http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/05/02/obama-calls-for-review-of-death-penalty-after-botched-killing/?hpt=po_c2 This article is about Obama having an investigation conducted into the death penalty after a serial rapist convulsed and died of a heart attack after only receiving the first lethal injection. He still believes in the death penalty, but wants officials to see how it is being applied to cases. He believes it is racial bias and uneven application. I think that it has nothing to do with racial bias. It seems as if he just wants to lower the amount of people on death row. In my opinion, it is possible that one of the drugs in the lethal injection process, the serial rapist was allergic to it.
I honestly do not think that the process they use for the death penalty could be anymore humane or thorough. I feel that Obama may be doing this more for publicity, because many people are irrational and would assume that if he didn't think much of this case, like how you feel, then he may be a "bad" person. I do not think he is doing it to give himself good publicity, but more to prevent worse publicity than he already has. I also agree that there is no bias when it comes to this sentence because the judge and jury are given too many regulations to do that.
I think that he should look into not only this case but other prisons to see if they are conducting executions properly. This is not the first case where lethal injections have not been used in an ethical way, for example using drugs that have not been tested on humans before. I don't think this was a racial thing at all, I think that either they did not do it correctly or the person had an unknown allergic reaction to it. I agree that Pres. Obama is just taking interest in this for public opinions sake. Personally I think we should go back to public hangings of violent criminals like rapists but that just me.
It's very unsettling to hear that a prison or institution "botched" a lethal injection. I don't know how well those who administer the lethal injections are trained, whether they have a medical license, or if they're just a guard with a syringe. Either way, if Obama's statements are true, our death row system definitely requires reform. Sending someone to their death then later finding out they were completely innocent is too big of a risk to take. The whole incident with the injection causing a reaction in that inmate is merely just a random chance. I doubt this is the first time it's happened.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-skewers-republicans-democrats-media-at-100th-white-house-correspondents-dinner/ This article is about Obama taking multiple jabs at all kinds of politicians and possible 2016 election candidates. I think this is kind of childish, after all there isn't any reasons to take jabs at other politicians. It was also a big social event, so that makes it more immature.
I read about the 100th White House Correspondents' Dinner and it did seem like a childish act. I understand that Obama was trying to have fun and joke about the major changes throughout his terms, but the comments towards other politicians wasn't very professional. I agree it shouldn't be all work and no play, but there are other ways to celebrate the president and those important people involved in our government.
It is just Obama doing what politicians do, when they are in places of power. They take jabs at people they disagree with and get attention like this, and it makes people second guess who that person really is and what they stand for. This is why we should be more careful about who we elect because people higher up have a good amount of influence, and can change people's opinions.
I agree this kind of goes with the territory when it comes to politics. Everyone in the game tries to make others look bad in an attempt to make themselves look better and raise public opinion. The more they get attention the better. Stabs like these are hard for the victims to deal with and come back from.
Although I agree that what Obama did is kind-of childish, it's not like he's the only one who does it. Politicians often try to 1-up eachother and talk trash, it's just their nature. When you get that kind of power, some of it goes to your head. They're like the kid who gets picked to take the class pet home: They're given a huge responsibility so they think they're top of the food chain.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-says-prayer-ok-before-town-council-meetings/ Yay! Yay! Yay! (That was me trying to sound as excited as Mrs. Frase was) I think our mock trial did a fantastic job of arguing all sides of this case. I am glad it was ruled the way that we had in class. I think it is interesting to note that the 5-4 was backed by a Conservative majority. It was stated that there was effort made to include ministers of other faiths. It has been a part of our history for hundreds of years and shall continue on.
I completely agree with this ruling. While we have freedom of religion in this country, for many years, the sole religion was just different sects of Christianity, and if they were to change what this case focused on, they would have to change the phrasing of other things in our political realm to either fit all religions, or none, and that is a huge hassle.
im on the other side of this and am slightly disappointed in the way this has turned out. I hope for one day we can become truly secular in our politcal realm. I don't believe that it is necessary to have and just because something was made to be "traditional", doesn't mean it should continue today. People who believe in some sort of deity may not mind as much, but being atheist, makes things a little uncomfortable with religion being in such areas.
