http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/07/us/guns--ammo-editor-resigns-after-gun-control-column/index.html This article discusses how the editor of Guns & Ammo had to resign due to publishing a piece on favoring gun control in his magazine which did not favor it. He thought it would open peoples' minds to get a rounded look at different views on the subject. The regulars supporting this magazine were very upset because they believe their second amendment rights should be protected and not questioned in a magazine favoring their beliefs.
I believe that these people had a right to get upset that the editor of their magazine would alienate them like this by putting such an outlandish article for the readers. In journalism you have to appeal to your followers and this could have had a very lasting result on the views of their magazine and possible loss of subscriptions. On this note though this just proves how big of an issue gun control is and how much our safety could potentially be at risk or one of our hobby's.
It's kind-of ridiculous for the readers of Guns and Ammo to act so radically towards an article posted in their favorite magazine. Sure, it's out of character for the editor of Guns and Ammo, who is probably a gun enthusiast himself, to allow an article about gun control laws to be published, but for the reader's to be outraged with it to the point that the editor has to resign is ridiculous. It's stories like this that brings a bad name to gun enthusiasts and 2nd amendment righters.
I think that editor guy done a good thing here. Honestly, if I were to pick up my Babes and Bagpipes Monthly and come across an article about a dude playing clarinet (the opposite of a babe and bagpipes) I'd probably say "Well, this doesn't belong here... But the clarinet was nice". What I mean by this is that guy had good intention and I personally wouldn't be mad, just a little confused. Everyone is just up in arms with their right to bear arms. Ugh.
I think that it was a little strange for the editor to do this considering that he probably knows that his readers are gun and ammo regulations. That being said, I do not think that it was right that he had to resign because of it. I'm the kind of person who likes to see things from different perspectives. All in all, either way the man should not have been made to resign. If worst came to worst, he should have been "slapped on the wrist" and everyone should just move on.
It doesn't make sense why a writer doing an article in a magazine that has strong beliefs on a subject and would be assumed to feel the same way since he is writing in said magazine would want to write something apposing those beliefs. When readers buy these magazines they want to see the things they like not have then questioned.
I agree as well that the company and viewers should be upset. What I disagree with is the fact that the man had to resign. Yes, people buy the magazine they want to see that supports their opinion. But what about all those other magazines that discriminate against celebrities and tear at their reputation? Why don't people react badly to them? People are getting worked up over a small article.
I agree with his resignation because the magazine is against guns so it doesn't make sense to publish an article that supports guns. Since the magazine is against gun the most he could have done was ask the editor first because it's very controversial. He did this with his own free will and didn’t think of re-precautions so i don’t really feel bad for him. He went against something he wasn't supposed to and that is wrong.
This is a case of political correctness gone too far. An Editor is expected to express hi thoughts in order to generate discussion on a topic. I think a small minority of the most rabid gun people generated so much noise about it, he felt it was better to resign rather than hurt the magazine. I bet that if they had actually read through his article it would have contained some valid points that even they might agree with. People need to read past the headline banner and think through issues rather than just reacting in the loudest and most extreme fashion the can. The author did not call for a gun ban, just stated that some type of regulating is needed. And most states already have this in some form so this outcry is just foolish rhetoric by fringe elements.
I think its great that someone supporting guns would also have an open mind on having good gun control laws. The fact that some people hated this and mostly force him to resign is quite upsetting this shows they don't care about no one but themselves and this is very ignorant. It was just a opinion anyway and a good one at that.
