After reading this weeks poll question, I asked myself, "What is going on in Iraq?!" I then went on thinking either I really need to pay more attention to what is going on or the media is doing a poor job at informing citizens on the situation. After choosing my second thought, I researched this information and have learned that Al Qaeda has taken over Fallujah and Ramadi. The US gov't is currently working to help Iraqis regain control. The second link includes an informative video. I will continue to research this subject to get a better understanding, but I am torn on my opinion of the media following the action in Iraq. On one hand I believe registered, active voters need to be informed on what is going on between our government and Iraq seeing that we have had many conflicts with them in the past. On the other hand I believe we do not need to bring conflicts of other nations to every television in the homes of America unless we become actively involved, noting that many Americans do not know what is currently going on in their own country. (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/01/04/iraq-army-battles-al-qaeda-linked-militants-to-regain-control-in-key-cities/) (http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/07/opinion/iraq-anbar-crisis-lister/index.html?iref=allsearch)
I had no idea what has been going on recently in Iraq, but to hear that Fallujah has fallen to Al-Queda is a massive shock. After our withdrawal from Iraq in 2011, there was thoughts in the air that peace, no matter how small it was, would not last in such a religious and political cauldron like the Middle East, but to hear that the not only has an Iraqi city been captured by our very enemy, but that the military forces were ordered to withdrawal as well and the local police were not able to stop them is sad to say the least. As important as Iraq's government and political situation is currently with the dispute between the Sunnis and the Shiites is, I feel the safety of the citizens in Fallujah should come first and the military should step in.
I feel that it is because of the such little air time that this war is being provided, that we are just sweeping it under the rug. It is as if nothing is happening, we are being told by the president that it will be over soon, and that troops are being withdrawn but we are still at large in Iraq. It isn't right for the American people to be left in the shadows like this just so the government doesn't have to deal with protests and dissatisfied citizens. I think we should get updates on the war today like we did during the Vietnam war, and then we could see how bad it really is, because we have a right to know what our country is doing in the world. It reflects heavily back upon us as a nation, and as people.
When I went to make a blog post for this week I seen what miss frase said about how the poll question might help with blog post, so my curiosity got to me and I read the poll question. I had no clue what was going on in Iraq, I mean I'm not a active involved citizen but I thought for sure I would have heard of this situtation somehow. Peaca doesn't last long in the middle east, yet I was surprised to hear of Fullujah falling to Al-Queda.
Am I the only one who notices the apathy of people who learn of news like this when the media's sensationalism hasn't taken it over? If someone isn't already making a big deal about it, no one else will. I myself am torn on the issue of whether or not we should keep soldiers in Iraq, as terrorist organizations are the tap water you put into your contact case, thinking nothing of the amoeba that will make you go blind as it's not affecting you at the moment. However, how many times have you already done that without going blind? (For me, none, but I do watch Dr Oz so I know these things.) Why can't the media go after something that is important for once?
I agree that it is hard to pick a side. Americans do need to be aware of what is going on in the world to prevent anything like that from happening here. But as Amanda said, we shouldn't advertise on every single television so we don't become too involved in the conflict. Everyone should already know that the media only covers what they feel is important and will draw attention and increase their popularity,
The situation in Iraq has been in the media, but it is not making headlines like it used too. Since American forces have withdrawn and turned security over to the Iraqis the events there do not impact the American people like they did when we had soldiers dying there. We are still interested because a stronger Al-Queda is a bigger threat to our interests in that area. This is a long term situation and the media likes to report things that are exciting and interesting in the right now. I think the media should continue to report this and keep the American people need to stay informed. I think that in the long term, our politicians will see the loss of these cities and the regional peace will reflect on the reputation and resolve of America and despite current non-involvement policies we may end up there again in some form.
