http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/17/obama-wishes-washington-was-like-house-of-cards/ This article discusses how Obama is working with major technology groups to correct the struggles of the HealthCare.gov site. Major industries, which include Apple, Google, Microsoft, and many others, are working together to ensure the practices of government websites that are ran to their best potential. I do not know why this wasn't a more important concern before they even created HealthCare.gov. The issues should have been worked out before it was even officially created.
I agree. It seems like they kind of rushed too much into this website thing. Like, shouldn't they have anticipated bugs like these? When Spider-Man fought Spider-Slayer in Superior Spider-Man (2013) Issues #11-13, he totally anticipated all the moves Slayer would've made while trying to escape The Raft. Why couldn't our government have done something like this with their website? Not cool, Obama.
This is a terrible idea to allow for the help of private companies, in the health care website. As if a national health care system wasn't bad enough now we have private industries helping in supposedly completely government based program. Even if it is just the website, it could usher into certain companies have a monopoly on health care, if it continues in other areas.
President Obama and his administration should've had any at all issues with his "fully-functioning" HealthCare.gov website fixed and ironed out before releasing it for public use. The fact that they waited until now to have the problems with the HealthCare.gov website addressed with such big players in the "Internet market" so to speak is very disappointing and shows the lack of initiative by the Obama administration.
It is very disappointing that yet another government technology issue has failed so badly. They did not learn from agencies like the IRS and the Veteran's Administration where those agencies had huge failures of their electronic filing and benefits systems. The Obamacare administrator should have looked at the lessons learned from those failures and made sure that his program did not suffer the same fate. Instead, we rushed through a program with some artificial deadlines and tried to get the American people to think this would be a great thing. It is no wonder the people are losing faith in the government, one mess after another and no one seems to learn.
They rushed to create the website and everything surrounding it but what I don’t understand what could possibly be wrong with the website. Twitter, Facebook, tumblr etc. are visited by not if not thousands, millions of people and the sites crash here and there sometimes but not as often as the heathcare.gov website
so third party organizations get to capitalize on our health care system? so now we are going to have these companies integrated with our "government healthcare system" because they couldn't get the site right in the beginning,
preaident obama has the power to do alot of things. whycould hehave not done this in the first place. This website shouldve been posted after everything is working to its full potential and not crash when it has a mass overload of people. if i was the president i wpuldnt make promises and then make it look like my work is sloppy amd people go with out health care.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/17/us/florida-school-name-change/index.html?hpt=us_c2 This article kind of pertains to what we are discussing right now with the 14th amendment and the different cases. A Florida school must change their name "Nathan B. Forrest" After the supreme court decided that schools can be racially integrated, they named it after him. He was a slave trader and part of the KKK. Now the school board has ruled that they must change the name, almost fifty-five years later. Many ruled against changing it due to the fact that he is a part of our history. Honoring Forrest has been a major struggle for years in Duval County. Many civil right groups are pushing for memorials of Forrest, but a lot of their propositions haven't been favored or carried out.
I'm more towards the middle on this whole situation. Sure, Nathan B. Forrest has a very terrible background as a Confederate general, slave trader, and the first grand wizard of the KKK, but just because his past isn't as ideal as we want it to be doesn't mean we can erase the existence of his character being honored by having a high school named after him. The article said it right there that the school was named after Forrest during the de-segregation era so at that current point in time a problem like this wasn't anticipated. The townsfolk were merely honoring one of their famous residents. Also, I bring up the point as to why it took so long for civil rights groups to make an initiative to change the name of the high school. You'd think if it was that offensive and posed such a problem it would've been a higher priority of the people behind the initiative.
I agree but disagree. I agree with the point that they don't need to change it. He had a part in our history and a major one. But I dont agree with what he had apart of but just like that we are allowed to state our opinion. The supreme court should just let shorten it or something but at least keep it to the same guy so it still has its meaning.
Okay is this guy was a slave trader and part of the KKK why does he have a school honoring him? Is h e being honored for his bad behavior or what? Just because it is part of history doesn’t make it right to honor someone who did something as horrible sell people and discriminate against other. There is no question to this the school should change their name.
