Homework #3 (MP2)

Obama: Health Care Plan Would Give Seniors Right To Choose How They Are Killed

http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-health-care-plan-would-give-seniors-right-to,2822/

This article is political satire because, well the title says it all. This article talks about how Obama really did say this, but he meant it as if you grandmother wanted to die in the privacy of her own home rather than in the middle of a soccer field. Regardless of what the point he was trying to make was, Onion news is still making a joke about it.
"The president said he sympathized with and related to the fears of older Americans, adding that if a politician told him he could only be killed by being forcibly removed from his home and shot in the street like a dog, but left out the fact that he could also be put down by painless lethal injection, he would be scared, too." This is cracking on how the president "sympathized" with being scared to die horribly. I cant really explain how this is satire because its so unbelievably obvious.
They continue to say how Obama's bill lets senior choose between 600 executions and how he just really wants to kill us. The plan is obviously for something more serious and Onion news is just making a satire out of it because they think its not right and stupid. i happen to find this article hilarious though. hope you enjoy it.

Homework #2 (MP2)

The Electoral College is a parody. Before, people could not be informed about the candidates enough to be educated in a vote, so the popular vote for president doesn't mean anything right now. we need to abolish that, and base the whole system on the Popular vote, so we can truly have a government by the people.
The electoral College is basically the reason for our votes, technically, not counting. when we vote for the president, we are also voting for state electors as well. How every many electors get appointed for state depends on the population. Once we select them, they then decide on who to select for the president. So while our votes may have somewhat of an effect on the decision. It still doesn't really count. And to me this seems pretty unfair. Reason being i rather my vote literally count for the choosing of the president. Not for people who will choose for the state as a whole.

Homework #1 (MP2)

The video basically states that..
Before it became a bill, some people wanted a law to be passed, so they called up the local congressmen and once he agreed to this being a law, he wrote it up and sent in up to the congress. Once hes sent there he has to wait in committee while other congressmen discuss and debate whether or not it should become a law. If they vote yes then the bill is then sent up to the house of representatives. Once the house of representatives agrees to it then its sent up to the senate where the process begins all over again.

If the whole congress agrees to the bill turning into a law then it is sent up to the president. If the president veto's the law than is is sent back to congress where the whole entire process will have to start over. And by that time many years would have already passed. But if the president signs it then it will then be a law. So just to recap, the bill is made up by a local congressmen in which it is then sent to the congress. After the committee agrees to it then the bill moves on to the house of representatives and if they agree then it moves on to the senate where it re-lives the process and if agreed to there the president must sign it and it will then be a law. yay.

Current Event #5

The topic of my article is about the revision to conform to a law that reduced a wide gap between prison terms for crack cocaine and powder cocaine convictions.
The title of my article is "Crack, powder cocaine sentence guidelines adjusted"
I got my article from realclearpolitics.com

This article is mainly about the change and adjustments that are being made for the same mandatory prison time to anyone who has possession of crack cocaine, whether it be 5 grams or 500 grams they will still receive the same punishment.
I believe this is a good thing and now not everyone can get away with having it which will open more peoples eyes in the sense that no matter how much you have on you your still going to receive at least 6-7 years in prison.

Current Event #4

The topic of my article is about an allegation made by the former manager of a gubernatorial campaign that records of his unemployment benefits were illegally obtained.
The title of my article is "RI police reviewing leaked document accusations"
I got my article from realclearpolitics.com

The article is basically about the former manager of a gubernatorial campaign making an allegation on how his unemployment benefits were illegally obtained. The Rhode Island police are reviewing the allegation and, " Friday that the matter was under review but stopped short of calling it an active investigation." said Detective Lt. John Lemont.
In my opinion the Rhode Island police should look more into this case because it isn't right that someones records were illegally obtained and no ones doing anything to find out.

Homework #13

The New York Civil Liberties Union questioned the legality of the searches, however, and Mr. Kelly said department lawyers were researching the constitutional implications. "Every certain number of people will be checked," Mr. Kelly said. "We'll give some very specific and detailed instructions to our officers as to how to do this in accordance with the law and the Constitution."