Drones, we are really sending drones over there and regretting involved, this is just going to call for more debate about what is going on, although it is important that we the people should have the right to know what's going on with the government and what they're handling our country to the sky or to the ground
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/08/utah-will-not-recognize-same-sex-marriages-performed-before-high-court-stay/?hpt=po_c2 This article is about Utah not recognizing same-sex marriage in their state. A federal judge ruled to temporailly allow same-sex marriage before the Supreme court issued an official injunction. So Utah is reverting to their previously appointed law of marriage, saying it is illegal for anyone to preform a marriage of same-sex, as well as not recognizing them. The case is currently in the appeals process the ruling will affect Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Kansas. I think that it is wrong for them to try to find a lope-hole just to get around equality. It also isn't right for the men and women who have marriage certificates to their same-sex partners, that now mean nothing in the eyes of the government.
I agree with what you're saying. Individuals in same-sex relationships shouldn't have to jump through extra hoops just to gain recognition for their marriages. It's pretty messed up that these people still have to struggle to gain the same basic rights as other people.
This whole issue in my opinion is really messed up to me. First of all I don't think equal rights in any case should ever even be questioned let alone denied. Same sex marriage being equal to traditional marriage should be a nobrainer in the eyes of government since our country was build on the ideas of out forefathers for all to have the equal rights so why should anyone have the right to take that away. Secondly the federal judge should have never issued the right for these couples to get legally married before it got sent to the Supreme Court for ruling. He should have realized that their was a high chance in conflict accruing later on and it would be a bad decision for the couples being affected.
I agree as well. Equality for all is equality for all, no ifs ands or buts. Just because the LGBT community is different doesn't make them any different than interracial marriage. Are the courts going to say that those are illegal again too? It isn't fair to them and it never will be. It is definitely not okay and it infuriates me.
This type of situation is not really surprising. Our government in all its branches seems to have made a habit of changing promises made to groups of people and continue to do so since we do not hold these officials accountable for their back-and-forth changes. This situation is of interest to more than just a few states; the federal governemnt and the military have begun to move forward to recognize the rights of same-sex couples. The judge who issued the injunction did not seem to include any clause that lets existing couples remain legally together while preventing new marriages. It is very wrong to give people rights and promises and then go back and take them away because some politicians changed their minds. We treated the American Indians that way, promising them land forever and then took it away and moved them to less desirable locations to allow the politically connected to benefit. We did the same with our military retirees by promising them health care and now are taking that away. Now we are doing the same thing to the LGBT community, giving them rights and then taking them away. Maybe we should have a law that institutes a permanent grandfathering clause for all federal laws. If you want to change the rules, you can only do that for new situations and have to leave the rights of those under the old systems alone with the promises they were given.
Even I who Is straight religious when it comes to that kind of thing just sees its wrong, what ever happened to equAlity and all mean are equal, the way were running this country we should start saying all men are equal but some are more equal than others. It's just messed up what is going on here, you're taking away and making a big deal out of something as pointless as a marriage certificate.
I honestly don't see why gay marriage is such a big controversial topic. Why can't people just marry who they want to marry. It is not the people for these laws are going to be in any way involved in these marriages they are disrupting. The thing that disappoints me the most is that even those that are already in same-sex marriages are considered void. There should at least be some sort of grandfather clause allowing past marriages to continue.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/08/us/pregnant-and-forced-to-stay-on-life-support.html?hp&_r=0 This article was brought to my attention from a post on my Facebook. It is about a women, Marlise Munoz, who collapsed back in November and pronounced brain dead. This involves the government because in the state of Texas, as well as more than two dozen other states, there is a law stating the a female cannot be disconnected from life support while carrying a child. This goes against her wishes as well as causing the practice of medicine, the government, and an individuals rights and wishes to clash. I do not agree with most cases of abortion, but I also think they should not use the mother as a "host" seeing that as soon as the baby is welcomed into the world planning a funeral and grieving the loss also comes with them. I think it will be hard for this family as well as the baby knowing the mother won't be there to care for her child.
This law is really creepy and weird. There isn't much of a reason to keep this woman on life support if it goes against her wishes. This decision should be left for her family, and it's really gross that they would keep her on life support just so some unborn thing can feed off of her. The baby is going to be brought into an unfortunate situation. Like, it's already complicated enough. The whole situation could be totally avoided, and it just inconveniences everyone to keep her on life support.