I personally would be against naming of this but according to our rights, it is accepted. Even though the naming of the school towards Nathan B. Forrest is offensive and immoral in my opinions and the people going against this, we can't force the school to change its name. Though, considering it was the school board telling them to change it, they also have the right to decide what their schools names will be.
http://mashable.com/2013/12/16/nsa-records-court-ruling/ This article talks about the NSA collecting phone data. The issue is that collecting data from an individual's phone violates our fourth amendment rights to search and seizure. I agree that this violates our rights. Like, it's such an invasion of privacy. Mass surveillance is creepy.
Mass surveillance is an infringement of our basic right as human beings. Why should we be treated as suspects in a crime, when we are free and innocent. This is not right on any basis or grounds. We need to step up as a nation and stop the massive imposes on our civil liberties if we ever want to have freedom from government control again. It will only escalate until it is completely out of control.
I completely agree with both of you, I think the government needs to take a step back out of our personal lives and let us have privacy. No, the right to privacy is not directly given in the constitution but it is an implied right which the government should uphold. Under the fourth amendment the government only has the right to search personal thing with a warrant or probable cause which they don't have
I agree. This type of mass surveillance is just overboard by the government. There may be reasonable cause to monitor and intercept the calls of a few thousand people who may be engaged in illegal and terrorist activity, but what about the 200 million people who are law abiding citizens. We think it is OK to monitor them just because we can with the technology we have? Instead of going after the people we need to and using the resources fully against them, we are spreading out the net and trying to just see what will come up. This is like fishing with dynamite. Let's just throw a stick in and hope some good fish come up and we can pick them out of all the mud and junk created and we don't care how messy the pond is after we are done. Not surprising that we have so many conspiracy theorists out there, maybe some of their mistrust of the government is justified.
While the main focus of this is to stop terrorism or crime I don't especially like that they are invading the privacy of millions of Americans violating our fourth amendment to hopefully catch a terrorist or crime maker in the mix of it all. While not having terrorist and crime causers is nice I don't feel comfortable with the government breathing down my back even though they would be very bored just monitoring my random messages with my friends because I don't have sights of world domination in my future because I'm basically just another citizen to them in a country of around 350 million people in it.
I agree with the main focus , I dont like that they are invading our privacy at all. The should not search our personal things without warrant. Violating our fourth amendment might be okay to try and catch terrorist or criminals but with most Americans its not okay.
This is what we were talking about in class yesterday, and our class had some common points and some not so common views. How far are we willing to go with giving up our privacy for our safety? I think that this is going to far, search warrants were made for a reason. The government should have probable cause before they can read our messages or have anything to do with our private things.
I agree as well. Even though the people who aren't doing anything wrong wouldn't mind, it lets the government know they can push further into controlling our lives. It begs the question where does it stop? The government is already intertwined into our daily lives enough as it is.
There really isn't anyone cool with the surveillance going on here folks. But the bigger question is why did Germany stage mass protests for their government just being semi-involved in the process, while we still have people that didn't know this was happening? Like does anyone see the issue there? Someone needs to step up and talk about this. Like the video Ms. Frase showed us said, Nixon taps a few phones and he gets impeached; Obama and the rest of the government tap almost every phone in America and no one cares enough to do anything about it.
Excuse me, the German protests were about their governments lack of a reaction towards the NSAs spying and especially the disbelief the general population has of their governments claim they had no idea this was happening.
Well here's the thing, next I'm going to start night vision goggles and watch yall sleep at night. Exactly what your thinking, what? Talk about invasion of privacy although they are trying to keep an ear out for signs of terrorism to "keep us safe" they should still do it constitutionally, like if they get tipped off, but to just go out and straight listen to the population that's crossing some sort of line
This article is about how members of Congress are filling for impeachment for President Barack Obama. So far 29 congress members have agreed, this has come from the grievances of one republican representative and his supporters. This has gone into action because Tom Rice, the republican representative, has spoke up about how he feels that the president is picking and choosing the laws he wants to follow. He feels that he is skipping over the checks and balances system by implementing laws without congressional review. Another reason behind this is that they feel Obama care is unconstitutional by forcing all Americans to have something. It is still a very long ways away from being put into place though.