anyone who speaks another opinion to people who can't see two sides of the spectrum will be immediatly shut down. These people don't want too see anything unless it benefits them, and it just comes to show these people are so stubborn in their ways that a writer lost his job just "showing" another view
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/12/us/philippines-typhoon-aid/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 In the philipine there was a massice typhone the displaced thousands of people from there homes and into the streets. The U.S. has been asked to help in the relief efforts. There are three warships at home port and have orders to prepare and diploy within the next 48 hours to bring relief to the philipeno people. Sanitation efforts are also being arranged. Portable toilets are being flown in, but until that is done, human waste may have to be burned in place. This is such a tragic thing going on right now. Im glad that i live in a country that helps any country in need. I feel that if we were in the situation we would have countries helping us just because of how much we help other countries. God bless and protect the people of the Philipines
It's truly fantastic that the people of The Philippines are able to receive aid as quickly as possible after such a drastic disaster. With a possible death toll of 2,500, 800,000 displaced people, and 2,000,000 people in need of food aid, the fact that action is being taken for these people very quickly shows how compassionate our country is and how willing we are to help people in need, even across the world.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/09/us/marijuana-public-opinion/index.html?hpt=us_t5 This article is about the recent uproar in support for pro marijuana legislation. They talk about how it is like it is moving on "greased tracks" because it is picking up so much speed at the state and municipal levels. It also talks about how it has no sign of stopping or slowing down. I think the public opinion change is chiefly due to the fact that people view it more as something like cigarettes or alcohol than a drug. Also how this is a debate between state and federal levels of government, that means the federal government could shut this down at anytime. But they said that they weren't concerned with it and that their had to be some serious circumstance for them to take action. So it looks like weed is here to stay.
"So it looks like weed is here to stay." Vote Curtis Dyer 2016 I think the prohibition of marijuana was a lot like that thing with the prohibition of alcohol, in a sense that neither of them did much of anything. It makes sense that the federal government would want to tax it. Marijuana wouldn't be the first drug to be legal, either (nicotine and caffeine, for example).
I think that the legalization of marijuana is long past overdue in this country. I agree with Kaitlynn that banning marijuana is a lot like the prohibition of alcohol in the sense that it is pointless to try to ban something that people are still going to find a way to do it. The sell of marijuana in states that have legalized it are taxing it which is going to help the community which is beneficial.
So many people do marijuana that it is a downhill battle to fight against it. It is the people's choice to smoke it and live with the consequences. I am against marijuana, but then again I am against most drugs that are used for recreational purposes. If the people want to destroy their bodies and brains then let them. They will realize their mistake too late and will try to make up for it like people do for anti-smoking ads.
I agree that Marijuana should be legalized. It has been around to long for the government to try to completely stop it in its tracks. Like what people have already been saying with the prohibition of alcohol, it will not stop just because it is illegal, if that were the case then people would not have been doing it in the first place. I think that government just needs to find a way to put a tax on it so that they can figure out what they really want to do.
I agree that marijuana should be legalized, because it should be YOUR choice whether or not you want to do something like that, I however am against it for myself. I agree with other peoples post, that its a lot like the prohibition of alcohol- it brings money into the country and is difficult to stop.
http://kuow.org/post/interest-groups-pour-money-whatcom-races-ahead-coal-terminal-decision A nice article about interest groups and their involvement with pouring money for campaigning. This demonstrates how interest groups can leave a big impact although being relatively small-- the election itself here is in a small country of Washington however it could potentially bring big changes to the US's oil industry. Think about it. Captcha: itGoats 69
Yeah, the interest groups may be small, but they do leave big impacts. I feel like the size allows people to overlook their potential threat. They're allowing the campaigns to blow more money. And with bogus slogans like "stop the war on workers" slathered everywhere, it'll be too easy for them to trick the average monkey into thinking that further destruction of our environment will be for a good cause.
I Feel like that losing two weapons & then they came up in a shooting, shouldnt the person who lost the weapons be responsible for that. I think they should have the impeachment of Eric. The house is like gladys said going to that it wants. The house and attorney general need to get along and come to some agreement or nothing will be settled. They needa to work together in this situation.
http://www.nytimes.com/projects/elections/2013/general/virginia/map.html Many people think that the turnout of this election may help in predicting the turnout for many elections in the next several years. This election shows the Democrats winning the election, which means that they may lead in the Presidential campaign as well. What are your opinions? Do you think that this is just some prediction or that it may hold some truth about future campaigns?
Well I would like to believe that it is trust, but from what I understand from what has happened in the last 50 years people tend to forget how much the Democratic candidates have done. They tend to fall victim to the manipulation of the Republican party, for example, when I ask people about what they know about President Kennedy I get two answers: Bay of Pigs invasion or his cheating with Marilyn Monroe.
http://www.americavotes.org/node/701 I find this very interesting about women in politics, especially from the interest group Emily's List. I really like how at the top of this page, it is quotes from male politicians who said that if women were in charge of the consensus for the new budgets, it would be decided in only a few short hours. This, to me, shows how immature politicians can be, especially men, and they know it. I feel that this quote makes me have less faith in our government because obviously they do not have faith in themselves either... I think it is kind of pathetic. But this is only one part of the article. The rest of it is quite interesting as well.