I agree this is a really twisted and odd law. I don't think that any one should have the right to take an unborn life not even the mother yet in this case I feel that the state should not be able to force a birth from a brain dead mother. Even if the woman in this situation has a will saying that she does not ever want to be on life support it is most likely that she would have never imagined this situation occurring when putting this in her will. the state shouldn't have this right because what is she is a single mother with no one else to take the child resulting in the child being put up for adoption, that would not be right for the child nor the the yet to come guardians. So I feel that it should be the decision of the next of ken whether or not to keep the mother alive long enough to give birth to the baby.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/08/showbiz/juggalo-gang-lawsuit/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 So, Insane Clown Posse is suing the FBI because they have been identifying their fans, also known as juggalos, as a hybrid gang. To them, that is just simply not true. They have been in an ongoing battle with the FBI since 2012, and they are taking action now as they believe that discriminating against a whole group of people based on the actions of few is wrong. I agree with them on that last bit, I can say that.
Oh god as soon as I saw ICP I knew this was the post for me. Now for once I agree with what them crazy clowns have to say. I know tons of Steelers fans that are active law breakers, yet the group of Steelers fans as a whole are not considered a criminal organization. I think ICP fans are getting classified like this because of their admittedly bad reputation and a bias from non-Juggalos (I heard we're called zombies from cousin whose a Juggalo) against Juggalos. While I have never liked a Juggalo I've met, and I have never cared for their company, I still don't think they deserve the treatment they're getting.
I completely agree with both of your opinions and I think that this brings up a very interesting issue. I think that it is wrong that the FBI would classify a group of people as a dangerous cult just from the actions of a few and I feel that this issue is what shows the thin line of the rights we have. There are large groups that commit crimes to politically harass other groups, however, they do not get in trouble for that and probably never will.
I also agree somewhat. This is discriminatory and stereotypical towards the whole group as has been said but I think that ICP is encouraging the behavior and though they may not be directly responsible for it, they should be aware of what they are encouraging.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/14/politics/affluenza-jenkins-opinion/?iref=obinsite This story is soooooooo pathetic. Just because the defendant came from money he got away with drinking underage, killing a person and paralyzing another. It’s not fair the people that he hurt and killed and it is not fair to their families either. Even though he was only sixteen at the time of the accident I think he should have went to a juvenile detention until he was eighteen and serve the rest of his sentence. People with money shouldn’t be and aren’t above the law.
I completely agree with this! And it is EXTREMELY present everywhere. For example, remember a few years back when we had a few students making bad decisions and then driving while under the influence? Well, we got MAJOR headlines for that, but then when our school did something else, it didn't matter as much... However, in the Hilliard school district, they have more money to cover up what they did, OR even in our own district... Last year a group of fall athletes from Grove City were caught at a party drinking and smoking and doing other drugs, however, it never became a big deal and the teenagers barely got punished. It just makes me made.... :(
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/09/world/asia/north-korea-dennis-rodman-apology/index.html?hpt=wo_c1 This story is about Dennis Rodman apologizing about his comments he made about the US and North Korea. He is claiming to have been drunk during his interview on CNN. This story bothers me because he is a basketball player and not a politician. He should let the politician do their jobs. He has no business going to North Korea to try and negotiate an understanding between the two countries. He is not a politician.
http://www.msnbc.com/hardball/congress-millionaires-report How can those in Congress understand the the economic struggles of the average American when they are worth much more than them? That seems to be the new question arising from the Center of Responsive Politics who say that about half of the members of congress make $1 million or more each year with the most paid member makes $464 million, but not to be confused, he made his fortune in the car alarm business. However, it should still be said that he cannot understand the economic problems of the average American.
but just because they are making that money now, doesnt always mean they started out that way. some could have grown up in poverty and had to strive to get to where they are today. many good have been spoon fed there education and job, but still some may have faced struggles of poverty too.
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/10/22258125-us-deploys-small-military-team-to-somalia?lite America once again has put boots on the ground in Somalia. Even though they have only set three units on the ground and have no plan on trying to increase the size of the unit this is the first time America has sent troops to Somalia since the infamous Black Hawk Down scenario. These three units are there strictly for advisory for the Somalian security forces.
