In this article, another instance of police being put in hot water for doing their job. In this case, a 13 year old with a BB gun was running away from the police was shot. They told him who they were, and they did everything they were required to do, but the kid still ran away. The parents and the child both agree that the police were not wrong.
I think it's funny how race wasn't mentioned once in the article, and this article is an excellent example of how police do their job and it's peoples poor decisions that create this atmosphere surrounding police.
I have to agree with you here. Racism exists anymore due to people creating it. The police did their jobs by protecting the people around them, and making sure everyone was at safety. Race shouldn't have to be mentioned and I appreciate this article for not doing so.
I agree with you Pam, I think this whole injury could have been avoided if the boy had just listened to the cop. Too many people are worried about the immediate consequence in life rather than looking at the long term consequence instead. In this case this boy was probably scared of being arrested so he decided to run.Thus causing him to get an even worse consequence. People in this world need to look in the long term rather than what will happen right after the event.
This article talks about how many people are choosing not to vote in this presidential election as a way of protesting against the candidates. This article's author brings an idea to add an option to the ballot that says ,"No Acceptable Candidate". I believe that there is both positives and negatives to adding such a ballot option. For one negative, what will happen if majority were to vote, "No Acceptable Candidate"? For a positive, voting against all of the candidates shows that Americans are not happy with their candidates and possibly more people would run in the presidential race or more candidates would alter their policies.
My sister is actually one of these people. She has told us multiple times that she is not going to vote because she does not like anyone on the ballot. That said, I think that it would be a bad idea to have that choice on the ballot because Obama might get a third term from it. This could cause congress to become even more republican in it's elections and nothing would ever get passed. Plus there is that issue with the new supreme court justice which would just get blown way out of proportion.
I agree with you. There are positives and negatives to this idea. I think this option should be on the ballot but before this the government and the people need to find out a system of what to do if this no candidate option is the majority and who will become the president if this does occur. But the negative is taking the time to make such a thing.
This article is about the new "alliance" between Ted Cruz and John Kasich. Cruz plans to draw out of the states where he is not doing so well and Kasich is doing the same thing. This is an effort to try and draw the votes away from Trump and secure that he does not get the 1,237 delegates he needs to win the nomination. However, when asked, Cruz says that there is no alliance, they are just simply in an agreement on the fact that Trump should not be the next president of the United States.I disagree, while the media will call this what ever it wants, I think their is definitely a partnership between the two and I feel it is a great way to keep Trump out of the Oval Office!
Ill have to admit, this "alliance" between Ted Cruz and John Kasich is an interesting thing to hear about. Seeing as most statistics admit that Ted Cruz and John Kasich have no chance of acquiring the delegates needed to secure the Republican nomination for president, with cruz needing something like 101 percent, and Kasich needing something like 162 percent of the remaining delegates to receive the nomination. It makes the most logical sense that all they can do now, is work together to garner as many delegates as they can in hopes of having a contested convention, where anyone could come out to be the nominee.
This seems like a very weird thing to happen in politics. Though granted, I've haven't payed that much attention to political developments before this year. However, I wonder how much if at all this happened in previous runnings in America. It's odd and kind of scary they are going this far, and by that I mean giving himself a slight disadvantage in their campaign, to help in getting Trump out of the race.
I have mixed feelings after reading this article. I definitely understand why police shot at the boy, but I feel like their could've been a better solution. That being said, it also wasn't the smartest decision for the boy blatantly ignore the officers warnings. This boy was a teenager, so being chased by the police probably scared him into thinking he was going to get arrested. Both parties in the incident are not completely in the wrong or right.
Its not really shocking to see the former U.S House speaker abused students back when he was a coach only because we elected men and women with no true knowledge on who they were before. we know what they tell us but no one goes and looks up what happen before. I think he is getting what he has earned and feel no inch of mercy for his punishments.
I agree all the way that the people make a biased view on the police force and do not care about what is right from wrong they look for the picky things such as race and blow it up to make it a big deal when its not.
