As we seek to contribute to the world, we must first understand the world. What is going on in the world? What do you think about these events? Where do you find out about current events? Why do you trust your source? What is news? Is news important? Why?
Submit five different posts reflecting on five different current events. Also respond to a minimum of five posts made by other students.
Hey guys hope you are all having a great summer! I guess I will get this started. I read a story on the internet about North Korea gaining nuclear power. This is an area that is overshadowed in the news by our issues in the Middle East so I was shocked to hear that we still have 28,500 troops in South Korea. North Korea is ignoring the UN by gaining this power, so I think this is a problem that is not going to go away. I really don't watch the news as much as I probably should so this whole Korean conflict is totally new to me. Any thoughts?
ReplyDelete- Emily Hentschke
hey everyone. So I'm not exactly well informed about the North Korean issue, especially seeing as the main media focus is Iraq and Iran like Emily said but I'm somewhat curious. I know the UN has placed restrictions on North Korea's nuclear expansion-restrictions that North Korea hasn't totally respected. They tested some of their new weapons recently and Obama was adamant that something must be done. My question is, how are we justifying limiting their expansion when our nuclear capabilities are far beyond their's if I'm not mistaken? I know we don't have the same political views and obviously if we still have troops there, there's some threat but what are we concerned they'll do? And since they disregard the current limitations, are they cooperative with us? -Karla Robinson
ReplyDeleteHey guys...like everyone else I hope you're having a great summer. Ok so i was online and i found this story that aired on FOX news in Cleveland about an 11 year old boy who seems to have been reincarnated of a man that participated and died in WWII. Now i know this sounds kind of crazy, but if you watch the video they have some pretty convincing points. This also isn't you're normal news story, but i thought it was kind of interesting. Just check out the story on the website and let me know what you think...
ReplyDeletewww.fox8.com/wjw-riencarnation-txt%2C0%2C1190900
sorry guys...i forgot a part of the web address
ReplyDeletewww.fox8.com/wjw-riencarnation-txt%2C0%2C1190900.story
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the issues in North Korea as brought about by Emily and Karla...I understand that right now North Korea is being run by a radical dictator. North Korea itself is strapped for cash, so a concern is that they will sell nuclear weapons to terrorist leaders. North Korea is in open defiance of the UN and the security council, which has passed resolution for them to stop all development of nuclear weapons.
ReplyDelete-Emily Mattevi
On the video lauren brought up...
ReplyDeleteat first, I was thinking it was pretty silly and that James had watched one too many war movies, but then it became a bit creepy. James' parents didn't seem to really know their own son. The examples they spoke of were shocking. How would James even know about the old lady's paiting unless he was truly her brother? Pretty mindboggling if you ask me. How would you like to be the parents of a son like that? How you would deal with that just baffles me! I personally don't believe in reincarnation, but this was interesting.
~Gennavieve Carmazzi
In the world we live in, there is bound to be global conflicts that will seem to be illogical and inhumane. With hope, we can only look to ourselves and strive together in order to conquer these quarels. North Korea is in deep dispair; however, we are still in a conflict overseas with our own terrorist enemies. Being willing to aid everyone with a problem is not a realistic possibility at the moment due to the economic situation we are in. The time will come to heal the world, but now we must focus on rebuilding ourselves for the future aid to those surrounding us.
ReplyDeleteHey guys hope you are having a good summer. I was looking at an article on Cnn.com titled "House GOP oulines health care bill". Now in that article it said that it will cost the United States $1 trillion over 10 years to supply health care to 16 million, simply a third of the 45 uninsured americans. The plans has a lot of pros and cons, listed at this address.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/17/house.health.care/index.html
My questions is, what do you think about this, it is okay to drive our country another trillion dollars in debt, or not?
-Emily Wood
I somewhat agree with Ryan. I understand that the United States is going through some really tough times economically, however there are so many countries fighting bigger battles than our own. Of course I think we should be repairing our own country, but we should not stop all of our foriegn aid. Compared to many other countries, we have life so easy. Our biggest worries of rising gas prices and plummeting stock markets are nothing compared to what is going on around the world. While our own issues are huge and important, they can not begin to compare to genocide, starvation, and nuclear threat. I feel that it is our responsibility as human beings to reach out to those who are in desperate need of help. I am not saying that we should forget about our own country, but I am sure we can shift our focus so that a compromise between the two can be made.
ReplyDelete-Emily Hentschke
I am not yet on top of the issues in North Korea, however, I agree with Emily. I believe we in the US have it easy compared to other countries, and finding a medium between digging ourselves out of debt and dealing with our own problems while aiding foriegn countries at the same time would be ideal. However, too high a percent of the US population's focus is on themselves, and they act soley for personal benefit/gain rather than reaching a helping hand to those in need. My question is how do we open the eyes and hearts of those people to how much foriegn countries need our help?
ReplyDeleteI Think the government should focus their aid on America. We are already in debt especially to China. People are jobless and our economy sucks. You can make an arguement that compared to other countries we have it easier, but that doesn't mean we should or can help them as much we're used to. If our economy contiues to sink will we have as much money or power to help them as we would if we improved our economy first. Besides there are people in America that need help to.
ReplyDeleteI know that it isn't the aim of the US governemtn to be selfish but we are in an expanding economic crisis and although I agree that it is important ti aid those of other nations that are struggling with horrifying problems that we ourselves do not have to face daily, it is far more imporant for us to focus on rebuilding our economy first before squandering money in aid of other nations. It is unforntunate that there are selfish American's who have no intention of aiding foreign nations and instead focus soley on personal gain, but I believe that once our economy has returned to it's prosperous state that the aid and relief that the US offered in the past will be readministered with an even greater fource than it was before.
ReplyDelete-Clair Molander
I absolutely agree with Clair and Keith...i was just reading a couple articles in the newspaper and my reason for not wanting Obama to be ellected president is being presented. Now Obama wants to pass a bill that will work to improve the climate and work to reduce green house gases. And as great as an idea as that is, where are we going to get the money?!?! Sure it'll bring in more jobs but it is said that it will also raise electricity and other prices and job costs, costing each household $3,100. And another part of the bill would protect consumers from rising energy costs by giving rebates and credits to low-income families. But the question still remains of where the money will come from. As Keith mentioned America is far enough indebt as it is, for example take a look at California. Our economy is crashing right before our eyes! Schwarzenegger want to issue another furlough day to the state workers cause each of the people to take a 14% income cut including the other two days that have already been issued. And even that pay cut would hardly make a dent in our 24 billion dollar debt, which would further have to make California issue IOU's. So realy i think that it is time for America to be selfish and take care of itself. We have helped other countries, but as the Chinese proverb says, give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a life time. The US can't just go around the world fixing the problems that we think are wrong. Sometimes we just need to let a country duke it out themselves instead of the US hustling in there to be the refaree of the world and clean up the mess for them.
ReplyDeleteOn the issue between helping foreign countries out and being selffish as a country i do agree with keith and carla but there should be a balance between helping out and being selffish. We should help out some because we are all human, part of the same species, not to be separated based on where we live. Yet we are in the world we live in, so it comes down to a balance between helping ourselves and helping others at the same time. I think that we should put more time into ourselves but still put time into other countries as well.
ReplyDelete-Kelly Scanlon
Hey everyone hope you're all having a fantastic summer! Ok so referring to the comment Emily made about whether or not it's fair for our country to be driven another trillion dollars in debt I would have to say I don't think it's fair. In the budget crisis we're in now it wouldn't help to spend more money and keep borrowing from neighboring countries such as China. I'm sure they're not going to keep giving us the money we need like its nothing, they're bound to get irritated with us sooner or later, right? I think, like what Keith and Lauren and Claire said that we should stop helping other countries out and just get ourselves under control first. Now, on the House GOP Healthcare I believe that it's a good idea to make sure all Americans have affordable healthcare coverage but in order to get that it is going to cost money. In my History class at the beginning of the term I remember taking a quiz that told you if you were more of a Democrat or Republican, some of you might remember those, and my result was Democrat. Now I'm not sure how accurate those quizzes were but since I took it I've been thinking more like a Democrat and getting to know a Democrat's viewpoint in general, like take from the rich and give to the poor, sounds nice right? But I haven't noticed any changes in our economy since the new presidency and because of that I'm starting to think differently. If we don't act fast we could end up going into a 21st century depression.
ReplyDeleteHello all......I have a couple things to say about Ashley's post...People have to keep in mind that we have only had our president for approximately 6 months. It is asking way too much to see a huge difference in the economy in that short amount of time. President Bush was president for 8 years and got us into many problems that have as a result created this intense recession that we are in right now. It is going to take some time to fix eight years of mess-ups and bad choices, so our nation just needs to be patient a bit longer because its totally outrageous for people to think everything's going to be fixed right away.
ReplyDeleteOn the issure being discussed about helping our foreign countries in our current state of economic depletion, I think that it is important for the US to stay involved in foreign affairs, but it is more important currently to aid the United States economic crisis. The US, as the most powerfull, rich, and influential country in the World, needs to have a stable economy and income for us to continue being the mediators of the World. So, the US should focus their attention on the US for the time being, so that we can aid other countries.
ReplyDeleteRecalling back to what Jordan said, even thought Obama has only been in office for 6 months, I am not one expecting immediate change. I know that we can not just turn America around in a night, but at the same time, I don't see Obama working to fix the issues that we have right now. I see him spending more money or working on things that in turn will bring America further into debt. And at the same time you can't say the President Bush made the worst choices and made terrible mistakes, because for a good period of that time, we were all nodding our heads by his side with many of his choices. We all abandoned him when things started to turn for the worse. The more and more we talk about all these budget crisis, the more I begin to feel that maybe America should go back to a government that is least involved in American lives. Why do people need to depend on getting health care from their government, and why are we beginning to lean on them so much? It's not like their our bank account, and that we can just run to them every time we need more money. I know it sounds harsh, but people need to become more responsible for themselves. They need to be the ones to get their own health care. they need to be responsible for themselves and budget the money that they have. It just seems like the government is a crutch for the American people rather than a guild line.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I stand pretty firm on what I said before, Lauren did point out a couple of things that escaped my thought process when I was writing it. I wholeheartedly disagree with the whole war that we are in right now, and I will forever resent George Bush for getting us into that mess, but there was a time where I indeed thought he was doing a pretty good job. One thing I do not exactly agree with is the fact that though the government really needs not be incredibly involved with the American people’s lives, there definitely needs to be a lot more regulation. Because American was doing so well, the government loosened its reigns and there was less regulation going on, but then banks started giving out loans to people with band credit who couldn’t compensate for the costs later. The government really needs to be more responsible for regulating those kinds of things. If they would’ve tried to fix the problem when it was small instead of letting it escalate into this egregious recession that all of American is suffering from.
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to bring to attention Sarah Palin's resignation as Alaska's governor.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you guys think of this? Is it a good thing or not? why?
~Gennavieve
From what I have heard, I am pretty sure the reason why is she resigning is because she wants to start campaigning and getting ready for the 2012 presidental election. I think she is planning on running for president. I do not think it is a good or bad thing. As far as I am concerned, I don't really know a whole lot about her or the way she plans on running our country so my standpoint right now is that she is just another person trying to run....if that is indeed the case of why she resigned her posistion as Alaskan Governer which could or could not be the real reason.
ReplyDeleteRegarding Sarah Palin's act of resigning as Governor in Alaska I would agree with Jordan. She is most likely planning on running for president or vice president again and the best thing for her would be to get herself involved with the government once again and show the people the things she is able to accomplish. She is being very smart about the situation putting herself out there and gaining more support continuously.
ReplyDelete-Emily Mattevi
Hey everyone! Okay so what I am interested in is hearing about everyone's opinion on the current environmental issues and how the government should aid in this. Personally I believe that government needs to take control of this particular situation and help regulate the people and their actions towards the environment in order to save our environment. I do not believe that we can leave it all to the people and trust that everyone will do their part (recycle, conserve water, etc.). If government did end up taking a hands off approach, i believe we would need to offer incentives for people to recycle, to conserve water, electricity, and so on. As time goes on I think that the condition of our environment is going to become a huge issue and we need to address it as soon as possible. What are your thoughts on this??
ReplyDelete-Emily Mattevi
On Emily's comment about environmenatal issues. I absolutely agree with her that the government needs to get involved. I also think that it is really hard for them to actually do something fast bacause of all the things they need to pass to get everyone to actually have a part. It's a slow process that needs to be picked up. I was reading about the "tahoe tax" and how it helps with environment up in Tahoe. People don't like it because it costs them money but shouldn't we be more concerned with what will happen to our world when we don't take care of it. It doesn't help that we are only making a certain amount of people pay. The government should find a way to make it fair. I can understand why people don't want to pay the tax because they feel as if they are being screwed and treated unfairly but I think it needs to be put in place because if they get used to paying it like anyother bill then it becomes normal to have something to pay to help our environment.
ReplyDelete-Kelly
Hey I was reading on yahoo news about kids of troops in Iraq that needed mental help. Thought it was interesting http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090707/ap_go_ca_st_pe/us_children_and_war
ReplyDeletecheck it out. Tell me what you think.
-Kelly
I agree with Kelly on the "tahoe tax" that people will eventually get used to paying it as regularly as any other tax. Foe example, this might be a stretch but haven't we, the United States been gaining more taxes as the years go on? We started with a couple of internal taxes and because of the Civil War back in 1862 to support it the nation made it's first income tax law so to get to the point, I don't see how the people of Lake Tahoe are makin such a big deal of the new tax if we've been gaining taxes for as long as since the civil War. I hope that made sense.
ReplyDeleteIn response to what Emily had posed earlier about the government taking control and enforcing environmental efforts, I agree and think that if greater lengths were taken on top of what already is being done there would be extremely beneficial to the preservation and well being of the planet. Although there are already incentives that are offered at recycling centers and such, if the government were to take a greater part in creating different environmental reforms I feel that the results would be astounding and a greater part of the US would have to act consciously for the planet. I don’t see any possible negative outcome to the intervention of the government in this age where people are inclined to waste resources and trash our environment. Government efforts would definitely help this situation.