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/10/22255186-house-passes-obamacare-cybersecurity-bill?lite This addresses the continuing of Obama's Affordable Health Care Act to be put down. The Republican lead House is denying most things regarding act and the Senate plans to deny any future things too. This reinforces how it seems much of the American legislative branch has turned against the president and will not have any more of his bill pushed through.
Yo check this wild stuff out, this may be something too graphic for some of the more easily disgusted people in the audience. Anyways this is a video with a following story of a police officer slamming this man into a wall, and shortly after, another officer macing him. Now, according to the article the victim was arrested for DUI and according to the police report he was being uncooperative in his drunkenness (lets just say the police are being honest about this pfft), the officer who maced him sat their grinning while they frisked him off. Now I believe that what the officers did was way beyond what was acceptable, considering he's a stumbling drunk man, and there were 3 officers escorting him (the drunk guy didn't even come at their necks). Now the victim is trying to sue the police department for "a bump that won't go away and also brain injuries" caused by the incident.
Now again, this video isn't for the faint of heart. http://rt.com/usa/seabrook-nh-police-video-323/
some police officers are so corrupt and ruin it for the police officers who do there job very well. this is showing that a few bad apples can ruin the bunch and give a bad name.
This is about the obamacare. I still am not sure how to think about this. On somethings I think it is a good idea because it will help people that can't afford insurance but on the other hand I think it is kind of dumb that everyone now has to have insurance or they will get fined. What if someone has never been sick? Then all they would ever have to get is their life insurance to cover when they die.
So they just passed the gay rights to marriage... But now they want to pause that. Why? Because the constitution doesn't say its okay. But now they are talking about letting it go on with no problem. They say that in about 1 to 2 years it will be legal in all 50 states.
After reading this weeks poll question, I asked myself, "What is going on in Iraq?!" I then went on thinking either I really need to pay more attention to what is going on or the media is doing a poor job at informing citizens on the situation. After choosing my second thought, I researched this information and have learned that Al Qaeda has taken over Fallujah and Ramadi. The US gov't is currently working to help Iraqis regain control. The second link includes an informative video. I will continue to research this subject to get a better understanding, but I am torn on my opinion of the media following the action in Iraq. On one hand I believe registered, active voters need to be informed on what is going on between our government and Iraq seeing that we have had many conflicts with them in the past. On the other hand I believe we do not need to bring conflicts of other nations to every television in the homes of America unless we become actively involved, noting that many Americans do not know what is currently going on in their own country. (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/01/04/iraq-army-battles-al-qaeda-linked-militants-to-regain-control-in-key-cities/) (http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/07/opinion/iraq-anbar-crisis-lister/index.html?iref=allsearch)
ReplyDeleteI had no idea what has been going on recently in Iraq, but to hear that Fallujah has fallen to Al-Queda is a massive shock. After our withdrawal from Iraq in 2011, there was thoughts in the air that peace, no matter how small it was, would not last in such a religious and political cauldron like the Middle East, but to hear that the not only has an Iraqi city been captured by our very enemy, but that the military forces were ordered to withdrawal as well and the local police were not able to stop them is sad to say the least. As important as Iraq's government and political situation is currently with the dispute between the Sunnis and the Shiites is, I feel the safety of the citizens in Fallujah should come first and the military should step in.
DeleteI feel that it is because of the such little air time that this war is being provided, that we are just sweeping it under the rug. It is as if nothing is happening, we are being told by the president that it will be over soon, and that troops are being withdrawn but we are still at large in Iraq. It isn't right for the American people to be left in the shadows like this just so the government doesn't have to deal with protests and dissatisfied citizens. I think we should get updates on the war today like we did during the Vietnam war, and then we could see how bad it really is, because we have a right to know what our country is doing in the world. It reflects heavily back upon us as a nation, and as people.
DeleteWhen I went to make a blog post for this week I seen what miss frase said about how the poll question might help with blog post, so my curiosity got to me and I read the poll question. I had no clue what was going on in Iraq, I mean I'm not a active involved citizen but I thought for sure I would have heard of this situtation somehow. Peaca doesn't last long in the middle east, yet I was surprised to hear of Fullujah falling to Al-Queda.
