Sunday, with protesters marching in the streets of the capital when men on rooftops and on the backs of trucks started opened fire.

“I swear to God what happened today is a horrible massacre, and we are not able to even describe it, that the regime would use this violence against peaceful protesters,” said Bassem al-Sharjabi, a lawyer of one of the protesters.

However, an army general claimed “We used tear gas only and water cannon only.”

Fortunately, a cease fire was negotiated by Vice President Abed Rabbo Mansou on Tuesday.

But the cease fire may only delay further attacks.

President Saleh has been in the neighboring country of Saudi Arabia for medical treatment since suffering from an attack by protesters in June.

He put his sons and nephews in charge.

However, political change has been slow in coming and General Ali Mohsin, a top Yemeni general, has developed his own interest group.

A man protesting the rule of President Ali Abdullah Saleh holds up his blood-stained hands in Sanaa, Yemen, on Sunday, after security forces opened fire on thousands of protesters in the nation’s capital.

A third group, Hashid, is led by Sadiq al-Ahmar and he represents the country’s most powerful tribe.

Yemen has now become a “struggle between the elites,” according to Mona Debaz, a John Carroll University political science professor, noting that all of these groups are “striving for power.” This creates a very dangerous environment.

Many of this country’s problems stem from systematic issues like, “unemployment, illiteracy, and low standards of living,” said Debaz.

The World Bank estimates that Yemen’s unemployment rate is between 20 percent and 35 percent.

“Ordinary families are telling us they simply don’t have the money to buy even the basics,” said Ashley Clements from Oxfam International, an organization dedicated to solving world hunger.  “Many say they don’t know where their next meal is coming from.”

The numbers are astonishing. Estimates are that over 7.5 million Yemenis are starving. The World Food Program says that food prices have risen almost 50 percent since the turmoil began.

Eileen Donahoe, U.S. ambassador to the Human Rights Council said she was concerned about the “increasingly disturbing reports about violence.”

Furthermore, she said, “The United States believes that now is the time for an immediate, peaceful and orderly transition.”

That would be ideal because of the potential of escalation. “It could really become a civil war at this point,” said Debaz.

A peaceful transition would be exactly what the Yemenis want and would also serve the U.S. strategic interests as well.

John Brennan, a White House counter-terrorism advisor said, “The Yemenis have done a good job of finding and arresting and carrying out attacks against Al Qaeda types.”

A safer environment for the Yemenis to operate should help counter terrorism efforts.

But who will lead and when that transition will happen remains unclear. 

A week after proposing a $477 billion jobs plan, Obama announced a new plan to cut the federal deficit by $3.6 trillion over 10 years, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The president brought up the subject of Medicare and Medicaid, stating how they would be receiving very few cuts, mostly when it comes to drug companies.

He estimated the figures to be around nearly $580 billion in cuts from the federal budget along with a $1.5 trillion tax increase for higher income Americans, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Upon taking office in 2009, President Obama accepted the duty to help restore the American economy.

He indicated this during his campaign and now hoped to prove that he would be a man of his word.

It was obvious that he would face challenges along the way, such as opposition from Republican lawmakers.

Nevertheless, he remained optimistic that his Republican colleagues would be willing to work for a successful goal.

As the first months went by, things appeared to be moving slowly, but nothing the president considered out of the norm of the legislative process.

When the 2010 midterm elections began to unfold, the Republicans managed to swipe back the house while receiving respective gains in the Senate.

The President took this defeat as a possible sign that he may have pushed to far without providing some adherence for the opposition.  He hoped that perhaps this could then allow for the two parties to come together and form a proper solution to the deficit.

As summer came, everything seemed to take a turn for the worse for the president.

Twice, the president witnessed Speaker of the House John Boehner walk out on discussion for the deficit, according to The New York Times.

No matter what he seemed to propose, the Republicans refused to negotiate on any plan to bring down the deficit.

By the end of last week, the president implied that he was fed up and he was taking matters into his own hands.

Republican lawmakers went off on the president’s deficit-reduction proposal. Some did not feel it necessary to bring about cuts for higher income Americans.

“The administration’s insistence on raising taxes on job creators and its reluctance to take the steps necessary to strengthen our entitlement programs are the reasons the president and I were not able to reach an agreement previously,” Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement on Monday.

Still, the president did not seem fit to back down, “I will not support – I will not support – any plan that puts all the burden for closing our deficit on ordinary Americans,” Obama said Monday, in regards to the critics he received from his Republican counterparts for the tax increase on higher income Americans.

Obama’s attempt to control the ballooning deficit comes as he faces the lowest approval rating of his term.

The success of his deficit-reduction plan and his securing of a second term very well may be tied together.

Image from Associated Press

With lingering concerns about the economy, President Obama made a blunt call to Congress to pass a $477 billion dollar job promotion plan last Thursday night.

There is a clear need for economic change.

Nationwide, unemployment stayed at 9.1 percent in August as employers did not create any new jobs.

With elections only 14 months away, there are both economic and political pressures involved.

The plan includes cutting payroll taxes in half for 98 percent of businesses.

It also provides tax credits of $5,600 to $9,600 to businesses that hire veterans and advocates measures designed to prevent up to 280,000 teacher layoffs.