ReplyDeleteThis was interesting, I was reading about part time jobs that offer part time benefits on AOL News this morning and here's the website: http://jobs.aol.com/articles/photos/part-time-jobs-with-benefits/1525843/?ncid=AOLCOMMjobsDYNLprim0001&icid=main|main|dl4|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fjobs.aol.com%2Farticles%2Fphotos%2Fpart-time-jobs-with-benefits%
ReplyDelete2F1525843%2F%3Fncid%3DAOLCOMMjobsDYNLprim0001
I'm curious how these companies are able to pay for such benefits like established health plans dental plans and so on. How are they able to support other people when our economy still isn't doing that great itself? Let me know what you think.
In regards to what Emily (the other one) said about the government focusing on helping our environment, I think it is important to make sure that we stop depleting our environmental resources, however in this economy i think it is much more important for us to spend the majority of our money helping the impoverished and the unemployed. If we are able to make our economy more stable then we will be able to spend more time on other important things, such as the environment. To tell you the truth, I think it is more the responsibility of every single American citizen to make sure they recycle and make "greener" choices, I don't think that the government's money and time spent on making our environment heathier is going to help all that much.-Emily W
ReplyDeleteAllrighty, I'm pumping two out at once...Massachusetts sues federal government over marriage law. Once again, a state is challenging the federal government claiming that denying a gay couple marriage is unconstitutional.
ReplyDeleteI know posting this may become a huge debate, but I'm going to chance it. I personally believe that Masschusetts is right, I think that all people should be allowed to get married.
Unfortunatly, I am fairly confident that Massachusetts will lose, this Nation isn't ready for that yet, as shown by the case in California where a gay group tried to revoke Prop 8.
My question is to all of you out there is, do you think this Nation should allow gay marraige? & Who do you think will win, Massachusetts or Federal Law?-Emily W.
More Info:http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/08/massachusetts.marriage.lawsuit/index.html
I read the article about Massachusetts sueing the federal government and I am not suprised. Gay marriage is a hugely debated and controversial topic. Regardless of my opinion on the subject I think that Masssachusetts will fail because marriage has been defined between a man and a woman for as long as our country has existed. Whether I believe gay marriage should or should not be legalized in our nation, I think it will be. As the more traditionally raised generations fade away, I think the younger generations will have no problem voting for its legalization. I do believe that every person should have the same rights, as the constitution states, and the same opportunity to make their own decisions. At this very moment I think that Massachusetts will lose the law suit but over time the long debate over gay marriage will be resolved by its legalization.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with Natalie on the subject of gay marriage and Massachusetts. I believe that Gays should be given the same rights as everyone else, but because of the way marriage is defined it will be overruled. I have heard that some people would be more okay with it if they just call it something other than marriage because then the definition of marriage doesn't change. So many people are against it because of religious reason that it may take time, even more than has already be taken. It seems as if new generations are not bothered as much by gays fighting for their rights, but here in todays time more people have decided that marriage is reserved for the rights of a man and a woman. Even if Massachusetts won the battle, I'm sure there would many people trying to overturn it just making it into a back and forth war over rights.
ReplyDelete-Kelly
I agree with Natalie on the topic of gay marriage. Society has change significantly over the past several years and will continue to do so, especially with our current conflicts. Gay marriage has gained more publicity and support than ever and is an issue that will not simply lose interest. Either it will be legalized or people will continue to fight.
ReplyDeleteA current issue that struck me hard was the daycare fire in Mexico that killed many children. It made me think about all the rules and regulations we have here in America that can be a nuissance but have a point. For example; a daycare could never be built by a machine shop, concrete barriers are required between certain buildings, and a certain number of staff members are needed. The law is what gives us freedom. America is a country with many many rules, yet they aid us in our ability to live and be able to make our own choices for the future.
ReplyDeleteSaudi Woman Activist Demands Right to Travel. This Saudi woman wanted to take a simple 45 minute trip down to Bahrain, but she got stopped at the border because even in this day and age she needed permission from her Husand to leave the country. My question is do you think it is right in 2009 for women still to be denied the right to leave the country when they please? Another question is do you think these rules will ever change, and if so, will they change soon? -Emily W
ReplyDeleteOn Emily's comment, I think that a woman should not need her husbands permission to do anything. Each of us is our person and we should be able to do reasonable things such as being able to travel when we want without anyone having to give us permission. I mean what makes the man so much better than the woman that he can tell her when and when she can't go somewhere? I just think its absolutely ridiculous that she has to have permission. But on the note of whether it will change is a tough one. The thing is, is that those are that country's beliefs, and we can't make them change them or enforce them to do so. As much as I believe that is completely wrong, I guess that's a reason why I live in America and there. So only at the point in which Saudi Arabia wants to change their ways will it change.
ReplyDeleteAnd back to the comment Emily made earlier about gay rights I have to agree with Natalie that people in our generation seem to be more accepting of Gay rights. I also agree that Massachusetts probably won't win, but I think in due time that gays will get their rights. And it is unconstitutional for the government to not give rights to a minority, such as gays based on their sexual preferences. So by law, eventually gays will get their rights. And the main reason it hasn't passed i think is because of people and their beliefs in their religion. Remember that religion is not to mixed with government. They are two separate things and need to stay that way. There for people need to put this whole religious stand point off to the side and open their eyes to a new and up coming branch of our society.
-Lauren Dillier
Going back to Emily's post..I really think that gay people deserve the right marry whoever they want. I think one of the main reasons why they can't is because religious views and beliefs are getting in the way, which the shouldn't because theres supposed to be a seperation between church and state. It really needs be based on if it is constitutional or not...which it is not...not about what certain religions think. I know that probably not going to happen anytime soon, but thats my opinion.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I have seen posts that deal with alot of social and economic issues, but one that hasn't been adressed is the debate over whether or not the Earth needs to go into some kind of environmental revolution, because the Earths resources are rapidly depleting with the way that the humans are living currently. Do you think it's time that huge steps be taken or that we should continue the way we are iving curently?
I watched this program on TV and it really opened my eyes on the issue....heres a website with more info on it ** www.abcnews.go.com/technology/earth2100/
~Jordan Conti~
In response to Emily Wood's post: No we may not believe it right here in the United States for a woman to need permission for outings from her husband but our country has not always extended the courtesies to woman they do now. Woman earned the right to vote not so long ago and it took our country a long time to achieve the "equality" we have today. I personally believe a woman should do as she pleases but different countries and people have their own beliefs. Our country was based on the principles of freedom and yet look at all we have had to conquer still in order for our people to be free. Different civilizations evolve at different rates and in different ways; however, when the public opinion is supressed as in many of the middle eastern countries it is a different fight for rights then here in the U.S. Hence the war.
ReplyDeleteThis blog has prompted me to watch the news and yesterday evening I saw a a clip that was sopmewhat disturbing to think about. At the Pentagon a simulated biological terrorist attack was held. This event led me to thinking about how much the goverment know about North Korean weapons and are they simply taking precautions or has somehing made them very nervous. I dont not watch the news often nor do I read much of the newspaper pertaining to politics, so I may have missed something. Making my question irrelevant but since I read the other blog on this sight asking whether or not poloticians lie purposely it has gotten me thinking alot about the subject and what our people don't know about the war and all the reasons behind it.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Caitlyn's issue of the biological warfare at the pentagon and North Korea. I think that The United States is justified in being in North Korea because they suspected suspicious activities that could threaten and harm the US. I think the government knows what they are doing, however, it is possible that they government has done the same thing they did in Iraq and maybe acted to harshly too soon. But only time will tell if the government's action were right or wrong.-Emily W.
ReplyDeleteI was looking on CNN.com and I saw a sad and intersting story about 6 churches that were bombed in Baghdad, at least 4 were killed and 32 were wounded. I personally think this bombing is sick becasue not only did they kill people, but they also occured in churches. I'm so sick of hearing about bombings in the middle-east, I feel like they happened more often after the War in Iraq started, but maybe I was just too young. My question is: Do you think that the War in Iraq caused all of the rebellion and outrage in Iraq, which led to car and church bombings, or do you think that it has always been bad there? -Emily W.
ReplyDeleteIn context with all of the other ideas, I believe that war with Iraq and all the other countries overseas is utterly meaningless, for we have a very pressing matter of our own. War costs billions of dollars to finance and we are in a national debt of trillions. Aiding other countries will do no good because when we give money, there is less for us to rebuild our own economy and end our financial crisis. We must collect ourselves and do what is necisary for us in order to aid others in the future.
ReplyDelete-Ryan Jue
On Emily's post about iraq. I think that the unrest in Iraq was created by the war, but only because before hand the people that mostly believed in that sort of thing were in charge. So they wouldn't do that because why bomb something if you own it? It's only until recently that they have been taken out of power so it is only natural that they would try to get it back. If you look at Israel there have been car bombings and this sort of thing almost since its recreation after WWII. Its not new to the middle East it just hasn't been in that location as much.
ReplyDeleteI just read a very disturbing piece of news. In the country of Lithuania a bill has just been passed that will censor certain information from reaching minors. This sounds nice at first, but the information that they are censoring is about homosexuality, bisexuality, polygamy, death, and violence. In Lithuania homosexuality is frowned upon greatly, but I feel that homosexuality is not something that can either be taught or prevented. You can not control someone's sexual preferences, and it is unjust to try to pretend that it doesn't exsist. Also death and violence is something that happens in the world. It shouldn't be advertised everywhere, but children need to know that it does exsist. In order for the children to grow up to be successful members of society, they need to be educated. Sheilding this knowledge is not only unjust, but it could end up hurting this country in the future.
ReplyDelete-Emily Hentschke
i agree with Emily! i think that by censoring these topics it can potentially hurt the country in the future. I mean what happens if someone leaves the counrty and lets say comes here? it would be a total social shock to see homosexuals, which chould inturn result in violence becasue the people are uneducated on it and unaccepting. I think it is important for people to be exposed to many of those topics. like Emily said many of those things are natual occurences and can not be stopped. Look at other animals around the world. It is natual for there to be violence between them. A lion might attack and kill a rabbit, which relates to blood, guts, and gore. So violence is something that is incripted into our genes whether we want it or not. When people dont understand or get frusterated, or think that somethign is wrong, they act out, becasue that is the only way they can release their feelings. Look at the the past of the united states. The poor and uneducated people are the ones to act out violently. If people do not become educated it could reciprocate into an outbreak of violence which could cause more trouble in the long run.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI commend Lithuania for doing this. If you look at American society today it leaves much to be desired compared to the past. Look at before the 60's when the information that Lithuania is censoring wasn't widely spread in America. There weren't many drug problems, no one would ever concieve the idea of a school shooting like columbine, there weren't as many violent protests, it was safe for children to just go off for a day and their parents never to know where they were. They were just happier. Today however we are almost the opposite. Our country is not very happy. Parents have to know where their children are for fear of kidnappings! I think this is a good step in making the world a better place. Also I think if they do come to America it will only make them appreciate their life in Lithuania even more.
ReplyDeleteHey guys! So I wanted to talk about Iran's election because as far as I know, no one's touched on it yet. A site I found has some pretty intense pictures if anyone's interested...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/06/irans_disputed_election.html
Anyways, what I understand is that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is now the supreme leader and supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi are in an uprage because of the "corrupted" vote-they suggest there was some bias calculation. Mousavi is typically called the "reform candidate" and I'm fairly sure that he had the US support as, of the two, he's more diplomatic with us. If anyone knows whether or not there actually was proven discrepancies in the vote count, please let me know. I'd also like to know if anyone knows how Khamenei plans to address us in his foreign policy-I think he's less cooperative with us but articles I've read don't go much into detail.
Sorry. so Khamenei is supreme leader but I'm actually wondering about President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad instead not Khamenei. (I mixed up the names-sort of confusing...)
ReplyDeleteResponding to Emily's post about Lithuania, I think it is wrong to censor any information about any topic. If you censor things that happen in everyday life, even if they are frowned upon like homosexuality, drugs, or bisexuality, then you are giving the minors a false view of how a society runs. They would be think they would be raised in a Utopia and when they became of the age that is deemed appropriate to see all news, they will have a culture shock.
ReplyDeletePlus, half of the knowledge of drugs doesn't come from the news, it comes from a bad influence at home or at school. Homosexuality isn't learned from the news either, it is learned from the environment you grow up in, not the news programs you see.
Okay, so I am posting something thats hits a little closer to home for me, my brother goes to the Air Force Academy and the new batch of cadets have gotten swine flu. 67 of them to be exact. The new cadets are put through 6 weeks of basic traning where they are treated poorly, "six weeks of hell" as described by my brother. My question is who's fault do you think it is that all of these cadets have swine flu. One cadet obviously had it then spread it to others, but would it have spread without the poor conditions they are stuck in, making it the fault of the staff watching them? Or is it simply the fault of the boy or girl who brought to camp?
ReplyDeleteSorry to switch the topic again Emily, but I just can't help and make a comment on Keith's opinion. He mentioned how things were safe before the 60's and children could run around as they pleased, but you also have to take into consideration that the 60's was a rebellion against the tight conformity of the 50's! So obveously the 50's couldn't have been that great otherwise we would still have those same values and expectations that were prevalent. Secondly, censoring those topics are not going to stop drugs, violence, or homosexuality. People use drugs mostly becasue have the need to get something off their mind mostley created by family issues, which continue to grow by leaps and bounds by people being abused which is all something that is created by the stress of everyday life. Times have changed and we can't withhold that same innocence that we used to have.
ReplyDeleteI was reading on yahoo news just looking around and I read an article about Obama and his health care plans to have bills passing before the August recess. He is trying to insist that this time is different, what do you think?