DeleteAm I the only one who notices the apathy of people who learn of news like this when the media's sensationalism hasn't taken it over? If someone isn't already making a big deal about it, no one else will. I myself am torn on the issue of whether or not we should keep soldiers in Iraq, as terrorist organizations are the tap water you put into your contact case, thinking nothing of the amoeba that will make you go blind as it's not affecting you at the moment. However, how many times have you already done that without going blind? (For me, none, but I do watch Dr Oz so I know these things.) Why can't the media go after something that is important for once?
DeleteI agree that it is hard to pick a side. Americans do need to be aware of what is going on in the world to prevent anything like that from happening here. But as Amanda said, we shouldn't advertise on every single television so we don't become too involved in the conflict. Everyone should already know that the media only covers what they feel is important and will draw attention and increase their popularity,
DeleteThe situation in Iraq has been in the media, but it is not making headlines like it used too. Since American forces have withdrawn and turned security over to the Iraqis the events there do not impact the American people like they did when we had soldiers dying there. We are still interested because a stronger Al-Queda is a bigger threat to our interests in that area. This is a long term situation and the media likes to report things that are exciting and interesting in the right now. I think the media should continue to report this and keep the American people need to stay informed. I think that in the long term, our politicians will see the loss of these cities and the regional peace will reflect on the reputation and resolve of America and despite current non-involvement policies we may end up there again in some form.
DeleteDrones, we are really sending drones over there and regretting involved, this is just going to call for more debate about what is going on, although it is important that we the people should have the right to know what's going on with the government and what they're handling our country to the sky or to the ground
Deletehttp://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/08/utah-will-not-recognize-same-sex-marriages-performed-before-high-court-stay/?hpt=po_c2
ReplyDeleteThis article is about Utah not recognizing same-sex marriage in their state. A federal judge ruled to temporailly allow same-sex marriage before the Supreme court issued an official injunction. So Utah is reverting to their previously appointed law of marriage, saying it is illegal for anyone to preform a marriage of same-sex, as well as not recognizing them. The case is currently in the appeals process the ruling will affect Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Kansas. I think that it is wrong for them to try to find a lope-hole just to get around equality. It also isn't right for the men and women who have marriage certificates to their same-sex partners, that now mean nothing in the eyes of the government.
I agree with what you're saying. Individuals in same-sex relationships shouldn't have to jump through extra hoops just to gain recognition for their marriages. It's pretty messed up that these people still have to struggle to gain the same basic rights as other people.
DeleteThis whole issue in my opinion is really messed up to me. First of all I don't think equal rights in any case should ever even be questioned let alone denied. Same sex marriage being equal to traditional marriage should be a nobrainer in the eyes of government since our country was build on the ideas of out forefathers for all to have the equal rights so why should anyone have the right to take that away. Secondly the federal judge should have never issued the right for these couples to get legally married before it got sent to the Supreme Court for ruling. He should have realized that their was a high chance in conflict accruing later on and it would be a bad decision for the couples being affected.
DeleteI agree as well. Equality for all is equality for all, no ifs ands or buts. Just because the LGBT community is different doesn't make them any different than interracial marriage. Are the courts going to say that those are illegal again too? It isn't fair to them and it never will be. It is definitely not okay and it infuriates me.
DeleteThis type of situation is not really surprising. Our government in all its branches seems to have made a habit of changing promises made to groups of people and continue to do so since we do not hold these officials accountable for their back-and-forth changes. This situation is of interest to more than just a few states; the federal governemnt and the military have begun to move forward to recognize the rights of same-sex couples. The judge who issued the injunction did not seem to include any clause that lets existing couples remain legally together while preventing new marriages. It is very wrong to give people rights and promises and then go back and take them away because some politicians changed their minds. We treated the American Indians that way, promising them land forever and then took it away and moved them to less desirable locations to allow the politically connected to benefit. We did the same with our military retirees by promising them health care and now are taking that away. Now we are doing the same thing to the LGBT community, giving them rights and then taking them away. Maybe we should have a law that institutes a permanent grandfathering clause for all federal laws. If you want to change the rules, you can only do that for new situations and have to leave the rights of those under the old systems alone with the promises they were given.