The proposal also includes plans to modernize at least 35,000 public schools with new infrastructure and renovations, primarily in rural and urban areas.

Obama also proposes improving unemployment insurance by taking measures that might stop more than five million Americans from losing their benefits.

Obama wants to propose a $4,000 tax credit for businesses hiring previously long-term employed Americans. The plan also includes measures to cut payroll taxes in half for over 160 million workers.

Entitled The American Jobs Act,  Obama claimed that nothing should be “controversial about this piece of legislation. Everything in here is the kind of proposal that’s been supported by both Democrats and Republicans – including many who sit here tonight.  And everything in this bill will be paid for.”

Obama seemed optimistic about the bill’s prospect, an optimism shared by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), who said he “heard plenty in the president’s speech last night where I think that there is a lot of room for commonality, and we can get something done quickly.”

However, as House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) indicated, Republican support for some elements of the proposal will not necessarily translate into support for the total package.

Figure from The Wall Street Journal

Boehner and other Republican leaders sent a letter to Obama expressing concern about passing a single bill.

In the letter, Republicans said, “As we are certain your advisers have told you, not all your ideas should be packaged in a single legislative vehicle.”

One example comes from House Republican Mike Simpson (R- Idaho), who is concerned about the school modernization elements. He said, “All of the sudden the federal government takes over building schools? I don’t know if that’s a challenge we want to take on.”

Other congressmen are even less optimistic about the plan. “It simply doubles down on the same failed policies that he has pursued before. And, I don’t expect they will be any more successful than they were the first time around,” claimed Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (Utah).  “I fear what he’s putting forward owes more to political positioning than sound economics and tax policy.”

However, according to John Carroll professor Larry Schwab, “Some ideas are so politically popular that they will have to pass. Everyone wants returning veterans to find jobs.”

Schwab also said many Republicans will oppose parts of the bill because of the spending.

But if Obama wants any chance of re-election he will have to get the economy working again soon.

Unless there is some unforseen dramatic change in foreign affairs, the economy will be the whole ball game, said Schwab.

Despite some initial agreement, the success of the bill became more bleak after Obama released his payment plan for the bill on Monday.

In regards to the financing of the bill, $405 billion would come from repealing itemized deductions for the rich and $62 billion from cutting out tax cuts for investment fund managers, corporate–jet owners, and oil and gas companies.

These would go into effect in 2013, and would be active  over the next 10 years.

Upon hearing Obama’s funding proposal, Michael Steele, Boehner’s spokesman, told The Wall Street Journal, “It would be fair to say this tax increase on job creators is the kind of proposal both parties have opposed in the past.”

The proposal of The American Jobs Act is timely considering Obama’s approval rating is at 40 percent according to the most recent Gallup polls.

With the Republican primary debates heating up and the 2012 presidential campaigns underway, Obama’s chances for re-election may be tied to the success of this policy.

Seven of them greeted each other Monday at the Reagan Presidential Library, in Simi Valley, Calif., getting ready to debate the issues of the upcoming election.

While the final goal of these seven may be to represent their party in the 2012 presidential election, which individual it will be has yet to be decided.  For many viewers, eyes were on the two leading contenders in the race, Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, and Governor Rick Perry from Texas.

As the debate progressed, the issue at hand  turned to jobs and employment, both questioned the other’s record. According to The Wall Street Journal, Perry pointed to the fact that Massachusetts ranked the 47th state for employment growth during Romney’s tenure as governor.

John Carroll Professor Larry Schwab also pointed out Perry “has a strong conservative record on policy issues and that Texas gained many new jobs during the past ten years.

The former Massachusetts governor responded by citing his valuable business experience and referred to dealing with a Democratic legislature.

As Perry began to highlight Texas’s job growth, Romney pointed to the fact that Texas lacked an income tax.

Turning to the Texas governor, Romney said believing Perry created jobs in Texas is “like Al Gore saying he invented the Internet,” therefore trying to downplay his success.

While the two governors stole most of the spotlight, other candidates tried to put in their two cents, as well.

The other candidates ranged from Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah, referring to his time as ambassador to China, to former pizza magnate Herman Cain making reference to his 999 business plan. At one point, Texas representative Ron Paul even exchanged an attack on his governor for taxes.

Rep. Michelle Bachmann (Minn.) attacked Perry for his controversial law requiring young Texas girls to be vaccinated for human pappilomavirus.

After the debate, the candidates parted ways for several days in order to keep their names out in public. Soon enough, a few political endorsements came in for the big two contenders.

Gov. Perry received support from his neighbor to the east, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindall, who, according to The New York Times said, “Rick Perry is the candidate who can lead our party to victory in 2012.”

Schwab believes the other candidate is better suited for victory in 2012, though, claiming “[Romney] has an excellent background in economic policy and that he would be the strongest Republican candidate against President Obama.”

Meanwhile, Romney found an ally in former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who withdrew from the race in mid–August. As for the other candidates, their bids for the nomination have yet to gain the same traction.

By means of runners-up, Bachmann and Huntsman seem to have the best chance.  Unfortunately, they struggle to have the same organization that Romney and Perry currently enjoy.  Nevertheless, at least for Huntsman, a large amount of money could prove beneficial down the road.

As of this week, however, the race seems fit to stand between Romney and Perry.