As you can see from above, if the government wants to get something done, they will always find a way around it, no matter what the case may be. I agree with the idea of searching bags for the protection of us as Americans, but i do not like the idea of peoples names being put in a database nonchalantly. If they want to check our bags as a safety precaution then fine, but for us to have our names in a random database doesn't suit me well. I do believe that by having random bag searches, it will make terrorists or anybody trying to harm Americans think twice about doing stuff. The government has been getting ridiculous lately but with recent attacks and threats, its quite reasonable. I mean it all balls down to the question, would you rather have your bag checked? Or be blown up in a train station? Think about it.

Homework #12

Federal Powers
-Regulate foreign and interstate commerce
-Declare a war
-Provide for the common defense and maintain armed services
-Pass naturalization and immigration laws.

State Rights
-Provide education for all.
-Conduct elections
-Provide for local governments

Concurrent Powers
-Collect taxes
-Make and enforce the law
-Maintain the courts

They all create a balanced sense of democracy and order.

Current Event #3

The topic of my article the United States apology to Guatemala. The title of my article was "U.S. Apologizes for syphilis Experiment". I got my article from nytimes.com

This article is basically saying how the United States is sorry for what happened and how although the event happened nearly 64 years ago "We deeply regret that it happened," stated by Hilliary Clinton and Kathleen Sebelius. What happened was that the United States was treating certain people of Guatemala like they were experimental rats. They injected them with syphilis because they wanted to see if penicillin actually worked. By doing this they killed more than 200 people. In my opinion I think that it was wrong what happened to those Guatemalan prison inmates, women and mental patients. And the US should have never done this at all.

No matter who or what kind of person it is they should not be used as medical experiments, unless of course that person wants to. I'm glad we apologized to Guatemala, even though we are 64 years late. It was well over due.

Homework #11

Congress would amend the US Constitution to make it benefit the whole country in a way that dramatically improves or or does something in assistance to us.
There are two methods in which the government can amend the constitution. The first method is the bill needs to pass through both houses of the legislature with at least a two-third vote from each house. Once the bill has passed through the houses it goes on to the states as the way all amendments do. Normally Congress puts a time which usually takes about 7 years until the bill is approved. The second method to amend the constitution is to establish a constitutional convention. The the legislatures of the state propose one or more amendments to be sent to states to be approved. This method requires a simple majority vote but however is never taken. No matter what method they would use the amendment still has to be approved by a very large majority of the states.

Homework #10.

I think federalism is a good idea because it stops different states from passing unbearable laws. The biggest benefit of federalism is that it creates 2 layers of protection. Federalism is like family. You have the children, who are the citizens of America. Then theres the parents who are equal to the states. And lastly there's your grandma, who has rule over what ever anyone else says. Speaking in terms of the government, if a state creates a law allowing cops to stop anyone who they think is an immigrant than the federal people come in and stop that law from being passed. So in turn, federalism keeps balance.

Current Events #2

The topic of my article is about what mothers in middle class feel about the economy and this downfall.
The title of my article was "Wal-mart moms", struggle to stay afloat. "
I got my article from realclearpolitics.com

This article is basically saying that 10 moms were called into a meeting, in which they had a discussion about the economy and how its affecting them. words used the most were "recession","depression", "sad", "loss of control", "downhill", "unfortunate", and "backwards". Half of these woman, who voted for Obama i might add, explained their lives and how some lost their homes, their jobs, their cars, or all three. Others complained of having husbands or partners without jobs as well.

These woman, who do actually shop at walmart, complain of the educational system, employment rate, the whole economy in general, "collectively getting worse". And while the National Bureau of Economic Research say that we havent been in a recession for over a year, many of us, especially those without jobs or who unfortunately lost an essential asset to their lives, feel like whatever they are in isnt good and recession or not, the economy needs to get better fast.

Homework # 9

At the time the constitution was made, there were 13 states. Each of these states had different idead of what people rights and laws should be. So a group of men decided to write the constitution so it would be a plan that everyone could agree with. The fact that they had so many different laws in each state meant confusion for people when they traveled. Also some states couldve had really unfair and wrong laws. By making the constitution everybody followed the same rules no matter where they went. Although new hampshire and rhode island took the longest to agree with it, only nine out of the thirteen were to agree so the fact that they did it this way made our country the way it is now.

Homework #8

I do not think that colonists should have to compromise or live with what just one person wants. The fact that colonists got their independence and was freed from living under the kings rule shows that regardless of whether or not they could have lived with it, they shouldnt have to. When people are living under the rule of a king, they have no say what so ever and any order that the king gives must be followed. so if the king says for him to give all his money and starve then thats what that person has to do. Having their own independence stops this and frees them from being tortured or "owned", so to speak.