DeleteEven I who Is straight religious when it comes to that kind of thing just sees its wrong, what ever happened to equAlity and all mean are equal, the way were running this country we should start saying all men are equal but some are more equal than others. It's just messed up what is going on here, you're taking away and making a big deal out of something as pointless as a marriage certificate.
DeleteI honestly don't see why gay marriage is such a big controversial topic. Why can't people just marry who they want to marry. It is not the people for these laws are going to be in any way involved in these marriages they are disrupting. The thing that disappoints me the most is that even those that are already in same-sex marriages are considered void. There should at least be some sort of grandfather clause allowing past marriages to continue.
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/08/us/pregnant-and-forced-to-stay-on-life-support.html?hp&_r=0 This article was brought to my attention from a post on my Facebook. It is about a women, Marlise Munoz, who collapsed back in November and pronounced brain dead. This involves the government because in the state of Texas, as well as more than two dozen other states, there is a law stating the a female cannot be disconnected from life support while carrying a child. This goes against her wishes as well as causing the practice of medicine, the government, and an individuals rights and wishes to clash. I do not agree with most cases of abortion, but I also think they should not use the mother as a "host" seeing that as soon as the baby is welcomed into the world planning a funeral and grieving the loss also comes with them. I think it will be hard for this family as well as the baby knowing the mother won't be there to care for her child.
ReplyDeleteThis law is really creepy and weird. There isn't much of a reason to keep this woman on life support if it goes against her wishes. This decision should be left for her family, and it's really gross that they would keep her on life support just so some unborn thing can feed off of her. The baby is going to be brought into an unfortunate situation. Like, it's already complicated enough. The whole situation could be totally avoided, and it just inconveniences everyone to keep her on life support.
DeleteI agree this is a really twisted and odd law. I don't think that any one should have the right to take an unborn life not even the mother yet in this case I feel that the state should not be able to force a birth from a brain dead mother. Even if the woman in this situation has a will saying that she does not ever want to be on life support it is most likely that she would have never imagined this situation occurring when putting this in her will. the state shouldn't have this right because what is she is a single mother with no one else to take the child resulting in the child being put up for adoption, that would not be right for the child nor the the yet to come guardians. So I feel that it should be the decision of the next of ken whether or not to keep the mother alive long enough to give birth to the baby.
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2014/01/08/showbiz/juggalo-gang-lawsuit/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 So, Insane Clown Posse is suing the FBI because they have been identifying their fans, also known as juggalos, as a hybrid gang. To them, that is just simply not true. They have been in an ongoing battle with the FBI since 2012, and they are taking action now as they believe that discriminating against a whole group of people based on the actions of few is wrong. I agree with them on that last bit, I can say that.
ReplyDeleteOh god as soon as I saw ICP I knew this was the post for me. Now for once I agree with what them crazy clowns have to say. I know tons of Steelers fans that are active law breakers, yet the group of Steelers fans as a whole are not considered a criminal organization. I think ICP fans are getting classified like this because of their admittedly bad reputation and a bias from non-Juggalos (I heard we're called zombies from cousin whose a Juggalo) against Juggalos. While I have never liked a Juggalo I've met, and I have never cared for their company, I still don't think they deserve the treatment they're getting.
DeleteI completely agree with both of your opinions and I think that this brings up a very interesting issue. I think that it is wrong that the FBI would classify a group of people as a dangerous cult just from the actions of a few and I feel that this issue is what shows the thin line of the rights we have. There are large groups that commit crimes to politically harass other groups, however, they do not get in trouble for that and probably never will.
DeleteI also agree somewhat. This is discriminatory and stereotypical towards the whole group as has been said but I think that ICP is encouraging the behavior and though they may not be directly responsible for it, they should be aware of what they are encouraging.
Deletehttp://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/14/politics/affluenza-jenkins-opinion/?iref=obinsite
ReplyDeleteThis story is soooooooo pathetic. Just because the defendant came from money he got away with drinking underage, killing a person and paralyzing another. It’s not fair the people that he hurt and killed and it is not fair to their families either. Even though he was only sixteen at the time of the accident I think he should have went to a juvenile detention until he was eighteen and serve the rest of his sentence. People with money shouldn’t be and aren’t above the law.