Now check this wild stuff out y'all. We've been talking about this amendment stuff for like ever and now here's the perfect example. Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty is permanently suspended from the show for his remarks towards homosexuality. You can find the quote in the article if you'd like to see (I can't talk about the high paced world of sexual intercourse on the blog y'know).
Anyways I find it moronic that he is being punished for expressing his views, however controversial, by the general public. He is taking fire especially from supporters of gay right's, which is a given. But even the gay dude the Washington Post had said “Whether or not I think his understanding of desire is primitive and brute, there are lot of people in America who hold his opinion, dismissing an idea is not engaging a debate; that is not even entering into one.” All I'm saying is I think it's dumb that Phil is getting so much hate for just expressing his views, considering it was just him saying what he thinks, no hate mongering, no calling for a holy war against the gays, no national game of smear the queer. I would have thought that a community that has been judged for so long for the same reasons would be more tolerant of him just expressing his views.
You ain't gotta agree with it but you should atleast acknowledge his freedom to say what he believes. That's what I think.
So yeah, what do all you guys think about this sticky situation Phil's got himself in?
Also I fully acknowledge A&E's right to do whatever they think they should, if he broke his contract by saying these things or if there was a provision in the contract dealing with A&E's rights to suspend members of the show. I think they're dumb for removing him though because now they got a huge chunk of Duck Dynasty's fanbase whipped into a frenzy but thats not the point here nah mean?
Just giving some of my own personal beliefs here, for I don't wish to go under fire here either, I am a christian and I hold very christian morals. I for myself believe that homosexuality is wrong cause I'm attracted to females just as it is put in the Bible. I'm not gay and I never see myself as becoming be gay. However when I take a worldly look on things I side perfectly with the Pope on this issue. People are allowed to live life as they chose and if being gay is part of your life that brings you happiness and fulfillment why should I deny you from having that. That's why, honestly even though I'm a christian, I would vote for gay marriage to be legal. A follow up comment from Phil Robertson has him saying basically while we all have different opinions on subjects, we are all human also, so why hate each other? I can give just as much love to a person of a different religion or race or whatever else as I can to a fellow white christian. As for Phil Robertson this is an a problem on his first amendment. He is allowed to say this, but when you are a famous TV celebrity you are going to have the media watching you like a hawk for a screw up so they can get the next big story. While what he said may have crossed the line to some people he was simply using his first amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. People know that he's on a show that has religion in it. At the end of every episode they say a prayer and yet someone becomes mad when he says his beliefs when you most likely already knew his beliefs were that way. I say bring him back or Duck Dynasty might be off television for a while disappointing about 10 million Americans who watch the show.
Yo check it, this might be very biased in every kinda way but I was waiting for this be be brought up! Alright, I know bout the show, I watch it, it's Hilarious, and at the end of EVERY episode the family prays, you knew some sort of religious side of the intervew was coming. As to the comparison to murderers and gays one, he has the right to believe in his religion and two, the reason they make such a big deal out of it besides the fact that America has lost its priorities is because of the fact that the way we see it without religion the are degrees to levels of "sin" or madness but the way we as Christians view it, sin is sin no degrees. But honestly the media is just overreacting and as for A&E if they wanna lose thousands of viewers well hey.
he was just saying his views in a way that describes his views based on his religion. its very ignorant when one side can preach what ever they want, but when an opposition arrives, all hell breaks loose. He wasn't being offensive, just speaking his opinion. People just can't take when the opposition has something to say.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/20/does-phil-robertson-get-the-bible-wrong/?hpt=hp_c2 Im not a duck dynasty fan but I think this is wrong. He didn't do anything wrong but just say his views on what he thinks is okay and what isnt. I see nothing wrong with this. Everyone is titled to their own opinion. But apparently A&E doesn't want this brought up on the show.
I heard about this the other day, I think it's pretty messed up too. I think he is entitled to own opinion, they have all these shows bout pregnant girls and gays/lesbians but yet when he says an opinon he gets kicked off, I think its just wrong. A&E not wanting it on the show is sorta dumb, he is allowed to have an opinion, free speech!
I heard about this also, its all over the internet. I understand that A&E wouldn't want this on their show however, I don't think he should have gotten kicked off, everyone has their own opinion and have the right to speech.