I agree with you, the lack of faith among politicians do to gender differences can be very appalling. The quote listed by this said politician is a very frustrating and prejudice. The fact that this very man believes that a woman cannot make a political form decision is very irritating.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/11/13/kasich-stops-execution-of-phillips.html In this article you will find that the man who was charged with four counts of rape and one count of agerrvated murder was supposed to be executed today. This has been postponed due to the man wanting to donate his organs to his mother and brother. This is somthing that hasnt been done befor. HIV in prisons are 30% higher than what they are to the general public. This man would have to be evaluated and then determined if able to donate his organs. The new execution date will be July 2, 2014.
I think that this is not a fair thing to do. The man raped a little girl. No person should ever want the organs of someone who did that to a sweet little baby girl inside their body. I would feel like this would be unholy. How can you not wonder if you have someones organs in your body that you will not turn into the same monster he was. He should be executed as soon as possible and not have an option to prolong his life.
Well, I think waiting twenty years to execute someone can wait a couple more weeks. I feel the government needs to be quicker in making a descision for major cases, like rape and murder. I think this man shouldn't be denied his rights to donate his organs, but this should have been taken care of a long time ago. Justice should be served, in this case, and the man should suffer the consequences. I feel that his execution will just continue to be postponed and they won't do anything about it.
Why did they wait 20 years ? I agree with amanda , they needa be quicker in these decisions. I understand him wanting to donate his organs for whatever reason , but they should have had that done by now. He needs to suffer the consequences for what he did , it was not right at all. Rape or murder in my opinion should be immediate execution.
I also agree with Amanda and Hailey, if they can wait twenty years to execute somebody shouldn't they have decided whether or not he cant donate his organs by now? Twenty years is a long time to wait for the execution, and it seems like its just going to be continually postponed.
It is a fair thing to do. Should his organs be harvested, he could save up to eight lives and improve the life of countless others. He would like to donate his liver to his mother. It's not unholy. If anything, it's just the opposite. He should be allowed to donate his organs. It is fair.
so because he raped people, that makes his organs rapist?ok. But for everyone who wants him not too and just die, why would you want that. What sounds more brutal than organ harvesting? Take what is useful from him and chuck him.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/14/ring-of-house-republicans-to-call-for-impeachment-of-holder/?hpt=hp_t3 I think the impeachment of Eric Holder should be done. Ultimately the House is going to do what it wants and if they do not like the Attorney General, they will never get anything done. If this does not happen, we can expect no progress coming from the House Republicans. If they cannot vote on issues together, there is no point in having a House Republicans at all.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/14/breaking-obama-to-make-statement-on-health-care This article is about Obama and how he fumbled with the affordable care act. He is apologetic and wants to make messed up insurance policies right. I don’t know if this means he’s going to come up with another bill to fix the common problems or if he's going to handle issues individually. but i think that if there has been that many problem about this bill and he himself thinks he made a mistake he should amend it and take it out of law because nobody like it and now he's starting to see his faults as well.
It is good to see the President starting to admit that his affordable health care act has some major flaws in it that are affecting people in ways he did not anticipate. He dropped a huge stone in a pond and did not plan for all the ripples to expand as far as it did. Many people have lost health care plans they have had for years and were happy with. Now the new standards require them to have insurance they don't need. Another newspaper article told of a 65 year old couple that was being forced to buy maternity insurance. An unintended consequence of a law that was not well thought out and needs fixed.
Obama apparently also created s grandfather clause stating that certain previous obamcare customers, due to several flaws, would get a year of insurance with that package but the insurers had no idea what Obama was talking about and not all of them could supply them with this.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-14/google-says-u-s-government-requests-for-data-rise-to-10-918.html How much to too much the next thing you know they are logging right into everyone's personal email that have nothing to do with any. In other hand i do think its right that Google makes them actually request them to see personal information and simply doesn't give them out like other companies. Im sure this will be short lived though as they will continue to rise in request to the point where they will just make a law that will by pass this.