ReplyDelete-Kelly
heres what I was reading
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090721/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_health_care_overhaul
Going back to the topic on gay marriage. Gay marriage has always been such a controversial subject and I can see why. Many people who go to church and who learn the word of God will know that it is unnatural for anybody but a man and a woman to have a sexual relationship because it's how God made it. He made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. On the other hand, many people who do NOT go to church see differently and believe it contradicts our natural rights and freedoms. Now I'm not saying that ALL people who go to church believe that, there are still many others who are possibly torn on the subject because just naturally we would most likely think that denying a couple of their relationship with one-another whether they are two males, two females, or a male and a female would just be ridiculous without and potent reason. On the other hand, many will bring up that the bible was in fact made to enforce the law and to make it easier to follow and abide by. But I am one of those people who is torn on the subject, I'm still not sure what to think because I go to church and learn the word of God but I believe it is really immoral to deny a couple their partnership but I also remember that same sex couples are able to be together without a trial they are just unable to get married and have the same priveleges as a married couple which is still tough in the long run.
ReplyDeleteAshley this is in response to your gay marriage question. I go to church. I believe in God. I read the Bible. I support gay marriage. This country was founded on the belief of seperating church and state. Having a law that forbids two people who love eachother from getting married because the Bible says it is wrong goes totally against traditional American ideals. This country was also formed so that each individual had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. By forbidding same sex couples to marry we are denying them liberty and happiness. I feel that people can believe whatever they want and do whatever they want as long as they don't cause anyone else harm in the process. Same sex marraige doesn't hurt anyone. I am sure you can argue that it offends people's religious veiews and can hurt them in that way, however in a country of hundreds of religions we can't cater to everyone. If you don't believe in same sex marriage that is fine, just don't choose it for yourself. However, you can't make that decision for other people.No matter what
ReplyDeleteyou personally believe is right or wrong you can not control who someone falls in love with.
-Emily Hentschke
Hentschke brings up a strong argument on gay marriage that exposes the main issue with gay rights...Tolerance. Tolerance also plays a key role in the Iranian protests. Iranian officials are continuously attempting to silence their people. Remarkable audio and video footage is proving to the world the violence and harassment the people endure as they gather to demonstrate. With the arrival of the militia and police, comes an increased amount of aggressive tactics being used against the citizens. The police are authorized to use tear gas and other methods to disperse crowds. The protests often end with an ever increasing number of missing Iranian citizens. With no official records, numbers of the missing are rough. Iranian officials have announced an official warning advising the people " Be careful what you say in public."
ReplyDeleteClair and I recently went to a conference in Tennessee and were confronted with a problem that had never crossed our minds... So here's the thought.... think about the clothes you wear. Do you know who made the shirt? Do you know who processed the fabric? and do you know who picked the cotton in the fields to make the clothes you wear each day? Modern Day Slavery is something most people don't think exists anymore but the statistics prove otherwise. Did you know that children in India cost less than cattle and over 2.2 million children are sold into slavery each year! Currently there are around 27 to 30 million slaves! Whether it's domestic slavery, sex trafficking, or labor...it still exists.
ReplyDeleteThe relevance of sex trafficking in other cultures was really surprising to Natalie and I. Human sex trafficking comprises the fastest growing criminal industry in the world based on recruitment, harboring, and transportation of people solely for the purpose of exploitation. The term sex trafficking includes prostitution, pornography, bride trafficking, and the commercial sexual abuse of children. And one of the most shocking statistics that we heard was that there is an estimated 200.000 American children who are at high risk for trafficking into the sex industry. For more information visit www.freetheslaves.net. The question that we are asking is, “What do you think you can do in order to help aid this growing crisis?”.
ReplyDeleteOk guys, so I was reading the newspaper today and I read one article on the developments in California's State budget and then I read another article on the federals positions on schools. Now with California's State budget they want to cut money for all schools including elementary, high schools, community colleges, state colleges, and universities. My question is how do you feel about this since after all at the end of the year I don't know how many new that our school ran out of money and could hardly afford paper? I remember being a TA and having my teacher that I was TAing for having a secret stash of paper just to be able to print their finals. So with an even bigger budget cut how is D.O. going to even get by this year? But then at the same time as I was reading about the federal position on schools they feel that we aren't doing well enough and that we still need to improve our testing scores. David Sanchez president of the California Teachers Association made a valid point saying "reading scores have gone up and math scores have gone up. It's getting more challenging theses days, asking us to do more with less". So the country wants to give us less money but expect more out of us with testing. But at the same time we as students today learn a lot more than our parents even covered. As I got up to Algebra 2 and trig/ pre-calc I could no longer go to my parents to ask them for help, because they never even covered that in high school. High officials expect much more out of us than they would have 10 even 20 years ago. So i just wanted to see what you're guys opinion is; let me know!
ReplyDeleteWell personally at our age now, I think we are limited in what we can do. However, because many people don't know very much about this topic we could enlighten them by producing videos or holding assemblies that explain what is going on and then collect donations to help the cause. It seems like such a small thing to do because it doesn't rescue anyone quickly or solve the problem, but I am sure it would help a great deal just to inform people and raise funds to support the situation.
ReplyDelete~Gennavieve
Creating awareness about the issue of sex trafficking would be a start, seeing how the media tends to focus on current politics and whatnot. The media doesn't show issues dealing with sex and slaves, so it's up the public to take action and get the word out. In regards to slaves in other counties, the freetheslaves.net has links to repost it on facebook, myspace, etc, to show other people. This is a huge issue, and it's sad that more people aren't aware of it. Although we can't really control what another country does, people do have the power to make an impact, whether it be big or small.
ReplyDeleteWith Lauren's school post, taking money from schools is the last thing we should do. I remember my elementary school gave out extra credit if you brought in a tissue boxes or other classroom supplies, seeing how the school couldn't even afford to get those. If you take away money from schools, then classroom sizes get bigger, and ultimately takes away the supplies needed for a good education.
ReplyDeleteI read an article where US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, is working on rewarding some states up to 4 billion dollars for education purposes. At least there are people working on this issue, with plans to make change.
For gay marriage, I agree with a lot of Emily's points. I've noticed that a lot of people who were against gay marriage were of a certain religon, so that probably influenced there decision, but the separation of church and state should have destroyed that. Allowing gay marriage will only make the country a happier place,overall, which I think is essential in a time like now.
ReplyDeleteIt's a simple wedding, that's it.
It won't effect anyone negatively. For the people who voted yes on prop 8, I wonder if their decision would have been different if they had a gay son or daughter, because I highly doubt they would choose for their son or duaghter not to be able to get married.
Here's an article discussing how the U.S. Army is trying to help modernize Afghan farms depsite it being a war zone, with security plans need a week prior a visit to one single farm. Should the US be helping this country, even though it puts American lives at risk?
ReplyDeleteIs it worth it?
thttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-afghan-farmers26-2009jul26,0,1898417.story
On Gay marriage. The point about religion influencing peoples choices. Well of course thats a belief system its how anyone makes decisions by what they beleive in. another problem with legalizing gay marriage is that if it does become legal it would be discrimination for a church to turn down a gay couple that want to get married. Which then means they can get sued which in todays country is a pretty safe bet they would. Why do they need to be married anyway, whats wrong with just having a different name but the same benefits? After all marriage is usually defined as a religous ceremony, and are'nt they trying to get away from religion?
ReplyDeleteYou know Keith, I think most gays would be fine to have marriage defined under a different name. I think mostly what they want are the benefits and having a definitive promise to one another like a man and women are granted in marriage. And its not that gays want nothing to do with religion, my cousin is gay but he still has catholic beliefs, so it's more that the church is probably pushing them away. And I understand what your saying about the whole suing process, which I agree that Americans are not responsible and will do anything to get their way. But gays would have other places to turn to like the state to get married other than just churches.
ReplyDeleteOff of what Keith said, marriage is a religious ceremony. It's sealing a sacred covenant before God and the ones you love. Gay marriage goes agains most religions and since marriage is defined as religious than gay people shouldn't be a part of it. How can you maintain separation of church and state if by legalizing gay marriage the church is forced to marry gay couples or suffer legal action?
ReplyDelete~Gennavieve
I'm respondigng to Lauren's topic about the government cutting school costs even further. I think this is absoulutly ludicrous, California's education budget is already the smallest budget of every single state's, and I was also a TA last term and the last few weeks of school I was scraping by to get copies made. I feel like there is a better place to cut the budget than in schools, these schools are teaching our future child who will control the world one day. Sure we are in hard economic times now, but imagine what the fine state of California will become if students are unable to learn as much because one teacher has to have 50 students in a classroom, and virtually no one on one student time. I really hope that the dock of money in California's school will not effect the future.
ReplyDelete-Emily W.
On Gennavieve's comment about gay marriage. I have a friend whose mom is gay and has a partern. They got married last year in the alloted time that allowed gay marriage in CA. It was all through the state and had nothing to do with a church bringing them together. I don't think many gay couples would want to force a church to marry them just to be married. It would all depend on the belief system of the person. Like my friend's mom, she just wanted to be able to have a commitment and the same rights as any other couple. I can see how it can be argued that churches could be sued but why would gays sue if they could be married through the state?
ReplyDelete-Kelly
On gay marriage, I saw on a tv show that a gay couple just wanted the same rights. In this gay couple, one of the men was slowly using the ability to walk, and he wanted to be on the same medical insurance as his partner, but he wasn't allowed since they weren't technically married. The mom of the ill one said, "Reminds me when a few marriages of a different race was illegal. And these guys' marriage is way better than a lot of straight marriages, including mine."
ReplyDeleteSo it just comes down to the same rights and equality. Plus, marriage isn't always a religous ceremony. My mom got remarried a few years ago, and she or her husband isn't of a certain religon.
On Kelly's comment about why would people sue churches. Its simple the world is full of jerks who like to use others to get their way. Some of these people want to see religion out of the U.S. and they wouldn't mind stooping as low as to use gay marriage to meet their own goal.
ReplyDeleteAbout cutting school funding I think that is unacceptable. I was hanging out with a German college student awhile ago. Apparently for their geography in middle school they must learn almost all the country's in the world and three major cities in each. For some countrys like America for example they need to learn every state/province and three major cities in each. Personally I think unions should be the ones to take a hit. For example in Sacramento when firemen respond to a 911 medical emergency there are 4 men to a truck. Only one of those perfoms the medical precedures and then the other three just stand around. Plus don't forget the ambulance that responds to. I know in Roseville there are only 3 to a truck so it does work.
Responding to Tommy's comment, it is evident that gay marriage is indeed a "touchy" topic. Marriage is meant to be between a couple who dearly love each other. I see obvious reasons why many men and women think that same-sex marriage is unethical and immoral; however, no man or woman has the right to dictate the lives of others. In a life ran by tyrany, we lose free will and the American Dream is practically erased. In conclusion, marriage will never always be between two happy people. Whether there are both a man and woman present, or two men, or two women. We all must persue whatever makes us happy.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with Ryan! America is based on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Don't tell me that each of us doesn't desire to find the love of our life as part of our search for happiness. We all do, and so do gays! By not letting gays join together we stand in the way of people pursueing the American ideal.
ReplyDeleteMarriage is something that we have all grown up with and tought to look forward to. Girls, how many of you have thought about where you want to get married, what your dress will look like, what kind of activities will be at the reception, or what color scheme it will have? All of us have thought about it at some point! Marriage is something that is drilled into our heads. Think of all the fairy tale stories. Don't they all end with Prince Charming sweeping the princess off her feet and marring her. And as children we idolized these princesses and all wanted our price charming to come sweep us off our feet too! We've all been tought that when you really love someone you get married, and I'm sure gays want to take that same step.
Hi everyone. Hope all is well with you guys. On the topic of gay marriage I believe that homosexuals should have equal rights but not marriage. This may sound like a contradictory statement but to me it is the best way to go about the issue. The reason being is to allow gay marriage would be to change the very definition of marriage itself. However since it is only right to grant homosexuals equal rights I feel that civil unions or domestic partnership are the best ways to do so. This would maintain the sacred definition of marriage while allowing gay unions.
ReplyDeleteI was reading an article in the International Herald Tribune about the European Union’s controversy with farm subsidies. This aid/relief program was originally created in the 1960s to increase the food supply and help farm communities that were recuperating from the devastation of World War II. Their plan was to increase food production that would simultaneously support the traditional farmers. But since then the system has evolved to become something that just barely parallels their original motives. In past years the E.U. has distributed over €50 billion [$71 billion] in farm subsidies, but some of this “aid” has benefitted companies that aren’t related to the farming industry at all. In fact, the guidelines to qualifying for these grants are surprisingly slack; money could flow to number of development objectives: organic farming, farm tourism, infrastructure, renewable energy products and rural businesses. So major commercial industries have been taking advantage of the system by applying for qualification through export refunds- government rebates that pay the difference between the European price of their commodity and the lower world market price- such as “Adris Roma”, a construction company that justifies their need for subsidies with constructing roads in rural areas, “Groupe Doux” a chicken producer that outsources raising chicks to contract breeders, and even cruise lines like “Ligabue” receive export subsidies for sugar and dairy creamer packages that are “exported” out of Europe into passengers’ stomachs. Because of these rebates from the government that the headlining industries dig for, global trade is powerfully affected and poor farmers’ incomes are undercut outside of Europe.
ReplyDeleteSome economists argue that environmental projects like the rural road building and supporting the chicken, sugar, and brandy industries boost the rural economy because these major companies buy their products from them; ultimately, creating a trickling down effect. But others argue that this just opens up a tunnel for the elite (including the queen of England) to accumulate more unneeded money that directly interferes with the money that the farmers should be receiving. Personally, I’ve always been a fan of the little guy; supporting the underdog farmers that don’t get nearly as much subsidizing money as the elite do. But in this case I believe there should be a healthy balance between the two. By allowing the construction companies to use this money to build roads in rural areas, it would benefit the farmers transportation wise; but at the same time, the program is altering into a new program and giving money to the big-guys who don’t need it. I want to know what you guys think.