I also agree that this guy should not of been on leave for this. I think that you do have the right to say what you want to say, and this guy said what he thought. Though i know that because of organizations like the FCC (which i actually don't know if they were involved with this) show that there are things on tv that you cannot say, but it really do not think that A&E should of made so that he would not be on the show for how long. This also affected the other cast members of the show so that they do not want to do it without him. Since this is a popular show, this would probably affect many different people.
I think that he really should not have been put on leave considering the question in general would lead to controversial answers. Not only that, but he was not going against it or pushing his opinions on anyone else. He was only stating his opinion. I think this isn't much of a political issue as the channel does have the right to put him on leave, but I think this is more of a poor decision on their part. It has caused this huge outcry by his fans and considering Phill is a huge part of the show, it has harmed the show a lot as well.
This article was about a Georgia Congressman defending his comments he made dressing school lunches. He said that lower income families should have their children work to pay off the "free food" they eat. I think that he is targeting specific groups and they are being victimized because they do not have enough money to pay for their "free food". It is not the children's fault that they may not be able to pay for their food, they are being targeted made to look like they do not want to pay for their food. This again is an example of how the media can stories into feeding frenzies. The Congressman is standing by what he said, which with most of the country not being in the upper class social level, I think he is bound to lose a great deal of his republican supporters. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/20/georgia-congressman-defends-school-lunch-comments/?hpt=po_c2
I agree with Gladys. It is not fair to make the children at fault for their free lunches. It is definitely not their fault and shouldn't be treated as though it is. He will lose a lot of supporters because he is targeting a child who has no control over their family's financial issues.
This video is about President Barack Obama addressing the NSA's snooping. Obama has said that he is reviewing all of the suggestions made about the NSA and what to do, and he is confident they are not snooping around in people's business. I think this was a very smart move on his side, because, he took the people's side by saying he is reviewing all suggestions to make sure people will be happy with whatever decisions he makes, and he is supporting the NSA by saying he has it on pretty good authority that they were not snooping around. He is making both sides happy. I think the fact that he said that he is reviewing all the suggestions made, makes the American public feel better like something is going to change. The American public feels like he actually cares, which is a good strategy on the President's part. http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2013/12/20/sot-obama-nsa-surveillance.cnn&hpt=po_c1&video_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2FPOLITICS%2F%3Fhpt%3Dsitenav
I really agree with what you are saying here. I honestly did not think that it would be possible for this situation to be handled in a way that more than one side would be happy, but obviously Obama had pretty much done that. I think that this is one of the traits that makes him a good president. And I really like this and I am happy you found it! It is nice to see something nice every once in awhile!
It could be great that Obama is taking both sides of this situation, but for this certain topic, i feel as if it has the chance to benefit no one. I say this because the NSA is such a controversial topic. There are the people who wouldn't care to being spied on and then there would be people who would greatly appreciate the fact that they know this. But there will always be people who won't believe the president. And this could be understandable because you personally would never be able to check if the NSA is watching everything.
So, one thing that always drives me insane is how people treat a politician they do not like by dehumanizing them. It is a horrible thing to do and crosses the line in a way that makes that person idiotic, rude, and honestly, just a horrid person. I have been seeing a picture circulating on the internet of a black man wearing drag and it has Obama's CURRENT face edited onto it, saying that this is from his college years. Number 1, he had a thick Afro is college and he is pretty bald looking in this picture and number 2, the blurriness of the picture proves that it is Photoshop. In addition, I was tagged in a picture of Mrs. Obama in a pretty dress, and someone commented on this tag that the dress was pretty but the THING that was wearing it was a number of cruel things. I find the majority of Americans to be so judging and rude and disrespectful that I can understand why other countries disrespect us so much. Sometimes, the way people act and judge makes me sad...
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/17/obama-wishes-washington-was-like-house-of-cards/
ReplyDeleteThis article discusses how Obama is working with major technology groups to correct the struggles of the HealthCare.gov site. Major industries, which include Apple, Google, Microsoft, and many others, are working together to ensure the practices of government websites that are ran to their best potential. I do not know why this wasn't a more important concern before they even created HealthCare.gov. The issues should have been worked out before it was even officially created.