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/04/27/donald-trumps-ridiculous-womens-card-comments/?ref=opinion&_r=0 In this article, Trump once again attacks Clinton because of her gender, saying she supports the things she does because of her "woman card". Clinton does discuss issues that effect women, but also includes topics that will affect everyone. Trump pulling the "woman card" is just another way to point the finger at someone else to distract how terrible his ideas are.
This article discusses that Bernie Sanders is a figurehead of a living idea and involved in a zombie campaign. Bernie's path to becoming the democratic nominee is now smaller and becoming narrower. The New York Times reported on wednesday that Sanders “ is planning to lay off ‘hundreds’ of campaign staffers across the country and focus much of his remaining effort on winning California.” . The editor says that people have mischaracterized the choice between the democratic candidates as a choice between idealism and pragmatism between Hillary and Clinton. The editor also talks about making cut to the deals to reach ideals, which is called compromise and is very essential in politics. Sanders has argued that politics are broken and moneyed interests have too much influence.
This article highlights that marijuana should be legalized. It states that it took 13 years for the united states to end prohibition. Congress passed the current ban on marijuana for more than 40 years. The times Editorial board have reached the conclusion through debate that the federal government should repeal the ban on marijuana. They are inspired by a rapidly growing movement among the states to reform marijuana laws. They say They “ believe that on every level - health effect, the impact on society and law-and-order issues” . They say that decisions will allow for there to be a decision on whether to allow recreational or medicinal production and use it where it belongs at the state level. The board considers if it would be best for washington to hold back while the states continue to experiment with legalizing medical uses of marijuana, reducing penalties, or simply legalising it one for all to use. Apparently ¾ of the states has done one of these either recreational, I think that's the best thing to do because this experimentation allows for a view on the effects of this legislation at a small scale.
This is a really complicated issue. Part of me wants to say, "Let the people do what they want," even if I want no part of it at all. But the other part of me says, "This is dangerous and a slippery slope." Marijuana is a drug and drugs negatively affect your reactions and cloud your mind. This even happens with typically medicine like allergy pills. Most labels have warnings that clearly state that they will make you drowsy. The clouded mind can be dangerous in several ways, not just while driving. However, in Germany I believe it is, people are legally able to drink before they are legally able to drive. This has actually considerably lowered their drunk-driving accidents because young people can get the urge for experimentation and experience out of their system before they have the potential to be dangerous to people. This could also work for marijuana, but if legalized, it should be clear that it is not highly recommended to use it. It's still a drug. Though medical marijuana (which should definitely be legalized) is beneficial, not all of the implications are good and people need to be aware of that if buying it for recreational use.
In reply to Pam, Kayla, Curtiss and Taylor: I believe it is pointless people even have guns and many people being in "hot water" probably would have not happened if American took away guns entirely. But because owning a gun is "apart of being American," people can not just take away that right. Anyways, the media also focuses a lot on people being shot by the police than police being shot by people which is also why people have this belief that policemen tend to be trigger happy. From what it seems, the boy is alive and that is what makes this conventionally okay. But honestly, if someone is running away, especially, a 13 year old boy, they are scared or trying to get away from someone this is a defense mechanism, and I guess I just do not understand why police are more willing to reach for a gun when they could use a stun gun or even pepper spray. I understand that not all cops are bad, because not all people are bad, but this situation could had easily been avoided on both ends.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/opinion/if-not-trump-what.html?ref=opinion&_r=0 This article is about how Trump is going to be the most likely republican candidate and how appalled people are about it. The question he is asking throughout the article is if Trump is not going to be the republican candidate then who will? It illustrates that Trump and Sanders growing popularity shows that there is growing pain in the country. Suicide has surged to older ages, such as 30 years old. I think it is important that the article highlights that Trump's success grew out of pain, this reminds me a lot of a certain dictator. When Germany had fallen into an awful economy, their pain grew into what we know as Nazi Germany and they had taken their pain out into a different way.
While I agree that Trump's success did grow out of pain, he also had to work for it. I think that what America wants in him is from turning his "small loan of a million dollars" into billions. If someone was given a million dollars that would still be a hard thing to do. I think that Americans want him to help make our country better in a similar way based on his increase. I dislike him.