-Bri Holt
Referring back to Gabe’s post about gay marriage…
ReplyDeleteAlthough if I were 18 when we were voting on Prop 8 I would have voted no, I do believe that all humans have the right to love whoever they want to love. It’s a natural born right for us to have the liberty of self-enrichment and self-indulgence of having what makes us happy. Prop 8 is a very touchy and controversial issue only because it doesn’t come down to our liberties and freedoms, but to what moral obligations we belong to- to what we believe. What we believe in is influenced by so many different experiences and outside forces that there isn’t a possible way that each of us could feel exactly as the other does. That’s why it would still be incredibly hard for the gays of today to have the same liberties as the straights. There would still be that social awkwardness and outcast that the homophobic/conservative/sexist people would still cast out onto society.
History follows patterns, and this I revolution of gay marriage becoming legal would follow the history of the enslaved African Americans. Even after they were set free there were still the black codes and racist people. We still have extreme racists in our world today. Even though enslaved African Americans isn’t as morally controversial as two men or two women getting married is, it is still a controversial issue that will possibly never go away. In my opinion, there isn’t a way to solve the problem because there won’t be a truce that is accepted by all people involved.
-Bri Holt
Recently I was at my great grandma's house and she was talking to me about the war. I kind of laughed to myself because this is a topic she never fails to bring up, but my laughter was stopped short when she told me that July is being considered the deadliest month with the death toll brought to 40 US troups killed. This may seem like a small amount but when you know people fighting in the war, the same war that's been going on for more years than expected, it becomes a subject close to the heart. I want to know what you guys think of what's happening. Should the US change our course of action? Should we keep the troups in? Take them out?
ReplyDeleteHey everybody :)
ReplyDeleteIn the response to the discussion on gay marriage I believe homosexuals should be granted the right to marry. At first I was against gay marriage because I believed marriage should be between a man and a woman and that was it.
However, my views have changed. Homosexuals don't decide they are homosexuals, just like all straight people thats the way they were born, like it or not. Even though it's tough for some poeple in our society to accept this, just like everything else that was once scrutinized it's going to take time.
Women didn't used to have the rights that they have today and when they started being granted them, no one was used to it at first.
In the same way, African Americans had to fight for their rights and even today there are still people out there who are racist but America has come a long way.
By prohibiting gays to marry, homosexuals aren't going to disappear. They will always be in our society and allowing them to marry is a right I think they are entitled to, being citizens of America.
To go back to Clair's question of sex trafficking, I was watching this special on the msnbc news channel about teens and sex trafficking that was happening right here in the U.S., and they told this horrid story of a girl in America. She got pulled into this where she unwillingly was forced to go down into a basement of a few guys at her school (who were running this as a business), where a dozen men were waiting for her. She was then brought back to that basement many times, along with a few other homes.
ReplyDeleteTo skip the graphic details, her teachers turned a blind eye as her grades dropped from B's to D's, and it finally took a janitor who saw one of the guys shove the girl to a locker, spit on her, and then walk away laughing, to finally do something. The girl didnt want to tell her parents, because she was ashamed of the situation, and was highly religous as well, where she felt like she sinned, despite it being unnintentional. There's a lot of help out there for teens already, whether it be help hotlines, help websites, or something similar. I'm trying to think of other ways to help the situation, but since it's such an underground phenomenon, it's hard to do anything. When a teen is abused like that, they usual feel ashamed and embarresed and end up not wanting to talk about it, so perhaps the school can have an assembly or something and go over these issues, and make it explicitly clear that if anyone is ever thrust into a situation like that, they need to find help immediatly. They should be reminded over and over again that it's not the teens fault for what's happening/happened.
Hey guys so I was watching the news about the whole, “universal health care or not” issue and about the bill Obama is trying to pass.
ReplyDeleteAt first I thought that universal health care was a fantastic idea, it sounds amazing. But after hearing some different things I changed my mind. America is known worldwide for having amazing doctors and medical resources. Because of this, many people from other countries travel here in order to get better healthcare than they would in their own countries, (more than 80,000 are currently on a waiting list for United States Hospitals) The reason we have such amazing resources is because out non-universal healthcare system makes it so medical companies make a profit.
Companies obviously want more profit and therefore they want to have the newest and best machines and best doctors. Even though profit is the primary driving force the result is still that we have great resources. What do you think?
ope.. and "me" is Christen Lehmann.. I don't know if that's just showing up on my computer or what.. but yeah.
ReplyDeleteSo about health care: Apparently this is Obama's main priority right now and I've read several times that it's his "Waterloo" in the sense of it's failure to be passed would mean his (metaphorical) "end." Anyways, I have no doubt that universal health care would do wonders for many. But Obama is now saying that throwing billions into this health care system will stimulate the economy, aiding the horrible recession. Not quite sure how to figure that one because I don't see how adding to our atrocious debt will help us in the end. Obama believes that "we have been able to pull our economy back from the brink" but is that true? I keep reading articles from economists that venture to say we're burrying ourselves deeper. My family has health insurance and is paying great amounts to keep it so I understand the frustration but is Obama's program economically beneficial or only to aid those worse off? -Karla
ReplyDeleteAnd about the budget cuts on education: Maybe it's just me but California's $26 billion dollar debt is an embarrassment. I've been out of state this summer and many of the people I talk to agree that they're states aren't prestine but they hear so much about California's economic debacle. With us all going off to college next year, tuition is a major concern as well as choosing the right college. Being in school, we see first hand the effects it has: running out of paper, less funding for academic programs, favorite faculty members getting laid off, classrooms being stuffed full to milk the teachers of their worth. None of which are particularly exciting to consider but in my opinion its a small sacrifice to us-where others are sacrificing much more (like their jobs!)-if it digs us out of debt. We are expected to know more now than our parents did, but we also have much better resources for attaining it. Our education is incomparable to other countries where illiteracy is huge. We can survive the cuts, and if they prove effective it won't be long. I think there are far worse things that could be cut.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Gabe's post about the whole gay marriage situation. I do not think that gays should be giving the same title of "marriage". I agree with Gabe in the fact that it would be ultimately changing the actual definition of marriage. I do in fact believe that gays should be given the same rights as any other marriage couple. Saying this, civil unions or domestic partnerships should be the titles available for gays. I have absolutely nothing against gay people...i am just saying that the word "marriage" and the definition that it has upheld forever, should be kept the same and not altered.
ReplyDelete-Emily Mattevi
I also agree with Christen's post in that i believe we should stick with our non-universal health care system. Instead of spending the money to completely change our health care system, we should focus on improving the current system. Our system gives people the choice on whether or not they would like health care insurance or not. Or on the other side of this argument, do you think that it truly is the governments responsibility to provide health care for everyone? Your thoughts?
ReplyDelete-Emily Mattevi
Okay guys...another current issue that is being debated...the legalization of marijuana!After listening to several debates about the legalization of marijuana several different viewpoints have come about. Some people say that marijuana should be legal because medical marijuana could be used and essentially help relax people who are ill with long term disease or some of that sort. Others think it should be legal because of the fact that drinking is legal and hundreds of thousands of people have died from that, compared to absolutely no records of people dieing from marijuana use.
ReplyDeleteThere are also things to talk about on the negative side of this argument. For one people are worried that pretty soon everyone is going to be walking around stoned out of their minds and it would come just as common as smoking a cigarette. It could be a safety hazard while driving, around schools, and for the mental health of the person? (there are tons of things to debate and bring about on this topic...these are just a few)
Personally, I am not strongly persuaded one way or another. I find arguments on both side of the spectrum to be correct. Is there a way to legalize marijuana and regulate it in a way that it can only be used in the privacy of your home? What are your thoughts about the legalization of marijuana?
-Emily Mattevi
In responce to Emily's post, I believe marijuana should not be legalized. Allowing people to poison their bodies is not only wrong, but it will have many effects on our country. Health care would take a major hit if marijuana was legalized. The more wide spread marijuana becomes, overdoses and health problems will rise. Hospitals would have a hard time handling these patients as well as the regular patients under this changing economy. The second issue I have with marijuna is the harm it could do to all of our citizens. There is no way to police where people would take the drug and driving under the influence could harm many people. Also by allowing marijuana will be be opening the floodgates of people trying to get more harmful drugs legalized as well. I know it will be used whether it is legal or not, but it is just not something I want to be part of our culture.
ReplyDelete-Emily Hentschke
I read a very interesting article about assisted suicide in Britian. Currently in that country if you assist in the suicide of someone you could face 14 years in prison. Because of this law many citizens seeking an end to their life mearly hop over the border with a loved one to an assisted suicide clinic in Switzerland. So far none of the people who have transported someone to the clinic have been prosecuted, but that is all about to change. British law now forbids you from leaving the country to aid with suicide, with the penalty still being the 14 years in prison. What do you think? If someone chooses to die should they be allowed to like in Switzerland, or should the law prevent it like in Britain?
ReplyDeleteThe assisted suicide commment is from Emily Hentschke.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Emily's assisted suicide comment...
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think Britain is completely taking the wrong avenue in fixing this problem. I don't think anyone of those people who have been put behind bars for assisting a suicide attempt would regret doing it. The average person would not just say to themselves 'I think I'll help my significant other/friend commit suicide today', it just doesn't make sense. Most people I’m sure would try to talk the troubled friend out of taking their life, maybe try to get them some professional help. And if in the end they decide that maybe their troubled friend is too far gone, and can’t be helped anymore, they could only help them by taking them out of their misery. Why would a threat of 14 years in prison make them regret a sacrifice I’m sure they didn’t want to give? How is that punishment? They already lost someone they love; I would think that for them so see professional help or have any sort of help would be more effective then having them mourn in a jail cell.
I’m just saying most people would think long and hard about this before they made that rash decision.
I don’t know if any of you girls have read My Sister’s Keeper (not the movie, but the book) but this “assisted suicide” reminds me of the thought process that the main character Anna goes through. Her sister dying of leukemia asks her to basically not to medically help her anymore so she can stop fighting and die. If any of you have read the book, I think you would all agree with me that Anna wouldn’t have taken back anything she did for her sister, because if ultimately helped her in the end.
So I’m thinking maybe Britain should take a different approach to the situation, because it’s obviously not working if people are going over the boarder to die there instead.
- Bri Holt
WEll on Emily's comment on assisted suicide, i was just wondering if this clinic in switzerland was assisted suicide like as in medical doctors and the euthenasha or if it is a friend/ loved one like bri said in helping them end the others life? becasue those are both different things.
ReplyDeleteAnd on the topic of legalizing majijuana some food for thought is to remember that with such economic trouble that california is in, by legaling the sale of it, claifornia would gain a great about of income off a tax that would be put on it. I'm not saying that we should legalize or anything, but just remember that that is one way to definatley help out in our economic crisis.
Another comment on the education cuts is that state colleges next year won't be accepting appkuications in the spring term...only in the fall, which inturn is going to reduce the income of the colleges, but they have no choice becasue they dont have the classes that the students need.
-Lauren Dillier
Lauren this is to answer your assisted suicide question. The article said that it was an assisted suicide medical clinic in Switzerland, but the loved ones who accompanied people to that clinic would now face jail time.
ReplyDelete-Emily Hentschke
I completely agree with Lauren's comment on the positive economic aspects of legalizing marijuana. I understand that there could be alot of negative repercussions like Emily said but I can't help but compare the situation to the prohibition times. When alcohol was banned, the "moonshine" business and mobs came out full force. I think to some people, marijuana's appeal is because it's illegal. We have driving and drinking restrictions for alcohol; adaquate restrictions could be placed on marijuana if only to allow medical use. In legalizing marijuana it could in fact help the economy and I don't honestly think it would cause that much of an increase in use. Tobacco is similarly harmful and just because it's legal doesn't mean every 18 yr old chews/smokes. I think the main problem is there isn't an easy breathalizer test for being high like there is being drunk so it's harder to restrict.
ReplyDeleteOn assisted suicide, I'm fully with bri because of the tremendous psychological damage of suicide. Having such restraining laws (14 yrs!) are probably some of the reasons some people consider suicide. I can't imagine the threat of jail worrying someone who wants to help a deeply troubled love one when it all boils down. -Karla Robinson
On the topic of legalizing marijuana, I agree that there are legitamate arguments on both sides. As Lauren and Karla said, it is probable that the legalization would boost the economy but we have to wonder how long it will last. If marijuana becomes legal the profit margin would likely decrease because it will be grown everywhere and become easily accessible. After a while, wouldn't the money made on taxes be a less significant number?
ReplyDeleteAnother thing to think about is whether or not marijuana is a gateway drug. After someone has smoked marijuana do they get bored of it and crave a different kind of high, causing them to move onto more harmful drugs? I found, while doing research that people are more likely to try other drugs after having first smoked marijuana. It seems to me that in the end legalizing marijuana would do more harm than good.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJoe Klein from Time Magazine has a proposition. Legalize marijuana at a certain age. He believes eighty would be ideal, and preferably not only marijuana but all drugs. In exchange however these eighty year olds will surrender driver’s licenses. Klein estimates that these drugs will be used mainly for medical purposes, helping to ease the aches and pain of time. After all, pot is California's biggest cash crop. It annually rakes in about $14 billion in sales. The legalization of marijuana could bring in about $1.3 billion a year, a much needed influx of money. However, when the demand of marijuana goes up, will it create a demand in harder drugs as well? How will America deal with the potential of an increase in drug trafficking?