I agree. It seems like they kind of rushed too much into this website thing. Like, shouldn't they have anticipated bugs like these? When Spider-Man fought Spider-Slayer in Superior Spider-Man (2013) Issues #11-13, he totally anticipated all the moves Slayer would've made while trying to escape The Raft. Why couldn't our government have done something like this with their website? Not cool, Obama.
DeleteThis is a terrible idea to allow for the help of private companies, in the health care website. As if a national health care system wasn't bad enough now we have private industries helping in supposedly completely government based program. Even if it is just the website, it could usher into certain companies have a monopoly on health care, if it continues in other areas.
DeletePresident Obama and his administration should've had any at all issues with his "fully-functioning" HealthCare.gov website fixed and ironed out before releasing it for public use. The fact that they waited until now to have the problems with the HealthCare.gov website addressed with such big players in the "Internet market" so to speak is very disappointing and shows the lack of initiative by the Obama administration.
DeleteIt is very disappointing that yet another government technology issue has failed so badly. They did not learn from agencies like the IRS and the Veteran's Administration where those agencies had huge failures of their electronic filing and benefits systems. The Obamacare administrator should have looked at the lessons learned from those failures and made sure that his program did not suffer the same fate. Instead, we rushed through a program with some artificial deadlines and tried to get the American people to think this would be a great thing. It is no wonder the people are losing faith in the government, one mess after another and no one seems to learn.
DeleteThey rushed to create the website and everything surrounding it but what I don’t understand what could possibly be wrong with the website. Twitter, Facebook, tumblr etc. are visited by not if not thousands, millions of people and the sites crash here and there sometimes but not as often as the heathcare.gov website
Deleteso third party organizations get to capitalize on our health care system? so now we are going to have these companies integrated with our "government healthcare system" because they couldn't get the site right in the beginning,
Deletepreaident obama has the power to do alot of things. whycould hehave not done this in the first place. This website shouldve been posted after everything is working to its full potential and not crash when it has a mass overload of people. if i was the president i wpuldnt make promises and then make it look like my work is sloppy amd people go with out health care.
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2013/12/17/us/florida-school-name-change/index.html?hpt=us_c2
ReplyDeleteThis article kind of pertains to what we are discussing right now with the 14th amendment and the different cases. A Florida school must change their name "Nathan B. Forrest" After the supreme court decided that schools can be racially integrated, they named it after him. He was a slave trader and part of the KKK. Now the school board has ruled that they must change the name, almost fifty-five years later. Many ruled against changing it due to the fact that he is a part of our history. Honoring Forrest has been a major struggle for years in Duval County. Many civil right groups are pushing for memorials of Forrest, but a lot of their propositions haven't been favored or carried out.
I'm more towards the middle on this whole situation. Sure, Nathan B. Forrest has a very terrible background as a Confederate general, slave trader, and the first grand wizard of the KKK, but just because his past isn't as ideal as we want it to be doesn't mean we can erase the existence of his character being honored by having a high school named after him. The article said it right there that the school was named after Forrest during the de-segregation era so at that current point in time a problem like this wasn't anticipated. The townsfolk were merely honoring one of their famous residents. Also, I bring up the point as to why it took so long for civil rights groups to make an initiative to change the name of the high school. You'd think if it was that offensive and posed such a problem it would've been a higher priority of the people behind the initiative.
DeleteI agree but disagree. I agree with the point that they don't need to change it. He had a part in our history and a major one. But I dont agree with what he had apart of but just like that we are allowed to state our opinion. The supreme court should just let shorten it or something but at least keep it to the same guy so it still has its meaning.
DeleteOkay is this guy was a slave trader and part of the KKK why does he have a school honoring him? Is h e being honored for his bad behavior or what? Just because it is part of history doesn’t make it right to honor someone who did something as horrible sell people and discriminate against other. There is no question to this the school should change their name.
DeleteI personally would be against naming of this but according to our rights, it is accepted. Even though the naming of the school towards Nathan B. Forrest is offensive and immoral in my opinions and the people going against this, we can't force the school to change its name. Though, considering it was the school board telling them to change it, they also have the right to decide what their schools names will be.