I haven't thought of Trump being with the "working class", he seems with all his plans, spending a whole lot on things that won't help the working class. Maybe even negatively affecting the working class. Plus in the article him promising jobs for town, and surprise, he did not do them. I've never really seen him as a person that keeps his word, or at least from what I've seen.
With the peimaries coming closer and closer to their close, some are starting to speculate what will go on when we get to the conventions. To some, on the Democratic side, it's already over, Hillary is going to be the nominee, Bernie stands no chance of getting the delegates needed in order to secure the nomination, the establishment has won. On the republican side, Trump, the origionally unlikely nominee, is still in the lead to clench the republican nomination, with cruz and kasich not really coming close to stopping him. It' interesting to see that the establishment is in the lead on the democratic side, while the establishment is on the losing side in the republican competition. One can only wonder as to why that is, which message seems to resonate with the people more?
I do not think the message is the real reason that the republicans are losing. I think the main reason is the republicans stubbornness. Their refusal to change with modern time is what is undoing the republicans. People want change, not a lot but they want someone to help fix their problems. The Democrats on the other hand offer change and evolving views. Trump even though i believe it is in the opposite direction offer radical change too.
This article's title is very misleading. They only mention racism at the end of the article, and even then it is not racism. They say that many people who black and Hispanic people lost their homes more often through contracts for deed, basically cheaper, easier to get mortgages. The difference between contracts for deed and mortgages is that with a mortgage the company has to give you time to catch up if you miss a payment and contracts for deeds can evict you as soon as you miss a payment. The reason that this is not racist is because more blacks and Hispanics have to rely on stuff like this because they are not eligible for mortgages, which the article pointed out and chose to ignore.
This article was discussing recent suggestions of raising the juvenile court age to 21. Most of the reasons for treating juveniles differently in the first place is according to the unfinished development of the adolescent brain. The authors of the editorial admit that development continues even beyond 18, but their question is whether they are still too undeveloped. Recently, in English, we read an article about teen angst and the developing brain. This article suggested that brain development goes into the early-twenties. Based on that, I was thinking when I started reading this article that it would make sense to be raised. Also, in the article it says "A disproportionate number of serious violent crimes are committed by individuals between 17 and 21." To me, that seems like they are having some serious mental conflicts at this age if they are committing serious, violent crimes at higher rates than other age groups. However, at the same time, the article brings up the difficulty that would come with adapting to a change in legislation. Would juvenile detention centers really be able to hold that many people? And is it fair to keep 14-year-olds on the same level as 21-year-olds? I'm not sure. I think perhaps it's best to keep things as they are to help the developing brain transition into being treated as an adult, even in the court room. It will hopefully prevent them from wanting to endure that process again and reduce the likelihood of repeated offenses in the future.
This is a really good point. Many people's brains are still developing on their early twenties, so they can't make the best decisions. But if they made twenty year olds juveniles in the courtroom, they would have to raise the voting and drinking ages too since they would still be treated as children, and that's just too much of a hassle.
This article discusses the continued persecution of homosexuals throughout the world. While the United States does not have complete equality when it comes to sexuality, it is much more developed and accepting than other parts of the world. This issue is being focused on even more right now after a hate crime in Bangladesh that ended in a gay man being killed. There are places where people are imprisoned or even executed for being gay. In the article, it talks about a gang of men with machetes killing gays in Bangladesh. This is completely disgusting, and it shows just how close-minded and underdeveloped some countries are. I think that the United States and its allies should campaign to stop the violence and ignorance around the world. There is a lot more that we could be doing to stop this, but it seems like the government has other things that it would like to focus on that it has deemed more important. According to the article, 75 countries had enacted laws that criminalized anyone who was gay in 2015. Money put into media, awareness projects, and, if needed, troops, would help to solve this growing issue.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/29/politics/donald-trump-bernie-sanders/index.html This article is discussing the possible future of Donald Trump's campaign, stating that he is now trying to get Sander's Supporters.Although Trump has repeatedly attacked Clinton, calling her crooked, he has remained prasiing toward Sanders, which is odd for the likes of Trump. Trump even said, "I think Bernie Sanders should run as an independent" Donald Trump also said that he thinks a lot of the things that Bernie stands for are interesting and he w ill actually be implementing them! I think this is very odd, especially for Donald Trump, and this definitely adds to the chaos of this election .