Homework #7

Do i think America would work well in a direct democracy? I honestly don't know. I believe that with the democracy we have now, people do have a voice. In a direct democracy, everyone participates. But in a democracy where there are representatives, what people want or say goes through them, we have elections and votes. So in reality if there was a direct democracy, i think we'll manage.
As for the reaction to us having a direct democracy, i think most people wouldn't bother to care or realize unless things started to go wrong or products keep getting expensive, or until something happens that affects them negatively. And even with the young people we have today's day, they still wouldn't care. Life would probably be more hectic. You cant really say what might be until it happens. My perfect government would be one that has no problems with other countries, one that cares for our country first and then others, a government that protects itself from getting into an economic depression.

current events 9-16-10

The topic of my article is about the stimulus, is it a waste or was it good?
The title of my article is Sloooow Trickle.
I got this article from realclearpolitics.com.

This article is basically saying that the stimulus made to be given to create jobs...is beyond a waste. so far 111 million dollars has funded only 55 jobs. 55! thats basically 2 million per job. Why is so much being wasted?Even though they do plan to create another 265 jobs, that's still 460,000 per job and none of them will be getting paid that much. The rest of the money goes back to regular government duties. There is also 175 million to fund 120 jobs and another 138 million to fund 300 jobs. So the point is so much money is being wasted , yet were in a recession.

This whole stimulus article can piss somebody off. Theres millions of people struggling to make a living and the greedy ass government is taking half of their paychecks and spending it nonchalantly. Meanwhile all these government employees are bringing home nice big checks, bonuses, and even overtime pay probably. If this continues im either going to be taking out a lot of loans to pay for medical school or im going to end up with no job.

I dont know if this affects the entire world but as for america, its not good. More people will continue to lose their job and instead of the 1/7 people being in poverty, it will be 3/7. We also most likely would be in debt with other countries.

HW #6 .. 9 -15 - 10

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were great philosophers at one time, but only ones ideas actually are actually still being used today. Thomas Hobbes philosophy was that all people are evil and that they need to be controlled. And he thought that in order to control them, they needed a government, one to "help" them. See people might agree to a social contract with this philosophy because since everyone is "evil", a government can keep them in check and in turn have a stabilized town. Now the downfall with Hobbes ideas is that by using a government with this sort of manner he will use it to control people and have ownership of their rights. Not only is this wrong but it can and most likely will cause problems, riots, or just chaos in general.

Now the other philosophy that John Locke came up with was based on people being born free and with their OWN NATURAL RIGHTS. That basically means that people are born with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as well as some property rights. Locke wanted to implement a government so that they, the people, can and will be protected at all times. Like Locke said, "The great and chief end of people putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property and rights. People, when they enter into society give up liberty (rights) of a kind; yet it being only with an intention in everyone the better to preserve his rights: his life, his liberty, and property." So in a nutshell, its a give and take situation, you give us just a little bit of your rights, and we, the government, protect the rights you do have.

If i had to choose which side i agree with most, it would most likely be John Locke. Don't get me wrong though, his theory was not a hundred percent correct but it was a more reasonable philosophy than that of Thomas Hobbes. Where Locke went wrong was how he said we have to give up some rights in order to protect the ones we do have, and my theory is, why not let us keep all of our natural born rights and just protect them. If we let you govern us, then you should do as we want and that's also what the social contract is about. But like i said Locke had the better philosophy and that is why a lot of whats in the constitution is based on philosopher John Locke's ideas.

Blog #1. Feelings on Gov't.

I believe that without a government, there would be complete and utter chaos in this world. the reason people will go crazy is because without government, there isn't any consequences. People obey laws because they do not want to go to jail or pay any fines. For example, if you murder somebody, you will then spend the rest of your life in jail and with no freedom. So people who want to avoid that would not commit any murders. Aside from that, they may obey laws for their own personal reasons such as religion.

Do i trust the government? NO!
my reasons for not trusting government is because they hide things from us. For example, when the attack on September 11, why was the clean up so fast, why did they say that they never found the black boxes from the planes. It's stuff like that that leads me to believe the government is hiding other things. I would change the fraudulent parts of the government.
Get all the sneaky people and jobs out, let the people in which im governing know whats going on and things like that.