Deletehttp://mashable.com/2013/12/16/nsa-records-court-ruling/
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about the NSA collecting phone data. The issue is that collecting data from an individual's phone violates our fourth amendment rights to search and seizure. I agree that this violates our rights. Like, it's such an invasion of privacy. Mass surveillance is creepy.
Mass surveillance is an infringement of our basic right as human beings. Why should we be treated as suspects in a crime, when we are free and innocent. This is not right on any basis or grounds. We need to step up as a nation and stop the massive imposes on our civil liberties if we ever want to have freedom from government control again. It will only escalate until it is completely out of control.
DeleteI completely agree with both of you, I think the government needs to take a step back out of our personal lives and let us have privacy. No, the right to privacy is not directly given in the constitution but it is an implied right which the government should uphold. Under the fourth amendment the government only has the right to search personal thing with a warrant or probable cause which they don't have
DeleteI agree. This type of mass surveillance is just overboard by the government. There may be reasonable cause to monitor and intercept the calls of a few thousand people who may be engaged in illegal and terrorist activity, but what about the 200 million people who are law abiding citizens. We think it is OK to monitor them just because we can with the technology we have? Instead of going after the people we need to and using the resources fully against them, we are spreading out the net and trying to just see what will come up. This is like fishing with dynamite. Let's just throw a stick in and hope some good fish come up and we can pick them out of all the mud and junk created and we don't care how messy the pond is after we are done. Not surprising that we have so many conspiracy theorists out there, maybe some of their mistrust of the government is justified.
DeleteWhile the main focus of this is to stop terrorism or crime I don't especially like that they are invading the privacy of millions of Americans violating our fourth amendment to hopefully catch a terrorist or crime maker in the mix of it all. While not having terrorist and crime causers is nice I don't feel comfortable with the government breathing down my back even though they would be very bored just monitoring my random messages with my friends because I don't have sights of world domination in my future because I'm basically just another citizen to them in a country of around 350 million people in it.
DeleteI agree with the main focus , I dont like that they are invading our privacy at all. The should not search our personal things without warrant. Violating our fourth amendment might be okay to try and catch terrorist or criminals but with most Americans its not okay.
DeleteThis is what we were talking about in class yesterday, and our class had some common points and some not so common views. How far are we willing to go with giving up our privacy for our safety? I think that this is going to far, search warrants were made for a reason. The government should have probable cause before they can read our messages or have anything to do with our private things.
DeleteI agree as well. Even though the people who aren't doing anything wrong wouldn't mind, it lets the government know they can push further into controlling our lives. It begs the question where does it stop? The government is already intertwined into our daily lives enough as it is.
DeleteThere really isn't anyone cool with the surveillance going on here folks. But the bigger question is why did Germany stage mass protests for their government just being semi-involved in the process, while we still have people that didn't know this was happening? Like does anyone see the issue there? Someone needs to step up and talk about this. Like the video Ms. Frase showed us said, Nixon taps a few phones and he gets impeached; Obama and the rest of the government tap almost every phone in America and no one cares enough to do anything about it.
DeleteExcuse me, the German protests were about their governments lack of a reaction towards the NSAs spying and especially the disbelief the general population has of their governments claim they had no idea this was happening.
DeleteWell here's the thing, next I'm going to start night vision goggles and watch yall sleep at night. Exactly what your thinking, what? Talk about invasion of privacy although they are trying to keep an ear out for signs of terrorism to "keep us safe" they should still do it constitutionally, like if they get tipped off, but to just go out and straight listen to the population that's crossing some sort of line
Deletehttp://yournation.org/congress-moves-to-impeach-barak-obama/
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how members of Congress are filling for impeachment for President Barack Obama. So far 29 congress members have agreed, this has come from the grievances of one republican representative and his supporters. This has gone into action because Tom Rice, the republican representative, has spoke up about how he feels that the president is picking and choosing the laws he wants to follow. He feels that he is skipping over the checks and balances system by implementing laws without congressional review. Another reason behind this is that they feel Obama care is unconstitutional by forcing all Americans to have something. It is still a very long ways away from being put into place though.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/phil-robertsons-suspension-from-duck-dynasty-sends-fans-rallying-to-his-side/2013/12/19/eb1c427e-68f8-11e3-997b-9213b17dac97_story.html
ReplyDeleteNow check this wild stuff out y'all. We've been talking about this amendment stuff for like ever and now here's the perfect example. Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty is permanently suspended from the show for his remarks towards homosexuality. You can find the quote in the article if you'd like to see (I can't talk about the high paced world of sexual intercourse on the blog y'know).