This article is about how the Obamas have challenge the Royal Family. But it may not be what your thinking. The Obamas challenge Prince Harry to the Invictus Games. That's an international event where wounded, injured or sick armed services members and veterans compete in sports. But Prince Harry stepped up and even add the Queen in this challenge.
This article is about a virus that was believed to be non deadly is now deadly. A 70-year-old Puerto Rican man died from complications of the Zika virus in February, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Puerto Rico Department of Health announced Friday. This is the first time in the United States or territories that Zika infection contributed to a death, the CDC said. The elderly man, who lived in the San Juan metro area, contracted Zika and was treated for symptoms that lasted less than a week, said Tyler Sharp, an epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Dengue Branch in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/29/politics/donald-trump-protests-republican-convention-california/index.html At the Republican convention attenders of the event protested Trumps rally. A group of people with bandannas over their faces and carried Mexican flags forced Trumps motorcade to pull over into a hotel and go in and Trump says he "felt like he was crossing the border." Now this is very troubling to me not the fact that Trump was protested (i like that) but the fact that Trump says he felt like he was crossing the border which is very offending and he only says that because of the Mexican protesters. Trump is just a bad guy and bad guys shouldn't be president.
Its good to see that people are actually protesting Trump in a serious way, if the campaign continues like it is we may actually have Trump as a president. The truly sad part is everyone knows how bad Trump is, and they even will talk about it, but no one will actually go and vote against him, and that will end up hurting this country.
This article is about the chance Donald Trump has of getting to 1,237 delegates to prevent a contested convention, and why it is so hard to try to predict if he can or not with any certainty. Currently the Republican race isn't that hotly contested with Donald Trump the clear leader, but it is still playing out like it is with the threat of a contested convention looming on the horizon, and each state becoming a must win for both Trump and the anti-Trump coalition to for that 1,237 majority. The race is volatile to predict because of the ever changing media coverage of it and how it seems to buck any kind of momentum that looks like may be forming. It looks like an uphill battle for Trump to reach the majority he needs, but every state from here on is pivotal for both sides in the lead up to Cleveland
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/29/health/brigham-young-university-rape/index.html This article is about a girl who was raped, but ended up being punished instead of her rapist. She was punished because she was on drugs at the time, which I agree she should be punished for because it was against the rules. However, raping someone should be a much bigger deal than doing drugs because it hurts someone else and can even ruin those lives. He definitely should have been punished, and much more than she was.
This article is about Public defenders and how its failing to protect people. Its not surprising that a system designed to protect (suspected) criminals is failing, its seems to be common theme. Everything from the failing prisons systems to blacks lives matter movement and now to the failure of public defenders, the system of law and order is crumbling. The court system has its many flaws and theres a lit of other problems to fix, but, public defense was put in motion by the supreme court obviously the government thinks its important, so i feel they should increase their funding and support of public defenders.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/opinion/dark-money-and-an-irs-blindfold.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0 I think contribution should always be public. Private donation have no good advantages as i can see to the public. Money does influence politics and the electorate should atlas always know who they are voting for and what the candidate are being influenced by. By letting a foreign source have a say in our government would be very dangerous. The public would never know if what we are doing in our best interest or the other countries benefit
First
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2016/04/28/us/baltimore-13-year-old-shot/index.html
ReplyDeleteIn this article, another instance of police being put in hot water for doing their job. In this case, a 13 year old with a BB gun was running away from the police was shot. They told him who they were, and they did everything they were required to do, but the kid still ran away. The parents and the child both agree that the police were not wrong.
I think it's funny how race wasn't mentioned once in the article, and this article is an excellent example of how police do their job and it's peoples poor decisions that create this atmosphere surrounding police.
I have to agree with you here. Racism exists anymore due to people creating it. The police did their jobs by protecting the people around them, and making sure everyone was at safety. Race shouldn't have to be mentioned and I appreciate this article for not doing so.