I personally don't like the decision the Supreme Court made, it just shows that our church and state are not as divided as one would hope. After having read what the city of Greece had done I thought it violated the establishment clause of the first amendment, and was in violation of our constitution. Also if you go off the basis of tradition, you can make the argument that traditions are made, and broken all the time, we've had many traditions that have been broken for good reason.
I myself am a Christian and would have no problem having a prayer before a meeting however when I look upon the status of our nation and its government I disagree with the constitutionality of having prayer before a meeting. My reason for this as Curtis mentioned is that there needs to be a speration between our church and the state. Yes I know that our nation was founded by men who were basically from Christian faith so in turn we accepted much of church into the state back then just as an American would support the playing of the national anthem before a football game. Christians will approve of Christian things. So since then all of the actions they committed have basically just become tradition since then and are still continuing. For the church to be seperated from the state completely there would have to be a major change of traditon including the changing of our money.
I have gone to church a few times but i wouldn't really say im a specific religion. I dont have or see a problem with the prayers! If you dont like it then just step out of the room. They arent hurting anything.I'm glad our mock trial was correct. If its volunteers leading prayer why dont you just volunteer and say the prayer in your kind of religion
I personally don't agree with the decision. Like Curtis already stated it just goes to show that our church and state are not as divided as they should be. I believe its not right that if there are people of a different religion present, that they have to hear the prayer. "I don't see any reason for why we still have the prayer.
http://news.yahoo.com/monica-lewinsky-speaks-article-bring-back-politics-90s-163057336.html Monica is finally speaking out what happened in the golden days of the American Bill Clintons presidency. It seems some are worried with Hilary preparing to run for office that this could get even more publicity and bring an impact into her own campaign run.
If this is going to bring any type of publicity to Hillary ' campaign, it's going to be bad publicity. It is too late for Monica to tell her story she's looking for attention. We wanted the story when it happened 14 some years ago not now. So I think nobody should pay attention to it.
Monica speaking up might bring up publicity towards Hillary, but most of what is said might not be good towards her or Bill. The public would end up thinking of what Bill did and all of that will go towards Hillary as she is trying to run in the campaign. Monica having her story be heard might be bad for the Clintons.
Since Monica is finally speaking up about what happened its mainly because Hillary is running so that makes it a better opportunity for Monica to get attention. This won't be harming Bill but it will have some negative affects for Hillary.
www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/breaking-gop-romney-backs-minimum-wage-hike-n101221 Over the past couple weeks the GOP has been becoming increasingly more open to supporting the rise of the national minimum wage. They deem that they are to help the "blue collar" worker even though they usually never support wage increases. Former Republican Governor from Minnesota Tim Pawlenty said that the GOP should be open to a "reasonable" increase in the wage. On top of this they just don't want to make the party look bad by not allowing to raise the minimum wage for everyone. Personally I still support a minimum wage increase but I agree that it must be reasonable not to destroy the economy through inflation.
I am a minimum wage worker and as much as I would love for minimum wage to go up to fourteen dollars an hour it's not reasonable. Raising minimum wage to a significant crazy high amount would either create inflation or cost prices at the grocery store to go. This neither benefits the government nor does it benefit employees
I feel that if the minimum wage does increase, the people who do deserve more than minimum wage, it could be fine for them. But there are also workers in the world who should not deserve minimum wage. Some people in the world could manage to make more money with this than they did before, even if they do not deserve it. Also this raise of the minimum wage would be less money that the government would have.