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/14/21460308-a-more-defiant-obama-in-ohio-i-am-going-to-see-this-through?lite O-H-I-O Mr. President made a trip to Cleveland yesterday and after talking about the economy and manufacturing he put up a defense to the Affordable Care Act. He made sure everyone knew that he was going to make sure that he saw things through with it. He even made a nice complement to our GOP governor Kasich for expanding Medicare within our state when many other GOP governors refused to.
I think that it is actually fascinating that the president would come to Ohio. You usually hear about officials going to the bigger states like California, Florida, and New York. But he came to Ohio to discuss the affordable care act. This also shows how Obama is starting to talk to a wider range of people about the affordable care act.
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/15/21477296-in-mild-rebuke-to-obama-39-dems-vote-with-gop-on-keep-your-plan-bill?lite On the topic of the act named "Keep Your Health Plan Act of 2013," which under called for insurers to keep offering individual health coverage plans in 2014 that don’t meet the minimum requirements of the Affordable Care Act, 39 democrates voted along side of the Republicans to promote this bill. They considered it a mild rebuke to president Obama. This is much better than what was originally thought was going to be 60 democrats breaking with the president.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/15/world/meast/iran-nuclear-deal/index.html?hpt=po_c2 This article is saying how the countries are coming to a deal with Iran and using these Nuclear Weapon against the countries. This is a good idea, but there are a few things that are kind of concerning. The concerning factors are how in the article it says we are getting close to this, but there are the quotation marks around those words. This makes it seem how they say we are getting close, but not really. Also something possible that could happen is that they would sign this, but still use the nuclear weapons on fellow countries.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/07/us/guns--ammo-editor-resigns-after-gun-control-column/index.html This article discusses how the editor of Guns & Ammo had to resign due to publishing a piece on favoring gun control in his magazine which did not favor it. He thought it would open peoples' minds to get a rounded look at different views on the subject. The regulars supporting this magazine were very upset because they believe their second amendment rights should be protected and not questioned in a magazine favoring their beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI believe that these people had a right to get upset that the editor of their magazine would alienate them like this by putting such an outlandish article for the readers. In journalism you have to appeal to your followers and this could have had a very lasting result on the views of their magazine and possible loss of subscriptions. On this note though this just proves how big of an issue gun control is and how much our safety could potentially be at risk or one of our hobby's.
DeleteIt's kind-of ridiculous for the readers of Guns and Ammo to act so radically towards an article posted in their favorite magazine. Sure, it's out of character for the editor of Guns and Ammo, who is probably a gun enthusiast himself, to allow an article about gun control laws to be published, but for the reader's to be outraged with it to the point that the editor has to resign is ridiculous. It's stories like this that brings a bad name to gun enthusiasts and 2nd amendment righters.
DeleteI think that editor guy done a good thing here. Honestly, if I were to pick up my Babes and Bagpipes Monthly and come across an article about a dude playing clarinet (the opposite of a babe and bagpipes) I'd probably say "Well, this doesn't belong here... But the clarinet was nice". What I mean by this is that guy had good intention and I personally wouldn't be mad, just a little confused. Everyone is just up in arms with their right to bear arms. Ugh.
DeleteI think that it was a little strange for the editor to do this considering that he probably knows that his readers are gun and ammo regulations. That being said, I do not think that it was right that he had to resign because of it. I'm the kind of person who likes to see things from different perspectives. All in all, either way the man should not have been made to resign. If worst came to worst, he should have been "slapped on the wrist" and everyone should just move on.
DeleteIt doesn't make sense why a writer doing an article in a magazine that has strong beliefs on a subject and would be assumed to feel the same way since he is writing in said magazine would want to write something apposing those beliefs. When readers buy these magazines they want to see the things they like not have then questioned.
DeleteI agree as well that the company and viewers should be upset. What I disagree with is the fact that the man had to resign. Yes, people buy the magazine they want to see that supports their opinion. But what about all those other magazines that discriminate against celebrities and tear at their reputation? Why don't people react badly to them? People are getting worked up over a small article.