DeleteReply to Pam...
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Pam, I think this whole injury could have been avoided if the boy had just listened to the cop. Too many people are worried about the immediate consequence in life rather than looking at the long term consequence instead. In this case this boy was probably scared of being arrested so he decided to run.Thus causing him to get an even worse consequence. People in this world need to look in the long term rather than what will happen right after the event.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/25/opinion/should-everybody-vote.html?_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about how many people are choosing not to vote in this presidential election as a way of protesting against the candidates. This article's author brings an idea to add an option to the ballot that says ,"No Acceptable Candidate". I believe that there is both positives and negatives to adding such a ballot option. For one negative, what will happen if majority were to vote, "No Acceptable Candidate"? For a positive, voting against all of the candidates shows that Americans are not happy with their candidates and possibly more people would run in the presidential race or more candidates would alter their policies.
My sister is actually one of these people. She has told us multiple times that she is not going to vote because she does not like anyone on the ballot. That said, I think that it would be a bad idea to have that choice on the ballot because Obama might get a third term from it. This could cause congress to become even more republican in it's elections and nothing would ever get passed. Plus there is that issue with the new supreme court justice which would just get blown way out of proportion.
DeleteI agree with you. There are positives and negatives to this idea. I think this option should be on the ballot but before this the government and the people need to find out a system of what to do if this no candidate option is the majority and who will become the president if this does occur. But the negative is taking the time to make such a thing.
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2016/04/28/politics/john-kasich-ted-cruz-alliance/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about the new "alliance" between Ted Cruz and John Kasich. Cruz plans to draw out of the states where he is not doing so well and Kasich is doing the same thing. This is an effort to try and draw the votes away from Trump and secure that he does not get the 1,237 delegates he needs to win the nomination. However, when asked, Cruz says that there is no alliance, they are just simply in an agreement on the fact that Trump should not be the next president of the United States.I disagree, while the media will call this what ever it wants, I think their is definitely a partnership between the two and I feel it is a great way to keep Trump out of the Oval Office!
Ill have to admit, this "alliance" between Ted Cruz and John Kasich is an interesting thing to hear about. Seeing as most statistics admit that Ted Cruz and John Kasich have no chance of acquiring the delegates needed to secure the Republican nomination for president, with cruz needing something like 101 percent, and Kasich needing something like 162 percent of the remaining delegates to receive the nomination. It makes the most logical sense that all they can do now, is work together to garner as many delegates as they can in hopes of having a contested convention, where anyone could come out to be the nominee.
DeleteThis seems like a very weird thing to happen in politics. Though granted, I've haven't payed that much attention to political developments before this year. However, I wonder how much if at all this happened in previous runnings in America. It's odd and kind of scary they are going this far, and by that I mean giving himself a slight disadvantage in their campaign, to help in getting Trump out of the race.
DeleteIn reply to Pam and Curtiss:
ReplyDeleteI have mixed feelings after reading this article. I definitely understand why police shot at the boy, but I feel like their could've been a better solution. That being said, it also wasn't the smartest decision for the boy blatantly ignore the officers warnings. This boy was a teenager, so being chased by the police probably scared him into thinking he was going to get arrested. Both parties in the incident are not completely in the wrong or right.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/27/dennis-hastert-sentenced-to-15-months-in-prison.html
ReplyDeleteIts not really shocking to see the former U.S House speaker abused students back when he was a coach only because we elected men and women with no true knowledge on who they were before. we know what they tell us but no one goes and looks up what happen before. I think he is getting what he has earned and feel no inch of mercy for his punishments.
This is a reply to Pamela
ReplyDeleteI agree all the way that the people make a biased view on the police force and do not care about what is right from wrong they look for the picky things such as race and blow it up to make it a big deal when its not.