ReplyDeleteAnne-Elise Duss
Marijuana actually only serves a few medical purposes; some of which would be the treatment of glaucoma patients to reduce pressure in the eye and also the treatment of cancer patients to either give them an appetite or help ease the vomiting that comes with chemotherapy. As for aches and pains it may not do much other than give users an outlet to escape reality. There have been countless tests, experiments, and observations on marijuana being a gateway drug and all point to an undeliable yes. Most drugs have been illegal for a long time and our society has functioned perfectly without them so why make it legal now? There are plenty of other ways to make money other than the legalization of a drug. Also, the reprocussions of lealizing a harmful drug could cost the government more money than what it makes. I don't think America should be focusing on legalzing a drug that can break down the foundation that our nation was built upon, but instead focus on the much bigger issues facing our country today.
ReplyDeleteIf marijuana was legalized, yes it could help our economic standings but did anyone take the time to think how it could affect our jobs. Their are a lot of jobs based on punishment for those who break the law and buy and sell pot. What happens to them if marijuana is legalized? it's like a domino effect on what happens to the economy. Some of it is good and some of it isn't. Also without a good way to test people who are driving under the influence of drugs, there is not a good way to regulate it. We have already been told the affects of drinking and driving with every 15 minutes. Do we really want a repeat of something like that with marijuana. I agree with Natalie that we should be focusing our time on bigger issues than legalizing drugs.
ReplyDelete-Kelly Scanlon
I read a somewhat surprising article today. With all of the world issues of today, the U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon declared the largest challenge we face as humans is the changing climate. He stated that we have less then ten years to stop the rise in greenhous gas, or we will suffer immense consequences. There will be a U.N. summit in New York on September 22 to discuss the issue of climate change. Ban acknowledges that there are many other challenges facing the world now, but he feels like the climate is the most urgent and catastrpohic. If the U.N. Secretary General is changing world focus, should the United States put the environment at top priority as well?
ReplyDelete-Emily Hentschke
Michael Jackson
ReplyDeleteWhy is it when someone famous dies we all go crazy and focus all our attention on that one person? The whole world went crazy when Michael Jackson died, and it was like the news and everyone forgot about the other problems in the world that are WAY more important then one mans death. I'm not just singling out Michael, he is just the most recent celebrity to die and it just made me think how backwards out culture is. The whole time he was alive we just wanted to know all the bad things he did and were entertained by that. However now that he is dead we want to praise him and remember him for all the music he made. It just really sad that that is how our society is and how we can so easily forget about the bigger issues at hand. Also how we have to wait for someone to die before we can think of the good things they did, by going overboard and practically worshiping and idolizing them, when that isn't right either. i think our culture has just continued to get worse if we don't do anything it will only further brainwash us into thinking things like death are just a reason to idolize people.
in responce to Emily Hentschke about the climate being the most imporstant issue. Personaly i think that is so far from the most important. If the world is going to be destroyed or we are all going to die soon because of the climate, then we should be trying to save people and bring them to Christ. to me and many other Christians that is the most important
ReplyDeleteWALMART! Ok so we all know walmart is the biggest retalier in the world, and a lot of you guys took Lundburgs us history class so you know about walmart but i just wanted to say that i think that the only way to change how walmart is taking over is if everyone and i mean everyone starts buying american made products. But its almost impossible for everyone to do that becasue with Chinese products so cheep there is no comparison to the price of American products. Its just a fact that because of the laws we have for workers about min wage we just can not sell products for the same price that China would. So it creates a sort of Catch 22 because a lot of people i beleive want to buy american products and like living in america but they pay for the cheeper china made products because they simply cant afford anything more expensive. And with todays economy i dont see walmart going away any time soon.
ReplyDeleteok in regards to gay marriage i just want to point out that our counrty was founded upon the religion of Christianity. Its only because of our culture that we are now bringing up gays. 20 years ago this was a very non issue but not anymore, everyday our culture is changing and not for the better. of course gay marrigae will eventually be passed and other minortiy couples will rise up and do the same thing. im not afraid to say it, our world is a messed up place and it needs to change
ReplyDeleteIn response to Emily's post:
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is trying to get some attention with an ignorant comment like that. The climate being the most important thing? Coming before our soldiers being captured in the Middle East? Coming before the millions of unemployed? Coming before our international economic crisis? There are certain things that need to be resolved ASAP, & "global warming" or "climate change" is not one of them.
-Lynda Davis
Quotes taken from Yahoo! World News:
ReplyDelete"U.S. refineries bought millions of dollars worth of oil stolen from Mexican government pipelines and smuggled across the border, the U.S. Justice Department told The Associated Press — illegal operations now led by Mexican drug cartels expanding their reach."
"U.S. Homeland Security department is scheduled to return $2.4 million to Mexico's tax administration, the first batch of money seized during a binational investigation into smuggled oil that authorities expect to lead to more arrests and seizures."
We are already in quite an economic cucumber (pickles are gross) on our own here in the U.S. as is, so why do we continue to trade with & associate ourselves with a country who is only contributing to this fiscal crisis?
If the Mexican gov't cannot take control over their "drug lords", we can't take the risk of continuing trade with them, which could, essentially, increase our debt.
Granted their are certain things (crops, more than anything) that would be pricier to get imported from elsewhere, but there are plenty more "safe" countries that bare oil. How about our own? However that's another controversial issue. :)
Thoughts? Comments?
-Lynda Davis
In response to Jessica's post:
ReplyDeleteI didn't have Lundberg for US, so I'm not well informed on "Walmart taking over".
Walmart invests & operates in China AND South America, however, is an American public corporation. It greatly benefits the US; our economy, even! So what is the issue?
-Lynda Davis
To Lynda, it’s the fact that Wal-Mart is not based in America, We are benefiting China but not in a good way. Because the workers get paid extremely low and have bad working conditions. And Wal-Mart loves it because in America we cant pay employees low wages or have them work in bad conditions. America has done the right thing in giving rights to workers and China should be doing the same but their government is messed up and America is just feeding off of it. And it started when Wal-Mart went to China. Now almost every manufacture is in china or outsourced to another location where they don’t have to pay well or give benefits. This also creates another problem because now people in America can’t open businesses because they can’t compete with the low prices of Wal-Mart and other companies that have outsourced so then they have to outsource and pretty soon nothing is made in the US anymore.
ReplyDeleteHey guys! I read a story CNN was running about the worlds population reaching seven billion by 2011. While a lot of this growth is predicted to be taking place in poorer developing countries it will still effect the United States. It will effect the US and Canada half through immigration. With immigration already a hot button topic and the worlds resources dwindling how do you think America will brace for such a continuous infiltration of people.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the wall mart issue. I had Lundberg last term and I am somewhat informed on the issue. From what I have learned I agree with what Jessica is saying about America taking advantage of the developing country China. I don't think it is right for us as Americans to benefit from what is a poor civil rights situation in China. However, with our economy in the position it is in and people trying to stretch a dollar more than ever I don't think it is fair to say it is not ok for the average Joe to shop wall marts low prices. Personally I think it is an all around bad situation caused by poor government regulation and crooked politics.
ReplyDeleteForeclosures rise 7 percent in July from June! Every time I drive through a neighborhood it seems that I always see houses being sold or (forced to sell) because the owners couldn’t pay and had to foreclose. This means these people had to get rid of their homes and give it to the bank because they couldn’t keep paying for it. It’s horrible! Now know there are many reasons as to why people can’t afford their houses anymore but in today’s economy it’s becoming worse. And I feel that it is because our culture has seemed to make it ok to just keep spending money when in reality WE DON’T HAVE ANY. But people just think things will get better and that they won’t lose their job and that with credit and so many buy now and pay later plans, people just keep on buying. Its so messed up, everyone just wants more more more and instant satisfaction no matter what. Lets face it we are the most greedy nation. WE take money from everyone else and think its ok because we are like the “police of the world” and everyone has to respect that. But America needs to go back to basics and just live within its means. If we just continue to keep buying and swiping that card, there is no way for our economy to rebuild itself.
ReplyDeleteGay Marriage:
ReplyDeleteToday we are a society that is more open than we ever really have been in the past. We finally allow people such as gay to be able to open themselves up, although they still are tortured by societies cruel demands, there are some who allow them to finally show their true colors. Gays, are not forcing their way of life upon any of us. They just want to be happy and be able to be accepted for who they are. Why do some of us still feel like we can control their happiness? Why can't we just accept them for who they are? We are all different and we should be able to embrace of differences rather than punish those for being different. The people who are gay are still the exact same people. The only difference is that they are into the people of the same gender. As I was participating in WINGS, we were talking about how once you hear someones story and their background, it's hard not to like a person or at least understand why they maybe act a certain way. I think if many of us heard their stories and heard how passionate they are about the people they love, it would be hard for us to put something in their way to keep them from being together. Another thing is that today, sure part of our world are messed up, but there is a lot more going on now than there ever has been. Since the 50's our population has easily doubled, and with that can come stress and economic strain which can result in troubles at home or sexual abuse, just to name a few. These ways of acting out change all of us and how we act and live our lives. You can't expect society to stay the same as it's always been. Think of how each of our decades is stereotyped: 1950's- innocent and censored, 1960's- demonstrations and rebellion, 1970's- drugs, sex, and rock and roll and so on. Every decade is different from the last. Now as crappy as things may seem now, I feel that today we embrace one of our founding ideals of freedom more than ever and we should rejoice at the idea of accepting everyone including gays.
Foreclosure:People were not foreclosed because they bought on credit. Credit doesn't have anything to with them losing their homes. The blame is on the banks. The banks lent out money to these people to allow them to purchase houses to live in and give them a percentage and time frame in which they are to pay them back. The issue is that the Federal bank gives money to the little banks and they can control how much comes in and how much goes out all by a percentage in which the little banks have to pay the federal bank back. The federal bank needed more money and recalled money from the little banks. The little banks didn't have the money because they lent it out to people to buy houses for themselves. The little banks rose their percentage for the people to pay them back. The people already previously agreed on a percentage to pay the bank,and it was something they could manage. But when the banks double their percentage to pay back, many people couldn't afford the rising cost. So the issue is that many people bought houses when they shouldn't have bought them. But we all need a place to live, so that a very hard predicament to deal with. And you also contract you're self in you're statement by talking about when dealing with Walmart you ask America to try and regulate China's government but then you say in this statement that is is wrong for America to be the police of the world.
-Lauren Dillier
hello everyone! hope your guy's summer was amazing!!!
ReplyDeleteConcerning gay marriage I agree with you Lauren and I think you put that very well.
Growing up in a Christian environment and having my parents feel very strongly about having a law against same sex marriage has made it hard for me to take this side, but its what I believe. Whether the Bible says its ok or not I believe is important, however, like Lauren said freedom is the heartbeat of this country and a gift God has given each one of us also, therefore no one has the right to dictate how one should live his/her life. The beautiful thing about this country is that we have the freedom to pursue any career we desire and have faith in any God we believe in... That freedom should NOT STOP when It comes to an individual's decision of who they choose to marry.
-Teagan Seman
In responce to Lauren, its still all about people not having that money. Little banks are being taken over because they are lending out money they DONT have. Any people are trying to take more and more loans to buy things they dont need. Its simple, if we just stop buying things we dont need out economy would be much better
ReplyDeleteWhat do you guys think about the idea from India's Health and Welfare minister that increased electricity and television usage be promoted in India to try and throttle their rapidly expanding population?
ReplyDeleteI was aware that there were dangers in the future for this country as they are already in poverty and have scarce resources but don't you think education should be promoted instead? Maybe people are simply unaware...
The thing is Jessica, if we stop buying things, then our country will become in huge jeopardy. Think about what would happen to all those jobs if people stopped buying computers. The people who fix, make, and sell them would all lose their jobs. And what about cell phones? Sure we don't need that stuff but there are a lot of jobs in those fields. Our country and actually the entire world is based off of borrowing and lending. We no longer have enough gold or silver to back up all the money in the world. If we stop buying things our whole economy will crash and we'll be nowhere.
ReplyDelete-Lauren Dillier
I agree with Jessica about how crazy people have become over Michael Jackson now that he is dead. I understand looking back at his successes and commending him for being very talented, however many people had never listened to or appreciated his music until now. I think it is really sad that while someone is alive all people want to know is the latest gossip about them, and it takes their death to respect and see what the person has contributed to society.
ReplyDeleteIt would be pretty surprising to me if putting television and electricity in vast areas of India helped to control the potential population explosion. In theory it sounds like a good idea: In the evenings people will watch T.V. until late at night and then just fall asleep, never having a chance to produce children. This, however, will probably have a very minimal effect on India's population if it has any at all.
ReplyDeleteOn the forclosure/economy: I agree with lauren in that our economy is based on a lend/buy relationship. I think when our economy fails is when that relationship becomes imbalanced. It'd be nice to think if we all just started spending less our problems would be fixed but I think rather than spending less we need to spend wisely-and by wise I mean like jessica said with American products. Obviously it's not entirely convenient to do so but every little bit helps. Look up which gas stations use foreign oil and try to avoid them-at the risk of a couple more pennies a gallon. Try and support local institutions as opposed to walmart.
ReplyDeleteI do have to disagree though in terms of climate change being unimportant. I think all our foreign rivalries and unemployment problems won't matter once we pollute our earth to the point of extinction. Yes those are the pressing issues of today but there will always be "more" urgent issues. We can't sit back and wait for a calmer time when our environment requires us to take notice now. Also, politically I think uniting under the cause of climate issues could actually bring the US in closer relationships with foreign countries we struggle with. Not to seem cheesy but I don't know how many of you guys saw Watchmen. The ending is applicable I think. When the world was on the brink of nuclear war, bitter nations were able to put aside their differences to tackle a worser, greater force (Dr. Manhattan as they were led to believe). I think the environment could be the greater issue that forces us and other countries to put aside our differences.