Anyways I find it moronic that he is being punished for expressing his views, however controversial, by the general public. He is taking fire especially from supporters of gay right's, which is a given. But even the gay dude the Washington Post had said “Whether or not I think his understanding of desire is primitive and brute, there are lot of people in America who hold his opinion, dismissing an idea is not engaging a debate; that is not even entering into one.” All I'm saying is I think it's dumb that Phil is getting so much hate for just expressing his views, considering it was just him saying what he thinks, no hate mongering, no calling for a holy war against the gays, no national game of smear the queer. I would have thought that a community that has been judged for so long for the same reasons would be more tolerant of him just expressing his views.
You ain't gotta agree with it but you should atleast acknowledge his freedom to say what he believes. That's what I think.
So yeah, what do all you guys think about this sticky situation Phil's got himself in?
Also I fully acknowledge A&E's right to do whatever they think they should, if he broke his contract by saying these things or if there was a provision in the contract dealing with A&E's rights to suspend members of the show. I think they're dumb for removing him though because now they got a huge chunk of Duck Dynasty's fanbase whipped into a frenzy but thats not the point here nah mean?
Delete"nah mean?" LOL
DeleteJust giving some of my own personal beliefs here, for I don't wish to go under fire here either, I am a christian and I hold very christian morals. I for myself believe that homosexuality is wrong cause I'm attracted to females just as it is put in the Bible. I'm not gay and I never see myself as becoming be gay. However when I take a worldly look on things I side perfectly with the Pope on this issue. People are allowed to live life as they chose and if being gay is part of your life that brings you happiness and fulfillment why should I deny you from having that. That's why, honestly even though I'm a christian, I would vote for gay marriage to be legal. A follow up comment from Phil Robertson has him saying basically while we all have different opinions on subjects, we are all human also, so why hate each other? I can give just as much love to a person of a different religion or race or whatever else as I can to a fellow white christian.
DeleteAs for Phil Robertson this is an a problem on his first amendment. He is allowed to say this, but when you are a famous TV celebrity you are going to have the media watching you like a hawk for a screw up so they can get the next big story. While what he said may have crossed the line to some people he was simply using his first amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. People know that he's on a show that has religion in it. At the end of every episode they say a prayer and yet someone becomes mad when he says his beliefs when you most likely already knew his beliefs were that way. I say bring him back or Duck Dynasty might be off television for a while disappointing about 10 million Americans who watch the show.
Yo check it, this might be very biased in every kinda way but I was waiting for this be be brought up! Alright, I know bout the show, I watch it, it's Hilarious, and at the end of EVERY episode the family prays, you knew some sort of religious side of the intervew was coming. As to the comparison to murderers and gays one, he has the right to believe in his religion and two, the reason they make such a big deal out of it besides the fact that America has lost its priorities is because of the fact that the way we see it without religion the are degrees to levels of "sin" or madness but the way we as Christians view it, sin is sin no degrees. But honestly the media is just overreacting and as for A&E if they wanna lose thousands of viewers well hey.
Deletehe was just saying his views in a way that describes his views based on his religion. its very ignorant when one side can preach what ever they want, but when an opposition arrives, all hell breaks loose. He wasn't being offensive, just speaking his opinion. People just can't take when the opposition has something to say.
Deletehttp://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/20/does-phil-robertson-get-the-bible-wrong/?hpt=hp_c2
ReplyDeleteIm not a duck dynasty fan but I think this is wrong. He didn't do anything wrong but just say his views on what he thinks is okay and what isnt. I see nothing wrong with this. Everyone is titled to their own opinion. But apparently A&E doesn't want this brought up on the show.
I heard about this the other day, I think it's pretty messed up too. I think he is entitled to own opinion, they have all these shows bout pregnant girls and gays/lesbians but yet when he says an opinon he gets kicked off, I think its just wrong. A&E not wanting it on the show is sorta dumb, he is allowed to have an opinion, free speech!