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/04/27/donald-trumps-ridiculous-womens-card-comments/?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteIn this article, Trump once again attacks Clinton because of her gender, saying she supports the things she does because of her "woman card". Clinton does discuss issues that effect women, but also includes topics that will affect everyone. Trump pulling the "woman card" is just another way to point the finger at someone else to distract how terrible his ideas are.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/28/opinion/campaign-stops/bernie-sanderss-legacy.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article discusses that Bernie Sanders is a figurehead of a living idea and involved in a zombie campaign. Bernie's path to becoming the democratic nominee is now smaller and becoming narrower. The New York Times reported on wednesday that Sanders “ is planning to lay off ‘hundreds’ of campaign staffers across the country and focus much of his remaining effort on winning California.” . The editor says that people have mischaracterized the choice between the democratic candidates as a choice between idealism and pragmatism between Hillary and Clinton. The editor also talks about making cut to the deals to reach ideals, which is called compromise and is very essential in politics. Sanders has argued that politics are broken and moneyed interests have too much influence.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/07/27/opinion/sunday/high-time-marijuana-legalization.html?_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article highlights that marijuana should be legalized. It states that it took 13 years for the united states to end prohibition. Congress passed the current ban on marijuana for more than 40 years. The times Editorial board have reached the conclusion through debate that the federal government should repeal the ban on marijuana. They are inspired by a rapidly growing movement among the states to reform marijuana laws. They say They “ believe that on every level - health effect, the impact on society and law-and-order issues” . They say that decisions will allow for there to be a decision on whether to allow recreational or medicinal production and use it where it belongs at the state level. The board considers if it would be best for washington to hold back while the states continue to experiment with legalizing medical uses of marijuana, reducing penalties, or simply legalising it one for all to use. Apparently ¾ of the states has done one of these either recreational, I think that's the best thing to do because this experimentation allows for a view on the effects of this legislation at a small scale.
This is a really complicated issue. Part of me wants to say, "Let the people do what they want," even if I want no part of it at all. But the other part of me says, "This is dangerous and a slippery slope." Marijuana is a drug and drugs negatively affect your reactions and cloud your mind. This even happens with typically medicine like allergy pills. Most labels have warnings that clearly state that they will make you drowsy. The clouded mind can be dangerous in several ways, not just while driving. However, in Germany I believe it is, people are legally able to drink before they are legally able to drive. This has actually considerably lowered their drunk-driving accidents because young people can get the urge for experimentation and experience out of their system before they have the potential to be dangerous to people. This could also work for marijuana, but if legalized, it should be clear that it is not highly recommended to use it. It's still a drug. Though medical marijuana (which should definitely be legalized) is beneficial, not all of the implications are good and people need to be aware of that if buying it for recreational use.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn reply to Pam, Kayla, Curtiss and Taylor:
ReplyDeleteI believe it is pointless people even have guns and many people being in "hot water" probably would have not happened if American took away guns entirely. But because owning a gun is "apart of being American," people can not just take away that right. Anyways, the media also focuses a lot on people being shot by the police than police being shot by people which is also why people have this belief that policemen tend to be trigger happy. From what it seems, the boy is alive and that is what makes this conventionally okay. But honestly, if someone is running away, especially, a 13 year old boy, they are scared or trying to get away from someone this is a defense mechanism, and I guess I just do not understand why police are more willing to reach for a gun when they could use a stun gun or even pepper spray. I understand that not all cops are bad, because not all people are bad, but this situation could had easily been avoided on both ends.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/opinion/if-not-trump-what.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how Trump is going to be the most likely republican candidate and how appalled people are about it. The question he is asking throughout the article is if Trump is not going to be the republican candidate then who will? It illustrates that Trump and Sanders growing popularity shows that there is growing pain in the country. Suicide has surged to older ages, such as 30 years old. I think it is important that the article highlights that Trump's success grew out of pain, this reminds me a lot of a certain dictator. When Germany had fallen into an awful economy, their pain grew into what we know as Nazi Germany and they had taken their pain out into a different way.
While I agree that Trump's success did grow out of pain, he also had to work for it. I think that what America wants in him is from turning his "small loan of a million dollars" into billions. If someone was given a million dollars that would still be a hard thing to do. I think that Americans want him to help make our country better in a similar way based on his increase. I dislike him.