I completely agree with this! And it is EXTREMELY present everywhere. For example, remember a few years back when we had a few students making bad decisions and then driving while under the influence? Well, we got MAJOR headlines for that, but then when our school did something else, it didn't matter as much... However, in the Hilliard school district, they have more money to cover up what they did, OR even in our own district... Last year a group of fall athletes from Grove City were caught at a party drinking and smoking and doing other drugs, however, it never became a big deal and the teenagers barely got punished. It just makes me made.... :(
Deletehttp://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/09/world/asia/north-korea-dennis-rodman-apology/index.html?hpt=wo_c1
ReplyDeleteThis story is about Dennis Rodman apologizing about his comments he made about the US and North Korea. He is claiming to have been drunk during his interview on CNN. This story bothers me because he is a basketball player and not a politician. He should let the politician do their jobs. He has no business going to North Korea to try and negotiate an understanding between the two countries. He is not a politician.
http://www.msnbc.com/hardball/congress-millionaires-report
ReplyDeleteHow can those in Congress understand the the economic struggles of the average American when they are worth much more than them? That seems to be the new question arising from the Center of Responsive Politics who say that about half of the members of congress make $1 million or more each year with the most paid member makes $464 million, but not to be confused, he made his fortune in the car alarm business. However, it should still be said that he cannot understand the economic problems of the average American.
but just because they are making that money now, doesnt always mean they started out that way. some could have grown up in poverty and had to strive to get to where they are today. many good have been spoon fed there education and job, but still some may have faced struggles of poverty too.
Deletehttp://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/10/22258125-us-deploys-small-military-team-to-somalia?lite
ReplyDeleteAmerica once again has put boots on the ground in Somalia. Even though they have only set three units on the ground and have no plan on trying to increase the size of the unit this is the first time America has sent troops to Somalia since the infamous Black Hawk Down scenario. These three units are there strictly for advisory for the Somalian security forces.
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/10/22255186-house-passes-obamacare-cybersecurity-bill?lite
ReplyDeleteThis addresses the continuing of Obama's Affordable Health Care Act to be put down. The Republican lead House is denying most things regarding act and the Senate plans to deny any future things too. This reinforces how it seems much of the American legislative branch has turned against the president and will not have any more of his bill pushed through.
Yo check this wild stuff out, this may be something too graphic for some of the more easily disgusted people in the audience. Anyways this is a video with a following story of a police officer slamming this man into a wall, and shortly after, another officer macing him. Now, according to the article the victim was arrested for DUI and according to the police report he was being uncooperative in his drunkenness (lets just say the police are being honest about this pfft), the officer who maced him sat their grinning while they frisked him off. Now I believe that what the officers did was way beyond what was acceptable, considering he's a stumbling drunk man, and there were 3 officers escorting him (the drunk guy didn't even come at their necks). Now the victim is trying to sue the police department for "a bump that won't go away and also brain injuries" caused by the incident.
ReplyDeleteNow again, this video isn't for the faint of heart.
http://rt.com/usa/seabrook-nh-police-video-323/
some police officers are so corrupt and ruin it for the police officers who do there job very well. this is showing that a few bad apples can ruin the bunch and give a bad name.
Deletehttp://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/10/house-passes-obamacare-website-security-bill/?hpt=po_c2
ReplyDeleteThis is about the obamacare. I still am not sure how to think about this. On somethings I think it is a good idea because it will help people that can't afford insurance but on the other hand I think it is kind of dumb that everyone now has to have insurance or they will get fined. What if someone has never been sick? Then all they would ever have to get is their life insurance to cover when they die.
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2014/01/07/ac-scotus-utah.cnn&hpt=po_t1&video_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2FPOLITICS%2F%3Fhpt%3Dsitenav
ReplyDeleteSo they just passed the gay rights to marriage... But now they want to pause that. Why? Because the constitution doesn't say its okay. But now they are talking about letting it go on with no problem. They say that in about 1 to 2 years it will be legal in all 50 states.