I feel like the minimum wage should go up but not to fourteen dollars maybe 10. Raising it this high would cause problems such as inflation and money for things will just go up. Also it would make us more in debt too.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/05/02/obama-calls-for-review-of-death-penalty-after-botched-killing/?hpt=po_c2 This article is about Obama having an investigation conducted into the death penalty after a serial rapist convulsed and died of a heart attack after only receiving the first lethal injection. He still believes in the death penalty, but wants officials to see how it is being applied to cases. He believes it is racial bias and uneven application. I think that it has nothing to do with racial bias. It seems as if he just wants to lower the amount of people on death row. In my opinion, it is possible that one of the drugs in the lethal injection process, the serial rapist was allergic to it.
ReplyDeleteI honestly do not think that the process they use for the death penalty could be anymore humane or thorough. I feel that Obama may be doing this more for publicity, because many people are irrational and would assume that if he didn't think much of this case, like how you feel, then he may be a "bad" person. I do not think he is doing it to give himself good publicity, but more to prevent worse publicity than he already has. I also agree that there is no bias when it comes to this sentence because the judge and jury are given too many regulations to do that.
DeleteI think that he should look into not only this case but other prisons to see if they are conducting executions properly. This is not the first case where lethal injections have not been used in an ethical way, for example using drugs that have not been tested on humans before. I don't think this was a racial thing at all, I think that either they did not do it correctly or the person had an unknown allergic reaction to it. I agree that Pres. Obama is just taking interest in this for public opinions sake. Personally I think we should go back to public hangings of violent criminals like rapists but that just me.
DeleteIt's very unsettling to hear that a prison or institution "botched" a lethal injection. I don't know how well those who administer the lethal injections are trained, whether they have a medical license, or if they're just a guard with a syringe. Either way, if Obama's statements are true, our death row system definitely requires reform. Sending someone to their death then later finding out they were completely innocent is too big of a risk to take. The whole incident with the injection causing a reaction in that inmate is merely just a random chance. I doubt this is the first time it's happened.
Deletehttp://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-skewers-republicans-democrats-media-at-100th-white-house-correspondents-dinner/ This article is about Obama taking multiple jabs at all kinds of politicians and possible 2016 election candidates. I think this is kind of childish, after all there isn't any reasons to take jabs at other politicians. It was also a big social event, so that makes it more immature.
ReplyDeleteI read about the 100th White House Correspondents' Dinner and it did seem like a childish act. I understand that Obama was trying to have fun and joke about the major changes throughout his terms, but the comments towards other politicians wasn't very professional. I agree it shouldn't be all work and no play, but there are other ways to celebrate the president and those important people involved in our government.
DeleteIt is just Obama doing what politicians do, when they are in places of power. They take jabs at people they disagree with and get attention like this, and it makes people second guess who that person really is and what they stand for. This is why we should be more careful about who we elect because people higher up have a good amount of influence, and can change people's opinions.
DeleteI agree this kind of goes with the territory when it comes to politics. Everyone in the game tries to make others look bad in an attempt to make themselves look better and raise public opinion. The more they get attention the better. Stabs like these are hard for the victims to deal with and come back from.
DeleteAlthough I agree that what Obama did is kind-of childish, it's not like he's the only one who does it. Politicians often try to 1-up eachother and talk trash, it's just their nature. When you get that kind of power, some of it goes to your head. They're like the kid who gets picked to take the class pet home: They're given a huge responsibility so they think they're top of the food chain.
Deletehttp://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-says-prayer-ok-before-town-council-meetings/ Yay! Yay! Yay! (That was me trying to sound as excited as Mrs. Frase was) I think our mock trial did a fantastic job of arguing all sides of this case. I am glad it was ruled the way that we had in class. I think it is interesting to note that the 5-4 was backed by a Conservative majority. It was stated that there was effort made to include ministers of other faiths. It has been a part of our history for hundreds of years and shall continue on.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with this ruling. While we have freedom of religion in this country, for many years, the sole religion was just different sects of Christianity, and if they were to change what this case focused on, they would have to change the phrasing of other things in our political realm to either fit all religions, or none, and that is a huge hassle.