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/opinion/working-class-fraud.html?ref=opinion
ReplyDeleteI haven't thought of Trump being with the "working class", he seems with all his plans, spending a whole lot on things that won't help the working class. Maybe even negatively affecting the working class. Plus in the article him promising jobs for town, and surprise, he did not do them. I've never really seen him as a person that keeps his word, or at least from what I've seen.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/opinion/wrath-of-the-conned.html?ref=opinion
ReplyDeleteWith the peimaries coming closer and closer to their close, some are starting to speculate what will go on when we get to the conventions. To some, on the Democratic side, it's already over, Hillary is going to be the nominee, Bernie stands no chance of getting the delegates needed in order to secure the nomination, the establishment has won. On the republican side, Trump, the origionally unlikely nominee, is still in the lead to clench the republican nomination, with cruz and kasich not really coming close to stopping him. It' interesting to see that the establishment is in the lead on the democratic side, while the establishment is on the losing side in the republican competition. One can only wonder as to why that is, which message seems to resonate with the people more?
I do not think the message is the real reason that the republicans are losing. I think the main reason is the republicans stubbornness. Their refusal to change with modern time is what is undoing the republicans. People want change, not a lot but they want someone to help fix their problems. The Democrats on the other hand offer change and evolving views. Trump even though i believe it is in the opposite direction offer radical change too.
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/opinion/the-racist-roots-of-a-way-to-sell-homes.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article's title is very misleading. They only mention racism at the end of the article, and even then it is not racism. They say that many people who black and Hispanic people lost their homes more often through contracts for deed, basically cheaper, easier to get mortgages. The difference between contracts for deed and mortgages is that with a mortgage the company has to give you time to catch up if you miss a payment and contracts for deeds can evict you as soon as you miss a payment. The reason that this is not racist is because more blacks and Hispanics have to rely on stuff like this because they are not eligible for mortgages, which the article pointed out and chose to ignore.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/opinion/sunday/dont-treat-young-adults-as-teenagers.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article was discussing recent suggestions of raising the juvenile court age to 21. Most of the reasons for treating juveniles differently in the first place is according to the unfinished development of the adolescent brain. The authors of the editorial admit that development continues even beyond 18, but their question is whether they are still too undeveloped. Recently, in English, we read an article about teen angst and the developing brain. This article suggested that brain development goes into the early-twenties. Based on that, I was thinking when I started reading this article that it would make sense to be raised. Also, in the article it says "A disproportionate number of serious violent crimes are committed by individuals between 17 and 21." To me, that seems like they are having some serious mental conflicts at this age if they are committing serious, violent crimes at higher rates than other age groups. However, at the same time, the article brings up the difficulty that would come with adapting to a change in legislation. Would juvenile detention centers really be able to hold that many people? And is it fair to keep 14-year-olds on the same level as 21-year-olds? I'm not sure. I think perhaps it's best to keep things as they are to help the developing brain transition into being treated as an adult, even in the court room. It will hopefully prevent them from wanting to endure that process again and reduce the likelihood of repeated offenses in the future.
This is a really good point. Many people's brains are still developing on their early twenties, so they can't make the best decisions. But if they made twenty year olds juveniles in the courtroom, they would have to raise the voting and drinking ages too since they would still be treated as children, and that's just too much of a hassle.
Deletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-bangladesh-horror/2016/04/29/a9c12608-0d76-11e6-bfa1-4efa856caf2a_story.html
ReplyDeleteThis article discusses the continued persecution of homosexuals throughout the world. While the United States does not have complete equality when it comes to sexuality, it is much more developed and accepting than other parts of the world. This issue is being focused on even more right now after a hate crime in Bangladesh that ended in a gay man being killed. There are places where people are imprisoned or even executed for being gay. In the article, it talks about a gang of men with machetes killing gays in Bangladesh. This is completely disgusting, and it shows just how close-minded and underdeveloped some countries are. I think that the United States and its allies should campaign to stop the violence and ignorance around the world. There is a lot more that we could be doing to stop this, but it seems like the government has other things that it would like to focus on that it has deemed more important. According to the article, 75 countries had enacted laws that criminalized anyone who was gay in 2015. Money put into media, awareness projects, and, if needed, troops, would help to solve this growing issue.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/29/politics/donald-trump-bernie-sanders/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is discussing the possible future of Donald Trump's campaign, stating that he is now trying to get Sander's Supporters.Although Trump has repeatedly attacked Clinton, calling her crooked, he has remained prasiing toward Sanders, which is odd for the likes of Trump. Trump even said, "I think Bernie Sanders should run as an independent" Donald Trump also said that he thinks a lot of the things that Bernie stands for are interesting and he w ill actually be implementing them! I think this is very odd, especially for Donald Trump, and this definitely adds to the chaos of this election .