DeleteI agree with his resignation because the magazine is against guns so it doesn't make sense to publish an article that supports guns. Since the magazine is against gun the most he could have done was ask the editor first because it's very controversial. He did this with his own free will and didn’t think of re-precautions so i don’t really feel bad for him. He went against something he wasn't supposed to and that is wrong.
DeleteThis is a case of political correctness gone too far. An Editor is expected to express hi thoughts in order to generate discussion on a topic. I think a small minority of the most rabid gun people generated so much noise about it, he felt it was better to resign rather than hurt the magazine. I bet that if they had actually read through his article it would have contained some valid points that even they might agree with. People need to read past the headline banner and think through issues rather than just reacting in the loudest and most extreme fashion the can. The author did not call for a gun ban, just stated that some type of regulating is needed. And most states already have this in some form so this outcry is just foolish rhetoric by fringe elements.
DeleteI think its great that someone supporting guns would also have an open mind on having good gun control laws. The fact that some people hated this and mostly force him to resign is quite upsetting this shows they don't care about no one but themselves and this is very ignorant. It was just a opinion anyway and a good one at that.
Deleteanyone who speaks another opinion to people who can't see two sides of the spectrum will be immediatly shut down. These people don't want too see anything unless it benefits them, and it just comes to show these people are so stubborn in their ways that a writer lost his job just "showing" another view
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2013/11/12/us/philippines-typhoon-aid/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
ReplyDeleteIn the philipine there was a massice typhone the displaced thousands of people from there homes and into the streets. The U.S. has been asked to help in the relief efforts. There are three warships at home port and have orders to prepare and diploy within the next 48 hours to bring relief to the philipeno people. Sanitation efforts are also being arranged. Portable toilets are being flown in, but until that is done, human waste may have to be burned in place. This is such a tragic thing going on right now. Im glad that i live in a country that helps any country in need. I feel that if we were in the situation we would have countries helping us just because of how much we help other countries. God bless and protect the people of the Philipines
It's truly fantastic that the people of The Philippines are able to receive aid as quickly as possible after such a drastic disaster. With a possible death toll of 2,500, 800,000 displaced people, and 2,000,000 people in need of food aid, the fact that action is being taken for these people very quickly shows how compassionate our country is and how willing we are to help people in need, even across the world.
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2013/11/09/us/marijuana-public-opinion/index.html?hpt=us_t5
ReplyDeleteThis article is about the recent uproar in support for pro marijuana legislation. They talk about how it is like it is moving on "greased tracks" because it is picking up so much speed at the state and municipal levels. It also talks about how it has no sign of stopping or slowing down. I think the public opinion change is chiefly due to the fact that people view it more as something like cigarettes or alcohol than a drug. Also how this is a debate between state and federal levels of government, that means the federal government could shut this down at anytime. But they said that they weren't concerned with it and that their had to be some serious circumstance for them to take action. So it looks like weed is here to stay.
"So it looks like weed is here to stay."
DeleteVote Curtis Dyer 2016
I think the prohibition of marijuana was a lot like that thing with the prohibition of alcohol, in a sense that neither of them did much of anything. It makes sense that the federal government would want to tax it. Marijuana wouldn't be the first drug to be legal, either (nicotine and caffeine, for example).
I think that the legalization of marijuana is long past overdue in this country. I agree with Kaitlynn that banning marijuana is a lot like the prohibition of alcohol in the sense that it is pointless to try to ban something that people are still going to find a way to do it. The sell of marijuana in states that have legalized it are taxing it which is going to help the community which is beneficial.
DeleteSo many people do marijuana that it is a downhill battle to fight against it. It is the people's choice to smoke it and live with the consequences. I am against marijuana, but then again I am against most drugs that are used for recreational purposes. If the people want to destroy their bodies and brains then let them. They will realize their mistake too late and will try to make up for it like people do for anti-smoking ads.
DeleteI agree that Marijuana should be legalized. It has been around to long for the government to try to completely stop it in its tracks. Like what people have already been saying with the prohibition of alcohol, it will not stop just because it is illegal, if that were the case then people would not have been doing it in the first place. I think that government just needs to find a way to put a tax on it so that they can figure out what they really want to do.