-Karla Robinson
Hey guys well I just wanted to talk about the media and the news coverage that we are surrounded by everyday. I just went onto the CNN website and the first four things in the latest news section were about all the forest fires in California, a famous skateboarder who died from an insect bite, a drunk mom who killed 8 in a auto accident, and a fire at a wedding in Kuwait that killed dozens of women. All we ever hear on the news today is about disasters, deaths, sex or the economy. The news stations do this because they know thats what their viewers want to hear. Hearing all of that garbage just personally makes me feel like we live in such a terrible and violent country. Which isn't the case but or news would seem to say otherwise by what they make seem important and news worthy. I'm not saying that all of what they show is that but it is definitely the bulk of their show. This is why i choose to not watch the news because it makes me worry more about the times i am living in then i already am and i don't need that extra stress in my life.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both Jessica and Carly about Michael Jackson and his death. People are so crazy about him now that he is gone and worship him like he is an idol or something. Its been over a month now since his passing and yet i still see them talking about him all the time on the news. Carly I think you hit it right on the nail when you talked about how the media and tabloids and just the gossip from the public hounded him and made a mockery of him but after his passing everyone starts to look at what he has done for society. I am not saying we should not honor the dead but enough is enough! Juse let him rest in peace.
ReplyDeleteIM OUT!
Hey did you guys hear that Chicago is closed for the day. Ya they decided that over the course of the rest of the year they will take 3 furlough days off to save money. They estimate that by taking off the three days they will save around 8 million dollars. I have heard of schools and such taking furlough days off, but never full blown cities like Chicago. I just wanted to talk about this because i though it was a great idea to save money and jobs, but i just thought it was crazy that they could do that. What i did not understand though is what about like the cops and fire fighters cause they work for the government but will have to all take the day off as well. Anyways i thought that was interesting to hear.
ReplyDeleteHey this is in regards to Lauren and the video that she brought up years ago. I just watched it and that kid really creeped me out. At first James just seemed like a kid who had watched way too many war movies, but as the story unraveled it was chilling some of the things he knew that only that WWII soldier would know who was also named James. The parents through out the video looked as if they did not know their own child. I don't believe in reincarnation as well gennavieve but it was sort of interesting.
ReplyDeleteOn the topic of gay marriage, I know gays in the U.S. are treated unfairly and discriminated against but has anyone heard about what's going on in Iraq? I read on the CNN website that hundreds of gay men are be tortured and killed! The attacks, killings, and kidnappings on those suspected of homosexual conduct have intensified in the past few months and they are becoming more common in areas such as Baghdad. It is really sad that people are discriminated against at all but this is horrible!
ReplyDeleteAs most of you are aware the US is in a recession, houses are not selling, banks are not loaning, and college grads are not working. For the first time in over 25 years the unemployment rate for 20-24 year olds is above 14 percent and only 20 percent of recent college graduates finished college with more than a diploma in hand(Kansas City Star,2009). As the brother of a recent college grad i have experienced first hand what it means. My sister who graduated top of her class has moved home and is in constant of her career, having to settle for mediocre jobs just to pay bills and keep busy. So what prospects are there for college graduates who can't find work? Those who have just built up a huge debt to help them accomplish their dream which can no longer be repaid? Well I can only assume that it is the best time to stay in school and that graduate schools will be seeing an all-time high in enrollment than ever before.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYa Carly I read that same article and I just thought that was horrible!I knew that homosexuals were prosecuted and mistreated in that area but i had no idea that it was this bad. When I hear stories like this it makes me thank God that I live in a nation where I can have the freedom to have my own faith and political views without being afraid for my life. I don't just mean stories of people being killed for their sexual orientation but also for their religious beliefs and their political stances. This story further proves that obviously Iraq still needs our help because if we don't step in then this country will tear itself apart from the inside.
ReplyDeleteI was reading an article off of abc news about the cash for clunkers program. I think it is a good idea and is helping car companies get back on their feet a little bit. The numbers are hard to argue with, GM said that the sales in July were 60,000 to 70,000 units above what the company had foreseen. However with our struggling government pouring billions of dollars into it I was wondering if you guys thought it would be a beneficial program overall or just another short sighted quick fix.
ReplyDeleteJust to comment on what you guys were talking about earlier with the news coverage surrounding Michael Jackson. I think the amount of attention people are paying to every aspect of his death is absurd. Even worse most of the attention is focused on negative things in his life such as drug abuse. Even though he was one of the greatest entertainers to ever live and he captured the attention of millions with his innovation and style it is disrespectful to be dissecting his death in this manner.
ReplyDeletehey guys! hope the first few days of school have been going good.
ReplyDeleteDating back to earlier this August and what Christen was saying about the healthcare idea Obama was pushing i have to disagree with her. Yes, America has good doctors and we dont want to lose that but try living without healthcare. For seven months my family went without health insurance because we just couldnt afford it. My dad is diabetic and has heart issues. It is ridiculous how expensive everything is for him and after my mom lost her job due to the recession we could no longer afford it. He had to go without his pills for both his heart and diabetes. So with that first hand experience I can relate to the majority of people who just cant afford it but really do need medical attention. I know Obama is reconsidering this plan now but I think it would have benefitted the lower class in this slow moving economy. Some might say that those that cant afford it need to go find jobs or something like that but you try finding a job in this economy. It isnt easy and for someone to have to worry about whether a member of their family is going to make it to the next year and trying to find a job it can really add up.
I know I just posted one but I have to post another one on the Michael Jackson issue.
ReplyDeleteI think its ridiculous about the amount of attention it is recieving. Yes, his music was great and yes, he was an icon. But think back to two months ago. If someone brought up Michael Jackson their response would be something along the lines of "He's a creep". Due to his trial on the molestation of young boys he had that label. But now when you say his name people gush. I think its utterly absurd that people only like him now that he has passed away. If you were a true fan before, then thats fine. But dont become a fan just because he died. Thats not fair to his original fans and just makes you look stupid.
In regards to what Greg posted about the furlough in Chicago and its potential as an economic solution as far as saving money and jobs I understand how it could potentially save employers money but I don’t see how it would benefit the worker. Although I’m sure that there are some people who are unwilling to take the necessary pay cuts that it would take I do believe that it would help businesses and schools conserve resources and money but I don’t think that it would necessarily benefit the worker. It does however strike me as a valid idea to save money though.
ReplyDeleteSo I currently have a foreign exchange student here from York England and we were recently talking about the health care plan that is used over there. She explained to me that their policy includes a national health care plan that allows for the same general, free health care for everyone or an alternative plan that is consequently far more expensive. She told me that although she thought it was great to have cheap healthcare for everyone, the quality of public care was far less than that of the private. A newly released statistic showed that the mortality rate of countries that have used a health care plan such as this have a far greater mortality rate than those who have a more expensive plan. My question is do you think that allowing for a cheaper more accessible plan is worth dropping the general heath care standards if the US were to have a similar plan?
ReplyDeleteSo our troops pulled out of some urban areas in Iraq and all over the news today is how 95 people were killed by truck bombs. Suicide bombings happening as well. Our troops were asked to help from iraqi commanders that were onsite. Some people think that the war is a waste of our time. Some thing that we need to clean up our mess before we get out of there. Some people think we should stay and do something. So what do you think about whats going on oversees?
ReplyDeletekelly scanlon
In regards to Gregs comment on the furlong days, I think that it is potentually a good idea, but what about our education? Those days are being cut and not only effecting the workers but the strudents as well. Schools already stuff so much work into our already concise school year so it our education that is being cut short. In the world we live in today its almost impossible to get hired and have a comfortably paying job if you do not have a proper education and display clever potential. Its all at a really high price and will have some serious negative effects.
ReplyDeleteI just had my brother-in-law leave for seven months to serve in Iraq, and its a really hard thing to deal with especially hearing from the side that argues we dont need to be there in the first place. Selfishly, I would love to have that be true so he could come home. However, the reality is no one wants to be there fighting and losing honorable men...the only reason we are there is because there is a serious threat and we need to be. Thats why he went.
ReplyDeleteHey I just read this article on CNN that talked about a bill that might be passed that if it is passed it will realease about 27,000 inmates early. They say that if this bill is passed it will save our state over 525 million dollars, but if this bill is passed it could also jeopardize the public's safety. So I ask you guys; should it be passed or not?
ReplyDeleteIn regards to Greg about the inmate release I think it all depends on who they are releasing, if its people from death row then obviously I don’t want them back into the society and I doubt that the prisons would let them go anyway. If they are going to release a person im sure they have to qualify to leave but rehab and good behavior in the prison so I think that yes it could be a good idea. However there is always a shady or iffy side because people could just pretend to be better and do a lot of stupid things that could make the release ineffective.
ReplyDeleteHey so in Gov/ Econ the issue of the war in Iraq was brought up and we were thinking of new laws we should add if we redid the bill of rights. So I was thinking that there should be a more established law that only allows for America to be in another country and aid or help them for a certain amount of time. Then if plans change we can adjust to them according to what needs to be done and what can be done. That way we wont be killing more of our citizens and the other countries citizens and would help us. Especially now because of how bad our economy is and how mush money we could save by only allowing a certain amount of time in a place. Even if by the end of the time allowed we haven’t really accomplished a lot but have made some improvement but have to stop, we should do that if it has exceeded the time limit and our country is in need more then the country we are helping. In the end we have to protect our country first and help others if we have the means and the time and money.
ReplyDeleteDespite our inter-connectedness, we're now more alone than ever.. I was reading this article on MSN and it really interested me in how our society and cultre has changed. http://www.newsweek.com/id/213088
ReplyDeleteEverything today is so individual and isolated. We have everything instantaniously and and personalized and made for one person. WE make “friends” on facebook and myspace and feel that on a superficial level that is all we need. But deep down I think a lot of people in America are really lonely and sad. People don’t just go out anymore and meet other people organicaly. Unless you go to school or are invloved in a huge group of people. Now its all done on the computer and through technology. All those dating sites are made to Help a peoson meet someone, but in reality its destroying social skills and having real interaction with a person. Even with texting. Its compleatly different texting then simply talking on the phone. With text you can think about what your going to say more and plan it out or simply not reasopond. All these things just lead to insecruties and doubts when someone is faced with an actual person to talk to. People don’t know how to react and communicate effectivly because they have always been by themsevles and never had to look anyone in the eye. The way things are going with all technology and indepentent ways of comunitacting I don’t know how we can ever go back to having natural and guenine converersationas or meeting a new person.
I agree with what jessica said about how even though in todays standards we have a lot of friends because of facebook, twitter, and myspace yet on the inside we are lonely. We have to have real interaction with people face to face and not face to computer screen. I think that kids today are losing their social skills more and more because of texting and chatting online. I don't feel like many kids even talk on the phone anymore, because it is too awkward for kids to actually use their voices to communicate. Good thing for schools that forces kids to inter mingel with each other in groups. We need to step away from our computers, cell phones, iPod's, and t.v.'s and go out into the world and makes some real friends. GO BE SOCIAL TODAY!
ReplyDeleteResponding to Claire's blog on the new Healthcare plan I think we need to keep our Healthcare that we have now. Sure it would be great if everyone had health insurance, but the quality of healthcare would go way down. America has such great doctors and many people from different contries know that and are on a waiting list to get into an American hospital. This healthcare will just cover the basic stuff and patients who need any special care will have to pay out of their own pocket which will cost a small fortune. Like this will affect my family because my dad has Lime's Disease and has to go see multiple doctors and takes all of these shots and pills and what not just to help him get through the day. Our health insurance helps us pay for that but if this new healthcare passes then I don't know what we will do. Long story short, old healthcare good new healthcare not as good.
ReplyDeleteHey I was reading this article on CNN about how it is almost the end of the clunker deals and car dealerships are swamped and are selling so many cars. It is such a relief to hear that something the government did to help out the economy has actually worked. It just shows that we are starting to get out of this recession =, but obviously we still have a ways to go but it is definitly a start. This is my finally blog so I will leave you with these words," Do not ask what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country." John F. Kennedy.
ReplyDeleteWell responding to Claire and Greg's statements on health care, i agree with Greg that we need to keep this old regime. If we go to the new health care system, what people don't realize is that it will takes months before you will even be able to get into any hospital to even get things checked out. The money to pay the medical doctors has to come from somewhere, and where do you think its going to come from??? Out of all our pockets in taxes. And like Greg pointed out, it's only going to be able to cover the basics, and not all the expensive things. Like Claire also mentioned that if you talk to almost anyone who comes from a country with universal health care, they admit that it is not as good as ours. The whole idea of this new health care system is actually scaring people away from becoming doctors, because they know that there pay would be less, while at the same time the prices of attending college is going up resulting in a even bigger mass of debt than they already have to deal with. I can understand where Lacy is coming from and explaining how difficult times can be, but i know this is harsh, but whatever happened to survival of the fittest? Our population is so huge right now, maybe we need something like a plague or a disease just to be able to help control our population. I'm sorry it is so morbid, but i feel like maybe its the truth.
ReplyDelete-Lauren Dillier
Hey--Sara here. First time signing on, so this should be interesting. Anyways, I'm here to talk about the Delta farming thing. About a week ago I went to Sacramento, and there were a bunch of protesters there. I didn't know what for. Today, as we were driving through the Central Valley,there were a bunch of signs that said "Congress Created Dust Bowl" on an empty field. Dunno if you guys know what the Dust Bowl is, but last year in U.S. History I found out that it was a big problem in the 30s, when overfarming and a lack of water created huge dusty areas, which the wind now blew around, causing extremely harsh weather conditions. Apparently Congress limited the supply of water to the Central Valley to protect the salmon in the Delta, and now the farmers are upset. There were 60 "Congress Created Dust Bowl" signs out, and more empty fields than I had ever seen. What are your thoughts? Are the salmon worth it, and are the farmers just being dramatic, or is this a real and big problem?
ReplyDelete-Sara Hannigan
In response to the farming issue Sara brings up. I was not aware this was happening. I certainly think that it is a huge problem on various levels because it deals with our environment, food, and peoples livelihoods. Just the fact that there were sixty crop-less fields is cause for concern. I don't know if the salmon are worth it, but I think the problem might be deeper than that. The lack of water has to be the biggest issue here. However I don't know how that problem could be solved because there is no way for us to get more water. I think one of the few solutions would have to be conservation.