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/29/politics/invictus-games-obama-michelle-queen-prince-harry/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how the Obamas have challenge the Royal Family. But it may not be what your thinking. The Obamas challenge Prince Harry to the Invictus Games. That's an international event where wounded, injured or sick armed services members and veterans compete in sports. But Prince Harry stepped up and even add the Queen in this challenge.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/29/health/us-zika-death-puerto-rico/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about a virus that was believed to be non deadly is now deadly. A 70-year-old Puerto Rican man died from complications of the Zika virus in February, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Puerto Rico Department of Health announced Friday. This is the first time in the United States or territories that Zika infection contributed to a death, the CDC said. The elderly man, who lived in the San Juan metro area, contracted Zika and was treated for symptoms that lasted less than a week, said Tyler Sharp, an epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Dengue Branch in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/29/politics/donald-trump-protests-republican-convention-california/index.html
ReplyDeleteAt the Republican convention attenders of the event protested Trumps rally. A group of people with bandannas over their faces and carried Mexican flags forced Trumps motorcade to pull over into a hotel and go in and Trump says he "felt like he was crossing the border." Now this is very troubling to me not the fact that Trump was protested (i like that) but the fact that Trump says he felt like he was crossing the border which is very offending and he only says that because of the Mexican protesters. Trump is just a bad guy and bad guys shouldn't be president.
Its good to see that people are actually protesting Trump in a serious way, if the campaign continues like it is we may actually have Trump as a president. The truly sad part is everyone knows how bad Trump is, and they even will talk about it, but no one will actually go and vote against him, and that will end up hurting this country.
Deletehttp://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-trumps-nomination-to-lose/
ReplyDeleteThis article is about the chance Donald Trump has of getting to 1,237 delegates to prevent a contested convention, and why it is so hard to try to predict if he can or not with any certainty. Currently the Republican race isn't that hotly contested with Donald Trump the clear leader, but it is still playing out like it is with the threat of a contested convention looming on the horizon, and each state becoming a must win for both Trump and the anti-Trump coalition to for that 1,237 majority. The race is volatile to predict because of the ever changing media coverage of it and how it seems to buck any kind of momentum that looks like may be forming. It looks like an uphill battle for Trump to reach the majority he needs, but every state from here on is pivotal for both sides in the lead up to Cleveland
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2016/04/29/health/brigham-young-university-rape/index.html
This article is about a girl who was raped, but ended up being punished instead of her rapist. She was punished because she was on drugs at the time, which I agree she should be punished for because it was against the rules. However, raping someone should be a much bigger deal than doing drugs because it hurts someone else and can even ruin those lives. He definitely should have been punished, and much more than she was.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/30/opinion/a-mockery-of-justice-for-the-poor.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article is about Public defenders and how its failing to protect people. Its not surprising that a system designed to protect (suspected) criminals is failing, its seems to be common theme. Everything from the failing prisons systems to blacks lives matter movement and now to the failure of public defenders, the system of law and order is crumbling. The court system has its many flaws and theres a lit of other problems to fix, but, public defense was put in motion by the supreme court obviously the government thinks its important, so i feel they should increase their funding and support of public defenders.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/opinion/dark-money-and-an-irs-blindfold.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0
ReplyDeleteI think contribution should always be public. Private donation have no good advantages as i can see to the public. Money does influence politics and the electorate should atlas always know who they are voting for and what the candidate are being influenced by. By letting a foreign source have a say in our government would be very dangerous. The public would never know if what we are doing in our best interest or the other countries benefit