DeleteI heard about this also, its all over the internet. I understand that A&E wouldn't want this on their show however, I don't think he should have gotten kicked off, everyone has their own opinion and have the right to speech.
DeleteI also agree that this guy should not of been on leave for this. I think that you do have the right to say what you want to say, and this guy said what he thought. Though i know that because of organizations like the FCC (which i actually don't know if they were involved with this) show that there are things on tv that you cannot say, but it really do not think that A&E should of made so that he would not be on the show for how long. This also affected the other cast members of the show so that they do not want to do it without him. Since this is a popular show, this would probably affect many different people.
DeleteI think that he really should not have been put on leave considering the question in general would lead to controversial answers. Not only that, but he was not going against it or pushing his opinions on anyone else. He was only stating his opinion. I think this isn't much of a political issue as the channel does have the right to put him on leave, but I think this is more of a poor decision on their part. It has caused this huge outcry by his fans and considering Phill is a huge part of the show, it has harmed the show a lot as well.
DeleteThis article was about a Georgia Congressman defending his comments he made dressing school lunches. He said that lower income families should have their children work to pay off the "free food" they eat. I think that he is targeting specific groups and they are being victimized because they do not have enough money to pay for their "free food". It is not the children's fault that they may not be able to pay for their food, they are being targeted made to look like they do not want to pay for their food. This again is an example of how the media can stories into feeding frenzies. The Congressman is standing by what he said, which with most of the country not being in the upper class social level, I think he is bound to lose a great deal of his republican supporters.
ReplyDeletehttp://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/20/georgia-congressman-defends-school-lunch-comments/?hpt=po_c2
I agree with Gladys. It is not fair to make the children at fault for their free lunches. It is definitely not their fault and shouldn't be treated as though it is. He will lose a lot of supporters because he is targeting a child who has no control over their family's financial issues.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis video is about President Barack Obama addressing the NSA's snooping. Obama has said that he is reviewing all of the suggestions made about the NSA and what to do, and he is confident they are not snooping around in people's business. I think this was a very smart move on his side, because, he took the people's side by saying he is reviewing all suggestions to make sure people will be happy with whatever decisions he makes, and he is supporting the NSA by saying he has it on pretty good authority that they were not snooping around. He is making both sides happy. I think the fact that he said that he is reviewing all the suggestions made, makes the American public feel better like something is going to change. The American public feels like he actually cares, which is a good strategy on the President's part.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2013/12/20/sot-obama-nsa-surveillance.cnn&hpt=po_c1&video_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2FPOLITICS%2F%3Fhpt%3Dsitenav
I really agree with what you are saying here. I honestly did not think that it would be possible for this situation to be handled in a way that more than one side would be happy, but obviously Obama had pretty much done that. I think that this is one of the traits that makes him a good president. And I really like this and I am happy you found it! It is nice to see something nice every once in awhile!
DeleteIt could be great that Obama is taking both sides of this situation, but for this certain topic, i feel as if it has the chance to benefit no one. I say this because the NSA is such a controversial topic. There are the people who wouldn't care to being spied on and then there would be people who would greatly appreciate the fact that they know this. But there will always be people who won't believe the president. And this could be understandable because you personally would never be able to check if the NSA is watching everything.
ReplyDeleteThis is was supposed to go with what Gladys said*
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2013/12/20/politics/obama-bad-year/index.html?hpt=po_c1
ReplyDeleteSo, one thing that always drives me insane is how people treat a politician they do not like by dehumanizing them. It is a horrible thing to do and crosses the line in a way that makes that person idiotic, rude, and honestly, just a horrid person. I have been seeing a picture circulating on the internet of a black man wearing drag and it has Obama's CURRENT face edited onto it, saying that this is from his college years. Number 1, he had a thick Afro is college and he is pretty bald looking in this picture and number 2, the blurriness of the picture proves that it is Photoshop. In addition, I was tagged in a picture of Mrs. Obama in a pretty dress, and someone commented on this tag that the dress was pretty but the THING that was wearing it was a number of cruel things. I find the majority of Americans to be so judging and rude and disrespectful that I can understand why other countries disrespect us so much. Sometimes, the way people act and judge makes me sad...