DeleteI agree that marijuana should be legalized, because it should be YOUR choice whether or not you want to do something like that, I however am against it for myself. I agree with other peoples post, that its a lot like the prohibition of alcohol- it brings money into the country and is difficult to stop.
Deletehttp://kuow.org/post/interest-groups-pour-money-whatcom-races-ahead-coal-terminal-decision A nice article about interest groups and their involvement with pouring money for campaigning. This demonstrates how interest groups can leave a big impact although being relatively small-- the election itself here is in a small country of Washington however it could potentially bring big changes to the US's oil industry. Think about it.
ReplyDeleteCaptcha: itGoats 69
Yeah, the interest groups may be small, but they do leave big impacts. I feel like the size allows people to overlook their potential threat. They're allowing the campaigns to blow more money. And with bogus slogans like "stop the war on workers" slathered everywhere, it'll be too easy for them to trick the average monkey into thinking that further destruction of our environment will be for a good cause.
DeleteI Feel like that losing two weapons & then they came up in a shooting, shouldnt the person who lost the weapons be responsible for that. I think they should have the impeachment of Eric. The house is like gladys said going to that it wants. The house and attorney general need to get along and come to some agreement or nothing will be settled. They needa to work together in this situation.
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/projects/elections/2013/general/virginia/map.html
ReplyDeleteMany people think that the turnout of this election may help in predicting the turnout for many elections in the next several years. This election shows the Democrats winning the election, which means that they may lead in the Presidential campaign as well. What are your opinions? Do you think that this is just some prediction or that it may hold some truth about future campaigns?
Well I would like to believe that it is trust, but from what I understand from what has happened in the last 50 years people tend to forget how much the Democratic candidates have done. They tend to fall victim to the manipulation of the Republican party, for example, when I ask people about what they know about President Kennedy I get two answers: Bay of Pigs invasion or his cheating with Marilyn Monroe.
Deletehttp://www.americavotes.org/node/701
ReplyDeleteI find this very interesting about women in politics, especially from the interest group Emily's List. I really like how at the top of this page, it is quotes from male politicians who said that if women were in charge of the consensus for the new budgets, it would be decided in only a few short hours. This, to me, shows how immature politicians can be, especially men, and they know it. I feel that this quote makes me have less faith in our government because obviously they do not have faith in themselves either... I think it is kind of pathetic. But this is only one part of the article. The rest of it is quite interesting as well.
I agree with you, the lack of faith among politicians do to gender differences can be very appalling. The quote listed by this said politician is a very frustrating and prejudice. The fact that this very man believes that a woman cannot make a political form decision is very irritating.
Deletehttp://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/11/13/kasich-stops-execution-of-phillips.html
ReplyDeleteIn this article you will find that the man who was charged with four counts of rape and one count of agerrvated murder was supposed to be executed today. This has been postponed due to the man wanting to donate his organs to his mother and brother. This is somthing that hasnt been done befor. HIV in prisons are 30% higher than what they are to the general public. This man would have to be evaluated and then determined if able to donate his organs. The new execution date will be July 2, 2014.
I think that this is not a fair thing to do. The man raped a little girl. No person should ever want the organs of someone who did that to a sweet little baby girl inside their body. I would feel like this would be unholy. How can you not wonder if you have someones organs in your body that you will not turn into the same monster he was. He should be executed as soon as possible and not have an option to prolong his life.
DeleteWell, I think waiting twenty years to execute someone can wait a couple more weeks. I feel the government needs to be quicker in making a descision for major cases, like rape and murder. I think this man shouldn't be denied his rights to donate his organs, but this should have been taken care of a long time ago. Justice should be served, in this case, and the man should suffer the consequences. I feel that his execution will just continue to be postponed and they won't do anything about it.
DeleteWhy did they wait 20 years ? I agree with amanda , they needa be quicker in these decisions. I understand him wanting to donate his organs for whatever reason , but they should have had that done by now. He needs to suffer the consequences for what he did , it was not right at all. Rape or murder in my opinion should be immediate execution.
DeleteI also agree with Amanda and Hailey, if they can wait twenty years to execute somebody shouldn't they have decided whether or not he cant donate his organs by now? Twenty years is a long time to wait for the execution, and it seems like its just going to be continually postponed.