ReplyDeleteWe were having a discussion in my gov econ class today about the lack of coverage on the war in Afghanistan. Like most people I guessed the war was not being covered much to benefit president Obama since the media always seems to be in his corner. However I was surprised to learn that the reason for the lack of coverage is because Afghanistan is such a dangerous place that journalists are killed there so often that only few dare to go. It got me thinking, if the war was being covered and dissected in a similar manner to the war in Iraq during the Bush administration would it have a negative affect on Obama's approval ratings. What do you guys think?
ReplyDeleteIn response to Gabe on the Afghan war--I think the reason that there's no coverage is that things are worse there than Iraq. Iraq did seem to be a relatively controlled situation--they haven't had nearly the problems with the government that the Afghanistans have. But why would having coverage change how people feel about Obama? Obama removed troops from Iraq to fight in Afghanistan because the problem there wasn't being taken care of. Mind, I don't care for war in general, but most people believe the Afghan war is a good cause. On the other hand, do we REALLY want to go through more war coverage? I don't know about you, but I'm really sick of seeing anything about casualties, or hearing it in the morning before I go to school. I think we should be finding another way other than a war--but I also don't think that's an option.
ReplyDeleteThere's my scatter-brained post for you.xD Oh well.
-Sara
On a truly global note, have you guys heard anything about the controversy that's occuring in Scotland right now? Apparently the Scottish prime minister released a guy who had killed almost 300 people by bombing a plane. The guy is dying of cancer, and so they released him out of compassion and sent him home. But apparently, once home, they threw a huge party for him and hailed him as a hero. Should the Scotts not have let him go, or was it better to show compassion for a terrorist?
ReplyDeleteYou can read the story here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/8216897.stm
The Scottish story that Sara brought up is a confusing situation. I do not think it is ever ok to let a man go who was responsible for 300 deaths. It seems almost any body would agree with me on that. Even though he had cancer I think he should've served his entire sentence no matter how sick he got. What is extremely confusing is that they called him a hero after he was released. That had to be a slap in the face for all of the victims families.
ReplyDeleteI was reading a story on the US postal service on CNN and I was surprised to learn it is failing. Sure I realize that the we now have email and other quicker ways to communicate with each-other but I did not think about the dramatic loss of money this would cause the postal service. They are set to lose seven billion in 2009, and of course this means the loss of many jobs. The article was dealing with the buyouts the company is offering to its employees, and since they run only off of the money they make and not taxes things are not looking up for them. Am I the only one who had no idea this was going on?
ReplyDeleteDon't worry Gabe. You are not alone. I too didn't even think about the Postal Service until I saw it on the news. As I watched I remembered how many people are predicting that in 20 or so years from now, newspapers and postal letters will be virtually non-existent in the U.S. Not only will seven billion dollars be lost in 2009, but several mailmen will be unemployed throughout the country. The news also said that U.S. mailboxes are supposed to be taken out if the inbox of letters is not reaching certain standards. As for my stance, I don't agree with an all-electronic mail and news system. Those special hand-written letters from loved ones will soon be typed messages that need to be saved on a computer instead of inside a special drawer. To me, letters are just more personal than e-mails. However, that's the cost of a more convinient mail system.
ReplyDeleteI was watching the news today and saw the story of the girl that was kidnapped in 1991 form south lake Tahoe. I was not aware of the story and I think it is amazing that it is being solved so many years later. What is even more disturbing is that the girl that was kidnapped lived her whole life in her captures backyard. She even had two kids in the backyard both girls who are eleven and fifteen. Both girls have never been to school let alone a doctor. I am glad that these people were found but it is hard to imagine what their lives will look like now since the only thing they know is a backyard.
ReplyDeleteSo the other day I got one of those chain email letters that everyone asks you to forward on to your contanct list etc... but I found this interesting, the government has been circulating new one dollar coins with George Washington on the face, but "In God We Trust" is no longer engraved like every other coin and bill. I found it interesting because we had a huge controversy about taking out "Under God" from the pledge of alligence. The U.S. Mint tells the press that it was big mistake, but I'm not so sure. What do you guys think? Is "In God We Trust" something worth fighting for?
ReplyDeleteThat's definately an interesting topic Bri. I suppose it's questionable on whether the U.S. Mint purposely left out the phrase, but if you ask me, I believe it was intentional. It's hard for me to think that such a tradional saying that is on EVERY single coin and bill could have just been forgotten. It wouldn't surprise me if they experimented with the absence of "In God We Trust" with a provided excuse if it didn't work out. As far-fetched as that sounds, it could be a possibility; but what do I know?
ReplyDeleteThe bigger issue here is whether it is in fact worth fighting for. I will tell you right now that I strongly believe it is. If you asked the same question to George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abe Lincoln, John Adams, John Hancock, Ben Franklin, James Monroe, James Madison, Samuel Adams, (all of whom are just some our Founding Fathers except Lincoln), I'm sure they would all agree to keep the expression on all coins and bills. The Declaration of Independence also references and acknowledges God in its writing multiple times; however, the standard U.S. history book will not tell you that. The point is, America has "trusted God" every since its beginning, and to suddenly "distrust God" would disappoint the Founding Fathers of our nation. It would be making a statement that America is too good to trust in God anymore, and that isn't the way I think it should be at all.
hey guys! so I wanted to comment on the negative aspects of technology that jessica and greg were talking about as well as Gabe and Dustin. I've always been relatively concerned about this. I saw a preview for a movie called surrogates where people have robots go about living their daily lives while they all sit back at home and watch. While I guess the idea of relaxing at home all day may be appealing to some, the thought sort of freaked me out: never knowing whether you're conversing with a human or metal and having intimate relationships with technology. I know we aren't to that extreme and I'm not sure if that's an avenue technology's traveling down but if so I'm truly concerned especially considering how faulty technology/computers really can be.
ReplyDeletehere's the link if anyone's interested:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwTJ7mCcFoY
Making face time should be important to us all. I don't know if any of you did Breaking Down the Walls but if you did you'll know how much small waves and hellos make a difference and technology minimizes if not eliminates that significance.
As far as what gabe was saying with the media coverage, I'm actually truly relieved that it has lessened. While I don't want reporters dying, I'm glad that the crazy obsession with war on the news has somewhat subsided. We've always gone to war in the past without a blow-by-blow via video and I really don't think anyone was the worser off. Constant media attention on negative things, as crucial information as it may be, is just not healthy or at the very least pleasant. Granted, I do want to be informed and ignorance is a problem in this country but so is depression. Also when the media owns the information sometimes things are skewed or overexaggerated or even down-played. Sometimes I feel myself losing faith with the news because they'll attack you with all this information and later down the road it will be completely opposite or not nearly as significant as it was hyped up to be.
ReplyDeletelast one I promise :) Apparently the recession is over guys! A little hard to believe? I don't know what to think of it but I was reading the News Digest section of the Auburn Journal (from thursday the 27th so it's a little late...) and it read "Most economists now agree the recession that began in December 2007 has ended or is ending" based upon the big-ticket spending spree in July (things like homes, appliances, planes and computers it said). There's still speculation on whether the growth will last but the article ended with an uplifting hope. As much as I'd like to believe it, do you guys think it's true or even possible at this point? Is that all we have to do to survive a recession: have faith in the market and buy? I'm not taking Gov/Econ but I was wondering if any teachers had said anything about this. Please let me know!
ReplyDeleteOn the topic that Bri brought up, I truly believe it's worth fighting for. Like Dustin said, our country was founded on "In God We Trust." If we just throw that away, it's like losing a part of who we are as Americans. Our country was based on freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion. We are free to worship God however we please, not to eliminate God. "Under God" has already been removed from the pledge of allegience. If we keep compromising and letting details like this disappear, what will happen to our traditional morals? I know this may seem like a tiny thing because it's just one phrase on a simple coin, but we cannot just cast out our moral foundation. Even though it comes from Biblical principles.
ReplyDelete-Gennavieve
Brianna,
ReplyDeleteI was totally shocked about the story you read regarding the one dollar coin and how the "mistake" was taking the In God We Trust out of the coin. Like Dustin said, our Country was honestly founded with God being written in the Decleration and there was no intention of taking God out of it. Even though there are a lot of Americans that may not believe in God, if they live in a country that was founded by God believing men, than they shouldn't try and change the way our money has always been. Alhough some people may not necessarily "trust in God," our country supposedly always has and it should stay that way. It's not right to change the principles that America was founded on, and by discluding the "In God We Trust" phrase in our money, that's changing the principles.
Hey Guys,
ReplyDeleteI just read a story on the internet saying that Michael Jordan is building a 37,492 square foot house that will cost approx. $7,627,669. The property is in Jupiter, Florida near a golf course. I just thought that this was a crazy story becasue there are so many starving people in te world, let alone this terrible time in our economy, and Michael Jordan decides to go build a 7.6 million dollar house! Im so tired of athletes (retired or not) signing contracts for huge chunks of money! The people that really deserve money like that are teachers, and anybody in the medical field. Those are the people that actually make a difference. I can understand how people (younger kids especially look up to athletes such as Michael Jordan as a role model, but is spending your money on a house the size of Wal Mart Super Center really the best idea at a time like this?
I was thinking the same thing Brittney. I am an admirer of Michael Jordan, and after seeing this I was very let down. This seems ridiculous to me. There is no need for him to be living in a house that is 19 times bigger than the average American house. I'm still trying to figure out his motive behind buying a house THAT big- he's already living comfortably and his kids are in college. I hope this poor decision will help other rich celebrities and athletes see how absurd it is to spend huge amounts of money on things that don't matter. If everyone spends their money wisely, the economy might just edge its way back to normal. Hopefully people will be willing to cooperate.
ReplyDeleteI was just reading something off of CNN about President Obama being in Copenhagen, Denmark to help make Chicago the host city for the 2016 Olympic Games. There are 105 Olympic Committee members there for the voting of the host city and the four final cities are Chicago, Illinois; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Madrid, Spain and Tokyo, Japan. In any case, all four leaders of each location are there to make a personal appearance and help make their country the host. Do you guys think Obama is using his time poorly by focusing on the Olympics and not more pressing matters, or is he using his time wisely by giving people postitve news during a bad time?
ReplyDeleteDustin, I think that it is a very wise decision for Obama to be campaigning for the Olympic host city. The Olympics could be a big boost for our economy. There would be thousands of athletes and tourists flocking to America. They would be buying our food, using our transportation, and staying in our hotels. This would greatly help us out. Hosting the Olympics would be helpful in getting us back on our feet, and instilling a pride in our country that has been lost lately. It would also shed a positive light on us for the rest of the world to see. It is very unfortunate for America that the host city went to Brazil.
ReplyDelete-Emily Hentschke
In response to Dustin's post on Obama & his priorities: I agree with Emily Ho in the fact that it would be beneficial due to an economic boost. In rebuttal to an opposition, Obama is not the sole leader of our country. It's not inconvenient for him to go to Denmark to discuss the Olympics for a day or two; he has other people he can delegate to do the other important duties (that is what a vice-prez is for).
ReplyDelete-Lynda Davis
Emily, I'm sorry it says "Emily Ho"; I mean't for that to be a period & I don't know what happened.
ReplyDeletePUBLIC OPTION. It's been the buzz for a month now. In my opinion, hybrid health care sounds best. A public option offered to everyone, but still a private option for those that desire.
ReplyDeleteThoughts?
-Lynda Davis
In response to Dustin's post on where the olympics should be held in 2016 and whether or not Obama should have his attention towards this matter... I definitely think that Obama won't even be in office in 2016 so he can go attend to matters that are of importance for the present. Such as the war on terorism, or this huge economic crisis that not only California is in, but the whole entire rest of the country. Chances are, that in 2016 we won't need a little "boost in our economy" because we will have gotten over these times by then. Also, it's not really going to boost our economy by that much. It will only help the economy around Illinois.
ReplyDeleteLynda- in response to your last post, I don't think a public option will do much good for health care. My reason in saying this is because once a public option is put into motion, private businesses will MOST LIKELY drop their private coverage and tell their employees that they can now go get FREE health care with the public option. Why should employers spend money on health coverage when it's free? However, as I mentioned before, that is just my prediction on what would most likely occur if a public option was put into play. Another problem with the public option is that it will be totally and completely taken advantage of, adding massive debts to the health care system just like Medicare has. Don't get me wrong, Medicare is one of the most well-intentioned ideas that America has, but some people just drain the money out of it, not because their life depends on it, but simply because they can. And they are all 65 years old or older! Just think about how much money would be spent if EVERYONE could do that. To me, the public option would go down as a giant mistake in American history, but then again, no one knows the future.
ReplyDeleteHello Everyone i know that i am a little late on the blogs and everything this being my first one, but i would like to add my own little response to Lynda's post about the health care billm and having a public option. To be honest the whole concept of it goes in two different ways and its very easy to see both sides. There is a huge issue with money going on with the health care bill and everything revolved around it. Business owners already pay for thier employees, people dont want more of their money gone, and to be honest this doesnt surprise me. Most people are greedy, and its unavoidable. At the same time, i have a lot of family and friends that are not fortunate enough to have employers that willl get it, or dont have the money for it, so what about them. Health care wouldnt be as expensive as it is if it wasnt for all the people in the united states sueing doctors because they think it will make a few bucks, like that lady that sued mcdonalds for burning her tounge on the coffee, to me the public option is one of the best ideas that america could have right now, but with the economy the way it is how could we ever really deal with it. The truth is right now we cant, we need to focus on fixing that instead of worrying about health care.