Deleteim on the other side of this and am slightly disappointed in the way this has turned out. I hope for one day we can become truly secular in our politcal realm. I don't believe that it is necessary to have and just because something was made to be "traditional", doesn't mean it should continue today. People who believe in some sort of deity may not mind as much, but being atheist, makes things a little uncomfortable with religion being in such areas.
DeleteI personally don't like the decision the Supreme Court made, it just shows that our church and state are not as divided as one would hope. After having read what the city of Greece had done I thought it violated the establishment clause of the first amendment, and was in violation of our constitution. Also if you go off the basis of tradition, you can make the argument that traditions are made, and broken all the time, we've had many traditions that have been broken for good reason.
DeleteI myself am a Christian and would have no problem having a prayer before a meeting however when I look upon the status of our nation and its government I disagree with the constitutionality of having prayer before a meeting. My reason for this as Curtis mentioned is that there needs to be a speration between our church and the state. Yes I know that our nation was founded by men who were basically from Christian faith so in turn we accepted much of church into the state back then just as an American would support the playing of the national anthem before a football game. Christians will approve of Christian things. So since then all of the actions they committed have basically just become tradition since then and are still continuing. For the church to be seperated from the state completely there would have to be a major change of traditon including the changing of our money.
DeleteI have gone to church a few times but i wouldn't really say im a specific religion. I dont have or see a problem with the prayers! If you dont like it then just step out of the room. They arent hurting anything.I'm glad our mock trial was correct. If its volunteers leading prayer why dont you just volunteer and say the prayer in your kind of religion
DeleteI personally don't agree with the decision. Like Curtis already stated it just goes to show that our church and state are not as divided as they should be. I believe its not right that if there are people of a different religion present, that they have to hear the prayer. "I don't see any reason for why we still have the prayer.
Deletehttp://news.yahoo.com/monica-lewinsky-speaks-article-bring-back-politics-90s-163057336.html Monica is finally speaking out what happened in the golden days of the American Bill Clintons presidency. It seems some are worried with Hilary preparing to run for office that this could get even more publicity and bring an impact into her own campaign run.
ReplyDeleteIf this is going to bring any type of publicity to Hillary ' campaign, it's going to be bad publicity. It is too late for Monica to tell her story she's looking for attention. We wanted the story when it happened 14 some years ago not now. So I think nobody should pay attention to it.
DeleteMonica speaking up might bring up publicity towards Hillary, but most of what is said might not be good towards her or Bill. The public would end up thinking of what Bill did and all of that will go towards Hillary as she is trying to run in the campaign. Monica having her story be heard might be bad for the Clintons.
DeleteSince Monica is finally speaking up about what happened its mainly because Hillary is running so that makes it a better opportunity for Monica to get attention. This won't be harming Bill but it will have some negative affects for Hillary.
Deletewww.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/breaking-gop-romney-backs-minimum-wage-hike-n101221
ReplyDeleteOver the past couple weeks the GOP has been becoming increasingly more open to supporting the rise of the national minimum wage. They deem that they are to help the "blue collar" worker even though they usually never support wage increases. Former Republican Governor from Minnesota Tim Pawlenty said that the GOP should be open to a "reasonable" increase in the wage. On top of this they just don't want to make the party look bad by not allowing to raise the minimum wage for everyone. Personally I still support a minimum wage increase but I agree that it must be reasonable not to destroy the economy through inflation.
I am a minimum wage worker and as much as I would love for minimum wage to go up to fourteen dollars an hour it's not reasonable. Raising minimum wage to a significant crazy high amount would either create inflation or cost prices at the grocery store to go. This neither benefits the government nor does it benefit employees
DeleteI feel that if the minimum wage does increase, the people who do deserve more than minimum wage, it could be fine for them. But there are also workers in the world who should not deserve minimum wage. Some people in the world could manage to make more money with this than they did before, even if they do not deserve it. Also this raise of the minimum wage would be less money that the government would have.
DeleteI feel like the minimum wage should go up but not to fourteen dollars maybe 10. Raising it this high would cause problems such as inflation and money for things will just go up. Also it would make us more in debt too.
Delete