DeleteIt is a fair thing to do. Should his organs be harvested, he could save up to eight lives and improve the life of countless others. He would like to donate his liver to his mother. It's not unholy. If anything, it's just the opposite. He should be allowed to donate his organs. It is fair.
Deleteso because he raped people, that makes his organs rapist?ok. But for everyone who wants him not too and just die, why would you want that. What sounds more brutal than organ harvesting? Take what is useful from him and chuck him.
Deletehttp://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/14/ring-of-house-republicans-to-call-for-impeachment-of-holder/?hpt=hp_t3
ReplyDeleteI think the impeachment of Eric Holder should be done. Ultimately the House is going to do what it wants and if they do not like the Attorney General, they will never get anything done. If this does not happen, we can expect no progress coming from the House Republicans. If they cannot vote on issues together, there is no point in having a House Republicans at all.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/14/breaking-obama-to-make-statement-on-health-care
ReplyDeleteThis article is about Obama and how he fumbled with the affordable care act. He is apologetic and wants to make messed up insurance policies right. I don’t know if this means he’s going to come up with another bill to fix the common problems or if he's going to handle issues individually. but i think that if there has been that many problem about this bill and he himself thinks he made a mistake he should amend it and take it out of law because nobody like it and now he's starting to see his faults as well.
It is good to see the President starting to admit that his affordable health care act has some major flaws in it that are affecting people in ways he did not anticipate. He dropped a huge stone in a pond and did not plan for all the ripples to expand as far as it did. Many people have lost health care plans they have had for years and were happy with. Now the new standards require them to have insurance they don't need. Another newspaper article told of a 65 year old couple that was being forced to buy maternity insurance. An unintended consequence of a law that was not well thought out and needs fixed.
DeleteObama apparently also created s grandfather clause stating that certain previous obamcare customers, due to several flaws, would get a year of insurance with that package but the insurers had no idea what Obama was talking about and not all of them could supply them with this.
Deletehttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-14/google-says-u-s-government-requests-for-data-rise-to-10-918.html
ReplyDeleteHow much to too much the next thing you know they are logging right into everyone's personal email that have nothing to do with any. In other hand i do think its right that Google makes them actually request them to see personal information and simply doesn't give them out like other companies. Im sure this will be short lived though as they will continue to rise in request to the point where they will just make a law that will by pass this.
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/14/21460308-a-more-defiant-obama-in-ohio-i-am-going-to-see-this-through?lite
ReplyDeleteO-H-I-O
Mr. President made a trip to Cleveland yesterday and after talking about the economy and manufacturing he put up a defense to the Affordable Care Act. He made sure everyone knew that he was going to make sure that he saw things through with it. He even made a nice complement to our GOP governor Kasich for expanding Medicare within our state when many other GOP governors refused to.
I think that it is actually fascinating that the president would come to Ohio. You usually hear about officials going to the bigger states like California, Florida, and New York. But he came to Ohio to discuss the affordable care act. This also shows how Obama is starting to talk to a wider range of people about the affordable care act.
DeleteI agree with Jason. All the "smaller" states get neglected and don't receive the same attention as the most popular of states
Deletehttp://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/15/21477296-in-mild-rebuke-to-obama-39-dems-vote-with-gop-on-keep-your-plan-bill?lite
ReplyDeleteOn the topic of the act named "Keep Your Health Plan Act of 2013," which under called for insurers to keep offering individual health coverage plans in 2014 that don’t meet the minimum requirements of the Affordable Care Act, 39 democrates voted along side of the Republicans to promote this bill. They considered it a mild rebuke to president Obama. This is much better than what was originally thought was going to be 60 democrats breaking with the president.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/15/world/meast/iran-nuclear-deal/index.html?hpt=po_c2
ReplyDeleteThis article is saying how the countries are coming to a deal with Iran and using these Nuclear Weapon against the countries. This is a good idea, but there are a few things that are kind of concerning. The concerning factors are how in the article it says we are getting close to this, but there are the quotation marks around those words. This makes it seem how they say we are getting close, but not really. Also something possible that could happen is that they would sign this, but still use the nuclear weapons on fellow countries.