ReplyDeleteHope its not to wierd coming in this late in the show, just have had lots going on
-Tyeler Perry
In response to Brittney's post on the Micheal Jordan thing, I have to say that it is ridiculous. I agree fully with Dustin on what he says about hoping it will show all of the other celebrities that they spend their money crazily. I don't get the point behind a lot of the things celebrities do, but at the same time i don't have the kind of money that they make on a annual basis. Its one of those things where you need to understand the person by being in their shoes. It seems crazy to us yes, but do you really know what is going through Micheal's head, no you don't. There is some point to it just no one know it right now.
ReplyDelete-Tyeler Perry
In August and September of 2006 a contractor of the cargo ship, Probo Koala, from a giant oil trading company dumped five hundred tons of toxic waste on a city in West Africa. The waste was dumped in Abidjan, Ivory Coast's largest city and has impacted the people greatly. The toxins killed fifteen people and sickened another 100,000 people. 69 people were hospitalized and most people reported headaches, skin lesions, digestive difficulties and nose, throat and lung problems. To resolve the problem, Trafigura is offering about 1500 dollars per person to settle the lawsuit. There are about 30 thousand people who have been affected making the settlement worth nearly 46 million. The Dutch-based company does not admit liability in the settlement and aggressively fought the suit. It threatened to sue media outlets, including the BBC, for its reporting of the case. The judge still must approve the deal before it becomes final. The company admits that they dumped the toxic waste but does not claim responsibility. Do you think the company should be able to pay the people off or do you think they should have to remove the toxic waste and attempt to reverse the damage?
ReplyDeleteI think that the company should be made to remove all the damage that was caused to the people. How idiotic can you be to think that even though you dumbed the waste that its not your responsibility. The waste was dumbed on the city in Africa by the Dutch based company should be forced to pay for their wrong doings. They have sevearly damaged an ecosystem, how can they think that it is not their fault. That is not right. I mean i know that Africa has many different laws and rules than we do, but their are still certain natural laws that they have crossed that need to be fixed that is not cool.
ReplyDeleteOk guys here is something interesting for you, According to Yahoo.com there is a single solider mom that is refusing to go to Afghanistan because she has a ten month old infant that she needs to take care of. To me that is a pretty good reason not to go, but they want to put criminal charges on her. Now you tell me do you think that this is right, because i dont.
ReplyDeleteOn Tyler's comment about the woman who refused deployment to take care of her infant, I believe they should not put criminal charges on her; however, I do think she could have handled things more responsibly. Before going into the army, there is a requirement for all single-parent soldiers to, "Submit a care plan for dependent children before they can deploy to a combat zone." The woman did this; however, she only had one person listed, her mother. I believe she should have been more thoughtful in this. The article sated the mother takes care of sick relatives, a disabled child, and to top it all, runs a daycare. I think, adding an extra load on her mother was an irresponsible choice. While criminal punishment seems wrong and unsuitable for this woman, she could have handled her child's welfare much better.
ReplyDelete~Gennavieve
Guys this is something kind of shocking, you need to watch this video and tell me what you think that it means.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHmwZ96_Gos&feature
Im not gonna lie this stuff is crazy, and what it means to me is that, society is gonna get into more than we can handle real soon. Do you guys think that all this stuff is good or bad, the thing about the computer in 2049 thats kind of scary. Something so common will be smarter than us. All the information growing and everything that continues to advance. The jobs that are most demand in 2010 didnt exsist in 2004 thats scary. Technology is really advancing quickly
OK i know that this post was a very long time ago, but on the 4th of july Gennavieve posted something about Sara Palin and her step down from office, and to be honest I think its a good thing. I know that a lot of things have happened between then and now but there are certain things that i didnt like about her run as vice president. I know that some people have attacked her child with i think its down syndrome and one late night talk show host made fun of her child. To be honest there just were a lot of things about her views that i didnt like, but still i think her leaving office was good for her.
ReplyDelete-Tyeler Perry
Tyeler, I watched the video that you posted and I have to agree with you that the world is getting crazier by the minute with population and technology. It's mind-boggling to think that we are living in an "exponential" world now, and that a super-computer will be built in 2013 that exceeds the computational capabilities of the human brain. The 2049 computer is even scarier, and everyone reading this should watch the video to understand where we're coming from. Perhaps you will have a different opinion. In any case, I don't think that computers will take over the world are anything else to that degree, because it is humans who create computers in the first place. In fact, I think we can even use these "super computers" to our advantage for problems that haven't been solved such as cancer. However, if you solve cancer, you add more population to the already staggering world population, which is bittersweet. Also, I don't see any problems to more jobs. If the population is really increasing at such a rapid pace, the world is going to need to provide more jobs anyways. The problem with more technology is of course the lack of personal connection with one another, which some people cherish more than others. For me, I don't see any massive problems with the way things are going, but all these random facts make you wonder if there will be big problems in the future.
ReplyDeleteOk guys what do you think about trying the guantanamo prisoners in New York instead of a military tribunal?
ReplyDeleteWell guys I got a new one for you, they say that due to the amount of sales and growth going on right now that the recession is over. As you guys know that even if the recession is over thier wont be any significant changes for a little bit, but still. I want to know what you guys think about this. Here is an article with more information.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/is-the-recession-over-extended-transition-phase/
Tell me do you guys think that their is enough growth going on right now to keep the economy alive?
To Keith's posting about the Guantanamo prisoner's, i think that its a really good idea. They are the reason for September eleventh, and it was a very heavy disaster that America had to take on because of them, and it should be America's responsibility to punish those who wronged us. Now i am against the death penalty, but to be honest sentencing them to life in prison wouldn't even seem worth it because what is that gonna do. Is it gonna show other terrorists that you don't mess with the united states of america, i dont think so. Obama is trying to close the detention center in Guantanamo bay, to show that he wants to put an end to terrorism. Its all about his publicity and looking good for the American people, dont get me wrong he does want to fight terrorism now, but there is a lot of things going on in America, that's the reason that their is a department of the government that handles foreign affairs. I know that to do something that big would need the president but come on focus on America at this point we need to get better.
ReplyDelete-Tyeler Perry
I think most of us are in Gov/Econ right now. I was just curious, do you think music file sharing is a property right, or public domain. I know that it's the final, but I'm interested to see what people believe. I have talked to a few people who say they believe it's a property right, however they themselves share music files. Are you choosing a side because it's easy to write about or because you actually believe it? Just curious!
ReplyDelete~Gennavieve
On Gennavieve's question regarding music file sharing whether it is a property right or public domain, I believe that it should be a property right because it is someone's property. People think that just because it is a intellectual property rather than a physical property that it is okay to to share the music files. Yes, intellectual property can be accessed for free on the internet, but does it make it right? This is just my opinion and I would like to hear what others think too.
ReplyDeleteGennavieve, I think that music files should be private property depending on what the creator of the song wants to do wiht it. If it's their desire to hae the music free for everyone to listen to than it's fine. But if the owner is not okay with it, than that's not okay and should remain illegal to share music files. So all in all, I think it should be up to the owner or the person who created the song.
ReplyDeleteSo I don't know if any of you guys listened to Obama's speech the other night, but it caught my attention when he said that he was going to send 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. This is weird because during his candidacy he said that he was going to bring the troops home rather than send more.... Any thoughts?
In response to Brittney's blog about Michael Jordan spending over $7 million for a new home in Florida, I guess when you have tons of disposable income and you're used to a certain lifestyle, to him it probably doesn't seem excessive. The bigger question is what percentage of his earnings over the years has he given back or donated relative to what he has/is spending. If he has given a big chunk to worthy causes then go ahead and build your mansion.
ReplyDeleteYeah Kelsey that makes sense. I had told my brother about how I thought that was weird that Micahel Jordan was building that mansion and he said that it would help stimulate the economy in that area a little bit because of all the workers and businesses that he will be using to build his mansion. In a way, I totally see his point because it definitely will provide people with jobs which is exactly what America needs right now.
ReplyDeleteSo what does everybody make of the Tiger Woods drama. I mean did he really think he was beyond reproach? He had to realize that at some point the odds were someone was going to come forward and "tell all". I think the only way he can salvage any of his public image is to literally come out and admit that he has a disease (addiction to sex) and seek help for it. It's not like he can say I had poor judgment nine different times (at latest count)... I realize this seems kind of extreme but I feel like he'd get more sympathy if he were to admit something like that as oppose to letting the media continue with their versions of it.
ReplyDeleteThanks Brit :) I think people tend to judge celebrities without understanding what really goes on behind closed doors. I realize this isn't something major like a worldly issue but the media does have its affects on teenagers like us so it is important that we are aware and try to understand people's situations. Michael Jordan has played an influential role in the lives of may children and I feel the positives he's contributed to our society outweighs the negatives.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the drama about Tiger Woods, I agree that he should take responsibility and step in and stop the media from going on and on about his affair. He needs to apologize for his inappropriate behavior.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that it is fair that celebrities get so much bad publicity when they make a mistake because they are in the public eye even though there are many normal people making the same mistakes as them but with no consequence? Or do you think that there should be more harsh punishments such as a lot of publicity because they are in the public eye and they are role models for some? Just curious what everyone thinks!
M'kay--just curious, why is everyone up so late?xD I've seen more posts now than I have ever before. it's crazy! Did we all procrastinate on finals or something?
ReplyDeleteRachael- First of all, your question about the degree of punishment for celebrities is a very good question. I do NOT believe that celebrities should recieve any more punishment than a regular human being, and here's why- First, no one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes. I think we've all heard that one before. The only difference between us and celebrities is that when celebrities make a mistake, everyone knows about it. Becuase of this, I think society should focus more on forgiving than holding a grudge. It just puts more pressure on celebrities to be flawless if we are constantly nagging on them for things that they've done. Secondly, a celebrity is only a celebrity becuase their job is displayed for the public to see. But this does not automatically make them a role model. What I'm trying to say is that if a football player signs up to play football for a living, he is not necessarily signing up to be a role model as well. Furthermore, even when celebrities do make mistakes, it is not always a super bad thing becuase then it warns other people to not do the same thing. A celebrity getting punished in front of the whole world for something they did is humiliating enough, so I don't think they need more punishment.
ReplyDeleteSo, switching the subject, what do you guys think about global warming? There are lots of people that think it's false, but recently, e-mails of scientists were stolen to see if there was any record of falsified data, and there ended up being no such record. All the research concerning global warming has left many wondering whether it's a serious matter or not. Do you guys think global warming is true, or is it just a hoax?
I think that Tiger Woods should have known what he was getting himself into. He knew that if what he did were to reach the news he would get really bad publicity but he did it anyway. Everyone knows that famous people are watched all the time so it was his own judgment call that led him to all the bad publicity. I also think that many people look up to him and that he is not being a good role model. In my opinion the punishment fits the crime.
ReplyDeleteAnd to Dustin's question about Global warming- I don't know any fatcs or information about it but All I have to say is that it SNOWED last week in loomis for the first time since i was in fourth grade and that was a light snow. It was the first time in 20 years that it has snowed and stuck to the ground. Global Warming...really?
ReplyDeleteDustin- I have to agree with Natalie on the global warming subject. I also don't know many facts about Global Warming but I havent heard much recently on the topic. It seems like it has been talked about for so long but we havent seen it happen yet so as of right now I believe Global Warming is a hoax.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to Tyler's post on December 3rd about whether or not there is enough growth to keep our economy going, I think that there is not enough growth to keep our economy going at all. First off, businesses have to lay off their employees just to keep their business going. If there was growth, then they wouldn't have to lay off their employees. Also, it is getting more and more difficult for entrepreneurs to break into the industry because there is so little growth and this is hurting our economy too. If the government does not do something quick, then our economy will completely fail.
ReplyDeleteSo on December 3rd Tyler Perry posted about the end of the recession. As I am also in gov/econ right now I believe that I know where he is coming from because we have discussed this topic as a class. I do agree with the article and while i know that there will be no significant change any time in the very near future, I do believe that we have hit the trough of this particular recession. Unfortunately I also believe that one of the last places that will be influenced by this positive change is the unemployment rate. There is always going to be a trend of ups and downs in the economy and I believe that we are seeing the inital steps of change in this process.
ReplyDeletehahah Kelsey...I don't know if I agree with you when you say that Tiger Woods adicted to sex...But still I do think that this recent obsession with the media is a very intersting topic. I do believe that there is an extreme amount of pressure that is places on celebrities and I dissgaree with Dustin when he says that celebrities should have the same punishment as other people. I understand that they are still flawed like others, but while they are in the lime light there are going to be far more severe reprecussions for their actions than their would be with someone who is not well known. Celebrities like Michael Phelps and Woods do make mistakes. But as responsible leaders who represent compaines with core values, it is exceedingly important that they uphold these. I'm not saying that it is ok for your neighbor to cheat on their wife and that it isn't ok for Woods, but I do believe that many look (ed) up to Tiger Woods as a role model. I personally even thought that it was below him and was shocked when I heard about his disgressions. I believe that with celebrity comes great responsibility and that this is what should not be handled lightly.
ReplyDeleteOh and one more comment for tonight...Brittney had posted earlier this month about the troops that Obama is sending into Afghanistan. After dicussing this in my gov econ class I agree with several others in my class that there is most likely information that we are not all entirely privey to as citizens. Should there be a threat of some sort that we don't know about (or don't want to know about) it would make sense that he has gone back on his word and decided to put in more troops. I feel that this commonly happens with presidencies...someone is elected and after being in office generally has at least a remote change of plan. Should this be the case, it would easily explain why exactly more troops are being sent to fight overseas.
ReplyDeleteI recently heard that Obama has spent more money than all of the presidents combined. What do you guys think of this? I know that some people may have just voted for Obama to make history; they neglected to think of the economy, and how his plans would effect America.
ReplyDelete~Gennavieve
Okay guys, i know that somewhere way back in this line of posts there is something about Sarah Palin and im wondering what do you guys think of her still being a political heavy weight and in running for the 2012 presidential elections
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/23/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5749255.shtml
heres an article to look at